CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE - Congress.gov

-~ ) !926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE 10059

By 1\Ir. FRENCH: A bill (H. R. 12420) granting a pension to Ezra E. Howard ; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

Also, a bill (H. R. 12430) to authorize the Caxton Printers -(Ltd.) to make application to the Commissioner of Patents for tlie -extension of Letters Patent No. 921467; to the Committee on Patents.

By 1\Ir. HARDY: A bill (H. R. 12431) granting an increase of pen!'ion to Ellen Cannon ; to the Committee on Pensions.

lly Mr. HOWARD: A bill (H. R. 12432) granting an increase _of J.!.ension to Jennie Paniska; to tlle Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mrs. KAHN: A bill (H. R. 12433) for the relief of James ·walsh; to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

Also, a bill (H. R. 12434) to make an award of $10,000 and grant a pension to Michael A. Donalclson; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

Also, a bill (H. R. 12435) to provide for the advancement on · the retired list of the Army of l\laj. Andrew Summers Rowan;

to the Committee on l\Illitary Affairs. By Mr. RATHBONE: A bill (H. R. 12436) granting relief

to David Homer Bates, of the Military Telegraph Corps of the Army <luring the Civil War; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

Also, a bill (H. R. 12-137) granting relief to 1Ym. R. Plum, of the Military Telegraph Corps of the Army during the Civil War; to the Committee on 1\'Iilitnry Atiairs.

By ~Ir. ROBSION of Kentucky: A bill (H. R. 12438) granting an increase of pension to Annie C. Jarvis; to the Committee on In valid· Pensions.

By l\lr. SWING: A bill (H. R. 12430) granting an increase of pension to Carrie Hosack; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By 1\.Ir. TAYLOR of Tennessee: A bill (H. R. 12440) granting an increase of pension to Thurza C. Carver; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

AlRo, a bill (H. R. 12-1-11) granting an increase of pension to Mary J. Bowman; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

lly l\Ir. PARKER: Resolution (H. Res. 273) authorizing additional compensation for the clerk of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce ; to the Committee on Accounts.

PETITIONS, ETC. Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, petitions and papers were laid

on the Clerk's desk and referred as follows : 2280. Petition adopted at the Ninth Annual Convention of the

National Retail Coal l\Ierchants' Association, favoring the ap__proval by Congress of House Joint Resolution 208 and Senate

Joint Resolution 7; to the Committee on the Judiciary. 2281. By l\Ir. CHALMERS: Petition of the Toledo Council

of Catholic 'Vomen, numbering 4,000, protesting against the expulsion of Archbishop Caruana from Mexico on the grounds of American citizenship; also urging influence to have the Mexican Go\ernment respect religious freedom and withdraw its program of persecution ; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

2282. By Mr. GALLIVAN: Petition of Mrs. F. B. Tracy, 58 Armandine Street, Dorchester, Mass., vigorously protesting against the passage of House bill 7826, the purpose of which is to extend the civil and criminal laws of the United States to Indians ; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

2283. By Mr. GRAHAM: Preamble and resolution of Philadelphia Board "'Of Trade, favoring the enactment of House Joint Resolution 15, to prevent further amendment of the Constitution of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

228-!. Also, preambles and resolutions of Philadelphia Board of Trade, favoring the enactment of House bill 0594, re appointment of additional Federal· judges; to the Committee on the Judidary.

2285. By Mr. HADLEY: Petition of a number of residents of Skagit County, Wash., protesting against pendin: compulsory Sunday observance uills ; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

2286. By Mr. HUDSPETH: Resolution of executiye commit· tee of the Sheep and Goat Raisers' Association of Texas, in· dorsing Senate bill 1618; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

2287. By l\Ir. KINDRED: Petition of the -Queensboro Chamber of Commerce of the Borough of Queens, city of New York, to the United States Congress, approving and recommending the passage of House bill 3091, prohibiting the sending of unsolicited merchandise through the mails ; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

2288. By l\1r. 1\lcCLINTIC: Petition of sundry citizens of Shattuck, Chancy, and Gage, Okla., protesting against compulsory Sunday · observance; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

2280. By 1\ir. MOONEY: Petition of certain citizens of Cleveland, protesting against various provisions of House bill 11250 ; to the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization.

2290. By Mr. O'CONNELL of New York: Petition of Metal Trades Council, of Brooklyn, N. Y., opposing the passage of House bill 8902, a bill which would prevent work from going to the navy -yards and arsenals; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

2201. Also, petition of the William Wrigley, jr., Co., Brooklyn, N. Y ., fa Yo ring the passage of House bill 1206!3, a bill to amend the interstate commerce act and transportation act of 1920. and for other purposes ; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

2292. By Mr. SWING: Petition of certain residents of Los Angeles, Calif., protesting against the passage of House bills 10311, 10123, 7179, or 7822, for the compulsory obsernmce of Sunday in the District of Columuia; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

SENATE WEDNESDAY, lJlay B6, 19B6

The Chaplain, Rev. J. J. Muir, D. D., offered the following prayer:

Our heavenly Father, that Thou dost take care of us day after day is evidence to us of Thy mercies unfolding in great consi<l· eration of our needs. We do thank Thee this morning for the brightness of the day and humbly ask that in our heart of hearts there may be realized the consciousness of dependence upon Thee. Help us to order our steps aright and to be govei'ned continually by the high. and holy influence of glorifying Thy name in every act of duty. We ask in Jesus' name. Amen.

The Chief Clerk proceeded to read the Journal of the pro· ceedings of the legislative <lay of Friday, May 21, 1926, when, on request of Mr. CURTIS and by unanimous consent, the further reading was dispensed with and the Journal was approved.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. Halti· gan, one of its clerks, announced that the House had passed without amendment the following bills of the Senate:

S. lOR. An act for the relief of the Commercial Union Assur· ance Co. (Ltd.) ; the Automobile Insurance Co., of Hartford, Conn. ; American & Foreign Insurance Co. ; Queen Insurance Co. of America; Fireman's J!'und Insurance Co. ; St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.; and the United States Merchants & Shi{)pers Insurance Co. ;

S. o88. An act for the relief of A. T. Whitworth ; S. 726. An act for the relief of Hilbert Edison and Ralph R.

·walton; S. 511. An act for the relief of all owners of cargo laden

abonrd the lighter Linwood at the time of her collision with the U. S. S. Absecon;

S. 1208. An act providing reimbursement to J". M .. LaCalle for services as instructor at the United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, 1\id., from October 1, 1914, to October 19, 1914;

S. 1223. An act for the relief of J. L. Flynn; S. 1224. An act for the relief of John P. McLaughlin; S. 1361. An act for the relief of the Maryland Casualty Co. :

the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., of Baltimore, l\ld.; and the Fidelity & Deposit "Co. of Maryland ;

S. 1415. An act authorizing and directing the Secretfiry of the Treasury to immediately reconvey to Charles Murray, sr., and Sarah A. Murray, his wife, of De Funiak Springs, Fla., the title to lots 820, 821, and 822, in the town of De Funiak Springs, Fla., according to the -map of Lake De Funiak drawn by W. J. Vankirk;

S. 1651. An act for the relief of the widow and minor children of Ed Estes, deceased ;

S. 1702. An act for the relief of William Alexander ; Frank :M. Clark; George V. Welch; Grant W. Newton; William T. Hughes; Lucy V. Nelson; Frank A. Gummer : Charles E. Mulliken; Leo l\1. Rusk; Fred Falkenburg; M.cary E. Kelly; William C. Hall; Rufus L. Stewart; Hugo H. Ahlff; Paul J. Linster; Ruida Daniel ; Faye li'. l\1itchell ; Dollie Miller ; Alfred And.erson : Gustavus M. llhoden; Marie L. Dumbauld; estate of Fred l\1oody, deceased ;

S. 2533. An act for the relief of R. P. Rueth, of Cbamita, N. 1\Iex.;

S. 2674. An act for the relief of Kate T . Riley; S. 2808. An act for the relief of all owners of cargo laden

aboard the steamship Oconee; S. 3077. An act for the relief of John T. Wilson;

10060 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE }lAY 26

S. 3879. An act for the relief of W. T. 1\Iurray, administrator of the estate of Florence Martin, deceased; and .

S. 3880. An act for the relief of 1\iollie Van Hooser, administratrix of the estate of l\lyrtle Van Hooser, deceased.

The message also announced that the House had passed the following l.Jills of the Senate, each with an amendment, in whi<.:h it requested the concurrence of the Senate:

S. 106D. An act for the relief of R. Clyde Bennett; and S. 18Do . .Au act to correct the military record of George

Patterson. The message further announced that the House bad passed

the l.Jill (S. 2820) for the relief of Jose Louzau, with amendments, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate.

The message also announced that the House had passed bills of the following titles, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate:

H. R. G95. An act for the relief of B. Jackson; H. R. 726. An act for the relief of George J. Covert; H. R. 819. An act for the -relief of James 0. Simmons, alias

James 0. Whitlock; H. R. 830. An act for the relief of John Jakes; H. n. 1105. An act for the relief of the Kelly Springfield

Motor Truck Co., of California ; H. R. 1330. An act for the relief of Helene l\1. llubrich ; H. R. 1565. An act for the relief of Pirtle Handley; H. R. 1507. An act for the relief of .Albert 0. Tucker ; H. R. 2160. An act for the relief of Patrick J. Langan; H. R. 2207. An act for the relief of Simon R. Curtis; H. R. 2313. An act for the relief of .Amos Dahu:ff; H. R. 2316. An act for the relief of John Clark; H. R. 2320. An act for the relief of Delmore A. Teller; H. R. 2882 . .An act for the relief of E. D. Macready ; II. R. 3060. An act for the relief of Charles 0. J?unbar ; H. R. 3592. An act for the relief of Johanna B. Weinberg; H. R. 3663. An act to correct the military record of G. W.

Gilkison; H. n. 4125. An act for the relief of Louis A. Hogue ; H. R. 4664. An act for the relief of Arthur H. Bagshaw; H. R. 4716. An act for the relief of Samuel Pelfrey ; H. R. 5074. An act for the relief of George D. Vedder; H. R. 5507. An act for the relief of Agnes 1\1. Harrison, post-

mistress at Wheeler, l\Iiss.; H. R. 6139. An act for the relief of Seymour Buckley; H. R. 6267. An act for the relief of Joseph F. 1\lacKnigbt; H. R. 6422. An act to correct the military l'ecord of George W.

Kelly; II. R. 6584. An net for the relief of Charles 0. Schmidt; II. R. 6586. An act for the relief of Russell 1V. Simpson; H. R. 6655. An act for the relief of William A. Hynes ; H. R. 6728. An act to regulate in the District of Columbia the

traffic in, sale, and use of milk bottles, cans, crates, and other containers of milk and cream, to pre"Vent fraud and deception, and for other purposes;

H. R. 6834. An act for the relief of Joseph l\1. Black ; H. R. G921. An act to correct the military record of James

Perry Whitlow; ll. n. 7352. An act for the relief of Leste-r Cooley ; H. R. 7G32. An act to provide payment for services rendered

in preparation for the international conference on traffic in habit-forming narcotic drugs;

H. R. 7674. An act for the relief of Capt. H. Bert Knowles; H. R. 7703. An act for the relief of James F. McCarthy; H. R. 7030. An act for the relief Gf the Broad Brook Bank &

Trust Co.; H. R. 7973. An act to provide American registry for the Nor

wegian sailing vessel Derwent; H. R. 8292. An act to correct the military record of John R.

Butler; H. H. 8293. An act to correct the military record of Milton

Longsdorf; H. n. 8489. An act to relinquish the title of the United States

to the laud in the claim of Thomas Durnford, situate in the county of Baldwin, State of Alabama;

H. R 8552. An act for the relief of Herman Wagner, alias Henry Burnett;

II. n. 8663. An act for the relief of Alvin II. Tinker; H. n. 8941. An act for the relief of Turpin G. Hovas; H. R 8!)61. An act for the relief of William E. Jones; H. R. 9089 . .An act for the relief of Mabel Blanche Rockwell; H. R. 9232. .An act fQr the relief of Isaac A. Chandler ; H. R. 9234. An act to change the military record of Thomas

Dowling, alias James Murphy; H. R. 9324. An act for the relief of desertion from the name of

George A. McKenzie, alias Willlam A. Williams; H. R. 0606. An act for the relief of L. J. Houghtaling;

H. R. 0667. An act for the relief of Columbus P. Pierce; H. R. 10020. An act for the relief of 'Villiam Knabe; H. R. 10078. An act for the relief of Myron J. Conway, Frank

W. Hulsey, and others; H. R. 10161. An net for the relief of the owners of the barge

Mcilvaine No. 1; H. ll.1022G. An act to correct the milita~y record of John P.

Daley; H. R.10446. An act validating the application tor and entry

of certain public lands by Myrtle Sullinger ; H. R.10489. An act to perfect the homestead entry of John

Hebnes; H. R. 10028. .An act for the relief of the Liclgcrwood Manufac

turing Co. ; and H. U. 10641. An act for the relief of Elias Field.

ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED

The message further announced that the Speaker bad affixed his signature to the following ·enrolled bills, and they were thereupon signed by the Vice President:

S. 2537. An act to provide for the condemnation of land for the opening, extension, widening, or straightening of streets, an'nues, roads, or highways in accordance with the plan of the permanent system of highways for the District of Columbia, and for other purposes ; and

S. 2730. An act to amend section 1155 of an act ·entitled "An act to establish a code of law for the District of Columbia."

CALL OF THE ROLL

Mr. CURTIS. 1\fr. President, I suggest the al.Jsence of a quorum.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll, and the following

Senators answered to their names: Ashur~t Fcrnalu KP.yes Bayard Ferris King Bingham :b'ess L'l lt'ollette Blease Fra~icr McKellar llorah George McLean Bratton Gerry McMaster Broussard Gillett McNat·y Brnce Glass Mayfield Rutter Go!I Means Cameron Goouing J\1etcal f Capper 0 reene Moses Cat·away Hale Norbeck Couzens Harreld Norris Cummins Harris Oddic Curtis Harrison Overman Dale Beilin Pepper Deneen Howell Phipps Dill Johnson Pine Edge .Jones, N. l\Iex. Pittman Euwards Jones, Wash. RanRl1ell Ernst Kenurick Reed, Pa.

Robinson, Ark. Sacl<ett Schull Sheppard Shipsteau Shortridge Simmons Smoot Steck Stephens Swanson Trammell Tyson Underwood Wausworth Walsh Warren Wheeler Wlllis

The VICE PRESIDENT. Eighty-two Senators swered to their names, a quorum is present.

having an-

.AID TO RURAL POST ROADS

1\Ir. ODDIEJ. Mr. President--The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator from Nevada. 1\fr. CURTIS. Mr. President, have we had the presem:ation

of petitions and memorials? The VICE PRESIDENT. That has been called for. Peti

tions and memorials are now in order. 1\lr. ODDIE. I ask permission to have H. R. 9504 taken up.

It iR the bill amending the act providing fo1· Federal aid to rural post roads. -

1\Ir. MOSES. Let us hnve the regular order. 1\fr. BORAH. .I call for the regular order. The VICE PRESIDENT. The presentation of petitions and

memorials is in order. PETITIOl'iS AND ME"MORLU.S

Mr. FERNALD presented a petition signed by 58 citizens of Waterville an<l vicinity in tl1e State of Maine, praying for tl,l.e passage of legislation granting increased pensions to veterans of the Civil War and their dependents, which was ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. WILLIS presented a resolution adopted by the executive committee of the council of the American A8sociation for the Advaneemcnt of Scienco protesting against the alienation of public lands and national forests to private individuals, groups, or corporations, and opposing particularly the provisions of the so-called Stanfield bill, which was referred to the Committee on Pul.Jlic Lands and Surveys.

Mr. r.rYSON presented a telegraphic memorial from the president of the Southern Appalachian Coal Operators' Association and one from coal operators of the southern Appalachian region in meeting assembled at Knoxville, Tenn., in opposition to proposed coal legislation, which were ordered to lie on the table and to be printed in the REcORD, as follows:

<.

J 1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 10061

KNOXVILLE, TENN., May 125, 1926. Senator L. D. TYso~.

Washington, D. 0.: The coal-operating interests of our section deplore the energetic

efforts of l\fembers of Congress, pal'ticularly Representatives from nonproducing coal Stutes, to pl'ess legislation to regulate or intel'fere on part of Government, which means unquestionably the utter destruction of initiative on part of operators to work out their own problems. The desperate effort now being madP, even though apparently limited in its scope, when once a foothold is gained will draw further legislation in future until final disaster ovet·tal<cs us. Our people depending on you to stand firm and energetically, through your entire resource, oppose any measure of any kind along these lines.

C. W . HENDERSON, P1·esident Soutllern .Lippalac11ian Coal Operators' Association,,

KNOXVILLE, TEN.N ., May 24, 1926. Bon. L. D. 'I):so:-r,

Senate Office Bnilding, Washington, D. C.: Coal operators of the southern Appalachian region in meeting here

this morning unanimously passed resolution and appointeu us commit·tee to communicate same to you, it being resolveu that, in their opinion, any legislation by Congress regarding coal industry is an opening wed;;e for later and more legislation, any of which legislation in regnru to coal industry will prove to be worst thing imaginable for industry itself, both from standpoint of owners and workers, and will result iluully in complete demoralization of the indust1·y and tlnally llound to bring a situat.iou which Great llritain is now facing in the same iudustry. Having stuuied the matter from all angles, operators arc fit•mly of opinion tbnt unquestionably the best thing for the coal inuustry is that the Government permit it to work out its own problems, and we urge upon you to usc your best efforts to prevent such legislation. We understa11d that Parker bill is now before the Interstate Commerce Committee of House, and we urge you to use your influence with that committee against favorable report. Any legislation, Government control, or interference by the Government will with absolute certainty inc1·easc tbc cost of coal to the consumer.

c. w. l-[}:NDERSON. I!OBEUT s. YOUNG.

G. 1\1. C.niP. L. I. COLFJ~fAN.

JOHX L. BOYD. V. N. HACKER. E. C. MAHAN. R. E. HowE.

CIVIL WAR PENSIONS

Mr. NORBECK. Mr. President, I present and ask to have printed. in the RECORD and lie on the table a letter from the Depnrtmcnt of the Interior. It is a report in reference to the Civil War pension bill that will be taken up to-morrow night.

TlJ.ere being no objection, the letter was ordered to lie on the table and. to be printed in the REcoR~, as follows :

Hon. PETER NORBECK,

THE SECRETARY OF TIIE I.NTlllniOR, Washington, May 241 1926.

Ollairman Committee on Pensions, United States Senat«:.

M:r DEAn SE.N.ATOR NORBECK: I am in receipt of your communication inclosing copies of the bill (S. 4050) granting pensions and increase of pensions to certain soldiers, sailors, and marines of the Civil and Mexican Wars and to certain wi!lows of said soldiers, sailors, and marines anu the widows of the War of 1812 and Army nursr s, and for other purposes, concerning which you ask certain information and an. estimate of the cost of the bill by classes.

Section 1 of the bill benefits survivors of the Civil War. On April 30, 102G, there were u2,:392 Civil War eurvivors on the roll at $GO per month. Allowing tor a loss of 7,800 in this class on account of death uurin:; the year, the net additional cost of increasing them to $72 per month, as provideu in this section, would be approximately $12,867,888.

On April 30, 1926, there were 5G,2D5 Civil War survivors pensloned at $72 per month; and estimating roughly-it being impracticable to do otherwise-that 20 per cent of these would be entitled to the rate of $90 per month provided for in the section, the approximate cost would be, after allowing for a loss on account of death of 3,300, $2,105,544.

If all of the lJG,205 Civil War survivors on the roll at the rate of $72 per month should prove entitled to the rate of $90 provided for in this section of the bill, the estimated additional cost would be approximately $10,0·13,8u6.

On the bnsis that but 20 per cent of the pensioners receiving the $72 rate would be entitled to the $00 rate provided tor in this section, the entirl! ndditional annual cost of this section would be $14,078,432; but on the theory that all of those survivors on the roll at $72 per month would prove themselves entitled to the $90 rate, tho entire additional cost of this section would be $23,811,744.

Section 2 refers to widows and remarried widows of the Civil War. There were on April 80, Hl26, the number of 222,082 Civil War widows pensioned at the 1·ate of $30 per montht It is estimated that 04 per

cent of them are 75 years of age or over. To increase this number (142,600) to $40 per month, allowin~ for loss by death of 24,000 per year, would involve an additional eX11endlture of appt·oximately $15,G72,000.

The estimated additional annual cost for the beneflci:uies of the War of 1812 and l\Iexican War wi!lows provided for in section 3 of tlle bill is estimated at $126,000, and for the Army nurses provided for in section 4, $12,000.

Section 6 extenus the provisions, limitations, and benefits of the act of May 1, 1020, to the classes of persons enumerated· in paragraphs 1 and 3 of section 4603, Revised Statutes of the. United States, who sened during the Civil War. The persons mostly to be benefiteu by the provisions of this section are the militiamen of the several States who served during the Civil War. There is no way to even approximate the additional cost by reason of the provisions of this section, because it is not known bow many can be benefited.

On tbe basis that but 20 per cent of tlJe Civil War .survi>ors now pensioneu at. $72 per month woulu be entitled to the $DO rate provided ln the bill, tbe total approximate aduitional cost of the bill is $30,-783,432 ; but on the theory that substantially all of the Civil War survivors now pensioned at $72 per month would be entitled to the $00 mte provided for, the total additional ~oat of the entfre bill would be $39,621,744.

A. copy of this report was submitted to the Director of the Bureau of the Bud:;et, who, under date of the 14th instant, advises " that the proposed legislation is in confilct with the financial program of the President."

Very truly yours, HL'BEHT WORK.

JtEPOHTS OF COMMITTEES

1\!r. FERNALD, from the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, to which were referred the following bills, reported. them sevet:ally without amPndment and submitted a report as indicated:

A bill ( S. 4221) authorizing the construction by the SecretRry of Commerce of a power-plant huilding on the present site of the Bureti.u of Standards in the District of Columbia (Rept. No. 931) ; •

A bill (H. R. 2;32) to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to · accept a title to a site for tile po:st office at Donora, Pa., which excepts and reserves na~ral gas and oil underlying the land;

A bill (H. R. 431) providing for tlle conveyance of certain land to the cily of Boise, Idaho, and from the city of Boise, Idaho, to tlle United States;

A bill (H. R. G35fl) authorizing the purchase by tile Secretary of Commerce of a site and tbe construction and equipment of a building tuereon for use as a master-track scale and testcar depot, and for other purpoRes ;

A bill (H. R. 9809) to authorize and empower the Cecretary of the Treasury to accept a corrective dce<l to certain real estate in the city of New York for the use of the new post-office building ; and

A blll (II. R. 11353) to convey to the city of Oshko. h, Wis., certain Government property.

1\Ir. BORAH, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, to which was referred C:e bill (H. R. 11308) authorizing the payment of an indemnity to Great Britain on account of the death of Daniel Shaw 'Villiamson, a British subject, who was killed at East St. Louis, Ill., on July 1, 1921, reported it without amendment and submitted a report (No. 932) thereon.

1\Ir. JONES of Washington, from the Committee on Commerce, to which was referred the bill (II. R. 10973) to readjust the commissioned personnel of the Coast Guard, and for other purposes, reported it without amendment and submitted a report (No. 033) thereon.

He also, from the same committee, to which was referred the bill (H. R. 5026) to provide for the construction of 10 vesRels for the Coast Guard, reported it with an amendment and submitted a report (No. 934) thereon.

1\ir. PEPPER, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to which were referred the following bills, reported them each without amendment and submitted a report as inuicated :

A bill (S. 1641) for the relief of l\:fary H. Dougherty (Rept. No. 93"5) ; and

A bill (H. R. 7181) to provide for the equalization of promotion of officers of the staff corps of the Navy with officer. of the line.

Mr. DUTLER, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to which was referred the l>ill (H. R. 2808) for the relief of Paymaster Herbert Elliott Stevens, United States Navy, reported it without amendment and submitted a report (No. 036) thereon.

Mr. HALE, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to which were referred the following bills and joint resolution, reported them severally without amendment and submitted reports ~he!'eon 1

10062 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE }fAy 26

A bill (H. R. 8763) to pre>ent delay in the promotion of officers of the Navy an<l Marine Corps (Rept. No. 937) ;

A. bill (H. R 3052) authorizing the Secretary of the Navy to receive for instruction at the United States Naval Academy at .Annapolis Mr. Gustayo Tegera Guevara, a dtizen of Venezuela (Rept. No. 038) ;

A. bill (H. R 6015) to correct the Marine Corps record of Roy W. Saam (Rept. No. 039) ;

A bill (H. n. 7217) to authorize Capt. F. A. Traut, United States Na>y, to accept a <lecoration from the King of Denmark known as the "Order of Dannebrog" (Rept. No. 940) ;

A bill (H. R. 8725) to establi~h the warrant grade of pay clerk and the commissione<l warrant grades of chief marine gunner, chief quartermaster clerk, and chief pay clerk in the United States Marine Corps (Rept. No. 041) ; and

A joint resolution (H .• T. Res. 0) granting permission to ' \'alter Stanley Haas, lieutenant commnmler, United States Navy, to accept a decoration bestowed upon him by the Government of Ecua<lor (Rept. No. 942).

l\lr. HALE, also from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to whicl-t was 1~eferrerl the bill (H. R. 03H)) to authorize certain officers of the United States Navy to accept from the Republic of Chile the order of merit, first class, and the oruer of merit, secoll(l class, reported it with an amendment, and submitted a report (No. M3) thereon.

:Mr. CAPPER, from the Committee on the District of Columbia, to which ·was referred the bill (H. n. 12266) to amend the act entitled "An act for the retirement of public-school teachcrR in the Di strict of Columbia," approved January 15, 1920, and for other purpo~t~~. reported it with an amendment and submitted a report ( .L ;o. 9-H) thereon.

Mr. TRAM;)lEJLL, from the Committee on Claims, to which were refer re<l tlle following bills, reported them each without amen<lmcnt and f'ubruitted reports thereon :

A bill ( S. 3462) for the relief of Homer H. Hacker ( Rept. No. 945) ; and

A bill (H. n.. 0775) for tlJe relief of Sherman files (Rept. No. D4G).

PASSAIC VALLEY S E"WERAGE COMMISSIONF.RS

Mr. TRAMMELL, from the Ogmmittee on Claims, reported the following resolution ( S. Hes. 233), with accompanying papers:

Recol rcd, That the bill entitled "A bill (S. 3366) for the relief of tue l'assa ie Va lley Sewera~;e Commissioners," now pending in the Senate, together IYith all the nccompanying papers, be, and the same is hereby, referred to the Court of Claims, in pursuance of the provisions of an act entitled "An act to codify, revise, and amend the laws r elating to the judiciary," approved March 3, 1911 ; and the said court shall proceed with the same in accordance with the provisions of such act, and report to the Senate in accordance therewith.

ENROLLED BILLS PRESENTED

Mr. GREENE, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that on to-day that committee presentc;u to the Presi

, dent of the United States the following enrolle<l "bills: S. 2537. An act to provide for the condemnation of land for

the opening, extension, widening, or straightening of streets, avenues, roads, or highways in accordance with the plan of the permanent system of highways for the District of Columbia, nnd for other purposes ; and

S. 2730. An act to nmend section 1155 of an act entitled "An act to establish a co<le of law for the District of Columbia."

BILLS INTRODUCED

Bills wel·e introduced, read the first time and, by unanimous con ent, the second time, and referred as follows :

By Mr. JONES of Washington: A bill (S. 4352) granting a pension to Agnes O'Neil; to the

Committee on Pensions. By :Mr. G U;LETT : A bill ( S. 4353) for the relief of the widow of Warren V.

Howard; to the Committee on Military Affairs. By 1\:lr. McLEAN: A bill ( S. 4354) granting a pension to Julia I. H. Dilworth

(with accompanying papers) ; to the Committee on Pensions. By Mr. CAPPER: A bill ( S. 4355) authorizing the National Capital Park and

Planning Commission to purchase Fort Hunt, Va., and l!~ort 'Va shington, Md. ; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

.AIR CORPS OF THE ARMY

Mr. BINGHAM: submitted two amendments intended to be proposed by him to the bill (H. R. 10827) to provide more effectively for the national defense by increasing the efficiency of the Air Corps of the Army of the United States, and for other purposes, whi<:h were ordered to lie on the table and to lJe pripted.

COOPERATIVE MARKETING

1\Ir. HARRIS submitted an amendment intende<l to be proposed by him to the bill (H. H.. 7893) to create a divi1>ion of cooperative marketing in the Department of Agriculture; to provide for the acquisition and dissemination of information pertaining to cooperation ; to promote the knowleuge of cooperative principles and practices; to provide for calling advisers to counsel with the Secretary of Agriculture on cooperative activities; to autlJorize cooperative associations to acql!_ire, interpret, and uis ·eminate crop and market information, and for other 1mrposes, which was or<lered to lie on the table and to be printed.

HOUSE BILLS REFEHRED

The following bills were severally read twice by title and referred as indicate<l below:

H. R. 6728. An act to regulate in the District of Columbia the traffic in, sale, and use of milk bottles, cans, crates, and other container of milk and cream, to prevent fraud and deception, and for otller pul"}JO~es ; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

H. R. 7532. An act to provide payment for services rendered in preparation for the international conference on traffic in habit-forming narcotic drugs ; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

II. R. 7973. An act to provide American regi~ try for the NorWC'gian sailing vesRel Derwent; to the Committee on Commerce.

H. R. 1044G. An act valiclating the application for and entry of certain public lauds by 1\Iyrtle Sullinger; and

H. Rl0489. An act to perfect the homestead entry of John Helmes; to the Committee on Public Lands and Suneys.

H. R. 505. An act for the relief of B. Jack. on; H. R. 1105. Au act for the relief of the Kelly Springfield

l\!otor Truck Co., of California ; H. R. 1330. An act for the relief of H elene 1\I. Hnbrich; H. R. 1565. An act for the relief of Pirtle Handley ; H. R. 2207. An act for the relief of Simon R. Curtis; H. R. 2320. An act for the relief of Delmore A. Teller ; H. R. 30C9. An net for the relief of Charles 0. Dunbar; H. R. 3592. An act for the relief of Johanna B. Weinberg; R. R. ·H2o. An act for the relief of Louis A. Hogue ; H. n. 466-1. An act for the r elief of Arthur H. Bagshn w; H. R 6267. An act for the relief of Joseph F. MacKnight; H. R. 6G84. An act for the relief of Charles 0. Schmidt; H. R. G58G. An act for the relief of Russell W. Simpson ; H. R. 7674. An act for the relief of Capt. H. Bert Knowles; H. R. 7703. An net for the relief of James F. McCarthy; H. n. 7930. An act for the relief of the Broad Brook Bank &

Trust Co.; H. R. 0089. An act for the relief of Mabel Blanche Rockwell ; H. R OOOG. An act for the relief of L. J. HouO'htaling; H. R. 10020. An act for the relief of William Knabe ; H. n. 10IG1. An act for the relief of the owners of the barge

Mcnt-·ainc No. 1; H. R. 10G23. An act for the relief of the Lidgerwood Manu

facturing Co. ; and H. R. 10641. An act for the relief of Elias Field ; to the

Committee on Claims. H. R. 726. An act for the relief of George .J. Covert; H. R. 810. An net for tlJe relief of James 0. Simmons, alias

James 0. Whitlock ; H. n. 830. An act for the relief of John Jakes; H. n. 1507. An act for the relief of Albert 0. Tucker; H. R. 2160. An act for the relief of Patrick J. Langan; H. R. 2313. An act for the relief of Amos Dahuff; H. R. 2316. An act for the relief of John Clark; H. R. 2882. An act for the relief of E. D. J\Iacready; H. R. 8663. An act to correct the military record of G. W.

Gilkison; H. R. 4716. An act for the relief of Samuel Pelfrey; H. R. 5074. An act for the relief of George D. Vedder; H. R. 6130 . .A.n net for the relief of Seymour Buckley ; H. R. G422. An act to correct the military recor<l of George W.

Kelly; H. R. C65G. 1\n act for the relief of William A. Hyucs; H. R. 6834. An net tor the relief of Joseph M. Black ; H. R. 6021. An act to correct the . military record of James

Perry Whitlow ; H. R. 7352. An act for the relief of J;ester Cooley ; H. R. 8202. An act to correct the military 1·ecord of John R.

Butler; H. R. 8203. An act to correct the military record of Milton

Langsdorf; H. R. 8552. An act for the relief of Herman 'Vaguer, alias

Henry Burnett ;

I

\

--

1926 CONGRESSIONAL R.ECORD-SENATE 110063 - . _ II. R. 8663. An net for the relief of Alvin H. Tinker;

H. R. 8941. An act for tlw relief of Turpin G. Hova.s; H. R. 8061. An act for the relief of William E Jones ;

- H. R. 9232. An act for the relief of Isaac A. Chandler ; H. R. 0234. An act to change the military record of Thomas

Dowling, alias James Murphy; H. R. 032-:1. An act for the relief of desertion from the name

of George A. McKenzie, alias William A. Williams ; · H. H. 0667. An act for the relief of Columbus P. Pierce;

H. R. 10078. An act for the relief of l\Iyron J. Conway, Frank W. Halsey, and others ; and

H. R. 10226. An act to correct the military record of John P. Daley; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

MESSAGE FHOAI THE IIOUSE

A message from the House of Representatives, by 1\Ir. Chaffee, one of its clerks, anuounced that the House had agreed to the amendments of the Senate Nos. 1, 2, and 4 to the bill (H. R 10089) granting the consent of Congress for the construction of a bridge over the Columbia River at a point within 1 mile upstream and 1 mile downstream from the mouth of the Entiat lUver in Chelan County, State of ·washi-ngton, and that the House had disagreed to the amendment of the ~enate No. 3 to the said bill.

PRESIDENTLAL .APPROVALS A message from the President of the United States, by Mr.

Latta, one of his secretaries, announced that the President had apl}roved and signed the following nets :

On May 24, 1926 : S. 2GOu. An act to prohibit offering for sale as Federal farm

loan bonds auy securities not issued under the terms of the farm loan act, to limit the use of the words " .Federal," "United States," or "reserve," or a combination of such words, to prohibit false advertising, and for other purposes.

On May 25, 1926 : S. 1729. An act to authorize the payment of an indemnity to

the Government of Norway on account of the losses sustained by the owners of the Norwe;;ian bark Janna ns a result of a collision between it and the U. S. S. Westwood~·

S. 1731. An act to authorize the payment of an indemnity to the Government of Sweden on account of losses sustained by tlw owners of the Swedish steamship Oliv-ia as a result of a collision between it and the U. S. S. Lake St. Clair;

S. 1732. An act to authorize the payment of an indemnity to · the Government of Norway on account of the losses sustained by the owners of the Norwegian steamship John BZ1mter as a result of n collision between it and a barge in tow of the U. S. Army tug Brittania;

S. 1733. An act to authorize the payment of an indemnity to the Government of Denmark on account of losses sustained by the O\-vners of the Danish steamship Masnedsund as the result of collisions between it and the U. S. S. Siboney and the U. S. Army tug No. 21, at St. Nazaire, France; and

S. 4209. An act to provide for the establishment of the l\1nmmoth Cave National Park, in the State of Kentucky, and for other purposes.

On May 26, 1{)26 : S. 3115. An act to amend section 220 of the Criminal Code.

COLUMBIA. RIVER BRIDGE The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate the action of

the House of Representatives agreeing to the amendments of the Senate Nos. 1, 2, and "4 to the bill (H. R. 10089) granting the consent of Congress for the construction of a bridge over the Columbia River at a point within 1 mile upstream and 1 mile downstream from the mouth of the Entiat River in Chelan County, State of Washington, and disagreeing to the amendment of the Senate No. 3 to the said bill.

Mr. JONES of Washington. Amendment No. 3 has reference to a section which was evidently a mistake, so I move that the Senate recede from the amendment.

The motion was agreed to. l!OI!ONGO INDIAN RESERVATIO~ LANDS, CALIFORNLA

Mr. HARRELD. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the conference report on Senate bill 2702, submitted by me on the 10th instant.

The report was read, considered, and agreed to, as follow.s :

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the House to the bill ( S. 2702) to provide for the setting apa-rt of certain lands in the State of California as an addition to the Mocongo Indian Reservation, having met, after full and free conference have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows :

That the Senate recede from its clis:!greemcnt to the amend-ment of the House, and agree to the same.

J. \Y. HARRELD, SAM G. BRATTON, RoBERT M. LA FoLL!:"I"TE, Jr.,

Managers on the part of the Senate. SCOTT LEAVITT, w. H. SPROUL, CARL HAYDEN'

Managers on the part of the Ho1tse.

SANTA YSABEL INDIAN RESERVATION LANDS, CALIFORNIA Mr. HARRELD. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate

proceed to the consideration of the confetreuce report on House bill 8186, submitted by me on the 19th instant.

The report was read, considered, and agreed to, as follows :

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 8186) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to purchase certain lands in California to be added to the Santa YRabel Indian Reservation and authorizing an appropa:iation of funds therefor, having met, after full and free conference have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:

That the Senate r ecede from its amendments. J. W. HARRELD, R.AI.PII H. CAMERON, JOHN B. KENDRICK,

Managers on the part of the Senate. SCOTT LE.A.VlTT, CARL HA1."DEN, \V. ll. SPROUL,

Managers 011- the part of the Houso.

ADDRESSES ON BIRTHDAY OF JOHN ll.A.YS .IIAMMOND :Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. 1\fr. President, on Monday

evening, May 3, 1026, the seventy-first anniversary of the birth of a very distinguished American, one of the greatest mining engineers of the period, 1\Ir. John Hays Hammond, was cele· brated in the city of New York by a convention of his friends. On that occasion addresses were delivered by the toastmaster, tile Hon. Charles S. Thomas, formerly a Member of this body ; the Senator from Nevada [Mr~. PITTMAN]; and Bishop Freeman, of "Tasbington. Those addresses relate to an interesting and important phase of American life and industry and reveal the fact that the figure to which the addresses relate, Mr. Hammond, bas had an exceptionally interesting and useful career. I ask unanimous consent to have the addresses re· ferred to, with the accompanying matter, inserted in the RECORD.

The VICE PRESIDENT. 'Vithout objection, it is so ordered. The addresses are as follows:

A.DDRF.SS OF l:ION. KEY PITTliiA:::-f, UNITED STATES SENATOR FROY NEYADA lion. CIJarlPs S. Thomas presiding. The TOASTMASTER. The career of the next speaker runs largely

along parallel lines to that of :\!r. Hammonu. Mr. Hammond went to Germany and found the treasure of his life. Senator PITT:\IA~ went to Alaska and had a similar delightful experience. There he and his bride traveled in dog sleds for about 2,GOO miles as their honeymoon journey, took the boat, went to San Francisco, and from thence to Nevada. Senator PI'l"l'MAN has ever since then had the courage of his wife's convictions. [Laughter and applause.] And those convictions were all right; therefore he became, before he entered public life, a celebrated lawyer, and is one of the most prominent and valuable Senators in that great legislative bo<ly at Washington. Senator PITTMAN. [Applause.]

Ron. KEY PITTMAN, United States Senator from Nevada. Mr. Toastmaster, Mrs. Hammond, 1\Ir. Hammond, and friends, I am very glad to be in the same company wllh the ulstinguished toastmaster and our distinguished guest. I doullt if any of us would be standing here to-night if it were not for our wives.

Nothing gives me more possible pleasure than being called on tonight to participate in paying tribute to my friend, John Hammond. My surprise, however, at being called on to-night is equal to the pleasure that I experience, because when I saw my dear friend, Charlie Thomas, and asked him why it was that he did not notify me that I was to be called on to-night, so that I might make some preparation, he said, "That is the exact reason why I didn't call on you." He said, " While the Vice Presiucnt has not yet succeeded in placing the rule of cloture on the United States Senate, tt wlll be placetl upou you to-night at this meeting. [Laughter.]

As the chairmnq, I have a very fond and sympathetic feeling for our distinguished guest. Wl1ile not a member of his profession, like

10064 CONGRESSIONAL R.ECORD-SENA~rE l\fAY 26

onr distinguished chairman, have been a mining lawyer, and for years both of us have made our living out of proving to the courts and to the juries the mistakes of distinguished mining engineers. [Laughter.]

In coming here to-night, and in trying to think of something that 1 might say in five minutes, because we have a custom in the Uniteu States Senate of taking 30 minutes to converse with ourselves bC'fore we dC'cide upon the topic which we will discuss [laughter], I thought po!'lsibly that I might hC'arken back to twenty-odd years ago, when I sat in a little office building in a little office in a little mining camp then and listened to Mr. Hammond discuss the days of his past anu the prin· ciples that surround his profession. He was then, as he is now, the foremost defender of the mining industry throughout the world. As has been so ably stated, he looks on it beyond a teclmical occupation; he looks on it as the very foundation of the production and utilization of metals.

I remember that he went back; he stated that in the very dawn of history mon was a wr.ak animal who ran from the larger a11d fiercer animals and bill in caves, who preyed upon the smaller animals and ekeu out a mjserable exist<:nce, until tllere dawned upon his mind and imag· ination the use of metals. And then, by a rough-hewn flint that was attacLeu to his hammer anrt to his arrow and to his spear, he beca me the dominant animal in aU tlle world. And that discovery of metal went on until through it he overcame the forests and hewed them into boats; be overcame the land and made agriculture produce. And as be moved on in the use and the utilization of metals he performed the great feat of manufacturing sometlling that woul<l utilize the tt·emen· dons power of steam. And on and on he went until the wooden canoe became the great steel shlp of to-day. On he went until copper poured from out of our mountains and made the great wire connections that made the whole world neighbors. And further on and on he went in the nse and discovery of metals until it became apparent that tlJe fundamental advance of civilization in the last few hundred years has marched parallel with the production and the utilization of metals.

He has done more-mot·e than ru1y man that I know of-to mo\·e aside the fog that su rrounds the mining industry and give it a dignity among the industries of the world.

Those were Iron and copper and other metal~ of utilization. nut it became apparent, If not In ancient times certainly in modern times, that gold an<l silver, though not subject to the utilization of the other metals, were the very foun<lation of all prosperity, of all buildingsyes; the very foundation of every go'\"ernment. Why, looking back through history we find that that country, that government, that possessed the most gold anu silver during that period of time was dominant in peace and In war. Anu as we come down through history we find that in 1849, away back in 1849, when the miners in the hills of California, in those mountain F:tt·eams took from out of the gravel the gold anti wealth that poured through the uterics of trade in this country, then began a prosperity in trade and commerce in the Unitetl States that ne,·er has stopped.

And then the Civil War came on, with its blight, and it was o>er and the perio<l of della tion was forced upon us, when even the credit of this great Government was shaken to its foundations, as the credit of foreign countries after this last Great War; it was the <liscovery and opening up of the great Comstock mine in the State of Nevada that poured its six hundred-odd millions of gold and silver into the trade marts of our-. country and restored the credit of· this country and placed it upon a basis from which it has never yet fallen.

.And then we come down to this last great world strug-gle, when, in March, the Germans were making that drive that seemed a lmost impossible to stop, when the British had thrown in every man that they had, when Foch was crying for but a single reserve, there was a revolution tllreatened in Inuin, a reyolution tl1-:t some of the great statesmen of Englanu had saiU would have come had it not been foT the aid that this Go,·ernment coulrl giYe in silver at that time. Silver was essential, yet in all the world silver had been held so lowly, it had been so despised, that no go,·ernmcnt had seen fit to bold a reserve of it, except the United. States. In the Treasury of the United States there were four to five hundred millions of silver dollars that might be used, and they had been used once, but by legislation they were used again, and that threatened re•olution in Inuia was stopped, and possibly the whole course of the war was changed.

And when the war was over, as we look now at the deflation whicll followed, we have found out that there is no such thing as Go-.crnment credit. We have found out that there is nothing except solid metal, gold and silver, that is the basis of credit throughout the world. A.nd if the rehal.Jilitation of credit and the reconstruction of Europe ever takes place, it must be dependent upon the reserves of gold and sllvcr of this country. That is the very foundation of all credit, the founuation of all government.

And so, sirs, our prospectors have been sent out into the hills; they have gone out with their burros, with their slab of bacon and little sack of flour; they have gone through the de:wrt's heat and through the wintry blasts into the barren, desolate wastes to hunt for the gold and silver that makes wealth for onr Nation and makes sound the governments of ail countries. And in their trucks have followed along that bard, bitter train the engineers.. Jack Hammond has followed them

from the barren wastes of South Africa to the Icc-bound mountains of Alaska. He has followed them through the deserts of the West, from the Rocky Mountains down through Mexico and down into the jungles of South America. He has followed them, and following him have l!een that great class of mining men, term them speculators, if you please, but men whose spirit lool<ecl out toward the vision of a stronger alid better empire backed by gold and silvet·.

I say to you that Jack Hammond represents the very spirit of mctnllism. Jack Hammond represents the soul of metn.llism, which in pires the prospector, which in spires the mining engineer, which inspires the mining man, no matter what part of the world he may be in. He has raised and dignified that occupation. He is inspiring the young engineers of the country, the young mining men of the country, the college boys of tlle country, to see that there is something more than obtaining interest on money; that the gTeat pleasure ancl glory of production, of placing in the vrorld something new, of placing a foundation under· all industries and all governments, is better than any other accomplishment.

.Anrl it is for these reasons, among the other reasons, that we love and admire Jack Hammond. [Applause.]

ADDRESS OF' llrSITOP FREE.MAN

Tl!C TO.lST~IASTER. Ladies and gentlemen, the next speaker is also a Washington institution. I have heal'(l many sincere comr•liments paid to him, not the least of which was paid lJy a somewhat liberally· inclined friend of mine within the last six months. He said, " Senator, do you know Bishop Freeman? " I said, " Yes ; lJut not as well as I wish I could." "You are right," he saitl, "a great man, a. gooll man. He Is a man who is really better tllan his religion."

I refrain, I am rathct· hesitant, to say anything in addition to that story, but I will introLluce the bisllop. [Applause.]

Bishop FREEUAN. :llr. Toastmaster, ladles and gentlem<'n, and my very dear friends and former parishoners, Mr. and Mrs. Hammond, there are no limitations in my speech, either In time or subject matter. The chairman had specific instructions given to him us to what be could say and could not say. :Mr. Hammond, it is a da1.1gerons business for a rector to be turned loose on this crowd to tell them what be thinks of yon . To sit through such an ordeal as this and to hear that which a man rarely hears, the estimate of his friends while in life, is not only a trial to a man but it certainly ought to be a source of infinite joy to him.

I was thinking, as the toastmaster alluded to Mr. Cecil Rhodes, of the obser•ation that is accredited to him as his last words. It is said that when Cecil Rhodes was dying, that with his last breath be said, " So much to do ; so little done ! "

I can not but reflect as I think about this man, this great man, dying in the prime of his years, that his distinguished colleague, who is here with us to-night, certainly could hardly echo such a sentimPnt, for in this presence he has disclosed to his vision a wealth of friendship that nny man might highly esteem.

After all, the accumulation of lJOnors or the accumulation of riches are the common prope1·ty of almost any man who seeks them, but the accumulation of frieuds, that is an end a.nu a consummation devoutly to be wished.

Charles Kingsley was once asked by an 1nquiRitive woman, when he was at the height of his fame both as a preacher nnd a.s a literateur, " What, Doctor Kin~sley, do you regard as the secret of your genius?" He was an exceedingly modest man ancl he hesitated for a moment and then Yery quietly and very modestly he responded, " Madam, I had a frienu." That was all . Somewheres in the bacl{ground of that man's great Hfe resided a supreme personality, ancl from that personality he had caught tire, and the enthusiasms of his life had been seized and he had gone forward upon his grent quest.

Cbivali'ouRly, shall I not say it, John llays Hammond hacl a friend that constituted in his Ufe one of the contributing factors to his ·greatness and to his genius, and it would be highly improper for us to assemble in such a gathering as this and not record the fact that the friend tllat has stood by him in all seasons and in all weathers and in all and in every very grave crisis, has been the motller of his children alHl the wife of his bosom. [Applause.]

We have heard from his own modcRt lips something of the story of that extraordinary experience he bad in South Africa. I have begged him to keep his pen busy in writing for succeeding generations the graphic and colorful and fasciuating story of his life. llut if he writes, and I am confident he will, as llis chivalrous nature dictates, he will allot to her a very conspicuous place in that very tragic incident that might have terminated his earthly c:Jreer-.

I think of him to-night an<l I have followed the sp<'eches as his frien<ls have uttered them here-I think of him to.-night not only in terms of frlenrlship, for I have known him in very close an·u intimate terms, and his rector, Doctor 'l.'ownsend, who knew lllm ycat·s before I did, woulu certify to what I say. I ha,·e known him rather closely and intimately in many ways, but It may not be known to the .mining fraternity or to those who arc engaged in the great enterprises here in this great metropolitan center that the latest distinction that bas come to Mr. Hammond-and I confess is quite a unique one in the

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 110065 l!ght of his career-Is that of a cathedral builder. When I attempted to dragoon him in his delightful Gloucester home into service as my colleague, it was vet·y interesting to wntch the play of his features as he li.:ltened to my story. And again I must pay tribute to his wife, for it was only by a conspiracy that existed between Mrs. Hammond al:ld myself that we ultimately delivered John Hays Hammond as a cat hedral builder. [Laughter and applause.]

You have been talking about him to-night in many ways and many phases. You have been thinldng about him in connection with those

-outstand ing things that have distinguished hls professional car~er. You haYe been thiuldng about him as a great empire builder. We used to use that term in 'l\Iinnesota concerning the lute James J. Hill. I think we may with perfect propriety apply it also to Mt·. Hammond. .

I recognize the utter yulue of all that has been said here concPming the distinction o.f his profes:'l ional career, and I llail with delight every honor that has been given him on this a uspicious occasion. Dut I ltl;:e to think of him In another rOle. For, after all, quite apart from this dl~tinction we may al'quire by reason of our Inherent genius or by our application to a giYcn calling, thrre is a uistinction that every rightmlndPd American citizen ought to seek at least, ancl that is to be a useful and valuable member, not merely of society, for that may mean a limiteil flphere of or.cupation, lmt a useful, efficient, self-effacing, con. er.rateu citizen of the State and of the Nation. [Applause.]

.And so to-night, coming from ·washington, I hall him not merely as a great engineer, and in that capacity I do not know him quite as well. I know him in tho!'le clor-;er intimacies of his own home, in those closer tics of friell(lship. nut I do l'l' joicc on Ruch an occasion as this to sC'e a gt·oup of distlnguishr.d New Yorkers come together not only fot· the purpose of passing wonh; of afl'ect~on and of kind1y compliment to a distinguished engineer and a great financier nnd an outstanding busine.;;s man and a loyal fl'iend, but if I rightly tlefine the real purpose of this occasion, it is to pay tribute to John Hays Hammond, eminent citizen of the United States. [Applause.]

You remember, do you not, that on one occasion :Mr. Emerson was attempting to define what constituted the greatness of a country, and as be went on to tell of what was really the right kind. of evaluation of a country, be said : "You can not judge a country by its extent of territory, nor again can you judge it by the value of its crops, nor even can you estimate its worth by its known or unknown resources, but the thing that determines the efficiency and the worth of a country is the kind of men it turnR out."

.And my friends, never has there been a time when it was more important to recognize that method of evaluating life and the values of national life. Taking that as a standard , I rejoice to think as a citizen of no mean country, as a citizen of the imperial capital of this western world., than which no capital is more dominant in the world, I rejoice to think that in private lifC', without either the distinctions or the cmolumC'nts of public office, this man pursuing his own daily ta"k along the cool, sequestered vales, has nevertheless rendereu conspicuom~ and valiant Hervice, selfless service, to his country and to his time and to his generation. [.\pplause.]

There i!i no need for the emulation of these virtues in public anu private life to-day. For, after all, we may boast that we arc the creditor Nation of the world, we may boast that we have greater resources, known and unknown, than any nation in the world, we may boa~:>t of our man power, our money power, our producing po,ver, our mPchanical genius, but the ultimate test of a nation's greatness re!'liues in its citizens. And it is the citizen John Hays Hammond that I lift my hat to to-night and rejoice on this occasion to bring my tribute to hiru, reflecting, as I b<:'lieve I do in this imperfect word and tribute, not a per~onal jndgment but the judgment of men who occupy the loftiest places in the gift of this great llepubllc.

.Anu so, ;\lr. Hammond, I bring you as your bishop, as your former rector, as your beloved friend, the cord.ial greetings of the great diocese of \Vashington; and I bring to you, as I venture to think I do, not my own greetings, they might seem poor and mean to you; not my own felicitations, they might seem inconsequential to you ; but I bring to you the greetings of all your neigbl>ors and your frienfls who know and love you !Jest for your true worth, who esteem you not only because you occupy a commanding place in your chosen profession, but because you are a great citizen of a very great 1·epublic. [Applause.]

May I close with just tllese lines that somehow or other have a striking significance as applied to Mr. Hammond, the lines known as " The Bridge Bullder· "-

"An old man going along a highway Came n t the evening cold and gray

To a chasm vast and deep and wide And the old man crossed tn the twilight dim J The sull en stream bad no fear for hillll. nut he tmned when safe on the other side Anll built a bridge to span the tide.

'Old mun,' said a fellow pilgrim, 'why Are you wasting your strength with building here? Your j ourney will end with the ending day l You never again w111 pass this way~

You ha,·e crossed the chasm deep and wide, Why build this bridge at eventide? ' The builder lifted his old gray head;

'Good friend, in the path I've come,' he said, ' There !ollu-weth after me to-day a youth

Whose feet must pass this way. This chasm that bas bC'en as naught to me To that fair-haired youth may a pitfall be. He, too, mu;;;;t pass in the twilight dim ; Good friend, I'm building a bridge for him.' "

[Applause.]

CLOSI!'\G ADDllESS OF llO!'i. CHAULES S. THOMAS, FORMER SENATOR FRO~I COLOllADO

Lad.ies and gentlemen, it is out of the question to attempt to do more tbnn briefly refer to the many letters and. telegrams of congratulation that have come to this meeting. There are two or three, howeYer, which I think should be made a part of the record. The others will appear in book form as soon as they can be properly prepared for publication, and then you will be acquainted with their contents.

There is a letter here from the White House : " It gives me pleasure to have the privilege of joining your mnny

friends in heartiest congratulations on this your seventy-fi rst birth1lay. It is good to know that, while you have passed the Biblical ' tllrce score and ten,' you arc still in the enjoyment of good health and able to continue those public services wllich have so d.istinguishe<.l your career.

"~Jay the future years hold for you peace and happiness." Luther Burbank wrote-and this is nddres5ied to Mr. Wall: "Yours of March 5 came in due season, but since then I have re

ceived more than 4,000 letters, several thousand of which I have not had time to answer, and they are still waiting on my desk.

"I have great appreciation for Mr. John llays Hammond. And hC're are my most hearty kinll regard.s and admiration for a very charming and e1!icient man-:Mr .. John Hays Hammond."

The Vice President wrote: · "May I be included among those who desire to congratulate and

extend best wishes to Mr. John Hays Hammond on the seventy-first anniversary of his birth?"

From Cardinal Hayes : " On my return to the city after an absence of several weeks, I find

your invitation to the dinner of affectionate r egaru for John Flays Hammond. I regret exceedingly that I am unable to be present, but I hope to be considered as one of the company of friends who honor him to-night. His career of actual achievement with unfailing loyalty to his ideals of servke and. country and fellowmen is a notable contribution to the life and history of .America."

From the mayor of your great city: " On the occasion of your seventy-first birthday, permit me to offer

you my most sincere congratulations. Not only have you every cause to I.Je proull of the active and extraordinary life that you have led, but it must mean much to you to know that your fellow Americans have reason to congratulate themselves over your valued accomplishments. Rarely have scholarships and science been so successfully combineu with the :romance of achievement, auventure, and high purpose. Gladly do I join with your many friends in ardently wi:shing you many birt~days in the years to come."

There is a l etter here from Mr. llammond's old classmate, one of the most eminent of our citizens of any generation, Chief .Justice 'l'aft, and I must read it. I will only trespass upon your patience a little longer :

"I greatly regret that my court duties make it impossible for me to join the throng o-f Jack Hammond's frienus in evidencing by this dinner their affectionate regard for him and their high appreciation of his quallties as a friend, and man, and a citizen. Few men have had such a world-wide experience as Mr. Hammond. A leader in the most important field of mining engineering, be has been brought in touch with prominent men and leaders in many countries and especially in that of his own. Offered many offices, he has d.eclincd to give up the frePdom and indepenuence of private life. Broad and liberal :mel catholic in his appreciation· of organized effort to help the community, active in many groups of men, be bus devoted much of the ~vealth which he bas earned by his professional skill and foresight for the benefit of others. He rendered a great· national service as chairman of the national coal investigation, and the report which he signed is the best review of the defects of our present coal situation and the soundest suggestion for its improvement that we have bad. Few men are better known the world around than the guest whom you honor.

" I am especially disappointed not to be present to pay in person to Mr. llammond my tributes Qf love and admiration, based on more than GO years of close friendship beginning 'neath the elms of dear old Yale.

"WILT .. IAM H. TAFT."

[Applause.] A word or two in conclusion. Reference has been made to one of

the most tragic moments in Mr. Hammond's life.. I watched the pro-

10066 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE MAY 26 cecuings tn South Africa, although I dld not then know 1\Ir. Hammond, with the great peculiar and anxious interest and apprehension, knowing, as I did, the danger in which be stood. lle stood under sentence of ucath and under the very shadow of the gallows. His life seemed to ba ve been forfeit beyond all hope of human interference, when l\Irs. Hammond marshaled in his behalf and mobilized the sympathy and the moral force of the civilized WOiild. [Applause.] It was she whose constant efforts in his behalf with those in power and those out of power that brought home to every nation having an interest in justice and the moral determination to secure it, that so actively and so ener· gctically bestirred themselves in behalf of this innocent man convicted unjustly, after a most degrading and unjust trial-it was these influences combined anu brought to bear in all their power and majesty upon the !lull-witted and determine(} and ignorant ruler of the Boers, that finally lifted this shadow and caused the sunshine to take its place away over in tbe wilds of South Africa.

Let me, therefore, before we adjourn, ask you to drink to the health of one of the finest women, one of the most devoted and exemplary wives that man was ever blessed with.

('l'he toast was responded to amid great applause.) The TOAST:\IASTF.R. Time is fleeting, and we must bring this meeting

to a close some time, so I will ask Father Wal::;h to pronounce the benediction.

The Very Rev. ED:\IU~D A. WALSTI. We give Thee thanks, Almi~hty God, for this, the journey's end, and we do beseech Thee that as Thou hast guided us and him whom 've love and honor into this year's end, so mayest Thou guide him anu all that love him into the true harbor of eternity, that we may all with him know Thee and love Thee forevermore. Amen I

MAY 20, 1!)2G.

[Fwm Herbert Wall, 42 Broadway, New York City, chairman, company of friends tht·oughout the world who paid tribute to John Hays Hammond on the occasion of his seventy-first birthday]

It gives me pleasure to transmit to yqu copies of a few messages of affectionate regard and respect for Mr. Hammond ft·om overseas :

COL. lll. lf. HOUSE~ HOTEL RITZ, PLACE VENDO:'>fE, PARIS

It is a pleasure and a pdvilege to be given an opportunity to pay homage to so vital and distinguislled an American as John Hays Hammonu. He is one of the world's outstanding figures and there clings around his name a romance that fascinates and intrigues. Adventurous, courageous, and loyal to friends and country, he bas played a great part worthily. I make obeisance to him and his kind, for if the United States is to enuure, our· leaders of the future must have within them something of the heroic uber of John Hays Hammond.

SIR RODERT S. HOR~E, 69 PALL MALL, LONDON

To JOHN HAYS HAMUO~D: From a country in which yon have long been admired and have

hosts of affectionate friends I send you sincere and cordial greetings on the attainment of your seventy-first birthday. I venture to offer you e.lso warm congratulations. upon the health and vigor with which you still confront the future, and on the splen<lld work and shining achievements of the years that lie behind.

ARTHUR l\1. GRENFELL, 9 CO~NAUGHT PLACEl, LONDON

I need hnrdly tell you how sorry I am that I can't span the 8,000 miles that divide us in time to be prese~t at the dinner to Hays IIammond. • • • We Britisbers owe a deep debt of gratitude to Hays Hammonu. If be hadn't openly and bravely allieu himself to our cause in South Africa-" Equal rights for all white men "-the world to-day would still judge our actions in South Africa as though we had been influenced by selfish and ulterior motives, and again, where should wo be to-day if be hadn't persuaded South African engineers as to the >ulue of the deep levels in mines? We get forty rnlllions of gold to-day from his brain waive, and on that foundation our present economic position entirely rests.

LillUT. COL. L. C. S. ::11. A::IIERY~ SECRETARY OF STATE FOR TTIEJ COLONIES,

LONDON

l\lay I join yom· many frienus in this country who appreciate the great services which you have rendered to mining industry throughout the world in senuin:; you my congratulations and best wishes. Your labors have added another link to the chain which binds British Commonwealth and the United States together.

(This cable was transmitted by Ron. H. G. Chilton, G. M. G., minister plenipotentiary, Washington, D. C.)

JOHN lliYS HAll:\IO~DJS SPEECH OF ACCEPTA:SCE OF THE TRIDUTES OF

HIS FRIE~DS TUROUGHOUT THE WORLD

MY FRIENDS : I should feel lacking in the finer sensibilities if I wero not overcome by this tribute of affection. Deprecation arms a man; all the energies of his nature rise in protest against assault. But kindness, kindness that goes far beyond one's deserts, bends one's

spirit in humility. I feel more helpless than ever 1n trying to express my gratitude for this demonstration .

When I accepted an invitation to be the birthday guest of a few friends, I bad no idea that the occasion would develop such magnitude. I reckoned, however, without the energy and organizing genius of my friend, Herbert Wall, although long experience should have taught me that whatever undertaking he sets his band to becomes noteworthy.

I suppose there is no usc in denying that I have attained the towering height of 71 years. nut in these days of increasing longevity, with the marvelous advance of efficiency in creature comforts, I decline to admit that three-score and eleven have any terrors for me. Yet I have not the temerity, recently attributed to me by the press, to aspire to the rule of a centenarian. Indeed, but a few days ag-o, when congratulating Chauncey Dcpew-thut dean of well-preserved facultiesupon the occasion of his ninety-second birthday anniversury, I told him I felt like a piker.

No; I will not interpret this evening of good ebcer as a sort of sympathetic demonstration that I have held on so long. I choose to sec in it only cHuse for rejoicing that I have lived long- enough to make such friends and throug-h them to acquire some undcrstandin~ of the real values of life. Whatever good there is in me they have brought out. Wbate,··er I have accomplished has been through their encouragement.

~'hus to me the real esse.nco of a birthday gathering bas far deeper significance than mere good wishes. It seems to say that the great purpose, the real business of life, is to build up and maintain human con~ tacts, and in so far as one bas done this one merits felicitation.

"Not marble • or the gilded monuments Of princes "-

shall outlive thls. I have been to an unusual degree blessed with the loyalty of frien<l·

ship. There arc some of you here to-night who will recall a certain grave crisis in my life when far away from my own country and my own people I stood in imminent danger. There was scarcely time to appeal for aid, but appeal was not needed. Far and wide throughout this land and other countries my friends bestirred themselves, seconded by the indomitable efforts of my devoted wife. To their tireless energy I owe my lifo. It is flttin~ and proper, therefore, to confess to them to-~ight that a long career dedicated to the development of the earth's resources has proved to me conclusively that no wealth ever came out of a mine comparable to that loyal comradeship which makes life worth living. It is this divine gift which makes the poor man rich and without which the master of a world were poor indeed.

Of course, I would not deprecate ambition nor success, honestly achieved. Life is not to be r.egarded merely as a season of pleasuregiving incidents planned for the individual's delight. Life is the real test of a man. I like the motto of the plucky cowboy : " Life ain't in holding a good band, but in playing a poor hand well." Anll it follows logically that if there be joy in the struggle, it arises f-rom the consciousness that the laborer is worthy of his hire.

Bernard Shaw says somewhere: "This iR the true joy of life : To be used for a purpoRe recognized by yourself as a mighty one; to be thoroughly worn out before you are tht·own on the scrapheap; to be a force of nature instead of n feverish, selfish little clod of ailments and grievances complaining that life wlll not devote itself to making you happy."

After a full and active career I am cQnvince<l that there is no service so mighty as the service of one's :fellow men ; no reward so gratifying as that ft·iend ·hip which begets friendship. Yon will not blame ~e, therefore, for a sense of solemn pride as I gaze about this room and sPe so mauy men, strong and wise in their generation, who call me their friend.

The memories of bygone years, reCfllled by theRe faces and by all the kindly me sages which have reached me merge into a prayer of heartfelt gratitude:

Thank God I have lived and toiled with men l

DETROIT, TOLEDO & IRONTON RAILROAD CO.

Mr. DILL. Mr. Presi<lent, I ask unanimous consent to hav:e printed in the RECORD the story of the ra.ilroa<l of Henry For<l, which was printed in the Washington Herald. It is such an illuminating story of how a <lcfunct railroad was made to pay, while goo<l wages were paid, thnt I thiuk it ought to be inRorted in the RECORD.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, it will be so or<lered.

The matter referred to is here printc<l, as follows: [From the Great To-day, the Greater To-morrow, by Henry Fordl

BANKRUPT RAILROAD :MADE TO PAY MILLIONS BY .ArPLICATIO~ OF FOnD

PRINCIPLES OF MANAGEMENT TO Dl!lTROIT, TOLEDO, A.?\J) IRONTON

CHAPTER XVII-li!AKING A RAILROAD PAY

We have owned tho. Detroit, Toledo & Ironton Railroa<l for about five years. A great deal bas been written anu said about this rouu,

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RE·OOR))-SEN ATE 10067 bccau~{', until we took it over, it had been through more than a dozen receiverships and reorganizations. We have no record that it ever earnCii any money before we bought it-tbnt is, em·ned money for the stockholders. It bas earned fairly well for the bunkers who, from time to time, have reorganized it.

The road bas earned money for us and would earn more were it not that an act of Congress limits the retum on our investment to G per cent. We are limited in our service by laws conceived in part by ill-informed theorists who can not understand the real function of profits, and in part by those who see in regulnt~d business the ineyituiJle necessity for banker finance.

CONDITIONS A'l' STA~T

These are the advantages under which we took the road : 1. A complete freedom from banker control. 2: .A large traffic originating in our own industries, which the former

road might have had and repeatedly had offered it, but which it would not satisfactorily handle. Our own traffic amounts now to atwut 50 per cent of the total traffic; but after deducting our own freight we still handle a far larger volume than the old road ever did.

3. Direct connections with all of the ]Jig trunk lines of the country. The old road had these connections also, lJut it took small advantage of them.

These were our disadvantages at the beginning: 1. A thoroughly demoralized working force. 2. The bad will of the public and the shippers. 3. A ramshackle road that started nowhere and ended nowhere. 4. A roadiJed llardly fit for use, rolling stock and motive power which

were all but junk. Out of the chaos which existed when we took it over we have now a

railroad which, while not first class in other than men and management, earned in Hl25 more than $2,500,000, or about half of what we paid for it.

This result has not been brought about by magio. We have not yet put the new electrical short line between Flat Rock and Detroit into operation. This short line represents the highest type we lrnow of concrete construction with the wires carried on concrete arches. This cut-off road is owned by the Detroit & Ironton Railroad Co., the stock of which is owned by us.

We have not made the short cuts which we intend to make on the road and -for which we have bought the right of way. We have not laid all the heavy rail we intend to put down, and we have not touched many of the worst grades. 'Ve shall make over the road, but ·we have not yet done it.

The earnings have been made with only a small addition to the equip-ment which was already in use when we bought the road.

"re have simply brought in management. That is to say, we have: 1. Cleaned up the road and everythiug about it. 2. Put all the equipment in good condition. 3. Put in what we illink are proper wage scales, and have demand-ed

work for pay. 4. Abolished all red tnpe and division of duties. u. Played square with the public and the people who work !or us. G. l\Iade all our improvements with our own money. The point in the management of this railway is not the money 1t has

earn-ed, or where or how it gets its trafilc. The point is that this railway llas utterly discarded many o! the precedents of railroad operation and is doing its job with the utmost directness at much lower than the formet· average operating ratio and at the same time paying the highest railwny wages in the country. 'J.'be railroad is really more remarkable for the time-honored formula it neglects to observe than it is for the profits it earns.

FORCED TO BUY ROAD

Wt> did not buy the railroad because we wanted to own n railroad. We <lid not want to go into the railroad business. It was simply that the right o! way interfered with some extensions of our River Rogue plan4!. The I'ailroad wanterl so much money for a small portion of Its land that we thought it would be cheaper to buy the whole railroad.

Once we bought the railroad we had to run it according to our own principles of management. Of course, we did not know whether our principles would apply to the man.ngement of a railway, but we thought they would. We found that they did. We ha\e not lJeen able to do much yet. When we get the road in the shape we want, perhaps it will amount 1o something.

Our factories were in Detroit long before we bought this railroad, and the railroad was here, too. It would seem that the railroad should have bnd as much business from us then as it has now. We have spent more money than the old rnilroacl could have spent, for it bad no credit, but it could easily enough have used what facilities it all·t'ady bad in such a way as to get more business and build itselt up. We really have spent very little money, except out of earnings.

lliGU OPERATING It.\TIO

For the fiscal year e])(ling in JunP, 1!)14, the old Detroit, Toledo & Ironton r encbcd an OIJerating ratio of 154 per cent-that is, it spent 3 cents to earn 2 cents. It was capitalized in 1913 at $105,000 a

mile. Nobody knows how many millions have been raised on the strength of this railroau.

In the reorganization of 1914, the bondholders paid ar01md $i:i,OOO.OOO in assessments. That is what we paid for the road and we could have paid less. We paid what we thought to be a fair price, wllicb is the only price we ever pay. Our price happened to be above the market price. We paid GO cents on the dollar for the bonds, although they were IJeing ofl'ered between 30 nnd 40 cents without takers.

The bonds were in default. In fact, no sec11rity ever issued by this railroad had, np to the time of our purchase, made a return to any investor. We paid a dollar a share for the common stock and ~5 a share for the preferred stock. These stocks did not have a market price, because there were n.o buyers. "'e made our llid for the securities on the basis of giving fair value as nearly as we could estimate it.

DID NOT GET A BARGAIN

We did not get a bargain. We did not want a bargain. We think our management experience bas been sufficiently large to permit us to turn a profit on any investment we may make. Every transaction must have at least two sides, and so we are just as much opposed to paying too little as we are to pp.ying too much.

The road taken over·, the first step was to put in the Ford principlPs of management. The principles are extremely simple. They may be compressed into three statements:

(1) Do the job in the most direct fashion, without bothering with red tape or any of the ordinary divisions of authority.

(2) Pay every man well-not less than $6 a day-and see that he is employed all tlle time through 48 hours a week, and no longer. ·

(3) Put all machinery in the best possible condition, keep it that way, and insist upon absolute cleanliness everywhere, in order that a man may learn to respect his tools, his surroundings, and himself.

Railroad management, because of long usage, the demands of legislation, and for a dozen other reasons, has become exceedingly complex. A big railroad divides up into numerous circles of authority; so do many manufacturing corporations.

The Ford Motor Co. has only two divisions-office and shop. It bas no rigiU lines of authority and therefore no buck passing. The people are supposed to get through the work. This same system went into force on the railwny.

The divisions of work among the men were abolished ; an engineer may be cleaning an engine or a car or even working in the repair shop. The crossing tenders act as track walkers for their districts, the station agents sometimes paint and repair their own stations. The idea is that a group of men have been assigned to run a railroad, and among them they can, if they are willing, do all the work. If a specialist bas some of his special work on band he does it; if be has no such work, be does laborer's work or whatever may be at band.

We abolished the legal department and all the di>isions in the clerical department. We wiped out the Detroit office and all the freight solicitors and a considerable line of executive officers. The legal department was costing the old road $18,000 a year. It now costs $1,200 a year. The new principle is to settle all claims for damages at once on a fair basis according to the facts and not to let any cases go to court.

STAFF OF 90

The whole clerical !orce--which includes the administrative officersconsists of 90 persons. The executive officers are in two rooms ; the whole accounting force is in one small building. The traveling auditor makes reports on any conditions be finds. It is no one's bqsiness to spy on anyone else, because no one bas any exclusi>e business to spy on. The Job, not convention, rules.

'l'he old railwny bad 2,700 employees for a freight business running to 5,010,000 tons. 'l'he force wns at once reduced to around 1,500. Now, handling twice the old tonnage, the road bas 2,390 employees, and these include the mechanics in a large repair shop where the old engines ar~ being made over.

The railway unions have made no objection o! any kind, for all the men are being paid well allove the highest union scale. The management of the road does not know wbetbe.r a man is · union or nonunion ; the unions do not seem to care either, for the road has been exempted from all wage negotiations and also from all strike orders.

CLEA.NLI~ESS FIRST

Cleanliness is an integral part o! our plan. The first thing we did was to clean the railway from end to end and to paint every building. New ties are being lllid at the rate of about 300,000 a yea,t·, and the GO-pound rails are being rf'placed by 80 and 90 pound rails. The new stone ballast has to be as exact and to be kept exact as a straightedge can make it. No employee may smoke on the premises.

The engines are being made over at an average cost of around $40,000 each; they are being practically rebuilt, auu when they come out of tlle shop they are show engine;;. They have to be kept tba.t way. No hammer of a size to damage au engine is allowed in a cab.

10068 dONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE }\fAY 26

An engine must be cleaned after every trip and must always look as though it bad never been used.

Give a man a good tool-a fancy polished tool-and he will learn to take care of it. Good work is not possible excepting with good tools uRed in good, clean surroundings.

These are not unimportant points ; they are fundamental. They make for the working spirit. They are as important as the wages. 'l'lle work woulU not be returned for the wages were not the <:onclitions so arranged that _the work is possible.

ALL STA:XDARDIZED

Rection sheds ar·e all standard and have cement floors, every tool and piece of material is in a stan<lanl rack, and a supply car goes over the stock once a month. These houses, as well as the stations, have to be kept painted and absolutely clean; stations and platforms have to lw. swept at least three times a day.

Locomotives are now cleaned by a machine which was designed nt the River Houge and which saves three men and docs the work in two and a half hours less than before. The locoawtives and all the machinery in the repair shops are enameled to an automobile finish. Cabooses are kept clean and they arc comfortable; often the brakemen come in before time to scrub the floors.

It is said that a Detroit, Toledo & Ironton man always carries in his hand a bunch of cotton waste. It is the insignia of the road. But that cotto·n waste is not thrown away once it is used. It goes back to a cleaning plant at the Rouge. and comes out as new. ~o scrap is thrown away. It all goes back to our reclamation plants. (Copyright, 1!J2G, by Doubleday, Page & Co.)

F'ORD R.AILUOAD, 'l'HROUGII EFFICIE~T 1\IETHODS, PAYS TIETTliJR WAGES

TO LOWF.ST PAID EJI.IPLOYEBS TllAN HIGHEST-CLASS LIXES IN THE

COUNTRY

(By Henry Forll, written in collaboration with Samuel Crowther) One hears a great deal about railroad wages. No dispute on wages

ever takes place in tbe Ford industries ; the wages are always somewhat ahead of what the workman reasonably expects. When an ordinary laborer goes on the railway he is paid, according to our rule, $G a day for GO days ; then he goes on to the $G a day minimum.

Excepting in a few instances, the men running the road to-day are the men who were with the old company. We do not like to discharge men. Whenever we take over a property, we keep all of the old employees who are willing to work and to fall in with our ideas of management. Very few fail to fall in step with our policies. Those few we let go, because invariably they are the men who want jobs and. not work.

The trainmaster of one of the most important uivisions of the road began as a ~:;ection hand when he was lG years old. He got 10 cents an hour, and often was not paid for three months. His father was a road supervisor of the same section, along with three other supervisors and numerous foremen. Now this trainmaster bas charge of the whole division, and. there are no road supervisQrS. Instead, we have a few maintenance foremen, who work on theil· own initiative instead of being directed from above.

NEW WAY TO WORK

As this trainmaster put it to the foreman wllen the new plan went into effect:

" Wouldn't you fellows rather put in a bolt or a tie when you see · it is needed than walt around for me to come along and tell you to do it?"

'.rbe foreman have their pay raised on their work. Everyone on the road has his pay raised accordinJ; to his work. .All the foremen are workers-not one of them stands around just bossing. If you come upon a gang you can not tell who is the boss. .

We judge the men solely by results. For instance, a section in charge of one young man was always in first-clas~ shape-the rails were always right, the ties good, tile ballast straight lined, And the builuings frcf'h with paint. We raised the young man without telling him. When his first clleck under the new scale carne to him ho took it to the superintendent.

" There is a mistake in my check," he said. Then he was told that he had been raised, and why. The section

next to him was in bad conilition, but the moment its foreman beard of the pay raise that section began to get better.

We find it goou business to pay solely on ability, and when two men arc doing- the same job and one is getting more than the other·, to let it be known why. Thus we rarely have a re<]uest for an increa~e in pay ; the men know they will get more when they are worth more and that asking \Viii not help.

PAYI~G ON .ABILrrY

And we have no grievance committee or committees of any kind other than safety committees. Any man may go direct to beadqnru·ters, anrl be knows it.

One o:t the big fights on a railroad bas to do with derailments, and under the old rnetho!ls the trackmen always got tbe blame. Now they_

have a chance, and we can place the real blame, and we find that it is seldom with the trackmen.

We had some trpuble with the track gangs in the beginning. Tiley were nearly all foreigners, a,nd we found that being related to the fw·eman was the best credcn tial for a job. Now relatives are not alloweu in the same gang.

We arc having an increasing number of young bigh·school graduates coming into the section gangs. They nre no longer taking the wbito collar. They see that manual labor can be performed under decent and. self-respecting conditions.

This is particularly noticeal.Jlc in the bridge gangs. Former·ly these gangs were made up without regard to tlle resilience of the rnemiJers, anu tile men slept in dirty camp cars, reaching home only on Sundays and sometimes not then. Now we have the road divided into 50-milo stretches ; the ga11gs arc chosen from men who live along the stretch, an(} with fast motor cars we see that each man reaches home every night. The morale of these gangs used to be low; now it is high. Incidentally we save the pay of seven cooks and the keep of the men. '.rbe saving has been transferred to the pay of the men, and they can have real homes.

We have no seniority rules. Such rules are not fair to the community. If a man bas been in service a long time, he ought to be better· than a newcomer; if his experience has only taught him to dodge work, then tbe new man, in the public interest, ouglit to go ahead of him.

The engineers on most of the railroads are, lJceause of the rules, usually old men. We have quite a number of young men. We care nothing about age anywhere in our industl'ies. We are after /the best man, regardless of age.

.ABSE~CE OF RULl!JS

The absence of rules helps in many ways. As a yardmaster who bas been on the railroad for 30 years-he is C8 years old-said :

" Say a car comes 'in marked ' Rush' and no yard engine is aronnd. In the old dflys if I asked a regular engineer and crew to shift that car they would just tell me to chase myself-that moving cars around the yard was not in their working agreement. Now any engineer available w1ll shift the car. The men are paid to work, not to debate rules."

One M the big tasks aheau of the country is to break up the old idea that a man has to work at a certain job and no other-that he is a bricl<layer or a rnacbini!:;t. That notion puts him out of work if there are no bricks to lay or machines to build. If only men would turn their bands to whatever there is to be done, we should not have unemployment.

'l'he wages are paid for a str·ictly 48-bour week, with no overtime, and also tbe1·e is no piecework at all. The lowest paid man on the Detroit, Toledo & Ironton receives $1,872 for a year of 2,406 hours. According to statistics of the Interstate Commerce Commission for Class I railroads, the average compensation for railroad employees, excluding general division officers in 1023, was $l,G88 for a year of 2,584 hours-that is, the Detroit, Toledo & Ironton men receiving the lowest pay get $25 a month mo1 e than the general average of railr·oau pay for the highest-class roads.

Take some specific wages. The Detroit, Toledo & Ironton freiglit conductors get from $H,GOO to $4,500 a year, as against from $3,080 to $3,247 on other lines; the brakemen get from $2,100 to $2,820 a year, against from $2,308 to $2,5!!3 ; and the engineet·s from $3,GOO to $4,500, as againHt the general average of from $3,248 to $3,758. The average pay of office employees on the Detroit, .'l'oledo & Ironton is $8.11 and. of operating men $7.26.

. PROl<'I'l'-SHARIXG PLA~

In addition to the wages the road bas an im·cstmcnt plan. The impulse to invest is right, and it is a thousaud criticit>ms upon our civilization that a man can not invest where he works, so that not ouly may be have an aduitional income but that his work may take on added interest. If there were more opportunities for solid industrial in vestment in business with which men arc acquainted, thet·e would be far less of appeal in the false bonanza schemes thnt are cxvloitcd.

The plan has been in operation only since October, 1!.>23, but up to date employees have su!Jscri!Jcd for cert'ificatl'S to the amount of $UOO,OOO, and more than one-half of the men arc investors. They pay for the certificates out of wages, and arc permitted to buy up to an amount the installment payment on which will not exceed one-third of the wage. No interest is guaranteed, but the men arc paid G per cent if they find it necessary to withdraw. It is essentially a profitsharing plan, drawn in accordance with the railroad laws and rulings.

The earnings are in part due to the buHiness of the Ford :Motor Co. and in part to the better divisiou of rates with connecting roads. Tho old Detroit, 'l'olcdo & Ironton did not l:a vc enough traffic to make a fight on the division it received for its pnrt uf a through bnul, an<l it rcceiv·ed divisions which were often below the actual cost of transportation. It took what it could get; under our management all those rate divisions have hcen revlserl upon a fair and .Just . baRis.

'l'be operating ratios tc>ll the really important story . . In 1!)20, umler the old management, it had an operating ratio of 12G.4 per cent; in

, __

1926 CONGR.ESSION 1\._L RECORD-SEN ATE 10069 the nrst y('!lr of thr nrw mnnag('ment a11d with. practically the same equipment it had a ratio of 83.8 pee cent. In 1022. it spent a great deal of money on repairs, anll the ratio was 83.3 per cent, as compnre<i ,dtll the operating nv0rage of 70. :11 . The present operating ratio is around GO, which is much less than the average of the countl'y for far I.Jetter cquip11ed 1·oads.

Another 11oint we make and curry through all our inclu, tries: No man may work on Sunday. Canvass~g some of the old men auout a yenr ago to sec how they liked the cllange l.Jronght tb('SC answers:

Con'tlnctor : It permits a man to attend church and lwcp in touch with the religious euucation of his children .

Brakeman: It is a privilege and experience which the railroad man nc-.rer even dreamecl of having. One man described it as "the most wonderful thing on earth."

Bngine cleaner: A Sunday off leads to contentment nntl dispels that feeling of discontent which very often comes to a man when be is never fri'C from work.

LEADS TO CONTE~T:.IE.:-<T

Engineer: ~ot only does it bring happiness to the home, but it has the advantage of lotting one's friends get together and renew old times.

Britlge gang: One man said, " If you saw the welcome from my cbildl'en you would see the real advantage."

Rondmaster : It de't"elops the efficiency of tile railroad. Every man rl'turns res ted and with. new ideas J1ow to overcome that difficulty that loomed so big last week.

Roundhouse foreman: Some described it as the greatest event in the history of railroading, because so many experts said it was impossii.Jle.

Section man : Even the railroad itself nee1ls a rest. Agent: It gives a man a real chance to sit down with his wife anu

family with the set purpose of helping them with their proi.J1em'>. ~lachinist : It makes one proud to belong to an organization wllicb

can accomplish such things. Fireman : It makes Sunday what it was meant to be--"A day of

rest." The experiment is Jiot unimportant. For a long time the country's

rnilwnys have been at war with their. employees or with the publicand sometimes with both. The war bas been so long drawn out that the purpo~e of the railways seems sometimes to be forgotten.

I believe in private ownershJp. I think time does not hallow the practice of business. Under private ownership it is possible to con<lnct any business so that it will pay high wages and yet l?;ive cheap service.

TIIE PROHIBITION LAW

Mr. EDW A.RDS. Mr. PreRident, I send to the desk an article nppeuring in ye:::terday's New York World, which I ask may be read.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the clerk will read as requested.

The Chief Clerk read as follows : [From the New York Worlu, May 25, 1026]

CUT F.ROl\1 THE SA11IID CLOTH

On :\Iay 8 the rresident signed the famou s Executive order permitting the appointment of State officials as Federal prohibition agents.

On Ma:r 15 1\Ir. Coolidge made an address at Williamsburg, Va., saying that " the Stn1.es should not I.Jo induced by coercion or by favor to surrender the management of their own atrairs."

On ::\Iay 18 there were tho rennsylvania primaries. On May 21 the Treasury made public the order signed on May 8. Thus within two weeks lllr. Coolidge made a drastic attack on State

rights, delivered an eloquent speech in defense of State rights, and his Treasury officials accidentally, or accidentally on purpose, kept the attack secret until after an election that interested the bead of the Treasury was over. This is not the noblest or the most competent thing that Calvin Coolidge has done. If be knew what be was signing when be appt·oved the Executive order, then all his .utterances about j:he rights of the States arc empty talk. If he did not know what he was signing, then he will do well to find a few advisers to read the documents presented to him.

By this time ~lr. Cooliugc must be very sick of the whole affair. It bas g-iven bim just the kind of trouble which he will do anything to avoid and stirred up the ldnd of excitement which he detests. It can't be helped. Popular resentment against Volsteadism l.lns. r eached a point where not even Mr. Coolidge and Mr. Mellon arc politically safe. l\11·. ~[elton had his 1 sson in the Pennsylvania primaries. Now Mr. Coolirtge bas his lesson. ~'be outlmrst against Mr. Cooliuge over this order can be interpreted (,nJy as showing that the public temper about proh!I.Jition is getting out of band. The pulJlic has been apathetic fot· some years. Now it is • sensitlve nnd inflammable on any and every point eonnected with the miserable bmdne~s.

hlt·. Coolidge's Executive order IR attackefl throughout the country ns fin invasion of the rights of the StntPs and as a violation of the spirit of the .American constitutional !'YS1.em. It is all of that. But it is no more a violation of the rights of the States and it is no more

LXVII---G34

contrary to tbe. spirit of our constitutional system than ·the eighteenth amendment itself, the Volstead Act, the pa.cllock proceedings, tho senrcbes and seizures, the injunctions, and t!Je denials of trial l.Jy jury. General Andrews is perfectly right in saying tbnt tbe Executive ordP.L' is the logical dcvclopm ent of prohi1Jit1on. 'l'he whole Federal prohil.Jltion policy is a violation of State rights. The Volstead Act is rottrn with violations of tbe spirit of our constitutional srstem. To objed to this one new invasion of rights and yet to approve the greater invasion of which it is a part is illo&ical.

The eighteenth amendment, as interpreted in the Volstead Act, happens to be unenforceaiJie in America. The attempt to enforce it neceRsarily involves not only the corruption of officials engaged in enforcement but the abandonment of all kinds of legal and constitutional guaranties. The eighteenth amendment and the Volstead Act, though legally enacted, are so inconsistent with the rest of the .American system of law that tller e is no way to reconcile them. Either they must IJe abandoned or vital parts of our l<~ga l system must be abandoned.

Mr. Coolidge's order, whether a deliberate act or an innocent blunder, makes this plain. The outcry about it shows that at last public opinion bas awakened to a realization that if Yolstead.ism is pursued much further t.he outlines of the American system of government will be blotted out.

.Mr. C.ARA. WAY. l\Ir. President, I . hope to be indulged for a few moments while I prove that all the poYerty, all the misery, all the crime, and all the unrest in this country is due to sol.Jriety. l\len are de::;erted by their wives l.Jecause they insh;t on l.Jeing sol.Jer and making an hone.c:;t living. People are turned out of their places of employment because they are industrious and sober instead of drunk and loafing. No one can mention Jaw enforcement in tlle Senate unless some Senator rises and demands a referendum upon it. From the talk which is indulged in here it would be thought to be believed that there was not any poverty in this world; that there was not any crime in this world; that there was not nny unrest in this world until people got to be so!Jer; that immediately they became sobor they became crimina!; that they deserted their wives and their children and let them go in rags to beg on the streets; that industrial systems turned them out of their places becau:->e they insisted on being sober. It is the common custom to denounce everybody in tllis country who contends tllat sobriety is to be desired.

Why, the distinguished Senator from Maryland [M:r. BnucE] yesterllay tllougllt that the policemen migllt be thrust out of their high social places if they were thought to be in favor of enforcing the law. I am con::::cious of this-and I do not want to l.Je offensive about it-that what is being done here is done in an effort to propagandize the country. That is what it is intended for. The hearings before the Senate committee had that ol.Jject in view and nothing eiRe. I know, and e>ery other Senator on this floor knows, that government itself may be di~crcdited; that every law on the statute l.Jooks may be made obnoxious if men in high places will rise every day and denounce such laws as being an invasion of men's rights and tell them to resist law; ' that if they do not want their lil.Jerties taken away from them they must ha>e liquor and lawlel-4sneRs. This talk has that one ol.Jject .in view, with one other; thnt is, it is thought in some jurisdictions it will aid some to be returned to office. I do not know. There is not anything in our Constitution to provide for a referendum, and there is no one who honestly believes in law enforcement who wants a r eferendum.

::\Ir. BRUCE. 1\Ir. rresident--l\lr. CARA "TAY. I yield to t11e Senator from l\Iarylnn<l. l\Ir. BUUCE. Of course, it is a new question, an incidental

question n8 to whether or not Oongress bus the power to order a referendum in relation to the prohibition question or any other que::;tion witllin its jurisdidiou; but does not the Senator i'rom Arkansas think that if Congress bas the power to submit to the people an amendment to the Federal Constitution relatiug to prohibition it has the power and authority by a nation-wide referendum to elicit the existing state of public opinion with reference to such a provosition?

Mr. CAllA 'VAY. No; I do not. Mr. Bll{ CE. 'Vby'? Mr. CAllA. WAY. A constitutional amendment may be sub

mitted in n certain mnnner pointed out and <le~i~nated by the Constitution. It may he rntif1etl or rejected by thos.e methods, lmt ueither of those methotls pro ·ides for a popular referendum.

.Mr. BH.UCE. l\lr. President--Mr. CA.RA 'V A.Y. Pardon l11e for just one second, and then

I- v·ill yield to the Seuator. The Senator from Maryland knows that the people who wonld partiPipate in a referendum of that kind are of two Clnssc·s: Fir~t, those people who would rather

10070 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE MAY 26

ha"Ve beer than law, those folks who are willing to trade off the Constitution for strong drink would \ote two or three times ; and, second, some of the extremists on the other side would vote; but the great majority of the American people

. know that there is not any constitutional warrant for such a procedure and they would not waste their time in voting in a referendum. It would not give us the American sentiment, except in so far as it would give us the opinion of those people who think there is nothing sacred under the sun except beer. It would give us their opinion, and we already hR\e it. It would giYe us the opinion of those people who think that all other laws ought to be disregarded as secondary, except the prohibition law, and we already have their opinion.

The great mass of the American people, I dare say 90 per cent of them, are satisfied with what the law is, and would not participate in what I think would be a farce in the form of a national referendum. Now I yield to the Senator from :Maryland.

Mr. BRUCE. 1\.ir. President, I will ask the Senator from Arkansas whether he is not aware of the fact that only a very small percentage of the voters of most of the States vote on any proposition of any kind?

Mr. CARAWAY. I am conscious of that fact. l\Ir. BRUCE. Would the Senator, then, advise the com

plete cessation of the submission of propositions of one sort or another to the American electorate?

1\ir. CARAWAY. No, sir. The Senator from Maryland holds his position in the Senate by public confidence in his character and intelligence, and I would not want to withdraw the authority from the people to return the Senator.

Mr. BRUCE. As compared with my :purpose to maintain my strongest conviction3 at all costs, it is a matter of perfect indifference to me whether I am returned or not.

l\1r. CARAWAY. I do not share that view. Mr. BRUCE. If the Senator will let me recall a classic

story on that subject, one o:V the ancient Greeks was asked on one occasion why his condnct was so fearless with regard to something, and his laconic answer was, ·~Old age." Perhaps that is the reason for my attitude. Not to say anything more, I am ariving at that point when the "Vicissitudes of politics have comparatively little significance to me. All I want to do before I die is to accomvlish all that I can possibly accomplish to bring this monstrous, imbecile, iniquitous system of prohibition tyranny to an end.

Mr. CAllAWAY. If the Senator shall hold office until prohibition ceases to be the law of this land, Methuselah would have died in early youth as compared to the Senator when be shall retire.

Mr. BRUCE. No; I think, short as may be the span of my life, it will see the end of that ~ystem of tyranny.

Mr. CAR.A WAY. If that is the Senator's expectation, the Senator is going to live under it for a thousand years. This world is not going back to the old days when we had to ha\e guards on, the trains to keep the drunks from throwing the sober people off. That time has passed.

Mr. BHUCE. If that time has passed, it is only because people get urunk now in their homes and do not get drunk ou the streets.

Mr. CARAWAY. Then, it is more decent to get drunk in erne's own home and sbty there than it is to go out on the streets and interfere with e\erybody else who is sober.

l\Ir. BRUCE. I do not know. I think I would rather have my bnd example exert a demoralizing influence on the general puiJlic than on my wife and children.

Mr. CARAW' AY. The Senator is certainly not so selfish as to want to inflict upon other people's families wilat he would not want to intlict on Ilis own. If drunkenness is such an abhorrent thing, the Senator ought not to want to inflict it on anybody. J

~Ir. BRUCE. I want to put into effect a rational system by which drunkenness, so fa r a s it is humanly posl'l ible to bling it to an end, will be brought to an ·end both on the streets and. in the home.

Mr. CAllA WAY. Tlie only way to do that is to keep people from drinking.

Mr. BRUCK Let me ask the Senator another question. fiir. CARAWAY. Yes. sir. Mr. W .ALSH. l\Ir. President, I ri~e to a point of order. 1\Ir. BRUCE. Mr. President, I understand the Senator from

Arka nsas has yielded tile fl oor to me. l\fr. C.ARA WAY. I did not yield the floor to the Senator.

I yielded to tile Senator for the purpose of a sking a ques tion. l\Ir. BRUCE. Yery well. . fiir. W .ALSH. l\Ir. President, I rise to a point of order. The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator will s tate his point

of order.

Mr. BRUCFl. l\Ir. President, I think I have the floor under the ruling of the Chair.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator from Montana rises to a point of order. The Senator will state it.

l\Ir. W .ALSH. 'l'here is disorder in the Chamber . l\Ir. BRUCE. The Senator has a 'Yay, a s we all know, of

construing everything that he does himself as being highly orderly and everything that everybody else do·es as being disorderly, just as he has a way of construing every request for information--

1\fr. CAB.A WAY. I hope the Sen a tor will ask me the question. Mr. BRUC:K That anybody else makes as mere propa

ganda-wet or otherwise-and every bit of information that he seeks as instructive and valuable knowle<lge. Now, I want to ask the Senator from Arkansas a question, if he will pardon me, and then I "·ill be content. The Senator referred to the fact that only a small percentage of tile voters pr'obably would vote in a prohibition · referen<lum. I should like to ask the Senator what percentnge of the voters of the State of Arkansas are in the bauit of voting at the primary elections in that State?

Mr. C.ARA WAY. Well, sir, all the white people vote. Mr. BRUCE. Oh, no; the Senator is mistaken if he means

that they actually cast their votes. 1\fr. CARA "\YAY. The highes t possible v.ote is not registered,

but a very large percentage of the people vote in the primary elections. I have always thought that those who voted against me were unusually active in coming out upon such occasions.

l\1r. BRUCE. A very large percentage of the "Voters of Pennsylvania came out the other day when the question of the modification of the Volstead Act was submitted to the voters of that State, did they not'?

1\Ir. CARA,VAY. Yes, sir; and the ·Senator is as conscious as I am that they never changed or helped or llUi·t the cause of prohibition in the United States. I ha\e beard tile Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. HEED] call attention fhat a dry candidate for governor won and a wet candidate for Seuutor receh·eu a plurality. If the Senator from Maryland can figure out that that was a wet victory I do not know how he can do so.

Mr. BRUCE. I can figure it out without the slightest difficulty. There is a State prohibition eufbrcement law in the State of Pennsylvania--

1\fr. CARAWAY. And Mr. Mellon is at the head of it. Mr. BRUCE. And therefore the issue of prohibitio·l or no

prohibition is not an acute issue in that State so far as State politics is concerned and so far as the election of a go\ernor or of any other State officer is concerned; but, of course, tho controversy becomes acute at once when the question is submitted to .the people of Penusylvania whether they will nominate a dry, such as Senator PEPPER, or a wet, such as Mr. YARE, to the United States Senate where the fate of prohibition will in part be determined.

filr. CAR.A WAY. Let me say to the Senator then that Mr. V ARE never got a majority of the votes in Pennsylvania, and, therefore, if that was the issue, Pennsylvania is dry in sentiment howe,er wet it may be under the present administration; I do not know as to that.

Mr. BRUCE. The Senator from Arkansas knows too much about politics not to know that all kinds of infiueuces apart from the predominant influence that operates at an election also come into play. For inHtauce, take the great city of Pitt:-;hurgh. Can a11ybody deny that that is a wet city? There are few cities in the Union in which the annual arrests for drunl\:enness have increased more of late than in the city of Pittsburgh. There is no city in the Union in which the sentiment against vrohibltion is stronger than it is iu that city. Yet, as I under:-;tand it, Senator PEPPER received a majority of the votes in that city. ·

:Mr. CURTIS. l\lr. President, I do not wish to interrupt tl1C. Senator, hut we adjourned last night so that we might have a morning hour to-day and might possibly consider some bills on the calendar. I wonder if the Senator from Arkansas and the Senator from l\Iaryland are aware of that fact?

1\Ir. CARAWAY. In three minutes I shall lJe through. Mr. BRUCE. I will not trespass further on the time of the

Senator from Arkansas. 1\Ir. CARAWAY. I do not want to take the Senator from

i\Iaryland off the floor. :Mr. BRUCFl. No, indeed; the Senator has given me quite as

much time a!;! I had a right to ask. • 1\Ir. McKELLAU. 1\Ir. PrcHiclent, will the Senator from

Arkansas suffer an interruption? l\Ir. CARAWAY. I will if the Senator will make it lJrief,

because I wh;h · to conclude and yielll the 11oor. I was not aware that the calendar was to be considered this morning.

Ur. l\IcKELI;AR. There is just one point about the Pennsylvania situation to which I wisil to call tile' attention of the

·1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECOI~D-SENATE 10071 Senate. I am informed that there are 67 counties in Pennsylvania; that Senator PEPPER carried 42 of those counties; that Governor Pincbot, another "dry," carried 2:3 of thoHe counties, nnd _tlJ.at 1\ir. VAil-E carried 2, and only 2, counties in the State of Pennsylvania .

... lr. CA.RA WAY. I should not like to hold up Pennsylvania as au example for otller States to follow, anyway. If you ·want immortality on thi~ earth, get on the roll of Uepublican voter~ in Pennsylvania and you will be voting a hundred years from now, althoug-h you may have lJeen buried 75 years. [Laughter.] Therefore I am not holding UD Pennsylvania as au example to other State~.

This pro}Jaganda againRt prohibition, s11ring from whatever motive it may, bas but one result, and that is to <lir-;credit law enforcement. · Tllerc is no doubt on earth bnt that there are men in jail to-dny who otherwise would be at liberty, who are criminalR undPr the law .to-day, who would not .have been if it bad not heen for propaganda in high pla<.:es. 'l'llCre is not a Senator 011 this floor wllo liHd rather have a drunken secretary tllan a l"oher one. There is not a S~nator on this 11oor wllo would eiuvloy in bis ofiice as a clerk some one who was audicted to tile use of intoxicating- liquor. Therefore we know that yon are in fa>or of Robriety. If you al'e, you must ha>e prohibition. You can not have a country half wet aud llalf dry, half drunk nncl half sober.

If y0u will pardon me for just one personal reference. I have tried to enforce prohibition laws in a country where some of tb£' counties were wet aud some were dry, and I know that as long us you can sell a substitute, as long as you can sell what they call light wines and beer, which I underr-;tand is beer with about 46 per cent of alcohol, in the case of every man who got urunk on it, they would prove that be mixed Jamaica ginger or something else with his temperance urink, an<l therefore he did not get drunk on what he bought of the dealer.

. You can not enforce the law unless you have 11robibition. Unless there is a law against selling any intoxicating liquors the whole ~.ystem is a faree, anrl everybody knows it. Therefore all this t-alk in the , 'enate about not wanting the old saloou, but wanting everybody to have beer and wine, is not quite candid. You have to have what you bad before, or have what you have now; and nobo<ly in America, except tbeHe Senators, is fooled by that propaganda.

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BRIDGE AT LITI'LE FALLS, MI!'Q'N. Mr. BINGHAM. From the Committee on Commerce I report

back favorably with amendments llouse bill 10771, grantillg the consent of Congress to the Northern Pacific Railway Co. to construct a bridge across the 1\fif;sis.c::;ippi River at Little· Falls, Minn. At the request of the Senator from Minnesota [Mr. ScHALL], I ask unanimous consent for the immediate considera-tion of the bill. ·

The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the immediate consideration of the bill?

There being no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the 'Vhole, proceeded to consider the bill. ·

The amendments of the Committee on Commerce were, on page 2, after line 2, to insert an additional section, as follows :

SEC. 2. The right to sell, assign, transfer, and mortgage all the rights, powers, and privileges conferre<l by this act is hereby granted to the Northern Pacific Railway Co., its successors and assigns, and any corporation to which such rights, powers, and priyileges may be solu, nssigneu, or tran ferred, or which shall acquire the same by mortgage foreclosure or otherwise, is h<'reby authorize<] to exercise the same as fully as though conferreu herein directly upon such corporation.

And on tl1e same page, line 3, after " Sec.," to strike out "2" nn<l insert "3."

The amendments were agreed to. The bill was reported to the Senate as arn:endcd, and the

amendments were concurred in. The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill

to be rend a third time. The bill was read the third time and passe<l.

MISSISSIPPI RIVER lllUDGE AT MINNE.AI'OLIS, MINN. 1\Ir. BINGHAM. From the Committee on Commerce I re

port back favorably with amendments House bill 108!>5, granting the consent of Congress to the Northern Pacific Railway Co., a corporation organized under tlle laws of tho State of Wisconsin, to construct n bridge across the Mississippi River in the city of Minneapolis, iii. the State of l\iinnesota. At the reque ' t of the Senator from Minnesota [Mr. ScHALL] I request unanimous consent for the immediate consideration of the bill.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the immediate consideration of the bill?

There being no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to consider the bill.

The amendments of the Committee on Commerce were, on page 1, line 8, after the word "navigation," to strike out "in the northeast quarter of seetion 15, township 2!> north, range 24 west of the fourth principal meridian " ; on page 2, line 1, after the word "at," to in&ert "or near"; on the same page, after line 5, to insert an additioual section, as follows :

SEC. 2. The right to sell, asRign, transfer, and mortgage all the rights, powe'rs, and privileges conferred by this act is hereby granted to the Northern Pacific Railway Co., its successors an<l assigns, and any corporation to which such rights, powers, and privileges may be solu, assigned, or transferred, or which shall acquire the same by mortgage foreclosure or otherwh;e iR hereby authorjze<l to exercise t'!le same as fully as tllough conferred herein uircctly upon such corporation .

And on the same page, in line G, to change the section number from 2 to 3.

The amendments were agreccl to. The bill was revorted to the Senate as amended, and the

ament.lments were concurred in. The amen<lments were or<lered to lJe engrossed nnd the bill

to be rcat.l a third time. The bill -was read the third time and vasse<l. The title was amended · so as to read : "An act ~ranting the

consent of Congress to the Northern Pa.ciiic Railway Co., a corporation or~auized under the laws of the State of 'VisconRin, to con::;truct a bri<lge across the ~Iis~issipvf. River at or near Miuneapolis, iu tile State of l\linnesota."

RED RIVER BRIDGE .A.T Olt NEAR COUSHATTA, LA.

1\Ir. BINGHAM. From the Committee on Commerce I report buck favorably without amendment Hou~e bill 11607, granting the conseut o.f Congress to the Hed River Parish Bridge Co. (Inc.) to con::;truct a bridge across the Red River nt or near the town of Coushatta, in the puri::;h of Red Uiver, in the State of Louisiana .

l\Ir. UANSDELL. I ask unanimous consent for the prel'ient consideration of the bill.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there objection? ·There· being no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the

Whole, proceeded to consider the bill. The bill was reported to tbe Senate without amendment, ol·

dered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

ATD FOR RURAL POST ROADS

The VICE PRESIDENT. The morning busines~ is closed. The caleudur under Rule VIII is in order.

1\lr. ODDIFl 1\fr. President, I ask unanimous consent that House bill 9504 be taken up.

Mr. MOSES. ·what is tl1e calendar number? 1\lr. ODDIE. Seven hundred and fifty-six. 1\lr. KING. Let the title of the bill lJe stated. 'l'he VICE PRESIDENT. The Secretary will state th~ title

of the bill. The CHIEF CLERK. A bill (H. n. !>504) to amend the act

entitled "Au act to provide that the United States shall aid the Stutes in the construction of rural post roads, and for other purposes," approved July 11, 1!>16, as amen<led and supplemented, nnrl for other purposes.

.1\lr. BOR.All. 1\lr. President, is this a request for unanimous consent?

Mr. ODDIE. Yes; I ask upanimous consent for the consid-eration of the bill at this time.

1\fr. BORAH. Un<lcr tlle five-minute rule? Mr. ODDIE. No. 1\lr. BRUCE. 1\lr. President, I objcet. I am opposed to that

bill. . . 1\fr. ODDIE. 1\fr. President, I move that the bill be taken up. 1\ir. BINGHAM. 1\fr. President, I hope the Senator will not

press that motion nt this time. The VICE PRESIDENT. The motion is not debatable. The

Senntor from Nevada moves--1\ir. NORRIS. 1\ir. President, I rise to a point of order. Tile VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator will state it. Mr. NORHIS. 'l'llis bill was not reached on the calendar.

The Chair had announced that the calendar under Rule VIII was in order, and hence it is out of order to make a motion to take up the bill except when it is reaehed on the calendar.

Tbe VICE PRESIDENT. 'l'he Senator from Nevada aske<l unanimous consent for the present consi<leration of. the bill.

1\lr. BRUCE. I objected. I am opposed to that bill, and tberefore I object, not on captious groun<ls, but becaul:ie I am opposed to the bill.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair holds the point of or<ler well taken. The bill bas not been reached on the calendar, and therefore it can not come up now except by un~nimous consent.

10072 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE }fAY 26

CONSIDERATION OF POSTAL BILLS

Mr. MOSES. Mr. President, I wish to call the attention of the Senate to certain bills on the calendar, beginning with Order of Business 937. There are five bills in order there upon the calendar which are House bills and deal wholly with certain details of the Postal Service. It is somewhat essential that these bills shall be speedily disposed of, inasmuch as the Post Office Department is pressing for their consideration.

I ask unanimous consent that those bills may be taken up. ::Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. What are the numbers? Mr. VOSES. Beginning with Order of Business 937, the

next five bills to Order of Business 941, inclusive. I will say to the Senator from Arkansas that they are House bills.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Are they on the calenuar? Mr. MOSFJS. They are on the calendar; yes. They have just

come over from the House, were considered by the Post Office Committee yesterday, and the department is very desirous that they may be speedily enacted, because they ,..,.m affect the activities of the department, bPginning with the first of the next fiscal year under the new appropriations.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Mr. President, I ask the Senator making the request whether the reports from the Post Office Committee are unanimous?

l\ir. MOSES. Yes. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. 'Yere the bills considered at

a meeting of the committee? Mr. MOSES. At a meeting of the committee, very fully

attended; res. ·Mr. ROTIINSON of Arkansas. In view of that I shall not

object, although copies of the bills have just been made availa!Jle for my examination.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the request of the Senator from New Hamp::;hire?

Mr. KING. Has the Senator asked for consideration of Order of Business 940?

Mr. MOSES. Yes; but I will explain that to the Senator wheu it comes along. I am just asking that these bills may be laid before the Senate. Of course, as I undertake to make the explanation regarding each of the bills--

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I suggest that the Senator · take them up one at a time.

Mr. MOSES. Very well, if that may bJ done. The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the request·

of the Senator from New Hampshire? The Chair hears none.

POSTAGE RATES ON HOTEL ROOM KEYS AND TAGS

Mr. MOSES. I now ask that Order of Business 937, H. R. 92. be laid before the Senate.

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to consider the bill (H. R. 92) fixing postage rates on hotel room keys and tags.

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I move as an amendment, after the word "hotels," that the wo~ds "and steamship" be inserted.

Mr. :MOSES. That amendment should be made on two lines, I may say to the Senator from California. On page 1, line S, the words " and steamship" should be inse:-ted, and on line G the words " or steamship" should be inserted.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The amendments will be stated. The CIIIEF CLERK. On page 1, line S, after the word

"hotel," it is proposed to insert the words "and steamship"; and on page 1, line 6, after the word "hotel," it is proposed to insert the words "or steamship." ;

The amendments were agreed to. The bill was r eported to the Senate as amended and the

amendments were concurreu in. · The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill to

lle read a third time. The bill was read the third time and passed. The title was amended so as to read : "A bill fixing postal

rates on hotel and steamship room keys and tags."

RE~T OF QUARTERS ~'OR POSTAL PURPOSES

The bill (H. n. 3837) authorizing the Postmaster General to reut quarters for postal purposes without formal contract in certain cases, was considered as in Committee of the Whole.

1\lr. MOSES. ~1r. President, I will .say that the passage of this !Jill is desired in order to free the department from the ruling of the Comptroller General with reference to making leases. The department estimates that it will save $500,000 a year in the operating expenses of the department.

J\Ir. ROBINSON of Arkansas. To what extent is the reQuirement for formal contract relaxed? Where is the bill? I should like to be furnished with a copy of this bill.

Mr. i\IOSES. What is it that the Senator desires to know?

:Mr. ROBI.NSON of Arkansas. Is the department or its head given authority to make all contracts for rent informally?

Mr. MOSES. That has beeu the case hitherto, but under a ruling of the Comptroller General tllat has not been 11ermitted. This bill, I will say to the Senator, particularly affects premises which have to lle taken for f;pecial uses or for limited times. and particularly applies to those sections of the country where the resort business brings about a very great exten:-;ion of the , Postal Service for a limited time only. Under the ruling of the Comph·oller General which requires the department to make these formal contracts much time is lost ·and higher rates of rental are demanded. The department estimates that if it could act as it used to it would save $500,000 a ycnr.

1\.Ir. ROlliNSON of Arkansas. I observe it is limited to cases where the amount of the annual rental does not exceed $1,000.

1\Ir. ~fOSES. Yes; but that figure, under the liberty of the department, can be set as a limit, whereas when they had to make a formal contract, and it ran over a longer period than that for which the premises were actually required, almost illvariably the landlord demanded a higher rental.

l\Ir. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I do not object. The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment,

ordered to a third reading, read tlle third time, and passed. TF.RMI~AL RAILWAY rOST OFFICES

The bill (H. R. 3842) authorizing the Postmaster General to make monthly payment of rental for terminal railway postoffice premises under lease was considered as in Committee of the Whole.

l\lr. MOSES. :Mr. President, the ·purpose of this bill is to apply the same general practice which the department now observes to terminal railway post offices as w.ell as to ordinary post offices.

1\fr. KING. Mr. President, may I ask the Senator a question? Mr. l\IOSES. Yes. Mr. KING. Does the provision found on page 2 legalize

contracts if there are any running for a period of 20 years? l\:Ir. 1\.IOSES. Oh, yes; it would; but that has been the

case in the Post Office Department except as to the more recent contracts, which have been made on the ba:-;is of 10 years. That may be <lone now. There is no change in substantiYe law.

Mr. KING. As I understand this provision, the Postmaster General may, in the disbursemeut of the appropriation for such purposes, apply a part thereof to the purpose of leasing premises for the use of terminal railway post oflices at a reasonable annual rental, to bo paid monthly, for a term not exceeding 20 years.

l\lr. MOBES. My understanding is that that is exactly what the ~tatute is now; and the only difference is that he may pay this monthly instead of quarterly in order to bring the practice of paying rent to a uniformity.

Mr. KING. 'Vhile we are on the subject, does the evidence before the Senator's committee warrant the belief that it is wise to make such long contracts? I ha Ye no opinion on tho subject.

Mr. MOSES. Mr. President, I can not enter into a discussion of the whole question of po~t-ofllce construction in tlli.s coun· try; but we haYe discovered that these railway terminal postoffice stations are in the large cities, and require con~iderablc initial investment for their construction; and inasmuch ns we are not appropriating money for the construction of postal buildings anywhere, the department has been compelled to have them constructed under lease and with a contract. In order to enable the owners to ftuance the thing properly, it was found necessary to make the long-term lease.

There is a p-ractice developing in the departmeut, I will say further to the Senator from Utah, in connection with the construction of post-office building!:! in communities, to limit tho term to 10 years, with the privilege of purchase during that period.

Mr. KING. Why should monthly payments be made instead of quarterly or semiannual payments? I should think a quarterly payment would be sufficient, and that would save a vast amount of bookkeeping and considerable expense.

Mr. MOSES. Quite the other way, because the clerk having the payments in hand is muldng monthly payments on everything except these mntters. It is just putting a few more items in his monthly entry, and ·he would have to keep a separate quarterly account if the payments were quarterly. As a matter of fact, this would facilitate the work of the department.

Mr. KING. I do not object to the bill. The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment,

ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECOR.D-SEN ATE 10073 COMPENSATION OF FOURTH-CLASS POSTMASTERS

The bill (II. R. 11084) to amenu the act of February 28, 1925, fixing the compensation of fourth-class postmasters, was cousidereu· as in Committee of the Whole.

1\Ir. l\10SES. 1\lr. President, that is the bill to which the Senator from Utah particularly calleu attention.

Mr. KING. I 1·esened the right to object to its consiueration.

Mr. MOSEJS. I will make an eJ...-planatlon of it. The Senator will remember that there have been frequent attempts to increase the salaries of fourth-class postmasters, also frequent attempts to make them allowances for rent, light, and fuel. None of those attempts have been successful. )j~ourth-class postmasters are still paid as they always have been paid, on the basis of cancellations in their offices-that is, upon the business done and the actual receipts of the offices.

The Comptroller General has held that the postmasters mny not account for certain receipts of their offices ns being receipts applicable to the computation of salary, because in the postal sa laries act of 1925 there were certain increases in fees for special services in the department, C. 0. D. fees, return registration card fees, special-delivery fees, and money-order fee~. Such services require stamps, ju:st the same as any other kind of mail matter, but tlle Comptroller General has held that tlJC cancellation of those stamps may not be computc<l for the purpose of fixing the salaries of the postmasters. The cancellation of those stamps requires the same amount of work as <loes the cancellation of all other stamps, whnt is paid for them constitute~ receipts of the oftice, and without question it was the intention, certainly of the committee drawing the bill, that those receipts should be computed as all otller re· ceipts arc.

Mr. KING. Is that the only change made in existing law? Mr. MOSES. That is the only chnnge. Mr. KING. Does it make any cllange in the matter of light,

hea.t, and quarters? Mr. MOSES. None. Mr. KING. It is merely to meet the two cases to which

the Senator refers? Mr. MOSES. That is all. Mr. KING. I hnYe no objection to the bill. '.rhe bill was reported to the Senate without amendment,

ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed. RATES FOR O.ARRIAGE OF MAIL DY .AIR

The hill (H. R. 11841) to amend section 4 of the air mail act of February 2, 1925, so as to enable the Postmaster General to make contracts for the transmission of mail by nircraft at fixed rates per pound, was considered as in Committee of the \Vllole.

;\Ir. UOBINSON of Arkansas. 1\lr. President, what cllang-e does this make in the present law?

Mr. MOSES. It gives the Postmaster General the right to put a pound rate upon uir mail. I will say to the Senntor from Arkausas that the purpo::.-:e of the bill is to facilitate the transmit'sion of the air mail. 'l'his is under the contract system, the Senator will recall, and if the mail can be carried at th·c ponnd rate, the mail can go through without having to be separated into each one of its component units, and it will save about 40 minutef'l at each transfer voint in the schedule of all air-mail tra n~mission .

'l'his will make no diffe1·ence with reference to the revenue. It ~imply changes the method by which the revenue shall be compnted.

'l'he bHl was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered to a third reading, rend the third time, and pussed.

AID FOR RURAL POST 1 OADS

l\fr. ODDIE. Mr. President, I renew my motion that the Senate proceed to the consideration of House bill 9G0-1, the Federal aid road bill.

The VIOFJ PHESID:fjNT. The Senator's motion is in order. l\Ir. TRA~I:\fELL. l\Ir. President, I am in fa\Tor of the bill,

but--The VICE PRESIDENT. The question is not debatable.

Such n motion is in order during the mornlng hour ou any day except Monday.

l\fr. ASHURST. 'Vhat is the bill? 1\Ir .. ODDIE. It iR the Federal ai<l road bill. The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will report the bill by

title. The CHIEF CLERK. A lJill (H. R. 9G04) to amend the act en

titled "An act to provide that the United States shall aid the States -in the construction of rural po~;;t roads, and for other purposes," approved July 11, 1916, as amended and supplemented, and for other purposes.

The VIOE PRESIDENT. The question is on agreeing to the motion of tlle Senator irom Nevada to proceed to tlle consideration of the bill.

Hr. BRUCE. ~Ir . President, I suggest the alJsence of u quorum.

The VICE PRESIDE11T. The clerk will call the roll. The Cllicf Clerk c:alled the roll, and the following Senators

answered to their names : Ashurst F ernald La Follette Bayard Ferris l\IcKcllar Bing-ham F eRs 1\IcLean Hlease Frazier l\lc:\Iaster llorah Geot·gc McNary Bratton Gerry :Mayfield Broussard Gotr M('ans Druce Gooding Metcalf ll u tler Hale Mof<es Cameron Harreld Norheck Capper Harris Norris Car a way HarriJ:;on Oddic Couzen~ Heflin Overman Curtis llowcll Pepper Dale Johnson Phipps Deneen Jones,~ - :\lex. Pine Dill Jones, \\·ash. Pittman :Edge Kendrick Ransdell Erlwnrds Keyes Heed, Pn. Ernst King HobinHon, Ark.

Sackett Schall Sheppnrtl Shi}Jstead Shortritlge Simmons Smoot ~teck Stephens Swanson Trammell Tyson Underwood ·wadsworth 'Valsh ·wan-('n WhE'elcr Willis

'l'he VICE PRESIDENT. Seventy-eight Renutors having answered to tlleir names, a quorum i~ 'present. Tlle question is on agreeing to the motion of the Senator from Nevuda to proceed to the consideration of House bill No. 9504.

l\Ir. ODDiffi. I a!"k for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nayt; were ordered, and the Chief Clerk pro

ceeded to call the roll. 1\[r. TRAl\ll\1ELL (when 1\Ir. FLETCHER'S name waH called). I

desire to announce tlle necessary absence of my colleague [1\Ir. FLETOHER].

1\Ir. MAYFIELD (when Mr. NEELY's name was called). The senior Senator from 'Vest Virginia [Mr. NEELY] is uecess'arily detained from the Senate. If he were present, he would vote "yea."

1\Ir. U:l\TDERWOOD (when llis name was called). Has tlle junior Seuator from l\!asHacllnsetts [1\Ir. GILLETT] voted?

The VICFJ PRJ<JSIDENT. He has not voted. 1\fr. UNDEHWOOD. I have a pair with tht{t Senator, and

in hh; absence I transfer the pair to the senior Senator from l\liHsouri [Ur. REED] anll vote "rea.''

Tlle roll call was concluded. 1\Ir. JO:l\TES of ·wa~hington . I desire to announce tlle neces

sary absence of the Senator from Illinois [l\Ir . .McKIXLEY], the Seuator from Indiana [l\lr. RoBINSON], tbe Senator from 1\Iarylan<l [l\Ir. 'WELLER], tbe Senator from l\Iissouri [Mr. \VILLIAMS) , the Senator from Indiaua [1\fr. \VATSON], and the Senator from Wisconsin [1\fr. LE]\HOOT] . If present, all these Senators would vote" yen."

I also desire to announ~c that the junior Senator from Delaware [1\Ir. nu PoxT] has a general pair with the senior Senator from Florida [1\Ir. FLETCHER].

1\Ir. BRA'l"'TON. I have a general vair ~ith tlle junior Senator from Indiana [1\Ir. RoBINSON] . I transfer tllat pair to tlle junior Senator from New York [1\Ir. CoPELAND] and vote "yea."

Mr. SWANSON. I wish to announce that my colleague [1\lr. GLASS] i~ nece:-<~arily ah~ent on bm;ine~R of the Senate.

The result was announced-yeas u4, nays 12, as follows :

Ashurst Rleas<' Bratton lleous:-;ard Cam ron CnpJ1cr Caraway Couzens Curtis Dnl<' Deneen Dill Edge Ernst Fernald Ferri:;

Bnyard Bingham Borah

YEAS-G-:1 Fess Frazier George Gofl' Gooding Hale Hnrreld Harris Harrison Heflin Howell Johnson Jones; N. ~Iex. Jones. Wash. Ke1Hlrick Keyes

I.n Follette l\leKellnr J\lcllnster '!\teNary :.'llnyflcld Means 1 Torhech: Norris Oddie o,·ermnn Phipps Pine l'ittmnn llansdell RobinRon, Ark. Sackett

KAYS-12 Bruce Gerry Butler McLean Edwards ~Ietcalf

:NOT YOTING-20

Schall ShPppnrd Shipstcad Shortridge Simmon!! Smoot Steck Stephens Sw:m!;on Trammell Tyson lin derwood ·wnlsh Vl'an·en Wlieeler Willi ~

Pepper lleetl, Pa. Wadsworth

Copeland Glass '!\foRes Smith Cummins Greene Neely Stanfield du Pont Kiug- Nye Watson Fletelier Lenroot Heed, :llo. l''el ler Gillett l\ItKinley Robinson, Ind. Williams

So the motion was ngreed to, and the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to consider tlle lJill (H. R. 9504) to

10074 CONGRESSION1\._L RECORD-SENATE MAY 26

amend the act entitled "An act to provide that the United States shall aid the States in the construction of rural post roads, and for otller purposes," approved July 11, 1916, as amended and supplemented, and for other purposes.

Mr. ODDIEl Mr. President, on Friday last, May 21, I made quite an exhaustive statement on the question of Federal aid highway legislation. I presented a number of tables eontaining facts and figures pertaiping to the question of Federal aid of public roads. I discussed some of the constitutional problems iuvol"ved, an<l belie,·e made a clear case. I hope so. I am not golng to debate the question at length at this time. It is well understood by the Members of the Senate. The House has passed this bill. I reported it favorably from our Committee on Po::;t Offices and Post Roads without amenument. This question is so well known and of such vital interest to every State in the Union t:llat I hope the bill will pass.

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

1\fr. ODDIE. Certainly. Mr. REED of Peuusylvania. IR there any time in the Sena

tor's min<l when the Federal GoYernment is to get out of this business of subsidizin~ the States?

Mr. ODDIE. I can not agree with the Senator's statement that it is a subsidy. I consider that it is an obligation on the part of the Federal Government to do certain things, aud that the Federal Government ·11as an arrangement with the States whereby the States cooperate with the Federal Gov-ernment in carrying out a governmental obligation and duty. The Federal-aid system comprises about 200,000 miles. The Government is using over 1,200,000 miles of roads to-day on which it is carrying the mails. The program is only partially completed. It will take a numbe.r of years to complete it. I can not say just how many years it will take.

1\!F. REED of Pennsylvania. The Government uses no highway in the country as much as it does Broadway, New York City. Would the Senator favor contributing money to help paYe Broadway?

Mr. ODDI.El. T1lat is too far-fetched an illustration. I can not agree witll the Senator from Pennsylvania that that is an argument at all, becuu~e Broadway, New York City, represents a very small number of miles compared to the whole Federalaid system.

Mr. GOODING. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER (l\1r. FEss in the chair). Does

the Senator from Nev-ada yield to the Senator from Idaho? Mr. ODDIE. I yield. Mr. GOODING. I al'ked the SPnator to yield to allow me to

submit a question to the Senator from Pennsylvania. I would like to usk tllc Senator from Pennsylvania if he knows when the Federal GoYernmcnt is going to stop appropriuting money for the improvement und maintenance of the Monongahela River, a factor in the building up of the city of Pittsburgh?

Mr. ·REED of PcuusylYania. The Government has already stopped doing that.

Mr. GOODING. It is still paying money for the maintenance of the Monongahela River, and altogether it has paid out over .'10,000,000 for that purpose.

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. As a result it is beneficial to the whole United States, of course.

l\Ir. GOODING. What does the Senator think about the higlrways? :.re they not beneficial to the dev-elopment of the Nation?

l\lr. REED of Pennsylvania. I do not think the highways were included by the constitutional clause in the objeet for \vhich the Federal GoYerument was intended to spend money.

Mr. GOODING. I think one of the first efforts of tlle country was to develop the post roads in Pennsylvania, and all of the Eastern State::;, so far as that is concerned. I diu not know the Goyernment had ever abandoned tllat policy.

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. 1'he Senator knows that the post-roads clause in tlle Con~titution is the only excuse for this great subsidy. It has nothing to do really with the development of post roads. 1:ho::;e roads are automobile road::;, roads for use by the local people for local purposes. It is a fine system for the conRtruction of western roads witll taxes raised out of the Eastern State .

Mr. "r ALSH. l\Ir. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Nevada

yield to the Senator from Montana? l\Ir. ODDIE. I yield. Mr. WALSH. The constitutional question which the Senator

raises is pretty old. It was debated with great eurnestness in this country 100 :vears ago--

l\fr. RgED of Pennsylv-ania. That was before I came into the Senate.

l\Ir. WALSH. In counection with the Cumberlanu Road enterprise, which wa::; earnestly advoeated in those days by resident::; of that section of the country from whieh tlle Senator comes, and which was then on tlle frontier.

Mr. Rl!JED of Pennsylvania. w·e have no frontier in the United States to-duy. " 7 c haYc, thank· to the great constitutional comvromise, a balance of power in the Senute in tlle States of ~mailer population, anu it s'eems to me that that balance of po,ver is being used to draw from the Federal Treasury money for local purposes whic11 ong11t in common 11onesty to be raise<l by taxation from the communities wllich are benefited.

Mr. DILL. 1\Ir. President, will the Senator from Pennsylvania yield to me?

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. The Senator from Nevada bas the floor.

Mr. ODDIE. I yiel<l to the Senator from WaHhington. Mr. DILL. I want to suggest to the Senator from Pennsyl

vania that the bulanee of power, \Yhich if..; baseu on population 1n the llonse of Repre. entutives, led to the passage of the bill.

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. I think it was rather inattention on the part of Hepreseutatives from the lDastern States than power on the part of others.

1\Ir. DILL. The Senator is rather unkind to his colleagues in the House.

l\Ir. HEED of Pennsylvania. No; I think that is a fair criticism. The Congressman to whom I suggested tllat an amcndm'ent ought to be offered progressively getting the Uuitc<l Stutes out of the business admitted to me afterwards that he forgot to offer the amendment.

Mr. WARREN. 1\lr. President--The PRESIDING Ol!'l!"ICEH. Does the Senator from Ne

vada yield to the Senator from Wyoming? :Mr. ODDIE. Certainly. l\1r. WARREN. :May I say to the Senator from Pennsyl

vania that unfortunately the Government withl.Jolds v-.ery largely its public lands and other possessions in certain State~ and pays no tuxes thereon, and the only way to build roads in that section of the country is for those who obtain taxes from a very small amount of mileage to pay the entire bill or to have a contribution from the Government in the way of Federal aid. Hence the Government in those States, because of that condition. surely ought either to submit to taxation for roads or to contribute in some otller way for the building of roads.

Mr. HEED of . Pcnn~ylvania. The Senator from "'Wyoming raises a very intere~ting point, which llas often bet>n urged in favor of these appropriations, that the large area of puhlic lands in those States which hear no taxe::; somehow justifit>s the Federal-aid system. All of the exponents of that argument seem to forget to tell us that tlle ~ystcm of oil and timber royalties is such that 37% per cent, my recollection is, of the rnyalties on the gross value of the oil produced in those domains is paid over to the States in whicll the public lands lie and 25 per cent, I think it is, of the timber royalties on those public lands go to the States. If I am wrong about that, I hope the Senator will correct me. It i::; obYions that the yield from those royalties to the States, which include these public lnn<.ls, is much greater in tax yield than they could obtain from them if tllCy were sutiject to State taxation.

Mr. W ARlUJN. But the Senator mnst remember llow much they are taking away from those States in all the oil, and so forth, and how little they arc paying in return for it.

1\Ir. REED of PennsylYania. That is the situation in all the States. I put in the CoNGRESSIONAL UEcorm on January G, nt pages 1573 and 1574, two tables which show the amount of the payments to the States in Federal aid and hy the States in taxation. It furnishes some very in..terestin~ coutrasts. For example, I find thut the State of New Mexico, which pays into the Federal Tr('laRury in every form of taxation $85-!,000, takes out in Federal aid $3,022,000. In other wor<.lR, the hrend it casts upon the water comes back at the rate of three and onehalf loaves for each loaf that is cast.

Mr. BRATTON. 1\Ir. President--1\lr. ODDIE. I yield to the Senator from New .Mexico. Mr. BRATTON. Does the Senutor hear in mind ln making

the comparison be is now engaged in making the fact tbnt the Federal Government retains unto itself approximately 4~ per cent of the entire area of the State of New Mexico, which is not subject to taxation in any form whatsoever?

1\Ir. IUJJiJD of Pennsylyania. Does not t110 State of New Mexico get royalties from that source?

Mr. BHATTON. It get:'{ a part of the rbyaltiPs. The Senntor comes from a Stn.te that i~ rieh in oil. Would he he willing to have his State ~nrrendcr to the Federal Govern-

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN A'l!E 10075 mcnt 43 per cent of its taxable values, or 43 per cent of its area, in cxcllaugc for 37¥2 per cent of the royalties upon the oil produced in tllat State?

Mr. HEED of Penusylvania. No; becam;e under those circumf.l.tances tile concession would be mucll greater than the royalty whi<.:h would be rec&ived.

Mr. BRATTON. Exactly. The Senator from Pennsylvania entertains the view that is entertained by certain people--that is,· that it i r-; entirely fail·, wholly just, ancl even right that his State Rhould have every acre of its lancl produ<.:ing taxes, Rhoulcl haYe every industry in his State contributing its just Hhare to the wcl fnre of the State, and at the same time that it is jm;t to llave these WeRtern States shorn of the ri~ht or power to tax a great part of tlleir area, their real estate, because it is owned by the Fefleral Government.

Mr. llEJiJD of Pennsylvania. .Ah, but tllat is another question entirely. If the Senutor is asking me whether it is fair for the United States to retain those public lapels, that is another question which I am not competent to answer.

Mr. BRATTON. In my judgment the Senator is competent to answer any question relating to the affairs of the Government.

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. I doubt very much whether it iR for the best interests of the United States that we should witlthol<l from the State authorities those great tracts of land in the Western StateR. I do not know a sufficient reason to justify it, aithongh Senators who have studied the question <.'an enlighten rue on that point.

Mr. BHATTDN. But so long as that is true, is It quite fair to say that those State!-\ pay into the Treasury a small sum anu take out a large sum. The comparison upon which the Senator's criticism of the administration of the Federal aid highway fund is bnse<l upon a fallacy that is patent.

Mr. REliiD of Pennsylvania. I clo not believe that factor ought to be ignored, bnt surely if the State of New Mexico hnd the 47 per. cent of its area which is now withheld, it would then practically double its . ource of taxation. We will assume that all acres arc the Rame. In that case its payment into the Federal Treasury would he $1,700,000. It still would be getting hack much more than it paid in.

Mr. BH.AT'.rON. But the Senn.tor fails to bear in mind that instead of getting 37% per cent of the royaltieA from its minerals the State would own the entire volume Qf such minerals nnd would re<>eive income from the entire volume, in stearl. of rccei>ing, at the hnnds of the Federal Govemment, 37~'2 per cent of the usual royalty of one-eight11; so that the comvarison the Senator now makes is ~naccurnte in that respect.

Mr. HEED of Penm;ylv"ania. I will admit that the retention of tlwse public lands i"l nn important factor and that in justice it ought to be considered, but I do think the payment of royalties ought to be considered in the other side of the hnlnnce. HoweYer it is considered, I see nothing tllat would justify such a contrast as tll is .

Mr. PHIPPS. Mr. President--The PRESIDING 0]'FICER Does the Senator from N~

vada yield to tlle Senator from Colorado? Mr. ODDIE. I yield to the Senator. 1\ir. PHIPPS. I would like to ask the Senator from Penn

sylvania if his figures of $854,000 of reyenue paid into the ~~ederal Treasury from New Mexico repre~ent all that goes into the Federal Trea~:mrr from New Mexico.

Mr·. REED of Pennsylvania. It represents all ·the figures reported by the Internal Revenue Bureau.

Mr. PHIPPS. Yes; collected by the Internal Revenue Bureau in New Mexico, but far nud away alJove that arc the revenues of the Federal Government from the resources of New M:exieo which are collected in New York anu Pennsylvania and other States, because they come from the production of oil, the production of minerals, ancl even the produ<.:tion of coal. In other words, the people, the citir.eus, the corporations who pay their Federal taxes in New Mexico pay only a smnll portion of the amount which the F ederal Government receives by reason of profits deriYed from the industries of the State of New Mexico; and to say that $854,000 represents what the Federal Government receives from the as. ets and the buslnesR, the de>elopment of New Mexico certainly can not be defended.

Mr. BRATTON. 1\ir. President, I thank the Senator from Colorado for the suggestion. I want to say in behalf of New Mexico that if the Congress will give to that State the public domain lying within its borders and put the State on a par with the State of Pennsylvania, \Yhich the junior Senator from that State [Mr. REED] so ably represents, we shall be glad to take care of our own public-highway activities and other public activities, including the reclamation projects within the State; but so long as the Government holds 43 per cent of the

lands of that State and denies to the State the right to receive any substantial income from them, I think the argument the Senator is now advancing can not be ju~tified.

I think it borders closely upon a violation of the constitutional doctrine of equality of the States for the State of Pennsylvania, in common with the other States of the Union, to own 43 per cent of the lands in New Mexi<.:o, in Colorado, and in the other western States, while other States own the entire area within their respedive borders. When a State is admitted into the Union upon the very doctrine of equality of rights as betw4:en the ~tates, I think it come~ perilom:ly ncar violating thut con:.,;titutional prerogative of that State to say that the Go\ernment as a whole--meaning the several States of the Union-shall own practically one-half of tlle real e:-;tate of the Stnte an<l deny to that State the power to tax tmd otherwise exerdse sovereignty over them, whereas other States, iuclu(ling the one from which the Senator from Pennsylvania comes, enjoy additional rights and prerogatives Leyond tho:se of my State. Consequently the criticism which the Senator now makes would seem to inhere in a fallacy that can not be sustained when we come to conRider the fundameutal inequality that now exists . between the western or so-called public-lund States and the States of the Enst.

l\Ir. REJ<JD of Pennsylvania. 1\fr. President, the Senator from New l\Iexico, with his usual fairness, has made my point for me as clearly as anyone coulcl. He has stated that if it were not for the large area of public lauds in bis State lle thinks that in all fairness the State should then build its own hi.ghwayA.

1\Ir. BRATTON. Oh, no ; the Senator misunderstood me. I said tllat if the Go>er)lmeut would turn that land over to the State we would undertake to finance our reclamation projects, our highways, and ~:;o on, in common with other States . .

:Mr. HEl!iD of Pennsylvania. 'l'hat is exactly what I mean : That if New Mexico were given the title which the United States now has in the public lands, comprising 4~ per cent of her area, then, in fairnes~:;, New Mexico should take care of her own highwa.rs. ·

1\Ir. BRATTON. I did not say quite that. Mr. REBD of Penn. ylvanin . I agree with the Senator that

it does seem wrong and paradoxical tllat a sovereign State Rhonld have 43 per cent of its araa, or, as in the cnse of Nevada, about 93 per cent, I understnud, of itl:l area, owned by the ot.her 47 Statel:l. It presents something of the same problem thnt would be presented if tlte State of New Mexico were to buy a lnrge area in New York, let us say, a.nd then ask that it be held nontaxable. It is not fair to the State within whose boundaries these tracts of land lie. I agree '\ith the Senator from New Mexico ns to that, at least, in the present state of the meager information that I have; but now that we have reached that under standing, let us pnss to some other States on the list.

\-Ve come to the States of North and South Dakota. North Dakota got back from the United States Governmeut 117 per cent of all that was collected from it in taxes. South Dakota got back 1G7 per cent in the. last fiscal year of all that it paid in all kinds of Federal taxes.

l\Ir. Mc~I.ASTl'JR. l\Ir. Pre!,;idcnt--'l'he PRI~SIDIXG OFFICER Does the Senator from Nevada

yield to the Seuator from North Dakota? l\Ir. ODDIE. I yield to the Senator. . Mr. :McMASTER. l\!r. President, with reference to South

Dakota recei>ing in return a larger proportion than it bas paid into the Federal Treasury by way of taxatio.n, I wi~:;h to cnll tlle attention of the distingubhed Senator from Pennsylvania to the fact that he has not yet nn. werecl the statement made by the Senator from Colorado [1\lr. PRn>Ps] to the effect that . railroads draw profits from South Dakota; that the Steel Trust draws profits from South Dakota in proportion to its llOpulation; that the Aluminum Trust draws profits from the Stnte of South Dakota in proportion to vopulation ; and so tl1e fact that the sto<.:kbolders of t11e Aluminum Trust and of tbe Steel Trust and of some of the railroad companies hnp11en to li\e in the State of Pennsylvania does not mean that the profits were derived wholly from that State. Therefore I would ask the Senator from Pennsylvania to answer the statement which was ma<le by the Senator from Colorado.

l\fr. PHIPPS. Mr. Pre~ident, if tb.e Senator from Pe!lnsylvania [Mr. llEIID] will permit me lJefore he makes answer to the question, I desire ·to say that what I said was not renlly put us an interrogation, but, rather, as a statement. Here, however, is the wuy in which the Treasury Department has placed itself on record. I desire to read it for the information of the Senator from Pennsylvania and other Senators who may be interested. Speaking of income-tax returns, the statement reads:

10076 GONGRESSIONAL R,ECORD-SENATE }f.tl.Y 26

The amounts do not repreRent, however, what may be culled the geographical distribution of income. The figures are compiled from the returns filed in ea.ch State. An individU:1l files his income-tax return in the collection district in which his legal residence or principal place of buslnC'SS is located, and a corporation files its income-tax return in the collection district in which its principnl place of business or the principal office or agency is located. Consequently, income reported by an individual or corporation in one State may have been derived from sources in other States. From the foregoing it will be clear that t}lerc is no way of ,ascertaining from the income-tax returns the amount of income earned in the respective States or the amount of tax paid on that basis.

I quoted that in my speech on April 29 last, and followed it with illustrations showing that railroad lines located a thousa~1d. miles away from New York paid their income taxes, amounting, perhaps, to five or six million dollars, in the State of New York. I also gave many other illustrations.

l\fr. GOODING. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Ne

vada yield to the Senator from Idaho? Mr. ODDIE. I yield. 1\Ir. GOODING. Mr. President, I wish to say also, for the

information of the Senator from Pennsylvania, who is usually fair in all matters, that I am rather surprised, in view of his broad vision, that he should now take the position that he does as to the pending bill.

Eastern corporations own practically all of the timber in my State; eastern corporations conduct all the fire-insurance business and practically all other businesses which serve the people there in the shape of corporation activities; they are practically all owned by people who live in the East. They are not taxable in the State at all.

1\Ir. REED of Pennsylvania. They are taxable by the State. lHr. GOODING. They are taxable by the State, yes ; but, so

far as the Federal Government is concerned, Idaho is not repre!3ented in the l!'ederal taxes. The taxe:;; are paid in Pennsylvania and New York. I may also say that great power plants in my State are mn1ed by the General Electric Co. or the Bond & Sllare Co., which is a subsidiary of the General Electric Co. Thirty-seven per' cent of the area of my State is tied up in forest reserves on which homesteaders can not even settle--all in the interest of the people of Pennsylvania and of other Eastern States.

We can not build an empire there. We have not the control of our great resources as the people in the Eastern States have of their resources, for they have been largely taken away from us.

As the Senator from New 1\Iexico [:Mr. BnATTON] has said, just give us hack the forest reserves, turn over the public lands to us, turn over to us what other States in the Union bad with which to build an empire, and get out of the State, and we will take care of the situation; the Federal Government need not approp:::iate a dollar for Idaho for public roads or anything else; but until that shall be done, until we shall have a people out tllcre who can build roads in order to develop not only Idal10 but America, it seems to me that it comes with poor grace for an eastern Senator and for the Eastern States, who have accumulated so much wealth largely by the exploitation of the ".,.est, to deny an opportunity of development to the 1Yest.

1\Ir. REED of Pennsylvania. l\1r. President, the Senator's statement that if Idaho had its own public lands it ought then in fairness to build its own public roads is exactly the point I was trying to make, because in colloquy with the Senator from New Mexico I admitted that the possession of those public lands does introduce a factor that is worth carrying in mind, but when we come to the Dakotas I understand that there are no public lands of any great extent in those States. It is true, as the Senator from Colorado [Mr. PHIPPS] has said, that there are industries in those States owned by corporations that make their tax returns in the East; but the converse is true, that there are inhabitants of those States who own stock in eastern corporations, so that their income tax is paid in the State of their domicile.

Mr. ODDIEJ. ~1r. President, let me ask the Senator from Pennsylvania to yield to me for a moment.

1\Ir. REED of Pennsylvania. Certainly. :Mr. ODDIE. l\.lr. President, on March 10 of this year I

placed in the REconn two Yery interesting articles, one entitled "A billion for highways! Who pays the bills?" by A. J . Brosseau, director of the National Automobile Chamber of Commeree, and. another article, entitled "\Vho pays Uncle Sam's bilL<>? " prepared by the Association of State Highway Officials. Those two articles are particularly interesting at this point. They answer the argument made by the Senator from Penn-

sylvanfa I think very completely. His arguments are base~1 on the assumption that the sources of Federal tuxes are circumscribed by State lines and that a Federal function to be properly fulfilled should benefit all the States in direct proportion to the tax revenue receivetl through them. He ov~rlooks entirely certain basic facts that are fu:::1damental to our Government. Our States ~re political and not economic units, ami our system of Federal taxation is such that the revenues collected. from qny State are in no way a true indication of the creation of wealth or use or consumption of the products taxed within the particular State. ·

Mr. SIMMONS. M.r. President, I should like to sny just a word or two on this subject. The Senator from Penm,ylvania [Mr. REED] has said that the ronds to which the Goverument is contributing are local in their character; that i~, that the contributions made by the Government are of local importance. That is not true, as I understand. The Government does not contribute anything to purely local roads; the Government only contributes to roans that are interstate in their character. I ask the chairman of the committee if I am not correct as to that?

1\Ir. ODDIE. Mr. President, the present Federal-aid highway system is based on 7 per cent of the mileage of all the roads of the country. Under the law three-sevenths of the 7 per cent may be used on primary or interstate roads and four-sevenths on intrastate roads; bnt, as a matter of fact, most of the work has been done on the primary or interstate roads.

1\Ir. HEFLIN. 1\fr. President, if the Senator will permit me to interrupt him just there, the aid ·that ·ts given to the States in building the intrastate roads is for such roads as connect with the interstate roads.

Mr. ODDIE. Yes; so as to make one complete system. l\1r. SHIMON~. So, 1\Ir. President, it is not a local matter,

as the Senator f1·om Pennsylvania would have the Senate believe. The most of this money spent in the States, as the Senator says, is for interstate roads. It is very well understood., where these great national highways have been constructed, that the travel over those roads originates to a very large extent in States other than the State in which the road is located. The contribution by the Government, therefore, is for the purpose of aiding interstate transportation through the various States of the Union. The roads, therefore, have the same relation to the public interest that the waterways of this country have to the public interest. Some of the waterways that are improved by the Federal Government are local in their character, but all connect with interstate highways. In the main the waterways that are improved by the Government are of interstate importance. The two things are upon a purity. If the Government has authority, and if the Government is justified as a matter of policy in aiding in the improvement of our interior waterways, it likewise has an interest in and should aid in the construction of our interstate roads.

Another suggestion with reference to the use of these roads : The States are not the only users of these roads. The Federal Government has become in recent years a great user of our highways. Years ago, before we introduced the rural mail system, and before we adopted the parcel-post system, the Government used these roads only to a very limited extent for postal purposes, but now there is not a road of any importancecertainly there is not an interstate road in the United Statesthat is not used extensively by the Government for the purpose of distributing its rural mail and for the purvose of distributing parcel post throughout the rural districts of the country. The Government therefore not only contributes to the u:::;e to which these roads are put, but the Government contributes to wearing out these roads. It makes it necessary for the local authorities to spend more money for the maintenance of these roads after they have been constructed. The Government contributes to the construction of the roads, but the Government does not contribute to their maintenance. The Government is in part responsible for the necessity of the heavy expenditures for maintenance.

When the recent tax reduction bill was under consideration in the House of Representatives it was said that if the tax imposed by the Federal Government upon automooiles should be removed there would be opposition to the continuance of Government contribution to these roads, meaning thereby that the tax imposed by the Government upon automobiles was not necessary to meet the expenditures of the Government, but it was levied largely for the purpose of offsetting the expense to the Government incurred in aid of good roads. In the State of North Carolina we are building our roads and paying for their construction by a tax levied upon automobiles. The Government is doing identically the same thing. The tax that we are levying upon automcbiles that use these roads, and for

1926 CONGRESSIONAL "RECORD-SENA'rE · 10077 which these roads have been constructed, is nearly enough to pay the annual contribution of the lfedenil Government to thoso roads.

Again, 1\Ir. President, the Senator says that some States pay more taxes than other States pay in proportion to what they get from the Government. :My State last year paid $173,000,000 of taxes to the l!~ederal Government. It received. in ai<l of road building not exceeding $2,000,000. l\ly State paid proportionately as much as any State jn the Union in taxes for the~e roads, and so diu the State of the Senator from Pennsylvania. The State of the Senator from Peunsylvania paid a large tax and received but very little direct fluancial aid from tlle Fe<lerul Government, but the Senator forgets that llis State is in tlw ~amc situation as my State. While my State bus contrilmted this enormous amount iu taxation the people· of my State di<l not pay tho He tuxes. One hundred and forty-seven million dollars of $1GG,OOO,OOO internal-reve11uc taxes collected in North Carolina was collected in tlle first instance upon manufactured tolmcco from consumers throughout the United States. Not more than 21h 11er cent of the tax on that manufactured tobacco was paid by the people of North Carolina. Ninetyseven and one-llalf per cent of it was paid by the citizenship of the United States outside of North Carolina.

I have just been making a calculation with reference to thnt matter, and that is the condusiou which I reached. In the Henator's Stute the tax upon the things from which these taxes arise is not paid by the people of the State of Pennsylyauia. The great steel corporation there, making its imnlense net corporate profits, sell~ the products upon which those profits are made from one end of the United States to the other. The Senator knows that the Steel Trust, like the other great corporation~-; of this country, treats the income tax as a part of the

· operating expenses of its business. It adds it to the price of the product, and charges it to the consumer, so that the manufacturers of these steel products produced in the State of Pennsylvania made a profit, and that profit was paid by the people of Pennsylvania only in proportion to the population of that State as compared to the population of the whole United States.

I have been making an investigation as to the State of New York. I find that more than one-half of the enormous taxes pnid by the State of New York are paid not by the people of that State but by the pe011le' of the country outside of New York. That is true of all these States.

Mr. President, the opposition to this gooll-roads project comes from a section of this country that has largely finished its goodroad construction-finished it why, Mr. President, so early, so much in advance of the rest of the country? Because in that section were located the great manufacturing industries of the United States in the past. They practically monopolize<l American manufacturing, and through those· industries they grew enormously rich, not out of the resources of their State, not merely by operating those factories, but by the contributions of the people of the whole United States who purchased their mauufactured products. Their immense "\Vealth which made them able to construct their roads in advance of the rest o! the country was due to the fact that they, enjoying certain privileges under the Government, including the advantages of a protective tariff, built up their manufucturing largely through these governmental levies upon the rest of the counh·y. Now, since they have finished their program in advance of the rest of us, to which the rest of us contributed so largely,. they come to us when we ask this little pittance of the Government and say: "You shall not have it because we have finished our road program, and we will not get much of it."

Mr. REED of Pennsyh·unia. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. Mr. REED of PeunRylvauia. Assuming the perfect equality

of all citizens of the United States--Mr. SIMMONS. That perfect equality under the law has

not existed at any time in the past, and it does not exist to-day. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. Very well, then. Assuming the

inequality of tlle people of the United States, will the Senator explain to me how it comes that New Mexico, with a population of 360,000 people, gets $2,fl00,000 per year for its roads, while Maryland, with a population four times as great; gets only $021,000?. 'Vhy should the people of New Mexico get sixteen times as much per person as the people of Maryland? Is that because great trusts have been built up in Pennsylvania, or is that because we have had a protective tariff on steel, or is that because the dividends are paid by these great corporations in New York?

I am surprised to hear an apostle of State rigbtF;, like my friend from North -Carolina, and an advocate of equality in taxation-he is distinguished for that-and a representative of

a s·tate which gets so small a 11ittance as does North Carolina out of this subsidy system, take the position he takes in re- · gard to this uill.

l\fr. sn.uro.~. TS. Mr. President, I am perfedly willing that North Carolina shall ai<l the other sectjons of the couutry as much as it cnn in acquiring thos-e publir.-road fa<.:ilities that we have our:o:elves. North Carolina, as I have ju~t xplaiued, pays this heavy tax and gets this small amount, just as PE·nnsyl vania docs.

The reason why New Mexico gets such a large percentage from the Federal Government, as compared with the amount of taxes paid, is bet!ause New Mexico is still a new and a voor State. It is probably ehiefiy an agricultural and. a mining State. Its inc~omel:) are small; its profits are small; its taxes to the Federal Government are small. It docs not manufacture any of those things upon which the Federal Government imposes these high taxes, and whic-h bring to a manufacturing State streams of gold from the out~ide, bec-ause it is purely an agricultural State, and its taxes are therefore small. It is dving things on whieh the profits are small, and it bas no factories manufacturing goodr.; of nation-wide deman<l an<l consumption that the Federal Government taxes and that bring such enormous profits into the co!Iers of the manufacturers. That is the reason why New Mexico is in this situation, taken together with the fact that the Government of the United States itself owns nearly one-half of all the landed property in that little State.

Mr. ODDI.ID. Mr. President, it should be understood that the apportionment for Federal aid on the highways is based on three factors-population, area, and mileage of the States.

1\lr. REED of Pennsylvania. l\fr. President, I think some more of these contrasts ought to be brought to the attention of the Senate. \Ve find, as I started to explain about South Dakota, which contains no public lands--

l\fr. l\lcMASTEU. Mr. President, is the Senator sure of that statement? I think South Dakota does contain public lands. We have our Indit1n lands in South Dakota that are exempt from taxation, and these lands come under the jurisdiction of the Interior Department.

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. I thank the Senator. Of course, he is right in that. That is true equally of Pennsylvania and New York and the other Eastern States. I should have said it does not contain any great percentage of its area withdrawn from the taxing power of the State of South Dakota.

The State gets back 167 per cent of all the taxes it pays to the Federal Government in appropriations from the Federal Government for roads, cooperative agricultural work, vocational education, vocational rehabilitation, maternity and infancy work. In other words, the State of South Dakota, which, as a part of this Union, took a highly creditable part in the fighting of the war, not only gets all its current Federal Government for nothing, not only gets it~ war paid for by its siflter States, but it gets a bonus, or subsidy, of 1G7 per cent of its contributions to the Federal Treasury in taxes.

Mr. PHIPPS. Mr. President, will the Senator yiel<l? 1\11'. REED of Pennsylnmia. I yield. 1\fr. PHIPPS. I just wanted to ask the Senator from Penn

sylvania whether or not the statement I made, the facts to wllieh I called his attention, and the statement of . the Treasury Department, made any impression whatever on him, when he goes on continuing an argument baRed on a false hypothesis?

Mr. REED of Penusylvania. It maue so deep an impression on me, 1\fr. President, that I answered it at the first opportunity ; but evidently the answer fell on deaf ears.

MA·. PHIPPS. If the Senator is satisfied with that answer, I confess that I did not consider it as a complete answer.

While I am on my feet I would like to ask the Senator from Pennsylvllllia a question. In giving his figures, can the Senator from Pennsylvauia tell us bow many million dollars ba ve been spent for river and. harbor improvements in the State of Pennsylvania to which no contribution was made by the State itself, entirely out of the Ferleral Treasury?

Mr. HEED of Peunsylvania. That would be difficult to answell'.

l\1r. PHIPPS. It would, indeed; but the information would be illuminating.

Mr. SIMMONS. And whnt benefit did New :Mexico and South Dakota get from that?

Mr. PHIPPS. None whll'tever. What benefit doel'! New Mexico or North or South Dakota get from the Panama Canal? Did we object to contributing for that development?

Mr. REEJD of Pennsylvania. I suppose the · Senator feels generous in taking a share in the milintenance of the Navy?

Mr. PHIPPS. I do not feel generous~

10078 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE M.A .. Y 26

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. The Navy seldom visits Colorado.

:Mi-. PHIPPS. I do not feel generous when I stand here and call the Senator's attention to- the fact that the State o! Colorado, on his basis, is paying more into the Federal Treasury thun it is receinng in the way of Federal aid. Yet I am advocating the adoption of this bill as it stands.

Mr. Sil\.lMONS. Mr. President, the Senator is now picking out some agricultural States and showing that they get some relief from the Government throug·h this good roads contribution, but pay n'!fry little in the way of taxes to the Government. Agriculture is not making much now, so as to be able to pay taxes to the Government. The people who are paying taxes to the Government now are people whose price levels are fur different from the price levels of the farmers of South and North Dakota.

I want to ask the Senator this question: Suppose Ford's great automobile manufacturing establishments were all located in the State of Nocth Dakota. Would not the Federal Government then receive from North Dakota the taxes collected in that State, paid by Mr. Ford in the first instance, many, many millions of dollars, probably thirty or forty million dollars?

I do not know how much it would amount to. I know Mr. Ford pays a tremendous automobile tax- to the Government. But does not the Senator realize _the fact that if Mr. Ford should pay an automobile tux alone of, say twenty or twentyfive million dollars, the people of North Dakota would probably not pay 2 per cent of that? It would be collected out of the balance of the country. Yet North Dakota would be entitled to the credit upon the books of the Trea~ury of that enormous tax.

Mr. REED of P ennsylvania. A little while ago the Senator denied that the inhabitants of the United States ought to be treated equally, and has defended a system that gives each inhabitant of New Mexico 16 times as much as ench inhabitant of Maryland. Now, I understand he is demolishing my contrast, made on the basis of taxes paid into the Federal Treasury.

Mr. SIMMONS. I have defended nothing; I have simply stated facts. All I have been defending in this argument was the wisdom and the propriety and the justice of the contributions by the Government of a small fraction of the expense for the construction of these roads.

Mr. REED of Peun. ylvania. It seems to me the Senator's arguments all lead to the conclusion that the State-rights policy ought to be obseHed here, because when we get away from that, we are on an uncharted sea. But let me answer one of the Senator's suggestions.

Mr. SIMMONS. I have not d!scussed State rights. Mr. REED of Pennsyl>ania. We have heard a gi'eat deal

about · e>..rpenditures for river and harbor improvements. Let me take a seacoast State, ·if you will. Let me take one in which there are no public lands owned by the United States. Let me take one where the money that is paid into river and harbor improvement does not go to Pennsylvania this time. Let us take the State of Massachusetts.

Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President, may I ask the Senator a questio-n?

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. Yes. Mr. McKELLAR. It is very vital to the measure. This

morning, by a vote of G-! to 12, we took this bill up, showing that the Senate desires to pass the bill. It is now 9 minutes of 2 o'clock, and unless the bill is ,·oted on before 2 o'clock the Senator realizes that it can not be voted on to-day. I am wondering whether the Senator would not--

Air. REED of Pennsylvania. That had occurred to me. Mr. McKELLAR. I wondered if the Senator would not be

willing to let us have a vote before 2 o'clock. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. No, Mr. President; in all

seriousness---Mr. McKELLAR. The T'ote was only 12, against 64, and

that desire of the Senate has just been expressed. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. Ah, but that was the vote be

fore the debate. Mr. GOODING and Mr. BRUCE addressf'd the Chair. The PRESIDING Ol!'FICER. Does the Senator from Nevada

yield; and if so, to whom? Mr. ODDIE. I yield to the Senator from Idaho. Mr. GOODING. Mr. President, I would like to ask the Sena

tor from Pennsylvania whether this is a filibuster on this bill. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. Nat at all. This is an attempt

to get reasonable consideration of a very important matter which the Senate has been in the habit of railroading through. I think the people of the United States oug-ht to have their attention drawn to the peril that lies in this policy, and as long as my voice holds out I menn to call their attention to it. This bill has been before us for less than an hour, yet the Sen-

ator asks if this is a filibuster. It appropriates $82,500,000, and its proponents grudge us an hour of dehate on it. I say that this bill is not going to pass until all the people my voice can reach ln1ow what is in it.

1\Ir. PIIIPPS. Mr. President, the Senator may llave been absent from the Chamber; but at least four hours have been spent in the discussion of this bill so far.

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. The Senate voted at 1 o'clock to take this bill up.

Mr. PHIPPS. It was brought up then; but previous to that the Senator from Nevada [Mr. OooiE] spoke at length on the measure, and I made a talk on it of at least half an hour some three weeks ago. Others haYe also spoken on the measure. 'l'he bill has been on the calendar for quite a length of time.

Mr. FRAZIER and 1\lr. McMASTER addressed the Chair. The PUESIDING OFFICEH.. Does the Senator yield; and

if so, to whom? Mr. ODDIE. I yield to the Senator from North Dakota. Mr. FRAZIER. Mr. President. I want to call the attention

of the Senator from Pennsylvania to the fact that his State and other Eastern States were getting Federal aid for a hundred years before many of the Western States became States, and if we could have this Federal aid continued for at least another hundred years we would not get as much as Pennsylvania and some of the other Eastern States have gotten. . Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. The Senator does not mean to say that North Dakota has been contributing to our support for a hundrec'l years?

Mr. FRAZIER. Perhaps not just that length of time; but the people out there and their ancestors have been contributing to the support of Pennsylvania for a long time.

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. The only people out there a hundred years ago caused us a good deal of expense.

Mr. FRAZIER. It has been more than repaid by what Pennsylvania gets from the Government, at that.

Mr. l\fcMASTEH. Mr. President, I would like to ask the distinguished Senator from Pennsylvania a question. What does .he consider of more fundamental importance to the general welfare of the country-the construction of national through highways or the rebating of $1GO,OOO,OOO in taxes to dead men's estates, and making the law retroactiYe, and rebating $90,000,000 additional? What woulc'l redound to the !n'eater benefit or welfare of the country-the construction of thm;e highways or the rebating of dead men's taxes?

Mr. REED of P<.'nm<ylvania. That is a good question. I would like to expand on it. Gentlemen talk about these refunds of taxes as if somebody were getting something out of the Treasury that belonged to the 'l'reasury. The plain truth is that thm;e refunds represent money illegally taken from taxpayers, and tardily and reluctantly, and in a rather surly way, paid back to the poor people from whom it was taken.

l\fr. Mcl\IASTER. That is, the inheritance tax was an illegal tax and an unjust tax:?

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. The Senator spoke of the tax refunds of $1GO,OOO,OOO.

Mr. l\lcMASTFJR. No; the Senate adopted an amendment to the revenoo bill repealing entirely the inheritance tax.

Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. I beg the Senator's pardon; they r educed the rate.

Ur. 1\Icl\lASTER. The conference committee reduced the rate, but as the · bill passed the Senate did it not repeal those taxes?

l\Ir. REED of Pennsylvania. The Senate repealed the inheritance tax, but the bill, as it went to the President, reduced the rate. ·

I have only a few minutes left of the time I have apportioned to myself. I believe that the people of this country do not r ealize the extent to which the rights of the several States are being encroached upon. When w·e think that the Federal Government is now spending nearly n million dollars a year on maternity work, which is all a part of this paternalistic program, which includes the roau appropriation we are now discussing; when we think that we arc teaching vocational training nnd doing vocationnl rehabilitation for civilians, not soldiers; when we r ealize the extent to which we ar'e in the business of cooperative agricultural work-and I begrudge that least of all, becau. e I think the value to the whole country is very plain-it is perfectly obvious that more nnd more we ar'e dwarfing the power of the States and expanding the power of the Central Government, and it is equally obvious that as it e>..rpands its efficiency dimini::;hes.

The very arguments we hnve been hearing in the last few days set forth with such eloquence about the President's Executive order show that the question of State rights is not always neglected. But when it com·es to an appropriation, when it comes to getting money out of the Federal Treasury, then it

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 10079 is " the Constitution be banged," and the balance of power establisbeu hy the Constitution is to be ignore<l. It is anything for au appropriation. Every governmental theory on which \Ye have been successful so far is to give way if there is a pork barrel to be shared in here in V\·a~hington. .

1\lr. BRATTON. 1\Ir. President, will the Senator yield? 1\lr. RI.JBD of Penm;ylv:mia. I yield. )lr. nRATTON. l\[ay I in(]uire of the dis tinguished Senator

from Pennsylnmia what proportion of the 7 per cent highways in his State have already been COIJstructe<l under the ]federal aiu higllway act'?

l\Ir. RRIDD of Pennsylvania. I do not know. 1\fr. BRATTON. I am told that practically the full 7 per

cent of those roads has already been constructed. 1\Ir. WAD, 'WOHTH. How much 't Mr. BRATTON. The full 7 per cent, in the State of Penn

sylvania, has already heon constrncted, I am tol<l. I do not vm1ch for the statement. If that is true, surely the Senator is too fair to desire to llave his State get its fu ll benefit under tlle law, and then terminate the program before the other ~tates receive their just ~hare.

1\lr. BL ·GH.~.\J\1. l\Ir. President, I am sure the Senator from New 1\[exi<.:o does not de!:lire to do any injustice to the Senator from Pennsylvania.

l\lr. BRA'l"l'ON. Not at all. 1\Ir. JiL. ~G I-IA~L One of the tables printed in the RECORD

the other day nt t.be· request of the Senator from Nevada, in cllarge of the bill, show~, on page 07G8 of the REOORD, that Pennf'ylvania llas constructed only 50 per cent of the mileage on the 7 per cent system. ·

Mr. BRATTON. Even so, that is far more than the West('>rn States haYe received, and if that table is a::~ inaccurate as tlle table the Senator from PennHylvania relies upon, with reference to the amount of money contributed by the \Vestern States and the amount received, it is not dependable.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The hour of 2 o'clock having arrived, the Chair lays before the Senate tltc unfinished business, which is Senate bill 2G07, the migratory bird bill.

1\lr. ODDIE. l\fr. PJ,·esident, I ask unanimous consent that the unfinished business be temporarily laid aside.

1\fr. BRUCE. Mr. President, I object. The PRI~SIDING OFFICER. The unfl.lliruous-consent request

of the Senator from Nevaua is objected to. COOPEB.AT£VE MARKETING

Mr. 1\loN.ARY. l\ir. President, the Senator from Iowa [1\lr. CuMMINS] desires to discuss the farm problem at this hour. Therefore I ask unanimous consent that the unfinished business may be temporarily laid asi<le an<l that tlle Ohair lay before the Senate House bill 7803--

l\fr. DILJ.J. Why docs not the Senator move to take up Hom,c bill 7893 '?

l\Ir. 1\IoNAH.Y. And at the· conclusion of the speech of the Senator from Iowa I aRk that llou~e bill 7893 he returned to the calendar and tl1at the nnfinished business be laid before the Senate for further consideration.

The PHESIDING OFlt!OER. The Senator from Oregon asks unanimous consent that the unfinished business be temporarily laid aside and that there be laid hefore the Senate House bill 7893, and that at the end of the address of the Senator from Iowa [Mr. CuMMINS] that bill be returned to the calendar and the unfinished business be laid before t.be Senate. Is there objection? The Chair hem·s none, and it is so ordered.

The Senate, as in Committee of the \Vhole, proceeded to consider the bill (H. R. 7803) to create a division of cooperative marketing in the Department of Agriculture; to provide for the acquisition and dissemination of information pertaining to cooperation; to promote the knowledge of cooperative principles and practices; to provide for calling advisers to counsel with the Secretary of Agriculture on cooverative activities ; to authorize cooperative as!::lociations to acquire, interpret, and disseminate crop and market information, ann for otller purposes, which had been reported from the Committee on Agriculture nncl l!~orestry with amendments.

l\Ir. CUMMINS obtained the floor. l\Ir. GOODING. 1\Ir. Presi<lent, will the Senator from Iowa

yield to me? 1\fr. CU:M HNS. I yield. Mr. GOODING. I suggeRt the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING Ol!~l!~lOER The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll, and the following Sena-

tors answered to their names: Ashurst Bayard Bingham Blense Borah

Bratton Broussard nruce ButlPr Cameron

Capper Caraway Couzens Cummins Curtis

Dale Deneen Dill l•J<lge Ernst

Fernald Howell Norris Fen-is Johnson Od11ie l<'ess Jon es, ·wash. Overman Frnzler K en clrick Pepper George K eyes l'h1pps Gerry King Pine Glass I-a FoJJette JtanF>dr11 Goft' McKcllnr Heed, Pa. Gooding McLean Hobin~on, .Ark. Greene ~Icl\Iastcr Sackett Hale l\fc r1ary Schall Hancld Mayfleld 81.Jcppnrd Harris l\lctcalf 8hip:;tead Harrison Moses Shortridge Heflin Norbeck Simmons

Amoot Steck ~teph('ns Swanson Trammell T:rson Pnd0rwond Wadswot1:h Walsh \\"arren

·Wheeler Willi~>

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Seventy-seven Senators having answere<1 to their names, a (]uorwn is present.

Mr. CUl\IMINS. Mr. President, I listened with the deepest interest to tile dlscu~sion of this subject yesterday by the able and distinguished Senator from Indiana [Ur. WATSON]. I deRire to continue that dh-;cns~ion for a brief time. The treatment of the subject by the Senator from Indiana wns fouudcd upon a letter written by an eminent Briti:::h economist to the Vice President. Thnt discuflsiou must llave been not only illuminating but convincing to t.bose "·ho had the opportunity to hear it.

I approach tl1c subject as an ordinary min<l, a mind that is fairly familiar witll the principles, the policies, ancl the his~ tory of tl1c Go...-erlllllent of the United States, a mind that reveres our Constitutfon and our institutions. It is from this stalldpoint that ·I desire for a sllort while to discu~s this vastly important subject

I shall institute no invidious compariRpns, but I tllink I can say withont any invidious comparison that I come from one of the greutest ngricnltural States of the Union, u State that has suffered more, a grca t deal more, s ince 1020 lJy rea!::lon of tlle depression in agriculture than any other State in the Union. It is not strange, therefore, that I should betray some interest in the matter now before the Senate.

l\1r. President, in the observations I am about to make it is my purpose to deal with certain fundamental phases of the legislation proposed for the relief of agriculture. To be more specific, I int ncl to consider tlle essential features of the legislation urged upon Congress by a committee created at a conference of 11 \\7 estern States, held at Des :Moines, Iowa, on January 28, 1926. This legislation is represented in what is known as the Haugen bill, which was recently under consideration in the House of Representatives, and in the amendment to the so-called "cooperative bill" reported by the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. These measures are identical in principle, but differ in two important reSDects. First, in the Haugen bill the surplus, whether removed from the market for export or stored for orderly marketing, is to be purchased by cooperative associations or other agencies at the foreign price plus t.be tariff duty and the cost of tram;portation; whereas in the amendment to the "cooperative bill" before the Senate, it is to be removed by tl1ese agencies at a fair and reasonable price. Ina. much as there is no import duty on cotton, the Haugen bill proposes that, if there be a surplus above the requirements for the orderly marketing of that commodity, the surplus s.hall be removed at a fair and reasonable price.

Second, in the Haugen bill, the e(]ualization fee iR laid from the beginning on butter, wheat, corn, cattle, and hogs, and the food products of the four last named, and upon cotton after two years from the passnge of the act not exceeding $2 por bule; whereas in tl1e amendment to which I have referred it is not to be laid upon cotton and corn for three years after the passage of the act, and then only if authorized by a further act of Congress.

I do not mean to be understood as saying thnt the "Committee of Twenty-two" from the 11 'Yestern States is insistent upon every detail of the.-e measures. They have, of course, undergone c:llanges made by the Committees on Agriculture in the two Houses.

1\ir. President, I must be permitted, first, to say a word with regard to the personnel of the committee from the 11 Western States. I am personally acquainted with most of them, and intimately acl]uaintcd with many of them, and it gives me great pleasure to say tllat they are men of the llighe t character. They have as great a stake in maintaining the sound principles of good government as any body of men who could be gathereu together for a common purpose. They have studied tllc prob· lems of agl.'iculture for years. They know the needs and necessities of this dominant industry as well, I venture to say, as they can be known. 'l'hey arEbprofound students of economics. They understand the relation between agriculture anfl the banker, the manufacturer, the merchant, and tlle distributer. It would be utterly impossible for these men to agree upon aml propose to the Congress of the United States u plan for farm

10080 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE MAY 26

relief that would violate the essential principles of sound government. Whatever may be our differences, the plan which they have proposed deserves the most serious consideration by all thoughtful and patriotic men and women.

l\Ir. Presiuent, I am botll shocked and indignant when I read the utterances of the eastern press and the speeches of some of our public men, insisting that the plan urged by these representatives of a gJ.·eat agricultural region is simply a raid upon the Treasury or is bused upon the selfishness of a class. I shall attempt to show tllat this plan is bottomed upon the highest conception of the general welfare and that the acknowledged powers of • the Government were never invoked for a more important purpose than to sustain and support a paramount, though unfortunately at this moment a declining, industry.

That agriculture needs the aid which the Government alone can give it is agreed upon everywhere and by every person. The President sees it and the Secretary of Agriculture admits it. Every civic and commercial association of which I know bas resolved for the restoration of prosperity to the agricultural population of the United States. There may be-indeed, there is-wide difference of opinion with respect to the measures that ought to be employed; but all thinking men and women agree upon one thing. It is that the Government should do something to arrest the decline in farm prices and farm values. The two chief political parties have time and again recognized the situation and have declared that in some way the Government must bring about economic equality between the products of agriculture and other commodities. These parties may not have had in mind the same measures of relief, but they must have had the same object in view; and before I close I intend to prove, if I can, that the plan presented by these representatives of the farmers is just as applicable to

· the Democratic platform as it is to the Republican platform. I want to divorce this question from partisan politics, and I shall appeal witll equal confidence to both sides of this Chamber. I shall try to examine it from the economic standpoint and test it by principles that are deeply cherished by Republicans and by Democrats alike, principles acknowledged by all shades of political belief and by all degrees in economic thought from ultraconservatism to extreme radicalism.

The Haugen bill and the proposed amendment to the Senate bill, in the final form agreed upon by their friends, propose a farm board of 12 members, appointed by the President upon the recommendation of a farm council, gathered together for that purpose in each of the 12 land-bank districts. I do not intend. to dwell upon the various and valuable powers of this board with respect to the collection anrl dissemination of helpful information save only to remark that it can be-and I believe will be-tremendously useful in this regard to the cooperative associations and farm organizations upon which the farmers must place their initial reliance for the betterment of the distressing conditions under which agriculture has been struggling for the last six years.

:iUr. President, I come immediately to the vital things which the board ic:; authorized to do. Cotton, butter, wheat, corn, cattle, and swine, including tbe food products of the last four, are named as basic agricultural commodities. I will refer more particularly a little later to cotton, for it is separately and diffen~ntly dealt with. Whenever the board finds that the price of any such commodity or food products in the markets of the· United States is materially lower than its foreign price plus the tariff duty and transportation charges to the United States and that there is a surplus in the United States which renuers the import duty wl10lly or partially inoperative, as proposed in the Haugen bill, or below a fair and reasonable price as proposed in the amendment, then the board is authorized to commence its operations with respect to that com· modity or food product. These are the conditions precedent for the action of the board concerning which such vehement complaints have been made IJy those who, as it seems to me have given but superficial study to the actual economic ques: tion involYed.

HaYing found the conditions above described to exist, it is made the duty of the board to assist in removing or withholding the surplus of such commodity or food product in a way that will maintain or tend to maintain a domestic price for that commodity or food product which will yield the maximum benefits of the tariff duty which has been provided by law or maintain a stable, fair, and reasonable price. In what way is the board to accomplish this object, which every American who loves his own country !Jetter tlaan any other country must applaud?

The object is to be attained by the board entering into agreements with cooperative associations or, -u necessary, with persons engaged in processing that particular commodity or its

food products, and to pay to such association or agency the losses they may sustain from the purchase, storage sale or other disposition of that commodity. The losses are to be paid from an equalization fund collected by the imposition of what is known in the bills as an "equalization fee." It is further provided:

No payment of losses shall be made unless the purchase or contract of purchase is made at a price which, in the opinion of the board, is not in excess of a fair and reasonable price.

1\ir. President, I pause at this point to consider the first and the most pers~:stent objection made to this authority giYen t? the. boaru, havmg stated ~he proposal with sufficient particularity to enable us to JUdge fairly the merits of the objection.

It is asserted that this operation constitutes "Government price fixing." This objection has been promulgated by men of high station in the official, political, and business world· by m~n ~Those sincerity I would not for a moment question; by men m whose judgment in most matters I have implicit confidence. I must, however, be permitted to dissent completely and emphatically from their conclusion and their terminolo...,.y upon this subject. They have been misled by a mere "catch" word into a train of reasoning which will not bear the analysis of a student.

Let us take one of the great agricultural commodities, wheat, for example. Let us assume that we have raised a surplus of 20 per cent which must either be exported or stored for another year. The wheat cooperative association buys this 20 per cent at the foreign price plus the duty and cost of trans~ portation, or at a fair and reasonable price, as the case may be, and thus removes it from the domestic market. We would then have a situation in which 80 per cent of the production is being disposed of by our wheat producers in our own markets. Under such conditions it is obvious there would remain a full opportunity for competition and prices would vary fl·om time to time and from place to place precisely as the prices of iron or steel will vary even though there are no importations unless the combination of steel makers or iron makers is sufficiently strong to control the entire field. If, of course the wheat association shall be strong enough to prevent the' sale of any wheat for domestic consumption for less than a fair price it would not be "Government price fixing" but "voluntary association price fixing," a practice that at this time can be observed everywhere except in agriculture. The maker of iron and steel products has the opportunity to raise his price to the foreign price with the duty and the cost of transvortation added. That opportunity, which the Government has created, and in my judgment wisely created, is exactly the opportunity which I desire to see extended to the farmer.

What I have said about wheat is equally true of each of the basic ngricultural commodities with the exception of cotton and in respect to that commodity the United States ought to be able, and if this measure passes will be able, to fix the world price. If ·we find through experience that combinations of agricultural producers are restraining trade and commerce and are exacting unreasonably high priceF:, we will be compelled to deal with them exactly as we have tried to deal with combinations and monopolies in other fields of industry. I submit, with supreme confidence, that a little sane reflection upon the operation I have vointed out will convince any openminded man that this is not a " Government price-fixing" operation.

Mr. President, the second prominent objection constantly heard is that it puts the Government into business. From my standpoint those who make this objection have no just conception of what this bill means nor what the proper functions of government are. There is not a single important industry in the United States vdth which the Government does not interfere, sometimes to build up, sometimes to destroy. The powers of the proposed farm board over agriculture do not approach even the powers of the Federal Reserve Board and its various agencies over business and commerce; and they are im;iguiflcant as compnrf'd with the authority of the Interstate Commerce Commission over rail transportation. We are main· taining a Sllipping Board anu an Emergency Fleet Corporation which, in their effect ·upon privately owned ship::4, fur transcend the powers conferred upon the farm board. We have a Federal Farm Lonn Bureau, which was created. for the very purpose of competing with private enterprise.

I could easily enumerate a half dozen more governrnP.ntnl agencies which have been organized to aid or re~train busiuess. Understand, I am not criticizing these various boards and bureaus. On the contrary, I think they are essential instrumentalities of the Government and I have instanced them for no other purpose than to bring to your minds the extent to

!'

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 10081 whieh the Government has entered !Jm;iness. It is scarcely neec~snry to recall the indirect interferenecs with free commerce. I suggest the tariff law. Let it he umlerstood that I am a thorough-going advocate of a protective tariff. I thiuk it ha8 contributed more to the develovmcnt of our country than any other economic policy. Some of the duties in our pre ·ent tariff law may be too high. I think there are some. Some of them may !Je too low. I think there are some. But the policy, properly applied, is the defender of our standard of civilizutio,n and of om· independent institutions.

When I remember the passage of what is known as the Underwood-Simmons tariff law, or the Simmons-Underwood tariff law, an<l recall tllC dedarations that were made by, I believe, both the authors of that !Jill, I find. it very hard to discover any difference in principle between the policy of the Revublican Party upon that question and the policy of tile Democratic Party. So far as I am concerned, I believe that our tariff duty should measure the d.iffercnce between the cost ·of production at home and abroad. The competitive tariff law of IU13, as described by the distinguished Senator from Alabama [~lr. UNDERWOOD], would do exactly the same thing-introd.uce and p1·eserve comvetitive conditions as between production abroad and at horne.

'l'he one thing accomplished in the provisions of the Haugen bill or the amendment to the Senate !Jill, is to give the farmer the same vroteetion against foreign priees, foreign market::;, antl foreign costs that we have gi\en in tile tariff lu w to other producers. I need. not, however, have cited these instances of governmental interference h1 business to justify and -vindicate tile power given to the farm board. The farm board is not, under this prOl)Osal, to buy anytiling nor to sell anytiling. It Ilas no other authority tilan to agree with buying agencies that it will vay, from a fund contributed by tile agricultural prouucers themselves, the losses sustained in making purchases of surpluses according to a standard specifically stated in the law itself. The power of the farm board is limited to the ascert.aiument of an emergency and the power to make good. losses to vurchases mad.e at a fair and reasonable price. It seems to me clear, therefore, that if we enact tilis measure, we nre not putting the Government into business in any such sense as to contravene the acknowledged and well-f.oundcd principles of good government.

l\lr. Sil\BIONS. :Mr. PreBident-Mr. CUnE\UN'S. I yield. :Mr. SIMMONS. The Senator undoubtedly r ecognizes the fact

that a competitive tariff would produce revenue, and a prohibitive tariff n<'ver can prod.uce revenue.

Mr. CU:Ml\IINS. Yes. I am not sure, Mr. President, whether we have not now a competitive tariff, even under Republica.n au~pices . I am to1d that the importation of many manufactured. commodities is increas ing so rapidly that it may be doubted whether as to some of them or as to many of them the rate is not below the competitive point; but I d.o not disagree with the Senator from North Carolina about that. I am simply trying to show that the bill I am discussing will be just as applicable to n Democratic tariff as to a Republican tariff.

Mr. Sll\ll\10NS. I am not going to get into a tariff argu· meut with the Senator; but I think that a great many of the duties in the present law are prohibitive, and there are practically no importations as the result of the prohibitive rates.

Mr. CUMMINS. I shall not enter upon a discussion of the tariff, of course.

Mr. Sil\Il\IONS. If the Senator will pardon me, however, I desire to say that the rates that are prohibitive arc, of course, very high as compared witil the rates that allow some importations.

:M:r. CUl\HIINS. Precisely. l\fr. Sil\Il\IONS. The Senator speaks of the fact that we are

not now receiving a great many imports in this country. I call the Senator's attention to the fact that by far the largest part of those imports is upon the free list under the present law-very largely raw materials of factories . In the other instances where tltere is a duty tilat is not too high to make some importations possible there is coming into tills country at tilis time an unmmal amount of importations because we maintain in tllis country an artificial market that is so high that the producers of these products in other industrial countries can pay the tariff rate and then have a greater profit than they would haYe if they sold those products in a free-trade market, especially the free-trade market of Great Britain.

Mr. CUl\HIINS. Mr. Pl'c~ident, I do not perceive any difference between a rule which declares that tariff duties shall rnea:-;nre the difference between the co~t of production at home and abroad and the r ule uvon which the Underwood-Simmons

bill was attempted to bo framed, namely, that we mu t be put on even terms with our foreign competitors. Now, I realize the difficulty jnst as well as the Seuator from North Carolina does. The difficulty is that in Republican hand.s those who are thoroughly wedded to tile principle or policy of protection, whe!l tiley come to apply tilat rule, are apt to attach a Iligiler d.uty thau may be necessary to fulfill tile rule ; and when our Demo· cratic friends come to apply the com}~etitive rule they may be inclined ~-;ometimes, I think, !Jy tradition, to attach lower dutie~ than will completely fill the competiti\e rule.

Mr. SIUi\lONS. In our anxiety to have a tariff that will produce revenue; !Jut I wanted to ask tile Senator this question: Doe~:> he believe that the :H'ordney-:McCurnber tariff !Jill is baseu upon tl.Je difference in the cost of production at home and abroad?

Mr. UUMl\UNS. l\fy best answer to that question is that I \ote<l ag-ainst that bill on its pas~nge through the Senate. I voted for tile adoption of the conferenee revort; but my dew of certain duties that may be found in it will !Je dh=covered by tile expression I llaYe just made, that I \Oted. against the law. In fact, I have ne\er had the vrivilegc of \Oting for any tariff law during the 18 years I have been in Cougrc:ss. I thought the duties in the Payne-Aldrich l>ill were too high, and I voted against that !Jill. I thought tlle duties in the UnderwoodSimmons bill were too low, and I \Oted against that !Jill; and when ''e came to the l\[cCurnher-Fordney bill, I thought a great many duties there were too high, anu I \oted against that bilL . l\Ir. SIMMONS. I want to sny to the Senator that in my judgment these very Iligh rates have been availed of by the manufacturers of this country; and the benefits that they have been able to cleri\e through that, together with the monopolistic eornoinations supvre::;sing domestic competition and enabling tilem to fix their price up to the le\el of the tariff wall and maintain them in this country ut that high le\el, have malic prices in this country so high as compared \\ith the prices in other countries that they constitute an absolute invitation to importations.

l\Ir. CUMMINS. l\Ir. President, I clo not intend to be drawn into a tariff discussion. ·when we enter upon th:lt field we must take np each individual article and ascertain wliether the duty upon tbat particular article or commodity is too high or too low, te ted by the rule I have suggested. All that I sny is that in the consideration of the farm relief bill, if we should finally auovt the plan proposed in the Haugen bill-namely, the foreign price plus the duty, plus the ,cost of transportation-if that should be the end of our consideration of the bill in the Senate, I wanted to leave the thought in the minds of my Democratic friends that that is just ns applicable to the DC'mocratic view of the tariff as it is to the Republican view of the tariff. You might not ~ive the farmer as ~rent relief, but you would give him provortionately the same relief, and I n~snme th.at you would reconcile yourselves by th~ thought th~t in lowering the duties upon manufactured products you were lessening the price he would have to pay for the things thut be must buy.

Mr. President, I now pass to the second chief feature of this measure. It is the vroposed equalization fee tilrougil which all the producers of the agricultural commodity or food product upon which the board is operating are made to contribute a sum which, in the aggregate, will pay the losses sustained by th·e agencies which buy and sell or store the surplus produetion in order that it may not destroy domestic prices or pre\ent orderly and efficient marketing.

I waut to be u~derstood as saying, although I may not enlarge upon the subject, that if this feature of the provo~ed farm relief is adopted there will be no contribution from the Treas· ury. If we levy an equalization fee upon the entire field in which the board is opemting, then that field pays the expen~e and the losses incident to the work which tile board is authorized to do.

This brings me to the founuation stone of this wh(\le l"tructure. If all the agricultural producers in the United Stntes could be welded into a single a:-:~ociation, or if the many cla::::r-es of agricultural producers could organize an effec.tiYe as..;ociation, each operating in its own field, and if the unfair comvetition from foreign countries could be shut out, our farmers would long ago ha\e solved their own prohlem. But we hn1e G,OOO,OOO or more of these farmers, and in the \ery nature of things tiley can not effectively organize for their own protection without the aid of the Go-vernment. The whole purpose of the measure which the farmers nrc urging upon Congress is to enable the cooperative associations to do just what every other considerable industry has done. I have no hesitation in Raying that unless these cooperative associations are successful in bringing about a condition, after this mensure is enacted, in which the fa r mers can enj oy the benefits of collecti\e bargain-

10082 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE MAY 26

ing, a principle recognized everywhere in the present civilized world, and unless they can control, within reasonal>le limits, the prices of the things they produce sold in domestic markets, the legislation I am urging will fail as a remedy for the evils we all recognize.

One of the hitherto insurmountable difficulties which these cooperative associations have encountered is that there is no way of making all the producers of a given commodity con· tribute to the losses sustained in removing a surplus or to the costs incitlent to proper and orderly marketing. This measure initiates a system through which all who enjoy the benefits of removing a surplus or the benefits of orderly marketing, must contribute to the expense of bringing this condition into existence. It is absolutely necessary that we do this thing if we mean to give the farmers of the country the relief which they have a right to demand ut our hands. It is not only neces-· sary to do it but it is fair and just to rlo it. Moreover, it is essential in any plan that we meet and overcome th'e tempta· tion toward overproduction of a particular commodity. I am not afraid of general overproduction of any commodity, and particularly of any agricultural commodity. I will not enter that subject, although it well deserves discussion; and I remark only that the danger of the future will come from under· procluction-not overproduction-and we may well be taking measures to guard against that approaching disaster.

As already mentioned, Mr. President, the chief difference be· tween t11e Haugen bill, as it has been amended and the amendment reported by the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry with respect to the equalization fee, is that the" Haugen l>ill provides that there will be no equalization fee paid on cotton for two years after the paHsage of the act, whereas the Senate amendment to the "cooperative bill" provides that no .equalization fee shall be paid in respect to cotton or corn prior to three years from the date of the act, and that no fee shall then be paid unless and until specifically authorized by a further act of Congress.

I digress here to say that I am opposed to that provision of tlte amendment that we have under consideration. I am not going to take up the case of cotton with regard to equalization, but it is unfair to relieYe corn from the operation of the equalization fee. So far as the northern farmers are concerned,

· we are willing to bear the expense of bringing our domestic prices up to a fair and reasonable standard.

Mr. SHIP STEAD: 1\fr. President, can "·e export cor,n? ::\'Ir. CUl\IMINS. We export so little corn as to be negligible.

We export a great many products into which corn enters. Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Does the Senator think this bill could be

avlllied to corn to take care of the exportable surplus? 1\Ir. CUl\fMINS. If we had the Haugen principle applied to

corn, we would buy the surplus, whatever it might be, whether it is casual or whether it is permanent, at the farm price plus 15 cents a bushel and the cost of transportation. I had not intended to enter upon a discussion of just how this bill would affect any particular commodity, but during the past year, if thL<:~ measure had been in operation, we would have raised corn in my State up to somewhere near the cost of production, whereas those who have sold their corn in my State during the last year have sold it for from 15 to 20 cents below the cost of production.

l\Ir. SHIPSTEAD. I asked the question simply to get information. I was under the Impression that, due to the quality of corn, due to the fact that it absorbs moisture, we could not export it successfully.

l\Ir. CUl\11\HNS. \Ve do not export any corn as corn. We export some foods into which corn enters, and we export a great deal of cattle products and hog products into which corn Yery largely enters.

Mr. SIMMONS. 1\Ir. President, if the Senator will pardon me, in view of the fact that we do not export or import corn to any considerable extent, it has never seemed to me that the principle of surplu!:t, so far as foreign markets is concerned, entered into the corn problem. But I can see very readily why corn would be benefited to the same extent as wheat would be IJenefited in this way : In some years we have an excess in the supply of corn. In some years we have n great shortage in the supply of corn. If we want to maintain the price of corn in this country, when the production far exceeds the consumption, then it is necessary, to affect that object in the domestic market, to withdraw a part of that corn from the market, so that the remainder will measure the demand. In that way I can see it would benefit corn very much.

Mr. CUMMINS. I think the Senator from North Carolina has stated one of the operations in which corn would be benefited. The word "surplus " is a vert misleading word. What is a surplus? We may have a surplus in one county.

We i:nay have a surplus in one State. We may have a surplus in the Nation at large. In the latter case we will export. In the former case we must transfer from one part of the country to another.

One of the great benefits of this bill, apart from using a ;yardstick for determining the losses that the board shall pay, 1s that it is h011ed it will bring about sane, orderly marketing. That means that the farmer will not be compelled to send his corn, if it be corn we are considering, to market at a time when he would depress an already depressed market by putting it upon the market. If the corn grower could say to the corn buyer what he is willing to take for his corn, instead of having to accept the offer of the corn buyer, no matter what it might be, he would be able to take care of himself, and we would be able to get a fair price for his corn. I think that is the idea in the mind of the Senator from North Carolina.

Mr. SIMMONS. That is the idea I have. When we raise a little below the demand in this country corn goes up to four, five, six, or seYen dollars a barrel. When we raise an excess of corn over the demand in this country corn goes down to three or four dollars a barrel. If in the fat year it coulcl be estimated-and it can be-how much the crop will exceed the demand of the American market, and we could take that amount ofr of the market, we would put the corn price up to the price of the lean years.

1\:Ir. CUMMINS. Exactly; and that is one of the things to be accomplished by this legislation. I look upon it as the main thing to be worked out. 'Ve have never attempted to rlo anything of that kind. That is, the Government has never lent a particle of aid or even a willing ear to the efforts of those who are trying to do that exact thing. As I look upon this legislation, it is simply putting the cooperative association in a position in which it can deal with agricultural products in a sane, safe way. I can not understand the opposition which has been aroused to this bilL

Mr. GOODING. I would llke to ask t11e Senator if he does not think that it would stabilize production as well as prices if we were to have rather a sane effort on the part of the farmers as to production i that is, instead of going into corn one year when it is high or wheat one year when it is high, if he would use the average price paid on different farm commodities and if he would plant something like the same acre· age he would know something about what his crop was goiu~ to bring him, and the acreage in the different furm crops would not fluctuate as it does at the present time.

Mr. CUMMINS. I have no doubt the measure would be very beneficial in respect to the matters stated by the Senator from Idaho. The farmer, however, must deal with a great many elements which he can not control and \Vhich no human being .can control so far as his outcome is concerned, so far as the volume of his production is concerned.

As I just said, the chief difference between the Haugen bill, as it has been amended, and the amendment reported by the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry with respect to tlle equalization fee iR that the Haugen bill provides that there will be no equalization fee paid on cotton for two Fears after the passage of the act, whereas the Senate amendment to the "cooperative bill" provides that no equalization fee shall be paid in respect to cotton or corn prior to three years from the date of the act and that no fee shall then be paid unless and until specifically authorized by a further act of Congress.

So far as I am concerned I have no hesitation in saying that I believe the equalization fee should be laid upon every commodity in which the board operates from the time of the beginning of that operation.

l\1r. SHIPSTEAD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. CUl\Il\HNS. I yield. l\1r. SHIPSTEAD. I do not know whether I was correctly

informed, but I was informed that that provision was inserted in the biB. on the assumption that the cotton growers of tho South might not be willing to have an equalization fee applied; tha.t possibly there might be some objection to collecting the equalization fee. I am wondering if a provision can not be inserted, if the bill shall pass, to provide, in case the cotton producers should want to avail themselves of the equalizatiou provision of the bill before two years have expired, that they may be permitted to do so.

Mr. 0Ul\1MINS. I am not in charge of the bill. It is in charge of the Senator from Oregon [Mr. McNARY]. The view just expressed by the Senator from Minnesota, it seems to me, is leading along the right line. I have no doubt we can agree upon some provision of that character.

Mr. l\1cKl1JLLAR. Mr. Presideut, I will say to the Senator from l\llnncsotn that the junior Senator from Arkansas [Mr.

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 10083 CARAWAY] has offered an amendment, which will deal with that situation and will no doubt be worked out upon lines that will be RA.tisfactory.

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Pre~ident, are we to understand that the Senator from Iowa is in favor of the amended Haugen bill proposition, bu·t not in favor of the Haugen bill amendment in the Senate bill?

Mr. CUMMINS. Mr. President, there are t,,.o essential things in the bill that I think must remain in it. ·with respect to everything else I am willing to yield to any reasonable proposal that will secure the passage of the bill. That matter is one of them. If Senators from the South insist upon a postponement of the equalization fee for some reasonable period and if their aid is neeessary to the passage of the bill-! am talking now with perfect frankness-! am going to be in favor of that proposition. I want the bill passed. In the first place, I want adequate power given to the board, and, secondly, I want the industry in so far as it is possible to pay the expense of the operation of the board. The Senator from North Carolina is an infinitely better judge of the effect of the bill upon cotton than I could be. If the Seuator from North Curolbta or nny other Senator representing a cotton State makes a proposal, eyeu though I may not think it is absolutely just, yet if it does not contravene some essential in the bill, I am going to agree to it.

Mr. SIMMONS. I want to say to the Senato~ that I think the reason wlly the representatives of the cotton-growing States who participated in the framing of the legislation insisted upon n different arrangement with resped to cotton from that with respect to cor1~ ond wheat was because of the fa<:t that while only a Yery small fraction of the corn crop and a very small fraction of the wheat ctrop wns exported more than one-half of the entire output of cotton was exported. If we ha(l to raise this fund by a levy uvon each bale of cotton, it would he a sum RO great that the cotton growers of the South would probably not be willing to pay it.

I realize, howeycr, the correctness of what the Senator from Iowa has :mid, tllat this le~islation is so essential to the prosperity of the farmers of the country, whose prospca:ity is so es. eutial to the continued prosperity of the whole country, that the two sections mu8t come together ; thnt is, the agricultural intereHts of the two sections must cooperate through their representatiYes in the Senate and in the House. Otherwise we can not pass the bill, llecause we must realize that there m:e certain interests in the country which are very much opposed to the legislation primarily because they do not want farm prices increased. They want cheap food products. They do not :::ympatllize with the demand of tlle farmers thnt their pri<'es shall be raised up to the le>el of the other prices at all, because they h<n·e a selfish intetrest in kee11ing them down ..

We have got to combine in order to make the legislation possible. In order to do that, so far as I am concerned, representing in part one of the cotton-growing Stutes, I am willing to mnke any reasonable concession that I think will be accepted by the cotton growers of the South. Of course I would not be willing to agree to something that I know the cotton growers of the South would rebel against, but as to any adjustment that can I.Je made that would meet the situation, while it might not he acceptable to me, yet I am so much interested in the legislation that I would agree to it. I think it means much to the people of the countll'y, not only to the fanner, but to all the people of the country, I.Jecanse if this condition continues of one half of the population upon n high level of domestic prices and ihe other half of the population upon a level of prices below the cost of production we may have prosperity or what appears to be prosperity for a time, but as sure as fate the country financially, economically, and industrially is riding for a fall, because the thing can not continue indefinitely. It may continue awhile, but it can not continue indefinitely ..

1\Ir. CUMMINS. The Senator from North Carolina exhibits a most admirable spirit and attitude toward the .legislation, and I join him heartily and whole-heartedly in the suggestion he has just made. He has a view with regard to the way in which complete justice could be done to the cotton grower, and I may have my view, but I am going to yield everything except the essentials in order that we may pass this legislation. It is absolutely necessary that we shall pass it if we are, in the first place, to resto1·e or begin to restore prosperity to the great body of men and women engaged in agriculture, the most important class of all our people, who believe-and I am not testing now the soundness of their belief-that our Government has done something for every other industry sa~e agriculture. That is a belief that will deRtroy the institutions of the United States unless it is removed. ·

:Mr. McKELLAR. Does not the Senator belie~e that is true? Mr. CUl\Il\IINS. No; I do not believe it is entirely true.

We have done a great deal for many industries, but I know of some industries for which we haYe done nothing at all.

Mr. McKELLAR. They arc inconsequential. All of the great industries except the farmer have received benefits from the Government.

lHr. CUMMINS. They are not vital and fundamental industries like agriculture. . l\1r. 'VIIEELER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

l\lr. CUl\11\llNS. Certainly. Mr. WHEELER. The Senator remarked a moment ago that

he was anxious to see tlle bill passed. DoeR he think for one moment the President would sign the bill if it were pnssc..cl?

Mr. OUMl\liNS. I do not care. I never inquire, when I am in favor of a ·bill and think that it ought to pass, whether the President would sign it or not. If he does not sign it, it is his responsibility.

Mr. W'HEELER. Why should we not inquire as to whether or not the President would sign it before we pass it? Why do a useless thing? .

Mr. Sll\IMONS. Let me propound the other inquiry, to wit, why should we inquire of the President '?

1\Ir. CUMMINS. I have never inquired and never will inquire whether or not the PreRident will sign a bill which I belieye to be right and for which I stand. We have our own re~ponsibilities to discharge. I am not going to surrender that responsibility to any Executiw, however much I may admire llim and respect him. I can hardly belie>e that the Senate will make nn inquiry of that kind before we pass the bill. I should think the passage of the bill itself would influence the Chief ExecutiYe to Rome extent when he comes to consider the matter of signing it.

There may be a sharp conflict of opinion with respect to this difference between the two proposals. I am speaking now about the cotton and corn. At the present moment I do not intend to discuss this difference, for it does not involve a question of principle. It is simply a matter of expediency, and I do not intend to consider at this time just how either of these provisions will nffect any particular commodity. I am confining myself to tile fundamentals of the proposals for farm relief, and the fundamental thought with regard to the so-called equalization fee is that the industry to be benefited by removing the f:urplus and the industry to be benefited by bringing about orderly aud economic marketing shall bear the cost inYol-red in the operation. While I huve heard and read muny disparaging and critical references to the equalization fee, it has never been assailed, in so far ns I know, as unsound or unfair, Rave as coupled with the pre\ious provisions which I haye already considered relating to the munner of removing the surplm; or the manner of establishing timely and orderly marketing.

:Mr. President, I have it in mind to make at this point some suggestions with regard to the alleged immutable "law of supply and demand." When the critic of either or both of these proposals has ex.h.austed his vocabulary with specific denunciations conce1;ning the economic unsoununcss of dealing with a surplus, or attempting to bring about sane marketing methods, he always closes his obseryations with a glowing eulogy upon the "law of supply anu demand" and the futility of any attempt to disturb the effects of this inyariable regulator of sale, bnrter, and exchange.

I sincerely hope that no one who favors either of the proposals I am discussing will deny that if any commodity is offered for sale when nobody wants to buy it or nobody wants it or nobody has the money with which to buy it and nothing to exchange for it or if it is offered for sale in quantities exceeding tlle needs of buyers who are accessible these condi· tions will seriously affect the prices at which the commodity can be sold. But to assert that sound legislation can not interfere with the fantastic conception of the "law of supply and demnnd," held by many distinguished writers and speakers, or that the concert of individuals can not accomplish a like result seems to me absurd. It will not be questioned that the tariff law limits the supply in many fields of industry to the products of our own country. It is not to be doubted that our immigration law does exactly the same thing in the domn.in of labor. Agreements between manufacturers-sometimes lawful and sometimes unlawful-may limit the supply of the commodities which they produce. We have all known of many instances in which agreements have limited the demand for particular articles. The conclusion to be drawn from these suggestions is that if when we speak of the "law of supply and demand " we are thinking of a condition in which there is universal freedom of production or of universnl liberty of sale or exchange, we are attaching to this so-called "law" a mean-

10084 CONGRESSIONAL R.ECORD-SENATE ~fAY 26

ing which it never has had and never can have. When we insist that a surplus production in any agricultural commodity should be withdrawn permanently or temporarily from the domestic markets, we are demanding precisely the same thing that the tariff law accomplishes for many commodities by preventing their entrance to our markets. When we contend that the surplus agricultural production must l>e taken care of, whether that surplus must be exported or is due to untimely marketing, and are granted this relief, we are surrounding the farmer with the same protection that we have so long extended to nearly all other industr-ies and to all workingmen. Moreover, if we expand our understanding of the "law of supply and demand " to meet the views of the opponents of this measure, upon. what theory is the law limited in its application to a single year? Why not consider two, three, four, or five years? And if we were to survey conditions over a period of five years it might be discovered that the problem of a surplus would largely disappear, and this is the very office of the cooperative associations which we ordinarily term orderly, timely marketing.

It is, of course, well understood that the object of all the measures which have l>een offered in Congress for farm relief is, first, to raise the prices receh·ed by the farmer, if the prices are below a fair and reasonal>le level, and to keep them there, avoiding the fluctuations through which the necessities of the farmer and the skill of the speculator and manipulator have so often wrought disaster to the agricultural interests. It has been said that if we help the farmer, in the same degree

we hurt tlJe consumer. My first answer to this objection is that the consumer can not afford to insist upon a policy that will pay to the producer a less than a fair price for the things he produces. But it mny l>e further said that if we nre wise in our lc~slation, and if we advance, as it is believed we will, in cooperative marketing, we can diminish the spread between the producer and the commmer and give the producer a fair price without increasing tlle cost to the consumer.

Mr. WHEELER. l\1r. President---Mr. CUMMINS. I yield to the Senator from :Montana. Mr. WHEELER. If this bill should become a law it would

stop, would it not, a ~eat deal of speculation in farm products, and thereby tend to lessen the cost to the consumer?

Mr. Cul\11.\HNS. One of the hopes is that it will. 'l.'here is nothing so destructive to the farmer as the speculator, and, although I suppose he is a necessary element in the commerce of the country, there is no greater enemy to tlle consumer than the speculator. If we can e tablish what I call orderly and timely marketing througll agricultural cooperative as::;ociations we will eliminate the speculator to a great degree if not entirely, and I think in that way we can at once confer a benefit upon the producer without in any wise inflicting any injury upon the consumer.

Mr. WHEELER. Let me ask the Senator another question: Is it not a fact that if the farmers of the Middle West and the West can sell their products at a reasonable price they are going to be able to buy more manufactured articles and thereby gi>e employment to many more people in the East who work in factories and elsewllere?

l\1r. CUMMINS. I think that will be the inevitable effect of the proposed law.

l\!r. WHEELER. Let me ask another question : Is it not the Senator's opinion that the reason why some of the manufacturers in the East ha Ye had poor lmsiness is been use of the fact that they can not find a market for their products in the Middle West and in the 'Vest?

Mr. CUMMINS. Certainly. The people who must sell what they vroduce at less than it costs them to produce it can not in the >ery nature of things be good buyers of the products of other industries ; that is impossible.

Mr. President, some very good people have been frightened with the charge that we are proposln~ a subsidy for one industry and that this aspect of the matter condemns the legislation as unsound and uneconomic. The term " subsidy," broadly speaking, inclurles, I suppose, either a contril>ution from the Treasury or legislation which compels one man or a class of men to conh·ibute something for the l>enefit or advantage of another man or class of men. If Congress would do exactly what it ought to do, the bill I am urging would not take from the Treasury permanently a single penny. I mean tllat if a proper equalization fee were laid upon the particular agricultural commodity upon which the board operates, tlle Government would simply advance a reasonable sum to cover the period between the time of beginning operation and the collection of the equalization fee. From the equalization fund so accumulated there would be repaid to the Trensury every dollar so advanced. In effect, the loan would be simply an advance, just as we have advanced or loaned Government funds in a score of instances in the past, and no one llas evet: had the temerity to denominate these

advances as subsidies. If, however, it be determined that the equalization fee upon any of these basic agricultural commodities be deferred for two years or three years, then there might be, and probably would be, an actual contribution from the Treasury to aid tbe agricultural industry, and there is a sense in which the contribution could l>e fairly called a subsidy, if that should be the form in which tho bill shall finally be passed.

It somewhat astonishes me, howe>er, to see many men holding up their bands in horror when the word " subsidy " is mentioned when I recall the policies of past legislation. E\ery time a man pays more for a manufactured article than he would have paid if an import duty had not been laid upon it, he pays a subsidy. Every time an employer of lal>or pays higher wages to his employee than he would have paid had not the immigration law been in existence, he pays a subsidy. nut our legislation is not confined to indirect subsidies. I understand perfectly that there are many respects in which general industry, like agriculture or like manufacturing, is not parallel with a public utility. But inasmuch as our authority to enact the legislation under consideration rests in our power to regulate commerce among the States and with foreign nations, it is pertinent to inquire what we have done with respect to public utilities which arc no more importantoftentimes less important-to the public welfare than is the agricultural industry.

The Go>ernment took over the railroads on the 1st of January, Hl18, and operated them until tlle 1st of March, 1D2Q-a year and four months after the close of the war. For the privilege of trying Government operation, we paid from the Treasury, in round numbers, $1,100,000,000. We continued the standard contracts, made during the war, until September 1, 1920, and that cost us six hundred millions more. So that the total contribution from the Treasury was substantially $1,700,000,000.

l\fr. SHIPSTEAD. 1\Ir. Prcsident--1\Ir. CUMMINS. I yield to the Senator from Minnesota. 1\Ir. ~HIPSTEAD. I desire to ask the Senator a question,

but in doing so I do not wiRh it to be under~tood that I aru asklng it in a controversial spirit.

Mr. CUMMINS. I understand. 1\lr. SHIPSTEAD. Tile Senator expressed the opinion, as I

understood him, that for the purpose of trying the experiment of Government operation of the railroads we paid a certain large sum of money. I thought we paid that as a matter of necessity, due to war conditions; that the railroads under private ownershi11 and management were unable expeditiously to trnnsport goods to the terminals and it was absolutely necessary for the Government to take over the railroads in order to open up the channels of trn.nsportation in order that food su~ plies and other commodities might be dh;tributed.

Mr. CUM~1INS. That is the view held by a great many people, and that is the view upon which the legh;lation of March, 1918, was passed. For one, I did not llold that view. I believe that if the operation of the railroads had been left in the hands of private management we would have accomplished just the same results or even better results and saved something like a billion dollars or more.

I am not going to discuss that queRtion, hecause there is a great difference of opinion about it. Many people believe that it was absolutely necessary for President 'Vil:-;on to take over the railroads; but remember he took them over without any autllority from Congress except the authority that \YUs given in an appropriation act in 1916.

Mr. SIMMONS. 1\ir. President-Mr. CT.JM:UliNS. I yleld. Mr. SIMMONS. Of course, I do not agree with the Senator

about the reason for taking over the railroads. I thought the railroads were tak.en over as a result of a war emergency; bnt I do not want to di~cuss that. I wanted to ask the Senator if he had the figures there to show how much of this money invested by the Government in the operation of railroads was returned or will be returned to the Government?

1\fr. CUMMINS. Not a cent. I am giving you the net results. After the books of the Railroad Administration are all closed, and afte-r e-verything bas been paid to the Government by the railroads that is owing to the Government by the railroads, and everything has been paid to the railroads which the Government owes them, there will l>e still a net final loss of $1,700,-000,000 or more which has l>een paid from the Treasury and which c:::.me from the general sources o·r taxation.

Mr. SIMMONS. That is a net loss? 1\fr. CUMMINS. Yes. Mr. 'WHEELER. Mt·. Presidcnt-Mr. CUMMINS. I yield. Mr. WHEELER. Does the Senator think the Government

was justified in paying that $1,700,000,000 to the railroads?

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN1\._TE 10085 1\Ir. CUl\fl\IINS. The Senator will remember that I YOted

against the act of March, 1918. We are getting into a subject that is foreign to this discussion; but I think the Goyernment undertook to pay certain railroads a great deal more than they ought to have receiYed. It will be remembered that. the President said to the railroads when they were taken over, " \Ve will see that you do not lose anything by this operation, and your property shall be returned to you in as good condition as when it was taken," and then when we came to frame the law we proyided that to each railroad-not to the railroads as a whole, but to each railroad-there should be giYen as compensation for the use of the property of that railroad the aYerage net operating income of the railroad for the three preceding years. That ..resulted in paying to some of the railroads of the country a great deal more than they should have received, and it resulted in paying to some of the railroads a great deal less than they should have received. I was opposed to that method o·f a scertaining compensation, and for that reason I voted against the bill that confirmed the authority of the President to take over the railroads.

l\Ir. GOODING. 1\fr. President, will the Senator put into the REconn the three test years?

~fr . CUMMINS. The years were the three years preceding the 1st of July, 1917.

Mr. Sll\BIONS. l\Ir. President, I recognize that · the discussion that is now going on is rather collateral.

1\Ir. OU~11\UNS . Entirely. l\lr. SIMMONS. But the question has been raised, and the

Senator has expressed his views about it. They are contrary to mine. I think we might just as well a sk the question whether we ·were justified in spenuing all the money that we did spend in· order to win the war as to ask whether we were justified in the expenditure that was inyolved in our taking over the roads, because I belieYe now and I belieYed then tllat unless the Government did take over the roa<ls our t·thole war program would break down.

1\Ir. CUMMINS. That was the theory upon which the roads were taken over.

1\ir. SIMMONS. I believe now that if we had not done that we could not have gotten across the water witll our boys in time to have made the victory possible.

1\fr. OU:l\11\HNS. I do not concur in that view. Mr. ~!1\Il\IONS. I know the Senator does not. I simply

\vanted to express my view of the matter. 1\fr. OUl\11\IINS. I think the railroads would have deliYere<l

· the war material eYen more speedily nnd more regularly than the material was delivered after the roads went into the hands of the Government.

l\1r. 'VHEELER. Ur. President. was it not a notorious fact that the terminals were filled up with f r eight tllat they could not deliver?

Mr. CU.l\fl'HINS. Certainly. l\1r. 'VHEELER. As a matter of fact, the railroads them

selves in runny instances simply said that they could not han<lle it with thei r facilities.

1\Ir. CUMMINS. It was perfectly ensy to clear out the terminals, so far as authority was concerned, without putting the railroads into the hands of the Government. Our powers of regulation and control are comprehensive and complete. I believe that we could have re~ulated the movement of trains in the terminals, and especially in the New York terminal, wllere the great congestion existed, and in the Pittsburgh terminal, wllich was hardly less difficult, and that it could have been done bettf'r if it had not invol\·ed the turning over of the railroads to tlle Government and the payment of what I havo always looked upon ns -excess compensation.

I want to say for this argument, 1\Ir. President, that I am not criticizing this expenditure. I did not intend to be led into a discussion of it. It was absolutely necessary from the standpoint of those who were then in power. But why was it necessary, viewed from that standpoint? Now, mark you, it was necessary simply to keep the railroads running. That is the view that has just been expressed by the Senator from North Carolina and the Senator from Montana, and I have no inclina tlon to dispute that view; but we paid out tllis money simply to keep the railroads running. If it now appears that a comparath·ely small contribution is necessary to keep the farms running, why should it be considered uneconomic or unsound to make it? That is the inquiry that I think every Senator must answer not only to the country, but to his own conscience.

1Ve hnve appropriated, using round numbers, $1,375,000,000 for the improvement of rivers and harbors-why? To enable private enterprise to reap a profit in ocean and river transportation, and, of course, for the additional reason that we

LXVII--035

need tho service which ocean transportation and river transportation can render the people. Some of these appropriations may have been improvident; but there is no man wllo ventures to say that the object in view was not wise, patriotic, sound, and economic.

In operating Government-owned ships during the last five years " 'e have lost $225,000,000, and this witllout reck oning losses in capital invested. I am not complaining about these losses. I am simply instancing that contributions from the Treasury are not infrequent, and many of them are not more closely allied to the common welfare than the contribution now proposed to initia te a system that will maintain agriculture, the success of which is inseparably bound up with the prosperity and endurance of the Nation.

We have spent more than $200,000,000 in the reclamation and irrigation of arid and semiarid lands. All this for the purpose of increasing the production of agricultural commodities about which the opponents of this measure seem to fe~l so keenly. There have been and will continue to be sums pe.id by the owners of these lands into the Treasury; but it is estimated that upon the basis of tile present projects the Government llas definitely lost somewhat more than $27,000,000.

Mr. GOODING. Mr. Pre~ident--1\lr. CUM~HNS. I yield. 1\lr. GOODING. That is not the fault of settlers , however.

Tllat was found by an investigation on the part of the Government to be due to incompetent engineering and lack of proper investigation of the projects. Undor the act of December 5, 1925, all reclamation projects in the future will be investigated, and a complete investigation or survey made of the marketing conditions and soil and eyerytlling tllat goes to make n successful irrigation project.

I merely wanted to make it plain to the Senator that the settlers, the 11ioneers, are in no way responsible for tlle losses to the Government itself.

1\fr. CUMMINS. I hope I haye not, even by inference, suggested anything to the contrary. I am simply saying that the Government undertook to do tllis for the people of the United States.

l\1r. GOODING. Yes. I haYe in mind a project in my own State in wllich it v•as estimated tllat there were available 23,000 acres of good lands that could be recla ime<l. The con· sh·uction was based on 2:~,000 acres, nncl finally it was foun<l that there were only 11,000 acres in that project that were practicable for home building or for cultiYation. The settler was not to blame for that.

Mr. CUl\11\UNS. Oh, no. I am saying that the GoYernment undertook to do these things.

If we have a right, and if it is sound policy, to expend Treasury money to enlarge the cultivable area of the country, it is certainly sound to expend a reasonable sum in entering upon a plan that will create and maintain economic equality between agricnlture and other forms of industry and wllich will stabilize agricultural prices so that farm values will regain their proper place and farmers will be able to carry on their activities with an even o~portunity for ultimate success.

At some future time in the discussion upon which we arc entering I may tnke up tlle details of tllese measures and examine what the effect of the proposed legislation will be upon particular commodities. But for the present I content myself with the effort to establish the f-undamental soundness of the legislation ; and I close with this appeal : The Government alone can give the farmer an even chance. Let us giye it to him, and give it to him quickly.

MIGRATOI!Y·DIRD REFUGES

The PRESIDING OFFICER. In accordance with the unanimous-consent ag-reement, this bill will go back to the ca lendar, and the Cllair lays before the Senate the unfinished business.

The Senate, as in Committee of tlle Whole, resumed the consideration of the bill ( S. 2607) for the purpose of more effectively meeting the obligations of the existing migratory bird treaty with Great Britain by the establishment of migra-tory-bird refuges, etc. ·

1\Ir. DILL. Mr. President, I make the point of no quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll, and the following Sena·

tors answered to their names : AAhurst Uin_gbam Rlcnse Borah Bratton nroussard Bruce Butler Cameron

Capper Caraway Cummins Curtis Deneen Dill Edge Ernst Ferris

Fess Frazier Ge-orge Gerry Gillett Glass Gofl' Gooding Hale

Harreld Harris Heflin Howell John son Jones , N. :\Iex. Jones , Wash. Kendrick Keyes

10086 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE l\lAY 26 King Norris Sackett Ln Follette Oddie Scbnll 1\lcKellar Overman Sheppard 1\lc"Master Pepper Shipstead McNary Phipps Shortridge Ma~·field Pittman fi'immons Metcalf Han:><.lell Smoot Moses Hred, Pa. Stanfield Norbeck Robinson, Ark. l:;tcck

Stephens Hwanson Trammell

~'lsi~~ Warren Wheeler Willis

1\fr. GERRY. I deshe to armounce that the Senator from Georgia [i\lr. GEORGE], the Senator from New 1\Ie:xico [Mr. JO.!'\'ES], and the Senator from Delaware [Mr. BAYARD] are una>oidably detained. at a meeting of the Committee on Finance.

The \ IC~J PRESIDENT. Se>cnty-one Senators having answered to their names, a quorum is present.

SUBSIS'fEI\CE EXl'ENSES OF CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES

Mr. WARREN. Mr. President, with the .conscnt of the Senator in c::Jargc of the pending bill, I ask that the Senate proceed to the consideration of House bill 7889, a bill to regulate subsistence expenses of civilian officers an<l employees while absent from their <lesignatcd posts of duty on official business. I am sure it ·will lend to no extended debate.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there objection? Mr. KING. Let tlle bill be reported. The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will read. The Chief Clerk read the bill, as follows : Be it be enacted, etc., That this act may be cited as the " Sub

sistence expense act of 1!J26." SEc. 2 . When used in this act-The term "departments and establishments" means any executive

department, independent commission, board, IJurenu, office, agency, or other establishment of the Government, including the municipal government of the District of Columbia.

The term " subsistence'' means lodging, mea ls, and other necessary exp;!nses incidental to the personal sustenance or comfort of the traveler.

The term " actual expenses " means the actual amounts necessarily expended by th e traveler for subsistence and itemized in accounts for reimlmrscment.

The term " per diem allowance" means a dally fiat rate of payment in lieu of actual expenses.

SEc. 3. Civilian officen; and employees of the departments and establishmont1:1 while trav·oling on official business and away from their designated posts of duty shall be allowed their actual necessary expenses in an amount not to exceed $7 each for any one calendar day.

SEc. 4. The heads of departments and establishments, in lieu of the actual expenses authorized by section 3, may prescribe a per diem allowance ·not to -exceed $G for any one calendar day or portions thereof for absences of less than 24 boors. - ·

SEc. 5. Civilian offic1!rs and employees of the departments and establishments while traveling on official bmiincss beyond the limits of the continental United States shall be allowed their actual expenses in an amount to be prcscrihed by the llends of departments and establishments not to exceed an average of $8 per day during the tra>el, exclusive of absence on leave.

Actual expenses and per diem allowance under t his section for any travel performed within the limits of continental United States sllall be in accordance with the rates prescribed in sections 8 and 4 of this act.

SEC. 6. The heads of departments and establishments may prescribe a per diem allowance of not to exceed $7, in lieu of the actual expenses autllorizecl by Rection u.

SEC. 7. The allowance and payment of actual expenses and the fixing and payment of per diem allowance, or portion,-; thereof, shall be in accordance with regulations which shall be promulgated by the heads of departments and establishments, and whkh shall be standardized as far as practicahle, and shall not be effective until approved by the President of the United States.

SEC. 8 . The heads of dPpartments and establishments, under regulations which shall be prescribed by the :;;ecrctary of the Treasury for the protection of _ the United States, may advance through the proper disbursing officers from applicable appropriations to any person entitled to actual expenses or per diem allowance under this act such sums as may be deemed advisable considering the character and probnble duration of the h·a.-el to be performed. Any sums so advanced shall be recovered from the person to whom advanced, or his estate, by dP.ductlon from any amount due from the United States or by such other legal method of recovery as may be neces:::~ary .

SEc. V. A.ll laws or parts of laws which are Jncomdstent with or in conflict with the provisions of this act, except such laws or parts of law us specially fix rates higher than the max:immn rates established in this act, are hereby rcpenled or modified only to the extent of such inconsistency or conflict.

SEC. 10. This act shall not be construed to modify or repeal the act providing for the traveling expenses of the President of the United States or any acts (including appropriations for the fiscal year 1V27)

specifically fixing or permitting mileage rates for travel and/or subsistence expenses.

SEC. 11. This act shall not be construed to modify or repea l the -per dlem travel allowances granted railway postal clerks, acting railway postal clerks, and substitute rc.ilway postal clerks in section 7, '£itle I, of the act approved February 28, Hl25 ( 43 Stat. p . 10G2) .

SEJC. 12 . .Appropriations for the fiscal year 1!J27 which contain specific rates of actual expenses . or per diem allowance inconsistent wlth the rates permitted by tl!is act arc hereby modified to tbe extent required to permit the application of the provisions of this act to such appropriations.

SEC. 13. This act shall take effect on July 1, 102G, but any increases deemed nccess.try to be made in the rates of actual expel)Scs or per diem allowance under the authority of this act shall not !Je

.authorized by heads of departments and establishments to the· extent of incurring a deficiency in appropriations available for the payment thereof during the fiscal year 1!)27.

SEc. H . Civilian officers and employees of the scYeral executive departments and independent establishments of the Government, including their field services, under such regulatious as may be prescribetl by the heads of such departments or establishments, may use their own vehicles for transportation when performing necessary official travel on duty away from their official stations. When such vehicles ar·e used for such purposes, the person so using his own vehicle m::ty be allowed and paid no't to exceed 7 cents per mile for distance actua1ly and necessarily traveled on official business in such vehicl e, for ve.hicles other t han motor cycles, and for motor cycles 3 cents per mile, l}n<l necessary tolls, ferriage, and storage charges, such allowance to be in lieu of any and all other allowances for transportation. Such · allowances, however, in any caRe of travel when absent from official station· between points where transportation by the most economical usually traveled route may be bud by common carrier, shall not exceed the amount of the cheape-st first-class fare by such common carrier: Pt·ovfdcrl, That the time consumed in travel betwc:>en Auch points in excess of the time required for such- travel by common carrier shall be charged to the traveler: An(l p1·ov·ided further, That when loss would

· ensue to the Government by awaiting transportation by common carrier allowance may be made in full for tbe actual distance traveled and for the time necc~;sarlly consumed.

:Mr. KING. Mr. President, I would like to have some ex· planation of this bill, and as to what the cost wi ll be, and as to what depA.rtment it will apply to.

Mr. WARREN. 1\lr. Presi<lent, it will apply to Government workers in all departments, civil-senice employees aud others, excepting the Po~t Office Department, the Army, the Navy, an·d the other military brancheR, which are provided for otherwiHe. It fixes a standard rate of $6 a . day in place of other expense allowance:-;, which may run up to $7 a day actual expenses, instead of regular pt!r diem. _ In other words, this is to take the place of the $4 and $5 old allowances, which it raises to $6 and $7.

The bill also provides a maximum of $8 a day for those in foreign service, whereas tllere have been various rates exh;ting. So that the measure would raise the rates at oue place and lower them to some extent in another.

The idea is to ha>e some measure that may apply to all alike, and not make it necessary, as it has seemed to be lately, when we have been providing for the expenses of any member of a commission, or anyone wbo has to tra-vel, to provide $8 or $10 or ~12 a day. All must take $6 or $7, as the case may be, or, in the Foreign Service, $8.

Mr. KING. Let us take, for instance, employees in the For· est Service; employees in the Agricultural Department, of whom there is . an army perambulating throughout the country; employees in the Internal Revenue Department, of whom there are literally hnndrecls throughout tile country; employees in the Prohibition Unit, of wbom tbere are many hundreds; and hundreds of men in the accounting divisions going throughout the country. Are all of them to get a maximum of $7 a day?

:\Ir. V.V AHREN. I hardly tbink the figures would be as larg~ as the Senator has iudicatccl, although tllere are quite a goo<l many such employees. Undei" the present practice many of tho~e employees arc receiving more than they would receive under this bill. Tllis is to fix a standar<l, that all may be treated the same. Where the present rate is higher, as in the case of certain commissions, the rate will be made uniform in the future. For instance, those who have been sent to the Vienna moeting will draw $15 a day. Tllat is recognized and will be allowed to stand just for the time being. llut beyond that, $7 a day or $8 a day will be the maximum.

Mr. KING. What would be the maximum allowed to employees of the Agricultural Department, of whom there are hundreds perambulating through the country?

Mr. WARREN. Six dollars. Mr. KING. Under this bill? Mr. ' VARREN. Yes.

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE 10087 l\Ir. KING. What is the maximum allowed to employees of

the Interior Department, Land Office officials, officials of the ]j'orest Service, and of the Geologkal Survey?

Mr. WARREN. To some of the services, like the Railway l\Iail Service, this does not apply. 1Ve haYe my amendmeut cut out what the Hom;e provided in the way of a mileage charge in connection with motor travel, because the Committee on Appro11riations of the Senate wantPd to get into <!Onference with the House and try to modify that particular item. ·

Mr. KING. This is just for lodging; it is not for mileage? 1\Ir. W AHREN. Oh, no.

· Mr. KING. Does the Senator know how much per annum this will add to the expenses of the Government?

1\Ir. ·w AUHEN. The Members of the House who have had the matter under consideration state that it is no considerable amount. It will relieve us of the constant pressure made from day to day to raise the salaries of those in this, that, or the other department of the Government.

l\Ir. KING. I think the Senator has minimized the importance of this bill. Perhaps HOO employees of the Government have been to see me about the measure. I suppm;e they thought I might object. Some wPre in the Veteran:;' Bureau. That bureau, as the Senator knows, has a great many employees traveling throughout the country, some in the legal <lh·ision, some doctors, FlOme im-.pectors. Then the Treasury Department has perhavs 5,000 employees of all kinds traveling throughout the country, as auditors and inspectors, and as agents in internal-revenue work. I believe that with the multitude of employeeH-and there must be 1:1any, many thousand:;-includiug thm;e engaged in the Internal llevenne Department, because in that department alone, as the Senator knows, there are n('arly 30,000-

Mr. WAUREN. Very few are traY<'ling. l\1r. KING. The Reuator is in era:or about that. In the

Senator's own State there nre quite a number in the Internal ReYcnue DPpartment. Many live in the State and have their headquarters iu Cheyenne. In my State they have their headquarters in Salt Lake City. But they travel around the States, and I am WO]l(lering if they would draw tile same expen:;e rates.

1\.lir. WAHREN. Not when they are in hotels or when they arc home. l\Ir. McCarl, the Comptroller Genernl, has been Yery careful in his rulings. 'l'he allowance must be for full days, and it must be while they are traveling. It is not applicable as it was under the old system.

Mr. KING. I kuow that any effort to cut down the expenses of the GoYernment or to prevent an increase in the expenses of the Government is absolutely futile. The exr1enses this year will be Y('fl'Y much more than those of last. year, and next year ·will be much more than those of this year. The number of employees will be increased, their salaries will be increased, the number of bnreaus will be increased, and we are on the high-

, way to increasing expenses and of course increasing taxes. 1\Ir. WARREN. '.rhe bill is to prevent that very thing of

raising salaries. 'Vllen these po~itions were 1reclas~ified, there was more or less of a promise with reference to thoRe to whom the cln~sificntion brought only a slight advance. The bill cures that defect, whatever it is.

l\Ir. KING. Of course I can not object to its consideration, but I think it is a very untimely proposition.

The Scnnte as in Committee of the Whole proceeded to consider the blll.

'l.'he VICE PRESIDENT. The amendments will be stated. The CHIEF CLERIC In section 9, page 4, line 3, after the wor<l

" fix " and before the word. " rate:;," insert the words " or now pcnnlt."

The amendment was agreed to. The CmEF CLERK. On page 5, after line 3, strike out section 14. The ameudment was agreed to. The hill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the

amendments were concurred in. The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill

to he a-end a third time. The bill was read the third time and passed.

THOMAS DUUNFORD

The YICID PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a bill from the House of Heprcsentatives (H. R. 848tl) to relinquish the title of the United States to the land in the claim of Thomas Durnford, situate in the county of Baldwin, State of Alabama, which was read twice by i ts title.

~Ir. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I nsk unanimous consent for the present consideration of tlle measure. It is a local bill. It iH indorHed by Secretary \York.

l\1r. CURTIS. Has the bill been referred to a committee? Mr. HI1JI1'LIN. Nc.; 1 just called it up from the clerk's desk

this minur~.

Mr. CURTIS. I think it ought to go to a committee. We have been objecting to the consideration of bills nnd joint resolutions without their reference to a committee.

Mr. HEFLIN. I have the report of the Secretary of the In-

1

terior. I should lil;:e to rend what he said. Mr. CURTIS. I sllall have to object, although I have no

objection to the Senator's bill in and of itself. M:r. HI~.D'LIN. I hope the Senator will not object. These

people down there want to sell the land, and I fear we will have to bold it up for days and days if the bill has to go to a committee.

Mr. CURTIS. I shall llave to object, much as I dislike to do so.

Mr. HEFLIN. Well, then, 1\ir. President, I haye tlle floor, and I have been wanting to make a speech for some days. [Laughter.] However, I h~ve no desire to establish a precedent that would disturb the standing rules and regulations of this body. The bill for whicl;l I have endeavored to get present consideration, of course, has not been referred to a committee. It passed the Honse on yesterday. No one would object to the measure. The reason why I want to get it passed at the earliest possible moment is because I had intcnd~d introducing the hill in the Senate and having it passed here, :::;o that a Member of tlle House could have it passed over there. That is why I wanted to get it pas:;~ed this afternoon if I could.

I am not going to speak this afternoon. I know the Senator from Kansas will regret to hear that. [Laughter.] I ask the Chair, howeYer, to refer the bill to the Committee o.n Public Lands and SurYeys, and I hope to get them to act upon it to-morrow so I can call it up for passage.

The YICE PRESIDENT. The bill will be referred to the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys.

NATIONAL PROHIBITION REFERENDUM

1\Ir. EDGE. l\fr. President, for several days there has· been considerable di:::;cuRsion as to the legality or constitutionality of the suggested national prohibition referendum. I ask consent of the Senate to have printed in the RECORD a brief prepared by the Senate legislative coun~el, 1\Ir. Frederick P. Lee, expressing as his opinion the entire legality an<l constitutionality of Congress providing for a national prohibition referendum.

The VICEJ PRFJSIDENT. 'Vithout objection it is so ordered.

The matter referred to is as follows: UXITED STATES SE::-<ATEJ,

0FFICF. OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUXSl!JL.

UEMORA::-<DU:\1 IN RE POWEll OF CO::-<GRESS TO PROVIDE FOR A N.A.TIO:\AL

RF.FEREXDGll{

The opinion of this office has ueen requested as to the power of the Congress under the Constitution to enact Senate Joint nesolution No. 81, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session, as introduced ~larch 26, 1926. The resolution provides for the holding of a national referendum "in order that the Congress may obtain information necessary for the appropriate exercise of its legislative powers unuer the eighteenth amendment." Under the resolution as introduced the question upon which the referendum is to be held Is as follows:

"Shall the Congress amenu the national prohibition act (commonly known as the Volstead Act) so as to allow the manufacture, sale, transportation, and possession of beverages containing as great an amount of alcohol as is lawful unuer the Constitution, proYl<led that such amendments shall not interfere with the constitutional powers of the several States to legislate with respect to intoxicating liquors as each State may deem proper?"

Provision is made authorizing the several States to conduct the referendum in accordance with such election and referendum laws, not in conflict with tbe provisions of the resolution, as the State legisla· tures may provide. In the event of any State failing to make auequate provisions for the holuing of the referendum, the Postmaster Genernl and the Secretary of Commet·ce are required to conduct the referendum through the post offices, the Bureau of the Census, or such other agencies within their respective jurisdictions and control as th y may jointly select. Finally, provision is made for reimbursing each State for the cost of the referenuum if held by It, and for the pnymcnt of tho expenditures of the Postmaster General and the Secretary of Commerce for the conduct of the referendum whenever ~eld by them in the absence of State action.

It will be noted from the above outline of the provisions of the resolution that no attempt is made to compel any individual to furnish inf<>rmation through compelling him to vote in the · referendum. Further, no compulsion is placed upon the States to make tbeir election machiner·y available nor to control tbe conduct of tbe referendum H held by the State, except that If the Stnte voluntarily determines to conduct the referendum the resolution imposes the following limitations: Fh·st, the referendum is to be conducted at the general elPction held by the State for Representatins in the Seventy-first Congress of

10088 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1\{.A.Y 26

the United States: second, the question shall be stated upon the bal· lots without alteration or expl:lnution; third, any individual qualified by law as an elector for a Representative in Congress, lllld none other, shall be qualified to vote upon the question ; and fourth, the governor of the State shall certify the referendum results to the Senate and the House of Representatives on the first day of the first regular session of the Congress commenc.'ing after the referendum. These mandatory provisions, however, come into effect only if the State voluntarily provides for the conduct of the referendum. It is therefore clear that the referendum, so far · as the individual or the State is concerned, is purely a voluntary matt~r.

The conRtitutional prolllems presented by the resolution are those relating to the power of Congress to acquire without compulsion infor· mntion in aid of or as a basis for legislation, anll to that end to avail itself of the services of State ofticinls nnd instrumentalities with the consent of the Stat the State to be reimbursed for expenses incurred. Such problems are general in their nature. Their solution is not peculiar to a rcfcrenuum relating to the eighteenth amendment or the national prohi!Jitlon act. Their solution as a matter of law is not in any way afl'ected by the merits of the proposed referendum as a matter of policy, nor is their solution as a matter of law affected by the merits of tlle pending controversy over the modification of the national prohibition act.

The constitutional problems presented by the resolution are discussed in connection with the four following questions :

I. Can Congress under the Constitution provi1lc by law for the acquisition without compulsion of information in aid of or as basis for legislation?

II. In case the first question is answered atn:-mntlvely, hns the Congress under the Constitution the discretion to determine by law the appropriate method for acquiring such information?

III. In case the second question is nns"·ereu affirmatively, would an act of Congre. s providing for a national referendum to be conducted by t~e Stat~s with their consent be open to constitutional objection as-

( A) .An interference with the rights of the several States reserved to them unuer the tenth amendment?

(ll) .An invnlld delegation of Federal legislative power? (C) A. denial to the States of a republican form of government? IV. Is an appropriation for e.."'."})ensN! incurred in the conduct of the

referendum either by the States or by Federal agencies a constitutional appropriation?

I. Can Congress under the Constitution provide by law for the acquisition without compulsion of information in aid of or as a basis for legislation?

Article I, section 1, of the Constitution provides that "the legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States *-"

Article I, Rection 8, of the Constitution provides that Congre!'.s shall hnve power " to make nll laws which shall be necessary and proper fo1· carrying into execution the· foregoing powers, anu all other powers vested !Jy this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

The Constitution does not mention any power of Congress to acquire information in aid of or as a ba!<is for legislation by a notional referendum or otherwise. .A glance at .Article I of the Constitution will reveal, howPver, that no attempt was made by that instrument to enumerate all the things which Congress might do by law. The frnmers of the Con. titution intended to create a legislative body such as tlley were familiar w:ith from .experif'nce or history, anu which would have the same plenary authority, within the limited Oeld of the powers vestf'd in it by the people, as snch legisl:ltlvc bodies had exercised in the pnst. 'l'he.rcforc it waR proviUed in the Constitution that the Congress sboulu have, in addition to its enumerated powers, certain unenumerate<l or implieu powerR. These are either implied in the grants of the enumerated powt'rs or are conferred by the "necessary and proper" clause above quoted. These unenumernted power:'! include the power of Congress to provido lJy law for the acquisition of information in niu of or as a basis for legislation.

Under the resolution the po~er to acquire such information would be exercised as necessary and proper to <:n.rry into execution the "power to euforcc" tlle eighteenth amenllmcnt "!Jy appropriate legiRlation." (Sec sec. !! of the £'ighteenth amenument.) In fact, the resolution states on its face that the referendum is authorized to be held "in order that the Cong-ress may obtain information neressary for the appropriate exercise of its legislative powers under the eighteenth amendment."

The existence of the power to acquire information in aid of or as a basis for leglslat.ion has always !Jecn assumed tn the many deci!'tions of the courts as to whether the CongTes::~ can compel such information to be furnished it, whether power to acquire such information for the Col}gress may !Je delegated, whether the acquisition of the information was asserted to be for a legislative purpose, or whether the legislative purpose, if asserted, did in fact exist in the particular instance. (Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U. S. 168; Interstate Commerce CommisSiQ.ll 41. Bdmson, 15" U. S. 447, 474; Henry v. Henkel, 207 Fed. 805,

21lu U. S. 219; Harriman v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 211 U. B. 407; United States v. Mitchell, 58 Fed. 093, 099; United States v. Morinrity, 106 Fed. 88G; Federal Trade Commission v. Claire Furnace Co., 28G Fed. 936, 043, 948 ; Ex parte Daugherty, 209 Fed. 620, 633, G37-638, 640; United States v. Sinclair, 5~ Wash . L. Rep. 451.) In the Kilbourn case in 1881 and in the Henry case in 1914 the Supreme Court in explicit language distinctly declined at those two widely separated dates to pass upon the question as to whether Congt·ess could compel the testimony of witnesses in aid of or as a basis for legislation. It seems reasonable to conclnue, therefore, that the only doubt confronting the Supreme Court was not the power of Congress to acquire information in aid of or as a basis for legislation, but to compel the furnishing of such information by contumacious witnesses.

The power of Congress under tbe Constitution to acquire by compulsory methods information in aJd of or as a basis for legislation is now pending before th0. Supreme Court in cases of Dnngherty v. McGrain, argued durin;; the October term, 1024, and Federal Trade Commission v. Claire Furnace Co., argued during the October term, 1023, and reargued during the present term. The same rjnestion is also pending before tbe Court of .Appeals of the District ot' Columbia in the case of tlle United States v. Sinclair. llut the decisions of these cases in the lower courts assumed the authority of Congress to acquire information in aid of and as a basis for legislfttion unless compulsory methods were employed. (Flx parte Daugherty, 20!) Fed. G20; l1'ederal Trade Commission v. Claire Furnace Co., 285 Feel. 9iJ6 : United States v . Sinclair, 52 Wash. L. Rep. Mil.) While adm1ttf'dly doubt will continue to exist as to the power of Congress to compel the furnishin~ of information until such tlmf' as the question left open by the Kilbourn and Henry cases is finally der.l<led by the Supreme Court, the past decisions of the Supreme Court have in nowise cast doubt upon the power of Congress to ncquire such information by voluntary methods.

Congress having the power to acquire information in ald of or as a basis for legislation, the resolution then presents the following question: Is it n<'cessary and proper to the exercise of the power of Congress to enforce the eighteenth amflndment by appropriate legislation, that the Congress provide l.Jy law for the acquisition of information as to whether a majority of the people of the United States favor the amend· ment of the national prohibition act so as to nllow the manufacture, Rale, transportation, and possession of beverages containing as great an amount of alcohol as is lawful under· thP. Com'1titution?

Once the existence of the power to acquire informntion in nid of 01•

as a basis for legislation is admitted, the wisdom of its exercise in the particulxr caRe, and the necessity for the particular information to be acquired, is a matte~· which Con~ress alone can determine.

"No principle of our constitutional law is more firmly eRtn.blisbrd than that this court may not, in pa 8ing- upon the valldity of a statute, inquire into the motives of Con~res~. • Nor may the court inquire into the wis1lom of the legislation. * Nor may it pn:;;s upon the nece~slty for the exerci ·e of a power possessed, since the pasruble abuse of a power is not an argnmcnt against its exh;tence." (Hamilton v. Kentucky Dlstllleries Co., 251 U. B. 146, lGl.)

The only question for the courts is whrther Congrr.sR , in flndin~ it nec<'sRary to acquire th0 particular informntiou. has gone bryond tho constitutional limitR upon its legislative discretion. Unle s the lnw Jlrovilling for the acqniF!ition of the information is an arbltmry and unreasonable <'.xercise of the power vested in Congress by the necessary and proper cJause, and the information to he acquired ran not reasonably b concPived as being iu aid of or a b:tsis for legisln tlon to en~orco the eil!hteenth amendment within the conHtitntionnl limits, the d<'tflrminntion of ConJZ"ress RR to the necessity is final, and the court will not substitute its jut1gment for the lc,?iRlative discretion. (Cf. Everard's Breweries v. Day, 20i'i U. B. 54.:1, fiU!), fi6:1.)

II. Has the CongreFs. nntlcr the ConRtitntJon, the discretion to doter· mine by l:lw the appropriate method for acquiring information in aid o! or aR a basts for legislation?

Tho ordinary methods by which the Congress obtains Information in aid of or aR a basi<; for legislation, al:!ille from the personal inqnirles ond experiences of indivillunl :Members, is by the dclPgation of the power to either House of the Congress, or committees thereof, or to F ellel'al agcncieR, such as the Interstate Commerce Commission or the Federal Trade CommiRsion acUn~ on behalf of the Congree<s. Snch mcth0us mny invol\'e personal appearance of witneHRes before McmherR of CongreRs with the opportunity for cross -examination, or mny inYolve only the trnnsmission of written information to the Members of CongreRs in the form of deposition~, briefs, reports, ailS"'ers to qneHUouualre:-:, nnd the lik<', which do not afford such opportunity for croRs-examination by the ~£embers. Senate Joint Resolution No. 81 presents the quf'stion, Con the Congref!s provh1n for tbe acquisition of the informn tion by moanR of a referemlnm conducted hy the legislatures of the several States throu~h State officials? Omitting from considera tlnn for the moment the constitutional question of delegation of legislative power, thel'e remHins for determination the question as to the extent of the discretion of the Congress in Relertlng the Instrumentalities by which information in aid of or as a !Jasis for legislation may lJe acquired for the usc of the Congress.

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 10089 Under the " necessary and proper " clause the Congress has power

to make all laws wllich shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution its power to acquire information in aid of or as a basis for legislation. In the case of McCulloch v. Maryland ( 4 Wheat. 316) the Supreme Court held that the Congress might employ any means appropriate for the execution of its powers. This doctrine has been repeatedly affirmed. In the Legal Tender case (110 U. S. 421, 440) the Supreme Court said :

" lly the ftettled construction and the only reasonable interpretation of this clause the words " necessary nnd ,proper " are not limited to such measures as are absolutely and indispensably necessary, without which the powers granted must fail of execution; but they include all appropriate means which are conducive or adapted to the end to be accomplished, and which in the judgment of Congress will most advantageously effect it."

And again in the Legal Tender cases (12 Wall. 41>7, 536) the court said:

" Indeed the whole history of the Government and of congressional legislation has exhibited the use of a very wide discretion, even in times of peace and in the absence of any trying emergency, in the selection of the necessary and proper means to carry into effe.ct the gr~at objects for which the Go~·ernment was framed, and this discretion has generally been unquestioned, or, if questioned, sanctioned by this court "' • • Happily the true meaning of the clause authorizing the enactment of all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution the express powers conferred upon Congress, and all other powers vested in the Govemment of the United States, or 1n any of its departments or officers, has long since been settled. In Fisher v. Blight (2 Crunch 3u8) this court, speaking by CWef Justice 1\Iarshall, said that in construing it ·,it would be incorrect and would produce endless difficulties if the opinion should be maintained that no law was authorized which was not indispensably necessary to ~ive effect to a specified power. Where various systems might be atloptcd for that purpose it might be said with respect to each that it was not necessary because the end might be obtained by other means.' ' Congress,' said this court, ' must possess the choice of means, and must be empowered to use any means which are in fact conducive to the exercl~e of a power granted by the Constitution.' • "

It is submitted that choice of the referendum upon the quesj:ion provitled in the resolution is reasonably contlucive or adapted to the E'ntl of furnishing Congress information in aid of or as a basis for appropriate legislation to enforce the eighteenth amendment. In any case it Is not for the co.urts to determine whether the method chosen by the Congress is the best possible choice to be matle or to requir& that the method be indispensably necessary to executa the congr.essional power.

" It is likewise well settled that where the means adopted by Congress are not prohibited and are calculatetl to. effect the object intrusted to it, this court may not inquire into the degree of their necessity, as this woultl be to pass the line which circumscribes the judicial department and to tread upon legislative grountl." C:UcCulloch v . Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 423; Legal 'l'entler case, 110 U. S. 421, 4u0; Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U. S. 6!>8, 713; Everard's Breweries v. Day, !!G:> u. s. 5-tu, 55!>.)

III. Would an act of Congress providing. for a national referendum to be conducted by the States with their consent be open to constitutional objection as an interference of the rights reserved to the States by the tent.h amendment, as an invalid delegation of Federal legislative power, m as a tleniul to. the States of a republican form of government?

Senate Joint ~esolution No. 81, in authorizing the conduct of the referendum by the States in ac.cordance wlth such election and referendum laws of the States as the legislatures thereof may provide, assumes that the State legislatures, ln pursuance of the congressional nuthorization, will provide for the conduct of the referendum through the use of State election and referendum machinery. This will necessarily involve State officials carrying out the referendum. Furthermore, in the CYent the State determines to contluct the referendum, the resolution specifically places upon the governor thereof the tluty of certifying the referendum results to the Senate and the Ilo.use of RepresentatiYes. Such u~e of State legislative and executive officials in executing the F ederal function of acquiring information in aid of or as a basis for legislation wlll be with the consent of the States. Such consent will not be implied from the absence of any action by the States prohibiting State officials from serving pro hac vice as Federal officials in executing the Federal Jaw. The consent w111 be expressly given through enactments of the State legislature authorizing the conduct of the r eferendum in the State by the State and ptoviding for its conduct through the State electio.n and referendum machinery. The question then arises, Has Congress th~ constitutional power by law to avail itself, with the expressed consent of the State, of the services of the State ofiicials and instrumentalities in carrying out a national referendum?

The hasis for any possible constitutional doubt as to the power of the Fedcrnl Government to confer Federal authority upon State officials and instrumentalities has been variously expressed. In case the power is a judicial power the objection seems to rest upon Mr. Justice Story's observation in Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (1 Wheat. 304, 330),

to the etrect that " Congress can not vest any portion of the judicial power of the United States, except in courts ordained or established by itself.'' (Prigg v. Pennsylvania, 16 Peters 539, 082 ; Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 U. S. 275, 278.) In case of the power of condemnation, it is urged that the power is in its nature exclusive and its exercise by State instrumentalities is therefore prohibited as completely as though the prohibition were expressetl in the Constitution in terms. (United States v . Jones, 109 U. S. 513, 518.) In case the power is an executive power, the basis of the objection seems to be that the Federal legislation will infringe the rights reserved to the States under the tenth amendment. (See briefs for the plaintiff in error in Nos. 663, 664, 665, and 666, of the Selective Draft Law cnses, 245 U. S. 366.) Following the analogy of the above objections, it is conceivable that the objection to the delegations of legislative and executive power under the resolution would be basetl on the theory that the enactment of the resolution would infringe the powers preserved to the States under the tenth amendment. However, despite the above objections it is a settled law under the decisions of the Supreme Court that Congress may confer Federa.l authority lJPOn State officials and instrumentalities and State executive and judicial officers may act thereunder unless prohibited by State legislation. It is even unnec~~sary that the State affirmatively consent to the delegation of Federal authority as is provided in the resolution; all that constitutionally is necessary for State executive or judicial officers to act under the Federal grant is that the State shall not have prohibited such action.

Consideration of this problem first arose in connection with the fugitive slave act of February 12, 1703. (1 Stat. 802.) Section 3 of the act provided that fugitives from labor might be arrested by the person to whom such labor was due and taken before a State magistrate in the county, city, or town, or. a Federal circuit or district judge within the State wherein the arrest was made. Upon proof to the satisfaction of such magistrate or judge that the person arrested owed labor to the p~rson claiming the fugitive, it became the duty of the magistrate or judge to give a certificate to such efrect to the claimant, and such certificate was sufficient warrant for removing the fugitive to the State from which he fled.

In Prigg v . Pennsylvania (16 Peters, 536) the United States Supreme Court decided the question whether State magistrates were bound to exercise the Federal authority conferred by the fugitive slave act. Differences in the opinion of the court arose not as to whether the magistrates might act, but as to whether they were bound to act, under the Federal authority. Mr. Justice Story, 1n delivering the opinion ot the court, said :

" Wo hold the act to be clearly constitutional in all its leading provisions, and, Indeed, with the exception of that part which confers authority upon State magistrates, to be free from reasonable doubt and difficulty, upon the grounds already stated. As to the authority so conferred upon the State magistrates, while a ~ence of opinion has existed, and may exist still, on th~ point, in different States, whether State magistrates are bound to act under it, none is entertained by this court, that State magistrates may, if they choose, exercise that authority, unless proilibited by State legislation" (p. 622).

It will be observed that the opinion of the court a sserts that the State officials may exercise the ll'ederal authority without expressed permission from the State so long as the State docs not by legislation prohibit such exercise. The resolution does not go even this far, for its use of State officials and instrumentalities is contingent upon affirmative legislative action by the State authorizing the State olllcials to execute the Federal functions under such election or referendum laws as the State may provide. The decision of the Supreme Court therefore seems, a fortiori, both to permit the State officials to execute the Federal authority witil the expressed consent of the State and to sustain the constitutionality of the Federal legislation conferring such authority upon State officials subject to the consent of the State legislature. Chief Justice Taney in a concurring opinion admitted that the State legislature had the power, if it thought pt·oper, to prohibit State officials from exercising the Federal authority, while Justice McLean dissenting on this point urged that the State official "·was bound to perform the duty required of him by a law paramount to any act, on the same subject, in his own State" (p. 672). Following the decision of the court and the concurring opinion of Chief Justice Taney, many States enacted so-called personal liberty acts forbidding any State magistrate from taking cognizance of any certificate to be Issued under the fugitive slave act and forbidding any executive officer from arresting or detaining any person claimed as a fugitive slave. In order to remedy this practical difficulty, the Congress passed the a ct of September 18, 1850 (!> Stat. 462), supplementing the original fugitive slave act by providing, in addition, for Federal commissioners who would be authorized .to issue the proper certificates. However, the authority of the State magistrates to issue such certificates, in the absence of prohibitory State legislation, remained unchanged by the supplemental act of 1850 and continued in force until the repeal of section 3 of the fugitive slave act by the act of June 28, 1864. ( 13 Stat. 200.) .

It thus becomes evident that almost from the adoption of the Constitution up to the Civll War the Federal Government had ln effect

10090 CONGRESSION.A.L RECORD-SENATE MAY 26 legislation under which It availed nself of the services of State officers and instrumentalities in executing Federal authority. Such legislation was recognized by many of the States in the enactment of the so-ca1led personal liberty acts and was held constitutional by the Supreme Court of the l]nlted States. l~'urther, the court found that State officials might exercise the authority conferred by such legil'llation in the absence of any prohibition by State law and the States need not evE.'n affirmativE.'ly consent to their officials exercising the Feueral authority-a holding, the logic of which goes much beyond that necessary to sustain the provisions of Senate .Joint Resolution No. 18, n-bich specifically "requires State enabling legislation.

The rule laid down In Prigg v. Pennsyl>ania in the case of tho fugitive sJaye act has become settled law. The theory that the consent of the State is not required has at times been restated by saying that, in the absence of an expreS8E.'d prohibition in the State Jan-, the cons~nt of the State to the use of its officers aml instrumentalities as Federal Instrumentalities will be pre>:umed. (Fort Leaven\Yorth Railroad Co. L'. Lowe, 114 u. s. 525, u:l2.) The result, bowever, 1s the same in either case and the rule of P1·lgg- v. Pennsylvania has been subsequently applied and sustained by the courts In connect1on with Fedet·al leg-islation providing for the use of State tribunals and other agl'ncies carrying out the Federa,l authority to condemn pt·operty (United States tl. .Jones, 10!) U. S. 513, 519-u:.!l) ; pro>iuing for the use of State courts In carrying out Federal authority to arrc·~<t seamen offending against J;'edcral law (llobcrtson v. llalUwin, Hl5 U. S. 275, 278-280, and . Dallema~ne v. :Moisan, 197 U.S. 160, 173-174); proviUing for the uso of State courts In carrying out the Federal natmalization laws (Levin v. United States, 128 Fed. 8:::!6) ; and providing for the use of State executive officers in carrying out the provisions of the selectiYe draft act (Selective Dt·aft Law cases, :::!4!> U. S. 366, 389).

The extent and constitutional >alidity of the practice of Federal use of State officers and instrumentalities is well set forth In tho following quotation from an opinion of llr. Justice Field : ·

" The proceeulng for the ascertainment of the value of the property and conEequent compensation to be made is merely an inquisition to estnl.Jlish a particular fact as a preliminary to tlJe actual taking; and it may be prosecuted before commissioners or special boards or the courts, with or w1tllout the intervention or a jnry, as the legislative power may designate. All that is required Is that it shall be conducted in some fair and just manner, with opportunity to the owners of the property to present ev.ideuce as to its value, and -to be beard thereon. ·whether the tribunal shall be created directly by an act of Congress, or one already establiAhed by the States shall be adopted for the occasion, is a mere matter of legislative diRcretion. Undoubtedly it was the purpo. e of the Constitution to establish a general government independent of, and in some respects superior to, that of the StatE' governments-one which coul<l enforce its own laws through its own officers and tribunals; and this purpose was accomplished. That Government can crE'ate all the officers and tribunals required for the execution of Its powers. Upon this point there can be no question. (Kohl v. United States, 91 U. S. 367.) Yet from the time of its establishment that Government has been in the habit of using, with the consent of the States, their officers, tribunals, and institutions as its agents. Their use has not bel:!n cleemed violative of any principle or as in any manner derogating from the sovereign- authority of the Federal Government, but as a matter of convenience and as tending- to a great saving of expense.

The use of the courts of the State in applying the rules of naturali· zatlon prescribed by Congress, the exercise at one time by State justices of the peace of the power of committing magiRtrutes for violations o! Federal law, and the use of State penitentiaries for the confinement of convicts under such laws are instances of the employment of State tribunals and State institutions Jn the execution of powers of the General Government. At different times various duties have been imposed by acts of Congress on State tribunals; they have been Invested with jurisdiction in civil s11its and over complaints and prosecutio.ns for .fines, penalties, and forfeitures arising under laws of the United States. (1 Kent. 400.) Anu though the jurisdiction thus conferred could not be enforced against the consent of the States, yet when its exercise was not incompatible with State duties, and the States made no objection to it, the decisions rendered by the Stnto tribunals were upheld. (Unltt'd States v. Jones, 10!) U. S. 513, 519-520.)

The objections to provision by Jaw !or the Federal usc of State executive officials was apparently first assigned a definite constitutional origin in the Selective Draft Law cases (24u U. S. 366).

Section 6 of the sclectin draft act ( 40 Stat. 76, 80-81) proviues as follows:

"SEC. 6. That the President is hereby authorized to utilize the services of any or all departments and any or all officers or agents of • the several States • • • and subuivisions thereof, in the execution of this act, and all officers and agents of the • • several States • and subdivisions thereof, • • and all persons designated or appointed under regulations prescribed by the President, whether such appointments are made by the President hims.elt or by the ~overnor or other officer of any State • • to per-

form any duty in the execution of this act, are herC'by required to perform such duty as the President shall order or direct, and all such officers and agents and persons so designated or appointed shall herrby have full authority for all acts !lone by them in the execution of this act by the direction of the President. Any person charged as herein provided with the duty of carrying into effect any of the provisions of this act or the regulations maue or directions given thereunder who shall fail or neglect to perform Rnch duty; and any person charged with such duty or having and exercising any authority under said act, regulations, or directions, who shall knowingly make or be a party to the making of any false or incorrect registration, physical examination, exemption, enlistment, enrollment, or muster; and any pet·son who shall mal<c or be a party to the making of any fal>:c statement or certificate as to the fitnc:;;s or liability of himself or any other person for service under the provisions of this act or of said re~ulations, or who in any manner sha.ll fail or neglect fully to perform any duty required of him in the execution of this act, shall, if not suhject to military law, l.Je guilty of a misdemeanor ami upon conviction in the district court of the United States having jurisdiction 1hereof be puniRbPd by imprisonment for not more than one year * • ."

Counsel for the plaintiff in the Selective Drnft Law ca~es urge<! that the above-quoted section (A) infringed the rights reserved to the StateR, in violation of the tenth amendment, (ll) delegnteu Feueral legislative power to State administrative officers, in violation of section 1 of Article I of the Constitution, vesting in the ongress all legiRiative power grunted by the Constitution, and (C) denied to the Htatcs a repnbllcan form "of government, in violation of section 4 of Article IV of the Constitution.

(A) Infringement of rights reRervcd to the States: Chief Justice "bite ignored In his opinion in the Selective Draft Law cases the objection of counsel for the plaintiff that the act infr·inged the rights reserved to the States undet· the tt>nth amendment. If, however, it is well settled, as heretofore stated, that the Congress may by ln.w avail itE:elt of the services of State officials anu instrumentalities in executing a Fetleral authority and State officials may act under such authority In the absence of State prohibitory legislation, lt follows without further argument that the congressional enactment does not infringe the rights reserved to the States under the tenth amendment. It can not be held constitutional for the Congress to exercise a power by appropriate means and at the same time be held that the exercise of such power infringE's State rights, for the tenth amendment reserves to the States only those powers not delegated to the Federal Government.

(B) Delegation of the Federal lPgislative power: Chief .Tustice White, in his opinio·n in the Selective Draft Law cases, dismissed the objection of · counf;cl for tho plaintiff that the act delegated Federal legislative power to State administrative officet·s, with the folion-ing brief comment:

"First, we are of opinion that the contention that the act ls void us a delega1.1on of Fedrral power to State officials because of Rome of its administrative features, is too wanting in merit to require further notice. Seconu, we think that the contention that the statute is void because vesting administrative officers with legislative discretion bas been so completely ~idversely settled as to require reference only to some of the decided cases." (Field v. Clnrk, 143 U. S. 6-!!J; Buttfteld v. Stranahan, 192 U. S. 470; Intermountain nate cases, 234 U. S. 476; First Natiounl Bank v . Union '!'rust Co., 244 U. S. 416.)

As to the delegation of the Federal legislative power, Senate .Joint Resolution No. 81 provides that " Such referendum sball be held

in accordance with such election and referendum laws of the State not in conflict with the provisions of this resolution, as the legislature thereof may provide." The authority conferred upon the State legislatures goes merely to the procedure for conducting the refer· end urn. The resolution provides specifically that the referendum question may not be altered by the States and further provides definite restrictions as to the Individuals entitled to vote in the referendum. There remains then only the problem, does the granting of authority to the State legislatures to provide the necessary procedm:al requirements for the conduct of the referendum t·csult in an unconstitutional delcga· tion of the congressional legislative power?

Senate Joint llef'o1ution No. 81 diO:crs from the selective draft act in tbat tlle delegatrd powN· in question is deleg-ated directly to State legislatures and only indirectly to State executive officers save in case of the duty of the governor to certify the results. UndeL· the resolution the Congress adopts as its law future State proced1.wal legisla.Uon. The Federal law is that tlJe referrndum shall be conducted, with certain limitations, either in accordance with State law subscCJ,uently to be enacted, or in accordance with State law alt·eady in existence for othl'l' purposes but yet to be c:xtendeu by the States to the government of tho national referendum.

Not all deleg:ttions of legislative power are unconstltutlonal. 'rhc Supreme Court has como frankly to admit that the inevitable progress and exigencies of government and the utter inability of the Congress to give the time and attention indispensable to the exercise in d<'tail of many of its powers has forced upon the courts the modification of the oft-asserted rule that no legislative power can be delegated. (2u7 u. S. xxv.) The Supreme Court, through Chief Justice Taft, has stated that it is only a "pure" delegation of legislative power that is

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 10091 invalid and unconstitutional. A delegation of legislative power becomes invalid only· when it does not enjoin upon the subordinate authority " a certain course of procedure and certain rules of decision " in the performance of the delegated function. (Wichita Railroad & Light Co. v. Public Utilities Commission, 260 U. S. 48, GD, and Mahler v. Eby, 2G4 U. S. 32, 44.)

It must then be determined whether the delegation of power by the resolution to the State legislatures is a pure delegation of legislative power and therefore unconstitutional. The delegation of legislative power provided by the resolution is undoubtedly subject to a " certain course of procedure." '.rhe delegated power must be exercised through the ordinary legislative processes of the State. This necessarily involves a familiar d0tailed procedure comprised of committee hearings and debat('s on the floor of either house of the State legislature by representatives of tl1e people of the State, together with subsequent approval or disapproval of the measure by the governor of the State. The reasonableness of the procedure so far as the rights of the people of the State and of the United States are concerned S('ems self-evident. Further, the resolution not only provides for a " certain course of procedure" but for "certain rules of decision." Numerous guiding standards are laid down. The refer('ndum must be held at the Ume of the election of Representatives of the State for t~e Seventy-first Congress of the United States.

The referendum would therefore almost invariably be conducted in a manner similnr to that in which the election was conducted or in which any State legislative referendum held at the Rame time was conducted. Further, the referendum question must be placed upon the ballots without alteration or explanation and only individuals qualified by law as elP.ctors for a RepreHentative in Congress of the United States in such year, and none other, shall be qualified to vote. Finally, the governor of the State is required to certify the referendum r esults to the Senate and the House of Repre~entatives of the United States at a time specified. It is submitted that the resolution enjoins certain rules of decision for the performance of ·the delegated function that are far more definite than many delegations of legislative p-ower that have been made by the Congress and sustained by the Supreme Court. (See, for example, Ex parte Boyd, 105 U. S. G-!7, G52; Hanover Natonal Bank v . Mosses, 18G U. S. 181, .1!)0; Butte City Water Co. v. Bak<:'r, 1DG U. S. 11!), 125-127; Qlark Distilling Co. 1). Western )laryland R. R. Co., 242 U. S. 311, 320; nuttfleld ·v . Stranahan, 1!)2 U. S. 470; United States v . Grimaud, 220 U. S. 506; Intermountain Rate cases, 234 U. S. 47G; First National Bank v. Union Trust Co., 2-H U. S. 41G; Avent v. United States, 2GG U. S. 127, 130.)

'l'here is nothing novel in congressional delegation of Federal legislative power through the adoption of existing or future State pro· cedural or other legislation. For instance, section !)14 of the Revised Statutes provides that the practice in the Feu('ral diHtrict courts shall conform as ncar as may be to the practice existing at the time in like causes in courts of record of the State in which the district court is held. This statute bas been helrt binding in Amy v. ,.Vntertown (130 U. S. 301) . Section 916 of the Revised Statutes provides that a judgment in a common law cause in a Federal district court shall be entitled to similar remedies upon the same as are now provided in like causes by the laws of the State in which the court is held or as may be pro· vidcd by any such laws hereafter enacted. 'l'his statute bas been held constitutional in Ex parte lloyd (105 U. S. GH), the court saying, at page G52, that-

" It is the settled doctrine of this court that the power of Congress under the Constitution • extentls to the atlop-tion of the laws of the several Stn tes, not only as to the natme and form of writs of execution for the enforcement of judgments, but also as to all proceeuings thereupon."

The Federal bankruptcy act, in recognizing exemptions made by State law ns to dower, priority of payments, and the like, was held a lawful delega tion by the Cong1·ess of its legislative powers. (Hanover National Bank v . 1\Ioyses, 18G U. S. 181, 1!>0.) The Fetlerul mining laws (Ree, for instance, sections 2322, 2324, 2332, 2338, and 2339 of the Revi sed Statutes) adopt State legislation governing the location, manner of recordin_::~. and work necessary to bold possession of mining claims, and similar matters. These sections of the Revised Statutes have been held wltllin the power of Congress. (Butte City Water Co. v. Baker, 19G U. S. 119.) The Webb-Kenyon Act forbade the shipment of intoxicating liquor into a State in violation of any law of such State and was held constitutional as involving no delegation of legislative power to the States. (Clark Distilling Co. v. Western Maryland n. R. Co., 242 U. S. 311, 3!W.) The only example of a rule contrary to that above stated is in the field of the maritime law. Decisions of the Supreme Court hold that the Constitution itself requires the maritime law to be uniform in certnin instances and that the adoption of State law by the Congress woulu destroy such uniformity. (Knickerbocker Ice Co. 't'. Stewart, 253 U. S. 14!), and State of Washington v. Dawson & Co., 2G4 U. S. 219.) The rule of these cases is peculiar and limited to the maritimo law.

(C) Denial of n republican form of government: Chief Justice White, in hi::; Ollinion in the Selective Draft Law cases, ignored the

objection of counsel for the plaintiff tllnt tlle act deni-ed to the States a republican form of government.

Section 4 of Article IV of the Constitution provides that "the United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government • • *." · Whether or not Senate Joint Resoluti!>n No. 81 would deny to States a rep·ublican form of government presents a constitutional question, but not one for decision by the Federal courts. Under the constitutional provision the discretion rests solely in the Congress as to whether a State has a republican form of government under any given set of circumstances. The congressional discretion 1s not subjeet to judicial review. (Pacific Telephone Co. v. Oregon, 223 U. S. 118, and Davis v . Ohio, 241 U. S. 565.) In the two cases just cited the Supreme Court refuRed to determine whether or not a binding legislative referendum, as provided by the constitutions of Oregon and Ohio, resulted in those States losing their republican form of government. ·

Congress has recognized a legislative referendum of binding e!Iect under State law (1) through the seating of Senators and Representa· tlves from States in which such referendum laws prevail, and (2) by admitting the new States of Oklahoma anrl Arizona when the constitu· . tions of those States provideu for such referenda, and (3) by not objecting to the modification of the constitutions of several States in order to provide for such referenda. It would therefore seem that the Congress would not be justified at this late date in holding that the advisory referendum provilled in the resolution denied to any State a republican form of government.

IV. Is an appropriation for the expenses Incurred In the conduct of the refer('ndum either by the States or by Federal agencies a constitutional appropriation?

Senate Joint Resolution No. 81 makes no approprl~tlon. The resolution itself therefore is not open to any constitutional objection in respect of an appropriation. '.rhe resolution, however, authorizes an appropriation to be made to r eimburRe each State with the actual cost incurred by it in conducting the referendum and to pay expenditures of the Postmaster General and the Secretary of Commerce in conducting the r eferendum in the absence of State action. The authorization would normally be followed with an approp1·iating item to give eft'ect to the authorization. Any constitutional oiJjection that may be raised to the appropriation made by any such item, should, theJ.•efore, be here considered.

In United States ex rcl. Miles Planting Co. v. Carlisle (5 .App. D. C. 138) the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia refused to issue a writ of mandamus to compel the payment of the sugar bounty under the provisions of the McKinley Tarift' Act. The decision is . based on the theory that the appropriation was for n private purpose; that moneys for the appropriation must be raised by taxation; that any tax to raise the necessary moneys would therefore be for a private purpose; and that taxation for private purpose Is beyond the constitutional powers of Congress.

The Supreme Court has long held that States may not tax for private purposes and bas recently rested this restriction upon State legislation upon the due-process clause of the fourteenth amendment. (Green v. Frazier, 233 U. S. 233.) The Supreme Court has, however, never applied to Federal legislation the doctrine of unconstitutionality of taxation for private purpose. It would seem logical that the dueprocess clause of the fifth amendment, which is applicable to Federal l egislation, would impose the same restriction upon l:i'ederal taxation as the due-process clause of the fourteenth amendment has upon State taxation. However, the Supreme Court bas held in a considerable array of cases that the fifth amendment is in nowise a restriction upon the Federal power to tax. (See, for example, l\fcC'ray v. United States, l!):J U. S. 27, 63; Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 240 U. S. 1, 24; Billings v . united States, 232 U. S. 261, 282; and Lallelle Iron Works v. United States, 25G U. S. 377, 3!>2.) In consequence, the only remainIng logical foundation for any limitation upon the power of Congress would sr:em to be section 8 of Article I of the Constitution. The first clause proviucs-

" The Congress shall have power to lay and collect tnxes to pay the debts and provide for tbe • general welfare • ."

Under the above-quoted constitutional provision the test of the validity of the appl'Oprin tion would be whether the tax necessary to raise the money to be appropriated would IJe a tax "to provide for the general welfare." There would seem to be little argument possiiJle that an appropriation for expenditures Incurred in the acquh:!ition of information for legislative purposes of the Congress was not an appropriation for the general welfare. Certain it is that Congress must have information as a basis for legislation, and the method of acquiring such information, as already shown, is within the discretion of the Congress. In United States v. Realty Co. (163 U. S. 427) the Supreme Court upheld an appropriation to pay certain accrued suanr bounty claims agninst the United Stutes under the McKinley Tarift' Act. The court said (p. 444) :

"In regard to the question as to whether the facts ('Xisting in any given case bring it within the description of that class of claims that Congress can and ought to recognize founded upon equitable and

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENAT:m ~fAY 26 moral considera tlon and grounded upon principles of right and justice, we think that generally such que:tion must in its nature be one for Congre~s to decide for itself. Its decision recognizing such a claim and nppropriating money for its payment can rarely, if ever, be the subject of rcyiew by the juulcial braneb of the Government."

If it is '' for Congress to decide for itself " whether an appropriation 1:;; "to pay the debts" as Rpccifietl in the first clause of section 8 of Article I, it must be all'lo for Congress to decide (except in a rare case, at least), whether an appropriation is " to provide for the genernl welfare," as Rtatcd in the same clause of the Constitution.

Although it would not seem nccPssary in order to support the appropriation in qnc::;tion, there is goou authority for the position that the quN.tlon as to whether an npproprintion Is for the general welfare is a political question and one that will not he reviewed by the courts. (Bur~ick, Federal Aid Legishtlon, 8 Cornrll Law Quarterly, 324; Corwin , Spenuing Powers of Congress, 36 Hurvaru Law Review, 548; and note in !) Cornell Law Quarterly, uO.) It is also true that neither an in1liYidna1 tn:xpayer nor a State has orrlinarily sufficient interest to pE'rmit it to contest the constitutionality of a congressional appropriation. (Frothingham v. Mellon, 2G2 U. S. 447.)

CO:-<CT.TJSION

The enactment of Senate Joint Resolution No. 81 would be within the power of the Cong-ress.

Whether or not there exist inhibitions in the State conl?titutlons which wonld prevent the States from exercising the Federal function permitted by the resolution, anll w'hether or not the authority conferre<l by the resolution or by the eighteenth amP.ndment would supersede any such inhibitions and enable> the Rtatc legislatures and officials to act as l•edcral im'ltt·umentalitics in carrying ont the resolution, arc not questions as to the power of Con~ress to enact the resolution. They arc questions as to the vall!lity of the le~;h•lation of the State, enacted to carry out the authority /.!Tanteq the States by the resolution. Snch questions are, therefore, not considereu In this memorandum and no opinion is e:xprcsl'ed thereon.

Respectfully subml ttcd. FREDERIC P. LEE, LegiRlotirc Counsel.

Bon. '\'VALTEH E. EonE, United States Honate, April 19, 1926.

COOl'EnATIVE MARKE'fiNO

Mr. ~IcKELLAR 1\Ir. Pre~ident. I cle~ire to gi>e notice tlatt I shall ad<lrc~·s tlle Senate on the . nb.iect of the Hangen bill to-mol~row as soon as I <:an oiJtain the floor.

EJ.DfA E. L. PULLIAM

Mr. · SUil\IONS. 1\Ir. Pre~iclf'nt. I aRk unanimon~ onRc>nt for the consideration of Honse hill 777G, a small private bill. It will ·not provoke any <liscuRsion.

.J.\fr. NOHBECK. Mr. Prc>~idcut, re:-;erving- the rig-ht to object, I wnnt to be as courteonH a~ I can be, but the hill before the Senate, the migratory IJinl hill. has not heen mentioned !'lince la. t Friday. Howe>er, if the Senator's hill will take only a Hhort time, I haYe no ohjeetion : bnt some time or other we have got to get hack to the unfini~hed l.Jmdnes~.

Ur. SDIUO~ T~. The Senator from Kan:-:as [1\Ir. CunTJS] a.nd the Renator from Alabama [Mr. HEFLIN] apparently have a great <leal of time at their disposal for which they have no w;:e this evening-, nnd I thought I might take a little of it and pass this small bilL

The VICFJ PRJ;J. 'IDENT. The Senator from North Cnrolina a~lu; unanimous con~ent for the pre:-:ent con:-:icleration of the bHl (H. R. 7776) · for the reiml.Jnr emcnt of }Jmma Pulliam. Is there objection?

Mr .. TONICS of 'Vashinp:ton. I ask th<> Renntor from North Carolina if the bill haR been reported by a Renate <'Ommittee?

~1r . Sil\11\IONS. YeA; it was nnanhnom;ly reported by a Senate committee.

There heing- no ohjcction, the Senat(', ns in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to consider the bill, and it was rend, as follows:

86 it cnactccT, cto., Tbnt the PostmaRter General be, and he is hereby, authorized and uirecteu to cre<lit the account of Emma E. L. Pulliam, formerly postmaster at West End, N. C., in the snm of $17u lluc tho United States on account of money-order funds lost in transit to her designated depol'litory at Raleigh, N. C., on November 3, 1020.

The hill waR reported to the Senate without amendment, oruered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

The title was nmended so as to read: "An act for the reimbur ement of Emma E. L. Pulliam."

REPLY TO THE CO:M:MISSIONER OF INDIAN AFFAIRS

Mr. WHEELER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the RECORD a brief statement by the General Federation of Women's Clubs with reference to some statements or charges that were made about them before the Com~ttee on

Indian .Affairs of the House of Representatives. 1\fr. Burke, Commis&ioner of Indian .Affairs, appeared before the House committee and made some charges which they feel re1lected · upon their character, aDJl they requested an opporttmity to be heard in reply. This was uenied to them. 'rhe request was maue by Mrs. Kate Trenholm .Abrams, vi<'€ president of the Genera l Federation of 1"iTomen's Clubs, and by the Chamber of Commerce of Los .Angeles.

Mr. CURTIS. :Mr. President, may I ask the Senator from Montana if the statement in any way reflects upon a committee of the HoUI..;e or auy Meml.Jer of the House?

l\Ir. 'VHEEI;EH. No; upon no Member of the House. Mr. CURTIS. Or upon a committee of the House? Mr. WHEELER. Not at all upou a committee. 1\lr. CURTIS. It Is simply their defense? 1\ir. WHEELER. It simply answers statements that were

made by 1\lr. Burke hefore the Committee on Indian Affairs of the HouRe, but the statement does not reflect in any way upon any MemiJer of the House or any committee of the House.

1\lr. J01 "ES of Washington. .J.\lay I ask tbe Senator if there has been any objection in the House to the printing of this matter in the hEqoRn in the House proceedings?

Mr. ~HEELER. I do not know that that bas been requested. l\Ir. 'JOJ. TES of 'Vashington. It occurred to me, inasmuch as

these vroccedings took place in connection. with Honse business that it would be better for them to submit tlleir request to the House.

Mr. WHEELER. I will state that practically the same thing was gone into before a Senate committee, and similar statements were made there. There has IJeen a controversy over certain bills.

l\.Ir .• TO.Nli~S of Washington. There bas been a hearing before a Senate committee, too?

Mr. WHEELER Yes; concerning practically the same matter ..

Mr. JONER of 'Vashington. Of course that is different. I have 110 objection.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the request of the Senator from :Montana is granted.

The statemc11t is as follows: RBPLY TO COliL\IISSIO:-<ER BURKE'S ACCUSATION'S OF :MISREI'RBSENT.A.TION

AND FALSE l'ROI'AGANDA

By :\Ir~. Stella l\L Atwood, chairman of the Indian welfare division of the General Federation of Womeu's Clubs, anll Dr. Haven Emer· son, president of the American Indian Defense .Association, profel:lsor of public health administration, Columbia University

lfor the past three or four ycnrs the General lt'ederation of Women's Clubs, tbrourih its Indian welfare committee, and the American Indian Defense Association have been active in arousing the American veoplo to the true status of aiiairs upon Inuian reservations.

Each organization has, lndepenuently, charged the Bureau of Indian Affairs at Waf'lhington with gross neglect of healtll conditions among the tribt·s, with maladministration of Indian property, and with sponsoring let;islation in Cungres~:~ which amounts to confiscation of Indian lands and of tribal funds for the benefit of white men. We have prouucru facts to prove these assertions. Three examples arc here given.·

In 1V22 the General Federation took the field against the llursum bill, fa voret.l by the Indian Bureau, on the grouuu that it was an indefensible attempt in t.he interest of white settlers to confiscate !anus belongint; to the l'uelJlos of New ::Uexico in plain violntlon of promises maue wlth these peaceful Indians by rresiuent Abraham Lincoln. Mrs. Atwood, chairman of the Indian welfare committee, was at that time charged by Commissioner Burke and Secretary of the Interior Albert B. Fall with spreauing false propaganda. Her charges, however, were substantiated, and the llursum bill was ucfeatcu.

In recent months, and especially at the present sessjon of Congress, both the federation anll the Inuian Defense Associat~n (or~;nnized in 1023) have given wiuo publicity to the fact that t.h~ l'lmu Indians, of Arizona, are now rapidly ur!ng becauRe of slow starvation due to longcontinued burean neglect to protect their water RUpply and to bnilu promptly nn irrigation dam ordereu by Congress in 1V24 to meet their acute necessities.

Also, we have protc.«tcd against the oil leasing bill intro1luccd in this Congress with the inuorscmcnt of Commissioner Burl<c, on the ground that it placeu an outrageous tax of 371h prr cent on all royalties received by certnln Indians and exempted oil operators from prouuction taxes. More important still, it woulu dc.<Jtroy the rights of Indians in unallotcu lands in Executive-order reservations, totaling two-thirds of all Indian lands. In a telegram of protest to Presiuent Coollut;c on March 27, 1926, Mrs. Atwood said : "No more unjust or destructive measure against Indians ever appeareu in Congress." Out of many charges against bureau policy, we cite these for the reason that they were especially dealt with by Commissioner Burke in a carefully prepared defense of his official conduct before the House Committee on Indian Affairs April 10 last.

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECOR.D-SENATE 10093 Mr. Burke made wholesale <'Ientnl of all charges and tho claim that

his bureau had been misrepresented by the speeches of Representative FnEAR; also that be was the victim of false propaganda of Mr. John Collier, executive secretary of the American Indian Defense Association, and, by inference this time, of the Indian welfare committee of the General Federation, since this organization bas on its own account made tlJC same charges. Mr. Burke went further and charged Mr. Collier wilh venal, unworthy motives as the real inspiration of this propaganda.

An issue of veracity and of honorable dealing with tho public bas thus squarely been raised by the commissioner as between himself, n responsible officer of the Government, aud the representatives of two responsible organizations of citizens.

Mr. Burke's statements were carried by the press to the entire Nation. All efforts for opportunity of rebuttal before the Houso Committee on Indian Affairs, where this attack occurred, have been denied by .Mr. LEAVITT, and Ur. Burke's assertions stand unanswered in the official record.

Hon. SCOTT LEAYITT,

EXHIBIT A GE)IEUAL FEDF.RATION OF WOi\Illl)I'S CLUBS,

1Vashi11gton, D. a., .AprU 15, 1928.

ahairman Indian Affairs aommtttce, Washington, D. a. MY DEAR MR. LEAVITT: I have just learneu that an executive ses

sion of the committee is to be held and that a decision probably will be reached all to whether the committee will permit a reply to be made to the attack delivered by Commissioner Burke on the lOth. Tllis attack wns nominally directed against Congressman FREAR and Mr. John Collier, but the statements of fact which Mr. Commissioner Burke denounces have been independently made by the Indian welfare chairman of the General Federation of Women's Clubs, and she likewise is a member both of the California and t he national directorate of the American Indian Defense Association.

l\1rs. Atwood informs me tllat she has telegraphed you direct, and, further, she has asked me personally to urge a complete bearing on Commissioner Burke's charges. By a complete bearing we, of course, would understand a hearing in which sufficient time would be given to deal with the subject, and likewise a hearing whose record would be incorporated with the charges Commissioner Burke has made.

I do not feel that I would be carrying out tlle wishes and instructions of Mrs. Atwood H I did not emphasize the importance of this procedure, and, of course, I shall rely on you, us chairman of the committee, to see that the General Federation of Women's Clubs is protected in this matter.

Very truly yours, KATE TnENHOL!II ABRAMS, V 'lce Chairman.

We desire, therefore, to set out the evidence on which our charges aro based.

TilE PUfA DEATII llATlll AND TIIE INDIAN BUREAU'S RESPONSIBILITY

Mrs. Atwood, of the General Federation, took the initiative in the Pima matter. Since 1923 her articles and interviews ha,·e appeared in the Sunset l\fagazine, the Los Angrles Times, and the General Federa· tlon News, official orgnn of her organization, revealing shocking conditions on this reservation. Her findings havo been confirmed and sup· plemented by investigations of the American ned Cross and by the tes· timony of the llev. Dr. Dirk Lny before congressional committees as well ns by official statistics of the Indian Bureau. A part of. this data was set forth in a circular issued by the Indian Defense Association in April, this year. The circular incidentally carried an appeal for contributions, and stated in part, under the heading-

" A SAMPLE OF I)IDIAN BUREAU GUAUDIANSlliP

"The death rate among the Pima Indians Is appalling. .An acute crisis exists. No accurate vital statistics of the tribe as a whole are available. But recent investigations reported by Rev. Dirk Lay, for 16 years resillent Presbyterian missionary on the Pima Reservation, show that in one township, which contains a third of the tribe, one· fourth of the Indians have died in the past 4¥.1 years. This means an annual death rate of 59 per thousand as agRinst an average annual death rate among white people of 12 per thousand for Arizona and the whole United States.

"This fatality is not caused by sudden epidemic, but by slow starva· tion over a period of years plus an acute condition of utter hopelessness anu heartbreak, during the past 18 months, due to the failure of the Indian Bureau to execute the relief Congress ordered."

NoTE.-Here followed Doctor Lay's "death chart" of township 3 south, range 4 east, Pinal County, Ariz.

CO~Ili!ISSIONEit BURKE 0)1 STARVATIO)I

Replying to this statement, Mr. Burke said: '' In the appeal for funds is a sta tcment appealing about starving

Pimas, misleading, because r;>irk Lay, a missionary whom he (Mr. Col· lier) quotes, in a hearing before the Senate Committee on Appropria· tions, made the statement that there is no actual starvation, but not enough food; and yet they make representations to the e1Iect that those Indians are dying of starvation." (Hearings, p. 36.)

It ls patent that the commissioner confuses the distinction made by us between starvation and slow starvation, and totally ignores the vital element of hopelessness and heartbreak -as a prime factor in the death rate of a primitive, coniJuered people, a scientific fact too well established to be side stepped. He ans,Yers Doctor Lay's assertion of a death rate of 5!) per thousand as the annual death rate in one township for the past four and one-half years by quoting figures furnisbeu by Assistant Commissioner .Meritt to a Senate Subcommittee on Appropriations that "The apparently excessive death rate among the Pima Indians during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1!)25, Is not real, but due to corrections of former census rolls * and these figures indicate that there were 83 deaths during tllis fiscal year."

Thus l\Ir. Burke denies the truth of one thing by making assertions about another thing. Senator ASHURST, relying on Doctor Lay's figures, said : " In 1!)21 tho Government allotted 4,800 Pima Indians ; 1,103 have since died." Mr. Meritt or Mr. Burke did not dispute these figures, but uiscovered extenuating mistakes in the census. We sug· gest that if the allotment figures were false some one is guilty of fraud.

DOCTOR LAY ST.A.~DS FIRM

Apprised by wire of the commissioner's attnck upon his statement, Doctor Lay telegraphed on April 12 a rejoinder, which r~'ads, in part : "~1y statements made before the Senate subcommittee [as to the

Pima deaths] at·e absolutely true, and we can easily prove them • • • there are not 75 homes with wooden floors. 'l'his can also be easily proved by check of reservation. Indications are that reports for this year will show u 1arge1· df'.ath rate than last year."

(.Mr. Meritt had stated that " 1,020 familles have permanent homes with wooden floors.")

OD'FICIAL DELAY 0~ TUE COOLIDGE D.BI As to delay in building the Coolidge Dam, Mr. Burke said: "I say to you and llev. Dirk Lay knew it, that the Secretary (l\Ir.

Work) and everyiJody connected with the department is dolng , every· thing that is humanly possible to • • • complete this <lam at the earliest possible moment."

The truth is that Doctor Lay knew the exact opposite. He spent nearly three months In Washington to force action on the Coolidge Dam, and left for home on March 26 in the belief that be had succeeded. After his departure further delays occurred, added bureau incom· petency was disclo~ed, the nrcessary appropriation was killed, and now no uninterrupted action can be insured until February of 1!)27, if then.

Doctor Lay adus in the above telegram : "~Iy nnnativo nbout construing law [S. 966 of 1924, authoriz

ing the dum] is tt·ue. Meritt told me that conditions pertaining to white lands must be met before construction on Coolidge Dam coulu be started, and on February 15, 1!)26, the bill was referred to the solicitor of the Interior Department for an opinion, or nearly two years after the bill became a law. Lewis C. Hill, builder of the Roosevelt Dam, and Fred A. Noetzli, one of the leading engineers and the greatest authority on arch dams in the world, deemed inadequate."

Doctor Lay is too modest to state that it is only because of his forceful insistence while in Washington thaf the bill was referred by Meritt to the solicitor at all. The solicitor took less than a week to deciue. No real qurstion of construction was involved. The bureau was and bad been at liberty to .go ahead.

Then what happened? After allowing this opinion to lie dormant for nearly six weeks Secretary Work referred the matter to the Solicitor General of the UnHed States for his opinion. In 24 hours the opinion came back sustaining the opinion of the department solicitor.

The department engineers are competent. The aminent consnlting engineers, Hill and Noetzli, refen·ed to in Doctor Lay's telegram, who had approved their work, are admittedly disinterested; but Secretary Work, on the amazing plea that these consultants had served for only $20 a day, delayed all engineering processes while a law was obtained authorizing more money for other specialists, and we understand that these promptly approved the work of ·Hill and Noetzll. Finally, after Doctor Lay had departed, the delay of the Indian Bureau in negotiating with the Southern Pacific Railway a cb:mge in a right of way for a s idetrack, provided an excuse for throwing out the appropriation at this session of Congr;ss.

We stand ready to substantiate and extend these facts before any court or investigating committee and we submit that our charges of bureau neglect and delay are true despite the commissioner's assertion, "We (the bureau) are expediting in every way the construction of tba Coolidge Dam."

TllE OIL LEASIXG BILL

In his speech before the House Indian Atrairs Committee on April 10 Commissioner Burke said :

"I bold in my band a document issued by this Indian Defense Society· beaded ''.fhe Indian Crisis in Congress,' and containing false, untrue, and misleading statements."

DEFl,NSE ASSOCIATION STATEJIIENT

The document had this to · say about the oil leasing bill unuer the heading "Destructive Indian Bureau statesmanship "J.

10094 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1\fAY 26 " 'l'be Indian Bureau ts sponsoring and attempting to jam through

this Congress a bill (H. R. 9133) whicll would destroy any Indian title or claim to any vested right or interest in unallotted lands in Executive order reservations. It alrccts !:!3,000,000 acres, in 10 States, comprising two-thinls or the undivided lands remaining to American Indians in the entire United StateR.

" If enacted, the Indians, by Executive order, can be hurtled from the homes like trespassers, and by another IJ:xecutive order leases may be granted to oil, coal, timber, water-power, grazing land, and other promoters.

" It is manifest thnt no Indian problem is comparable with the immediate necessity of defeating this att<'mpt ut wholesale dispossession. For tv.o generations-and in some instances for centuries-the Indians have in good faith occupied these lands as theirs at the bands of the '()uited States Government.

"A hard fihbt is imminent. The lmreau, a powerfnl oil lobby, and Secretary Work is back of this effort to accomplish by law what Albert B. Fail, Work's predecessor, failed to do by departmental order."

GEXERAL FEDERATION STATEI\IE:'<T

A news release issued from Washington on March 27 by Mrs. Kate Trenholm Abrams, vice chairman of the legislative department of the General Federation of Women's Clubs, contained the following : · " The General Federation, throu.::;b its chairman on Indian welfare, Mrs. Stella M. Atwood, is taking very great interest in the measures that aro now before Congress in regard to Indi-an affairs. The bill especially attracting the attention of the women is H. R. 9133, and 1\frs. Atwood is voicin~ her objection to this bill in a telegram to President Coolidge to-day.

" 'General Feueration, through its Indian welfare division, protests absolut<'lY against House bill 9133. No more unjust, destructive measure against Indians ever appeared in Congress. Protests specifically against taxing Indlans 37¥.! per cent of oil income and making Indians pay all the taxes of whlte oil companies. Protests against treating Indian Executive ord·cr reservations as not being India:a property at all, thus prejudicing Indian case before Supreme Court. The title-cancellation feature of this bill will prepare way for wholesale confiscation of Indian lands, ultimately making 85,000 Indians homeless and meantime concentrating huge absolute power in Indian Bureau to diRIJossess Indians in favor of oil companies, timber companies, and white settlers. How is · it possible that Indian Bureau indorses and promotes this ruinous

· measure, based on Albert B. Fall's initiative of four years ago? ' " The other bill which is receiving the support of the General

Federation is II. R. 9315, which was introduced by Mr. FREAR. This bill prescribes the application of the civil and criminal laws of the United States and several States to Indians.

"Mrs. Atwood has brought to hex· aid In the opposition of the fix·st and support of the latter the influence of the vice president Mrs. Franklin White, of Iniliana, and the chairman of legislation, Mrs. Gilbert Davis, of Vermont.

"The General Federation of Women's Clubs has always taken a very active interest in aJl matters pertaining to the administration of Indian Bureau atrairs."

Authorized by-Mrs. KA•rE TnE~llOLU ABRAMS,

Vice Ohairmim Legislative Department, General Federation of Women's Olubs.

It ls noteworthy that these tv.o statements, issued independently, assert the same facts of record and take the same general attitude upon the oil leasing blll. It Is also to be noted that although Mr. Burke in his reply caustically charges the Indian Defense Association with circnl:l.ting falsehoods, he discreetly refrains from criticizing the General Federation officials for making essentially the same statements.

Our charges are not exaggerations. The subject is complicated but we shall endeavor to make c~ear the governing points at issue.

HISTORICAL A~D LEG.AL BACKGROUND

Indian reserYations are of two kinds. First, those established by treaty before 1871 anu, second, those established by presidential decree or act of Congress sinco 1871. The underlying tit! to both classes is in the Unlte<l States Government. Always until 1922, Congress, the Executive, and the courts have acted on the principle that Indian property rights in both kinds of reservations was identical. Congress has legislated scores of times in accord with the po1icy of recognizing that the holding of the underlying- title in United States was no reason for confiscating Indian lloldings or expropriating them from tlleir lands.

The courts have enunciated with utmost clearness that the entire subject rests with Congress and that, in construing Inuian property rights to unuivicled r~servation areas, they will follow the will of Congress as revealed by its acts.

All this is stated by former Attorney General Stone in an opinion rendered in 1924 which l.Jlocked the effort of .Albert n. Fall to destroy the Indian right of ownership in Executive-order lands.

ATTORXEY GEXERAL STONE STOPS FALL

In 1922 Albert B. Fall, then Secretary of the Interior, arbitrarily "ruled" that l:Jxccutive-order Indian hmds and the values contained therein were simply public domain, were subject to the general leasing law for public lands, and that the wealth-in this case specifically the oil wealth-belonged exclusively to the United States, and should therefore, under the terms of the general leasing law, be divided between the Government and the States, with nothing for the Indians. Fall received oYer 400 applications for leases, each of 4 square miles, 20 of which be actually granted.

Then came the ruling of Attorney General Stone completely reversing Fall, as above stn ted.

The signifieanc(1 of Commi~sloner llurl{e sponsoring and urging the pasr-age of an oil lensing bill the purport of which was to allow the de>elopmcnt of oil fields in Elxecutive-order reservations on the same baRis as that proposed by Fall can now be understood.

The Inulan Defense A::;sociation and the General Federation of \vomC'n's Clubs do not oppose but are actually Fmpporting legislation permitting oil development fair to producer ancl Indla.n alike, such us the Cameron bill. Precedent for such a law exists in the statute of 1!)24 affecting treatr-re. crvation lands. The Indians receive from 12lh per cent up in royalty. 'I"be producers pay a State production tax, usually about 3 pe1· cent, anu the Indians pay a like tax percentage on their royalty Rhare. It would have been simple to extend this law to Executive-order reservations, thus automatically providing that oil royalties be exclusively vested in Indians.

BURKE FOLLOWS FALL'S POLICY

But the bills as introduced and as indorsed by Mr. Burke took 37% per cent of the Indians' royalty an<l ~ave it to the States, with provision, which everyone acquainted with such matters knows would be ineffective, that the money be expended in certain ways t'or the benefit of the Indians. Tllese bills left the producers exempt from all taxation. The crucial thing, however, is that they imply that Executive-order reservations ure on the snme legal basis ns ordinary public lands, and the Indians possess no vested interest in them. The Indians then would simply be recipients of a bounty from Congress and be allowed to keep 621h per cent of th<.•ir oil royalties, at the extJense of having tbdt• "sacred right of occnpuncy and use " torn up as a scrap of paper.

If this principle were established, any President could, of course, turn the Indians as trespns~ers off from any coveted nrea of unallottcd Executive-order landl3. These features of ~Ir. Burke's l.Jill necessarily brought instant opposition from out· organizations and others and from Representative !J~nEAR and other Members of Congress.

The above recital is fully su!.'tained in the printed bearings of both Senate and House committees that had these bills in charge. Both of our organizations were represented, also the Indian Rights Association and the National Council of American Indians. They were attended by Assistant Secretary Edwards, of the Int~rior Department, and at all times by Commissioner Burke. These printed hearings constitute the basic indictment of Commissioner Burke in this matter.

CO~BUSSIOYER BURK:Er'S REPLY

In reply the commissioner cries out to Congress and the Nation that be bas been grossly misrepresented; that he is the friend of the Indians, not the oil companiet>, and is trying to give something to the Indians, not take from them. His reasoning is extraordinary. In reply to the charge that the Indians by his blll woultl be taxed 371h ·per cent and wllite producers go free of production taxes, ~Ir. Burke snys :

"'.rhe gentleman [Mr. FREAn] has repeated and so bas his friend Collier, that because tl.iere was language in the l.Ji1l tllat 37% per cent was to be in lieu of taxes tliat we were proposing to exempt from taxation all production and therefore we were favoring the oil operators. • On the lOth day of March a letter was written by the Secretary of the In terlor • and an amendment was suggested to clear up the matter ~;o that thero could not be any possibility of uncertainty about it. Tllat amendment has been incorporated in the bill pending before the Senate Committee on Indian Aft'alrs. It is preposterous to sug~est for a moment that we were concerned about exempting oil operators from being taxetl under the law of 1024, which would have become effective the moment section 1 ot your !Jill became a law."

Tho plain lnfercnco is that Mr. Burke's amendment to the oil leasing bill empowers the States to levy production taxes against operators. But if the reader will examine Secretary Work's letter referred to antl Inserted later in the record, page 22, he would find tho Secretary speaking of the words " in lieu of taxes " as being used " in section 2, line 2, of the printed bill H. R. 9133," and explains that it means "in lieu of all taxes against Indians."

It is not section 2 but section 1 of the bill that exempts white operators by specifically failing to give tho States power to tax their production. This construction was discussed at length in the Indian Affairs Committees of both Houses. Mr. Burke was present and did not dissent. The introducers of the bill, Senator Bratton and Representative Hayden, both used the following language concerning the construction that should be placed upon it:

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 10095 "Mr. CoLLIER. The Government must oJ..."i:end to the State the privi

lege of taxation before the State can net. "Senator llRA'l'TO~. ~'here can be no doubt as to that. "Mr. COLLIER. So that if the measure should stand as it is now,

no matter what the change of wording in section 2, your producer would be tax exempt ; whether the words ' in lieu of taxation ' were left in or taken out it would not affect the status of the producer."

In the House hearings quoted on page 77, Senate hearings: "Mr. HAYDlJlN. '.rbe Supreme Court bas passed on the taxation ques

tion specifically and dir·ectly in the Oklaboma case, that a State can not levy a tax on oil from Indian lands without the consent of the United States."

Thus Mr. llurke "cleared the matter" of section 1 by making a perfectly safe statement about section 2. And his eft'ort at selfacquittal falls to the ground. The chunge of language in section 2 in no way affects the status of section 1, and the implied inference that it does so is unwarranted.

AS TO TIIE DESTRUC1'ION OF INDIAN LAND RIGHTS The reasoning followed by Mr. Burke for urging this exorbitant

37lh per cent tax is more amazing than the tax itself. "We were trying to give the Indians something they did not have instead of taking from them." This is the keynote of au argument which runs from pages 15 to 23 of his speech, too long and involved for reproduction here.· Summarized and clarified, it is this-

1. "For four years I have been doing everything that I could to get legislation that would permit Executive-order lands to be developed."

2. Mr. Fall's permits were stopped by an opinion of the Department of Justice (Attorney General Stone) " that the general leasing law did not apply to Executive order Indian reservations."

3. nut a Federal judge in Utah has since ruled that the general leasing law did apply to Executive order Indian reservations and the case, " apparently a very close question," is now pending in the United States Supreme Court.

4. "Now, if the decision of the United States District Court of Utah be sustained by the Supreme Court * · * * the general leasing law would apply to Executive-order t·eservations, and no part of the proceeds from oil and gas leases would go to the Indians directly or in directly."

5. Members of Congress, for political reasons, would then refuse to pass a law giving the Indians anything.

G. Therefore, by getting H. R. 9133 passed now, before the Supreme Court bauds down its possible-yes, probable-decision, I can be sure of getting a royalty for the Indians. Sixty-two anu one-half per cent would be put in the Treasury to their creuit; 37% per cent would be given to the States, uirecting them to spend the money on roads .anu schools for Indians, which directing power I would not have under the general leasing law.

7. The general conclusion: "So I think you can see, gentlemen, that under this proposition the Indians are very fortunate if we can get the legislation enacted as proposed."

nut Mr. llurke curiously fails to discuss the greatest service he has given to bring about this " very important result."

He knows from Attorney General Stone's opinion that the question whcthet· the general leasing law applies to Executive-order reservations turns upon the greater question as to whether the InUians have the right of continued occupuncy and ownership of latent values found therein.

He knows Stone strongly inclines to the view that they do, as the law and the decisions now stand, and that the Utah judge is likely to be reversed by the Supreme Court.

Ile knows that an act of Congress based on the premise that the Indians have no sucb rights would have a strong bearing on the case, if, indeed, it would not detet·mine the decision, since he knows all parties agree that the final power is in Congress.

Now, every intelligent person knows that by Introducing a bill of this character and urging its passage Mr. Burke was doing the most effective thing be could to sweep from under the feet of some 85,000 Indians their legal right to remain upon these lands.

Furthermore, when Messrs. FnEAr:. and CAMERON introduced bills perfecting the Indians' right so to remain, Mr. Burke and the Depart· ment of the Intedor promptly opposed them.

we· submit that in this matter we have not misrepresented the commis~>ioner; that our churges are not untrue; but that he stands condemned by the official record.

THE CHARGES MR. BURKE IG:'iORED

It is regrettable that the commissioner has chosen to remain silent upon many other important charges which one or the other of our organizations have maue concerning bureau administration. We have apace here to indicate but a few and in the briefest manner. We assert:

1. That he lias suppressed and upon request of Members of both the Senate and the llou!:le refused inspection of nn elaborate report on health conditions among Indians made by his own request in 1923 by the American ned Cross. We affirm that 1t sustains our charges

concerning the Pima Indians, as well as revealing atrocious conditions in many other places.

2. That the suppression of a repoct made on the business methods of his bureau by the National Municipal Research Bureau . at the request of tha President has been continued.

3. That the Indian Bureau, given $300,000 through successive yean! to this date by Congress to purchase lands for homeless Indians in California, has bought land, 80 per cent of which is worthless for farming or grazing.

4. That 24,000 Indian chlldren are herded into lloarding schools which have a capacity for only 14,500 (bureau figures), and that this overcrowding, attended with medical neglect, makes these schools breeding places for infectious diseases, which are carried to the tribea and the white population.

5. That the bureau controls, subject to no court review, In·~lian property of more than $1,GOO,OOO,OOO; that it can and docs declare Indians incompetent and incapable; and that it frequently exercises its power unjustly to put Indians off their lands and lease them to the advantage of white men without appraisal, publicity, or public bidding.

G. That the1bureau maintains itself, in part, out of the principalnot the income-of Indian property without the consent of Indians.

7. That throughout the United States the Indians nre denied by the bureau the rights of citizenship and due process of law; are jailed without law or published codes of offenses with no bail or appeal to the courts permitted.

8. That the bureau bas caused to be introduced at this session of Congress a bill which would legalize and perpetuate these and similar practices, as charged in paragraph 7, and will endeavor to force this bill through Congress at the next session.

9. That the bureau has engaged, since 1923 and to the present time, in a persecution dir~ted against the religious customs and life of the Indians and has coupled with this persecution a nation-wide and libelous propaganda of defamation against the Indians in these matters.

At the outset of this statement we suiu that Commissioner Burke in his address before the House Indian Affairs Committee on April 10 had squarely raised the question of veracity and honorable dealing with tlle public as between himself and our organizations.

We submit tlle above as partial evidence .that the commissioner bas not been traduced or misrepresented by us, that he is not the victim of false propaganda, but that by his own misstatement of official facts of record, by his silence, and by the official records themselves, he bus failed to make convincing answer to our charges.

HAVEN EIIIERSON, M. D. STELLA M. ATWOOD.

ADDITIONAL STATEllE::iT REGARDING THl!l AUERICAN INDIA:'i DEFENSm ASSOCIATION (I:'iC.)

By Dr. Haven Emerson, president

In addition to denying the charges which were made independently by tlle Indian welfare committee of the General Federation of Women's Clubs and by the American Indian Defense Association, Commissioner Burke in his speech· of April 10 went further and charged Mr. John Collier, executive secretary of the Indian Defense Association, with venal and selfish motives and, by inference, with soliciting money under false pretenses.

At page 36 of the hearings Mr. Burke said: "I want to say to this committee that it is my opinion that what

actuates the representative, Mr. Collier, of this so-called Indian Defense Society are selfish motives, and that his campaign of propaganda is because he hopes to create a distrust on the part of the people that the Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Indiun Affairs are not safeguarding the interests of the Indiana and that they arc being, to use the expression, robbed and outraged, and that lhe bureau is seeking in the interests of oil companies, at the expense of the Indians, to exempt them from taxation and other similar extravagant statements, all for the purpose of laying the foundation of going to the country, ns frequently is done by others, and appealing for money that they may themselves enjoy the benefits thereof, • • • ."

Also on page 37 : " I did not know they bad a treasurer. I supposed the secretary

handled the funda-037 Munsey Building is John Collier's address. If you happen to have the names or know of any other suckers, fill out this ulank, etc. Then follows the phrase : 'Tell these friends they might help : Name; address; occupation.'

"So John sends the propaganda to them, and I presume it results in an accumulation of a considerable fund, and Congress does not know anything about what becomes of it, who contributes it, or wllat usc is made of it, and if there is not a law there ought to be a law that WO\.lld preclude people, under false pretenses, frow using the mails to solicit money as is contemplated in this document."

This sort of aspersion and atmosphere-creating innuendo runs throughout Mr. Burke's entire address. It was heard by the committee and a large number of Washington correspondents of important newspapers and press associations and was promptly reported throughout the United States. Later this address was inserted in the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD.

10096 OONGRESSIO.rJAL RECORD-SENATE }fAY 26 .As the responsible president of the .American Indian Defense .Asso

ciation (Inc.), I deny tho truthfulness both of 1\!r. Burke's statement of fact anu his innuendo. His tactics are common to oruinary politicians in th~ heat of political campaigns. It is reprehensible in a responsible bureau chief to resort to such methods. In itself it is a confession of the weakness of his position. However, in order that the Members of Congress and interested citizens may know the truth it becomes neces· sary for me to set out briefly the history, purposes, and methods of our organization.

The association was formed early In 1923. Its first work was to take a leading part in the defeat of the Bursum bill and of the equally in· famous Indian omnibus bill, both indorsed by the Indian Bureau.

Its interest covers all Indians, but to date its greatest expenditure of effort and money has been for the Pueblos of New Mexico. It is now financing and directlng legal aid to the Pueblos in their sh·uggle to reconr their lands. Commissioner Burke hns himself indorsed this service.

The association is financed by voluntary contributions; the ordinary annual e.xpenditures being approximately:

For legal aid to the Pueblos----------------.-------------- $10, 000 For executive service, including Pacific coast oillce, clerical,

travel, etc-------------------------------------------- 15, 000 .All funds pass through the treasurer, the executive secretary han!1les

no money. The whole of the modest snlary of the national execntl>e secretary, lncludccl in the second amount named above, is contributed by four individonls through the San Francisco treasurer. Hence, Mr. Burke's statement to the efiect that Mr. Collier was supported by money collected by himself in the East is entirely erroneous.

The organjzation needs twice as much money as it receives. Its nppeal for funds will be continued and extended. .AU citizens interested in Indian welfare thn t can be reached will be aske<l to contribute. The books of the association arc open for inspection at all tim<'s.

The association is not in politics as such ; Its purpose is to obtain a reorganization of the entire system of handling Indian affairs. It seeks this end through legislation anu is conducting in>estigatlons an<l giving to Congress and the public publicity to the facts it discovers.

As to its pet·sonnel and the character of men and women taking direct and personal re!':ponsibtlity as directors for the policies and metho<ls of the association, I list the following as typical of the ma.ny that could be given :

Irving Dachellor, New York City (novelist). Robert E. Ely (director of the Town Hall, New York City). Mrs. H . .A. Atwood; Uiversi1le, Calif. (chall·mo.n Indian welfare dlvl·

slon, General Fedet·ation of ·women's Clubs). · William Allen White, Emporia, Kans. (editor). James Ford (prvfessor social ethics department, Hnr>ard University,

Camuridg<', Mass.). Elizabeth Shepley Sergeant, New York City (author aml authority

on lndians). Charles F. Lummis, Los Angeles, Calif. (author and authority on

IncUans). Rev. E. P. WhE-eler, Aurora, Ill. ( 40 years a missionary among the

Indians) . William Kent, Kentfield, Co. lit'. (former Congressman). Dr. Aurelia H. Reinhardt (president Mills College, California) . Stewart Edward White, San Francisco, Calif. (author). Dr. Walter l\f. Dickie, Berkeley, Calif. (secretary California Board

tlf Health). 1\fr. Wllliam Palmer Lucas (professor pediatrics, University of Cali·

!ornia, Berkeley, Calif.). Edyth Tate Thompson, Fresno, Calif. (secretary California Tubcrcu·

losis .Association). Dr. John R. IIaynes (regent, University of California; member Los

.Angeles Public Sen·lce Commission). Dr. Henry J. Ullman (president .American Legion, Santa Barbara,

Calif.). . Mrs. Mnry Austin, Santa Fe (author and authority on Inrli:ms). James W. Young, Chicago (vlce presluent J. Walter Thompson Adver

tising Co.) . Dr. George P. Clement, Los .Angeles (agl'icultural director Los

Angeles Cbamb r of Commerce). James G. Swinnerton, Palo .Alto, Calif. (artist). Fred :M:. Stein, New York City (chairman joint committee on tuber

culosis). Gertrude Bonnin, Washington (presi<lent National .Association of

.American Indians). 1\Irs. Louise C. Gillrspic, Long Beach, Calif. (chairman, Indian Wel-

fare, California Feueration o! Women's Clubs). Jay B. Nash, Oaklanu, Calif. l\Irs . .Augusta Urquhart, Los .Angeles, Calif. Mrs . .Alice C. ~Iyers, San Diego, Calif. Miss Pearl Cho. e, Santa Barbara, Calif. Miss Mabel C. Washburn, Santa Barbara, Calif. W. F. 1\I. Cutcheon, Santa llar·bara, Calif. John 1\!. Curran, Santa llarbara, Calif. Chauncey ~I. Goodrich, Saratoga, Calif. Charles DeY. Elku , San Francisco, Calif.

1\Irs. Duncan McDuffie, Berkeley, Calif . Leo J. Rabinowitz, San Francisco, Calif. l\lrs. W. T. Sedgwick, Berkeley, Calif. Walter V. Wo.:hlke, Ross, Calif. 1\Irs. Frank A. Gibson, Los Angeles, Calif. Mary J. Workman, Los Angeles, Calif. Rev. Father Robert Luc!'y, Los Angeles, Calif. EJ. Raymond Armshy, Burlingame, Calif. Joseph M. Price, New York City. Tbe national oddsory board o! the association includes Rev. John .A.

Ryan, D. D., George Haven Putnam, Henry W . Taft, Adolph Lewisohn, Dr. John H. Finlay, Dan C. llcard, George Foster Peabouy, Right Rev. Monsignor J. l'. Childwick, and the Right Rev. W. C. Manning.

This statement is limited a.nu is e:rplicitly designe<l as a rejoinder to Commissioner Burke in respect to those matters wherein the veracity and motives of the officers aud directors o.f this association were challenged.

Respedfnlly submitted. HAVEN EMERSON.

PJUCES OF CRUDE OIL, GASOLI.:q-E, ETC.

M:r. TRAMMELL. Mr. President, we do not seem to be making very mneh progresH on the unfLUishe<l business. I therefore ask unanimous <:onseut to call up Senate ReHolution ~1.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the request of the Senator from Florida?

Mr. NORBECK. 1\lr. PreHident, I wonld like to extend the usual courtesy In this matter, but if it is ~oing to take a month I do not want to do it. I shall have to stop somewhere.

1\lr. TRAMMELL. I do not think it will take "'ery long. There arc not over G or 8 o1· 10 l\feml.Jcrs of the Senate wl10 are opposed to the resolution.

l\lr. EDGE. May I ask to what resolution the Senator from Florida refers?

'l'he VICI<J PRESIDENT. The resolution ( S. Res. 31) directing the ll'ederal Trade Commission to investigate and report to the 8enate on the anvances recently made in the price of crude oil, gasoline, kerosene, and other petroleum products, and so forth.

l\lr. NORBECK. I think tl1at is a very proper re::;olution to pass, but it is going to lead to debate. I do not want to let it get in ahead of the regular unfinished business, and therefore I shall ha \e to object. - ~fr. TRAl\HIELL. Ur. President, I move to lay aside temporarily the unfinished business and take up the resolution.

Tlle VICE PRESIDENT. Tlle motion is out of order. A motion to take up the resolution is in order.

Mr. TRJU\11\lELL. Then I move to take u11 the resolution for immediate cousiUeration. I do not like to try to dh:~placc any measure that i:-; the unfinished business, but the migratory bird bill has been pen<ling for two or three weeks, and the dlsposition ~::~cerns to be to drift away from it and take up other measures at this time. Just this afternoon, with the consent of the Senator in charge of the bill, the debate lms been alto0etller upon other matters. The matter covered by my resolution is of great importance. I realize that we llave other matters of importan~e to be consi<lered by the Senate. So far as the migratory l.Jird bill is concerned, I do not think it is of any imvortauce at all in comparison with the matter to which my resolution relates. I believe in the establishme~t of bird sanctuaries, Lut I do not belie"'e in some of the provisions that aro ~ontained in the pending measure for the ~:-~o-callcd preservation of the wild life of our country. The American people arc far more interested and more vitally con~erned in the matter of trying- to bring about some action on the part of the Government that will result in the future in checking this periodical, apparently unwarranted advance in tbc prites of gasoline and crude oil c"'ery spring. That is the object and pnrvosc of my resolution. Senators who think the veople of the country are pleased with what is being pulled off at thlH time by the rlea1ers in gasoline and crude oil and ke1'osenci are very sadly mistaken. If they think tllnt they are popularizing themselves hy defending the Standard Oil Co. and other oil companies in the country by preventing the consideration of a resolution of this kind, I think they will awaken to the fact that they nrc sadly mistaken as to how the Amerlcnn people feel upon the subject. I have received a number of letters and a number of newspaper comments upon the question. It Reems that the people of the country feel that some action should be taken. We should not allow A. meastn-e of this importance to be postponed day after day and time after time by dilatory tactics in the iuter·cst frequently of mea ·nres of far less importance.

I do not like to be ~ontinuously tryin~ to interfere with other propositions, but this is a matter of a great deal of importA.ncc. Throughout my service I have been extremely modest, but I

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 10097 state now that this is not a very desirable place for a man who is modest, and who stands back on the question of courtesy and is not disposed to push, under any and all circumstances, policies and measures which he favors. There are always others who are clamoring for attention and who are pushing the modest man back every time that he endeavors to secure action on some measure in which he is interested. Often the most dilatory tactics are adopted to prevent the consideration of even such an important measure as the one to which I am now referring. I ain going to insist on a h-earing on the proposition.

Mr. NORBECK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. TRA:Ml\IELL. I yield to the Senator in charge of the

bill for a moment. Mr. NORBECK. Mr. President, as to the disadvantage re

sulting from l>eing a modest man, I agree with the Senator from Florida. That is one of the troul>les with tl1e migratory l>ir<l l>ill. I have been too modest to object to everything else that comes along. I <lo not want to be put in the position of l>eing a defender of the Oil Trust. I at least am one Senator who T"oted against reducing their taxes.

l\Ir. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Mr. President, does the Senator from South Dakota think it would l>e possible to get an agreement to fix a time to vote on his bill and the amendments thereto?

l\lr. NORBECK. I should be delighted if I could get that kind of an agreement, but I <lo not think it is possible. I think one or two Senators would object.

l\1r. TRA.l\DIICLL. l\Ir. President, I should like to get an agreement wllereby we may vote on the question involved in tllis resolution. I myself do not care anytlling about discussing the resolution at length. So far as I am concerned, we can set an hour to-morrow or on any day in the ncar future or within 30 minutes. All I wish to do is to ascertain the will of the Senate on the proposition.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, will the Senator from Florida yield to me?

Mr. TRA.l\Il\IELL. I yield. Mr. CURTIS. The Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. HARRELD]

desired to be present when this re ·olution came up. I suggest to the Senator from Florida that he delay his request until the Senator from Oklahoma shall return to the Cllamber. I will say that the Senator has been telephoned for.

Mr. TRAMMELL. Let the Senator from Oklahoma remain in the Cllamber. I brought this question up <luring the last session of the Senate some two or three weeks before adjournment. At that time I belieT"e 75 per cent of the Senate would ha\e voted for a resolution of this chnracter, but by dilatory tactics, and pleading that I should wait until some Senator came !Jack to tlle Cllamber, a vote was prevented upon this i.J.nportant question. Now, if a majority of the Senators are opposed to the resolution, I <lesire that they shall say so. Let us vote on the re::;olution, but let it not be killed by denying it the priT"ilege of being considered or voted upon. That is all I ask for. I want to get a vote on the resolution. I am willing to haye it -roted on at 5 o'clock.

Mr. KING. Mr. President, will the Senator from Florida yield to me?

l\!r. THAMMELL. I yield to the Senator from Utah. Mr. KING. I will ask the Senator from Florida if it is not

a fact that statistics which are now :wailahle as to the earnings of the oil companies, particularly the Standard Oil Co. of Ohio and the Stan<la1·d Oil Co. of New York, show that by their manipulation of the prices of tile crude as well as the finished product they increased their dividends this last year to the extent of more than ~25,000,000 ahove the enormous dividcnd!:l of the preceding year, and that they have declared stock diT"idends exceeding $100,000,000? If the Senator answers the question affirmatively, I desire to ask does not that demonstrate the fact that the companies have gotten control of the market, that tlley are charging extortionate prices for their products, an<l the the American people are l>cing the victims of their rnpacity anu their inordinate prices?

1\lr. TRAMMELL. Mr. President, I think the Senator's statement is very correct. I noticed within the last few days some statistics of the character which be bas state<l. I do not rememl>cr the details so well as does the Senator, but a great many of the oil companies are making enormous earnings. A year ago when we had this question before the Senate the plea on the part of some of the uefenuers of the Standard Oil Co. and of other companies affiliated with this monopolistic aggregation was that the production of oil was on the decline. Howe\er, within a week after it had been stated that the production was on the decline statistics came out showing plainly that the production had enormously increased and that a discussion of the que::;tion of supply and demand was merely

a subterfuge. The law of supply and demand d~es not cont~ol the situation. " ' hat controls the situation is price fixing under the lead ·of the Standard Oil Co. At will they control tb~ fixing prices regardless of the question of production and regardless of the question of demand. As pul>lished in the newspapers of the past week or 10 days, the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey advanced its prices, which apply to the States within its jurisdiction; simultaneously, on the same day the Standard Oil Co. of Kentucky advanced its prices, and on the same day simultaneously with the price increase on the part of the Standard Oil Co. we find a number of other oil companies increasing prices. Anybody wllo does not see that there is a concert of action must be blind. It is very npparent that they are mRnipulating prices, and manipulatLg them to a very great extent, to tlle point of charging excessive prices, considering the cost of production and the investment in these industries.

It is sometimes claimed that these companies are only making a certain percentage on their investment, and reference is made to 10 or 12 per cent; l>ut it is necessary that we should go back and ascertain what that investment represents. The inYestment, as a rule, represents enormous stock dividends and enormous earnings made during previous years. I have some stath;tics on that question, and I urn going to let the country know something about it again, whether we vote on the resolution now or not. I am going to call the attention of the Senate to the manner in which the larger of these companies have increased their capital stock. ~'or a great many years the Standard Oil Co. in particular-and the others have reached the po~ition now where they cooperate with and assist themhas been exacting a toll from the American people that has been far in excess of anything reasonable or anything that was justifiable, considering the investment in the industry.

Mr. SWANSON. Mr. President, will the Senator-from Florida yield to me for a moment?

Mr. TRAMMELL. For what purpose? Mr. SWANSON. I wish to know who objects to the Federal

Trade Commission making the proposed investigation? Mr. TRA.l\1:MELL. Tbu.t is what I want to know. I desire

to have a yea-and-nay vote to ascertain who objects to it. :Mr. SWANSON. It seems to me to be apparent that the ad

T"ances made in the price of gasoline in rec.:ent months have been so rapid that they can not be the result of decreasing production, but simply the result of manipulation. If this commodity is being manipulated so tllat 120,000,000 people are being oppressed by rapid adT"ances in price, certainly it is not inappr opriate for the Senate to ask that an investigation shall l>e made l>y the Federal Trnde Commission. That commission was organized to make investigations for Congress, which is entitled to know when it shall meet here again in December whether or not lli1s vast industry is being mani11ulated for the benefit of priT"ate individuals and large companies. I can not see why anybody should object to an investigation . of the question by the Federal Trade Commission.

1\Ir. 'rRAl\BIELL. I do not see why there should be objection to the resolution. If the oil companies are not doing anything that is in restraint of trade or in violation of the antitrust law, then, of course, they will go free; the Senate will secure the facts ; and if further legislation seems necessary we can then take action.

l\1r. HARRELD. 1\Ir. President--The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Florida

yield to the Senator from Oklahoma? 1Ur. TRAM:MEI,L. Yes. l\1r. HARRTDLD. l\Ir. President, this resolution has been

lying on the table since the special session of the Senate last spring. I did not know that it was to be called up. It is my intention to resist the adoption of the resolution, and I expect to address myself to the Senato to show that there is no reason for it. I am not ready to do that this evening, but I have no disposition to delay the consideration of the resolution, and will inquire if we may not agree upon some other time to take it up rather than this afternoon.

Mr. TRAl\fl\IELL. 1\Ir. President, I desire to offer some obseHations on the subject. Of course, Senators realize that only within the last week or 10 <lays have the oil companies started out again to pyramid prices. If I had asked to have the resolution adopted a month or two mon.ths ago, when they were not advancing prices and were not engaged in concert of action, then, of course, I would have been confronted with the argument that there was no occasion for the Senate acting. If I all owed--

l\Ir. HARRELD. 1\!r. President, I should like to say to the Senator--

Mr. TRAMMELL. Will the Senator plen.se not interrupt me in the ~iddle of a sentence containing only about 10 words?

10098 CONGRESS! ON AL RECORD-SEN ATE MAY 26

If I had asked for the consideration of the resolution prior to the time when the oil companies began to pyramid their prices, tllen, of course, the resolution would not have been relevant, but I have had it on the calendar, and I rather suspecte<l that the oil companies would follow their past custom of advancing prices in the spring of the year when people begin to use automobiles more freely and there is a greater demand for gasoline. They began that a week or two ago, and immediately upon that information being published through the press I began h·ying to have my .resolution considered. I do not want to have the resolution delayed from time to time upon this, that, or the other excuse; but what I should lik·e to do is to get an expression of the Senate on the question, and that is really all I want, a-lthough, of course, I firmly believe that there ought to be an inve:;tigation made. However, I will be very glad, if we can consent to a particular time to vote on the resolution, to allow it to go o>er until

·some other time, if the Senator from Oklahoma ""ishes to dis-cuss it.

Mr. H.AHRELD. I am perfectly willing to do that; I am not going to try to delay action. I am perfectly willing to have the resolution set do""n for a day certain; I am not objecting to that.

Mr. TRAM:MELL- Would it be satisfactory to have a vote ou tlle question at 4 o'clock to-morrow?

:U..ir. HARRELD. I do not think I could get ready to say what I have to say in that time. I would be willing to take it up about Saturday.

:Mr. TRd.Ml\lELL. It is s.uggcsted to me that ·we are likely to take an adjournment over Saturday, and not be in session from Friday 1.mtil Monday.

Mr. HARRELD. I hardly suppose we will adjourn both on Satunlay and Monday. . 1.\Ir. THA~'BIELL. ] should be glad if we could agree to

take a -vote on the resolution, say, on Friday at 4 o'clock. If we may make such an agreement, I will promise not to occupy 30 minutes of the time of the Senate. ·

1\lr. CURTIS. 1\lr. President--The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Florida

yield to the Senator from Kansas? l\lr. TRAMMELL. I yield. 1\lr. CURTIS. I have no suggestion to make, but it was the

intention, if the Senate felt like following the suggestion, to adjourn on Saturday until Tues<lay. That would recognize l\Ionday as a holiday, but, so far as I now know, there will be a Elession on Saturday.

Mr. TR.Ai\L\IELL. M:r. President, it seems to me that on a simple propo::;ition of this kind we could vote on Friday. It does not involve the question of convicting the oil companies or anythlng of that kind. It involves merely the question of having tlle Federal Trade Commission, which was created for the very purpose of looking into conditions of this character, investigate tllei.r· modus operandi in connection with the fixing of prices.

1\lr. HARRELD. 1\ly opinion, 1\lr. President, is that if I can show. that there is no need for the investigation the Senate will not vote for it. That is what I am going to try to do.

l\fr. TRAMMELL. The Senator might convince himself to that effect, but I do not believe he will convince many Senators, and he certainly will convince very few of the American people who have to pay the freight in the interest of the Standard Oil Co. and other companies that act with them in the matter of monopolistic price control and domination. The Senator will not convince many of the American people who are paying the freight that there is no necessity for an investigation.

l\lr. SWANSON and Mr. FRAZIER addressed the Chair. Mr. HARRELD. l\Ir. President, I think the Senator from

Florida yielded to me, did he not? . The VICE PRESIDTill. TT. To whom does the Senator from

Florida yield? 1\Ir. TRAMMELL. I yield first to the Senator from Virginia,

as I believe he first requested me to yield. · l\lr. S\VANSON. 1\lr. President, I think we ought to have a vote on tbe resolution. I have noticed every time the Federal Trade Commission has investigated the rapid increase· in the price of gasoline and petroleum products that prices have gone back reasonably, while the profits of the oil companies have never been seriously impaired.

The record shows that the companies have never been hurt. Probably there never have been any companies that have made greater profits than those engaged in the oil business. It seems to me that there ought to be a vote on the resolution. The Senator from Oklahoma says that he is willing .to have a vote and the Senator from Florida says he is willing. Now, I am going to suggest that a vote be taken at 2 o'clock on Satur-

day. After tllat we could adjourn. So I suggest that the vote be taken on the resolution at 2 o'clock on Saturday next.

1.\Ir. TRAMl\1ELL. That is agreeable to me. I ask unanimous consent that tlle vote on the resolution be taken at 2 o'clock on Saturday next.

1\lr. HARRELD. I am willing to agree to 4 o'clock, because I want my remarks to be made just before t11e vote is taken. I will agree to that hour if it is understood tllat I may address the Senate on this question just before tlle vote is taken.

Mr. SWANSON. The Senate will meet at 12, and the Senator can speak from 12 until 2.

l\1r. HARRELD. Yes; if some Senator . docs not take the floor to make a prohibition speech.

1\lr. SWANSON. Tllere is no great danger of any Senator doing that. 'l'he Senator can give notice tllnt as soon as the Senate meets at 12 o'clock on S:lturday he will ask to be recognized. I have never known a Senator to be interfered with after giving a notice of that kind.

1\fr. Hi\.H.HELD. I lla\e no objection to 2 o'clock if I can have a ssurance that I will have that time.

1\fr. SWANSON. The Senator can safeguard tllat matter by giving notice that as l':oon as the Renate convenes on Saturday he will address the Senate on this question. I have never known a notice like that to be interfered with by any Senator.

1\lr. HARRELD. Very well. I will agree to the hour of 2 o'clock with that understanding; but I give notice .now that I shall desire to address the Senate just before the vote is ~~a . .

Mr. TRAMMELL. The agreement is that we will vote at 2 o'clock; and the Senator desires to have how much timeone hour preceding 2 o'clock?

Mr. HARRELD. I want about one hour. Mr. TRA1\il\1ELL. I ask unanimous consent that we vote on

the r~olution at 2 o'clock on Saturday. 1\lr. SHORTRIDGE. 1 object. The VICE PRESIDENT. Objection is macle. Mr. TRAMMELL. Then, l\Ir. President, I move that we now

take up the resolution. The VICE PRESIDENT. The motion of the Senator from

Florida is already before the Senate, that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Senate Resolution 31.

:Mr. BINGHAM. 1\fr. President, a parliamentary inquiry. If tbis motion is carried, will it displace the unflnislled business?

Tllc VICE PRESIDENT. If the motion is cn.rried, it will displace the unfinished busine!-ls.

1\lr. TH.Al\1l\1ELL. I make the motion. I do not think we will have any trouble in getting the migratory bird bi1l back before the Senate, but we will have trouble in getting this resolution back; so I make the motion, and ask for a yea-and· nay vote on it.

Mr. NORBECK. Mr. President, I do not want any misunderstanding about this matter. I should like to support the Senator in his motion; but I think it is an unfortunate thing that he is trying to displace a bill that hns been before the Senate for a week and insist on action on his resolution imme· diately. If he will wait until we get through with this bill I will support his motion, but under · the circumstances I hope it will not prevail. There should be some order about our legislation.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion of the Senator from Florida, on which tlle yeas and nays have been demanded. Is the demand seconded?

The y"eas and nays were ordered, and the Chief Clerk called the roll.

1\fr. JONES of New Mexico. I transfer my general pair with the Senator from Maine [Mr. FERNALD] to the Senator from South Carolina [:iUr. SMITH], and will vote. I vote "yea."

1\fr. REED of Pennsylvania (after having voted in the negative). I transfer my general pair with the Senator from Delaware [1\lr. BAYARD] to tbe Senator from Inc1iana [Mr. W .A.TSo~], and will allow my vote to stand.

1\fr. BRATTON (after having voted in the affirmative). I have a general pair with the Senator from Indiana [1\lr. RoBINSON]. I transfer that .pair to the Senator from 1\lississippi [1\fr. HARRISO~], and will let my vote stand.

1\'lr. 1\IOSiiJ S (after having yoted in the negative). I transfer my pair with the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. BRoussARD] to the Senator from Vermont [1\fr. GREENE], and will let my vote stand.

1\fr. JONES of Washington. I desire to announce the following general pairs :

The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. GILLETT] with the Senator from Alabama [l\1r. UNDERWOOD].

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 10099 The Senator from Maryland [1\fr. WELLER] with the Senator

from Missouri [ l\fr. R~ED], and The Senator from Delaware [Mr. nu PoNT] with the Senator

from Florida [Mr. FLETCHER]. Mr. GERRY. I desire to announce that the Senator from

Tennessee [l\Ir. TYSON] is necessarily absent on official business. If present he would vote "yea."

The result was announced-yeas 29, nays 37-as follows: YEAS•-29

Ashurst Gerry McMaster Blease Harris Overman Bratton Heflin Pittman Caraway Howell Robinson, Ark. Dill .Tones, N. ~lex. Sheppar<l Ferris IGng Shiplitead Frazier La li'ollette Simmons George McKellar Steck

NAYS-37 Bingham Fess Metcalf Borah Goff Moses Bruce Hale Norbeck I~utler Harreld Norris Cameron Johnson Olldie Capper .Jones, Wash. Pepper Curtis K·endrick Pllipps ~ Deneen Keyes l'ine Edge McNary Rred, Pa. Ernst Mayfield Sackett

NOT VOTING-30 Bayard Fernald McKinley Broussard Fletcher McLean Copeland Gillett Means Couzens Glass Neely Cummins Gooding Nye Dale Greene JtansdeH du Pont Harrison Reed, 1\Io. Edwarcls Lenroot Hobinson, Ind.

So Mr. TRAMMELL'S motion was rejected.

Stephens wnnson

'l'rammell Walsh Wheeler

Schall Shortridge Smoot Stanfield Wadsworth Warren Willis

Smith Tyson Underwood Watson Weller Williams

Mr. TRAMMELL. Mr. President, I wish to ha-ve it understood that this does not dispose of the matter. I am going to keep on calling up this resolution, and I expect to get a direct -vote on it sooner or later. I will call it up to-morrow if I can possibly get an opportunity to make the motion. I thought I was generous when I said that I was willing to wait until Saturday for a vote, and that J wanted to occupy only 30 minutes myself in · debating the question; but that does not seem to please some Senators, so I am going to insist that the I'esolution be considered at this session of Congress.

I wish to have read from the desk a letter received by me upon this subject which is ' indicative of a quite general sentiment among the American people with regard to the activities of the Standard· Oil Co. and other companies in the way of price advancing. I should like to ha-ve it read and printed in the RECORD.

l\1r. NORRIS. 1\Ir. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. TRAMMELL. I yield. Mr. NORRIS. I should like to say to the Senator that I

think I am just as much in favor of hi.s resolution as he is. I shall be glad to help pass it if we can; but I doubt the wisdom oi; trying to displace a bill that ought to be act~d on, that has been before the Senate a long time, . and Senators have been talking on other subjects while it was pending. We ought to meet the issue raised by this bill and dis])ose of it, either by passing it or by defeating it. So far as I am concerned-and I think that is the sentiment of a great many Senators-we are fa-vorable to the Senator's reHolution; but if we try to jump from one bill to another and from one resolution to another we will never get anywhere with anything. •

Mr. TRAMMELL. I fully appredate that the Senator is as much in favor of the r esolution as I am; but the question is how we are going to get up the resolution unless we insist upon its being taken up even while another bill is pending and unfinished.

Mr. NORRIS. I will vote to take up the Senntor's resolution if it does not displace something else that has not been di~posed of, and I will stay here until we can get it up. ·

Mr. TRAMMELL. It seems that we never can find a time. This morning, for instance, I proposed to call it up during the morning hour. The stage was all set, however; the list was probably already arranged that the Senator from Nevada [Mr. ODDIE] was to be recognized, and that the two hours would be occupied by the good ronds hill. I fa-vored that bill, but the whole time wns occupied by the goo<l roads bill.

Mr. NORRIS. I will say to the Senator that I do not think the resolution will take long; and if it can be taken up at some time by laying aside the unfinishC'cl business, I shall be glad to have that done. I will not, however, -vote to displace the unfinished business for the purpose of considering it.

Mr. TRAMMELL. I have been doing my best for two or th1·ee days to do that.

Mr. BRUCE. 1\Ir. President, I should like to say to the Senator from Florida also that my position with regard to his resolution is exactly the same as that of the Senator from Nebraska.

Mr. 'l'RAl\11\fELL. I am sure that a number of Senators -voted against taking up the resolution on account of the pendency of the other bill.

I would like to have this letter from a prominent citizen of Florida read and spread on the REcoRD. It is expressive of about how the American people generally feel on this subject.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will read. The Chief Clerk read as follows :

PCTKAM MERCANTILE Co., Oak Hill, Fla., May 24, 1926.

!Ion. PARK TRAliiMELL, United States Senate, Was1Jington, D. 0.

DEAR SENATOR : I hope you may be successful ln calling up ami having passed your resolution directing investigation of the price of gasoline and other petroleum products. Action should be taken before adjournment of Congress, as the recent advances in price affect the entire South, if not the whole country.

During the past 60 days the Standard Oil Co. has advanced the price of fireproof oil (kerosene) from 16% to 20% cents per gallon and gasoline from 24 to 26 cents per gallon, tank wagon, or wholesale price, and we have been compelled to advllnce the retail price accordingly.

The press is constantly holding up to public gaze the Rockefeller donations ; it seems to be n case or " robbing Peter to pay Paul " ; and a long-suiiering pullllc is growing weary of this sort of rot. I sincerely hope some means may be devised to curb the practice.

With best wishes, I am, Sincerely yours,

.1. W. PUTNAr.I.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Mr. President, I -voted for the motion of the Senator from Florida. The Senator is aware that at times, if we expect to keep up with our work, we must lea-ve the Chamber when the Senate is in session and sign correspondence. I came into the Chamber just in time to vote on the Senator's motion. I understood the motion to be to permit a vote on this resolution not later than Saturday. I fa-vor the resolution. Had I known that the motion was to displace the pending bill, my vote would haYe been in the negative. I wanted the RECORD to show that.

l\fr. KING. Mr. President, in my opinion the motion made by the Senator from Florida [Mr. TRAMMELL] should ha-ve prevailed. There is no doubt that the Standard Oil Co., which consist, of course, of a number of organizations, affiliated and coordinated, exercise a dominating influence in the oil industry of the United States, if not of the world. Prices of crude oil and of the finished products are dictated by the organizations just referred to, and commonly known as the Standard Oil Co. These corporations, which ha-ve been developed out of the company organized by l\lr. John D. Rockefeller, have resources so enormous as to almost defy imagination. Their holdings in the United States and in various parts of the world are worth billions of dollars, and their earnings are so great as to almost be beyond computation. Their cash dividends are increasing nnd their stock dividends have amounted to hundreds of millions of dollars. Their earnings during the past year show the growth of the Standard Oil Co. and its allied, associated, and affiliated organizations. The prices fixed from time to time do not result, generally speaking, from competition, but are determined by the -various Standard Oil companies and affiliated organizations and a few other companies, like the Shell Oil Co., which operates in the United States and in other parts of the world.

The understanding reached by the great oil companies fix the price of oil and the so-called "independents" follow in their footsteps, knowing 'the penalty which would befall them if they attempted to cut prices.

The Senator from Florida has just stated in effect that the law of supply and demand is set at naught. I think his statement is not inexact. The price of gasoline falls without reason and it rises with no less regard to the facts and to physical and business conditions. In other words, the prices are determined not alone by production but by fictitious and other causes, many of which are entirely capricious. I said capricious. Perhaps I should have Raid determined in part by the cupidity of some of the large corporations engaged in the production of oil in its various forms.

The interruption of the law of Rupply and demand is a great menace in the economic life of the people. It is an unhealthy thing to have enormous mergers and great consolidations effected in our manufacturing and industrial enterprises. Bnt under the Republican administration the growth of trusts and

10100 CONGRESS! ON AL RECORD-SEN ATE 1\J!AY 26

monopolies hns increased wjth enormous ._ trides. There nre more trust~ and monopolie~ and combination~ in restraint of trade and to control price;; and destroy competition tllan ever before in the United State!'. The trm;ts and tl)-e great capitaliRtic enterprises were never more powerful than now, and were ncYL'r more nudacious in dealing with the pe01)le an<l in dealing with tl1 e Go...-ernment. Tlle Sherman Antitrust Law, the Clayton Ad, and the Federal Trade Commi ·~ion act are flouted by big business and the vredatory lntereRt:-3. But little attention is Jlni<l to the feeble efforts mnde by the Government to enforce the laws of the United States which were enacted for the purpo. e of preventing monopoly and preserving the law of ~ntltllY and demand. Unfair lm~iness methods prevail in many lines of industry, and t'mall and weak corporations eithor fall by the wayside before the attacks of the great orgauizations, or they are absorbed and swallowe(l up, thus increa ing the actnal and the potential power of the voracious organiza-tions. .

-The Senator's reRolution askR for an investigation by the Federal Trade Commis~ion. There is no other organization provided by law to undertake such investigation. However, ·while I shall vote for the Senator's resolution, I fear he will be disappointed with the re ' nlts of any investigation made under tl1e au._pices of the present Federal Trade Commission.

This organization has recently been the subject of carne. t debate in the Senate. It was shown that the majority of the members of this commission have changeu the rules under wbicll the Federal Trade Comrni:-:sion operated in the past and ha•c announced that the ...-ery purpose of the commission has

. been changed. I attempted to show, in an address which I <leli...-ere<l in the ~enate a few weeks ngo, that the tatutc creating the commis~ion and defining ·its duties had been in one or more particulars ig11ored, if not violated. The result is that the commission has ceased to be an agency to restrain predatory <:orporations or to IJrevent unfair practices.

Apparently there is no rea on for its existence and it should be nbolh:hect, unless itR personnel is changed or the majority member~; of the commission change their attitude toward the law and the practices by corporations which are so injurious to honest husincss and RO harmful to the consuming public.

The President of the United States, as Senators will recall, r~cently spoke in New York in regard to the bu::;iness organizati?ns of the country. HiA ~peech, by big business, was regarded w1th very great fa...-or. l stated in the Senate soon afterwards that hi:::; speech was a benediction pronounced upon the bends of the g1·eat corporations and trusts of the United States. He stated, in ffect, that they had purged bn~iness of its transgressions and unfair practiceR. The PreRident's speech, in my opinion, was most unfortunate and un<louhtedly was rPgarded by the great trn. ts and aggregations of capital in consolidations and corporat ons as an approval of their present methods and conduct.

With such an adclres~ by the Chief Executive the organizations of which I. poke would ha'Ve but little fear of prosecution under the Sherman law or the Clayton Act or in\CRtigation by the Federal Trade Commission. 'I'hey would feel secure in the course which they are pursuing and would regat·d the executive branch of the GoYernment ns being entirely , ntisfied with their business actiYities and their bu~incss policies.

I repent, never before has there been so great a necessity for the enforcement of the law::; of Congress against unfair practices of corporations and trusts and again t conspiracies in re. traiut of trade and combinations engaged in the destruction of competition. Before relief can he had by the people from the oppres ·ive and destructive policieH nnd practices of predatory wealth, there mn. t be a change in the legislati'Ve and executive branches of the Government.

W'e need a Congress that will strengthen the Sherman law and an executive department that will enforce it.

ORDER FOR RECESS

M:r. JONES of Wnf'hingtou. I a~k unanimous consent that wheu the Senate concludes its busiuess to-day it take a recess nntll 12 o'clock to-morrow.

The PRESIDE1 ~T pro tempore. Is there objection? The Ohair bears none, and it is so ordered.

LESLIE WARXICK BREXNAN

Mr. BRUCE. l\lr. President, I would like to call up Order of Business 7GO, llom::e bill 2237, for the relief of Leslie 'Vnrnick Brennan. A similar bill was passed by the Senate at the last se~sion of Cougress. This bill was pa ·sed by the House at the present session and wns about to be passed the other day when the jnnior Senator from Utah [Mr. KING] objected. Now that Senator has withdrawn his objection.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Rcuator from l\Iarylnncl a~k::; unanimom; con~=:ent for the pn'scut con~ideration of House bill 2237. Is there objection? ·

Mr. SUOOT. L0t the bill' be reported. The PREHIDEN'I' pro tempore. The bill ·will be read for the

information of the Senate. The Chief Clerk rend the bill, as follows : Be it mwctcd, eto., That the Secretary of the TreaRury be, and he is

hereby, authorized an<l <.lirecte<l to _pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Leslie Warnick Brennan the snrn of $11,G-:1.4.14, being l!Je amount expenclPd by !Jim in taldng ancl distributing- motion pictures used by the War Department in instruction <luring the World War.

1\Ir. S~lOOT. I af'k the Seuator if thi::; amount bas been approved by the department"?

Mr. BHUCIG. Yc. ; it bas h<'en. A similar bill was pns~0d hy the Senate at tlui last ~cs~ion, and this bill has hecn pa~HNl by the House at the present s0ssion. The junior Senator from Utah has withdrawn hi_s objection after a curefnl examination. The bill iR approvc<l by the authorities.

1\lr. KING. I ohjecte<l .!.lt the time the bill was reached on the calendar before. I have looked into it since, and it is aU right.

There heing no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceecled to consider the bill.

The bill was reported to the Henatc without amendment, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and paRsed.

:MUSCLE SHOALS

1\Ir. HARRIS. M1·. President, I ask to have printed in the REcORD an address by fol'mer Senator B. B. Comer, of Alahamn, on the leasing of l\luscle Shoals, as well as a letter of the Farm Bureau ],e<leratiou inclosing an editorial on the same subject.

The PHESIDEJ\TT pro tempore. Is there objection? Thetre being no objection, the matter was ordered to be

printed in the RECORD, as follows: LABOR IS CO.\DIEXDF.D llY Ex-GOYEII:SOR COMER FOR STAXD O:S STIOAT.S

VIOLATIO:S OF Rnl!JR.\XA:S ANTITRUST ACT IR SEE:S I:S lJROI'OSAL OF

POWER Co:ur.A.XIES •.ro LF..ASFJ MURCLl'l .I'IIOALs-AccErTANCFJ orr BID WOULD BEl "DEST.I:WCTIVE TO ISTJ~llESTS OF THE PJOOI'LE"

Commending the Alabama Federation of Lallor for Its protest against leasing Muscle Shoals for power exploitation, former Gov. ll. n. Comer y(>Aterday isHne<l a statement charging tbnt such leasing wonl<l be a tllrect violation of the R!Jerman antitrust Jaw, an<l would be "destructive of the interests of tho people."

"If the AJaharna Power Co. and its sub~idiaries or itA associates secure :Muscle Shoals," saiu Governor Corner, " then tllere is no calculating w!Jere private exploitation will end. or t!Jc taxes of the p<'ople be rnensurell ." Tho former militant Governor of Alabama and former United States Senator charged. that the Alabama .Power Co. is practicing subornation of t!Je jury, " because," he said, "it llas for the purpose of accomplishing its exploitation of the people extended mnny larget-:ses to many citizens. Will the~e citizenA recognize t!Jis purchnse," be aRks, "and join wit!J the power company to secure conditions that will inevitably rnuUiply the taxc~:~ on their fellow citizen~?"

"The Age-Hera1<1 and associated JIPWspaperH can not be too hi~-;hly

commended," said Gover110r Corner, " for the splendid. fight they have put up against the succN-;s of these cou<litions."

The money which woulcl come to th-e Govcrnmc:nt !Jy leasing- this property for power purposes is Jnfinite~imal, in Governor Comer's vi w, and he adds, "In using this power if need. be as nn exporime11tal stu· tion for •the mmlUfaeture of every fertiliz<>r advantngeous to the In n<l, the Government could not spend the money to better purpose, if nothing was g-ained except economic 1nforma tion.

"T!Je leasing of Muscle Shoals to the Alabama Power Co.," he R:titl, " certain to be ti.Jen used ns n combination against the people, no mr,l tPr what the price paicl, would. be uestructlve of tire interests of the people; and in helping, abetting, malcing possible this combination, the Government itself is helpiT)g to destroy the Sherman antitrust Jaw." Guvcruor Cumer·s statement in full is as follows :

· .. The action of the Alabama State Feclcrntlon of f"'ahor at Shcfficlrl, protesting against t!Jc leat-:iug of ~Iuscl-e Shoals for any power !lropositlon, stating thnt this is contrary to the proposccl cconomlcH on which the power was developed, is exactly right. I will go a Htcp furth r; lm<'h leasing would be fl direct violation of the !::lherma n antitrust law. This law waR enacted to protect the people, no rnntter whether at large or small, against auy combination or Interests having tbo power to charge.

"If tbe Alabama Power Co. anrl its aRsoclates secure by lease or otherwise Muscle Shoals, then Alabama bas the very condition which tho Si.Jerman law proposecl to prevent; i. e., we are at the mercy of a trust, and this, too, with the Government conniving, helpin,;, abetting, maldng possible. How im!ignificant to the Government the money 1·ental proposed by the power company compar-ed to the Government

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 10101 protection of the people, or to the advantnges wbicll can come to the people by the proper usc of this great power, particularly that class of people which the Government should most love to protect-the farmer. In using this power if need be as an experimental station for the manufacture of every fertilizer advantageous to the land, the GovcrnDfent could not spend the money to uetter purpose 1f nothing was gained except economic information.

"The leasing of Muscle Shoals to the Alabama rower Co., certain to be then used as a combination a~;ainst the people, no matter what the price paitl, would be destructive of the interests of tllc people, and In hl'lping, abetting, making possible this combination, tlle Government itself is helping to destroy the Sherman antitrust law. The Government has spent $150,000,000 in builuing datns and installing machinery, but inherent in the water-a value not computable and which has not been paid for- is the power. Combine this inherent value with the money the Government has spent in developing those things which the people most need, which are most vital to their interests, fertillzer, anu this would be the greatest accomplishment thut could possibly come for the usc of the people to whom it should inalicnauly belong.

"No matter whether out of thls property the Government makes money or not; that is the least consideration . The llenefits which can come to the people are the greate:;t, and if it can he accomplishrd, then tlle Government has used in tlie most ccouomic:tl way this power, autl the runnin~, the managing of this by the Government is unlike any other business into which the Government could go. The outlay hns been made; the working of the outlny can be done at the least possii.Jle cost. A million horsepower put in motion hy the turning of a lever. In the largest mr.asurc the cost will be simply brains, and brains tlle Government can command ns economically as anybouy and many times safer for the people. Then the <Jne..;;;tion com<>s, are the Government anrl its properti<>s for the people or can the Government be useu to uestroy one of it most beueficial laws, protedive laws, tlle Sherman antitrust law?

"The money which could come to the Government by leaRing this property for power purposes is infinitesimaL The protection, the mmfruct to the people, if for nothing else than experimentation in the manufacture of fertilizer of whatever dcl:lcrlption is thr maximum that it can possilJly be put to. If the Alal.Jama Powl'l· o. and its snb~:;idinries or its associates secure :Muscle Shoals, then tllcre is no calculating where private exploitat ion will end or tlle tuxes of the people be men:::ureu.

"The Alabnma Power Co. has for the purpoRe of accomplishing its exploitation of the people extended many largcsl:leS to many citizcnR, direct s ubomation of the jury. Will these citizens recol-(nize this purchase, join in with the power company to secure conditions that will inevitably multiply the taxes on their fellow citizen·?

"The AgP.-Hcrald can not be too highly commended for the splendid fight it has put up again st the success of these conditions."

AlmniCAN Fan:.r BunEAU FF.DKRATWN,

Wa:sMngton, D. C., llfay ~, 1926. To all Members of Congress .

UIC\Tr~~:::IIl~:-< : By the conrtcRy of Mr. Ilcnry Ford we are al.Jlc to St'JHl you Ute i11closed advance editorial which will be published in the Dearborn Independent of June 5. The editorial speaks for itself.

I feel sure you will I.Je interested in knowing that :\Ir. Ford's interest in Muscle Shoals has not lessened antl that hi ldens and those which were transmitted to you luRt week IJy the Washington ofiice of the American Farm llureau Federation in regard to the pcnuing power proposal are in close agreement.

Very respectfully, AJ\[ERICAN FARM llun:EAU FEDJ<;RATION, Cln:STER'H. GRAY, Acti11g Director.

FAI:r.IERS NOT ItOOLED, HUT Btn<COED

A series of victories by the power combine over agriculture antl the national defense at :Muscle Slloals constitutes the history to date of that great Government war aucl peace enterprise. Muscle Shoals was planted !Jy Congress in the geographicnl heart of the country to supply muuitio11s of defense in time of war, and fertilizer for farms in time of peace. The power combine has I.Jeen successful until now in defeating both of these objectives of Congress.

It first em])loycu the ruethotl of ucrnnnding that Mnscle Shoals ue ~:,;crapped . "Not a nickel," said the power combine to Government requests for bids on the valuable property-" Not a nickel. Scrap it." The teamwork of the combine was perfect. On every hand the ~:,•Teat works at Muscle Shoals were belittled nnd condcmncu. The power combine, in answer to the Government's request for bids on Muscle Shoals, in Hl21, snid that neither "private capital nor the Uuited States can nfl'ord to invest allditional pul>lic money to complete tile dum and hydroelectric power at Muscle Shoals, Tennessee Uiver." The fcL·tillzer comi.Jine joined with its chorus " fertilhr.er can not be commercially and profitably produced at Muscle Shoals."

LXVII--636

Then, in response to the Go•crnmcn t's requc. t, Henry Ford made an honest oiier, which at oue stroke proved that :Muscle Slloals coulu be completed by private or public capital, and he guaranteed to produce fcrti:iizers.

Mr. Ford's offer saved the Government's investment at l\1uscle Shoals, so that even a small auxUim·y plant sold for $3,472,487.

Then the combine which S<lid Mu ·clc Shoals was "not worth a nickel" and wanted it scrnppeu bega n to fight the Ford proposul that m:tue it worth millions and worth putting into prouuction. Their purpose was the same in both instance~:; . That purpose was to eliminate a great works which, under competent management, could break the Power Trust, the Chilean Nitrate T'rutit, and the Aluminum Trust in the United Stutes. This had to be prevented at all co,sts.

To prevent Uuscle Shoals from I.Jeing useu to expose the gross overcharg-e made for power; to prevent exposure of the gross robbery of the farmer in fertilizer, the power combine strained every resource. It would not permit :\luscle Shoals to be operated except as a component part of tbe system of superpower exploitation now practice!] upon the American people. That explains the long fight ma<le again:;t the Ford offer.

Note 11ow their present tactics. Unal>le longer to say' Mnscle Shoals is "not worth a nickel" (the Ford offer bas given irrcuudble value to the f,rrcat works), the combine now seeks so excessively to overcapitalize it by usurious interest payments to the Government that the people served by .Muscle Shoals will be paying more for rower Trust finance than for actual power or actual products originating at the shoals.

nctwecn these extreme and contradictory attitudes, which yet agree in the main purpose of preventing Muscle Shoals being used for tho people as against the trusts, there is much history that need not here be repea ted. The cry of " scrap it" five years ago has changed to the cry of " exploit it" to-day. Behind both cries is the deter· mination of the power combine to keep the economies of Muscle Shoals away from the people. Its importance to the national defense has been absolutely lost sight of; its unity has been impcrileu by weasel amendments inserted by the Senate in House Concurrent He~:;olution 4. Congress ~;pendt5 days talking about farm relief, while Muscle Shoals, a great source of prnctical relief to the American farmer, goes neglected. '.rhc power comblne has succeeded in putting it over !'resident Cooliuge and the Congress.

Such a sweeping victory for such a sordid program finds 110 com· parable instance save the initial negotiations for Teapot Dome.

The situation at present llas two aspects: First, the contentment of the power combine that no final disposition of :Muscle Shorlls shall be made, because right now the comi.Jine is the beneficiary of the power that is being produced at the Wilson Dam power staUon. '.rhc Govetnment sells the power to tlle power combine at a price which makes it almost a gift. Second , the present offer and bid of the power combine, recommended !Jy a majority of the joint com· mittec, proposes to charge nll thnt the running water will bear re~arulcss of its cost, and this financial arrangement is designed not to prounce economic fertilizer at !\[uscle Shoals but to uefeat Hs ecouornic production.

The power comhine'R fertilizer offer, favorably reported by a majority of the joint committe~>. do••s not gunra,ntec to make fci·tilizer at Muscle Shoals. The power combine is bonnd to nothing more than an experiment in making fertilizer. The language of the proposal is very ch·ar on tllfs-if the syntb(~tic proce ·s does not work, •· ROme othl'r " method may l>e trie<l, and no limit· is placed on the numi.Jer of methods tlley may try nor the amount of time they may spenu jn experimenting. Tbi~:; uocA not promise fertilizer. The Power Tru .· t, which iA preventing Muscle Shoals from reducing the cost to the power consumer, is not going to injure its sister trust by r ednciug the cost of fertilizer to the farmer.

It luts long been accepted I.Jy tl1ot1e at Washing ton who stnncl for national defense anu tllc production of fertilizer at Muscle Shoals that no offer except one " as good or better than th e Ford oiTcr" Hhould be considereu. Tlle Ford offer was based on the principle of the lanrest usc at the lowest cost. It rcduce1l interest charges to the minimmu. It was, in fact, an engineer's proposal, not a bunl,er's proposal. 1\lr. Ford never could unucrstan<l, and cloes not understand to-dny, wlly bankers should be pe1·mitteu to collect intere~t from power consumers on the regulated flow of a river. In Ilenry Ford's proposal ~;inldug

fund paymcuts were placell at 4 per cent interest, compounueu an· nually, wllich woulu return to the Govermncnt at the end of lUO years tbe capital cost of the l\luRcle Shoals Dams. The oiJer hy the power combine to pay a maximum of $1,800,000 at these two dams on account of headwater imvrovcments can be consiclcrcd as the power combine's smking-lund plan and compared with Henry l•'onl's sinking-fund plan. The saving between the Ford pL1n of amortization and the power combine's plan il:l the difference bet '1\<'Cn $81,000,000 and $3,232,000, or $77,768,000. The public pays the dill'erence. Henry Ford proposeu to produce power and fertilizer; the power combine propofl\'s ·to produce watered stock and dividends. Worse than that; it asks the Government to go partner in the sch<>me,

10102 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MAY 26 and the majority of the Joint Committee on Muscle Shoals actually agr<'es!

Thus, it is clear that under the power combine's plan Muscle Shoals is removed as a factor compelling the Power Trust to reduce the price of pov-.rer and the Fertilizer Trust to reduce the price of fertilizer. Watered stocl>, interest charges, dividends, anu high cost of power now ha,·e th e right of way if the uninterrupted victories of the power combine continue.

l:'rcsi<lent Coolidge once said, in anticipation of a lower bid than the Ford offer being maue : "While the price is an important element, there is another eonsidera tion even more compelling. The agriculture of the Nation needs a greater supply and lower cost of fertilizer."

Docs the President not know that with the higher price offered by the power group for ;\Iuscl e Sl10nls power "a greater supply and lower cost of fl'rtilizer " is impos;,il>lc?

Does not the President know that breaking up the unity of Muscle Shoals by substituting "leases" for " lease" is an uupatriotic destruction of )lusclr~ Shoals as a gr eat defensive unit?

Does not the mnjority of the Joint Committee on Muscle Shoals know that the acceptance of grossly excessive capitalization at Muscle Shoals means a disgraceful betrayal of the farmer?

It all comes to this : Those who failed to scrap Muscle Shoals by saying it was " not

worth a nickel" are now trying to hamstring it by loading it with interest-bearing Govel'nmcnt capital. Either way, it comes to the same thing so far as the establishiilent of the electrochemical industry at Muscle Shoals anu the production of fertilizer for farmers are concerned. The farmers can go to Chile for their nitrates as in the past, and the electrochemical industry can go to Canada and Norway as it has been doing, and the water power on the TL•nnessee River can go on to waste by nonuse, until the power combine gets really to exploit its use.

EXECUTIVE SESSION

1\Ir. JONES of Washington. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive busineBs.

The motion was ngreed to, aml the Senate proceeded to the considoration of executive busine::;::;, After five minutes spent in executive session the doors were reopened, aud the Senate (at 5 o'clock p. rn.), under the order preyiously entered, took a reress until to-rnonow, Thursday, May 27, 1926, at 12 o'clock meridian.

NOMINATIONS Executive nontinations received by the Senate Jiny 26, 1926

ME~IBEUS Oil" THE BoAun oF T.A:x Al'rE~Ls FOR A TERM OF 12 YEARS

Jules G. Korner, of North Carolina. Charles R. Arundell, of Otregon. John J. Marquette, of Montana. Logan 1\Iorris, of Utah.

FOR A TEUM OF 10 YEARS Benjamin H. Littleton, of Tennessee. William R. Green, jr., of Iowa. l!ercy w·. Phillips, of New York. Charles l\l. Trammell, of Florida.

FOR A TERM OF 8 YEARS William C. Lansdon, of Kansas. Charles P. Smith, of Massachusetts. Sumner L. Trussell, of Minnesota. Jolin 1\L Steruhngen, of Illinois.

FOR A TERM OF 6 Y~S

J. Edgar Murdock, of Pennsylvania. 'Vill,inm D. Lo>e, of Texas. Johu B. Milliken. of A.rizonn. Erlle::it H. Yau Fossan, of Ohio.

PRO:liOTIONS IN THE NAVY MARINE CORPS

The following-named noncommissioned officers of the l\1arine Corp? to be Recond lieutenants in the :M:arlne Corps for a proba· tionnry period of two years from the 29th day of l\lay, 1926 :

Corporal Austin Kautz, jr. Sergeant Lee N. Utz.

J"CDGE OF TIIE COURT OF CLAIMS McKenzie t.loss, of Kentucky, to be judge of the Court of

Claims, vice George E. Downey, deceased.

CONFIRl\l.ATIONS Ea:ecuti'Ue 110minations confirmed by the Senate May ~6, 19~6

DmECTOR OF WAR FINANCE CORPORATION Floyd R. Harrison.

CoMPTROLLER, POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT William E. Buffington to be comptroller, bureau of accounts.

CoLLECTOR oF CusToMs Lewis H. Schwaebe to be collector of customs for customs

collection district No. 27, with headquarters at Los Angeles, Calif.

PROMOTIONS IN TIIE NAVY TO llE ASSISTANT SURGEONS

Alexander E. Brunscbwig. :F~dgar E. Evans. Clmrles F. Flower. Ilcrbert T. Uotbwell. Gilford H. Henry. Harold V. PtH.:kar<l. Leon D. Carson. Claude R. Bruner. George S. Heller. George D. Gertson. Joseph B. Gordon. Gerald ,V. Smith. Thomas ~f. Arrasmith, jr. Emmett F. Guy. Harry D. Cowlbeck. Franklin V. Sunderland. Walter F. James. vVelbourne F. Bronaugh. Arthur W. Loy. Albert T. 'Yalker. Albert Ickstadt, jr. Artlmr K. Joerliug. Verner P. Johnson.

Tl10mas .Jackson, jr. Roy A. Doe. Henry l\1, Walker. Glenn S. Campbell. Clyde 1\1. Longstreth. Herman M. l\laveety. Fred E. Angle. Charles R. Wilcox. Paul E. 'iVed:;ewood. French R. Moore. Charles B. Cougdon. Hobert Krohn. William D. C. Day. Cornelius G. Dyke. Paul S. ~'ergu::;on. Joseph ,V. Kimbrough. ·william J, N. Davis, jr. Raymond W. liege. John C. V errneren. Bruce E. Bradley. Stephen A. Parowski. Theophilus F. Weinert.

PosTMASTERS FLORIDA

Walter D. Griffin, Bradenton. Mamie E. Burnes, Plnnt City. Leland M. Chubb, Winter Park.'

GEORGIA Floyd 1\1. Carter, Rockingham.

INDIANA Ira N. Compton, Hamlet. Robert M. Waddell, Lagrange. I'ercie M. Briuenthrall, Leesburg. l!'rank B. Hu~ted, Liberty. William S. Matthews, North Vernon.

PENNSYLVANIA Sylvester D. R. Hill, Charleroi. Clayton S. Bell, Chicora.

SOUTH CAROLINA Henry N. Folk, Bamberg. Thomas J. Karnes, Georgetown. Paul F. W. 'Valier, l\1yers.

TEXAS Hazle B. Thomas, Gnuse. James F. Rodgers, Harlingen. nichard T. Polk, Killeen. Joe H. Victery, New Willard. Benjamin F. Womack, Snyder. Kate Senuing, Spur. Royce E. Dowdy, 'l'rent.

VERMONT Burton L. Hard, Arlington. William H. Startup, Proctor.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WED:NESDAY, Jfay ~6, 19~6

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

the following prayer :

Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, accept our tribute of praise and gratitude. We thank Thee that the eternal God is our refuge and strength. ·we are deeply grateful to be counted in tho train of Thy ser-vants. Thy mercy puts hope Into our lives and makes gladness a daily habit. We l>less Thee for heaven's blue, for the jeweled light of the open sky, for the sweet harmonies of field and woodland, for tho whispering divinity that nestles in the open flower, and for the glowing smiles of landscape near and far. Oh, what Thou hast made,

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 10103 let no man despise. Inspire us with unfailing trust that the Lord of all the earth will do right; blessed be Thy holy name. Amen. ·

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

PERMISSION TO .ADDRESS THE HOUSE

Mr. SWING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for five minutes in reply to the speech de~ livered yesterday by my colleague [Mr. CuRRY] on the Presi~ dent's order with reference to prohibition enforcement.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from California asks unani~ mous consent to ad~ress the House for five minutes on the subject of the recent Executive order. Is there objection?

There was no objection. Mr. SWING. Mr. Speaker, yesterday my colleague [Mr.

CURRY], who for a long time has ably represented one of the congressional districts in California, made a Rpeech attacking the presidential order permitting State, county, and city offi~ cers to be used in enforcing tho prohibition act. Since he is the dean of our delegation, his remarks, if unanswered, might be taken here and elsewhere to be the sentiment of the State of California. He may represent-and doubtless does-the sentiment of a majority of the people in his district, but his district is only a small part of California, and I am confident that the people of California as a whole are willing and anxious to coopernte with Federal officials in every way for the efficient and effective enforcement of the prohibition law. By the vote of the electors the people of California passed an act similar to the Volstead Act, thereby expressing their desire to cooperate with the Federal Government along this line.

My colleague said : The order is as unconstitutional as it is unjust, as vicious as it is

wrong. It is utterly contrary to the fundamental principles of the American Government and it must not be permitted to stand. ·

This criticism is wholly unwarranted, and without any foundation whatever, as a mere reading of the President's order will disclose. It is as follows :

In order that they may more efficiently function in the enforcement of the national prohibition act any State, county, or municipal officer may be appointed, at a nominal rate of compensation, a prohibition officer of the Tl.'easury Department to enforce the provisions of the national prohibition act and ~cts supplemental thereto in States and Territories, except in those States having constitutional or statutory provision against State officers holding office under the Federal Government.

No one has yet pointed to any provision of the Federal Con~ stitution which would make this order unconstitutional. My colleague referred to article 4, section 20, of the California constitution, but this clearly does not apply, as it is limited to a "lucrative office under the United States," while the pre~ent order limits the pay of these officers to " a nominal . rate of compensation."

Neither is there anything wrong or unjust about the order. By its express terms it is merely permissive. The order excludes those States which have constitutional or statutory provisions to the contrary. It merely gives tho Federal consent to the State officers to perform Federal functions in enforcing the prohibition law.

It is not an intrusion on State rights and does not constitute an interference with State autlwrity, because the State must consent if the order is to be effective. If a State is unwilling, its legislature can easily say so by an appropriate enactment, 'Yhereupon the operation of the order within that State is terminated.

Not only must the State be willing but the individual officer also must be willing, because there is nothing that can or will compel him to assume the resp<>nsibility of Federal functions unless he chooses to accept it. Therefore if the Federal Government, if the State government, and if the individual officer are willing to cooperate in enforcing this law, who outside can seriously object?

I want to go a step further nnd say there is nothing new or novel about this order. In 1907 a presidential order was issued authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to use State officers to assist in quarantine antl similar work. During the recent epidemic of the foot-and-mouth disease in California George H. Heeke, State director of agriculture, and his State assistants were appointed Federal officers at $1 per year to carry on the work of exterminatiJ1g the disease, while practically every county horticultural commissioner was taken over and put to work as Federal officers for the inspection of fruits and vegetables in order to comply with quarantine regulations against that disease. Nobody in California at tbat time thought that

tl.lere was anytl.ling " wrong" or "unconstitutional" about tllat order. No one objected to the operation of that arrangement as an intrusion upon "our sovereignty." We were, in fact, mighty glad to hnve the Federal cooperation, which proved effective and beneficial.

In 1DOD anotl.ler order was issued authorizing the Department of Commerce to use State officers in assisting in the taking of tlle census. In 1914 the Secretary of the Interior was autllorized to app-oint State game wardens as park and reclamation police. In 1:H5 laborers in charge of lighthouses could also be State officers. In 1917 another order wns issued permitting the employees of the Treasury ·Department to accept appointment as State, city, or county officers for tlle purpose of serving on local councils of defense. Tllat was just tl.le reverse of the present case, but it was a consolidation of two functions-State and Federal-in one person.

No one ever complained of these orders or of their operation, and it is to be presumed that they produced no undesirable complications, but, on the other hand, worked well to the mutual satisfaction of both the Federal Government and the States. However, the minute an order is issued to permit State officials to be appointed prohibition officers "il1 order that they may more effectively function in the enforcement of the national prohibition act " the floodgates of oratory are opened and every imag~ inable injury is predicted as a result of its operation.

I am glad the President is calm amid this sudden storm. I am glad that he is unwavering in his support of the man appointed to this Herculean task. In General Andrews, President Coolidge has an nble, efficient, and businesslike administrator, who is going to enforce the prohibition law i1 it is humanly possible to do so. The present is a reasonable, common-sense request to permit him to avail himself of the assistance and cooperation of the State law-enforcement officers without adding any additional cost to the Nation. In his difficult undertaking he is entitled to all the help he can get. The President has made it possible for him to double his enforce~ ment organization without increasing his expenses. We should stand behind the President in support of General Andrews.

The SPE1AKER. The time of the gentleman from California has expired.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

A message from the Senate by Mr. Craven, one of its clerks, announced that the Senate had passed without amendment bill of the following title :

H. R. 9724. An act declaring Eagle Lake, which lies partly within the limits of the State of Mississippi in Warren County and partly within the limits of the State of Louisiana in Madison Parish, to be a nonnavigable stream.

The message also announced thnt the Senate had passed bills and Senate concurrent resolution of the following titles, in which the concurrence of the House of Representatives was requested:

S. 4138. An net granting the consent of Congress to the State Highway Department of Georgia to construct a bridge across the St. Mary's River ;

S. 4331. An act prohibitil1g an appeal to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia from any interlocutory order in a criminal action ; and

S. Con. Re!'l. 18. Concurrent resolution requeRting the President to proclaim armistice day a day of thanksgiving and prayer for peace.

The roes age also announced that the Senate had passed with amendment H. R. 11718, granting the consent of. Con~ gre!;S to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvanin to construct a bridge across the Allegheny River.

The message also announced that the Senate had. agreed to the amendment of the House of Representatives to the bill ( S. 3997) to amend section 301 of the World War veterans' act, 1924.

The message also announced. that the Senate hnd agreed to the nmcndment of the House of llepreseutnti•es to the amendments of the Scnnto to the bill (H. R. 9558) entitled "An act to provide for allotting, in severalty, agricultural lauds within the Tongue River or northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation in Montana, and for other purposes."

The message also announced that the Sennte had pas:-;ed with amendments bill of the following title, in wllich the concurrence of the HouEe of n presentati•es was requested :

H. R.10089. An act entitled "An act granting the consent of Congress for the construction of a bridge over the ColumlJia River at a point within 1 mile upstream and 1 mile downstream from the mouth of the Entiat River in Chelan County, State of wa~hington."

The message also announced that the Senate had agreed. to the House Concurrent Uesolution No .. 29, as follows:

10104 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MAY 26 Reso~vcd by the House of ReprescHtcz.tivcs (the Senate concurriug),

That the President be requested to return to tlle House of Representa-1:1vcs the bill (II. R. 8513) entitled "An act to extenu the time for the construction of a bridgo across the 1\Ionougahela River at or near the borough of Wilson, in the county of .Allegheny, Pa."; that upon the return of said bill to the House of Representatives the action of tho Speaker and of the Vice President in signing said bill be rescinded ; and that in the reenro.llm.ent of saiu bill the woru " thereof" in tbe last line of section 1 of the enrolled bill be stricken out anu the word " hereof " I.Je Inserted in lieu thereof.

The message also announced that the Senate had passed without amendment bills of the following titles:

H. R. 3837. An a ct authorizing the Postmaster General to rent quarters for postal purposes without formal contract in certain cases;

H. R. 38-!2. An act authorizing the Postmaster General to make monthly payment of rental for terminal railway postoffice premises under lease ;

H. R. 11084. Ari act to amend tile act of F ebruary 28, 1!)25, fixing the compensation of fourth-class postmasters; and

H. R. 11841. An act to amend section 4 of tile air mail net of February 2, 1925, so as to enable the Postmaster General to make contracts for the b.'ansmission of mail by aircraft at fixed rates per pound.

El'\ROLLED BILLS PRESENTED TO THE PRERIDENT FOR HIS APPROVAL l\Ir. CAMPBELL, from the Committee on Enrolll'd Bills, re

ported that this <lay they had presente<l to the Presid.ent of the United States for his approval the following hills:

H . R. 5G 3. An act authorizing tt.e apvropriation of $2,500 for the erection of a tablet or marker at Sir Walter Raleigh Fort on Roanoke !~land, N. C., to Virginia Dare, the first child of English parentage to be born in Amc~·ica; and

H. R. 7911. An act to autllorize the excllange of certain public lund::; and. the establi~llment of an a,·iation field near Yuma, Ariz.

SENATE BILI.B REPERRED

Senate tills of the following titles were taken from the Speaker's table and r eferred to their appropriate committees, as indicated. below:

S. 4138. An act granting the consent of Congress to the State Highway Department of Georgia to construct a bridge across the St. Marys River; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

S. 4331. An act prohibiting an appeal to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia from any interlocutory ord.er in a criminal action; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

COAL LF.GISLATIO~

Mr. TREADWAY. Mr. Speaker, I a sk unanimous consent to revise and exten<l my remarks in the RECORD on the subject of coal.

Tlle SPEAKER. T4e gentleman from ~Ias~achusetts asks unanimous consent to revise and extend his remarks in tile RECORD on tile subject of coal. Is there objection?

There was no objection. Mr. TREADWAY. Mr. Speaker, there appeared in the CoN

GRE.ssroKAL RECORD of Tuesday, May 25, remarks on the coal industry by my friend an<l colleague, the gentleman from P ennsylvania [1\Ir. WYANT]. Tllere also appeare<l in part 2 of the hearings before the lnterstate and. Foreign Commcrco Committee of the House under date of April 2G, a brief or a statement by another Member from Pennsylvania [Mr. CoYLE], whom I infer filed llis brief but <lid not appear as a witness before the committee. Upon several occasions I have addres::1ed tile House upon the subject of tile coal industry, and I nh;o had the honor of being the first witness before the Committee on Interstate and ll'oreign Commerce on Tuesday, March 30, so that my views on the subject of conl legislation are fairly wen known. l\[y rea on for remarks at this time are to answer in a brief manner some of tile statements of the two gentlemen from Pennsylvania to whom I ba ve already referred.

As the brief of 1\Ir. CoYLE antedates tile remarks of his colleague ~Ir. \VYANT, I will refer first to llis statement. Tlrls brief wherein its author modestly admits that he has full knowledge of the subject matter, is one of the best arguments I have seen at any time of the need of coal legislation. He seems to think that his retained wit and ridicule are ample answers to tile logical arguments of the proponents of coal legislation. If, as be claims, he knows the entire im:dde of the coal busi:ne~s. he certainly carefully conceals that knowledge. His only constructive thougllt in the entire brief is that any legislation proposed should be written by the miners. That may sound very well in the thirtieth Pennsylvania district, but the gentleman should be aware that the bills are paid in New England, New York, and the anthracite-CO!;lSUming States.

Naturally theso persons are no concern of the distinguished. gentleman from Pennsylvania. It TI·oul<l be exactly as logical and. reasonable for me to a<lvocate that the terms of legi:::;lation should be written by the coal co11sumC:l'S of J\'ew England.. In our fligllts of conviction of our own witticisms, we never have allo\Yed our imagination to run snell riot to even suggest that the consumers should be tile only ones com;ulted as to the prospective legislation. Seriously, however, the consumers ask that their rights should be proiected and tho::;e now treating them "·ithout consideration should have place<l over them some regulatory control and an impartial jury.

Let me also refer in tllis connection to the testimony of two other witnesses before the Committee on Interstate and 1J'oreign Commerce. A former Member of this House, Hon. Harry L. Gandy, now an employee of the National Coal Association, pre.:ented a very long statement to the committee, he too crlti· cizing any suggestions of legislation and urging that nothing be done. He was particularly insistent that the bituminous industry nee<led no ~upervision, as it was entirely competitive.

I woul<l respectfully make tile observation that during the period of the strike, when no anthracite was availaule, the nature of the competition in the bituminous industry was to see what mine could boost the price to the northern consumer tlle lligllest. Still another di::;interested witness bas been llear<l, is the presi<lent of a company in ·west Virginia who has taken it upon hilm;elf to ndvise voters in New England that a·nyone interested in efforts to secure fuel at a fair price sllonld be defeated for a seat in Congres:-;. If lle does me the honor to refer to me in that conneCtion, I do not hesitate to say that an effort to defeat me on that platform would be very welcome. From comments which have reached me both by conespon<lence and by editorial references in the press of my section, such an opponent woul<l find bim::;elf bitched to the starting post.

Let me now make & brief reference to 'the remarks of the other gentleman from Pennsylvania [l\Jr. 'VYANT]. It is surprising that as one of the lead.ing members of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce he shoul<l fall into tile error of referring to an effort to-jam coal legislation through in the crowued hours of a session of Con;;ress drawing to its close.

The gentleman will, of course, recall that the Fact Find.ing Commission's report bas been before his committee for several years ; that President Coolidge llas twice recommen<led legislation; that both in the Sixty-eighth and Sixty-ninth Congresses numerous bills have been before his committee. The fact that there has been delay in action can not be laid at the door of Congres~. The House and the Senate have been ready to take up such r eport as his committe-e might make for a long time, and there are members of both branches who feel that less important legislation has been reported out of his committee. There is this difference, however, between the gentleman from Pennsylvania and myself, an<l that is a difference of the interest of our respective constituencies. Prominent among his constituents are undoubtedly owners and operators of soft coal mines, whereas among mine there are many thousands of users of both soft and hard coal. It is quite amm;ing to read Ills statement that-this whole nnticoul agitation has its ori~ln and source in a small section of the country.

Another interesting paragraph rea<ls: Except from the North Atlantic seaboard, where the recent anthracite

strilce may have caused a slight amount of inconvenience, I find little disposition on the part of the public or on the part of the ~1eml>ers of this House to jam through with such unseemly basto revolutionary legislation affecting an inuustry of the magnituuo of the one under attaclc.

How can my friend argue about unseemly baste in view of tllo length of time the subject has been before his own comlllittee? I note the first hearing was held on March 30 and continued almost daily through the first week of l\Iay. '!'hat may be haste in certain sections of Pennsylvania, but it would not bo so described in New England. l\Iay I also ask my friend where be woul<l expect a <lesire for fair play to be called for were it not in the section where the bills are pai<l? He makes such argument as he can for the bituminous industry, in wllicll, it is not denied, there is some possibility of competition. He also speaks of its increased use during the late anthracite strike. I fail, however, to find in his extended remarks any reference to the fact that <luring that period the price of bituminous coal in New England. was as high as anthracite or<linarlly is. It can not, therefore, be claimed that there is no monopoly in the bituminous industry, nor that the public should not know something of the value of the commod.ity it is forced to pay for. Coal, whether bituminous or anthracite, ~s only regar<led as a private industry by those dl!'ectly concerned in its production.

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 10105 The one argument used before the Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee was that any Government regulation would be interference with a private industry. There is no industry more nearly of a public character than supplying coal to consumers. In presenting his statement to the House the gentleman from Pennsylvania and the witnesses of the industry before his committee completely overlooked the fact that the consuming public ha-ve any rights whatsoever in market prices.

If we are to heed interested witnesses such as the representati-ves of tile operators and own~rs, members of the miners' unions, and the employees of coal associations, a strong case again t legi~laiion bas been made out in the hearings. Instead of this I prefer to accept the facts established by the United State~ Coal Commission, which have never been refuted. I prefer to follow the recomruen<lations of the Pre5;ident of the United States. I prefer to accept tile testimony of Dr. George Otis Smith, head of the Bureau of Mines and Mining. I prefer to accept the statements of Herbert Hoover, Secretary of Commerce. I prefer such legislation as is contained in the bill of the chairman of the committee, l\Ir. PAI~KER, of New York. I prefer the loud and insistent call of the press of the country that there shall be legislation before this session of Congress adjourns.

':Ve are bearing from those especially interested in the continuance of present conditions in the coal industry, the insistent call, "Leave us alone." It is being sent broadcast. It is claimed the industry is just overcoming the effects of several months of strike. Quite likely this is true. Let me refer to the editorial page of the Washington Post for May 26. Here we find a cartoon and an editorial. The coal operator bas scratched out his usual notice of GO cents reduction during the summer period. In the other hand is his account book, which if opened to public inspection would show what tbe omission of the 50 cents per ton item this year means. This is the book he is refusing to show tbe public and is the reason for his exclamation of "Leave us alone." The editorial states that there will lJe mined during the months of April, 1\Iay, and June 26,000,000 tons, which at 50 cents per ton increase will amount to $13,000,000. This is in spite of the fact that the one great call during- the anthracite strike was that the puulic must not be asked to vay any additional price for their fuel.

What is the nature of the legislation to which all coal operators and coni associations are so bitterly opposed? When compared with the testimony of Secretary Hoover, it will be found tlta t the Parker bill directly follows the suggestions he made to the committee. In brief, it simply authorizes the Bureau of Mines to obtain-information and statistics in reF:pe'Ct of the production, storage, transportation, distribution, free on board mine prices, margins of profit of 'owners, operators, terms and conditions (including royalties and rentals) of leases or other contracts in respect of the operation or usc of coal lands or strip pits, S11pply and demand, grades of coal, corporute . organization, and control, trade and labor practices an<l agreements, and the wage rates and earnings, working conditions, and living costs of miners.

Any person unwilling to provhle such information and statistics under the orders of the Secretary, shall be liable to criminal penalty. These facts have to do with the coal industry when normal conditions prevail. Section 5 deals with emergency conclitions by directing the Secretary of Lauor either to act as mediator or appoint one or more persons to act as such, when industrial peace in the coal industry is threatened. Section G provides against shortages or possible shortages of coal in the event of a lock-out or strike. I fail to see how this bill comes within the criticism of my friend, Mr. WYANT, ,..,herein it assumes any Goved"nment control o-ver the coal industry. Quite likely bo also objects to public information upon the royalties and rentals, which, together with certain laws of the State of Pennsylvania, are a serious blot on that State's fair name.

The opponents of tllo legislation in addition to the foolish claim of undue haste, set up a bugaboo of radicalism and interference witll private business. In view of the fact tbat the suggested bill so nearly follows :Mr. Hoover's suggestions, sufficient answer to tllis argument is Mr. Hoover's personality.

I llavc never heard him accused of being radical, and certainly llis wllolc career as Secretary of Commerce has been an effort to huild up 1·ather than destroy the industries of this country. The desire of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce for complete inforD;J.ation upon the subject before undertaking legisln tion was most meritorious. Everyone has been given a fair opportunity to be beard. The efforts of those in the industry to prevent legislation even in as mild a form as this bill prove the need of just such information and regulation as will be secured. It ~ futile to say the Govern-

ment should not have any regulatory control over an article so widely used by tile public as coal. However, the length of time consumed by the committee in its hearings must not be used as a reason against legislation now. Members of Congress are not so anxious for adjournment as they are to return to their constituents bearing evidence of their interest in the welfare of the people they represent. This would not be the first year that some of us have spent the Fourth of July in Washington attending to our congressional duties. I know I voice the sen· timents of most of my colleagues from New England and the Northern States when I say that in O!der to return llome with a record of accomplishment in behalf of those who have long grown tired of urging coal legislation we will gladly hear firecrackers and see fireworks in the Capital City. We have the facts before us as originally presented by the Ooal Commission, supplemented lJy the committee llearings, and followed up by a practical bill. To have this bill reported out Qf committee and pushed for promvt action will add greatly to the proud record of the first session of the Sixty-ninth Congress. This matter is of such vital importance to the people of New Bnglnnd and anthracite-consuming States that in view of all the material now before us this session of Congre~s will not have completed its duties or 11roperly fulfilled its obligation until the Parker bill (H. R. 12209) has become law. Do not let us deceive ourselves with the thought that because certain Relfish interests wish to retain their strangle hold on coal consumers that Congress can adjourn without passing this legislation, unless it does so over the protest of many l\fembers, including myself.

KOSCIUSKO .AND PULASKI

l\lr. GRIFFIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD by printing an address I delivereu on Saturday, May 22, at tb'e sesquicentennial celebration in New York City.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from New York asks unanimous consent to extend his remarks in the RECORD by printing an address recently made by himself. Is there objection?

There was no objection. Mr. GRH,FIN. l\Ir. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to

extend my remarks in the RECono by inserting a speech delivered by me at the Sesquicentennial Celebration in New York on Saturday, May 22, 1926, as follows: ADDRESS OF HON. ANTITONY J. GRIFFIN, OF NEW YORK, AT THE SESQUI

CEN'.rlilNNIAL CELEBRATION, UNDER TllE ,AUSPICES OF THill UNITED

PATRIOTIC SOCIETIES OF GREATER N'EW YORK, AT GRA.UA:ll SQUARE,

BRONX BOROUGH, CITY OF NEW YORK, SATURDAY, MAY 22, 1026

Fellow citizens, 150 years ago there arrived on the shores of this continent two great men, noble in rank us well as in character, whose lives were destined to ue forever linked with the great struggle for American liberty.

They came unasked. They needed no passports. They were not held up at the port of entry by inquisitive and, perhaps, hostile immigration officials to dig into their past history, to test their intelligence, or to inquire into their views on the rights of man .

In those days tllere were no drastic immigration laws and no Ellis Island. There was uot even a recognlznl authority to make laws save King George III of England, and he was too busy importing soldiers to put down the rebellion of tile thirteen American Colonies to uotllCI· with any law of any kind-human or ilivine.

Tiley came to offer their services as soldiers to General Wasbjngton. Their names were Thaddeus Kosciusko and Casimir Pnla kinames that will ll.ve forever in American history.

When Kosciusko arrived, the Declaration of Independence bu<l not been promulgated. Thjs splendid far-seeing Polish patriot had not the inspiration of that immortal uocument to give his noble impulses definite encouragement, as had Lafayette. All that he knew and all that he cared was that a noble people were making a valiant fight for freedom against - the greatest power in the known world.

Count Casimir l'ulaski ca.me later. After a splendid cnreer of mighty service for his own oppressed country be came to General Washington with a letter of introduction from that incomvarable diplomat and statesman, Benjamin Franklin; and oiiered his sword to the cause of liberty in the new world. Ills unselfish oiTer was accepted. He distinguished himself at the Battle of Brandywine and rendered invaluable aid to the American ca~;se, until stricken down by mortal woun<ls in tho u.ssault on Savannah, Ga., on October !),

1779. His death occurred two days later and plunged the American Army in the profoundest grief. The fame of Pulaski's Legion is one of the most cherished memories of the American Revolution. His name is enshrined in the Parthenon of the world's heroes and, in the hearts of every Americnn for all time to come, there shall vibrate the tenderest chords of responsive gratitude.

Thaddeus Kosciusko came with a namo already glorious in his native land. As a skilled warrior of great experience his Eervices to the American cause were· readily accepte<l. He receivcJ a colonel's commission in the Continental Army on October 18, 1776.~ and from

10106 CONGRESSIO~AL RECORD.-HOUSE ·MAY 26

thence onward his wisdom and courage played an important part tn the great conflict. He was the engineer officer under General Gates at Snratoga and planned the American defenses at Bemis Heights. He laid out the fortifications at West Point on the Hudson Rivera thorn in the side of British sh·ategy which forever after kept the North invulnerable.

He survived the struggle. He lived to see American independence achieved and the 13 Colonies attain an envied place among the nations of the world.

He lived to make another fight !or his own unfortunate land, and, although unsuccessful in that, history will accord to him the undisputed honor of having furnl·shed by his name, his character, and his achievements a fountain of patriotism to keep alive the struggle for Polis:h independence which culminated and recently attained its fruition in our own day at the end of the great World War. It is therefore IJo exag~eration to say that Poland's freedom, as a separate and reunited nation, is indebted in no slight degree to the unblemished life and lofty ideals of the immortal Kosciusko.

ll'ifteen years after the battle of Yorktown he paid another visit to America. His friendship for the ·young Nation his humanity and valor had befl'iended was to receive another test. Upon his return to Europe in 17!l8 be accepted a mission from Congress to take up the American cause with the Government of Rrance, and it was largely due to his skill, diplomacy, and unquestionable integrity that the pending conflict between the two nations was brought to an amicable end. •

The names of Kosciusko and Pulaski are indelibly engraved in the American temple of fame. History records how there swelled in the bosoms of the people of the American Colonies a wild torrent of gratitude to accord to these world heroes the highest honors due to their iudispensallle s&rviccs to our country in Its supreruc hour of trial and danger.

Let us not fail in emul!tting the grateful spirit of our forefathc.rs, anu on this day, dedicated in their honor as a part of the Sesquicentennial Celebration of American Independence, let us breathe the names of Kosciusko and Pulaski with an inRpiration of affectionate remembrance, C{)Upled with the solemn hope and prayer that the noble and historic Republic of Poland, which sacrificed so much in the past to civilization and to hnmanity, shall safely survive the storms of her present adversity and arise triumphant in her de tl.ny to endure forever as a beacon of libet·ty among ·the nations of the world.

SALABIES OF FEDERAL JUDGES

Mr. -DYER. l\Ir. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to proceetl for three minutes.

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

Tllere was no objection. Mr. DYER. l\Ir. Speaker, there is pending in the House

(H. R. 11053) legislation unanimously reported by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House to incr~ase the pay of the judges of the United States. Se.nate bill 2558, similar in all respects to the bill which we have unanimously reported, has been passed by the Senate by the unanimous vote of the Senate.

1\Ir. BLACK of Texas. The gentleman is in error about the bill having passed the Senate by a unanimous vote.

1\Ir. DYEU. Well, I will amend that statement by saying it required no roll call and was practically a unanimous vote.

Mr. Speaker, the judiciary of the United States are very much und·erpaid. Not only in connection with conditions that exist in this country as to cost of living now, but in comparison with the judiciary in all the principal cities of this country anu in all the important nations of the world.

The legislative department of our Government has a most important duty to perform in connection with the juuiciary. It is to render the necessary legislative assistance to make the judiciary as able, fearless, and independent as possible. The Congress must make it possible fo1· men of ability, fearless and independent, to accept appointment to the courts. We must give to the President all proper assistance to enable him to find the right kind of men. The courts of the United States are composed on the wllole of able and upright judges. For 100 years or more they have been and are still rendering distinctive service.

The Congress can create courts ; the President can appoint the judges, but upon the character and attainment of the men selected depends, in a large measure, the stability of our Government and the rights of its citizens. There is no justiflcation for condemning our courts, for with their splendid records they are one of the richest he1itages of our Republic. The Supreme Court, as well as the oilier courts of the United States, have been in the hands of patriotic, learned, and honorable men. It is true, of course, that in some instances mistakes have been made in the selection of j1}dges. Now and then a man has been appointed who has not measured up to the high standard which has been set by our judges. Just I! few of

them have failed to measure up in ability, in honesty, and the attainments that go to make the right kind of a judge. These few mistakes, however, have not caused the people to lose confidence .in our judiciary. The Congress is itself to blame for the fact that at times the President has not been able to secure the best men possible for the bench. This is due in part to the small snlaries that the Congress has authorized to be paid to the judiciary. It never was and is not now the intention to make the salaries an inducement for men to become judges. The pay, howe•er, should be large enough to enable a man with a family to live properly and take care of his needs. The present salaries paid to the United States judges are insufficient in many cases for a respectable living. This present legislation will give them a substantial increase and it. will be yery helpful to them.

The total amount.now paid to our judiciary amounts to about one million and a half dollars. The proposed incrense will amount to a little over a half million more. This is very small in comparison with the services rendered and the work accomplh;hed by our judiciary. The increase granted to the United States Supreme Court is as follows: The Chief Justice is to receive $20,500, instead of $15,000, per annum, and the associate justices are to receive $20,000, instead of $14,500; tl1e judges of the United States Circuit Courts of Appeals are to receive $12,500. instead of $8,500; the judges of the Court of Customs Appeals are to receive $12,500, instead of $8,500; the judges of the Court of Claims are to receive $12,500, at present the chief ju~tice receives $8,000 and tho associate judges $7,500; the judges of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia are to receive $12,500, at present the chief justice receives $0,000 and the associate justices $8,500; the judges of the United States district courts are to receive $10,000, instead of $7,500; the chief justice of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia is to receive $10,500, instead of $8,000, and the associate justices are to receive $10,000, instead of $7,500; and the members of the Board of General Appraisers a1·e to receive $10,000, in::;tead of $0,000.

'l'Ile Supreme Court of tile United States is composed of the Cilief Justice and 8 associate justices; the United States Circuit Courts of Appcais are composed of 36 judges; the Court of Customs Appt>uls is composed of 5 judges ; the Court of Claims is composed of 5 judges ; the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia is composed of 3 justices; the United States district courts at the present time Ilave 124 juuges ; the Supreme Court of the Di~trict of Ooluml.>ia is composed of the chief justice and 5 associate justices; and the Board of General Avpraisers is composed of 0 members.

'l'he increase as provided among the various courts would amount to the following : United States Supreme CourL---------------------------- ~40, r;oo United Stutes Circuit Courts of Appeals ___________________ 144, 000 Court of Cm;toms Appeals-------------------------------- 20, 000 Court or Claims----------------------------------------- 21,500 Court ot Appeals of the District of Columbia__________ __ 11, fiOO United States district courts------------------------==--= 310, OUO Supreme Court of the District of Columbia_________________ 15, 000 Board of General Apprail:;ers______________________________ U, 000

'l'his small increase in the pay of our judges is more than ju::;tified. As our country has grown In population, and business far greater, more important questions have come to our judges for solution. Great statutes have been enacted thnt the courts must pass upon, as well as receiverships, litigation affecting public utilities, and important patent cases. Likewise, the United States courts must pass upon great constitutional questions of far-rea.ching importance to tile people. For this important work we must have the services of lawyers of eminence and great attainments, and who have the confidence of the people. A high standard must be maintained in our judiciary. It mu t be so that lawyers who thus meusure up to this standard can accept the service. "\Vlth the standard of living greatly increased, it is now difficult to always obtain the right kind for the bench. As a result there have crept in some incompetent and tyrannical judges, who take into their hands the rights of our citizenl; and trample upon them without right or fairness. ·

This view is perhaps better expresRed by Hon. Charles Evans Hughes in a recent appearance before the Judiciary Committee of the House, when he said:

Onr domestic peace depends not simply upon the forms of our administration but upon the character and impartiality of the persons who conduct it. We are, indeed, a government of laws anu not of men; but I am increasingly lmprt-ssed with the importance of the man in every department of the work of our Government. Given one sort of man, given a measure of ignorance and incompetency in high place, and you have confusion; you have, instead of orderly procedure, a chaotic procedure; instead of the satisfaction and confidence which gives the basic contentment upon which our prosperity depends, you have a consciousness of wrong, because of laws misapplied, because

1926 OONGRESSION AL RECORD-HOUSE 10107 of inability to appreciate exigencies and deal with them expertly. · It is the man who counts-under law, subject to law-but it is the man who counts, not the mechanism simply. .And that is peculiarly true of our judicial arbiters.

This all comes to the test of the Federal courts. Whether we shall have our Fe<leral system properly maintained, whether it will desire the confi<lence of the people, whether we will have a sane balance-all depeu<l upon the quality of the men who are called to the performance of this function, more important than any judicial work in any other country on earth, this function of determining the limits of State and Federal power.

What do we demand of n judge? Let us attempt to visualize this demand:

First, he mm:t be a man of independent character, not subject to !'Olicitntion; not amenable to pen;onal or partlRan pressure. He must be a man of unquestionecl integrity of character. His decisions may be criticised but the integrity of his motive must be beyond contro· vcrsy. He must be a man learne<l in the law. .And it is not easy to be lrnrncd in American law. There are other jurisdictions abroad, with a more compact juriRp rurlence, as compared with ours-with our State system and our Federal syst em. This country is the greatest manufactory of laws the worhl bas ever known. Lawmaking is our priucipal business. It is not easy to be learned in the law of this country.

The j udge must be more thnn that. He must be sagacious In administering- the law. Learning and wiR<lom, impartiality and integrity are uemanded.

He must be a member of the learne<l profession of the law. That profession has greater opportunities to-day than ever before. The re· wards to the successful practitioners at the bar are greater than ever before. I have endeavored to sketch briefly the qualifications of a judge. But that sort of talent, that sort of character, is on ueman<l on every lland, in connection with the practice of the profe~sion of the law. Given a learne<l, inrlcpcndent, honest, sagacious lawyer, and the community constantly seeks, in its various activities, for his advice a nd his protection.

You are therefore seeking to recruit the courts, necessarily, from a profession with great rewarrls, which properly go to the men who have the talent that you must have upon the bench.

It is no longer the case where the man who is competent to sit upon tlle bench may find that a refuge, a resource, a place where be can be better taken care of than anywhere else.

I uo not care what salaries you pay. There are no salaries that could be imagined as possible for your considerations that woul<l not involve a sacrifice on the part of the lawyer, qualified to receive them, in going upon the Federal bench.

If you have in mind the pressure of the work, the enormous importance of the function of our Federal courts, the fact that a lawyer must be taken out of this profession with these opportunities and rewards, what is the obvioul'l courRe for tile Congress to take in maintaining an expert and independent judiciary?

No country has auler or greater judges than the United States. No judges in all the world have more or greater problems to solve than do the judges of the United States; yet we find .that we have neglected to pay the judges of our courts a salary commensurate with the cost of living or as compared with other countries. Since 18!)1 the salary of district judge has been raised 50 per cent, that of circuit judge 38lh per cent, and that of a judge of the Supreme Court 16 ver cent. During the same period the general purchasing power of a dollar bas decreased from 100 to auout 27. The wages of a farm hand have increaF>ed GOO per cent, of a stenographer 350 per cent, of a houF>el.Dai<l 400 per c;ent, of a bricklayer 450 por cent, and of a school-teacher 250 per cent.

The annual salary of the Chief .Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States is $15,000. Is his poc::ition one of leF>s dignity or impo"rtance, is his re!'ponsibility less heavy thau that which rests upon the Lord High Chancellor of England? But the ·Lord High Chancellor receives the equivalent of $50,000 a year.

.Are the demands for ability and learning less than those required of the lord chief justice of England.? But the lord chief justice is paid about $40,000 a year.

Lords of appeal in ordinary of the House of Lords receive about $30,000 a year. The master of the rolls and the lord justices of the court of appealF> receive auout $2!1,000 per year. ThesP. courts correspond to the United States Supreme Court.

Justices of the high court of justice, corresponding to our Federal circuit judges, receive about $25,000.

Justices of the King's bench division receive about $25,000. They correspond, roughly, with our Federal district judges.

In Scotland the lord chief justice receives about $25,000 and the associate judges of the inner house about $18,000. The justices of the "econd division, corresponding to our circuit judges, receive about $18,000. The justices of the outer house, some-

what corresponding to our district judges, also receive about $18,000.

Ireland: The lord chief justice receives about $25,000, the Lord High Chancellor receives about $30,000, justices receive about $20,000, justices of King's bench receive about $17,500.

In India the judges which correspond to our Federal district judges receive about $24,000.

South .Africa : Judges of appeal receive $16,250, judges corresponding to district judges receive about $11,250.

Let us compare, now, the Federal salaries with those in · our moRt populous Stutes. A justice of the Supreme Court of the Stnte of New York-the lowest court of general jurisdictionreceives in New York City two and. one-third times as large a salary as a judge of the Uuited States district court, for the salary is there fixed at $17,500. Else"·here in the State the salary is $10,000, while the salary of a judge of the court of appeals in New York is $13,700.

In Massachu~etts a juug-e of the rmperior court is paiU $10,000 and a judge of the snpreme judicial court $12,000.

In Pennsylvania a judge of the flUpreme court r ecei\es $17,GOO and of the superior court $1G,OOO. In Philadelphia and Pittsburgh a colll!Don pleas judge recei\es $11,000.

In New .Jersey a judge of the supreme court or a vice chancellor is paid $18,000 and. of the circuit court $1G,OOO.

Illinois pays a judge of the supreme court $15,000. 1\!i<:higan pays a supreme court judge $10,000, while some of

the circuit judges r eceive $11,250. Other examples almost without number could be assembler!

in which special masters, receivers, or trustees have been paid m1my times the salary of a l!'ederal judge for ser\·ices less onerous and exacting. The term " prevailing wage " has become common in all lines of employment. Is it not apparent that we are now payif1g our Federal judges not only less than the " pre,·niling wage " but less than a " living wage " for seryice of the character which is expected from them?

.As an evidence of the enormous amount of work that our judges have been and .are called upon to do, I cite you some figures touching the years 1923, 1924, and 1925.

SUPRE~Uil COURT OF THE U:-IITED STATES

N11mbcr of cases docketed aud dispos ed of during the fiscal years 1923, 191!4, and 1925 ; also number of ca8es pending at the close of each fiscal year

1923 1924 1925 Average

----------------1------------Cases docketed ___ --------------------------------Cases disposed oL _ ------------------------------· Cases pending at close of year----"--------------~-

720 765 392

731 661 462

UNITED RTATES ClllCUIT COURT OF APl'EALS

854 761 655

768 7~9 470

Ca8C8 rlockctecZ and dfspo8ed of durin.g the fisclj_.z 1/CCitrs of 192;1, 1921,, and 1925, also n ·umber of case.rJ pcndinv at the close of ea.ch vcar

Fiscal year-

1923 1924 1925

Average

----------------1------------SUMMARY FOR THE NINE CJRCl'lTS

Cases docketed: (a) CiviL_--------····- ___ ····--···-·- ----- ·-·

~~i ~~i~~-~ ~~= = = = = = == === = = = = = ~~ = = === = = = = = == = = Cases dispo~ud of:· (a) Ch-il. ··- _________________________________ _ (b) CriminaL ___ __________ _____ -··-· ___ ___ __ _ (c) Total ____ • _____ .... ____ . ______ ... _ •.. _____ .

ca.~es pending: (a) CiviL __ ----------··------·····--····-.-··· (b) CriminaL _________________________ --·--··-(c) TotaL ___ __ _ --------- - __ ------·-· ____ ---··-

FIRST CIRCUIT Cases docketed:

(a) Civil ____ ________ __________ _ ····----···· •.. (b) Criminal ____________ .--·-·-···---·-------_ (c) 'l'otaL __ ---------- -··- __ -····---------·-···

cas(!)dicf~s1~~ -~r~ ______ . _______ __ ~ ________________ _ (b) Criminal ______ _______ --- ···-·-···-···-·--· (c) Total ___ ····--·--··--····-···-····-··-····-

Cascs pending: (a) Ch1L ____________________________________ _

(b) Crt.minal_·-····----·······-·-·····-·····--(c) Total_·------·-··-·-···-·-·--········-·····

SECOND CIRCUIT Cases docketed:

(a) Civil _________________________ ·····-----·-·

~~i ~~~~~================================== cas(!)dlcY~~-o!~------------------··--···-··---··

~~f ~~t~~-a!::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::

1, 339 365

1, 704

1,408 323

1, 731

i54 197 951

66 7

73

76 3

79

39 5

44

293 40

333

281 41

822

1,631 1, 040 1, 537 491 521 459

2,122 2, 161 1, 996

1, 491 1, 631 1, 510 407 544 425

1,898 2,175 1, rus

897 899 850 287 266 2.';0

1,184 1,165 1,100

105 86 86 :?0 15 14

125 101 100

65 68 76 12 14 10 77 102 86

79 75 64 13 16 11 92 91 75

424 380 366 60 39 46

484 419 412

395 393 356 46 48 45

441 441 401

10108 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-ROUSE 1\fA.Y 26. Ca, es docl;ctcd and disposed of, etc.-Continued

SECOND CIRCUIT-COntinued

Cases penrling: (a) Ci nL ___ ----------------------------------(u) Cnmi nal ______ ----------- _______ ------ ___ _ (c) Total __________________ __ __ ----------------

THlilD CIRCUIT Casrs doclrrted:

(n) CiviL ______ ----- ________ -----------------. (h) Criminal _______ ---------------------------(c) TotnJ. ______ ----------- ___ -----------------

Cast'~~ d! ~pn~rct of: (o) G i >i l. __ ______ -.- __________________________ _

(h) CriminaL. __ -----------------------------(e;) T oLnL ... __ --------------------------------

Cn ~ ' pcnrling: (a) OiviL ______ ------- __ ----------- ____ -- _ ----(h) Criminal _________ -------------------------(e;) Total _______ -------------------------------

FOURTH CIRCUIT

C::s:-s dnrkrtcd: (a) CiviL ___________________ ------------------(h) C'rin1 inaL. ------ _ ------------------------(c) '.fotal ____________ -- _------- ----------------

Cases d i:~posod of: (a) CiviL ____ ------ ___ --------- __ -------------(b) Criminal _________________ -----------------(r) Total _____________ -------------------------

Case.'> pending: (r~) CiviL __ -----------------------------------(b) Criminal ___ ------- _________ --------------_ (c) Total __________________ ---------------_----

FrFm CIRCUIT Caspg docketed:

~~} .~H~~~~~=: ==: = == =: === = = ====== = === == = = =:: = Cnsos disposed of: (a) Civil _____________ ----------------- _______ _ (h) ( 'rlroina.L __ ----- ______ ------ ____ ---------(c) Total ___ -----------------------------------

Case:; pending: (a) CiviL ____ -------------- __ ----------------_ (b) CriminaL-------------- ____ --------------(c) TotaL ____ --------------------------------_

SIXTH CIRet:IT Cast>g docketl'd:

(a) Civil. _____ --------------_------------ ____ _ (b) CriminaL .. ------ ___ ---------- __________ _ (c) Total _____ . _______________ ----- ___ ---------

Cases disposed o!: (a) Oi\"iL. __ -------------------- __ ------------(b) C' riminnL _______________________________ _ (c) TotaL .. ____ --------- ___ ----------------- __

Cas pending:

~~} ~~I~~~==::::::·:::::::=::::::============ SEVE TTB cmcmT

Cases docketed:

~~ g~~~illai == = = = = == == = == == = ==== ====== === = == = (c) TotnL ___ ---------------------------- ____ _ Cases disposed of:

(a) Ch·iL __ ---------- ________________________ _ (b) Crimin31 ... _____________ ------- _____ _____ _ (c) Tot~>L .. : .. ____________ ----------- ________ _

Cases pendjng: .

w ~~~~~~= = ~= = = = === == = == ===== = === = === = = = = = = EIGHTH CIRCUIT

Cas~:>s docketed: (a) Civil. ______ ~ _____________ _____ ___________ _ (b) CriminaL _____ ------------------------ __ _ (c) TotaL ______________ -----------------------

Ca.<:es disposed of:

m ~~I~i~~!~== === == = == = == == = == == == == == ===== == CasPB pending: (a) Civil _____________________________________ _

~~1 .g~~~~~~~== = = = = = = = = ======= = = === = = == = ===== = NINTH CIRCUIT

Cases docketed: (a) Civil _____________ _______________ ----- ____ _ (b) Crhl)inaL ______ --------------------------(c) Total _____________ ________________________ _

Cases disposed of: (a) Civil _____________ ________________________ _

~~i ~~i~~~-~~= ==== ========== ======= =========== Cases pending:

~~ g~-ac================================ (c) Total. ______ --_-- __ -------- __ • _____ • __ ----_

Fiscal year-1----,---..----1 Aver

age 1923

101 6

107

114 23

137

100 22

122

96 17

113

!)6 22

118

111 28

139

44. 4

48

17!1 .'i2

231

1G3 40

203

85 29

114

140 74

214

142 52

Hl-1

81 34

118

98 46

144

J::o 47

177

76 26

102

228 64

292

268 54

322

170 61

231

125 87

162

137 Q6

173

59 15 74

1924

1~0 20

150

124 24

148

131 27

158

89 14

103

115 19

134

104 20

124

55 3

58

198 45

243

177 55

232

107 18

125

lf'l6 89

255

129 63

192

121 co

181

111 38

149

104 . ?\J

13J

83 35

118

m 136 359

216 !H

310

175 105 280

165 60

225

170 61

231

~ 14 68

1925

117 J1

128

150 2()

179

159 29

188

80 14 94

P8 28

126

113 30

143

43 7

50

177 44

221

198 43

241

86 19

105

134 85

219

162 1oa 270

93 37

130

94. 62

156

101 64

165

76 33

109

296 85

381

235 104 339

237 85

322

2'25 134 359

182

~

116 12

128

129 25

154

130 2tl

156

88 15

103

103 23

126

10~ 26

135

47 5

52

18.5 47

232

179 46

225

91 2'l

115

141l 83

22U

144 74

218

99 44

143

101 49

150

112 47

159

78 31

109

249 95

344

240 84

324

194 84

278

172 77

249

163 67

230

70 24. 94

UNI'.rED STATl' S COURT OF CUSTOMS Al'l'F:ALS

Number of caseR docketed and distJ08ed of durLng th6 fiscal years 1923, 192,4, and t .9Z5 ,· also numbet· of cases 1;endinr; at the close of eacl~ fiscal year

Cases dockotco ..... ------------ ___ ----------------Cases disposed oL ________________________ _______ _ Oases pending at close of year---------------------

COIJTIT OF CLAD!S

1923

110 70 72

1924

136 111 97

1025 I Average

~~~ 168 116 123 99

Xu;nber of ca.qcs docketed anrl di..qposcd of d1wing the fiscal uears 192.3, 1924. and 1925; al~:~o num!Jer of cases pending at the cLose of euch fiscal 11car

1923 1024 11)25 Averago

---------------1------------Cases docketed _____ . ______ --.-----.---------------Cases disposed oL.------------------------------Cases pending at close of enoh year----------------

1, 393 1!l3

1, 957

953 953

2, 270

1, 174 497

2,\Hl

COUTIT OF Al'l'FJ..LS OF 'l'UFl DIST!U CT OF COLU ~! RI.\

1, 173 514

2, 339

Ca.9cs dor;l~r:tcd and di.~posed of clu.t·ing the {lscal year.~ 19.~3, 1921,, and . W.25; al~:~o cases pCtadiny at tlie close of each.ycat·

Fiscal year-

1------.-----~----~IAvernge

1923 1924 1925

Cases docketed: (a) Pa trn t _______ ------- ___ ------------ _______ 78 89 129 99 (b) Cl vii _____ -------------------- _________ · ____ 129 22\J 230 195 (c) Criminal. ____ ----------------------------- 45 22 10 25 (d) Total __ __ _____ ----------------------------_ 252 340 3G9 320

Cases di~poscd of: (a) Patent_----------------------------------- 82 74 94 81

~~? Civil _________ ----------------------------- 144 184 220 lS:J C riminnl_ ------------ ____ --~- ------------- 31 2.'i 20 23

d) 'I'otal ____ --------------------------------- 257 283 334 2!ll

c1gf~~p~~==================================== 48 63 98 70 61 106 111\ 94

(c) Crin1inal. --------------------------------- 20 17 7 15 (d) Total ____ --------------------------------- 129 186 221 lill

UNI1'ED R'I'ATES DISTRICT COURTS (EXCLUDING Tlllil DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA)

Numbr1· of actions commenoerl rmtl tenninnterl, (i.scnl ycat·s 1923, 1924, and 1925, also num/J(:r of actwns pending at the close of each yem·

Fiscal year-1----.-----.-----1 Average

1923 1924 1925

A.. ACTIONS COMMENCED

l. United States civil cases _______________ _ 2 United States criminal cases ___________ _ 3. Admiralty (United States not a party)_ 4. Other private suits __ -------------------5. Bankruptcy proceedings _______________ _

10,979 13,552 1.5, 907 13,£0!) 70,997 59,057 65, 722 65,259 3,023 2, 081\ 2, 918 3, 002

16,637 14,207 1.~, 292 15,379 41,243 43,410 45,534 43,398

----------------Total. ___ --------------------------- 142,879 133,298 14.~, 463 140,547 ----- - ------ -

B. ACTIONS TERMI.NATED

9, 964 10,988 13,750 11, li67 68,071 6.3,165 81,702 70,979

2, 749 2, IJ72 3, 535 3, OS5 15, 971 13,960 lll, 135 lfi, 355 34,342 41,577 44,257 40,059

1. United States civil cases ______________ _ 2. United States criminal cases ___________ _ 3. Admiralty (United States not a party)_ 4. Other private suits.--------------------5. Bankruptcy procJodings ________ ____ ___ _

TotaL __ ---------------------------- 131,097 132, G62 159,379 141, 045 ~====-==

C. ACTIONS PENDING

l. United States civll cases ________________ 13,064 15,427 17, 733 15,410 2. United Statr.s e;riminal cases ____________ 67,525 5!J, 312 4.::1, 332 56,723 3. Admiralty (Unito<.l States not a party)_ 9, ll5 9, 212 8, 592 8, 973 4. Other private suits.-------------------- 31,307 28,316 27,512 29,0'15 15 . Bankmptcy proceedings ________________ 58,075 5'J, 091) 5V, 836 59,003

Total ___ --------.-------------------- 179,086 171,366 157,010 16:),151

SC'Pll.E:.\Illl COURT OF TITE DiSTlliCT Oli' COLUC.IniA

Numbet· of act,ions commencecl and tenninateUl d'ltril~a the fi .qcal vervrs 1923 to 1925, also 11umber of actions pct!c.ling at the close of erroh yeat·

1923 1924 1925 Aver

age ---------------------------1---~------------

A.. ACTIONS COMMENCED • 1. United States civil cases _______________________ _ 2. United States crimin!U cases.·--~--------------· 3. Admiralty (United States not a party) ________ _

114 1,48(,1

s 201

1,4!)8 2

312 1,130

0

209 1,37~

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 10109 Number of actions commettcca Otla ter'I'!Unated, cto.-Continued

1923 1924 1925 Average

------------------1-------------A. ACTIONS COMMENCED-COntinued

4. Other private suits_---------------------------- 2, 901 3,183 3, 506 3,197 5. Dunkruptey proceedings________________________ 61 103 107 90

TotaL-------------------------------------- 4, 565 4, 987 5, 055 4, 869 ===

'!!. ACTIONS TERMINATED

1. United States civil cases________________________ 102 133 218 151 2. United States criminal cases.____________ _____ __ 2, 31:!4 1, 712 1, 5tH 1, 886 3. Admiralty (United States not a party) __ ------- 4 1 2 2 4. Other private suits . . --------------------------- 2, 751 3, 309 3, 864 3, 338 5. Bankruptcy proceedings________________________ 59 72 83 71

----------TotaL __ ------------------------------------ 5, 300 5, 317 5, 728 5, 448

===== C. ACTIONS PENDING

1. United States civil cases ____ __ _________________ _ 2. Unitt:<l &tutes c~iminal cases _____ ______________ _ 3. A<lmtralty (Umtctl States not a party) ________ _ 4. Other private suits_- ---------------------------5. Bankruptcy proceedings _______________________ _

218 2, 531

4 3,002

78

2R6 2,317

5 2, 7&6

99

390 1, 886

3 2,428

123

298 2,245

4 2, 739

100

TotaL ___ ----------------------------------- 5, 833 5, 493 4, 830 5, 38.5

D. Actions pending at the close or March 31, 1926: 1. United States civil cases·----------------------------------------------- 453 2. United States criminal cRSeS ______________________ _!' _____________________ 1, 959 3. Admiralty (United States not a party) _____ ---------------------------- 3 4. Other private suit.'! _- --------------------------------------------------- 3, 605 5. Bankruptcy proceedings _____________________________ _____ ____ ----- ----- 123

'!'otaL _ _ _ ___ _____ _ __ ___ __ _ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ __ ___ _ __ _ __ ____ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 6, 233

In audition to this, let me call your attention to some collections reported through tlle Department of Justice and the courts for the years 1923, 1924, and 192G. Of course, as everyone knows, this is but an incidental part of the r('SUltR of the work of our ju<lges and the Attorney General. However, it is interesting and important. The figures are as follows :

1923 1924 1925 Average

Collections, jud_gmcnts, tines, etc.:

In civil matters and cases ________________ $9, 168,410.46 $4, 504, 641. 21 $4, 909, 013. 44 $6,194,021.70

In criminal prosccu-tions ________________ 5, 209, 485. 1!1 EarningS from individuals

6, 289, 738. 56 5, 947,720. 96 6, 815, 648. 22

and corporations by United States marsl1nls. 381,621.75 207,975.99 216,425.85 268,674.53

Earnings from individuals and corporations by clerks of United States district courts ___________ 1, 152, 632. 61 1, 147, 950. 99 1, 173, 509. 07 1, 157,997. 56

Net earnings by clerks, United States Circuit

u;c~~{!~~ A~~~~;s-ri0Di- 93,494.08 110, 428. 1G 113,909.90 105, 944.. 05

court registries (Treas-ury report) ____ . __ ------- 84,846.65 105,000.04 70,043.71 86,630.13

Net profit on operation cotton duck mill, United States Penitentiary, At-lanta, Oa _______ ________

Proceeds of sale of Govern· 211, 3()2. 70 78,571.53 93,982.76 1Z7, 972. 33

ment Broperty and other misce aneous. 1 t ems (Treasury report)_------ 5, 024.33 24,461.19 11,744.55 13,743. 36

Collections from foreign countries in extradition cases ______ ----~--------- 912.06 5, 910.48 4, 578.00 3, 800.20

Collections through war transactions section _____ lJ, 494, 835. 15 2, 412, 845. 48 3, 117, 442. 27 2, 341, 707. 63

Alaska license funds paid into Treasury----------- 10,010.00 5, 010.00 10,010.00 8, 343.33

Funds for Alaska roads and trails (collected by clerks or courts in .Alaska) ___ -------------- 183,349.95 184,553. 24 196,293. 36 188, oes.c;2

Total ___ ------------ 17,995, 884. 89 15, 077, 086. 87 115, 864, 673. 92 16, 312, 548. 56

1 Excludes $1,550,000 collected in Lincoln Motor case, but Included In first item of $9,168,410. 4(i.

In view of tile fact that the jurisdictions of the various United States courts have been changed and enlarged upon in the last few years, it might l.Je interesting to know just what the jurisdiction of these various courts at the present time is. I give tllem to you-

FxnsT, THE JURISDICTION OF TlliD SUPREME COURT OF THiil UNITED

STATES

ORIGINAL JURISDICTIOX

The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction undor Article III, section 2, clause 2, of the Constitution, as carried into section 233 of the Judicial Code, over-

Cases in which a State is a party; cases against ambassadors, other public ministers, etc.; cases by ambassadors, other public ministers, etc.

.AI'P'i:LLATJil JURISDICTIOS

By writ of error or ap11eal from circuit court of appeals in cases involdng the \alidity of a State statute, under section 240 (b) of the Ju<licial Co<le, as amended by the act of February 13, 192G ( 43 Stat. 036).

By certiorari from the circuit court of appeals over all cases made final in that court.

Over decisions of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia.

Over decisions of Court of Customs Appeals. 0\er decisions of the Court of Claims. Over uedsions of the Supreme Courts of the Philippines,

Porto Rico, and Hawaii. By certification of questions by circuit court of appeals, by

Court of Appeals · of the District of Columbia, by Court of Claims.

On direct appeal or writ of error from the district courts under section 238 of the Judicial Code as amended by the act of February 13, 1920 (43 Stat. 936), of cases-

Under tlleact ofFcbrunry 13, 1903 (32 Stat. 823), as amended by the act of June 29, 1910 ( 36 Stat. 854), to -expedite the bearing and determination of certain antitrust and interstate commerce. ca es.

Untler the act of March 2, 1907 (34 Stat. 1246), known as the criminal appeal:;; act.

Under the net of l\farch 3, 1913 (37 Stat. 1013), restricting the is~uanco of interlocutory injunctions to suspend enforcement of a Rtnte statute, etc.

Of cases to enforce, suspend, or set aside orders of the Interstat(' Commerce Commission.

Of cases involving regulation of interstate and foreign commerce in livestock, and so forth, under the act of August 15, 1!)21 (42 Stat. 15!l).

The cases wilich go before the Supreme Court in one way or another are most comprehensive in variety and origin. TJ1ey include cnses between tl1e United States and a State, cases between two State:;;, cases of every class 'vhich involve the construction or application of the Constitution, laws, and. treaties of the United States, cases originating in the Federal courts, cm:cs . originating in the State courts ancl involving Federal rights, and cases originating in the courts of the Territories and outlying possm;sions. Because of tlle very wiue application geo~raphically and otllerwisc of tlle Constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States and of the decisions of the Supreme Court consh·uing and giving eft'ect to them. the cases which go llefore that court have an importance wllich far surpasses any interest which the immediate parties may have in the outcome. Its decisions become precedents to be followed by all other courts, both Federal and State. in disposing of numberless cases involving like l!.,edernl questions. By its decisions it marks out the limits of governmental power, maintains the constitutional checks on that power, preserves the lines wilich separate National and State autilority, settles boundary and other disputes between the States, protects personal and property rightH of individuals from unconstitutional encroachment, enforces adherence by other Federal courts to State decisions when applying State lnw, and secures harmony of decision among all courts, l.Joth Federal and State, wilen applying Fed-eral lu\v. ·

The following is a summary of business by years for five ft1ll court years and for the pre. ent court year up to April 13, 1926. Tile court year is from tlle middle of June of the year designated ·to the middle of June of the next yenr, excepting as the current year (1{)25) is not yet completc<l. The figures are for the combined appellate and original dockets:

1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925

---------------Case.~ disposed of during the year_ 608 603 765 6()1 761 004 Cases remaining on dockets at

367 437 392 55&' end of year_ ____________________ 462 541 Total on dockets during the year_ 975 1,040 1,157 1,123 1, 3161 1,145

This statement takes no account of intermediate and interlocutory rulings and decisions, of which there are many.

Of the 701 cases :finn.lly disposed of in the court year of 1~24, 411 were disposed of upon their merits and 350 upon petitions for certiorari.

Of the 004 cases finally disposed of thus far in the court year of 192o-that is, up to April 13, 1926-318 were disposed of upon their melits and 286 upon petitions for certiorari.

Of the 541 cases pending April 13, 1926, 49 have been on the dockets a little in excess of 18 months, 94 have l.Jeen on the

10110 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE J\iAY 26

dockets less than 18 months but more than 12 months, and 398 'may be taken to the Court of Customs Appeals on questions of have been on the dockets less than oue year. law alone.

If allowance be made for cnses which have been advanced Section 516 grants an appeal from the judgment of the Board under statutory provisions and dispo!'led of without awaiting of General Appraisers upon protests of American producers, their regular turn, the cases now pending on the dockets repre- manufacturers, or wholc~alers, who prior to its passage were sent less than a year's business. without remedy against the clns~ification of goods as made by

It is believed that when the current court year ends the the collector and their value as found by the appraiser. number of cases remaining on the doeJ-ets will be perceptibly Section 563 permits a tinn.l apvea1 to the United Stn.tcs Court less than at tlle close of the last year; aud it is further believed of Customs Appenls in cases of refusal to make an abatement that the change in jurisct.iction nHHle by the act of February of duties or a deduction from duties for deterioration, loss, or 13, 1925, will enable the court, witllin anotller year, to reduce damage sustained by imported mercllandise wllile in a bonded the number of accumulatPd cases so that only a few will have warel10use. been pending as much as nine months. Below is given the jurisdiction ·of the Supreme Court and the SEcoxo, THE JuRISDICTION oF THE uxr·n:o STATF.s cmcuiT counTs oF Court of Appeals of tlle District of Columbia, to which judges

APrlil~Ls of the Court of Customs Appeals arc assigned.

The circuit courts of appeals ll::tYe jnrisdiction, under section 128 of the Jurlidal Code, as amentleu uy the act of J anuary 28, 1015 (08 Stat. 804), and tlle ad of Fel>ruary 13, HJ25 ( 43 Stat. 036), over-

Judgments, orders, and Hawaii.

Scc:tiou 18 of the act of September 14, 1922, authorizes the Chief Justice of the United States to assigu tlle judges of the Court of Customs Apveals for senice in tlle Supreme Court and the Court of .Appeals of the District of Columbia when requested by the chief justice of either of said courts, and all of

decrees of the District Court for said judges have been so assigned. The Supreme Court of tlle

Judgments, Porto Rico.

Judgments, for China.

orders, and decrees of the District Court for

orders, and decrees of the United States Court

orders, and decrees of the District Court for

District is a trial court and exercises a juri:::Hliction corresponclin;:; to that of the district courts of the United States and to that of the highest trial courts of any of the States, and may i~:; sue writs of mandamus again. t executive oflicials of the Government. (12 Stat. 762; 32 Stat. ::122, sec. 61 of the District Code.) Judgments,

Alaska. Judgments, orders,

Virgin Islands.

'l'he court of appeals exercises appellate jurisdictio.n from and decrees of the District Court for the final judgments and decrees of the Supreme Court of the Dis-

Judgments, orders, Canal Zone.

trict and is the tribunal to wllicll apveals may be taken from and decrees of the District Court for the the decisions of the Commissioner of Patents. Sections 226 and

Judgments, orders, and decrees of the Supreme Courts of 228, District Code. The jurisdiction of the court of appeals is broader than that of any of the circuit courts of appeal. l:Iawaii and Porto Rico.

Decisions of the Federal Trade Commission. Orders of the Interstate Commerce Commission. Orders of the Federal Reserve Board. Judgments, orders, and decrees of the district courts of the

United States, except in cases which go direct to the Supreme Court of the United States.

THIRD, TIIE JURISDICTION OF THE COUR'.r O.D' CUSTO~IS APPEALS To shorten customs litigation and to save expense the

United States Court of Customs Appeals was established by the act of .August 5, 1909. That act conferred on the Court of Customs .Appeals exclusive jurisdiction to review the judgments of tlle Board of General Appraisers determining the classification of imported merchandise, the rate and amount of duty due thereon, and the amount of customs fees or other charges exacted. As a result the number of appeals was reduced to one, and in 101(), the year of the organization of the court, the average time required for the final .determination of customs litigation was reduced to two years and one month, and within three years thereafter to eight months and one day. That meant the saving of time and expense to the importer and the Government, to say nothing of the saving of cost to the ultimate consumer, who, witllout the pos ibility of reimbursement, was compelled to bear the burden of excessive duties until their invalidity was finally decided.

.Additional jurisdiction was referred by the act of 1922, as follows:

Section 316 of the tariff act of 1022 grants a right of appeal to the United States Court of Customs Appeals from· certain decisions of the United States Tariff Commission, rendered after a hearing and reported to the President for his information in meeting unfair methods of competition in imported goods.

Section 480 of the tariff act of 1022 authorizes the importer to petition the Board of General .Appraisers for remission of additional duties and directs that such additionn.l duties shall be remitted upon a finding by the Board of General Appraisers that the entry of merchanrlise at a less value than that returned upon final appraisement was without any intention to defraud tlle revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The refusal of the Board of General Appraisers to make such finding has been held appealable by the Supreme Court of the United States in tlle case of the United States v. Fish, No. 653, decided June 8, 1025.

Section 501 of the act of 1022 gives to the importer the right to be heard as to the value of his goods and permits an appeal from the appraisement made by the local appraiser. On that appeal both the GoYernment and the importer submit evidence in support of their respective contentions to a general appraiser nssigne<l by tlle Board of General Appraisers to hear the matter. From his decision an appeal may be taken to a board of tllree general appraisers, an<.l from the board's decision an avveal

Worl' of the United States Oout·t of Customs Appeals and its judges

(During the calendar year 1925) Numi.Jer of Court of Customs Appeals cases filed---------------- 207 Number of cases disposed oL-------------------------------- 176

(This was t~e number of cases ready fot· disposition at the time the court took its summer vacation about July 6, 1025.)

Number of caseR heard by the Court of Customs Appeuls since Octo-her 1 10211, in which 134 opinions have been written _________ _

Cases (iP.cided withont opinion--------------------------------To be beard before vacatwu and requirin~ opinion (estimated) ___ _ To be disposed of without opinion (estimated)-----------------

154 :!6 40

6

226

Number of cases in which the judges of the Court of Customi! Appeals participated under assignment to the Court of Appeals of the Dl~:~trict in 1!)25-------------------------------- 100

Number of opinions written by judges of the Court of Customs Appeals as judges of the couTt of appeals____________________ 40

Number of matters heard by judges of the Court of Customs Appeals as judges under assignment to the Supreme Court of the D~t~ct----------------------------------------------- 05

Opinions written by judges of the Court of Customs Appeals act· lng as judges. of the Supreme Court of the District____________ 15

.An inspection of this table discloses that the work disposed of by the judges of the Court of Customs Appeals, including their work under assignment, exceeds that of any of the circuit courts of appPal, with the exception of the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. (See page 133, Attorney Genm·al's Report for 1025.)

FOURTU, TilE JURISDICTIO~ OF THE COURT OF CLAIMS The Court of Claims was created as the court in which the

United States can be sued, and with the exception of a limited concurrent juris<Hctlon iu the district courts is the sole tribunal in which an action can be prosecuted against the sovereign. In audition to its jurisdiction of claims against the Government, it has jurisdiction to hear and determine countercln.ims interposed by the United States against the pL1.intiff in any suit brought against the Government in which the court has jurisdiction of the plaintiff's claim.

The present principal jurisdiction of the court, or what is commonly termed its "geueral jurisdiction," is provided for by section H5 of the Judicial Co<.le, as follow~:

The Court of Claims shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine the following matters:

"First . .All claims (except for pensions) founded upon the Constitution of the United States or any law of Congress, upon any regulation of an executive depar tment, npon any contract, express or implied, with the Government of the United States, or for damages, liqui<ln ted or unl!quitlateu, in cases not sounding in tort, in respect of which claims the party would be entitled to redress against the United States either in n court of law, equity, or admiralty if the United States were suable: Pro?:irlecl~ howet·er-, That nothing in this section shall be construed as giving to the sai<l court juristliction to hear and determine claims growing out of the late Civil War, anti commonly known as ' war claims' or to hear and determine other claims which, prior to

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 10111 1\Iarch 8, 1887, bad been rejected or reported on adversely by any court, department, or commission authorized to hear and determine the same.

"Second. All set-offs, counterclaims, claims for dnmages, whether lif}uidated or unliqul!lated, or other demands whatsoever on the part of the Government of the United States agninst any claimant against the Government in saiu court: Prot·idcd~ That no suit against the Government of the United States, brought by any officer of the United States to recover fees for services alleged to have been performed for the United States, shall be allow ell under this chapter until an aceount for snid fees shall have been rendered and finally acted upon as required by law, unless the proper accounting officer of the Treasury fails to act finally thereon within six months after the account is received in said office.

"Third. The claim of any paymaster, quartermaster, commissary of subsistence, or other disbursing officer of the United States, or of his auministrators or cxecutoL·s, for relief from responsibility on account of loss b:r capture or otherwise, while in the line of his duty, of Government fun!ls, vouchers, records, or papers in his charge, and for wllich such officer was and is held responsible."

While the principal branch of the court's jurisdiction is its law jurif;diction, its equity and admiralty jurisdictions are of decided and increasing importance. I. CLAIMS FOUNDF..D UPO::'l' THE CONSTITUTIO~, OR ANY LAW OF CONGR"kJSS,

OR UPON .ANY REGULATION OF A.:"if EXECU'.riVlil DEPART~lENT

Of these classes of claims are claims arising under tlle follow~ ing laws and the duly authorized regulations thereunder·: Tbe public land laws, the revenue laws, the laws go\erning salaries, pay, and allowances in the Federal service, and laws providing for the taking or requisitioning of private property by the Government. Of great importance in this class of cases are suits for refund of excessive iucome-tax payments. 2. CL.AUIS FOU:'<DED "GPON A.NY CONTRACT, EXPUEHS OR ll\lPLIED, WITH TilE

GOVERNME~T

Of claims founded upon express contracts, which comprise tlle greater and more important part of the litigation in the com·t, are claims growing out of Government contracts in con~ nection witll go\ernmcntal activities and operations in all governmental lines, such as the support, equipment, and opera~ tions of tlle Army and Navy, the operation of the I)ostal Service, the construction of public ·buildings, river and harbor improvement:-l, reelamation projects, United States Shipping Board operationH, nnd so forth. .

Of claims founded upon implied contract, the principal claims coming before the court, ami of which it has jurisdiction, are claims for private property taken for public use, without ex~ press agreement with the owner or specific statutory authoriza~ tion , but under such circumstances as will support a contract implied in fact to pay the owner compensatiou. Among claims of this cluss are included claims for the use by the Government of deviecs or inventious covered by United States letters pntcnt.

3. The equity juriHcliction of the court lies principally in the power to reform contracts where, tllrough mutual mistake of tlle parties, reformation is necessary to effect the intent of the parties to the con tract.

4. Tlle admiralty jurisdiction of the court comprises juris~ diction to l.lear a11d determille claims for salvage services rendered to tile Government.

Claims of tlle four different classes above noted, paragraplls 1 to 4, which sound in tort are excluded from the court's jurisdiction.

5. The provision for juriHdiction of claims by paymasters, quartermasters, commissaries of subsistence, and other dis~ bursing officers needs no explanation. Suits in the court under this provision arc comparatively few in number.

G. The court's jurisdiction of counterclaims by the Government is a most important jurisdiction, nnd especially in cases growing out of the World War operations. It has enabled the GoYcrnmcnt to recover large claims against claimants in this court which would in all probability have never been recovered by k:l.dependent suits against such claimants in other Federal courts. An instance of the importance of this jurisdiction is the recent recovery by the Government, on counterclaim, of a net judgment ugainst the plaintiff in the sum of $1,222,540, in a caRe in which the plaintiff was suing on a claim of over $2,7GO,OOO.

SEc. 148. Judicial Code : This section of the code provides for what is commonly known as departmental cases, in which the findings an<l conclusions of the court are for the guidance of the department referring the claim or matter. Also the section provides for the court's taking general jurisdiction of the claim referre<l, and hearing and rendering judgment accordingly. if the claim should be one on which tile court would,

under the law, have jurisdiction to render judgment ; thnt is, a valid legal claim, not barred by statute~ of liinitation.

SEc. 151. Judicial Code: This l')ection of the code provides jurisdiction of wllat is generally termed congressional cases, witll the provision, as in departmental cases, for remlering judgment where tlle claim involved is a valid legal claim, not burred by statutes of limitation. Oases under this provl~lon of the code are comparatively few. and m1important.

P.ATEl-"'T INFRDIQ.El.)Illl.:o<T JUIUSDlC'l' IO::->

Prior to the act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stat. 851), the court had jurisdiction of claims for use of puteJlted iuTeution~ by tllc Government only wllere tllcre was an e.xvress contract or where tlle facts woulrl support a conh·act implied in fact; out under this act, to which tllere have been se\eral arnemllllcltts, the court llas jurisdiction, with certain limitations, of claims for iufringemcnt or wrongful use of a patented device.

Tile patent litigatiou in the court, both under this act and under cxprc~s and implied contracts, is of great importance, the claims in cases now in litigation amounting to iu the neigh~ borllood of $600,000,000.

SPECIAL JURISDICTION CASES

In addition to the foregoing jurisdiction of the court, juris~ diction in Rpecial cases, often of great imJwrtance, is confcned upon tlle court by special acts of Oongrc.~s, the most important of which are claims of Indian tribes against the Government growing out of treaties with the Indians and claims by citizens against the Indians, a number of which cases, involviug large amounts, arc now pending in the court. FIFTH, THE JURlSDIC'l'IO~ OF TilE COURT OF APPP:.ALS OF THE DISTRICT

OF COT.U:.\IBI.A

The jurisdiction of the Supreme Oonrt of the District of Columbia and of the Court of Appeals of tlle District of Columbia is defined by Chief Justice Tnft as follows:

Congress possesses a dual authority over the District, and may clotho Ute courts of the District not only with the jurisdiction and power of 1J'ederal courts in the several States but with such authority us a State may confer on her courts. (Publlc Utilities Commission v. Potomac Electric Power Co., 261 U. S. 442.)

The court of appeals exercises the jurisdiction not only of Federal circuit courts of appeals but also that exercised by State supreme courts.

It is the court of last resort in the District of ColumlJia, save only that its decisions are subject to review on certiorari by the Supreme Court of the United States.

The court wus created by act of Congress approved February 9, 1893, givin!; it appellate jurisdiction over

The Supreme Court of the District of Columbia. The Commissioner of Patents. The following tribunals have been added since:· The police court (March 2, 1897; D. C. Code, sec. 227) . The juvenile court (March 19, 1906; 34 Stats. 77). The municipal com·t (March 3, 1921; 41 Stats. 1310). The United States Board of Tax Appe-als (revenue act of

1926). When created the court consisted of a chief justice nnrl

two associate· justices. There has been no increase since, altllough the work has increased several fold.

A full court of three bus to sit in every cnse, unless counsel stipulate to hear the case before two justices, which is so rnrely none as to be out of the count.

Written opinions have to be filed in all cases heard on the merits.

When a judge is ill or disqualified the court may call on a judge of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia to :fill the vacancy, but this has not been done for several yenrs. In 1922 Congress authorized the Chief .Justice of the United States to assign to this court judges of the court of customs appeals when the work of that court would permit; but on account of the growing work of the Customs Court the aid tlley hnve been able to give has been, and will continue to be, very limited. Likewise, such judges do not participate in action on the numerous motions and petitions which constitute a material part of the business.

As shown by the report of the Attorney General for 192:1 ( p. 133), cases disposed of in this court, and in tllc circuit court of appeals, were as follows :

Cases Court of Appeals, District of Columbia _________________ 334 First circuiL--------------- 10:.! Second circuit_ _____________ 441 Tbird circulL-------------- 18R l<'ourth circuit-------------- 143

Cases ~fth C~l'CU~L--------------- ~i1 S1xth cLrcutL--------------- ~' 0 Seventh circuiL------------ lGii Eightb circuiL------------- ~!ln Ninth circuiL---------~·· -- 28tJ

It thus appears that, with two exceptions--the second and eighth circuits-the number of cases disposed of in this <'Ourt

10112 _CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-H01JSE 1\f.AY 26 was considerably greater than in the seven other several circuit J Under the trading with the enemy act, the Alien Property courts of appeal; and statistics from 18D3 to date show a rela- Custodian has been party to 130 cases !Jrou.;;ht in this court tive standing approximately the same. to determine the disposition of alien-owned property. Of 30

Appeals from the Commi1:1sioner of Patents-an important of these the claims amounted, in the aggregate, to approxibranch of litigation-ha\e increased nearly 100 per cent in mutely $21,000,000. the last year or two. These require a knowled.ge of patent law- Thirteen suits, taken at random from the civll docket of the a separate branch of the law in itself. United States district attoruey for tl1e District of Columbia,

The new revenue act, provid.ing for appeals from the United against the Emergency I<'leet Corporation, involve daims upStates Board of Tax .L\ppeals will add. a lurge \olume to the pro:ximating $400,000. business of the court. Among he suits filed in the court in which the Government

The locution of the court at the scat of national government is an interc ·ted varty are snits against the Postmaster Gennatnrally throws to it a muss of goyernmcntal litigation that eral, to enjoin him from barring matter from the mull::;, as in oceurs nowhere else. Numerous cases arise against officers Tribond Corporation against Postmaster General. and. departments of the Government inYolving large sums and Ag-ainst the Secretary of the Interior, to comvcl the issuance questions of graTe import. of patents to lands of the United. States, such as the caHes of

In fact, the court's business comes from so many \lllied O'Donnell against ·work, involving rights in Mare I Hlanll, Calif., tribunals and. involves so many unusual and specia l questions and the "Bru:fiet case," ,,·hi<:h concerns valuable mineral lnnus that its members are required to inform them:-lelYes in special in Utah. branches of practice which rarely or never arise in other tri- Again.·t the Secretary of State, to te::;t the Yalidity of the lmna ls throughout the country. ratification of the eighteenth amendment, as 'Viedcnbam agains t

The bulk of business comes by way of appeals taken as a Colby. matter of right from the Supreme Court of the District of Co- Against the Secretary of the Treasury, to determine the conlumbia and the Patent Office in the proportion of abont two- stitutionality of the maternity act, us Massachusetts against thirclH from the former ancl one-third from the lat ter. Cases l\Iellon. from the police, juvenile, and municipal courts mar he hrought Against the Secretary of the Interior and the Commissioner up only on \nit of error in tile discretion of members of the of the General Land Office, presenting the question of the title court and com;titute but an insignificant pa1i: of the work. and owner:-;hip as bd\veen the Indian Pueblo of Santa Rosa Refer ence to a recent \olume of tho Con:rt Reports (5fi App. and the Govemment of the United States, of upwar d.::; of 700 D. C.) disclo ·es thn t of the 0pinions reported therein 108 were square miles of land in fue State of Arizona. in cases appealed from the Supreme Court of the District of Against the Secretary of the Interior, to settle rights of Columbia, GO from tlle Patent Office, and 16 from the police, Indian wards of the Government to tribal lands, and so forth . ju\enile, and municipal courts comllined, which, it is believed., Against the Secretaries of State, "rar, and Navy, to prevent fairly indicates the distribution of the \YOrk. them from obstructing or interfering with the plaintiff, the

SrxTn, TITE J umsmcTro"" oF THE UxrTEo STATEs DISTRICT CounTs Western Union Telegraph Co., in making a shore connection off The jurisdiction of the United States d.istrict courts is found. the coast of !!,lorida with a newly laid ocean cable between the

in chapter 2 of the Judicial Code,. which is comprised. . of sec- United States and. the Island of llarbado~. tions 2-!, 25, 2G. and 27 of said code. Against the Veterans' Bureau, to enjoin or to compel the

An examination of this con\inces one of the almo!'lt unlimited. payment of policies. field of work that these judges are called upon to coyer. Against the ~ecretary of the Treasury, to enjoin the publica-Recent laws have added greatly to their dutie~, especially the tion of income-tax returns, as in Hubbard against l\lellon. prohihition enforcement act. Against the Shipping Board, in damage suits, equity suits, SErExTrr, TUE JumsmcTro~ oF TITE surRE)II<J CounT oF TilE DiSTRICT and 1n·oceedings to test its powers to dispose of ::;hips, as in Hall

OI<' CoLtniBI.A ag-ainst Shipping Board, Duke against Shipplng Board, Com

The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia is hriefty stated in section 61 of the Code of Law for the District of Columbia in the following language:

Th e said court (the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia) shall possess the same powers and exerclse the same jurisdiction as the circuit and district courts of the United States, anu shall be deemeu a court of the United StatPs, and shall also ha>c and exercise all the jurisdiction possessed and exercise(] l!y the Supreme Comt of the District of ColumlJia under the act of Congress approved March 3, 18G3, creating that court, and at the date of the passage of this code.

The act of Congress of 1863 (12 Stat. 762), referred to in the foregoing quotation. is the acf which estahli~hed the Supreme Court of thP District of Columbia as the successor of the Circuit Court of the Dh;trict of Columbia with the same powers and. the sane jurisdiction as exerch<ed by the circuit court, a court which, as dcclnred by Chief Justice Marshall in his famous Ollinion in l\Ia!·bury v . Mad.ison (1 Crnnch, 137), posses~eu the power to control the actions, in particular cases, of heads of executive d.epartments of the Federal Government. It bas complete jurisdiction both at law and in equity, and Congre::;s hn. also enacted. that a special t erm of the court shall be a district court of the United States (sec. 64 of the District Code), and it bas nlt:o invested the ju~tices of snid court with the powers and jurisdiction possessed by the judges of the digtrict courts of the United. StateR (sees. 62 and 84 of the code). It is believed. tba t it is the only court of original jurisdiction that can i:-:sue 11rocess against the beads of the l!'ederal executi\e de1)artments and enforco compliance !Jy them with its d.ecrces and judgmentA.

In the exercise of the dual, varied., and comprehen!':i\e jurisdiction thus possessed. by the court, cases in e\er-increasing numuers are constantly being presented and decided by the court in\olvin!; questions of great importance both to the United States and to prh·ate litigantR, as, for instance, cases involving title to the public domain throughout the country, the disbursement of appropriations made Congress, nnd cases arising under many important acts of Congress. A~ illustrative of the \ariety and scope of the jurisdiction

of this court, allusion is made to the following types of cases brought before the court1

pagnie ]'ranco-Indochinoise against Shipving Board, and Hearst against Shipping Board.

Against the Interstate Commerce Commission, for mandamus or iujunction, such as the cases brought by tbe Kansus City Southern Railroad Co., tho Abilene & Southern Railway ·Co., the l\lanitou & Pike's Peak Railway Co., and the Fort Dod.ge, Des l\Ioiues & Southern Railway Co., and the Minnesota, Northfield & Southern Railway Co., to com11el, or to prevent, action on the part of the commission.

Against the Federal Trade Commi!'lsion, to determine it.g powers with refere1o1ce to requiring monthly statements of the bmdness of various coal and iron corporations, as in Maynard Coal Co. against Fed.eral Trade Commission.

AgainHt the Board of Tax Appeals of the United. State~. to compel the enrollment of an attorney, as in Gold.:.;mith against United States Hoard of Tax Appeals.

..Against the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, to recover excess payments of taxes, as in the ease of tlle Union Pacific Hailway Co. against Blair, aloue, amounting to $42,D24.27.

AgRinst the Tariff Commission to refJUire it to vermit, to an interested party, ac<:e ~ to facts, <lata, and so forth, in its possession, as iu United. States ex. r ei. Norwegian Nitrate Products Co. against United States Tariff Commission.

Against the Commissioner of Patents, to compel action in behalf of an applicant for patentH, ns in United. States ex rel. 'l'roy Laund.ry :1\Iachine Co. against Robertson.

Against the Director General of Railroads, to compel him to l)ay a judgment ·reco\ered agaJnst him, as in United. States ex r ei. Rauch against Davis.

Against tlle Comptroller General of the United States, to compel the transmission of an amount claimed to he due the petitioner, as in United. States ex rei. Carroll Electric Co. against McCarl.

Agninst the Comptroller Genm·al, to secure his action upon a claim growing out of certain Government contracts, as in United States ex rei. Skinner & EJddy Co. against McCarl.

Against the District of Columbia Public Utilities CommiRsion, to comp~l the setting aside of the valuation placecl upon the property of a street railway, as in Capital Traction Co. against Utilities Commission.

Against the Secretary of the Treasury, to secure the pay~ ment of certiiicates issued by the Secretary of State for

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-IIOUSE 10113 amounts due petitioner for damages claimed against the Venc- exacted on doubtful interpretations of tl).e la'i by denying zudan Reimhlk, as in Lecrone again::;t 1\IcAdoo. prompt judicial relief until after an appeal had oeen taken to

Against the Secretary of Commerce to obtain the issuance of the administrative officer, who was just as much bound as was a litense for a radio station, as in Intercity Radio Co. against the collector to give the !Jenefit of the dou!Jt not to the taxpayer Hoover. · but to the Go>erument.

All(l, in the Nay~· pay cases, the court bas before it 120 suits Tllat act authorized the Pr~:-:idcnt to appoint a board of nine against the Comptroller General and. Secretary Wilbur to en- g neral appraisers aud ve:sted. the board with jurisdiction to join them from deuucting claim~ of the United States out of reavpraise good:s appraised by the appraiser in the collector's the salary of navnl o.ffic:ers. oific:e and to review on protest by the importer the collector's

It was in this court that suit was brougllt by the Attorney clas::;ification of imported. merchandise. Sitting as appraisers General in hebalf of the United States to enjoin the Swift, tlle final appraisement made by the board wn::; conclusive on Armour, \Vilson, Cudally, and l\lorris meat-packing organiza- the Government and the importer, and could not be re>iewed tiom; from violations of the antitrust net. by the courts. (Sec. 13, act of June 10, 1800.) Sitting for

In Adkins against Chil<lren·s Hospital the court was called dassification purposes the board from tlle beginning was a upon to decide the validity of tlle District minimum wage law; real judicial tribunal, and as such it tried and determined and, in Bloek against Hirsh, to determine the constitutionality the issues raised by protest against the action of the collector of tlle Ball rent act. in classifying merchandise and. in fixing the rate and amount

It is in this court thut there are pending the criminal cases of duty which should be paid thereon. The salary alloweU to agaim;t l\Ie. srs. Ji.,all, Doheny, and Sinclair. general appraisers is lfiO,OOO a year. The judgment of a classi-

Anwng the. other cases of national importance brought be- fication board might be appealed to the circuit court which fore this court were tho:e known as the "war-fraud cases," had jurisd.iction on appeal to retry the issues of fact and such as the Crowell case, involving the allotment of contracts render a jndgment on the law and the facts. Tbat judgment for Army camps; Unite<l States against E. C. Morse; the concluded the matter unless the court allowed a further upequity suit against the Newberry Realty Co. for alleged war peal to the Supreme Court of the United States, or unless an frauds; United States against Commercial Coal & Globe In- appeal was requested by the Attorney General. (Sec. Hi, demnity Co., which is still pending; nun the criminal prosecu- act of June 10, 1800; Anglo-Califqrnia Bank v. United States, tion of the Phillips Lumber Co., which took almost three 17G U. S. 37.) months to try; the pending equity siut against the same Phil- The act of March 3, 1891, permitted an appeal f-rom the circuit lips, Stevens, et al., involving about $1,000,000; and the case of court to the circuit courts of appeals, and from the deci ion of Unitc<l States against C. \V. Morse, which took 15 weeks to try. the last-named court the mutter might be carried to the

Another -duty of the court is to review, on appeal, the find- Supreme Court. ings of the Public Utilities Commission of the District of Co- ':Yhlle the act of June 10, 18fl0, accomplished greater unilumbia, such as its findings of valuations for rate-making. formity in customs decisions and gave the benefit of the doubt This duty or power of the court has recently been declared by I to the importer on questions of law and made the assessment the Supreme Court of the United States, speaking through the I of duties subject to prompt review by judicial tribunals, the deChief Justice, in tlle case of Keller v. Potomac Electric lays and the expense necessitated by a system which allowed, Co. (261 U. S. 428), to be a legislative power because a rate- in effect, not less than three reviews and possibly four, left making power. much to be desired. Many cases were litigated for as long as

Still another duty of the court is that all applications for 10 years, and the average delay in the decision of contested extradition fall to it, mainly, however, through the Chief cases was four years and eight months, with the consequent Justice of the court, though in his absence or disqualification, result that at times there was as much as $'50,000,000 tied up by the senior Associate Justice presiding, a purely executive in the Treasury unnxailablc for appropriation and rendered duty, which, in the States, devolves upon the governors therof. useless to the business life of the country.

It should be added that this court is also the Probate Court We aa:e in great danger, Mr. Speaker, of losing from our for the District of Columbia, with an ever-increasing volume Federal bench some of our very splendid judges, men who have of business. In the· pnst five calendar years, the court has not been able in their practice before coming to the bench to put dealt with over 0,000 administration and guardianship cases, aside money upon which to live. l\fany of them a1·e compelled to an a>erage of more than 1,800 a year. Perhaps it is unneces- live upon their salar;es, and they can not do this in many of the sary to add, it also hears all naturalization proceedings and all cities where they are now compPlled to live and to hold court. l1ankruptcy cases, and, in addition, it also conduct all lunacy Mr. McKEOWN. \Vill the gentleman yield? inquiries;. Mr. DYER. I can not yield for lack of time.

Mr. Speaker, I rose for the purpose of inviting the attention of the House to this situation and to the need of this legislation at this session of the Cong~ress if we are to maintain upon the bench the kind of men that you and the people of thh; country want upon tl1e li.,ederal bench. Unless we do this we are going to have some of our best judges leave the bench by resignation nnd the addition of men who arc incompetent and unfit to discharge tlle great duties thnt now come before the Federal courts, and it -is not right, 1\lr. Speaker, to permit this condition to e.x:ist. [Applause.]

BRIEF HISTORY OF THE BOARD OF GENERAL APPRAISERS WITTI ITS

JURISDICTION

Tariff duties on imported goods have been imposed e-ver since July 4, 178!). Against the aEsessment of duties by the collector the importer might, as the law originally stood, protest, and in case his entry was not reliquidated in conformity with his protest he might sue the collector to recover sueh duties as he deemed to be illegally exacted, the collector retaining the d.uties paid. until the suit agninst him was finally decided, in order that he might reimburse himself in case jud.gment was rendered against him. Section 2 of the act of Murch 3, 1830, prohibited. the retention of unascertained duties, and. the collector was required by the net to pay such unascertained duties into the Treasury of the United States, subject to the right of the Secretary of the Treasury, to repay excess duties by warrant on the Treasury in such cases as to the Secretary might Aeem proper. That act, of course, left the importer at the mercy of the Secretary of the Treasury and deprived him of the judicial remedy to which be was justly entitled. See Cary v. Curtis (3 How. 23G), which held that under that act duties illegally exacted could not be recovered by the importer from the collector in an action in a:;;sump~it for moneys had and received.

Tlle net of }february 6, 1845, restored to the importer his right of action against the collector, and the acts of March R, 1857, find June 30, 18G4, provided in effect that hefore any right of action could accrue to the iml)Orter he must appeal within 30 days after liquidation to the Secretary of the Treasury. His right of recovery was l.mrred unless suit was brought under the former act within 30 day::;, aud under the latter act within 90 days after an adyer:-;e deeision by the Secretary.

The act of l\1arch 10, 1890, marked a distinct change in a legislative policy which looked rather to the protection of the customs revenue than to the protection of the importer, and in effect ignored the sound legal principle that taxes should not be

The SPEAKER. 'l'he time of the geutlemau from :Missouri bas e.xpired. -....

Mr. DYER. Mr. Speaker, in connection with the work of the Juc1iciary Committee and the reporting of the bill to which I have mad.e reference, . I ·have prepared some data and facts touching the neecl of this legislation, showing the condition of various Federal courts, and I ask that I may be permitted to extend my remarks in the RECORD 'Dy including this datu.

The SPEAKER Is there obje<:tion to the request of the gentleman from Missouri?

Tllere wns no oiJjec:tion.

PER::O.USSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE

l\Ir. HO\VARD. l\ir. Speok(>r, I RRk unanimous consent to speak a while on the subject of the great need for legislation in behalf of agriculture ..

The SPF1A.KER. The gentleman from Nebraska asks unanimous consent to speak for a while [laughter] on the subject of agriculture. Is tllere objection?

Mr. BEGG. 1\Ir. S11eaker, reserving the right to object, how long a while?

Mr. HOWARD. 1\Ir. Speaker, I can not tell how long; I me.y be interrupted.

Mr. BEGG. l\fr. Speaker, tl1is is Calendar Wednesday, and it seems to me we ought to have some definite information. ~

10114 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE }fAY 26

will be glad ~ hear the gentleman if he does not mean to smother us, but I would not want the entire afternoon to be devoted to his talk.

1\lr. HOWARD. 1\Ir. Speaker, you know I promised the Speaker at the beginning of the session I would help him out and help him conduct things in an orderly manner. [Laughter.] If my speaking now will interfere with the day's program, I will make the request at some other time. I must not be called an obstructionist. [Laughter.]

TREATMENT OF EX-SERVICE MEN

:i\Ir. POU. 1\Ir. Speaker, I would like to address the House for five minutes.

The SPEAl{ER. The gentleman from North Carolina asks unanimous consent to address the House for five minutes. Is there objection?

There was no objection. l\Ir: POU. 1\Ir. Speaker, the so-called Fenning case has bad

the front page of the newspapers for some time. I do not propose to discuss Commissioner Fenning, but there have been some disclosures which, in my judgment, require the attention of the Congress.

When the boys went to the World War, we told them that thereafter; so long as they liveu, they were to be the wards of the Nation. I think almost all of us are trying to live up to that promise on both sides of the aisle, but the disclosures in tLis case show a condition which is indefensible. The taking of so mud1 of the estates of incompetents, as has been admittedly taken here in the District of Columbia, ought to be stopped by law. [Applause.]

1\Iy colleague from North Carolina, :Major BULWINKLE, has introduced a resolution which is now pending before the Rules Committee, which provides for a Runey of the status of exservice incompetents throughout the Nation. I have heard there is quite a bad situation in other States; in one State particularly, which I will not mention, because I am not sure the information is authentic.

This resolution gives the Committee on \Vorld War Veterans' Legislation the power to inquire into the manner of the handling of estates of these World 'Var unfortunates during the vacation of Congres8 so funt at the beginning of the next session they will be able to report to the Congress just what the condition is throughout the Nation. This is not an easy matter .to deal with. Some of these ex-service men are under the control of officials of the States, others unuer the control of officials of tile Nation. Now it seems to me this is a wise resolution, and I commend it to the conshleration of gentlemen on both sides of the aisle, and particularly to the members of the Rules Committee.

1\fr. McKEOWN. Will the gentleman yield? 1\fr. POU. Yes; I yield. Mr. 1\IcKEOWN. I simply wanted to call the gentleman's

attention to the fact that this IIou~e. on April 16, 1920, gave a promise that these vcternns would not lose any of their money by .reason of guardiunships in cases where they became insane.

1\fr. POU. A promise that ought to be lived up to and will l1e lived up to. The information necessary can be ready by the next session of Congress, anu the Congress will then be in position to puss a law which will take care of these unfortunate men anrl will protect tueir estates from the exploitation of any man or any ~et of men anywhere in the Nation. [Apvlause.]

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from North Carolina has expired.

BRIDGE OVER THE COLUMBIA lliVER AT CIIELAN COUNTY, WASH.

l\lr. HILL of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I call up House bill 10089 and ask unanimous consent that tho House agree to the Senate amen<lmtmts, except the amendment on line 6, page 3.

The SPEAKER The gentleman from Washington asks unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill H. R. lOOS!:l, \Yith Senate amendments, which the Clerk will report.

The Clerk read the title, as follows: A bill (H. R. 10089) granting the consent of Congress !or the con

struction of a bridge over the Columbia River at a point 1 mile up· stream and 1 mile downstream from the mouth of the Entiat Rlver in Chelan County, State of Washington. ·

Tlle SPEAKER. The gentleman from Washington asks unanimous consent to concur in Senate amendments 1, 2, and 4, and disagree to amendment numbered 3. Is there objection?

There was no olJjection. CALE ' DAR WEDNESD.A Y

The SPEAKER. This is Calendar "'Wednesday. 1\fr. GRIEST. Mr. Speaker, I call up the bill (H. R. 6n82)

relating to offenses against the Postal Service.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the bill. The Clerk read the bill, as follows:

A bill (H. R. Gl:l82) to amend sections 213 and 215, act of l\Iarch 4, 1909 (Criminal Cc;>de), relating to offenses against the Postal Service, and sections 3020 and 4041, Revised Statutes, relating to the exclusion of fraudulent devices and lottery paraphernalia from the mails, and for other purposes

Be it enacted, etc., That section 213, act of March 4, 1000 (Criminal Code), is hereby amended to read us follows:

" SEC. 213. No letter, package, postal card, or circular concerning any lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme of any kind ofl'ering prizes dependent in whole or in part upon lot or chance, or concerning any artiele, device, or thing designed or intenurd for the conduct of such lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme ; and no lottery ticket or part thereof, or paper, certificate, or instrument purporting to be or to rept·esent a ticket, chance, share, or interest in or uependent upon the event of a lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme of any kind offering prizes depenuent in whole or in part upon lot ot· chance; and no article, device, or thing uesigneu or intended for the conduct of such lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme, or matter r~lating thereto; and no check, draft, llill, money, postal note, or money oruer, for the purchase of any ticket or part thereof, or of any share or chance in any such lottery, gift enterprit~e, or scheme; and no newspnper, circular, pamphlet, or publication of :my kind containing any advertisement of uny lottery, gift enterprise, or ~!Cherne of any kind offering prizes dependent in whole or in part upon lot or chance, or containing any list of the prizes drawn or awarued by means of any such lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme, whether said li st contains any part or all of snell prizes, or containing any advertisement of any article, device, or thing designeu or intended for the conduct of such lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme, shall be deposited in or carried by the mails of the United States or be delh·ered by any postruastE'r or letter currier. Whoever shall knowingly deposit or cause to be deposited, or shall knowingly send or cause to be sent, anything to be conveyed or delivered by mail in violation of the proviRions of this section, or shall knowingly deliver or caut>e to be delivered I.Jy mail anything herein forbiduen to be carried by mail, shall be fi11eu not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not more than two years, or both; and for any subsequent offense shall be impriso11ed not more than five years. Any person violating any provision of tllis section may be tried and puniahed either in tbe district in which the unlawful nrnttP.r or publication was maileu, or to which it was carrieu by mail for delivery according to the direction thereon, or in which it was caused to be delivered by mail to the person to whom it was addressed."

Slilc. 2. '.fhat section 21u, act of March 4, 190D (Criminal Code), is hereby amendeu to reau as follows:

" S11:c. 215. Whoever, having devil:led or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtain.ing money or property by means of fal11e or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, or to Rell, dispose of, loan, exchange, alter, give away, distribute, supply, or furnish ol' procure for unlawful use any counterfclt or spurious coin, b11.nk note, paper money, or any oi.Jligntlon or security of the United State.<;, or of any State, Tenitory, municipality, com· pany, corporation, or person, or anything represented to be or inti· mated or held out to be such counterfeit or spurious article, or to sell, dispose of, loan, dh;triuute, supply, or furnish or procure for unlawful uRe any unfair, dishonest, or cheating gambling article, device, or thing, or any scheme or artifice to obtain money by or through correspondence, by what is commonly called the 'sawdust swindle,' or 'counterfeit-money frnud,' or by d€aling or pretending to deal in whnt is commonly called 'green articles,' 'green coin,' 'green good~!,'

'bills,' 'paper goods,' ' spurious Treasury notes,' ' United States goods,' 'green cigars,' or any other names or terms intended to be understood as relating to such counterfeit or spurious articles, shall, for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, or attempting so to do, place, or cause to be placed, any letter, postal card, package, writing, circular, pamphlet, or auvertiscment, whether addressed to any person resiuing within or outside the United States, in any post office, or station thereof, or street or other letter box of the United States, or authorized ucpository for mail matter, to be sent or uelivered by the post-office establishment of the United States, or shall take or receive any such therefrom, whether mailed within or without the United States, or shall knowingly cause to be delivered uy mA.il, according to the direction thereon, or at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any such letter, postal card, package, writing, circular, pnmphlet, or advertiRement, ~hall be fined not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

"All matter tho deposit of which in the mails is by this section mada punishable is hereby declared nonmailable."

SEc. 3. 'l'l1at section 3929, Revised Statutes, as amended, is hereby further amenued to rend us follows :

" SEC. 3929. The Postmaster General may, upon ovldence satisfactory to hlm that any person or company is engaged in conducting any lottory, gift enterprise, or scheme of any kind offering prizes dependent in whole or in part upon lot or chance, or that any person or company is conducting any scheme ot· device for obtaining money or property

1926 CONGRESS! ON AL RECORD-HOUSE 10115 of any kind through the mails by means of !alse or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, or that any person or company is selling, offering for sale, or sending through the malls any article, <levice, or thing designed or intenue<l for the conduct of a lottery, gift entcrpri::;e, or scheme of any kind offering prizes dependent in whole or in part upon lot or chance, or any unfair, dishonest, or cheating gambling article, device, or thing; instruct postmasters at any post office at which letters or other matter arrive directed to any such person or company, or tO the agent or representative of any such person or company, whether such agent or representative is acting as an iudiYiuual or as a firm, bank, corporation, or association 'Of any kin<l, to return all :-mch letters or other matter to the postmaster at the office at which they were originally mailc<l, with the word ' Fraudulent ' plainly written or stamped upon the outside thereof, and all such letters so returneu to such postmasterl:l shall be !Jy them returne<l to the writers thereof, under such regulations as the Postmaster General may prescribe. But nothing contained in this section shall be so construed as to authorize any postmaster or other person to open any letter not adurcsse<l to himself. The public advertisement !Jy such person or company so conducting such lottery, g ift enterprise, scheme, or device, that remittm1ces for the same ruay be made by letters to any other perl:lon, firm, bank, corporation, - or associatio·n named therein shall be held. to !Je prima facie evidence of the existence of said agency by all the parties named therein; but the Postmaster General shall not be preclu<led from ascertaining the existence of such agency In any other legal wny sati sfactory to hlmRelf."

S1oc. 4. That section 4041, Revised Statutes, as amende<l, is hereby further amended to read as follows :

" SEc. 4041. The Postmaster General may, upon evidence satisfactory to him that any person or company Is engaged in conducting any !ottery, gift enterprise, or scheme of any kind offering prizes depenuent In whole or in part upon lot or chance, or that any person or company is con<luctlng any scheme for obtaining money or property of any kinu through the mails by means of false or frauuulent pretenses, representations, or promises, or that any person or company is selling, offering for sale, or scndiug through the mails any article, device, or thing d ·signed or intenued for the conduct of a lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme of any kind off ring prizes dependent in whole or in part upon lot or chance, or any unfair, dishonest, or cheating gambling article, device, or thing, forbill the payment by any postmaster to said person or company of any postal money orders drawn to his or its order, or in his or its favor, to the agent of any such person or company, whether such agent is acting as an indiviuual or as a firm, bank, corporation, or association of any kind, and may provide by regulation for the return to the remitters of the sums named in such money orders. But this shall not a u thorize any person to open any letter not addressed to himself: The public advertisement by such person or company so conducting any such lottery, gift enterpx1se, scheme, or device that remittances for the same may be made by means of postal money orders to any other person, firm, bank, corporation, or association named therein shall be held to be prjma facie evidence of the existence of sail!. ·agency by all the parties named therein ; but the Postmaster General Rhall not be precluded from ascertaining the existence of such agency in any other legal way."

Witll the following committee amendments: On page 2, in lino 8, after the word " bill," at the end of the line,

ILsert a comma. On page 7, in line 5, after the word "honest," insert a comma.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the adoption of the committee amendments.

The question was taken, and the amendments were agreed to. 1\Ir. GRIEST. l\:Ir. Sp-eaker, the purpose of this bill is to

amend existing law so that lottery paraphernalia and fraudulent gambling devices shall come under the ban of the law as well as the lotteries themselves. Complaint that letters and advertisements promoting the sale of lottery paraphernalia are ue.iJ.Jg disseminated through tho mails has come to the Post Office Committee and the Post Office Department for many years. In the last Congress the PostJ:p.astel' General urged this committee to report out a bill favorably. Now the Postmaster General again urges action. The concluding sentence of the Postmaster General's letter with rega~d to this bill is :

The experience of the department is that the puulic interest demands s.uch legislation, and it has my most favoralJle recommendation.

1\Ir. Speaker, the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. RAMSEYER], the author of the bill, has given this question much intelligent kitudy, and I will ask him to make a statement concerning it.

Mr. RAMSEYER. Mr. Speaker, this bill word for word as it appears here passed this House during the Sixty-seventh Congress. necau::;e of an unfortunate amendment which was taeked onto it it failed of passage in the Senate. As stated by the chairman of the committee, this bill is an amendment to e:xisting law, and the Post Oflice Department is very desirous to have these sections of the law amended.

You gentlemen who are interested in knowing just what we attempt to do by this bill can find in the report beginning on the second page the sections of the bill. In the ordinary print you will find the part of the law that it is proposed to leave as it is. Printed with stricken-through type you will find the portions of the law that we recommend to ·ue omitted, and printed in italics are the additions to the law that we recommend.

I will make a brief explanation of each section, and if you have any questions you want to a k you may interrupt me at any time. ·

1\Ir. JOHNSON of Texas. I would like to a~lt the gentleman a question. Do I understand that the ordinary type in the printed report is tlle law as it now stands?

1\fr. RAMSEYER. Yes; it begins on page 2, third paragraph, of the report accompanying the bill.

l\Ir. JOHN SON of Texas. That is the existing law, with the exception of the italicized portion.

1\Ir. RAl\1SEYER. Yes; that is true. Section 213, whieh is sought to be amended by the bill before you, is what is known as the lottery ~ection. The use of the mails is prohibited for carrying on lottery enterprises of any kind. What we seek to rlo is to prohibit the use of the mail to manufacturers and ,-endors of lottery paraphernalia. There is nothing in the existing law to exclude lottery parapherualia to pErsons who arlvertise and vend such paraphernalia. Of course, the only thing the Federal Government can <lo in regulating lotteries is by its po\Yer in regulating the mails. As it is to-day the use of tllC mails is absolutely prohibited to the carrying on of any lottery enterprise. But the manufacturers of lottery paraplwrnalia can advertise it through the mails without any restrictions whatever.

Tbe first Fection of the bill, \vbich enlarges the scope of section 213 of the Criminal Code, amends existing law to prohibit the use of the mails to lottery paraphernalia.

The second section of tlle bill, which seeks to amend section 215 of the Criminal Code, is tlle section that deals with the frau<lulent n:-:e of the mails. It is this section under which numerous personA llave been indicted and convicted during re. cent years, especially for using the mails to sell fraudulent stocks. The only change we make in that section is to prohibit the use of tl)c mails to sell or dispose of any unfair, dishonest, or cheating gambling article, device, or thing, and the chief articles that we want to reach are loaded dice and marked cards. Manufacturers of these devices advertise them through the nmils and young chaps who want to venture into a gambling operation are induced to order these fraudulent gambling devices.

The third section of the bill amends se"ction 3929 of t11o Revised Statutes. Under existing law the Postmaster General has po"·er to issue what are known as fraud orders. Any person carrying on a lottery enterprise or some sclleme to defraud may haYe a fraud order issued against him by the Postmaster General, and after such order is issued mail sent to such concern or party ag{linst wllom tlle fraud order has been issued is not delivered. In the last three years the Postmaster General has issued fraud orders agaim;t 1,021 concerns and parties in the United States. The amendment to this section simply authorizes the Postmaster General to issue such fraud orders in cases of violations of the amendments added to sections 213 and 215.

Section 4 of the bill, which amends section 4041 of the Revised Statutes, gives the Postmaster General tlle power to refuse to pay post-office money orders payable to a concern or party carrying on a lottery enterprise or a fraudulent scheme; that is, post-office money orders payable to violators of sections 213 and 215 of tlle Criminal Uode. The amendment to this section of the Revised Statutes simply gives the Postmaster General the added power to issue orders refusing to pay post-office money orders payable to concerns and parties violat· ing sections 213 or 215 of tlle Criminal Code as amcuded in this bill.

1\lr. ABERNETHY. 1\fr. Speaker, will tlle gentleman yield? 1\.fr. RAMSEY.EH.. Yes. Mr. ABERNETHY. Docs not the gentleman think that sec

tion 213 would cover the average country newspaper or daily newspaper that runs a contest and offers a prize for the one who gets the most subscriptions? Is not that broad enough to prevent that?

1\.fr. RAMSEYER. This Rection of tlle code has been the law for many years, and such contests have been carried on by the newspapers for many years. I have never bad this matter up with the Post Office Dopartment, but I understand that such contests for subscription ar~ not in violation of this statute. I know that they are carried on with the knowledge of the Post Office Department. The distinction seems to be that the

10116 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MAY 26 contestants are entitled to a certain number of votes for every subscription procured, so that the procuring of a . prize or prizes o:trered is dependent upon the effort and enterpnse of the contestants and not upon lot or chance.

Mr. ABEHNETHY. It is not the intention of the gentleman's committee to pro"hilJit such contests?

Mr. R. .. VIiSEYER. We did not have that in mind, and it was not in the mind of anybody connected with this bill to change existing law in that regard.

Mr. ABERNETHY. And the gentleman does not think that it (h~es prohibit them?

1\Ir. RA.l\lSEYER. No; the amendment to that section does not vrohi!Jit anything along that line that is not prohibited under existing law.

JUr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

1\lr. RAl\iSEYER. Yes. 1\lr. JOHNSON of Texas. Within the past two years I have

had criticiBms of the Post Oilice Department from two newspapers in Texas with reference to r·ulings made by the department concerning advertisements contained in the newspapers which the department had claimed to IJe lotteries and wh~ch the newspa1)ers thought were not. I took the matter up With the depar tment, and I found a tendency on the part of the le¥al devartment of the Post Office Department to be, I thougnt, extremely narrow and technical in their · construction of tllis law. I recall the facts in one instance. The newspaper simply carried an adverti ··ement where a concern offered to give a prize to one who would gness the longest number of hours that a piece of ice would remain in a refrigerator.

Mr. RA::.\ISEYER. Right there, did those who guessed pay anything for the right to gue~s?

i1r. JOHNSON of Texa;;;. No; it was simr>ly an advertisement. The refrigerator v..as in a window. It was a pure guess, and nothing was paid for the right to guess. It r equired some skUl in estimating, and I recall the attorney in tbe department said that it might depend upon who saw it first or who reached there fir~t. and that thereby an element of chance was involYe<l. I thought at the time that the construction was extremely narrow. It occurred to me the element of consideration was lacking and not a lottery. I had another case, the facts of which I do not now recall. I am wondering whether there would be any review from such a decision of tl1e Post Office Department, or is the legal uepartrnent of the Post Office the final authority to uetermine whether the fraud order shall IJe entered?

Mr. B.Al\iSEYER. Of course, the party against whom the framl order is issued has the right to go to tlle courts. There ii:i no ~ueh oruer that can not be reviewed by the courts.

l\Ir. JOHNSON of Texas. As I understand the gentleman's statement this does not enlarge the law with reference to violations of' this kind. Its primary purpose is to enlarge it so a::; to cover paraphernalia that might be so nsed.

Mr. RAMSEYER. The gentleman's views are correct. The amendments to existing law as proposed in this bill would in no wise affect the state of facts that the gentleman just pre-

, sented. 1\lr. EVANS. ~Ir. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? l\Ir. RAMSEYER. Yes. Mr. EVAN'S. The gentleman was discussing the proposition

of an amendment to authorize the Postmaster General to decline to pay post-office orders under certain conditions. The question arises in my mind, if he were given that authority, as to what would become of the money paid by the individuals into the Post Office Department for the money order.

Ur. RAMSEYER. The money order is returned. Mr. EVANS. To the unsuspecting individual? Mr. RAMSEYER. Yes. Under a fraud order the Postmas

ter General prohibits the delivery of mail to the party or concern against whom the oruer is directed. In a case like that the mail is returned.

Mr. EYANS. 'l'o the sender? 1\Ir. RAl\ISEYER. To the sender. The statute specifically

prohibits anybody in the Post Office Department from opening first-class mail--

l\lr. EVANS. I appreciate that. l\lr. RAMSEYER. ·wen, there is law other than contained

in this section prohibiting anybody in the department from opening first-class mail, and the only place first-class mail is ever opened, or where there is any right to open letter mail, is the dead-letter office, where undeliYerable mail is sent.

Mr. EVANS. This thought occurreu to me. A post-office order might get in the hands of an innocent party, and I wanteu to know who is going to get tile money, who will be deprive(} of the money or lose the money?

Mr. RAMSEYER. The money or<ier is returned to the sender and in case of letter mail, as I said before, that is re· turned' to the post office from which it was sent to be delivereu to the sender.

l\Ir. WEF ALD. Will the gentleman yield? l\lr. RAMSEYER. I will. 1\Ir. WEFALJ). I would Uke to know whether there is any.

thing in this !Jill, if it is enacted, tilat would hit the so-called trade campaign carried on in small towns where business men of the '"''hole ..._town organize and a certain amount of money is set aside from each purehase for a list of prizes, including several automobiles, with the understan<ling that on a certain day at the close of the campaign they are to IJc distributed through a drawing. 'Yould this bill affect that in any manner.

Mr. UAMSEYEH. I will state this to the gentleman from Minnesota, that the amendments which are proposed to this bill to existing lnw in no wise affect a situation like the gentleman has just described. If these campaigns are legal under existing law they will continue to be legal when these amenuments are· adopted. Of course, enterprises or trade contests such as tile gentleman has described are often carried on without the use of the post office at all. ·

Mr. WEF ALD. Of course, there is no intention of frauu? l\Ir. RA:\ISilJYEU. I understand ; it is simply to !Joost the

t own and trade of the local merchants . There is nothing in the proposed amendments to this bill that would in any way affect the situation which the gentleman has described.

Mr. \VEl!"ALD. I thank the gentleman. Mr. RAMSEYER. Now, l\ir. Speaker, there being no further

questions--l\:Ir. GIFFORD. Will the gentleman yield? l\Ir. RAMSEYER. I will. Mr. GIFFORD. I understand we are amending the present

law, and I would like to try to make clear one particular trouble which it seems to me exists in the law. It says that no postmaster or letter carrier " knowingly " shall deliver any newspaper that might contain some advertisement which may carry the story that there is to be some sort of a gift contest. Now many of us, I am sure, know of cases where the postmaster assumed to know that the newspaper contained advertisements of gift contests which are forbidden under the law and he has held up the whole issue of a newspaper. Now, we all fully understand, I am sure, that the word "knowingly" does not carry very much weight in law, and I am wondering if the gentleman bas given very much consideration to the effect of that paragraph, stating tilat a letter carrier even mfty be haled into court to prove whether " knowingly" or not he delivered a new:-;paper earrying an advertisement, say, of a women's sewing <:ircle with reference to a gift contest?

1\lr. H.Al\If3BYJiJR. The way the thing works out in practiceand I think the postal employees have instructions to that effect-is where the newspaper is offering for mailing, and there is any question whether it has advertisements in violation of law the postmaster himself does not assume to pass on that bnt the ii:isne of the mailability of the paper is referred to the uepartment, and he awaits the ruling of the department before he takes any action thereon. Of course, after the devartruent has instructed the postmaster that a _ newspaper with a certain kind of an advertisement should not be carrieu in the mail and the postmaster and employees shoulu go on and dPliver them, then that would IJe considered as in violation of the law.

l\lr. GIFFORD. I would like to ask the gentleman if be does not realize that in many cases tile postmasters do not wait until the matter has been passed upon by an inspector or the department, but does hold up the whole newspaper issue, thinking that under the law he is certainly liable, if. he has the knowledge of its contents, having read the advertlsem·ent and deeming it in conllict with tl\e law?

Mr. RAMSEYER. 'Yell, he might have read the advertisement without knowing that it was in violation of the law.

1\lr. GIFFORD. Does not the gentleman ngree that the word "knowingly" in law has not very much legal effect?

1\lr. RAJUSEYJ;~R. Oh, it has legal significance ; certainly. One must know that what Ile is doing is prohibited by law. It is the doing "knowingly" that violates tllis law.

l\lr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. l\Ir. GRIEST. Mr. Speaker, how much time have I? The SPE.A.KER pro tempore (Ur. SNELL). The gentleman

has 37 minutes remaining. l\lr. GRIEST. I yielll 15 minutes to the gentleman from

Georgia [nir. B~LL]. Mr. BELL. l\1r. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to tile gentle

man from Oklailoma [1\ir. McKEOWN].

1926 ' OONGRESSION AL REOORD-HOU13E 10117 The SPE.AKIDR pro tempore. The gentleman from Oklahoma

is recognized for 10 minutes. 1\Ir. McKEOWN. l\lr. Speaker and gentlemen of the House,

I want to call your attention to a very important matter which this bill affects. I think when you hear me patiently you will agree with me that tilis amendment tilat I shall suggest should be put in the bill. Under the law as it now exists it has been held down here by the Post Office Department that a newspaper which printed the program of a chamber of commerce where prizes were given for the promotion of business, simply because they were to be distributed by drawing, could not go through the post office.

Now, gentlemen, that is not the intention of Congress. Associations of merch:mts for the promotion of trade, where there is no chance at an, who offer prizes, and in many instances offer cattle, fine blooded stock of every kind, as nn inducement to t11e boys' clubs, as an inducement to have the farmers engage in stock raising, are interfered with by the construction that is given to the law by the department. It is held down here by the devartment that you cari not print such an advcrth;ement in the newsvapers. No longer than a few days ago public comment was made by one of the distinguished Members of the other body jn reference to that matter. It certainly is not the purpose of Congress to prevent a board of trade or an a ssociation of merchants from conducting a trade sale, which is a common practice in the \Vest, where tiley will advertise a certain day, and every purchaser during all this time receives a ticket from the merchant. There is no effort to make money out of that, and in order to equitably distribute the prizes they permit them to be drawn. Yet the dCJlUrtment says you can not put into the post office a newspaper containing an advertisement that mnkes that provh;ion.

Now, that is not right. I am in favor of this law. I want you to understand now that it is not right to prohibit chambers of commerce and boards of trade .throughout the country, these small boards of trade, to offer prizes that can be drawn by cilance, becan:-;e that is the only legitimate way you can do it. I do not want you to go to work now and cut these men off.

I am delighted that this matter has come up at this time for the consideration of Congress, and I will be glad if you will adopt an amendment something like this ; I do not care as to the precise form, so long as it cuts out the arbitrary ruling. The amendment I have referred to comes at the end of the section on page 3, line 12, after the word " addressed." I want to haYc it di:;;tinctly understood that it is for the purpose . of taking care of this situation and not for the purpose of nullifying tlle act.

I want you to put in something to exempt a drawing where prizes arc given by bona fide a . ·sociations of merchants, chambers of commerce or boards of trade, or newt";papers promotiug suuscriptions to their papers by offering prizes. I do not think that this Congress means to cut out advertisements of that kind. I do not think it ever was the purpose of Congress, and now you have a chance to stop it.

I have sent to my office for a paper, uut it has not yet arri yed, sllowing wh:H kind of advertisement the department has held could not be put into the mail because it simply advertised that on a trade day, which was the first Monday of the month. tlw Chamber of Commerce of the city of Holdenville would d!stribute prizes by drawing. As I take it, it is not the intention of Congress to do more than bar the crooks who are trying to use gambling devices to mulct the public out of their money. I" am heartily in sympathy with the law, and you can not make it too strict for me, to bar crooks and schemes of that kind out of the mail. But in fairness to the people of this country I ask you not to make it apply to bona fide merchants associations and boards of trade who arc trying in the best way possible to promote interest in different lines of industry and business.

I am going to ask you to adopt some amendment something like this. If it is not exactly right I want somebody to draw one that mil fit the situation. At present the law bars from the mail the distribution of prizes where there is no chance auout the matter at all, because a man pays full price for his goods when he buys them, and he does not buy them on the theory that he will draw a prize. The offering of prizes simply brings a crowd on certain trade days to that community. I insist that you gentlemen give this your serious consideration, and that you correct this thing that ought to be corrected in the law. I do not believe the department is ~orrect in its construction. I have had some controversy with their attorney about the matter. I argued with him that the · law did not apply, but he said it did apply, and did bar them. It is simply an advertisement: by certain newspapers on a trade day to that effect.

LXVII--G37

l\1r. WEFALD. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? 1\fr. McKEOWN. Yes. Mr. \VEFALD. In other words, the gentleman means that

he wants a live town to be permitted to do its best? Mr. McKEOWN. Yes. Of course, I want a live town to

be permitted to do its Lest. There is no lottery or gambling about this proposition. This

is simply for the purpose of stirring up interest among tile people in industry and trade, and they ought not to be hampered now in the agricultural regions from carrying on their industry and trade as Yigorously as possible. I hope the committee will find it possible to agree to some such amendment.

Pass tile bill williout any amendment and the members of the Ladies' Aid Society will he liable for mnilin~ invitations to a measuring party. The mail-order houses wlll ue gratified to hnve the local merchants further hindered so as to extend the competition of the mail-order goods.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Oklahoma. has expired. The que tion is on tile engross- . mcnt and third reading of the bill.

l\1r. 1\lcKEO\YN. l\lr. Spct!ker, I want to offer tJ.tc amendment I ha\c referred to.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Pennsylvania yield to t11e gentleman from Oklahoma for the purpose of offering his amendment?

1\Ir. GRIEST. I will yield. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Oklahom:i

offers nn amendment, which tl.le Clerk will report. The Clerk read as follows : A.mendnwnt offereu by Ur. Mc~EOW~ : Page 3, line 12, at the end

of the line insert the following: uProt·idcrl, This Rection shnll not apply to advertisements of the distribution of prizes by drawing where same arc given by I.Jona fide associations of merchants, chambers of commerce, boards of trade in the promotion of trade or commerce, or to newspapers promoting sui.Jscriptions to their paper by oliering prizes."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.

The question was taken; and on a dlvislon (demanded by 1\Ir. :McKEowN) there were--ayes 26, noes 4u.

So the amE:'ndment was rejecteil. :Mr. GRIEST. l\1r. Speaker, I move the previous question

on the bill and amendments to final passage. The previous question was ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is now on the

engrossment and third reading of the bill. The bill was ordered to be engros~ed and read a third time,

and was rend the third time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is now on the

final passage of the bill. Mr. McKEOWN. l\1r. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit

the bill with instructions to report immediately with an amendm0nt. ._,

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Oklahoma moves to recommit the bill with an amendmept, wl.lich the Clerk will report.

The Clerk read as follows : Mr. McKEQW:-; offers a motion to recommit the bill to the Committee

on the Post Office and Post Roads with instructions to that committee to report the s::tme back forthwith with the following amenument : Page 3, Hne 12, after the word "addressed," insert: "Prot:£dcd, This section shall not apply to advertisements of the distribution of prizes by drawing where snmc are given by bonn fide nssociations of merchants, charu!Jers of commerce, boards of trade in the promotion of trade or commerce or to newspapers promoting subscriptions to tl.Jeir paper by offering prizes."

Mr. RAMSEYER. Mr. Spenkcr, I make the point of order thnt the amendment is not ~ermane and it is n.n amendment that l.lns been offered on the floor of the House and voted down, an identical amendment.

l\lr. l\lcKEOWN. But the gentleman did not make a point of order against the amendment at that time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is ready to rule. There is no doubt but that the amendment is subject to a point of order, because it is exactly the same proposition that bas just been passed upon by the House, and it is subject to a point of order under section 459 as found in the Manual. The point of order is sustained. The question is on the final pas· sage of the bill.

~'he question was taken; and on a division (demancled by l\lr. l\lcKEOwN) there were-ayes G2, noes 15.

l\1r. l\1cKE0"7N. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote and ,make the point of order that there is no quorum present.

10118. CONGRESSIOl~.AL RECORD-.. HOUSE MAY 26

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Oklahoma makes the point of order that there is no quorum present. The Chair will count. . .

Mr. McKEOWN. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the point of order of no qnorum.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Oklahoma withdraws his point of order of no quorum; and without objection, the proceeiliugs on the passage of the bill will be vacated and the decision of the Chair sustaining the point of order made by the gentleman from Iowa will be withdrawn.

There wns no objection. Mr. McKEO'WN. Now, l\fr. Speaker, I ask unanimous .con

sent to 11roceed for five minutes on the .motion to recomm1t. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Okla

homa asks unanimous consent to proceed for fivo minutes on tlle motion to recommit. Is there objection 'l

There was no objection. Mr. McKEOWN. Now, gentlemen, I want to show you what

you are going to do if you pass this _bill without this am~ndment · vou men who have towns out m the West. Here 1s a pape; 'advertising trade e...-xtension day on Saturday, May 1, and that paper was barred from the United States mails because of the lottery statute which you are amending. I have the opinion of the department in which they hold such an advertiRement can not be transmitted through the mails, tlle opinion being by the Solicitor of the Post Office Departm~t.

Now, I want you gentlemen to know what you ~re votmg ?n, and if you gentlemen are willing to bar advertisements hke that from the mails without having tllat amendment in the bill, all right; yon can take the responsibility.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Was it a lottery? l\fr. McKEO\VN. No; these are just prizes given away by

the board of trade, and tllat can not be called a lottery .. ~Ir. LEHLBA.Cll. How were the prizes distributed? Mr. McKEOWN. Tiley "-'ere distributed by drawing, but

there is no lottery about that, because the prizes do not cost them anything and they are not giving anything for them.

Mr. LAGUARDIA.. Do they pay admission to the grounds? Mr. McKEOWN. Not at all; they do not pay anything.

They distributed these prizes by drawing because there is no otller way to do it. ·.

l\Ir. ANDREW. Is that forbidden by existing law? l\1r. MoKEOWN. It is forbidden under the present law, as

coustrued by the solicitor. 1\fr. ANDREW. Under the law now on tlle statute books? l\:Ir. McKEOWN. Yes; the law has .been construed in that

way. Mr. LEHLBAOH. Will the gentleman yield? 1\-!r. McKEOvVN. Yes; I yield. Mr. LEHLBA.CH. Not only is that barred by the determina

tion of the Post Office Department, but in the · past, in a good many places, fraternal organizations holding annual entertainments were in the habit of printing numbers on the admission tickets and giving prizes as a result. Tlrls was declared illegal. They thereupon determined to try a plan by which each ticket entitled a person to estimate the attendance on the particular evening that he attended, and the one who guessed nearest the attendance that the count of the tickets in fact showed was entitled to a prize. They barred that procedure on the ground that it involved the element of chance. Does the gentleman think such schemes for the purpose of even securing large attendance, or securing purchasers for goods or lots in an extension, or anything like that, is a good practice and one which should be permitted?

1\lr. McKEJOWN. I do not see why it should not be permitted when it is done in a bona fide way for the purpose of carryi~g on commerce and trade. T!J.ere is nothing vi~i?us about it. There is no gambling about 1t. It is mala prohibita, and not malum in se. There is· no element of gambling, and it seems to me it is time the Congress in the passage of laws of this kind should confine itself to prollibiting things that are wrong. Is there any man in the House here who would say there is anything wrong or there is any violation of any moral or any other kind of law to give a prize in cases where persons buy goods throughout the month and receive a numbered ticket showing he may participate in the awarding of prizes, especially when tllese prizes are given away by merchants' associations or chambers of commerce?

Mr. BLAOK of New York. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. McKEOWN. Yes. Mr. BLACK of New York. Does the gentleman believe this

bill if it became a law, would also interfere with churches and charitable institutions in raising funds in this way?

l\fr. McKEOWN. I think it will prohibit them all, so far as that is concel'ned under this ruling of the Solicitor of the Post Office Department. A Member of the Senate the other day

raised the question of how far the solicitor had gone in the rlepartment in barring matter from tlle mails, and here is what . the solicitor says as to the advertisement in the Holdenville Democrat, of Holdenville, Okla. :

The recejpt· is acknowledged of your letter of the 17th instant, trans-. mitting a copy of the April 15 issue of the Holdenville Democrat, containing an adv·ertil:lemellt of a so-called trade-extension day to be conducted by the merchants of your city, wherein it is announced that certain prizes will be given awaJ; free. It is understood that ticlcets are given with purchases wilich entitle the holders to participate in a drawing for the prizes.

In reply you are advised that this scheme is a lottery, and under section 473, P. L. & R., 1924, all matter of every kind in any way relating thereto, including copies of the paper containing the advertisement in qti.cstion,. is accordingly unmailable.

The fact that the method of award or details of the plfm are not set forth in the ·advertisement <loes not render the matter any less objectionable under the law.

I simply want you gentlemen to see this adverth;ement. It is simply a trade-extension advertisement, and I ask you gentlemen to vote on this motion as to whether or not you will recommit the bill and have it reported ·back with the amendment I have offered.

Mr. RAMSEYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unauimous consent to proceed for three minutes.

The SPEAKER pro teruvore. The gentleman from Iowa a skr:; unanimous consent to proceed, out of order, for three minutes. Is there objection?

Tllere was no objection. Mr. RAMSEYER. Mr. Speaker, I have not had time, of

com·se, to closely examine the newspaper article, but the present law has been the law for many years. If you are going to make an exception of trade organizations, you ougllt to make an exception of farm organizations and of churches and of lodges and just repeal the entire law.

I want you to understand tlloroughly . that the bill before you does not change existing law in regard to wllat is propor:;ed here. Tlle only thing it docs is to add to existing law lottery paraphernalia, and tlle advertisement which has been sho~n here is not affected in the least by the amendments of the b1ll to existing law.

If you are going to make exceptions of any kind to the law as it is now and has been for many years, I would not limit it to just one or two organizations ; I would simply repeal tho stahHe and let everybody have a free hand.

l\Ir. BLACK of New York. Will tlle gentleman yield? Mr. RAMSEYER. Yes. Mr. BLAOK of New York. Is the gentleman of the opinion

this would bar churclles and charitable organizations from their usual methods of collecting money by means of chances?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Not their usual legal methods of collecting money; no.

l\fr. BLACK of New York. It depends upon what is legal. Mr. RAMSEYER. This docs not change existing law in that

r egard at all. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question js on the motion

of the gentleman from Oklahoma to recommit the bill with instructions. . .

Mr. LO,VREY. Mr. Speaker, may we have the motion agam reported?

The motion to recommit was again reported. 1\lr. RAMSEYER. :Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question

on tlle motion to recommit. The previous question was ordered. Tlle SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on tlle motion

to recommit. Tlle question was taken ; and on a division (demanded by

Mr. McKEOWN) there were--ayes 25, noes u3. So the motion to recommit was rejected. . . l\11·. BLACK of New York. l\Ir. Speaker, I raise tlw pomt of ·

no quorum. The SPEAKER 'pro tempore. The gentleman from New York

makes the point that no quorum is present. Evidently there is no quorum present. 'l'he Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will bring in Jl,bse.nt Members, and the Clerk will call the roll.

The question was taken ; and there were--yeas _264, nays 68, ansn·ered " present" 5, not voting 94, as follows:

Abernethy AckE>rman Adkins Andresen Arentz As well

Ayres Bacharach Barbour Beck Beers Begg

[Roll No. 1001

YEAS-264 Bell Bixler Black, Tex. Blanton Boies Bowles

Bowman Box Brancl, Ga. Brand, Ohio Brigham Browne

J92G CONGRESS! ON AL l{.ECORD-HOUSE 110119 Drumm Fulmer Bulwinkle Furlow Burdick Garber Burtness Gardner, Ind. Burton Gibson llutler GiiTord Byrns GoldRborough Cnmpi.Jell Goodwin Canuon Gorman Cnrpenter Green, lt'la. Cnr~s Griest

· C:utl'l', Calif. Griffin Carter, Okla. Hadley Chnlmers . Hale Chln<lblom Hall. Ind. Christopherson Hammer Cla~;ue Hardy Colo Ilnstings Collier Hau,gen Collins Rawley Colton Hersey Conno.Ily. Pa. Hlll, Wash. · Cooper, Wis. Hoch Cox Hogg Crisp ITooper· Cros::.~e r TllJ(ldleston Crowther Hudson Crumpacker Huclspeth Cuny Hun, Tenn. Dturow Hull, Morton D. Davenport Hull, William E. Davey Jacobsteia DaYit-; James Dempsey Johnson, Ill. Dickinson, Iowa Johnson, Ind. Dickinson, Uo. Johnson, S. Dale Dominick .Johnson, Wash. Doughton Jones Drane Kahn Drewry Keller Enton K elly Edwards Ketcllam Elliott Kiefner Ellis Kiess Esterly Kirl\ Evans Knutson Fairchild Kopp Fau~ Kurtz Fenn Kvnle msh LaGuardia li'itzgerald, Roy G. Lampert l •'itz/i'erald, W. T. Lanl.lnm Fletcher Lankford F'ort Lazaro Foss Lea, Calif.

.Frear Leatherwoou lo'ree Leavitt Freeman Lehlbach ]'rench Letts Fuller Little

Lozier Scott Mcll'ndden Sears, Nebr. McLaughlin, 1\Iich. Seger McLaughlin, Nebr. Shreve McLeod Simmons l\fcHeynolds Sinclair .Mc~weeney Sinnott MucUregot· Smith 1\Iugee, N. Y. Snell l\lagee, Pa. 8osnowskl 1\Iagrady Speaks l\Iajor Spearing l\Iaulove Sproul, Ill. Mansfield Sproul, Kans. Mapes StaUter Martin, La. Stobbs l\In1i.in, Mass. 8tron~, Kans. :Menges Strong, l'a. Merritt Strother 1\lichaelson Summers, Wash. Mich ener Sumners, Tex. Miller Swank Milligan Swartz l\lills Swing l\Iontague 'l'aber Montg-omery Taylor, N.J. l\1oore, Ky. Taylor, Tenn. Moore, Ohio Taylot·, W.Va. l\Iorgan Temple l\Iurphy Thatcher Nelson, l\Ie. Thurston Nelson, Wis. TilsOn Newton, Minn. Timberlake Newton, l\Io. Tinkham O'Connell, R. I. 'l'olley O'Connor, La. Treadway Oldfield Unrlerhill Olh·er, Aln. Underwood Parker Updike Phillips Upshaw Porter Vaile Pou Vestal Pratt Vincent, l\1lch. Quin Vinson, Ga. Ragon W ainwr1ght Rainey ·wnrren Ramseyer ·watson Rathbone WPfald Uayburn Welsh R eece Wh<'eler

g~~~: ~~~. ;~n~h~~~r· Iteid; 111. Whittington Hohinson, Iowa Williams, Tex. Ro~P t'3 Williamson Rowbottom 'Winter Rubay Wolverton Sanders, Tex. Wright Sandlin WYant Schncidet· Yates

NAYS-68 Allgood Deal Linthicum Almon Dickstein Lowrey Andrew Driver Lyon Arnold Dyer l\lcDuffie Berget· Gambrill ::\lcKeown Black, N.Y. Gilbert l\Ic ~lilian Bland Harrison McSwain Bloom Hayd<'n l\Jooney Bowling nickex l\Ioore, Va. Boylan Hill, Ia. Morehead Bri~gs Rill, Md. Morrow nus by Howard Nelson, Mo. Carew Irwin No1·ton Cellc:r Jeffers O' Co::mell, N. Y. Chapman J ohnRon, Tex. O'Connor, N.Y. Connery Kincheloe Oliver, N.Y. Cullen Lindsay Prall

ANSWERED " PRESENT ''-5 Beedy Rare Eslick

NOT Aldrich Fisher Allen Flaherty Anthony Fredericks Appleby l!"'t·othingham Auf der Heide l!'unk Bachmann Gallivan Bacon Garne1·, Te::r. Hailey Garrett, Tenn. Hankllead Garrett, 'l'ex. Barkley Gasque Britten Glynn Browning Golder Buchanan Graham Canfield Green, Iowa Clf'ary Greenwood Connally, Tex. Hall, N.Dak. Cooper, Ollio Hawes Corning Holaday Coyle Houston CrRmton Jenkins Deulson Johnson, Ky. Douglass Kearns Dowell Kemp D oyle Kendall

So the bill was passed.

P eery

VOTING-94 Kerr Kindred King Knnz Larsen Lee, Ga. Lineberger Luce McClin tlc Madden l\Iead Morin Parks Patterson Peav('y Perkins l'erlman Purnell Ham~ ley House Sa bath Sanders, N. Y. Sears, Fla. Smithwick

The following pairs were announced: General pairs until further notice:

Qnnyle Hankin Rob!lion, Ky. nomjue Itnthl'rford Schafer Shallenber~r Homers, N .. Stephens Thomas Thompson Tillman Tucker Vinson, Ky. 'Vcller Wilson, La. Woodrum

Wason

Steagall Stedman SteYenson Sullivan Sweet Swoope Taylor, Colo. Tinrher Tydings Va1·e Voi~t Walters Watres Weaver White, Me. WHliams, III. Wilson, Miss. Wingo Wood Woodruff Wurzbach Zihlman

Mr. :Morin with l\Tr. Bankhead. Mr. Luce with Mr. Mead. l\lr. Kendall with Mr. Buchanan. Mr. Bailey with l\Ir. Scars of Florida. Mr. Patterson with Mr. Cleary. Mr. Appleby with l\Ir, Stedman. Mr. Perkins with 1\fr. Doyle . Mr. Cramton with Mr. Garner of Texas. Mr. Denison with l\Ir. Bnrkley. Mr. Vure with i\fr. Rouse. Mr. l!'rothingham with Mr. Canfield. Mr. Wood with Mr. Corning. · l\fr. Sweet with Mr. GnS(]ue. Mr. Purnell with Mr. Sulllvan. Mr. nacon with l\Ir. Hawes. Mr. Alt.lrlch with Mr. Johnson of Kentucky, 1\fr. Britten with l\1r. Lee of Georgia. l\lr. l<'unk with 1\Ir. Greenwood. Mr. Gt·aham with Mr. Auf der Heide. Mr. White of Maine with Mr. Smitllwick. Mr. Green of Iowa with Mt·. Kindred. l\Ir. Golder with Mr. Taylor of Colorado. Mt·. Wurzbnch with l\Ir. Steagall. l\1r. Coyle with l\Ir. Parks. Mr. l\1adflen with Mr. Weaver. Mr. Couper of Ohio with Mr. Kerr. Mr. Ransley with Mr. Douglass. Mr. Anthony with Mr. l\IcClintic. Mr. King with 1\fr. Browning. Mr. Dowell with Mr. Stevenson. l\Ir. Williams of Illinois with Mr. Wingo. Mr. Woodruff with l\Ir. Tydings. Mr. Kearns with Mr. Gallivan. Mr. Zihlman with Mr. Wilson of l\Iissis:;; ippl. Mr. Sanders of New York with Mr. Kunz. Mr. Glynn with Mr. F'i~ller. l\fr. Watres with l\fr. Garrett of 'l'cnnesRee. Mt·. Perlman with Mr. Connally of Texas. Mr. Fredericks with M:r. Kemp. l\Ir. Allen with Mr. Larsen. Mr. Bachmann with Mr. Sab::tth. l\fr. Flaherty with Mr. Garrett of Texas. Mr. Swoope with Mr. Voigt. Mr. Houston with Mr. Peavey. The 11.·esult of the vote was announced as above recorded. On motion of Mr. RAMSEYER, a motion to reconsider the vote

whereby the bill was passed was laid on the table. nEGISTRA'l'ION OF MAIL MATTER

Mr. GRIEST. Mr. SpeRker, I call up the bill (H. R. 8377) authorizing the Postmaster General to establish a uniform system of registration of mail matter, and I ask unanimous consent that it be consi<lered in the House as in the Committee of the Whole.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania calls up the bill, H. R. 8377, on the Union Calendar, and asks unanimous consent that it be considered in the House as in Committee of t.he 'Vhole. Is theJre ob~ection?

There was no objection. The Clerk, proceediug with the bill, read as follows: Be it e11aoted, etc. , That section 3!)27 of the n evised Statutes of the·

United States, as amended by section 209 of the net of February 28, 1025 ( 43 Stat. L. p. lOGS), be, and the same is hereby, amended further to read as follows :

" l\Iail matter 8hall ue registered on tho application of the party posting the same, and the fees chargeable therefor shall be fixed by the Postmaster General in addition to the regular postage, to be, in all cases, prepnid; and all such fees sllall be accounted for in such manner as the Postmaster General shall dit·ect, but letters upon tlle otficial business of the Post Office Department which require registering shall be registered free of cl:!urge, and pass thr~mgh the mails tree of charge."

With the ·following committee amendments : On page 1 strike out all of lines 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12, nnd on page 2

the r emainder of the paragraph-that is, lines 1, 2, and 3-and insert in lieu thereof :

" Mail matter shall be registered on the application of the party posting the same, and the fees chargeable therefor, in addition to the r egular postage, shall be, in all cases, prepaid, as follows :

" For registry indemnity not exceeding $50, 15 cents. " For registry indemnity exceeding $GO and not exceeding $100, 20

cents. " For registry indemnity exceeding $100 and not exceeding $200, 30

cents. "For registry indemnity exceeding $200 and not exceeding $300, 40

cents. " For registry indemnity exceeding $300 and not exceeding $400, 50

cents. "For registry indemnity exceeding $400 and not exceeding $500, GO

cents. " For registry indemnity exceeding $500 and not exceeding $GOO, 70

cents. " l~'o r registry indemnity exceeding $600 and not exceeding $700, 80

cents. " For registry indemnity exceeding $700 anu not exceeding $800, 00

cents.

10120 - CONGRESSIONAL R.ECORD-_ HOUSE M.r\.Y 26

"For registry indemnity exceeding $800 and not exceeding $1,000, $1. "All such fees shall be accounted for in such manner as the Post

master General shall direct." Insert the following as a new section_ 2: " SEc. 2. That the provision of section 3 of the act entitled 'An act

111aking appropriations for the sen·ice of the Post Office Department for the fiscal year cncling June 30, 1885, and for other purposes,' approved July 5, 188i (23 Stat. L. p. HIS), with respect to the registration of official matter of the executive departments, is hereby amended to read as follows:

((l'roridcd furth er, That any official domestic letter or parcel to be registered by any executive depllrtment or bureau thereof, or independent Government institution, located at · Washington, D. C., or by the Public l'rintet·, which rP.quircs registration may be registered without the payment of any registry fee."

On page 2 in lirie 4, renumber " Sec. 2" as " Sec. 3."

.Mr. BLACK of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to strike out tile last word. I want to ask tile gentleman from 1\Ias~achu,setts a question. On this class of mail matter in a fourth-class office will the postmaster in determining his compensation take cre<lit for the cancellation?

:i\Ir. :E'OSS. It will remain in that particular just as it is now. This increases the rate of indemnity on registered matter.

l\lr. BLACK of Texas. If a patron of the post office wants to send a thousand-dollar Liberty bond and wants to insure it for a thousand dollars, he has to pay $1 registration fee. I suppose that will be by stamp which will be canceled, and the postmaster would take credit for it in his cancellation account.

l\ir. FOSS. Yes; I so understand it. Tlle SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the com

mittee amendments. The question was taken, and the committee amendments

were agreed to. The Clerk completed the reading of the bill, read as follows :

SEc. 2. The act of Februnry 27, 1897 ( ch . 840, 29 Stat. L . p. 5!>!)), provilling limited indemnity for loss of registered mail matter, and the act of March a, 1!)03 (32 Stat. L . p. 1174), fixing such indemnity at not exceeding $100, and that portion of the act of March 4, 1!)11 (3G Stat. L. p. 1337), malting appropriations for the service of the Post Office Department and for other purposes anu proviuing indemnity for the loss of third and fourth class domestic registcreu matter, are amended to read as follows :

"l1'or the greater security of valuable mail matter the Postmaster Gene1·a1 may establish a uniform system of registration, and as a part of such system he may provide rules under which the ·senders or owners of any registered matter shall be intlemni.fied for loss, rifling, or damage thereof in the mails, the indemnity to be paid out of the postal r e_venues, but in no case to exceed $1,000 for any one registercel piece, or the actual vnlue thereof when that is less than $1,000, and for which 110 other compensation or reimbursement to the loser has been made, the amount of such indemnity to I.Je fixed by the Postmas ter General."

1\lr. GRIEST. 1\ir. Speake.1·, I move the previous question on the passage of the bill.

Tile previous question was ordered. The SPNA.K.ER pro tempore. The question is on the en

grossment and third reading of the bill . The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read

a third time, was read the third time, and passed. The title was amended.

TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT OF RAILWAY P.OSTAL CLERKS AS SUBSTITUTE SEA-POST CLERKS

:Mr. GRIEST. .Mr. Speaker, I call up tile bill (H. R. 10132) to authorize the assignment of railway postal clerks and substitute railway postal clerks to temporary em11loyment as substitute sea-post clerks, and I ask unanimous consent. that it be considered in tile Honse as in Committee of the Whole.

The SPEAKER pro tcm1Jore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania calls up the bill H. H. 10132, on the Union Calendar, and asks unanimous consent that it be considered in the House as in Committee of the Wilole. Is there objection?

Tllere was no objection. Tile Clerk read the bill, as follows : Be it enacted, etc., That the PoRtmaster General is authorized to

assign railway postal clerks and substitute railwn.y potltal clerks to temporary employment as substitute sea-post clerks whenever in his opinion sucl.l employment is necessary. Any such clerks shall receive credit on his r.uilway Mail Sen-ice record for any pcrio~l while so employed, bllt his salary and expensE"s during any such period shall be the same as the salary and expenses paid and allowed a class 1 seapost clerk, shall be iu lieu of any othflr salary aud expenses, and shall be payable out of any appropriation available for maintaining sea-post service.

Tile SPEAEER pro t0mpore. Without objedion, tho word "clerks" will be changed to "clerk" in line 7.

Tllere was no objection. Mr. GRIES'l,. Mr. Speaker, I think tlle bill speaks for itself

and I ask for a vote. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The quel::ition is on the engross

ment and third rea(ling of tile bill. The IJill was ordered to IJe engros, ed and read a third time,

was read the third time, and passed. A. motion to reconsider the vote IJy "\Vhich the· bill was passed

was laid on the table. ADJUST~rE~T OF CLAIMS OF POSTY.ASTERS

Mr. GfliEST. JUr. ~peaker; I call up the bill (H. R. 12369) to amend the act entitlecl "An act authorizing the Postrna!'lter General to adjust certain claims of postm11sters for loss by IJurglary, fire, or other unavoidable casualty," approved March 17, 1882, as amended.

The SPEAKJ<JR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania calls up a bill wilich the Clerk will report.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. 1\Ir. GRIEST. Mr. Sveaker, I ask unanimous consent that

the bill be considered in the House as in Committee of the Wllole.

The RPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no oiJjection. Tlle SPEAKER. The Clerk will report tile bill. Tile Clerk read the bill, as follows : Be it enacted, etc., That the act entitled "An act authorizing the

Postmaster General to adjust certain claims of postmasters for loss by burglary, fire, or other unavoidable casualty," approved Murch 17, 1882, as amended, is amended so as to include losses of customs charges collecte(I on dutiable mail articles, but such act shall apply only to such losses occurring after April 1, 1024.

Mr. GRIEST. l\fr. Speaker, this bill speaks for itself, and I do not think we need any debate upon it. I ask for a vote.

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

A motion to reconF>ider the vote by which the bill was passed was laid on the table. TRANSPORTATION OF MAIL Bl!:TWEEN UNITED ST.ATES AND FOREIGN

COUNTRIES

1\fr. GRIEST. 1\fr. Speaker, I call up the bill H . R . 12211 to amend Rection 4,009 of the Revised Statutes, and I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered in the House as in Committee of the 'Vhole.

Tlle SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania calls up a bill which tile Clerk will report.

The Clerk read tlle title of the bill. Tile SPEAKl-iJR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania nsks

unanimous consent that the bill IJc considered in tile House as in tile. Committee of the Whole. Is there oiJjcction?

There was no ·objection. Tile SPEAKER. The Clerk will re11ort ·the bill. The Clerk read the bill, as follows :

A bill (H. R. 12211) to amend section 400!) of the Revised Statutes

Be it e_1wcted, etc., That section 4009 or the Revised Statutes is amended to read as follows :

"SEc. 400!). (a) Except as provided in sui.Jdlvision (b), for transportation of the mails (1) between the United States or its Territories or possessions and any foreign country, (2) between the United States and its possessions ot· its naval or military forces abroad, or (3) between any such possession or naval or mHitary forces and any other such possession or naval or military forces , the Postmaster · Gcueral may allow, in the case of a vessel of the United States, compensation not in excess of the amount of the postage collected on the mail transported ou such vessel, and in the case of a foreign vessel, compensation not in excess of the sea transit rates prcscribeu from time to time by the Uni \·crsal Postal Union Convention.

"(b) 'l'he provisions of subdivision (a) of this section shall not limit the compensation for transportation of mail which the Postmaster Geneml may pay under contracts entereu into in accordance with the provisions of section 4007 of the Heviscd Statutes or section 24 of the merchflnt marine act, 1!)20.

"(c) In the case of malls transportl'd between the UnJ.:ed States or its Territories or posHessions and any foreign country, payment for such transportation shall be made out of the appropriation for the trans· portation of foreign malls. In the case of mails transporte<l between the United States and its possessions or its naval or military forces abroad, or between any such possession or naval or military forces nnd a11y other such possession or naval or military forces, payment for such transportation shall be made, in the discretion of tbe Postmaster General, out of either the appropriation for the transportation of foreign mails or tbe appropriation for inlanu transportation by steamboat or other power-boat routes."

1926 CONGRESSIONAL REC_OR:Q-HOUSE _10121 Mr. GRIEST. 1\Ir. Speaker, I offer tlte following committee

amendment, whicll I send to the desk. The Clerk read as follows: Committee amendment: rage 2, line 14, after the word "country,"

strike out the remaindet· of line 14 and line Hi and to the word "in" in line 16 and insert in lieu thereof the word "ami"; also strike out all of line ~1 on page 2 after the word " made," to and including tho commn after the word "General," in line 21 ; strike out the word "e.Jther" in line ~2, page 2, and all of the wot·ds after the first word in line ~3 on page 2 and all of line 24.

The SPEAKER. The question is 01;1 agreeing to the committee amendment.

The committee amendment was agreed to. 'l'hc hill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a

third time, was read the third time, and passed. .A motion to r econsider the vote by which the bill was passed

wa~ laid on the table. Mr. GRIEST. Mr. Speaker, that concludes the business of

the Committee on the Po::;t Office and Post Roads. COY:AfiT'l'.CE ON THE PUBLIC LA~DS

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will call the next committee. The Clerk calle<l the Committee on the Public Lands.

DISPOSITIO~ OF ASPHALT, GILSONITE, ETC. Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee

on the Public Lands I call up the bill (H. R. u385) to provide for the disposition of asphalt, gilsonite, elaterite, and other like substances on the public domain.

The SPEAKER. This bill is on the Union Calendar. l\lr. SINNOTT. l\fr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that

it be considered in the House as in Committee of the -whole. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Oregon asks unani

mom; consent that the bill be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole. Is there objection?

Th re was no objection. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the bill. The Clerk read as follows : Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretnry or the Interior is hereby

authorized, uuder such rules and regulations as he may prescribe, to grant to any qualified applicant a prospecting permit which shall give the exclusive right to prospect for asphalt, gilsonite, elnterite, and other like substances in lands belonging to the United States, including lands in t!Je former Uncompahgre Indian Reservation in the State of Utah, for a period of not exceeding two years: Provided, That the area to be included in such a permit shall not exceed 640 acres of land.

With the following committee amendment: l'a~e 1, line !), after the word " Utah," insert " and not known to be

valuable for such deposits."

The SPEAKER. The question is on agreeing to the committee amendment.

1\lr. DYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. I take it that I am entitled to one hour.

The SPE.AKBR. Not at all. 'l'he House, by unanimous coneent, has just agreed to consider the bill in the House as in Committee of the 'Vhole. The bill is being read under the five-minute rnle for amen<lment.

l\1r. DYRU. l\Ir. Speaker, it is a very important matter, and there ought to be some discussion upon it. \Ve can not expect to understand it with a limitation of that kind. This legislation has not been before the Congress since 1!n6. I am sure tllat the membership generally docs not know about it in detail. I a k unanimous consent that there might be an hour at lea t in opvosition to the legislation.

l\Ir. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, I shall have to object to that. I have no objection to the gentleman having a few minutes in opposition to the bill.

l\Ir. DYER. Let us have 30 minutes on a si<le. l\Ir. SINNOTT. No; I shall object to that. The SPEAKER. Tlte parliamentary situation is that the

bill is being consi<1erc<l in the House as in Committee of the Whole, "·hich abolishes general debate and requires that the bill ~hould be read by sectio11s. 'Vhere no objection is Illude to a section the section shall be considered as adopte<l. The House has given :unanimous con ent to that procedure, and the only way that the gentleman coul<l take time in opposition to the hill under general debate would be to vacate the proceedingR heretofore had.

l\1r. DYER. When was that action taken? \Vas it taken on this pnrticular bill or on all bills that are being considered to-day?

The SPEAKER. It was taken on this particular bill just a moment ago. The Chair put the question, and there ·was no objection to the request of the gentleman from Oregon.

Mr. BLACK of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Missouri [1\Ir. DYER] have 15 minutes against the bill, and that the gentlelllan ·from Missouri [Mr. NEWTON] have 15 minutes against the bill.

1\Ir. DYER. l\1r. Speaker, I would modify that, with tbe consent of the gentleman from Texas, lJy saying that I may control 30 minutes in general debate in opposition to the bill.

.l\Ir. BLACK of Texas. I will be glacl· to modify it. 'l'he SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas asks unanimous

consent that the gentleman from Missouri [l\1r. DYER] may have 30 minutes in opposition to the bilL Is there objection?

Mr. SINNOTT. l\1r. Speaker, reserving the right to object, it seems to me 20 minutes on a side is sufficient !>n a bill of this size.

l\lr. BLACK of Texas. .Allow me to state this. Both of these gentlemen really were not giving heed when the Chair announced the request that the gentleman had preferred for unanimous consent, and it is a bill these gentlemen ought to have the right to discuss. I think the gentleman will not lose any time by granting the request.

i\1r. SINNOTT. Of course, that was done generally on bills to-(lay.

l\1r. BLACK of Texas. Oh, yes; it will be done. because Members have no desire to obstruct at all; but in this ease if they had been paying heed they would have objected, and then we would have gone into the Committee of the Whole House and they would have had a right to an hour under the rules of the House.

l\1r. SINNOTT. However, with that understanding, that I shall have control of 30 minutes time for the bill, I have no objection.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas asks unanimous consent that notwithstanding the recent action of the House that the gentleman from Missouri [l\1r. DYER] may control 30 minutes in opposition to the bill, and the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. SINNOTT] control 30 minutes in favor of the bill. Is there objection? [After a pause.] The Chair hears none.

Mr. SINNOTT. l\1r. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Utah [Mr. CoLTON].

i\lr. COLTON. 1\Ir. Speaker, I presume it will not be disputed thut most of the lands affected by this bill are wholly within my district. I realize that there are gilsonite or asphaltum lands in other portions of the United States, but the great supply comes from my district, and indeed from my home county. They lie almost wholly within a tract of land which in ·1882 was set aside as an Indian Reservation. Subsequent to that date allotments were made to those In<lians, and the title to the gilsonite and asphaltum lands was reserved to the Government of the United States. In 1903 an act passed the Congress ":hich provided that the Secretary of the Interior could sell at auction these gilsonite lands. Prior to that time there had been some locations made upon those lands and title had been acquired to something like 4tH acres. Under the provisions of the act of 1903 about 3,000 acres were sold at public auction. I just want to call attention to this point, that two or three companies now own practically all of these lands, having purchased most of the lands that had been acquired up to this date. There are other small holdings, but two or three companies own practically all of it.

J\lr. NEWTON of Missouri. 'Vill the gentleman yield? l\lr. COJ;TON. In just a moment. These companies hold a

practical monopoly of the output of this project, so far as the United States is concerned . . The lands lying in the CYen sections of the public surveys were sold at public auction in 1!)06 and were all purchased, I think, at that time or a short time subsequent by those two or three companies. The purpose of this bill is simply to place the remaining part of the gilsonite lands under the general leasing laws of the United States and make it pos::;ible for others, perhaps, to go in and work up a market for gilsonite. Now I will yield to the gentleman from Missouri.

1\Ir. NEWTON of Missouri. Did the committee have any hea,rings ~n this bill?

l\1r. COLTON. Well, the committee went into the entire matter very fully, but I do not know that there were any witnesses who appeared lJefore the committee.

l\1r. NE,VTON of l\lis~;ouri. Nobody appeared for or again:>t the bill?

1\fr. COLTON. Well, iuformation was obtained from the department in support of the bill. No; there "·ere uo formal hearings, but--

Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. Was there any information except the letter from the department, of which there i::; a copy he1·e?

i\lr. COLTON. Oh, yes; I have a copy of the letter from the Directo1· of the Geological Survey and all the information that

10122' CONGRESSIONAL R.ECORD-HOUSE 1f.AY 26

the department bas ln reference to this material. And I may say that one of the two companies which control the gilsonite output have headquru·ters in St. Louis, and, so far as I knowof course, I do not speak of this in any way disparaginglyso fur as I know the only opposition to the bill has come from one company which operates from St. Louis the mines in Utah.

l\fr. HILL of Alabama. Will the gentleman yield 'l Mr. COLTON. I will. Mr. HILL of Alabama. Has the Director of the Geological

Survey indorsed this bill'? l\lr. COLTON. Yes, sir; so far as I know; and the Secretary

of the Interior bas interposed no objection to it. .M1·. HILL of Alabama. 'Vell, now, I have read 1n the re

port the letter of the Secretary of the Interior, but I do not find any evidence in the Secretary's letter where be specifically indorses the bill. I wish the gentleman would advise us what language in the Secretary's letter indorses this bill.

Mr. COLTON. I perhaps spoke a little inaccurately in saying that he indorse~ it. He interposes no objection to the pas. age of the bill. I may say to the gentleman there was some question raised as to whether this would dissipate the natural and valuable resources of the United States, anu in reply to the que~tion the Director of the Geological Survey says:

Referring particularly to that portion ot your inquiry regarding monopoly, your consideration is directed to that part of section 4, H. R. G385, whereby it is proposed to amend section 27 of the general leasing law "so as to provide that no person, association, or corporation shall at one time take or hold permits and leases aggregating more than 040 acres under this act in any one State." In my opinion, this language is an absolute insurance against monopoly holdings. In fact, the whole tenor of the proposed law lends itself to a plan to promote the development of rc:tricted holdings in an orderly manner as contemplated under the leasing law.

~'he committee further restricts that by limiting it to 160 acres.

Mr. HILL of Alallama. The gentleman unuerstands that under this bill either one of these two companies owning that land now could come in and get this lanu?

Mr. COLTON. They could only get one lease, so far as I understand, and that i~ left with the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior, who I am sure would not lea~e it to a company already having a monopoly.

Mr. HILL of Alabama. Coulu they not sublease? Mr. COLTON. Not without the express consent of the Sec

retary of the Interior. Mr. HILL of .Alabama. The lease would be in the hands of

the Secretary of the Interior? Mr. COLTON. Yes. I am sure his policy would be to pre

vent a monopoly. But if they use gilsonite as they are now using it, the supply in my county woulu not be exhausted in a thousanu years. 'l'here is estimated to be 31,000,000 tons of it in one vein, according to the Geological Survey, and now they are using only about 34,000 tons per annum.

' Mr. HILL of Alabama. Are they not carrying on experiments, and in the future might it not become more valuable?

lir. COLTON. Yes; but the purpose of this bill, as pointed out by the Director of the Geological Survey, is to prevent monopoly of this material.

l\Ir. HILL of .Alabama. Has anybody been making an investigation of the value?

Mr. COLTON. My official information is that they have not. A statemont was made that I read from the attorney for the American Gilsonite Co. to the e.ffect that that is being done, but from my personal investigation I can not find that it has been, so that the statement is perhaps not justified.

Mr. HILL of Alabama. Was not this bill defcuteu as an amendment to an appropriation bill in 1916?

1\ir. COLTON. No; not a bill of this kind. That one was not safegunrdeu then as this one is now, and at that time it came up without any previous consiueration.

Mr. HILL of Alabama. It was practically for the same purpose, was it not?

Mr. COLTON. No. I think. it had an entirely different purpose.

Mr. McSWAIN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. COLTON. Yes. 1\lr. l\IcSW AIN. The gentleman from Utah says that there

ba ve been no hearings and that practical opposition bas come from only one· of the compa:uies now operating from St. Louis?

Mr. COLTON. Only one has shown oppo ·ition. Mr. McSWAIN. ·what form bas that opposition taken and

manifested itself?

Mr. COLTON. So far as I know, a statement preparec bY the American Gilsonite Co. was submitted to the committee. So far as I know, that is the only opposition.

1\lr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? l\Ir. COLTON. Yes. Mr. AllERNETHY. Will the gentleman enlighten the House

as to what this mineral is used for? Mr. COLTON. It is used in the manufacture of paints and

varnishes and also in roofing. Asphaltum and gil::;onite are practically the same thing. The gilsonite is the pure form of asphaltum, and the prouuct of gilsonite is useu largely in the manufacture of paints and varnishes. Some of it is useu, as I understand, for the manufacture of phonograph records and roofing. It has a very limited market.

Mr. HILL of·Alabama. They use it somewhat in the manu· factill'e of automobile tires, do they not?

Mr. COLTON. Yes. It is felt by men who would like to get a lease on some of these lands that they might open up a market along the line the gentleman from .Alabama indicates.

Mr. HILL of Alabama. As a matter of fact, they do not know just bow in1portant this material is and the future potentialities of its m;e?

l\Ir. COLTON. It is pretty well known what it can be use<l for. It has been used for about 40 years. Perhaps it would be going too far to say that no future u::;e can be found for it, but so far as experiments have been conducted it is not now probable.

Not only are there a number who would like to get leases under the supervision of the Secretary of the Interior but my home county is a poor county, and--

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Utah bas expired.

Mr. COLTON. May I have one minute more? Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman two

minutes more. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Utah is recognized for

two minutes more. 1\Ir. COLTON. 'Ve have hard work getting enough revenue

to run our schools and carry on other public necessities, and we see in this an avenue for adding a little to the taxable revenues of the county, and we believe it opens up a way to increase our revenues along this line.

Gentlemen, if I believed that there was any danger of monopoly in this bill, if I believed that this was not conservation to the nth degree, if I believed that it was to the interest of anything else but the uevelopment of a legitimate industry and the prevention of monopoly, I would be against this meas· ure. But I have believed that it is right, and I therefore favor this measure. I have tried to secure its enactment ever since I have been a Member of Congress. Heretofore it has not been able to reach this stage. I have tried to get these lands opened up under the general mining act, but I could not do that. The United States is committed to the policy of leasing. I believe this bill ought to be passed, and this industry would thereby be helped by placing these lands under the leasing act. [Applause.]

Mr. DYER. Mr. Speaker, I desire to use five minutes of my time.

Gentlemen of the House, this legislation is now up again . for the first time since 1016. In the Sixty-fourth Congres::; an effort was maue to enact it into law by an amen<lment to an appropriation bill in the Senate, offe1·ed by Senator SYOOT, of Utah, and known as Senate bill 43.

l\lr. COLTON. l\1r. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. DYER. No; I can not yield in my five minutes. Tllat

measure came over to the Hou~e in connection with the appropriation bill. The conferees of the House refused to a<:ccpt the amendment, and it was not enacted into law. But during the consideration of that appropriation bill tllat matter came up for Uiscus::;ion in the House, and Congressman Mays, of Utah, made quite a speech upon it, 1n which be discussed this legislation at orne length.

I interrogated him at some length, as the REcoRD of that Congress, pages 8896 and 8897, will show, anu he stuteu to me the names of the companies that alreauy hau leases out there. He mentioned, as the gentleman from Utah mentions to-day, a small company that bas its headquarters in St. Louis, calleu the American Co., and I asked him lf that company belonged to any trust and be said "No" ; it was not a trust, but he said:

There are people attempting to select these lands through dummies, and at the pt·esent time I undcrstaud they have hundreds of dummy entrymen around the land and about these ueposlts ready to select deposits of any value should the measure be passed.

192G CONGRESSIONAL RECORD_-I!OUSE 10123 Mr. Speaker, this is nothing more than an attempt to give

this land away. I am sure the gentleman from Utah who int roduced this bill is not to blame for it; it is from other sources, but it is an attempt to give away for nothing, as this legislation sLows, these valuable ore deposits v.:hkh exist in no other place in America except in this one county iu Utah, and they are Ynluable.

l\fr. w·AINWRIGHT. ·wm the gentleman yield? 1\lr. DYER. I have only five minutes, but I will yield. l\.1r. \VAINWRIGHT. I want to ask the gentleman if this

is the material that the War Department bad expressed some interest in from the standpoint of the national defense?

Mr. DYER. Yes; it is a very valuable material for national defense. The Secretary of \Var' bas written me a letter, under dnte of April 3 last, in regard to this material. I C'nlled his attention to this legislation and I called it to the attelltion of the Secretary of the Navy. The Secretary of the Navy bas written me that be is having an investigation made of this legislation from the standpoint of the national defense and that he would report and adYise me of the results when he had finished it. He has not done it as yet. But the Secretary of War wrote me and said:

Pending the results of an investigation now under way to determine the value of these deposits to the national defense, the War Department considers that it would be most inadvisable to enact the proposed legislation into law.

That is signed by the Secretary of War, who comes from my city, and ·I think it is my duty on this tloor to bring to the attention of the Members legislation that is not, in my judgment, for any public good.

1\lr. Speaker, there are many reasons of compelling force why the proposed bill under the prov~si.ons of which it is proposed to almos t give away a Government property of great value should be defeated.

'Vhat is gilsonite ore? It is a bydrocarbonate 99.4 pure. It was discovered by a roving miner named John Gilson, in Uiutah County in the extreme northeastern part of Utah in 1880. The ore is found in but two sections of Uintah County; it is found nowhere else in the world. Gilsonite ore is found in veins appearing above tlle surface of the earth, of indefinite deptll, always extending from northeast to southwest. A group of these gilsonite veins, all privately owned, lie east of a stream of some size known as White River. The larger and more valuable group of these claims, some privately owned, and all Government claims lie west and north of White River. The only railway extending into the gilsonite veins is the Uintah, a narrow-guage line extending a distance of G3 miles from Mack, Colo., to Watson, Utah. This road reaches the group of gilsonite veins east of White River. The freight rate per ton of 2,000 pounds of gilsonite from 'Vatson, Utah, to 1\Iack, Colo., is $10.50, while from Mack, Colo., to St. Louis it is about $7.50 per ton. The rates charged on the Uintah have only recently been considered by the Interstate Commerce Commission and held to be 1·easonable because of the unusual cost of operating the road.

From Watson, the present terminus of the Ulntah Railroad, to tlle Government-owned gilsonite claims it is a distance of 25 to 30 miles. These 25 to 30 miles are over rough roads and the haul will be difficult and expensive. A bill was before the House in 1916, by the terms of which it was proposed to dis-

. pose of these Government claims. In the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD published l\Iay 12, 1D16, on pages 8896 and 8897, OongresHruan Ferris a sked Congressman Mays of Utah the following question :

Is it not a fact that some of these claims are worth $20,000 for a 20-acre tract-20-acro tracts, 1,500 feet long anu GOO feet wide?

l\Ir. 1\fAYS. Yes. l\fember·s o! the company came before the committee a nd said that this company would give $25,000 each for such gilsonite trncts-20-acre tracts, 1,500 feet long and 600 feet wide. The prolluct is easily minPil anu is solu witllout treatment at from $2G to $30 per ton.

'Vhen the bill referred to was under consideration another objection to its passage was that these valuable claims should not be disposed of until a railroad should be built into the vicinity of the claims. The Moffatt Road west from Den\er now extenus to Craig, Colo. Its terminus is distant about 150 miles from these gilsonite claims. The great tunnel on this liJJe under James Peak is to be completed within the next 18 months at a cost of $D,OOO,OOO and after the completion of this tunnel it is l>elieYed that the Moffatt Road will l>e extended through these gilsonite fields to Salt Lake City, thus providing a standard-gauge rmlroad with trunk-line connection east and west into this <lh;trict. The proper yalue of these mining claims can not be realized even if they should be sold at

$25,000 to $30,000 per claim. Nothing can be lost by the Government retaining these claims for the present and a large sum should be saved by holding on until transportation is provitlcd and true values can be realized, if after mature consideration these claims should ever be disposed of.

This gilsonite ore is a property of rare Yalue. The Government supply is limited. In "t!ase of war it is invaluable. It can not be replaced. The pending l>ill proposes to part with all this valuable property on leaseholds in 320-acre tracts at 50 cents per ton-to give it away. If these claims are to be leased, then the leases should be confined to the ·area of 20-acrc tracts-1,500 feet long and 600 feet wide-as already surveyed and platted. by the United States Geological Suney. To lease in tracts of 320 ueres may l>e construed to mean 1 acre wide and 320 acres long-a good bargain for lessees l>ut n poor bargain for the Government.

Agniu, no voice, unless it be bargain hunters, is asking for the opening up and giying away of these valuable properties. The users or purchasers of this ore do not appear to be complaining of the prices they are paying on the market now for this ore. There are now a number of companies mining and selling this ore from the claims already privately owned. 'Ve haye the following list of companies now advertising tllat they are mining and selling gilsonite ore in this field, to wit:

Gilson Asphaltum Co., Philadelphia, Pa. Utah Gilsonite Co., St. Louis, Mo. American Asphalt Association, St. Louis, Mo. Allied Asphalt & Mineral Corporation, 217 Broadway, New York,

N.Y. American Gilsonite Co., Denver, Colo. Ausopure Gilsouite Co., Denver, Colo. Robert U. Lucas Co., Chicago, Ill.

"7 e are told that gilsonite is u sed chiefl.y .in making paints

and varnishes. It is shipped in saeks in its natural state to the consumer. The veins, usually from 2 feet to G feet wide, extending from the surface to un indefinite depth between per· pendicular walls, have in some instances beeri mined to a depth of more than 500 feet. Geologists have ad·mnced the theory that this rare ore was formed centuries ago by the settlings as the Pacific Ocean receded from the Rocky Mountains westward. The origin of this ore may forever remain unsolved. It is a valuable Government property and no sound reason appears for giving it away. Whenever the Government desires to sell these claims, the extent and Yalue of which bas been determined already by its Geological Survey, it should ·sell it for its fair market value, from $3 to $5 a ton. It should not be given away.

The Go\ernment should keep these properties for its own use. 1\fr. Speaker, the letter of the Secretary of War referred to

by me is as follows :

Hon. L. C. DYER,

WAR DEPARTMENT, Wasliington, AprH S, 19Z6.

IIou.se of Representatives, Washington, D. 0. DEAR MR. DYER: '''lth reference to your letter of March 2G, 192G,

and previous correspondence on the subject of II. R. 5385, I am pleased to inform you that the War Department is in serious need of a sub· stitute !or shellac and enamel.

Pending the results of an Investigation no'v under way to determine the value o! these deposits to the national defense, the War Department considers that it would be most inadvisable to enact the proposed legis• lation into law.

If in the jurtgment of Congress it is necessary to immediately dispose of this legi~;lation, It is recommendell that the following amendments be incorporated in H. R. 5385:

* * • • • • • (a) Line 7, page 1: Add, after the word "in," the words "tho

public." (b) Llne 15, page 2: After the word "that," inser t the word

"pul>lic." (c) Add after section 4 the words : "Pt·ovided fur th er, That nothing herein contained shall be held to

pre\·ent tl1e President of the United States from reserving for military purposes any lands within the public domain known to contain asphalt, gilsonite, elaterite, and other llke· substances."

Thanking you for the interest you have tnken in this matter, I am, Sincerely yours,

DWIGHT F. DAVIS,

Secretary of War.

The SPF1AKER. The time of the gentleman from Missouri has expired.

1\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. 1\Ir. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.

.10124 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MAY 26

l\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I would like to inquire the status of this measure at tho present time.

The SPEAKER. The Chair will explain that the House gave uuanimous consent that the bill should be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole. Thereafter the gentlemau from Texas [l\Ir. BL.ACK] asked unanimous consent that notwltlu;tanding the onler of the House the gentleman from Missouri [:l\lr. DYER] might have one-half hour of general debate in ovposition to the bill and the gentleman from Oregon [:i\lr. SIN:NOTT] one·hnl! hour in favor of the bill.

1\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. The bill has not yet reached the stage where we can offer amendments.

The SPEAKER. No; not until the time for debate has expired.

Mr. DYER. l\Ir. Sr1eaker, I yiel<l 15 minutes to my colleague from l\-lis~onri [l'\lr. NEWTON].

Mr. NEWTON of l\Iissouri. :Mr. Speaker, on December 14 last Mr. CoLTO:>i, of Utah, introduced H. n. 538u, which was referred to the Committee on Public Lands, of which he is a member. On February 2;) lnst Ur. CoLTON, for and on behalf of the Committee on Public Lands, reported the bill to the House with a recommendatiou that it do pass.

Section 1 of the bill provides that the Secretary of the Iuterior is authorized to grant to any qualified applicant a prospecting permit which shall give him the exclusive right to prospect for asphalt, gilsonite, elaterite, anu other like sub·stances in lanu belonging to the United States including lands in the former Uncompahgre Inrlian Reservation in the State of Utah. Sai<l section authorizes such permit to cover an area of 640 acres.

Section 2 of this bill provides that if any of the minerals enumerated in the act shall be discoverecl by the permittee within the area covered hy his permit, he shall be entitled to a lease upon the whole 640 acres embraced in hiE;; permit.

Section 3 provides that lands known to contain valuable deposits of these minerals shall be made subject to lease by the Secretary of the Interior through advertisement, competitive bid, or such other method as the Secretary by general regulations may adopt, in areas not to exceed 320 acres; and section 3 further provides that all leases under the act shall be conditioned upon the payment by the lessee to the Government of not less than 50 cents per ton of 2,000 pounds of marketable product and the payment in advance of a rental of GO cents pel' acre per aunum. The lease is to be for a period of 20 years with preferential right in the lessee to renew the same for successive periods of 10 years upon such reasonable terms and conditions as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe.

This, of course, gives to the present Secretary of the Interior or to any future Secretary of the Interior the right to lease without advertisement and without competitive bids, if he sees fit, to such persons as he may choose to favor, tracts of 320 ncres of lands known to be valuable with these minerals and tracts of 640 acres of land where discovery of such minerals is made by prospectors for periods of 20 years and such leases may be renewed indefinitely.

I have implicit faith in the integrity and high character of the present Secretary of the IntCI·ior. I would he willing to trust him to protect and safeguard the interests of the public in any matter which may be intrusted to him, but I do not believe that this could be said of some of his predecessors, and judging from our sad experiences in the past I do not believe that we are safe in trusting such unlimited authority to the unlmown secretaries of the future.

I am advised that gilsonite is a valuable mineral. The Vernal Exp~ess, published in Vernal, Utah, in its issue of .April 16, 1026, Sald:

Gilsonito has many uses in present·clay industrial life. Varnishes and paints are ronde of gilsonite. Carbon !Jlack, used also in pajnts, is a gilsonlte product. The tarred-paper and felt-roofing 1nuustry consume great quanti ties of the mlneral. About 40 per cent of the material going into the makeup of automobile tires is a mixture of gil· sonito and carbon black.

I am advised that knowledge of the infinite possibilities of gilsonite is very lin1ited. I am told that it is highly explosive and it is thought to contain wonderful possibilities for national defense.

The Vernal Express in the issue above referred to also makes the following statement:

As far as is known gilsonite is only fount! in the Ulntah Basin, with the exception of 11 very small vein in Russia.

I ·am told that there arc deposits of inf rior quality in Chile, Cubn, and l\lexico. The Uintah Basin is in Utah and is the land at which this legislation is aimed.

Congress passed an act on March 3, 1903, pcrm!tting the sale at public auction to the highest bidder in tracts not to exceed 40 acres in the odd-uumbered quarter sections of these gih;onitc lands; the even-numbered sections to be retained by the United States.

Inasmuch as this mineral is known to be valuable, inasmuch as the knowledge of the various uses to which it mny be placeu is limited and the possibilities of its usc for national defense are not known but arc under investigation, and inasmueh as its supply in the United States is limited to a small area, it seems to me that legislation which will open up these lands to exploitation and which will rapidly lead to the exhaustion of the supply of this valuable mineral is dangerous legislation to be enacted by this Congress, and I am convinced that for this reason alone this bill ought to he defeated.

As I have already stated, the act of March 3, 1003, which opened up qua1ier sections for public usc safeguarded the interest of the public by providing that the lands should be sold at public auction to the highest bidder while this bill, to my mind, is dangerous and is subject to suspicion in that it gives into the hands of any future Secretary of the Interior the power to lease these lands plivately for a nominal consideration over a period long enough to exhaust the entire supply of ore.

This bill challenges the closest scrutiny in another respect. The act of March 3, 1003, limited sales to 40-acre tracts, while this bill permits each purcllascr to get control of 320-acre tracts of land known to contain this valuable mineral and 640 acres in cases where he is given an exclusive right to explore and discovers the ore as a prospector.

I can understand how the private speculator who is anxious to get hold of this valuable mineral land might be exceedingly solicitous about the pas:;mge of this bill, but I can not conceive of how the Government of the United States will be benefited by the disposal ·and ultimate exhaustion of this valuable mineral.

I am not one of those who is prone to advocate the bottling up of our national resources and in the name of conservation preventing their development, but I am firmly convinced that this is one national resource which ought to be conserved.

This is not the first attempt which has been mn<le to open up these valuable Government mineral lands to private exploitation·. In 1016 an amendment was inserted in an Indian appropriation bill which sought to open up these laiHls for mineral entry, and the strange thing about that leghdative attempt appeared from the fact that these lands hall not belonged to any Indian reservation since 1880. In the debate in the House, in which the attempt was made to give the control of these valuable lands to private interest, it was charged by Congressman Mays :

There are people attempting to select this land through their clummies, anti at the present time I understand they have hundre<.ls of dummy entrymen arounll and about these deposits, ready to select any deposits of any value f'lhoulcl this measure be pasRed. It is not a proper amendment !or the Indian appmpriation bill to carry, and I believe that the Senator from Utah was imposeu upon by this trust, the Barber a~phalt people. If they shonlu secure these deposits jn Utah t!Jey would control the entire deposits of gilsonite that are of any value in the United States. It is a very useful product. (See p. 7858, pt. 3, vol. 53, CO!'lGRESSIONAL RECORD, G-Hh Cong., 1st Sl•ss.)

I wonder if there are any dummy entrymen around and abont these valuable deposits now ready to select any deposits of any va.lne should this measure be passed.

It will be observed that section 3 of this bill makes it possible for the Secretary of the Interior to lease these lands in large tracts, the Government to receive 50 cents per acre per year together with a royalty of 50 cents per ton of 2,000 pounds of marketable gilsonite. It is intcrestiug to note from the debates when the attempt was made to open these lands in 1016 that it was stated upon the floor of the House that gilsonite was easily mined and was sold without treatment at from $25 to $30 per ton. I find no provision in this bill which prevents all of the lessees from subleasing their lands to any one monopoly, and if this should result what is there to prevent the market price of this valuable mineral being raised far above $30 per ton, and yet -under the provisions of this bill the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to lease these mineral lands for a period of 20 years for a charge of 50 cents· per acre per year, with a royalty of only 50 cents per ton to the Government. Is there any Member of this House who doubts that it is dtmgorous to confer such power upon future Secretaries of the Interior? Instead of th's bill preventing n monopoly it is more likely to create one.

Mr. MOHROW. Will the gentleman yield ? Mr. NEWTON of l\1lssouri. Yes.

1926 OONGRESSION AL R.EOORD-I-IOUSE 10125 1\Ir. MORROW. How are you going to turn it o"Ver to a

private monopoly if you lease only a certain number of acres to any one individual?

Mr. NEWTON of 1\Ussouri. As I read the bill there is nothing therein to prevent an assignment of a claim.

Mr. MORROW. nut it is leased to anyone who desires to make a lease.

Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. Yes; and there is nothing in the bill to prevent anyone who niay procure a lease from operating it for the benefit of any one of the large gilsonite companies. There is nothing in tlle bill which would prevent a gilsonite trust from having a number of dummies who could lease a large part or all of the remaining gilsonite lands in :320-acre tracts, and there is nothing in the bill to prevent tllese dummies from operating their leases with the assistance of labor furnished by any company, and there is certainly nothing to prevent them from turning the ore O\et' to ·such company at a nominal price; and the bill gi\es to the Secretary of the Interior the right to assign these leases to anyone whom he sees fit-without advertisement and without pulJlic bids.

It seems to me that it is a very dangerous thing to give as much power as this into the hands of any one Government official. I have implicit faith in the present Secretary of the Interior, and I do not believe that he would lease these lan ds without being convinced that the Government's interests were fully protected, but the Lord only knows who may be Secretary of the Interior in the future, and I am not willing to subject such unknown Government official to the temptations which this bill provides.

l\1r. l\IORRO\V. Will the gentleman yield for another ques-tion?

Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. Yes. I\.fr. MORROW. · Who owns this gilsonite now? Mr. NE,VTON of Missouri. Half of it is owned by the

Government. Mr. MORROW. Is tlle Government getting any rev·enue out

of it? Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. It is not, and it will not get

much revenue out of it if this bill passes. 'Vhen the Government has a valuable property such as tllis and when the Secretary of War says that his department is considering its value for national defense, the Federal Government ought to bold on to it as a matter of precaution and of national conservation, especially so when nobody has protested against the price of gilsonite now on the market.

Congressman Mays stated to the House during the discussion of the legislation proposed in 1916 that members of a certain company carne lJefore the committee and stated that their c.ompany would give $25,000 each for 20-acre tracts of this gilsonite land. He stated further that there was evidence to show that there \''US a *32,000,000 trust standing ready with dummy entrymen to get control of these valuable mineral lands. In the face of these facts, which were presented to Congress in 1V16 which resulted in the defeat of this proposed legislation at that time, it seems to me that it behooves this House to move with great caution in attempting to pass legislation to dispose of this valuable property now.

~'he author of this bill, in the report which he made for and on behalf of tlle Committee on PulJlic Lands, stated that the present production of gih;onite rests with two or three companies who more or less monopolize the industry, and appnrently he seeks to persuade the House that the passage of this legislation is necessary in order to break a monopoly. The facts which I have gathered, however, from a limited investigation which I ~ave made do not justify this contention. I find that he is in error in his statement in his report to the effect that the present production rests with only two ·or three cornpnnies. I do not know how many companies there are at the present time engaged in the mining and sale of gil::;onite, but I have learned of the following:

Gilson Asphaltum Co., Philadelphia, Pa. Diamond Gilsonitc Co., with mines near Fort Duchesne, Utah. Utah Gilsonite Co., St. Louis, Mo. Allied Asphalt & Mineral Corporation, 217 llroadway, New York

City, N.Y. American Gilsonlte Co., Denver, Colo. Absopure Gilsonite Co., Denver, Colo. American Asphalt Association, St. Louis, Mo. RolJert M. Lucas Co., Chicago, Ill.

I am advised that tllese companies, who are both mining and Importing gilsonite from foreign countries, are selling this product upon the market at from $3 to $5 per ton. When you take into account tlle fact that it was selling in 1!)16 at :from $25 to $30 per ton, the market price at the present time does

not indicate a serious monopoly, and I am advised furthermore that the supply in the market is alJundant witll wllicb to meet demands.

Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Will tlle gentleman yield? Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. Yes; I will. l\Ir. LEATHERWOOD. I wonder if the gentleman could

inform us whether it is possible during the day to find out who the stockholders are in tllis St. Louis company?

Mr . .rnDW~'ON of l\Iissouri. I am not acquainted with any of the members or stockholders of the St. Louis gilsonite companies, or any of the other companies. The gentleman from Utah [Mr. COLTON] has repeatedly stated that there are only two or three companies, and I haYe given you a list showing that he is in error upon this point.

l\Ir. STRONG of Kansas. ·wm the gentleman yield? Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. Yes. JUr. STRO 1G of Kansas. I think it would lJe interesting to

know who it is that wants to get hold of this ore, Mr. NEWTON of l\lissouri. I ha\e had. a number of letters

urging tlle passage of this bill, and I am told that they come from men who are anxious to engage in the gilsonite business.

l\fr. LAGUARDIA. Will the gentleman yield? l\lr. NEWTON of Missouri. Yes. 1\ir. L.AGUAHDIA... W'ho controll:l the product now? :Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. The eight companies that 1 lla"e

named. I have never gone into that feature of tlle matter to any extent, lJecnuse I am not interested in the gilsonite companies. "'Yhat I am interested in is conserving our national resources and preventing private interests from getting control of these valualJle deposits which may become of tremendous value for use in our national defense.

Mr. L.AG UARDIA. It is pretty well monopolized in this country, is it not?

1\lr. NEWTON of Missouri. That is not my information. There are ~ight companies, and, as I am informed, gilsonite is selling from $3 to $5 per ton, and I do not lJelieve anyone could contend that this is an unreasonable price.

l\1r. COLTON. There are really three companies. Mr. L.AG UARDIA. 'I'hat was my understanding in the com

mittee. Mr. WAINWRIGHT. vVill the gentleman give way? 1\Ir. :NEWTON of Missouri. i yield to the gentleman from

New York. Mr. 'VAIN\YRIGHT. Is tllere any public interest, or any in

terest of the people of the United States can have in this matter that sllould induce Congress to give up its right in this property? •

1\fr. NEWTON of :Missouri. I know of no public interest demanding tllat the Gevcrnment dispose of this valuable property. - No apileals ha\e come to me from the public for the sale or lease of this land, and no protests have come stating that the market is not adequately supplied or that the present selling price is unreasonable. The appeals whicll have come to me are those in favor of pri\ate interests who want to get control of this valuable property.

·'- Another impression which at least justifies a most careful investigation results from the fact tha-t gilsonite can JlOW be bought for $3 to $5 per ton, while it was selling at from $25 to $30 per ton in 1916. It will be remembered that the World 'Var had lJeen raging for two years wllen gilsonite was selling at $30 per ton and that no serious military conflict is being carried on now. This raises a strong presumption that the use of gilsonite for military purposes was responsible for its selling in 1!:>16 for a price six times as high as it sells for now.

If it should be found expedient to sell these "Valuable mineral lands rather than to hold them as a matter of national conservation, I insist that this is not the time for such sale to be made, because the lands under present conditions could not be sold to advantage;

These lands are located in Utah some 30 miles distant from the nearest railroad, and these 30 miles are o\er a rough country, which would make the haul difficult and expensive by wagon or truck, which is at present the only means of transportation to the rail line. Certainly it can not be contended that these mineral lands belonging to the Government could be sold to advantage under exi:;ting transportation conditions surrounding them, and I do not believe that anyone could contend from a purely commercial standpoint that the Government's interests would not be best conserved by withholding these lands from lease or public entry at least until a time when transportation facilities have been constructed to the mines.

Mr. COLTON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. NEWTON of 1\fissouri. Yes.

10126 CONGRESSION ltL RECORD-HOUSE JUA.Y 26

Mr. COLTON. I am sure the gentleman wants to be accurate. As a matter of fact, there is a railroad right into these mines.

Ur. NEWTON of :Missouri. That is not my information. Mr. COLTON. It is my own county. There is another ques

tio.n . 'Voulcl the gentleman be willing to have the mineral resources of )Iissouri tied up indefinitely?

l\lr. NEWTON of Missouri. If t11e Government had a mineral or any other proverty in Missouri which I thought might be valuable in the future for national defense, or n mineral or product \Vhich I knew at this time could not be sold to advantage, I would insist that the Government hold on to it as a matter of national conservation. This ore has a tremendous vnlue to the Government, nnd there are possibilities of untold value yet to be discovered.

:Mr. COLTON. This is just an imaginary value, nnd has been given 10 years and even 30 year~:; of careful investigation.

Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. How many Members of this House ever lleard of gil~ onite until this debate started?

Mr. COLTON. No one ever attached any value to it until war timel:l.

i.\Ir. NE\VTON of :Missouri. The price went to $30 per ton during the war, and I am advised that this ore contains a high explosive quality.

Mr. ROl\IJUE. Wi-ll the ~entleman yield? Mr. NE\VTON of l\Hs~ouri. Yes. Mr. ROl\I.JUE. If I read the biU correctly, it will withhold

that part of the land where the mineral is now known to exist. Mr. NEWTON of ::JHssouri. The gentleman has not read over

the entire bill. The first :ection makes provision for the leasing of the land to prospectors where gilsonite is not known to exist, and if ore is found such prospector is entitled to a lease for 20 yenrs upon one tract of 620 acres, with the right of renewing such lea~;e indefinitely.

1\Ir. ROM.JUE. It Hays "and not known to lJe valuable for such deposits." ·

Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. But section 3 says : Lands !mown to contain valuable deposits enumerate(} in this act

and not covered by permits or leases shall be held subject to lea se by the Secretary of the Interior through advrrtiscment, competitive llidding, or such other method as be may by gener·al regula tious adopt, and in such areas as he shall fix, not exceeding 320 acres.

~Ir. BERGER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. NEWTON of 1\lissouri. I will. Mr. BEHGEll. Why is it that the Seeretary of the Interior

is in favor of it·? 1\lr. NEWTON of Missouri. I ha>e no evidence to show that

he is in favor of it. He does not recommend it. The gentle-, man from Utah [~lr. CoLTON], in his report for and on behalf

of the Committee on the Public Lands, states that this legislation-H. R. 5385-hns the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, and as proof he sets forth a copy of a Jetter from the Secretary in whi<:h he nsserts that the Secretary's approval was given. I have examined this letter, and I assert without fear of successful contradiction that nowhere in the letter does the Secretary declare himself in favor of the passa~e of the bill, noc does he recommend its passage to the :Public Lands Committee or to the House.

Mr. STRONG of Kansas. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. Yes. l\1r. STRONG of Kansas. What hearings were held on this

lJill? Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. None. Mr. STRONG of Kansas. Does not the gentleman think that

the bill ought to be r ecommitted to the committee for hearings? l\Ir. NE,VTO~ of ).Iissouri. It seems to rue that a bill which

undertakes to open up for private exploitation and exhaustion of the only gilsonite ore remaining in the United States ought to be subjected to the most exhaustive hearings and should be given the most careful consideration lJy both the committee and this House before it is enacted iuto law.

Mr. DYER. In the Sixty-fourth Congress Mr. Ferris, who was chairman of the Committee on the Public Lands nt that time, asked Mr. 1\lays a question. and Mr. Ferris says: "Is not it a fact that some claim are worth $20,000 for 20-acre tracts?" and Mr. Mays said: "Yes."

l\Iemhers of the company came before the committee and said the companies would give $25,000 for gilsonite 20-acre tracts 1,000 feet long and 600 feet wide. Now they want to give away 20 acres for 50 cents an acre.

Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. The gentleman is correct, and, as I have already s tated, gilsonite is a mineral which is thought to have vast possibilities for national defense, the extent of which is unknown. In order to be advised as to the po~:;ition he should take regarding this proposed legislation my

colleague [l\Ir. DYER 1 on March 26 laAt addressed a letter to the Secretary of War, making inquiry as to the views of U1e War Dermrtment regarding this propoRed legislation. The Secretary of War, as Mr. Dn:R has stated, responded in a letter which reads in part as follows :

With reference to your letter of March 2G, 1026, anrt previous cor· respondence on the subject of H . R. G38:J, I am pleased to inform you that the War Department is iQ serious need of a substitute for shellac and enamel.

Pending the results of an investigation now under way to dctermiue the value of these deposits to the national defense, the War Department considers that it would be most inadvisable to enact the proposed legislation into Jaw.

:Mr. LEA".l'HFJRWOOD. Will the gentleman yield? l\Ir. NEWTON of l\Iissouri. For a question; yes. Mr. LEATHBJRWOOD. To what use does the Secretary of

War think the deposit should be put? l\fr. NEWTON of Missouri. The Secretary of \-Var in his

letter states thnt this question is under investigation, and inasmuch as the Secretary of 'Var is responsible for our national defense I do not think that this bill ought to be passed until his investigation is completed and he reports the results to us. I am impressed, however, with the fact that while gllsonite is now selling at from $3 to $5 per ton, during the war it wns selling at from $23 to $30 per ton, which would indicate that somebody connected with the war wns fin< ling it . useful in national defense.

l\Ir. COLTON. Will the gentleman yield? l\Ir. NEWTON of 1\lissouri. Yes. Mr. COLTON. The gentleman doe:-; not mean to give the

impression tllat there is such a (lifference between the price of gil~:;onite during the war and now, I am •ure. ·Is not the gentleman quoting the price in U>lG on the eastern market and tho present price at tlle mine?

Mr. NEWTON of Missouri. I am quoting from the debate on tbe floor of the House when a provis ion similar to this was being cousidered in UHG, and in that instance it was stated upon this floor tllat gilsonite was worth from $25 to $30 per ton.

Mr. COLTON. That was in the pure state on the eastern market and there was also the expense of mining and shipping it there.

l\Ir. NEWTON of Missouri. De that as it inay, in the face of the statement of the Secretary of Wa1· who is responsible for our national defense, evidently made after consultation with the e::q1erts of his department, to the effect that the uses of gilsonite are now under investigation with the view to ascer~ taining their value in the national defense, is it conceivable that any J\lember of this House will vote to pass this proposed legislation until the in"9"estigation of the War Depnrtment bas been completed? Is there a Member of this lJody who. would be willing to vote for this bill until he has been advised by the Secretary of War that after n full, thorough, and complete investigation lJy the experts of his department it bas been fouud that this mineral can not be utilized to advantage in the defense of our country?

l\lr. DYER. 1\fr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 1\lcSwAI~'].

Mr. McSWAIN. l\lr. Speaker, I did not intend to inject myself into this matter of which I have no knowledge until a few moments ago, and would not except for the fact thnt it has been suggested that this commodity has a potential military value from the point of view of national defense. We have this situation here : The proponents of tile hill say that those who already have a monopoly are fighting the bill. We also have the countercharge made lJy those who oppose the bill thnt tho~-;e who want the hill pnsse<.l wish to create a monopoly. The odds are equal, and it is a good rule when in doubt to let the tree lie just where it fell .

It seems that there have been no hearings on the matter, and there is considerable doubt about the value from a military point of view of this commodity wbicl.L is unknown to the rest of us. It appears that the public is not being gr-eviously imposed upon by any monopoly, if there be any, lJecause it sells fer $3 to $5 a ton. The public for the next rear can not be very greviously imposed upon. I do not know that anything I am using has gilsonite in it. It mny he that this pencil hns some, because it is black. Just to he prudent, not to take any step in the clark, not to take any chances of any kind or <legree, let us hold this up for the time lJeing.

Mr. COLTON. ·would not that same argumeut apply to coal? Mr. UcS,VAIN. I do not think so; while coal has a poten

tial military value its value is known, while the value of gilsonite is unknown. This may have an explosive value; it may have something of the quality of nitrate in it.

1926 CONGRESSIONAL R.ECORD-HOUSE 10127 1\Ir. LAGUARDIA. :Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. 1\IcS\VAIN. Yes. Mr. LAGUARDIA. The gentleman is one of our military

experts--

l\1r. COLTON. Yes; the small company in St. Louis has recommended this bill.

1\Ir. McS'V AIN. Oh, no; I am a civilian. 1\fr. LAGUARDIA. 'Vhat is the military value of this?

Mr. DYER. And the other is a concern that has riot made any money and is not connected with any monopoly.

· l\1r. LEAVITT. During the period that the gentleman has been in Congress and bas been pressing this matter, has the War Department ever raised any question with him regarding the military vnlue of this material?

l\Ir. McSWAIN. I do not know, and for that reason I say, let us a'vait the experiment that is being conducted by the War Department nt the present time.

Mr. COL'l'ON. 1\fr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? l\fr. 1\lcSWAIN. I do not know, and the War Department

says it does not know, but it does say thnt they are conducting an experiment. I yield to the gentleman from Utah, whose ad>ocacy of this bill well-nigh takes the edge off my opposition.

1\Ir. COLTON. I appreciate that, but I say to the gentleman that it has about the same explosive properties as coal bas. It i~ another hydrocarbon ore, with unlimited supply in the United States. At the rate it is being used now you could not exhaust the supply in my county in a thousand years.

Mr. l\fcSW AIN. Of course, it is entirely probable · that this is almost pure carbon, and I have known ever since I was a little boy that ordinary gunpowder is made up of sulphur and what we used to call charcoal and saltpeter. ·we used to mix the constituents right there in my home community, with which we went rabbit and squirrel hunting, but it may be that this particular form of carbon has a degree of explosiveness that is in excess of that contained in ordinary coal. Therefore. in combination with nitrogen, it may be highly explosive. I do not know, but it js said here by this letter that we have heard read that experiments are being conducted. One year more can not hurt, and it seems that there is some suggestion of something mysterious about this. I do not make it ; but the sugg-f'stion is made that there is Rome mysterious veil surrounding this thing, and I want to have a little more light in the way of printed hearings.

l\1r. LEA VIT'l~ rose. The SPEAKEJR pro tempore. The time of the gentleman

from South Carolina bas expired. l\Ir. l\IcSW AIN. I would like to yielu to the gentleman, but

my time bas expired. 1\Ir. SINNOTT. l\fr. Speaker, I yield five minutes to the gen

tleman from Utah [l\ir. COL'l'ON]. l\1r. COLTON. 1\fr. Spealt:er, there is no unrighteous influ

ence back of this legislation. Tlle idea originated 'vith me when I first cnme to Congress, and I introduced a bill providing for the opening of these lands under the general mining law. The Department of the Interior refused to give that bill favorable indorsement. I then introduced a bill providing for its sale by auction, and they refused to indorse that. Then, wanting it opened, I came back and at their suggestion, at the suggestion of the men in the General Land Office, I introduced a general leasing bill; nnd that is the only influence that is back of it. The bill to wllich the p;entleman calls attention to which Congressman Mays addressed himself in 1916 provided for the opening of these lands to provide nitrates and hau no conne-ction whatever with the leasing act, and the statement made there does not in any way apply to the bill now being considered.

Mr. HUDSPETH. l\1r. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. COIJTON. Yes. l\Ir. HUDSPETH~ In view of the statement of the gentle

mRn from South Carolina [l\Ir. McSwA.IN] that it may be of militnry value, is it not marvelous that with a bill pending here since 1!H6, with the World War going on after that, the ·war Department never made any discovery of that fact, and why should we have all this great light on the proposition when there is an unliipited supply?

l\Ir. COLTON. Yes, to be sure; and how is it that the only information against this bill which has been filed during th~ lnst five years, since it has been pending before that committee, comes from an attorney from one of the three companies that practically control the entire market?

Mr. LEAVITT. Is it not true that the passage of this bill, instead of creatiug a monopoly, will aHow competition in the production of gilsonite?

l\Ir. COLTON. That is it exactly. These men want to try to. create a market. .

1\.Ir. LEAVITT. And is it not true that opposition to this bill originated with those who ba>e a monopoly at the present time?

l\Ir. COLTON. Absolutely. l\fr. LAGUARDIA. Where are these two companies located? l\1r. COLTON. One is located in Philadelphia and two in

St. Louis. l\lr. DYER. One of them in St. Louis has recommended the

passage of this bill.

l\Ir. COLTON. Absolutely not. This matter is left to the discretion of the Secretary of the Inte-rior and we have cut the amount which can be leased down to 160 acres. Gentlemen, this is a safe measure.

l\Ir. LEA \riTT. Is it not true that it was not the War Department that took the initiative in this case that a letter was written to them asking a question which they could not answer, wilich in itself proves that there has been no idea of this having any military value, because we have made no investigation of it in these 10 years?

Mr. COL'i'ON. That is it exactly. Mr. WILLIAMSON. About what is the total area covered

by this gilsonite deposit? l\lr. COLTON. It appears in fissure veins covering an area

of perhaps 25 miles one .. way and 30 another. l\ir. 'VILLIAl\ISON. Does it appear in veins similnr to coal

deposits? 1\fr. COLTON. No; it appears in fissure veins, and they have

never gone to the bottom of many of these veins. It is not known what is at the bottom of the veins. These ores have evidently intruded tilemselves up through fissure velns from some source below.

l\Ir. SOHA:b'ER. The committee report states that the bill has the approval of the Secretary of the Interior. Can the · gentleman quote anything in the letter of the Secretary of tile Interior appearing in the report indicating that he approyes of the bill?

l\1r. COLTON. Only so far as the usual form of the Secretary of the Interior in a letter. H;e states that there has been no information particularly brought to his attention and he interposes no objection to it. There is no indor~eme~t but ·I will say that I have letters subsequently from bureaus' in the Department of the Interior, un<ler the Secretary of the Interior, which do in effect lend their indorsement to this measure. The Secretary of the Interior is not opposed or sm·ely he would have said so.

l\fr. SCHAl!'FJR. "rm the gentleman yield? l\Ir. COLTON. May I say in conclusion-! do not want to

take up any moro time--the fact that men hnve pointed out that there is no railroad in this section of the country is conclusive evidence to me that very little real information is had by those in opposition to the measure. The fact of tile matter is there is a railroad into that country.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.

l\1r. SINNOTT. I have only one more speaker. Mr. DYER. I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Ala

bama · [~lr. HILL]. l\fr. l-ULL of Alabama. l\lr. Speaker and gentlemen of the

House, I am a member of the Committee on l\lilitary Affairs of this House, tile committee that is peculiarly charged with tlw responsibility of the national defense. We have here a letter from the Secretary of War stating he deems it to be ab~olutely inadvisable for the House to pass this bill, that the "rar Department is now carrying on experiments to ascertain just what use this mineral may have in connection with the national defense. It is known that this mineral has explosive values, and it may be we will find this mineral to be of exceeding value in the matter of explosives for our national uefense. Gentlemen will recall that just a few months ago \Ye found down in Texas a quality of gas known as Ilelium.

This gas is of great Yalue in use for lighter-than-air craft, far superior to the hydrogen gas which the world had always used up to the time we made the discovery of helium. Why should we to-day rush through tllis bill over the protest, over the request of the Secretary of War that we not pass it, that we give the 'Var Department further time to investigate and find out just what value this mineral has to our national defense?

Mr. ROMJUE. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HILL of Alabama. I will. l\1r. ROUJUE. Does the gentleman know wh.ether or not

any inYestigation was made during the recent war to develop whetller or not there was any explosive quality in this mineral?

Mr. HILL of Alabama. In this mineral? I could not an8wer that question. But I know that every day chemists and sdentists are pointing out new th.ings and developing ne\v things and that day by day--

I

10128 : CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE ~1AY 26

Mr. COLTON. I will say in answer to the gentleman that there were very extensive experiments carried on, but it has only the ordinary explosive properties usually found in coal.

Mr. ROl\fJUE. By whom were tile investigations made? Mr. COLTON. By prhate parties, it is true. Mr. ROMJUID. "-7 erc these private parties capable and

qualified to make proper experiments? Mr. COLTON. By chemists seek'ing to find properties fOl'

the purpose of de\eloping--1\fr. ROl\fJUE. Does the gentleman know what the results

of tho~e examinations were us to its explosive qualities? l\Ir.· COLTON. I only know they were founu to have no

more explosive properties than the ordinary coal. l\1r. HILI1 of Alabama. Now,. l\-1r. Speaker-Mr. SCHAPER. ·wm the gentleman yield? M1·: HILL of Alabama. Let me make a statement and then

I will yield to the gentleman. The gentleman states that investigations were macle by pd vate parties looking at ~t entirely from a commercial standpoint. Investigations that might be made by private parties looking at it from the standpoint of making money out of it would be entirely different from investigations that might be made by the War Department looking, not to its commercial properties; not as a proposition for making money, but as a proposition for the defense of this country, and the statement of the gentleman that private parties made investigations without telling us who these parties were is quite in accord with the action of the committee in bringing UR this bill without having any hearings on it, with no data, no real information presented, no real reasons, no facts given as to why this bill should be passed. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

1\Ir. SCHAFER Is it not a further remarkable coincidence that the committee report should state that this legislation has the approval of the Secretary of the Interior and the Sec~ retary's letter does not indicate his approval, and the gentleman who is pushing this bill on the floor of the House admits that it has not the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, lJut that it has the approval of some one under the Secretary of the Interior.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of the Honse, if there eYer was a cry of " Stop thief" from a legislative point of view we certainly have it here in connection with this bill. 'Ve have the two gentlemen from St. Louis pointing the finger of scorn and throwing suspicion upon the bill. It is in their city where we have these two companies that desire to keep uown competition and opposition.

l\fr. DYER. l\lr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield ? 1\Ir. ·SINNO'.rT. No. I can not yield now. That is the source of their opposition. I have a letter from

the gentleman from St. Louis, l\Ir. DYER, presenting to me his opposition and naming the companies in his home . town. One of them is the Utah Gil~onite Co. of St. Loui:->, 1\Io.

l\fr. DYER. 1\Ir. Speaker, will the gentleman ;field right there? 1\ir. SINNOTT. 1 10; I can not now yi<'1d. The SPEA .. KEH. pro tempore. The gentleman declines to yield. Mr. SINNOTT. That is in St. Louis, l\lo. The other company

is the American Asphalt .Aflsociation, also of St. Louis, l\io. Now, it is singular and surprising that the Secretary of

'Var, whose duty it is to send his communications to the proper House committees, communicates with the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. DYER]. I am not surprised that the Secretary of War would oppose the bill when it seems that the only information that he has comes from the gentleman from St. Louis, ~fr. DYER. In his letter to Mr. DYER he state!::! :

With reference to your letter of :Murch 26, and previous correspondence on the subject-

Apparently the only information be haR as to tlw merits or uemorits of tbi~ lJill comes from the gentleman from St. Louis, Mr. DYER. .Ancl l\1r. DYER has demonsh'ateu on the floor of tbb; House to-day that he is neiilier familiar with the bill before the House now, nor il:'l lle familiar witll what Mr. Mays was discussing in 1!l16.

The Senate amendment now seeks to open to entry all the remaining deposits, to be sold under the mineral laws, an unlimited num· bcr of claim8, nt $5 an acre.

.That is what Mr . . Mays was opposing and l\ir. l\fays at that time wus advocating whnt 1::; in this bill to-day, namely, permits.

l\fr. Speaker, I have been on the Committee on Public Lands for a number of years. 'Ve sat there for six years, Scott Ferris and myself, trying to porfect a leasing system thnt would prevent inuividuals and corporati01m from acquiring a fee title in these valuable oil and mineral lauds of this character, and I assure you I am 11ot comillg into this House to-day furthering any scheme to let any individual or corporation steal tllese great Yalnes. Hnre is the very question that the gentleman from l\fi~souri put to l\:Ir. Mays on l\1ay 12, 1916:

Does not the . gentleman think that something ough t to be done whereby gilsooite should be made availa ble for proper usc ?

Mr. MAYS. Ye:::. And I will say in that connection that a bill bas been r eported that will carry out the idea that the gentleman has in mind. The Public Lands Committee, to which such matters should be referred, . have conductecl hearings up on this matter and have reported a bill which wHl serve to open these lands to entry under regulations designed to prevent their being acquired by the trust, and yet provide a source of r e\enue for taxation purposes. That bill, in brief, provides that a permit according tho right to prospect and mine the land may be issued for 10-year periods free of royalty-

And so forth . Just the very provision we have here in this bill, ex·cept that

we make them pay a roynlty. If Mr. 1\fays were alive and here to-day he would be standing on the floor of this House auvo~ eating this bill, because in 1916 tllnt was the proposition he was advocating.

Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Mr. Speaker, will tho gentleman yield? 1\lr. SINNOTT. Yes; I yield to the gentleman from Utah. :Mr. LEATHER,VOOD. Does not the Government have con-

trol over these permits after they are issued'? :!\1r. SINNOTT. Certainly. They nrc surrounded by the

precautions in the oil leasing act and the provisions in the oil leasing act ngainst subleasing, ngninst monopoly, as to the diligent working of the property, and regarding the forfeitut'e of their rights. Those provisions are nll incorporated in this bill, as you will see if you '"ill read the last provision. l\fi'. l\fays went on to say ·further :

Having tJeen as:;igued the task of reporting this bill, the attorneys antl representatives of tlJe a:::phalt companies sought interviews- ·

And so forth. Yet we find liim then advocating the very thing that we are

advocating to-day. You all know Dr. George Otis Smith, Director of · the

Geological Survey and outstanding conservationist. What does he :;:;ay about this bill? Here is what he said in h is letter of l\Iay 10, 102(3 :

Referring particularly to that portion of your inquiry regarding monopoly, your consideration is directed to that part of section 4, H .. R. u38:J, wllcr·cl.Jy it is proposed to amend section 27 of the Gent. _tl Leasing law "so as to provide that no person, association, or corporation sha ll at one time take or hol<l permits and leases aggregating more than 640 acres under this act in any one" State. In my opinion this language is an absolute insurance ·against monopoly holdings. In fact the whole tenor of the propo:;cd law len ds .itself to a plan ,to promote the development of J'ef;t ricteu holdings in an orderly manner, as contemplated under the lensing law.

Yet in Rpite of this we llave the two gentlemen from Missoud trying to convey to this House the suspicion that a great committee of the House is endeavoring to pass legislation that will allow corporations, that will allow big interests, to get hold of these lands.

They can not get title to a ~ingle acre of th~; land. Their only interest will be tile lensing system under regulations made by the Secretary of the Intel'ior and under the supervision of the Secretary of the Interior. Mr. Speaker--

TrifleR, light as air, A1·e to tile jealous confirmations . Rtrong, As pt•oof:3 of Holy Wl'it.

[Applause.] The SPEAKEH pro tempore. All time bas expired, and the

Clerk will repo•rt tho first comruittce amendment.

1\lr. :Mays at that time was advocating the very legislation that we are to-day bringing before the House, and wltat he was opposing was the selling of those lands under the mineral law at $~ per acre, which was provided for in the Senate amendment that Mr. Mays was then opposing. An<l for proof The Clerk road as follows : I shall read to you from the very page of the CoNGRESSIONAL Page 1, line n, after the word "Utah " insert the worlls "an<l not RECORD that l\1r. Dl'"ER read in the effort to color yonr views I known to be valuable for such deposits." and prejudice you against a worthy measure. Here is what Mr. DYER~ Mr. SpeakeL·, I dc~ire to be heard on the amoud-1\lr. Mays said on May 12, 1916: ,. ruent ouly for the purpo~e of calling attention to a statement

1926 CONGR.ESSION AL RECORD-HOUSE :10129 made by the gentleman from Oregon [l\1r. SINNOTT] and making a correction, he refusing to yield to me when he made his speech, and it is this: The gentleman from Oregon stated, at least he intimated, that the interost of my colleague [Mr. NEwTON of 1\Iissourl] and myso~f was due in part, if not wholly, to tlle fact thnt one or two of these coml)anies were in St. L ouis. He said we were speaking for these companies. Mentioning as one of them the Utah Gilsonite Co. I want to state that I have a letter from the Utah Gilsonite Co.-which he mentioned as fighting this bill, and stating that we were representing the coml)nny-dated April 12, 1926, signed by its pre::;ident, and in which letter they ask me to support this bill. 1\lr. Speaker, I ask permission to place it in the RECORD in orde~t.· that it may be read to disl)rove that part of the address of the chairman of the Public Lands Committee.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Missouri asks unanimous consent to extend his remarks in the RECORD by printing the letter referred to. Is there objection?

There was no objection. The lette~r referred to follows :

UTAn GILSONITE Co., St. Louis, United States of America, Ap1·iZ 1'£, 19£G.

non. L. c. DYER, 1\L c., Washington, D. 0.

1\!Y DEAR CONGRESSMA:N: It bas been called to my attention that a bill (H. R. !3385) bus been introduced by Representative COLTON, of Utah, providing for the leasing of the gilsonite bearing lands under the general provisions of the leasing act.

I nm fully acquainted with conditions regarding these lands in the State of Utah and feel that under all of the cit·cumstances the passage of this l>ill would be the best solution of a problem that bas been ruther difficult to understand.

The Government bas withheld from sale or entry the lands in the odd sections of all of the territory having this mineral within them. The Department of the Interior bas vigorously opposed the opening of these lands under any conditions other than by lensing. It, therefore, means that this great resource will remain untouched indefinitely.

There is no danger of the supply of these minerals becoming exbauRted. The· three companies which now own all of the available lands bnve a sufficient supply to last for 500 years at the rate these minerals are now being mined.

It will, therefore, be seen that no good is accomplished by a policy of conservation absolutely withdrawing them from the market.

By the placing of these lands under the leasing act it will insure in the future the prevention of an absolute monopoly of these minerals. I, therefore, suggest that you strongly support this measure and will appreciate any elfurt you may put forth to secure its passage.

~ours .very truly, S. P. BARRO~, President.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the committee amendment.

The committee amendment was agreed to. The SPEAKIVR pro teml)ore. The Clerk will report the

next committee amendment. The Clerk read as follows : rage 2, line 20, strike out the words "six hundred nnd forty"

and in ert in lieu thereof the words "three hundred and twenty."

The committee amendment was agreed to. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will re})Ort the next

committee amendment. The Clerk read as follows : P age 4, line 1, after the wonl " shall '' Insert the words " at one

time."

The committee amendment was n.greed to. 1\:Ir. BLACK of Texas. :Mr. Speaker, I offer an amend

ment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas

offers nn amendment, which the Clerk will rel)ort. The Clerk read as follows : Am('ndment by Mr. BLACK of Texas: Page 2, lines 23, 24, and 25,

strike out the language: "not less than 50 cents per ton of 2,000 pounds of marketable product," and insert in lieu thereof the following: •· which shall not be less than one-tenth in amount or value of the prouuctlon."

Mr. BLACK of Texas. 1\fr. Speaker, the bill now provides that in case the Secretary of the Interior makes a lease of any of this land he shall charge not less than 50 cents per ton of 2,000 pounds of marketable product and in addition to that he shall collect 50 cents an acre. Now, I presume on the present market for gilsonite that 50 cents per ton of 2,000 pounds would be a good royalty. nut the price might advance substantially and that figure ,would be a poor royalty.

Mr. COLTON. Will the gentleman yield? l\1r. BLACK of Texas. Yes. 1\Ir. COLTON. I can ea~ily see where a great misunder

standing will arise there. At what point will the gentleman's amendment apply? The price quoted here is the present market price obtaining at the mine.

l\Ir. BLACK of Texas. It will undoul>tedly be at the mine. I haYe copied my amendment from an act approved August 21, 1916, an act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to lease for the production of oil and gas the ceded lands of the Shoshone or Wind Ri\er Reseryntion in the State of Wyoming, and section 2 of that act r eads:

That the leases granted under this act shall be conditioned upon the payment by the lessee of such royalty as may be fixed in the l ease.

And goes on further and uses the language of my amendment:

which shall not be less than one-tenth in amount or value of the production.

l\lr. COLTON. Will the gentleman yield further? l\lr. BLACK of Texas. Yes. 1\ir. COLTON. I myself belie\e in the royaltr system, in

fact, I think the country is committed to it, but I do not belic\e it would be well to provide for one-tenth of the \alue unless you fixed the \alue, because this is different than oil.

Mr. BLACK of Texas. I would not object to the use of tho words "the value of the production nt the mine." l\'Ir. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to modify my amendment to that extent.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas asks unanimous consent to modify his amendment as indicated. Is there objection?

There was no objection. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the

modified amendment. The Clerk read as follows:

Which shall not be less than one-tenth in amount or value of the production at the mine.

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. Will the gentleman yield? 1\lr. BLACK of Texas. Yes. Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. Why should not this be put upon

the basis of a royalty of one-eighth, the same as provided in the general leasing law, and have it apply all o\er the country in that way? I feel that instead of providing a royalty of onetenth we ought to provide the regular royalty of one-eighth.

Mr. COLTON. I think the gentleman from Colorado is right. If we are embarking upon a policy of leasing, we ought to follow as closely as pos!;ible the general pro\isions of the leasing act.

Mr. BLACK of Texas. l\lr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to modif~ my amendment so that one-eighth shall be substituted for one-tent1i. I simply used the figures one-tenth because it was used in the act of 1916, which I have just cited.

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. l\Ir. Speaker, I think if oneeighth is put in it will safeguard the public interests \ery much indeed and will remove some of the objections to it.

Mr. SINNOTT. Of course, it is a minimum amount anyway. The Secretary can go as much higher as he sees tit, and this really is not very material.

1\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I think 50 cents is ridiculous and I do not think that ought to be in there.

1\lr. HASTINGS. 1\lr. Speaker, it occurs to me that the words "at the mine" should come in after the word "\alue," and I call the attention of the gentleman from Texas to that because the amendment winds up with the words "production at the mine."

l\lr. BLACK of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this amendment was rather hurriedly drawn by me, and I think the suggestion of the gentleman from Oklahoma is a good one, and I ask unanimous consent tl1at the amendment may be modified in that way. I thank him for suggesting it. I am anxious to perfect the amendment so that it will conform to our general leasing laws for oil, gas, shale, and sodium.

The SPEAKER pro teml)ore. The gentleman from Texas asks unanimous consent to modify his amendment in the manner indicated. Is there objection?

There was no objection. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the

amendment as modified. The Clerk read as follows :

AmendiD~nt by Mr. BLACK of Texas : Page 2, lines 23, 24, and 25, strike oot "not less than GO cents per ton of 2,000 pounds of market·

10130 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MAY 26 able prouuct" anu insert the words " which shall not be lei!s than ' one-eighth in amount or value at the mine of the prouuctlon."

'l~he amendment was agreed to. Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. M~. Speaker, I offer an amend

ment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado

offers an amendment, which the Clerk will report. The Clerk read as follows :

'' Amendment offered by l\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado: Page 1, line 8, after the word " States," insert the words "in the State of Utah."

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. :Ur. Speaker, as the gentleman from Utall has stated, so far as known at the present time the main bodies of gilsonite througllout this country are located in the State of Utah, and, as he said within very small limitations. 'Ve have some of it, not very much, in Colorado, and for the pre:;ent I feel I would rather not have this law apply to my State. I have talked with the gentleman from Utah, and I understand the gentleman from Utah has agreed with me to accept this amendment that this law sllall be limited to the State of Utah., I live in tile adjoining county to the gentleman from Utah. We are very close neighbors, our counties adjoining. This gilsonite runs across the State line from my county into his, a part in Colorado and part in Utah. I think most of that in Colorado is patented at the present time, and in view of the statement of the gentleman from Utah and of my talk with him, my understanding is there is no objection to this bill being limited to the State of Utah.

Mr. COLTON. Mr. Speaker, in response to the statement of the gentleman from Colorado, I will say that he and I have talked this over, and personally I, of course, have no objection to limiting it to my Htate, although I will say that under the principles of the general leasing act, what is good for one community, I think, ought to be good for another, but I have no objection at all from a personal standpoint to the amendment.

Mr. SINNOTT. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. Certainly. Mr. SINNOTT. Does not the gentleman think we ought to

have uniform laws throughout the United States relating to our oil lands and our coal lands, otherwise this will be the situation. Gilsonite deposits will be discovered over in Colorado, we will assume, and they can be taken up under the mining laws at $5 an acre, and the applicant will get a fee-simple title to the gilsonite lands and they are gone forever from the Government.

Under this system it is a leasing system and the lease can be terminated or at the end of the term the lands can be reserved to the Government if they are needed for go'"ernmental purposes.

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. Does the gentleman desire me to .answer that question 1 ' Mr. SINNOTT. Certainly.

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I do not like to join in the opposition to this bill. These gentlemen from Utah are neighbors and very good friends of mine. But this asphalt-and that is what it is-is of tremendous potential value, in my judgment. There is very, very little of it in the United States. Personally I feel the Government ought to hold the rest of it. I do not feel that title ougllt to pass for this very limited amount of ground. .At the same time, . if the gentlemen from Utall want the gilsonite in their State opened up in the manner provided in this bill, so far as I am concerned, I have said to them that if they would limit lt to the State of Utah or leave out the State of Colorado I would not_ofl:'er any opposition to it.

l\1r. SINNOTT. Doe~ the gentleman want that part which is in Colorado opened under the present miniug laws? ·

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I do not want to have any contro'"ersy over the mattor. Colorado is not asking for any change in the present law. I am not very much of a so-called "conservationist" ; but if there is a place on earth where consorvation ought to be practiced, it seems to me it is right here on this very limited amount of remaining gilsonite.

Mr. SINNOTT. TllC gentleman, I know, is familiar with the oil leasing act, because he sat on the committee for six years and was of great help in the passage of that act.

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. Yes; I sat on ~he committee for 12 years.

Mr. SINNOTT. .And this merely applies the provisions and theory of the oil leasing act to these minerals. -

l\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. We have a million t 1·mes more acres of oil than asphalt land, and we have many of other substance~. but asphalt is very limite<l in amount throughout the United States. I think most of it is in the State of Utah. I feel that we onght to try this law out in Utah, and then if the gentlemen from other 'Vestern States want to amend the law, if they want tllcir States included, I have no objection.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Colorado has expired.

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I ask for three minutes more. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I am speaking, gentlemen, for

the West in this matter. I know something about this. Some 25 years ago I was the attorney for the people who first obtained title for the most of this land that is patented in my State. This gilsonite is mostly in veins in a crevice, a hundred or more feet deep, sometimes not over 10 feet wide. There is one vein some 5 miles long.

Mr. WINTER. Are not these lands now under the mining laws open for entry all over the United States?

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. Yes; unless they are withdrawn from entry, they are. I have no objection to the State of Wyoming coming in if it wants to.

Mr. FHENCH. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman's amendment should prevail, in all of the States other than Utah title in fee would be obtained to gilsonite deposits instead of operating them under a lease law. The gentleman from Colorado cloes not want to accomplish that. If he would couple with his amendment a proposition that all gilsonite laud should be withdrawn from entry, other than in Utah, we could look to the future and apply tho experience and benefit we may gain from the result of the operation of a leasing law in Utah. But if the amendment of the gentleman from Colorado shall prevail and the land containing gilsonite not be withdrawn from entry, then in paTts of the United States other than Utah the entryman would acquire under the mineral laws a patent in fee of lands containing gilsonite deposits.

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. My amendment woul<l not change tlle condition of the present law. Does not tho same condition prevail now?

Mr. FRENCH. Surely ; and under present law unless lands containing gilsonite deposits are withdrawn from entry they may be acquired in fee simple-

1\Ir. TAYLOR of Colorado. Would remain as it is now. Mr. FRENCH. The pending bill would take the place of

the present law under which a patent in fee may be obtained. Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. If we pass this law for Utah

only, it will not apply to any other State. The present law would remain as to all the other States.

Mr. FRENCH. That is true, and I think that is the reason the amendment of the gentleman from Colorado ought not to be adopted.

:Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. If the gentleman wants to change the present law, why not bring in a bill for that pu»pose? If any other State wants- it thoir Representatives shoul<l bring in a bill for that purpose.

Mr. FRENCH. I want to direct the attention of Members of the House to the fact that if the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Colorado shall prevail it leaves tho situation so that in the State of Utah those who desire to mine gilson\_te and other minerals included in the bill will do so under a lease from the Government, the title remaining in the Government, but in all the other States those who desire to mine gilsonite and other minerals mentioned in the bill will be able to obtain title to the lan<l unless it shall be withdrawn from entry under the mineral law. I think the Members of the House ought to un<lerstand this proposition as they vote on the amendment.

1\Ir. SMITH. The law applies to the public domain and not alone to the State of Utah.

Mr. FRENCH. True enough, but I am talking about the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. SMITH. If the amendment should prevail Colorado would be excepted from tlle operation of the law.

l\lr. FRENCH. Yes; Colorado and all the other States excepting Utah would remain under the present law through which a title in fee could pass under the mineral laws.

:Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I want the law to remain as it is in Colorado. There is no langunge here I submit with all due respect that changes the existing law. If we limit it to the State of Utah we are all left as we are now. If we are not satisfied with the present condition it is for us to legislate. If any Western State wants this law I have no objection to their being included. I have no objection to limiting my amendment to Colorado, but I do not want Colorado put under this law. I do not think it is in tho interest of the Western States, but if others think it is I am not going to oppose their coming in under the law. I made that plain to the gentleman from Utah [Mr. CoLTON] ancl he and I hnve agreed that this amendment should go in and I supposed there would be no objection.

1926 CONGliESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 10131 1\Ir. SMITH. There seems to 1Je some misunderstanding as

to the amendment offered 1Jy the gentleman from Colorado. Is it to except the State of Colorado 't ·

1\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. No; it is to make the law apply to the State of Utah alone.

l\fr. SCHAFER. l\:Ir. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment, aHd the speech just deli>cred in fa>or of the amendment is another good reason vv·hy thls legislation should not be passed and made a law ut the present time. ·what do we find'?

"'e find the bill before us in the closing days of the ses- · sion with a committee report that :-;ta tes "the legislation has the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, as is indicated in a letter addressed to the chnirman of this committee which letter is herein set out in fnll for the information 'of the House." There is not one word in the letter which follows indica t ing that the Secretary of the Interior has approved this legislation. The gentleman from Utah [l\lr. CoLTON] speaking in favor of the bill admits on the tloor of the House that he had. had correspondence with the Interior Department and that the only approval which he had of the bill was from some other officials who were under the Secretary of the Interior.

Both opponent::-1 and proponents have raised the question of monopoly. We have had pre~ente<l to this House a letter from the Secretary of \Yar indicating that he is investigating this gilsonite with a view of ascertaining what its value will be for the purposes of national defense.

I think it absurd that this Congress should pass legislation at this time on which hearings hnve not been held-legislation which the Secretary of War nsks us to withhold, legislation which has not been approved by the Secretary of tlle Interior legi~lation which the gentleman from Colorado [l\'Ir. TAYLoRi thinks should not apply to the State of Colorado but should appl~ to the State of Utah. We are not here legislating in the mterest of any one particular State. We are national legislators, and I do not see how the gentleman from Colorado can support this bill even if his amendment were adopted. Great stress has been made by the proponents of the bill about the Secretary of the Interior making regulations and their argument indicating that the Government would thereby be safegun.rded. What would happen? At some forthcoming presidential convention there may be certain arrangements made, as appear to have been made in tlle past, and we perhaps would not have a Secretary of the Interior of the caliber and honesty of the present Secretary. 'Ve may have, because of some forthcoming convention and election, a Secretary of the Interior who will have as little respect for the protection of the Nation's national resources as had former Secretary Fall. This House should not consider and pass this bill at this time. The bill should be referred back to the Committee on the Public Lands to await the report of the Secretary of War after he has concluded his investigation. Public hearings should then be held and the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of 'Var Ahould be given the opportunity to appear in addition to all others desiring to do so.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from "7i~consin has expired.

l\fr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following amendment to the amendment which I send to the desk and ask to have read.

The Clerk read as follows : Amendment by Mr. LAGUARDIA to the amendment offered by the

gentleman from Colorado, Mr. TAYLOR: Page 2, liue 2, strilte out the period and add the following : " and that all such land except in the State of Utah shnll be withdrawn from entry."

1\Ir. LAGUARDIA. l\Ir. Speaker, that connects up with the ameudment of the gentleman from Colorado [l\lr. TAYLOR].

~'he SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair does not see how that connects up >vith the amendment of the gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. The amendment offered by the gentle· man from Colorado would limit the provisions of the bill to the State of Utah, and my amendment to his amendment would then withdraw from entry all such land in otller States.

1\Ir. TAYLOR of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that that amendment is not germane to my amendment, that it is exactly the thing they do not want to do. They want to open this up to development and this would close it forever.

l\Ir. LAGUARDIA. It is germane to the gentleman's amendment. It is directly in connection with the gentleman's nmendment. It would not ha\e nny senRc if the gentleman's amendment were voted down and in order to safeguard the

pulJlic it must be considered in connection with the gentleman's amendment.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 'Taylor amendment is on ~age 1, line 8, and the gentleman's amendment is on page 2, line 2.

1\ir. LAGUARDIA. But an amendment to an amendment must not necessarily follow the amendment or precede the amendment. The amendment of the gentleman from Colorado would nv1)ly the pro\isions of this bill only to the State of Utah. My amendment provides that in those States where you except the provisions of the 1Jill in those States all such land shall be withdrawn from entry.

l\Ir. TAYLOR of Colorado. l\Ir. Speaker, I do not think this ge_neral withdrawal of the public domnin has nnything to do With my amendment. I am not trying to do what the gentleman from Idaho [Mr. FRENCH] intimated. I am not tryin"' to withdraw from all forms of entry all land in the Unite~ States because it may some time ha\e gilsonite in it.

l\lr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, in a bill providing for the leasing of public lands surely it is not germane to withura w all land from entry?

1\fr. LAGUARDIA. This applies to gilsonite land nlone. The SPEAKER pro temvore. In the opinion of the Ohair

the amendment is not germane at the present time to the amendment of the gentleman from Colorado. The question is on the amendment of the gentleman from Colorado.

The question was taken, and the amendment was rejected. 1\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. l\lr. Bpcaker, I offer the fol

lowing amendment, which I send to the desk. Th~ Clerk read as follows : .Amendment by 1\Ir. TAYLOR of Colorado : Page I, line 8, after the

word " States," insert the words "excepting in the State of Colorado ."

1\ir. SCHAFER. l\lr. Speaker, I move to amend by adding the words "and the Sk'1te of WiRconsin."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The geutleman from ·wisconsin offers an amendment which tlle Clerk will report.

The Clerk read as follows: .Amend the Taylor amendment by inserting . after the word "Colo

rado " the words " and the Staw of Wisconsin."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment to the amendment.

The question was taken, and on a division (demanded by Mr. ScrrAFER) there were--ayes 2, noes 35.

So the amendment to the amen<lment was rejected. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amend

ment offered by the gentleman from Colorado. 1\lr. SCHAli'ER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the amend

ment. My amendment to the amendment including the Stnte of Wisconsin was just as ridiculous in my opinion as the gentleman's amendment excepting the State of Colorado. Are we to ha\e the spectacle here similar to tllat which confronts the House on the river and harbor bill that will soon come before us, where there~is a great block of votes for one project and there is another great block of votes for another project? In all fairness to the gentleman from Colorado, if his amendment were offered in good faith, if his amendment were adopted, I do not see how his conscience could be satisfied if he would cast his vote for this bill as amended. If this bill is good for the State of Utah it is good for every State in the Union. Is it proper that this Congress, the national legislative body, should enact class legislation in the interest of any one State? The gentleman's amendment may be adopted, perhaps, with the hope of receiving a few more votes on the final passage of this bill. The Secretary of War is opposed to the consideration and passage at this time; the Secretary of the Interior has not approved tllis bill and the bill is reported to the House by the committee which llas not conducted a public hearing. If this Congress is going to legislate in this ridiculous manner I think perhaps we had better adjourn.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado.

The question was taken, and the Speaker pro tempore announced the noes appeared to have it.

On a division (demanded by l\1r. TaYLoR of Colorado) there were--ayes 18, noes 37.

So the amendment was rejected. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from New

York desire to offer his amendment? Mr. L.a.G UARDIA. No; it l1as no efl'ect now. Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. Mr. Speal{er, I move to strike

out the last wotd. Mr. SINNOTT. The last word ; where?

10132 CONGRESS! ON .A.L RECORD-HOUSE MAY 26 Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. Tbe last word of the section.

Has the bill been read? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill bus been read clear

through. l\lr. TATI~OR of Colorado. Then, Mr. Speaker, I move to

strike out the last word at tl1e end of the bill. Mr. Sr)eaker, if this bill is to l.le made applicable throughout the entire United States and it be enforced upon the people of my State of Colorado I feel impelled to comment upon it a little further. In my judgment there is only a very limited amount of aspllalt in the United States, and the Secretary of War has said it bids fair some of tbe~e time;j to be of tremendous value. It is true nt the pre~eut time there is very little market for it, and the price, I understand, is down to something like $3.GO. I have not paid any attention to the , price, l.lut during the war it was at a high price, and some time it is going to lJe at a high price again. As I ha•e ~mid before, if there ever was o. substance iu the public lfmds of this country owned by Uncle Sam that ought to be conserved it is the gilsonite and the asphalt that is in limited partR of the West.

Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Will the gentleman. yield? l\Ir. TAYLOH of Colorado. Yes. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I ask the gentleman would be favor

any measure which would pre\cnt the acquiring of deposits in his State in fee by anybody?

l\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. Well, my State is not objecting to the prcRent law. ·

Mr. r~EATIIEJRWOOD. That is what they are doing now--1\'lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I feel that wherever gilsonite is

known it ought to be withdrawn, just the same as valual>l-e oil deposits are withdrawn, and I think it will be.

l\J:r. J_,EATHER,VOOD. One other question : Now, if it is fair for the State of Colorado to get the~e deposits in fee and own them nbsolutely without any control by t11e Government, what is there unfair in allowing a sister State to have, at least where it is absolutely under tile control of the Government--

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I am not objecting. l\Ir. LEATHERWOOD. And if the Government needs it at

any time, can take it back. ~fr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I nm not objecting to my sister

State getting this law. I did not object to it; I said I would not object to it so far as Utah was concerned; but if it was sought to inflict it upon my State, I was opposed to that legislation. I have been very frank about this matter.

l\Ir. NEWTON of Missouri. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I will, l\Ir. NEWTON of l\Iissouri. Does not the gentleman think

that the passnge of a bill such as this will be tantamount to in~tructing the Secretary of the Interior to dispose of this land by lease?

Mr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I feel this way: I fear it will only be a short time until practically all the asphalt in the Uuited States goes into one or a very few hands. [Applause.] I think that is what is going to happen.

Mr. SINNOTT. The gentleman knows no one can get a lease un<lcr this bill of over 320 acres in a known territory aud 640 acres when be goes out and discovers it in wildcat territory.

J\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. There is not enough asphalt left in the United States to prevent a few companies from getting it all very soon under tllis bill.

1\lr. WINTER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yielcl? 1\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. Yes. Mr. WINTER. Is it not a fact that anybody cnn go out to

morrow and locate any of the known gilsonite deposits and turn them over to these parties?

l\Ir. TAYLOR of Colorado. Yes; they can locate it in small-lo<le cluims, and even then tlley will have just as much trouble in getti?g a patent as they would have in getting a patent on any oil-::;hale claims.

Mr. WINTER. You might as well have the general mining law operating fn'e for all parties to o-o and locate or have it under one general regulatory system?

1\lr. TAYLOR of Colorado. I woulu rather ba1e that than give the department full power to lease it all to a very few people.

Mr. WINTER. If the gentleman is going to dispose of these lands un<ler the general mining laws, how will thnt prevent those lan<ls from coming into the possession of these other corporatious?

l\Ir. TAYLOR of Oolorado. Neither the Secretary of the Interior nor the Commi~sioner of the General Land Office hnve rec~mmcnded thitl bill, an<l the Secretary of War is oppo~ed to It, and I be1ie1e all the consernttionists in the United States would be opposed to it if they knew of it and knew the conclitions.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Colorado has expired.

l\lr. SINNOTT. 1\Ir. Speaker, I move that all debate on this pamgrnph and all amendments thereto be now closed.

l\lr. HILL of .Alabama. I ask unanimous consent thut my colleague from Alabama [l\lr. ALLGooD] be given nn opportunity to offer an amen<lment. He wishes to offer nn amendment.

l\1r; SINNOTT. Very well. 1\lr. ALLGOOD. Mr. Spenker, I offer an amendment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the

amendment offered by the gentleman from Alabama [l\Ir. ALLGOOD]. · The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Ur. ALLGOOD: Page 2, IlneA 18 and 10, after the word "bidtling," strike out "or such other methods as he may by general regulations artopt" nnd insert on page 2, llne 18, between the word "auverth;ement" and tile word "competitive" the word "and."

l\lr. SINNOTT. l\lr. Speaker, I accept that amendment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on agreeing

to the amendment. J\Ir. DYER. Mr. Speaker, what is the amendment.? May

we ha\e it again 1·e.ported? The SPEAKER pro Jempore. Tbe gentleman from Missouri

asks unanimous consent that the amendment be again reporte<l. Is there objection?

There wns no objection. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report it. Tlle amendment was again rend. The SPEAKER vro tempore. The question is on ag1·eeing to

the amendment. Tlle amendment wns agreed to. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engross

ment nncl third reading of the bill. Mr. DYER .AND Mr. SCHAFER rose. The bill wns onlerecl to be engrossed an<l read a third time,

and was rend the tbiru time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passnge

of the bill . The question was taken, Rnd the Speaker pro tempore an-

nouuced that the ayes appeared to have it. 1\fr. NEWTON of :Missouri. .A division. The SPJiJAKER pro tempore. A division is demanded. The House divided; an<l there were--ayes 36, noes 14. Mr. DYEJR. l\Ir. Speal<er, a parlimentary inquii·y. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. l\ir. DYER. I was rising, ancl so was the gentleman from

Wisconsin, to offer a motion to recommit, but the Speaker pro tempore did not give us a chance. I ask that we be recognized for that purpose.

The SP.EJAKFJR pro tempore. Of course, the time hrts gone by now.

· :Mr. DYER. Wbat is the vote? The SPEAKER pro tempore. Ayes 36, noes 14. l\1r. DYER. l\Ir. Speaker, I make the point that the vote

has shown that there is not a quorum pre. ent, and I ohject to the vote if we can not have a motion to recommit.

The SPE.A.KER pro tempore. The gentleman from Missouri makes the poiut of order that tllere i::; no quorum prc:,;ent. It is apparent that tllere is no quorum present. The Doorkeever will close the doors, tlle Sergeaut at .Arms will bring in the absentees, and the Clerk v~ill call the roll. Those favoring the pas:-)age of the bill will, wllen their names are called, an::;wcr "yea"; tllose oprlosed will answer "nay."

The question was taken; and there were-yeas 197, nays 77, answered "present" 2, uot voting 155, a::; follow~:~ :

Auernetby A elkins Anthony Arentz Arnold Barbour Beers Rcgg nell Rlack, N.Y. Black, 'f<'X. Blan1l Blanton Bloom lJowl<'S Howro~:~n Boylan Driggs Brigbnm llrowne

[R.oll No. 101]

YE.AS-197

Brumm Burdick llurtneRs llnrton Campllell Can:w Car.s Carter, Okla. Chalmers Cl1ristopberson Clngue Cole Collier Colton Connery CrowthPr Crumpacker Cullen Darrow Davenport

nemrf;ey Gibson Di!'k :1sou, Iowa Olsnn Dowell Goodwin Drewry Gurman Driver Green, Iowa Eaton Griest l'miott Grlft\n .v;ster-ly Hauley Evans Hale Fairchild Hall~ Ind. FL h llUJ:ftY Fh;ber Harrison Fitzgerald, Roy G. Ilas1.i1Igs Fitz~;crald, \V. '1'. Bnwlcy l•'nrt Hayden Fo:-;s HP-l"sey Ft·cc H icl,ey French Hill, 1fd. Il'nllcr Hill, ·wash. Gallivan Hogg

1926 CONGRESSIONAL REC_ORD-HOUSE 10133. Hooper :Mapes Ran:;l y Tillman Houston Martin, Mass. ltatbbone Tilson Hnclson Menges Hecce Timberlake Jlnd~peth Merritt }{.e{'(l,N. Y. Tinkham Irwin :Michener Hobinson, Iowa Tolley .Tacob8tein 1\llller Hobsion, Ky. ~~d~~·i:ili John son , Ill. l\Ii11s Rogers JohnS<Ju, S. Dak. Montague Sanders, Tex. Underwoo<l 1\:ahn Moonoy Rand lin Vestal 1\:eller MoorP., Ohio Rcott Vincent, l\lich. l<endnll 1\Iorehead Seger Wason Ketcham I\ forgan Hinnott Wefald Knutson :Morrow Smith \Veller Kopp l\Iurphy ~nell Welsh Kurtz Nelson, l\le. Somers, N.Y. White{ Kans. Kvale Norton Sosnowski \\bitt ngton LaGuaruia O'Connell, N. Y. Spearing \Villinms, Tex. Lazaro O'Connell, ll. I. Sproul, Ill. WHHamson Leatherwood O'Connor, La. Stalker ·wilson, La. I.ea\itt Oldfield Htephens Wingo Letts Oliver, N.Y. Strong, l'a. Winter Linusay Parker Summers, Wash. Wolverton Lowrey l'arl{s Swank Wood McDuffie rortet• Swing Woodruff :;\fcKeown Prall Taber Wurzbach McLaughlJn, 1\Iich.Pratt Taylor, Tenn. Wyant McLaughlin, Nebr.Quayle Taylor, W. Va. Yates :;\lcJ,pod Quin Temple 1\TcZ\lillan Hainey Thomas l\Iagec, Pa. - Ramseyer Thurston

NAYS-77 Allgoou Douglass Lampert Romjue Almon Dyer Lankford Hubey Rnchmann Rdwards Linthicum Schafer Beck l~slick Llttle Rchneidcr Berger Faust Lozier Sears, Nebr. Box Fletcher McClintic Shallenberger Rran<l, Ga. Frear McReynolds Speaks Cannon Fulmer 1\Iel:;wain Sp1·onl, Kans. C'eller Gardner, Ind. McSweeney Strother Collins Gilbert l\fagee, N.Y. Sumners~ Tex. Connally, '.fex. Goldsborough Major Taylor, Colo. Coopet·, Wis. Grc-cn, Fla. Milligan Vinson, Ga. Cox Hammer Montgomery Voigt Crosser- Hare Moore, Ky. Wainwright Davey Hill, Ala. l\!oore, Va. Wheeler Davis Hoch Nelson, Zllo. Whitehead . Deal Howard Newton, Mo. Wright Dickinson, Uo. llncluleston Oliver, Ala. Dominick Johnson, Tex. Peery Daughton Kinclleloe Hankin

AN SWEllED " PllESENT "-2

Beedy Bowling

NOT VOTING-1G5 Acke1·man Doyle Kiess Rutherford Ahll'ich Drane Kindreu Sa bath Allen Ellis King Sanders, N.Y. Anllrcsen li'enn Kirk Hears, Fla. Andrew Flaherty Kunz Hhreve Appleby l<'r~dericks Lanham Him mons A swell Freeman Larsen Sinclair Auf der llcide Frothingham Lea, Calif. Smithwick Ayres Funk Lee, Ga. Stengall Bacharach l!'urlow Lehlbach Stedman :Bacon Gambrill Lineberger Stevenson ' Bailey Garber Luce ~tobbs Banld1ead Garner, Tex. Lyon Strong, Kans. Harldey Garrett, Tenn. l\1cFadden Sullivan Hlxler Garrett, Tex. MacGt·egor Swartz Roies Gasque l\Iadllen Sweet Brand, Ohio Gifl'oru l\Jagrady Swoope Britten Golder l\Ianlove Taylor, N.J. Browning Gmham Mansfield Thatcher Buchanan Greenwood Martin, La. Thompson Rulwinkle Hall, N. Dak. l\feau 'rinchcr · Busby Haugen Michaelson Tucker Butler Hawes 1\forin Tydings Byrns Hula day Nelson, Wis. Up<like Canfielu Hul l, Tenn. Nc>wton, Minn. Upshaw Carpenter Hun, Morton D. O'Connor, N.Y. Vaile Carter, Calif. Hull, William R. l'atterson Yare Chapman Jnmcs Peavey Vinson, Ky. Chindl>lom Jeffers Perkins \\' alters <..'1enry Jenkins Perlman \Varreu Connoll~ Pa. .Tohnson, Ind. Phillips Wntres Cooper, hio Johnson, Ky. rou Watson

1Con1ing Johnson, Wash. Purnell Weave1· Coyle Jones RAgon White, 1\Ie. CrR111ton Kearns Rayburn Williams. Ill. Cri~p Kelly Reed, Ark. Wilson, .Miss. Curry Kemp Iteid, Ill. ~·oout·um Dcnitlon Kerr ·nouAe Zlhlman Dickstein Kiefner now bottom

So the l>ill was pas~eu. Tllp Clerk announced tbe following additional pairs: Until furtller notice : 1\Ir. 1\Icii'adclcn with l\Ir. Dmne. Mr. Hutler with Mr. Byrns. lUr . .Ackerman with Mr. Aswell. 1\Ir. Thatcher with Mt·. Steagall. Mr. Watson with Mr. Jones. Mr. Johnson of Indiana with Mr. Lyon. Mr. Kiess with Mr. Mansfield. l\1r . MacGregor with Mr. Pou. Mr. Taylor of New Jersey with Mr. Woodrum. Mr. JohnRon of Washington with Mr. Tydings. Mr. Bacharach with Mr. Rayburn.

LXVII--638

Mr. Kfefner with Mr. Bulwinkle. Mr. Chlndblom with 1\Ir. Corning. Mr. Heid of Illinois with Mr. Hull of Tennessee. Mr. Lehlbach with Mr. Lanham. 1\Ir. Holes with ::.Ur. O'Connor of New York. 1\lr. " ' illiams of Illinois with 1\Ir. Hagan. l\11·. Rowbottom with Mr. Vinson of Kent1.1cky. ~lr. Shreve with 1\ir. Tucker. · · ~lr . Morton D. Hull with Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Strong of Knnsas with Mr . .Ayres. Mr. F enu with 1\Ir. Husby. 1\lr. Connolly of Pennsylvania with :Mr. Stevenson. Mr. Manlove with Ur. Wanen. Mr. Sinclair with Mr. Buchanan. 1\Jr. Gifford with Mr. Chapman. 1\Ir. Bixler with 1\lr. Crisp. 1\Jr. Ellis with )[r. Je.1Jers. Mr. Curry with Mr. Kindred. 1\Ir. MichaclMn with l\Ir. Lea of California. 1\fr. Stobbs with )Jr. l\Iartin of Louisiana. 1\Ir. Golder with l\Ir. ~nbnth. Mr. Furlow with Mr. Dp~hnw. Mr. Swoope with Mr. Dickstein. Mr. Thompson with Mr. Gambrill. l\Ir. Kearns with 1\Ir. Nelson of Wisconsin. Mr. Pel'lman with ~Ir. Peavey. Tbe result of the vote was announced as above recorded. On motion of 1\fr. SINNOTT, a motion to reconsider the vote

by wllicl.l the bill was passed was laid on tbe table. Tbe doors were opened. Mr. ALLGOOD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to

revise anu extend my remarks in the RECORD. The SPEAKER Tbe gentleman from Alabama asks unani

mous consent to revise and extend llis remarks in the REcono. Is there ol>jection?

There was .qo objection. 1\Ir. ALLGOOD. l\1r. Speakea:-, in tbe l>cginning of this dis

cussion I was undecided as to how to cast my vote on this bill. Howe\er, after llaving watched tbe procedure anu after having beard tbe gentleman from Colorado [l\1r. TAYLOR] object to tllis bill being apvlied to leasing asphalt and other mineral properties in his State, which is a sisted' State to Utall, to 'vhicll this bill directly applies, I have uecided to cast my vote agaim;t it. If the gentleman from Colorado thinks that these valuable properties in his State are not properly safeguarded by this meat:ure, then it is my opinion that similar properties in Utah "\\111 not be safeguarded by this measure.

Tllese lands are owned by tl.te Government and contain minerals whicll are not found to any great extent in any other sections, minerals tllat are of inestimable value in .time of wa·r, anu while I hate war, yet we should safeguard tbe natural resources of tllis country which are valuable for defense.

The question of monopoly has been l>rought into this discussion, ancl this I do know, that if the Government bolUs these properties as they are intact, that there can be no monopoly by a:py combine or corporation. There has always been too great a tenden<..:y by our governmental officers to ~·itter away for a mess of pottage tbe properties of our Government, and I think it is time for us to begin to put a clleck on such practices.

There llas been interposed a plea for State rights in the passage of tllis bill, but you must remember that we are not legislating for special fa,ors for States, but we F:houlu enact laws for the protection of the Nation. I am confident that this measure is going to be passed; however, it certainly should not be passed without enacting the amendment which I have offered.

The hill provides that the Secretary of tbe Interior can lease lands kno,vn to conta.in valuable ueposits through advertisement, competitive biduing, or such other metllou as lle may by general regulations adopt. :My amendment seeks to strike out the word " or snell other method lle may by general regulations adopt." I am not criticizing the present Secretary of tllc Interior, because I think lle is a very valuable and efticient Secretary. However, 've uo not know who will bold this important position in years to come, and certainly no man should have the power to dispo~e of great public provertics without advertising them and offering them to the highest biuuer. No man should be provided with a method whereby he could in secret, or in some back room, or by any regulation that he uesired, lease great govermnentul pr011erties. The principle is wrong, and matters pertaining to our Government should have all the publicity, all the light of day, all the information that it is possible to bring to bear upon these questions. In other worus, we sboulcl safeguard the Government's property in every way and leave the least opportunity and cllance for graft and corruption possible. \fe do not want to give opportunity or chance for any more Teapot Dome procedures.

LEASING OF PUllLIC LANDS IN ALASKA FOR FUR FARMING

1\Ir. SINNOTT. Hr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Public Lands, I call up H. R. 8048, a bill to provide for the

10134 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 1\fAY 26

leasing of public lands in Alaska for fur farming, and for other purposes.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Oregon calls up H. R. 8048, which the Clerk will report.

'l'he Clerk rea d the title of the uill. Mr. LAGUARDIA. l\ir. Speaker, I raise the question of con,

siderution of the bill. The SPEAKER. Tlle gentleman from New York raises the

question of consideration of the bill. The question was taken and tlle House agreed to consider

the bill. Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. LAGUARDIA. Under the present status of things, the

time '"ill be dh·ided when ·we go into Committee of the Whole? The SPEAKER. This it:; a Union Calendar bill and under

the rule the House automatically resolves itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Automatically? The SPEAKI!JR. Unless unanimous consent is given to con

sider the bill in the House as in Committee of the 'Vhole. Mr. SINNOTT. 1\fr. Speaker, I ask unanimous com;ent that the

bill be considered in the HouHe as in Committee of the Whole. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Oregon asks unani

mous consent that this bill may be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole. Is there objection?

1\Ir. LAGUARDIA.. :Mr. Speaker, I object.

UPPER MISSOURI RIVER PROJECT

Mr. McLAUGHLIN of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD a statement by Mr. A. J. Weaver, president of the Missouri River and Navigation Association, to l\Iaj. C. C. Gee, of Kansas City, Mo., with reference to the upper Missouri River project.

The SPEAKER. 'l~he gentleman from Nebraska asks unanimous consent to extend his remarks in the RECORD by printing a statement by ~lr. A. J. Weaver with reference to the upper Missouri River project. Is there objection?

There was no objection. Mr. McLAUGHLIN of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, under the

leave to extend my remarks in the RECORD I include the following:

Maj. C. C. GEE,

TilE :MISSOURI RIVER NAVIGATIOX AssOCIATION,

Kansas City, Mo., January 8, 1926.

United States Army, District Engineer, Kansas City, Mo.

DEAR SIR : As supplemental to the oral evidence adduced at the hearing held by you on the 4th day of December, in the city of Omaha, upon the appllcation of the Uissouri River Navigation Association that the Missouri ' niver from Kansas City, Mo., to Yankton, S. Dak., and to such farther point on the upper river as can be found practicable be recommended as an approved river project, we respectfully submit for your consideration the following:

Tile statistics herein pres~nted are for the year 1925, except where complla tion for sucil rear was not available, and in that case those for 1!>24 are used. It is wortlly of your con !deration that during both of these years there existed an agricultural and 1nuustrial de· pression in the Missouri River Valley territory which bas materially r educed the volume of business handlert in this area. Consequently, it can be safely assumed that under normal conditions the traffic would be of larger volume, and that with the yearly increase of population and business incident to the development of this r egion the tonnage available for an improved upper Missouri River waterway would be greatly augmented. Such natural and ineYitable increase should be considered in the decision of your di\•ision of the Government. However, the data obtainable as to the years referred to are illuminating, have been carefully compiled, and we respectfully submit the a;ame under the titles "Potential southbound traffic," "Potential northbound traffic," "The efiect or road impro,·ement on inland waterway traffic," "Financial cooperation with the War Department in improving the Misl:louri llivcr," and "Conclusion." The statistics quoted have been assembled by the members of the able committee appointed by the president of the association, and whose names appear at the conclusion of this hrief in verification of said statistics. Aclmowledgment is mnrle by the a sociation for the fine public service rendered to the Missouri lliver Valley territory by this committee.

POTEXTIAL SOUTIIBOUXD TOXXAGE

Under this heading we consider only those products which by their nature are suitable for tranl'portation via hnrgc, viz :

Grain and grain rn·oducts (flour a nil ferd) and hny. Such packing-!Jou~e products as hides, fertilizers, canned goods, etc. Smelter products and scrap iron.

Beet sugnr and alfalfa products, products of cannrries, and other manufactured goods.

By far the largest part of this tonnage consists of grain. The 10 States tributary to the upp-er Missouri River produce im·

mensc quantities of surplus grain which is shipped every year to COil·

suming territory all over the United States, to the West Indies, and to Europe. These States, by reason of the preponderance and importance of agriculture over other industries, produ(e and ship the greater portion ·of the exportable grain surplus of the country and are dependent upon the efficient transportation of grain at a reasonable cost for their commercial existence. Other sections with diversified industries consume a r elatively larger percentage of the grain they raise, but this section must export its surplus.

The United States Depa rtment of Agriculture publishes yearly an estimate o! the total prouuction of each kind of grain in each State, and an estimate o! the percentage of the pt·incipal crops of wheat, corn, oats, and barley that moves from the county ·where it is grown.

According to these estimates for the year 1924, there was produced in the 10 States tributary to the upper Missouri lliver (Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, ·wyoming, l\lontana, South Dakota, North Dakota, Iowa, and Missouri) a . total of 2,356,164,000 bushels, or G8,655,4G6 tons of grain, as shown by the following tal:> e :

U11itea States Department of Agrioulture estimate of total amount of ymin produced in the 10 States tributary to tl!e Missou1·i Rivet· in 19~4 aml their estimate of the peroentage of sai(l total 1Jroductioll that move(l from the county 10here grown, ana therefore presumably in interstate oommerce, and oompa1-iBo11s· u:ith similar figures fur entire count,-y

WHEAT

Estimated total

production Cor 1924

(bushels)

Estimated percentage

of total production

moved from

county where grown

Cor 1924

Estimated bushels

moved from county

wh~e1~wn

Oklahoma ________________________ ------- 44,448,000

Kansas . __ .-------------------------- ---· 126, 065, 000 Nebraska __ _ ----------------------------- 45, 692,000 MissourL·------------------------------ 15,763,000 Iowa_ ... _____ -----------------------____ 5, 694. OCO North Dakota___________________________ 110.387,000 South Dakota_.------------------------- 25, fl()4, 000 Colorado_ .. --------------------- ___ ··-·. 14, 300, 000 Wyoming ____ __ -----·-------·--·-·______ 1, 236, 000 Montana.-- ---------·-··---------------- 40,301,000

1------------1--------·1---------Total for 10 States.---------------- 429,400,000 Total for United States___ _________ 614,8411, 000

!========!:=====:===~~ I -·t>· CORN

Oklahoma·------------------------------ 8, li28, 000 Kansas_-------------- _____ ----------·___ 18.326,000 Nebraska·------------------------------- 60,984,000 l\lis..<~ourL_______________________________ 17,061.000 Iowa _____ _ --------------·--------· ______ . 85, 330, 000 North Dakota___________________________ 227.000 South Dakota._----·---------------- --- - 29,997,000 Colorado __ .---------------------------·· 3, 286.000 Wyoming .. _------------"---------------- 23,000 1\-Iontana_ --------------· ---------------- 92, 000

1-----------1---------1----------Totcl for 10 States.---------------- 223,854,000 Total for United States____________ 448, 318,000

1=========1=======1=======

RYE 0 kla homa .. ______ -_. _. __ . _. _____ . __ . __ . _ Kansas··--·------------···--·------- __ .. Nebraska __ .. _---.---- ____ ___ ._ .. _. __ ._._ :Missouri. .• _---_---- ___ •. _. ________ ._._ .. Iowa _____ . ___ .----._-- ___ ._. __ . ___ .• _ .... North Dnkota _____________ ----------- -- -South Dakota. ___ -----------· .•.•. _____ _

4,19,000 4115,000

1, 531,000 172,000 570,000

11,365,000 2, 217,000

' Ten-yea;: average percentage or corn movement from county where grown used instead Of l'J24 percentages beC8tlSC the department published DO figures for 1924 per· centages. ·

2 No pl'rcentages published by department covering rye, 1924; wheat percentages applled to rye.

1926 - CONGRESSIONAL REOORI!-HOUSE 10135 Unitc(l States Department of Agr·wulture estima e o tota amount of

{/rain pt·oduood, etc.-Continued

RYE-continued

Estimated total

production for 1924

(bushels)

Estimated percentage

of total production

moved from

county where grown for 1924

Estimated bushels

moved from county

where ~own in 1924

Colora no _________________ :______________ 740,000 2 68 503,000 ·wyoming________________________________ 204,000 2 58 153,000 Montana________________________________ , 1, 750, GOO 2 78 1, 3C5, 000

Total for 10 States _________________ l---23-,-704-, -00_0_ 1 _____ -_-_-__ -_-__ -_-_I--1-8,-7-60-,-0-JO

Totul for Uniteu States____________ G3, 446, GOO 2 70. 5 44., 729,000

DAnLEY Oklahoma ___________ :____ _____________ __ 4, 67/i, 000 111 701,000 Kansas __ -------------------------------- 11, 5.~0, 000 30 8, 4.65, 000 Ncbro.sl;a________________________________ G, 275,000 16 1, 004., 000 1\lL·sourL ______________ ---------- ___ ____ _ l 00, COO _______ __ ___ 1, 000 Iowa __________________ ~--------------- .: __ 4, 710, C-QO 32 1, 507,000 North Dakota___________________________ 35,100, (1()0 48 16,848,000 South Dakota_-------------------------- 22,428,000 48 10,765,000 Colorarlo __ ------------------------------ 8, HiO, 000 24 1, 958,000 Wyoming________________________________ 900,000 45,000 Montana ____________________________ ~~-- 3, 100,000 ---~;----:8: 2-!8, 000

1-----------1---------1----------Totul for 10 StutE's_________________ 96, 1198,000 ------------ 36,542,000 Totc.l for Uniteu States____________ 187, ~75, 000 34.9 65,695,000

Grnnd tot.nl all grain, 10 States: H ushcls _____________________________ _ 'l'ons __________________________ ------

Grand total all grain, United States: Bushels _____________________________ _ Tons _____ ------------------ __ -------

1====~~=1======1===~~

2, 356, 164, 000 58,655,466

5, 102,407, 000 125, 358, 442

893, 614, 000 23,614,388

1, 599, 579, 000 40,643,230

2 No percenta~es published by department covering rye, 1024; wheat percentages applied to rye.

'l'his table shows that the 10 States produce 4G.2 per cent of all the grain produced in the United States, and ship in interstate commerce 55.8 per cent, or more than hnlf of all grain shipped in the United States. Cheap and efficient transportation of grnin is therefore more essential to the welfarq of this territory than to any other part of the United States.

It is conceded that a small percentage of the grain moved ncross county lines is commmcd in other counties of the same State, and therefore does not move in interstate commerce. This percentage is very small because grain loaded in a freight car for movement across county lines will in almost every instance move across State lines or to processing or · storage plants within the State from which it is later forwarded in interstate commerce. Particularly will this percentage of consumption within the State be small in these great surplus producing States where practically every county produces a surplus and where there aro no great consumptive centers. We believe, therefore, that for t~e purpose of thfs inqujry we may assume that the estimates of the United States Department of .Agriculture of the movement of_ grain ac,ross county lines _in the 10 States is fairly representative of tlie movement from these States in interstate commerce.

Upon the basis <>f these-estimated pe~centages of the United States Department of .Agriculture, (here was moved in interstate commerce. (rom the 10 States in the upper Missouri River territory a total of 803,614,000 bushels, or 23,514,388 tons, of grain. Some of this grain mo>es in directions other than toward the Missouri River. Oklahoma anu Kansas ship direct by rail to southern consumers; l\Iontana, North

· Dakota, and part of South Dakota, to the Pacific coast and to Minneapolis and Duluth; eastern Iowa anu Missouri to St. Louis, Chicago, anu Milwaukee; and western Nebraska, western Kansas, Wyoming, and Colorado to Pacific coast and intermountain territory; !Jut taking the estimated total movement of 23,514,388 tons from the 10 States anu the known receipts ·of the primary markets located on the Missouri River for 1024 of 2130,832,420 bushels, or 7,101,050 tons, us shown by the followjng table, we estimate upon a conservative basis that <>ver 10,000,000 tons of grain moved in 1024 via the Missouri filver crossings, the diiTerencc between this estimate and the total primary receipts being the amount of grain moving direct from producing points to consumers and industries not located on the Missouri River and, therefore, not appearing in the total primary receipts:

Grain rcc.cipts. Missotlri Riter marlccts, 1921,, a.s per tho pubUo reoo'rd.'l of tl!o mw·kets nametl, ana added thereto pri-r:ate estimates tor A.tehwon and Lcavcnu:orth

Wheat Corn Oats Rye Darloy All grain

Bushels Bu.shels B-ushels Bushels Bushel.~ ~~ab~\~Kc(cailncil- 2, 455, oos 9, 536,884 5, 944, ooo 194,928 241, 000 __________ _

lllufis ______________ 34,234,300 24,735,200 15,400,0001,185,800 772,800 -----------

Gn1ttt~ receipts, Mtssouri Rir:er markets 19'21, etc -Continued , ,

Wheat Corn Oats Rye Barley All grain

B-ushels Bushels Bushels Bushels Bushels St. Joseph ____________ 13,651,400 12, 22U, 500 1, 790,000 61,500 68,250 -----------Kansas Oity_. _______ 90,823,950 23,112,500 7, 692,500 823,400 682,500 -----------Total:

Bushels ____ 141, 164, 6!)8 69,611,084 30,826,500 1, 765, 628t 764, MO 245, 132,4~ Tons _______ 4, 234, gag 1, 949,110 4()3,224 49, 4.il7 42, 349 6, 769,050

Ateh!Son, 8,000 cars, at 40 tons per car, 12,000,000 bushels; 320,000 tons . Leavenworth, 1,800 cars, at 40 tons per car, 2,700,000 bushels; 72,000 tons.

~~i~ ~0~~~~~~=======.================================================== 25~: ~~: 6~8 In consiuering the flow of grain via the Missouri Uivcr crossings

it ls impossible to differentiate !Jetween the upper and lower river !Hl there is some intcrmarket movement and consequent duplication, but to indicate the actual tonnag-e of grain whicli woulu have been available for barr:;e _transportation on the upper dver in 1D2·i, we have prepared a Atatement of the shipments of gTain anu grain products during the year 1D24 from the public records of three upper-riYer markets. This statement which follows shows actual shivmeuts from these markets of 104,412,222 bushels, or 2,717,878 tons.

Grain shiJNI1CILts, upper Missotlr~ River 11ta1·kct8, as per the publio t·ccords ot Siuwc City, Oma.l!a, and St. Joseph

Wheat Oorn Oats Rye Barloy All grains

------------

Bushels Bushels Bushels Bushels Bushels Sioux City ____________ _ 2, 508,000 7,441,~8 5, 530,000 14.4, 524 104,150 ---· -------Omaha and Council nlutrs ___ ___ __________ :lO, 277,800 25,122,400 16,950,000 I, 207, GOO 752,000 -----------St. J osupb ________ ______ 4, 923,800 8, 637,000 631,000 28,500 24,500 ----------------,-. Total:

Busht\ls ______ 37,769,600 41,201, 2tf!\23, 120, ooo 1,380, 72! 940, t\.50 104, 412, 2'22 Tons _______ __ 1, 133,088 1, 153, 635 36\1, 920 38,660 22,575 2, 717,::378

There can be no doubt but that this annual flow of grain woulcl be greatly increased by low water rates on the l\lissourl River and that grain now moving in other directions from the 10 States would be attracted to the Missouri River gateway by low water rates on a through route to the Gulf for export and to tlle immense consummg territory located on and adjacent to the lower rivers.

That part of the Unite<l States south of the Ohio River and eaRt of the li:Lississippi River antl the States of .Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas consumes the major part of the surplus feed grains and a large part of the RUrplus food grains produced in the upper Missouri River surplus-producing territory. All of this consuming territory is tributary to the Ohio and lower Mississippi Rivers and their branches and to the intercoastal canal either for consumption at the lower ports or for transshipment there to rail carriers for inland conf:lumption. We estimate that 50 per cent of the total 1024 shipments, as stated above, from the upper-river markets, amounting to 52,206,111 'bushels, or 1,3G8,930 tons, moved to and was consumed in territory tributary to the lower-river ports.

Water transportation on the upper Missouri River, by furnishing a direct water route from producer to consumer, woulu result in on immense and- immediate price benefit to both producer and consumer, anu would very greatly increase this annual flow of grain by extending the benefits ·of water transportation to an immense area at present solely dependent upon rail lines. -

The potentiality of this traffic is so great we hesitate to make an estimate in actunl figures of the tonnage that would move via water, but it is si:lfe to Ray tnat with this afmost ideal situation-that is, an immense su'rplus-producing territory located adjacent to the head of navigation on a practical waterway and a large consuming territory on tho lower rivers-these commodities would naturnlly be routed via water to the limit of the water-carrying facilities available.

The United States produces more bl'ain than it consumes, and this surplus is sold c11ch year for export, very largely in Europe, in competition with foreign grain produced by cheap forelgu labor. It is an accepted econoruic uxlom that " tbe price obtained for the exportable surplus of the grain of this country establishes the price for domestic consumption." As a result the agricultural communitiE-s have been laboring unrler t.l commercial dcpresf:lion ever since the war, because they are forced to sell their produce in competition with cheap forrlgn labor, while everything they buy is prouuccd by well-paid Americnn labor or is subject to tariff charges. On an exchange basis, therefore, the farmer is at a serious disadvantage, uecuuse the level of value of his prouuce is not equal to the level of value of t]le commodities he buys.

There was shipped in 1924, 100,114 tons of grain and grain products southbound for export via the 1\lississippi Warrior service from St. Louis and Cairo. Of this total tonnage the major portion originated in the grain fields tributary to the upper Missouri River. The Missis-

10136 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE :.MA.Y 26 sippi River barge Itnes were unable to handle the volume of grain ton· nage tendered them for transportation in 1024. Hall barge trnn~portation been available on the :Missouri River there would have been shipped for export a volume of grain and grain products so great as to rna· terially increase the net returns to the farmer, not only to the extent of the sa>ing in the cost of transportation of the grain actually shipped, but also to the extent that the prices of domestic grain would h::n·e been enhanced to the higher level of export returns.

The present saving in the cost of transporting wheat to New Or· leans via rail from upper :Missouri River territory to Cairo or St. Louis and thence by barge, as compared with all-rail transportation, is 2.82 cents per bushel, after paying 1 cent per bushel to cover the cost of transfer from railroad cars to barges at St. Louis or Cairo. A through water route that would pet·mit the complete movement by barge would result in a net 15avlng of 5 to 6 cents per bu~hel on every bushel of wheat shipped from the upper Missouri River territory for export .

We submit that at least a part of the benefits to be derh·ed by the fanner from proposed remedial legislation can alRo be obtained by giv· ing him a practical waterway direct from his fields to European mar· kets, so that the net price received for his exportable surplus will be greater by the amount of the saving in the cost of transporting his grain to the u-port market, thus automatically increasing the value of his entire crop.

That section of the United States tributary to the upper Mis ourl River is the largest highly developed agricultural section in the world that is located more than 800 miles from a seauoard, aud must, there· fore, of necessity pay higher freight rates to transport its surplus grain to \YOrld markets than do those sections more favorably located. The exportable surplu of the Missouri Ri>er Valley competes with the Argentine snrplus raised within 1u0 miles of tidewater. This is the real vital economic reason why the farmers in our section must havo cheaper transportation for their surplus grain.

A through water route from the upper Missouri Basin to New Orleans nud Pittsburgh, with a carrying capacity of an appreciable percentage of the entire gruln movement, woul<l uot only increase the net returns to the farmer on the grain actually shippell by water, but would establish a higher level of values for the total amount moved iri interstate commerce, an<l this would in turn reflect a higher level to the entire crop. If a farmer could E~ell wheat for $1.GO per bushel for transportation by water to New Orleans, he would ask and receive the same price at his local mill for domestic consumption.

If an adequate waterway had been ayailable on the ~flssouri lli>er the enhanced value of the 1024 crop of the 10 States of 2,35G,1G4,000 bushels, due to the saving in transportation costs of the exportable surplus, would have amounted to over $50,000,000, and this higher level of values would also have been reflected in the market value of every bushel of grain produce<l in the country,

The same arguments that apply to grain and its products also apply to a greater or lesser extent to all other commodities produced or manufactured in the upper Missouri !liver territory.

E'ertllizers are produced in large quanli ties by our packing houses, anu they are essential to the cotton and garuen truck farmer in the southern territory described who not only uuys our corn and oats to feed his draft animals and our food products for himself and family but also our fertilizers to enrich his soil. The farmer on the impoverished lands of Europe also uses this commodity. HidQS, canned mcnts, and other packing-house products shipped by the potential upper Missouri River territory to the consuming territory tributary to the lower river and its branches and connections in 10!!4 was over 40,000 tons.

Alfalfa !Jay and products, food for animals, is produced in large quantities and the consumption of these products is very largely in the territory tributary to the lower river. The total tonnage is estimated at GO,OOO tons now moving to or via lower river ports.

The Omaha smelter shipped in 1024, 14,000 tons of lead products to the St. Louis district. This in<lustry is locatr.d directly on the river bank and is the largest producer of lead products in the country. It serves the mines of all of the States tributary to the upper river and water transportation at its door would be of immense benefit to t!Je mining industr.y in the l\lissouri Dasln.

Scrap iron in the amount of o~er 50,000 tons and hay amounting to over 20,000 tons was also shipped from the upper ~lissouri River territory to the same destinations in 10:.:!4.

Livestock: The experience of Decatur, Nebr., would indicate that there are great possibilities in the development of the transportation of live cattle by river, especially for short hauls. Decatur has no railroad facilities and is dependent upon the river for its outlet. They have operated barges whenever the condition of the river would permit, and their experience demonstrates that live animals shipped from De-

catur via barge arrh·ed at market In better condition when tr:m~portcd quietly by water instead of being subjected to the ner~ons strain of rail transportation. No attt>mpt bas been made to estimate the amount of this potential tonnage. It is one of many items that would naturally increase and develop with the opening of nnvlgntion; but for example, the territory tributary to Yankton shipped in 1024 over 10,000 cars of llvestocl{, and Burt County, Nebr., which is tributary to Decatur, Nebr., shipped over 3,300 cars. It is rrasonnble to expect that a large part of this traffic would move ~ia barge at a consi<lerable saving to the entire farming community not only in the cost of transporting its animals to market but also in their improved condition upon arrival.

There was, therefore, actually shippc<l in 1024 an estimfltcd total of 1,8G0,47G tons of freight snttablc for transportation >ia watl~r from the potential upper Missouri River ports to the consuming territory tr1bntary to the lower river and connections (as P·<"r talJle shown below), as well as a very large additional volume which moved direct from inland points to the same uestinaiions. This potential tonnage so greatly exceeds the total southbound tonnage of the :\lississippi-Warrior service of 408,602 tons for the same yenr that there can be no doubt but that with the opening of the upper Miasonri River, southbound tonnage w111 be offered in such large qnnntitles as to immediately attract capitnl for the coni!truction and operation of barge lines to handle the traffic.

Estimated total 1924 shipments B01tf71boumd from upper .lfis80ttt'i Rivet• terrUory to tet-rUorJJ 8ervcd by lo10or Missouri ancl JIHs.sissippi Rivers, Ohio River, and trib11taries, <md tlie Inte1·coasta~ Oanal

Commodity Grain------------------------------------------------Grain products ( t>Stimates of milling industry)------------Alfalfa mill products (estimates of milling industry) _____ _ Packing-bouse product::; (e::~tlmatcs of chambers of com-

merce)---------------------------------------------Pig !Pad and pro<lucts (estimates of American Smelting &

ltefining Co.)----------------------------------------Scrap iron (cstimn.t~s of chambers of commerce) _________ _ Hay ( estimn tes of c!Jambers of commerce)---------------Atchison, all commodities (estimates of chambers of com-

merce)---------------------------------------------Leavenworth, all commodities (estimates of chambers of

commerce)------------------------------------------

Tons 1,3ri8,t)!l!l

1ilri, 7fl0 50,000

40,000

14, 000 50,000 2<i, 000

104, 019

G7,728

Total------------------------------------------ 1,860,476 POTE)ITIAL )IQRTIIDOU)ID TO.N)IAQE

A substantial movement of traffic upstream as well as down is necessary to insure economical liver transportation. It bas been shown that the potential downstream tonnage of agricultural and other freight on the upper Missouri River would be so vast that it would practically be limited only by the capacity of the barges available. If tbeso barges !Jad to be returned empty, the entire cost of operation in both directions ·would have to be include<l in the rates charged on the down· stream tonnage. Under such conditions the agricultural products in this region would not get the maximum benefits from river transpol'ta· tion. Uovement of freight upstream balancing in tonnage the downstream traffic would make profitable 9peratlon of boat lines at much lower rates in both directions than if the movement were one sided. In fact, the feasibility and economy of developing the upper Missouri River project may be largely measured by the extent to which the river could be profitably used for northbound as well as southbound tonnage.

With this in mind, the ~Iissouri River ~avigation Association bas made a careful and conservative survey of present possibilltics of tonnage which might reasonably be expected to move np the river to destinations north of Kansas City upon the development of navigation. Figures used herein have been obtained from chambers of commerce and other reliable sources, and while necessarily estimated, they are reasonably accurate.

In case of doulJt they are undarstated rather than overstated. There is shown below a statement o! freight moving annually from territory tributary to the lower Missouri, Mississippi, and Ohio Rivers to typicnl destinations in the upper Missouri Rivd Basin which may readily be transported by river. The fi.:;ures are for the year ending December 1, 1D2u, except in the few instances where 1025 figures were not available the calendar yenr 1024 was used. This was not a prosperous period. Fignres !or normally pt·osperous years would be greater. It should be noted that these statistics are !or only six cities. The benefits of water transportation would accrue not only to communities on the river but to all of the vast territory comprising the 10 States of Nebraska, South Dakota, Nor·th Dakota, Wyomiug, Colora<lo, KanHas, Oklahoma, Montana, ;\lissourl, and Iowa. It was impossible in the limited time in which this brief was prepared to obtain complete figures. If they were availaulc, the totals would, of course, greatly exceed the amounts shown below.

Estimattd annual tonnage

Commodity To Atchison To Leaven- ToSt.Josepb To Omaha I To Rioux To Yankton Total tollS worth City

Coal: 100,000 500,000 1 330,000 20, .'iOO 1,060, 500 From Illinois ___ ------- ______ ------------------·-------------- ____ 100,000 10,000

Kansas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas----- ---------------------------· (I) (I) (1) wo,ooo 75,000 12,600 ~7,600

1 Not included account short river haul.

1926 OON-G·RESSION AL R.EOOR.D-HOUSE 10137 Estimated annual tonnao-e-Continued

.commodity To Atchison To ~~·then- To St. Joseph To Omaha To Sioux City To Yankton Total tons

Lumber: Yt>llow pine· -- ------------------- ----------- -------- -------------- 10,000 18,000 20,250

33,750 24,000

81,000 5,000 120 !'60

134,370 204, 3.~0 121,4C.O

liard wood._----- ------------------ -- ---------- ---------__________ 11, 000 19, 400 135,000 5,000 Posts und piling ___ --- ----- -- _____ :_ __________ _._-------- __ --------- ------- __ __ ___ 100 9(),000 1,000 360 Box lumber, shooks, etc ________ -------- --- _____________ -------- ___ ------ ________ ----------- __ _ 6,400

10,000 21,600 9,000 130 36, 1::W

. Cement and lirne __ -- -------- - -- ----- -------------- --- ---- ------- - 800 4, 500 Sugar: .

93,000 11,000 1,800 121, 100

~th: ~~';r~r!~~~~-----=~~~~=================~ = =========~=========== --------~~~~~- ----------~~~- · ~g; ~gg 9,000 5,000 21,000 15,000

800 1, 200

26, f\.'\0 49,700 35,000 35,075

l\1olasses, refuse_ ____________________ ____ _______________________ ------- ------- ___ ____ . ----------·. _ 25, 000 10,000 -------------- --------------

.. ~!~~~~~======= ===== ============ ========= === === ===== ===== ======= === == = . ---------~~~- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ --------~~ ~~~~~~~~~~,~~~~::~:~ =~= =~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ :: ~=~~~ :~~ =~= =~~= :: ~~:: ~=~~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~,,j l~ ~ ~ ::::::~.~: ::::: ~~ ~~ ~ ~;.; :; : ~

27, 000 4, 500 s,aoo 4,000 3,000

15,000 46,800

2,000 1, 000

.............................. ... 1,000

150 1, 000

40,000

100 35

--------------------------------------------------------

600

8, 545 3,300 9,000 8,9!0

19,500 87,400

~~?;~~·~=~~==~~~~~~~~~=~~~~~~~~~==~ ~=~=~~~======~~~~~=~~=~~=~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ •; :1~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ iO; ~~ + m 4,000

29,000 18,500 20,000

1,000 14,000 1, 700 2,000

------------------------------------------

840

6,000 75, 110 21, 9.'10 24,380

Total of above. ____ ----- _____________ . _____________ .. _. ___ ..•• _ .... ________ .. _ . . .. ___ .. _____ . _. ______ • __ . _ ..••• _ ••• __ --·. -- •• -•. -. --.-.... ------- •• -· 2, 675. 880

1 ~ot included account sllort river haul. Miscellaneous and merchandise; not able to estimate, but tonnage would be substantial.

Figures are here given on only a few commodities. Experience in riv·er trausportation on the lower Missouri has shown that a large volume of manufactured articles will also seek differential river rates. The records of tlle Kansas City ~Hssouri River Navigation Co. contain daily billing of such articles as pianos, talking machines, dry goods, qucenswarc, hardware, glass, automobi1es and a uto supplies, rnbber tires, school supplies, furniture, hosiery, drugs, shoes, vehicles, . farm implements, canned goods, plumlJing supplies, coffee, chocolate, soap, machinery, electrical supplies, carpets, linoleum. These ma nufactarcd goods take much higher rates than bulk freight, and, therefore, the sa>ings per ton by use of river transportation would be very much greater.

Tlle experience of the Mississippi River -Warrior line ba s demonstrated that 1Jullt freight can profl tably b~ trnnsported by river ba rge at-a-rate of 2 mills per ton per mile. That ·is the basis of the grain rate in effect to-day from St. Louis to New Orleans. It is fail• to assume that approximately snch rato would be profitable for the transportation of heavy low-grade commodities by barge on tho Missouri River upon complete dev-elopment of chn.nnel and dockage facilities. Economy flowing from large-scale river navigation and improved methods and equipment may make possible considerably lower rates in the future. However, for tlle purposes of this brief we are using 2 mills per tonmile on coal and 3 and 4 mills per ton-mile for other low-grade freight and making some comparisons with present rail rates.' The fact must always be borne in mind that the benefits .of river transportation will flow not only to communities on the river banks but to all the population in city and country in the entir e upper Missouri River Basin, which would get the advantages of lower r at{:S by joint rail and rive.r hauls.

COAL

The aggregate tonnage of Illinois coal to only s ix upper Missouri River destinations was over 1,000,000 tons. The Illinois mines arc within a radius of 100 miles of St. Louis. Some of the Illinois miJ1es nrc within or adjacent to the city limits of East St. Louis. Others nrc close to :Mississippi River landings below St. Louis. Transportation charges by rail from the minPS to East St. Louis (on tratnc for bc~·ond) vary from 51.7 cents to 81.7 cents per ton. Using these rates from the mines to East St. Louis and a rate of 2 mills per ton per mile up the rinr to destinntion, the total rates by rail nnd river ns compared with the all-rail rates pail! on this coal to-day

- -are shown in the following statement :

Rail rate expressed in cents from-

Destination

Yankton ________________________ Sioux City---------------------Omaha. __ ------------------------St. Joseph ____ ___________________ Lca>enworth ____________________ Atchison-------------------------

Southern Illinois

Lump Fine

---474: 431 415 378 362 326 328 326 338 826 338 326

•.

Springfield Dellenlle

Lump Fine Lump Fine ------------

444 401 4.64 421 385 348 405 368 332 2:!6 332 296 289 277 2!.l8 291 289 217 298 291 289 277 298 291

Destination

Yankton_- ----_----------- __ ---------------- __ Sioux City------ ________ ----------------------Omaha. ____ __ ---------- _____ ---- ---------- ----St. Joseph_ . ___ _ ----------- -- -------_------ -- -_ Leaven worth _________ . _____ __ ____ • ___________ _ .Atchison __ ------------- _____________ ----------

Division of rail ·rate to East St. Louis from southern Illinois

81.7 81.7 81.7 81.7 81.7 81.7

Division of rail rate

to East St. Louis fro m Belleville, Springfield

51.7 51. 7 51.7 51.7 51.7 51.7

Estimated water rate from E::~st St. Louis

175 16:> 125 95 87 90

Saving compared with rail rates from-Total r a il an d 1--------.-------wator rate from- Southern Illinois Springfield, Belle

ville De1'tination

BelleSouthern ville, Illinois Spring- Lump

field Fine Lump Fine

---------1---- --------------------Yankton _____________ 257 227 217 174 217 174 Sioux City ----------- 242 212 173 136 173 136 Om aha. _____________ • 207 177 155 119 155 119 . St. Joseph __ : _________ 177 147 161 149 142 130 Leavenworth _________ 169 139 16.9 157 150 138 A tchlson __ __________ 112 142 166 154 147 135

Equally great or greater savings would result in transportation of coal from rnlnes in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, which now ship coal to the upper ~IissoUEi/ River Ba:;in, notwithstan ding extremely high freight rntl's. A similar compilation showing rates from Kansas, Oklalloma, and .Arkansas to only two typical upper Missouri River cities, using rail lines charges to Kansas City ( on traffic going beyond) and river rate from Kansas City north on a basis of 2 mills per ton per mile, follows:

Division Division Esti-Rrill rate Rail rate of rail rate of ruil rate mated

from southern from Arkan- to Kansas to Kansas water Destination Kansas sas-O~ahoma City from City from rate

southern Arkansas- from Kansas Oklahoma Kan-

sas Lump Fine Lump Fine Lump Fine Lump Fine Oity

------

~I-;:-; ------------

Sioux City __ _____ 3.15 2. 75 4.15 1. 00 I 2. 16 2.00 0.80 Omaha __________ 2. 65 2. 25 3. ()5 3. 25 1. 16 l. 00 2. 16 2. 00 • 45

Total rail Total rAil Savinf com- Savin!s com-and water and water pare with pare with rate from rate from rail rates rail rates

Destination southern Arkansas- from south- from Arkan-Kansas Oklahoma ern Kansas sas-Okhlboma

Lump Fine Lump Fine Lump Fine Lump Fine ------,-------------

Sioux City-------------- 1. 96 1. 80 2. 96 2.80 1.19 o. 95 1.19 0. 95 Omaha ______ __ . _________ 1. 61 1. 45 2. 61 2.45 1.04 .80 1.04 .80

10138 CONGRESSIONAL l{ECORD-IIOUSE The saving on co11l alone shipped to these typical upper Missouri

River destinations named would amount to more than $2,000,000 annually through the development of ri"rer navigation, if we accept the statement of the Mississippi IUver barge line that low-grade bulk traffic can be profitably transported at 2 mills per ton per mile. Increase this rate 50 per cent, to 3 mills per ton per mile, on account o! upstream haul, and the savir.g on coal alone to tile six upper l\Ilssourl llivet· communities would still be over $1,000,000 annually. Similar savings would accrue on coal from the sources named to the entire consuming territory in the upper Missouri basin, and the total benefits to the public on ·coal alone would amount well into the millions o! dollars annually.

LUMBER

The upper .Missouri River territot·y gets a large part o! its lumber to-day from the Pacific Northwel:it, nevertheless it received f.rom Southem States tributary to the lower l\lil:lsissippi River during the past year over a halt million tons of lumber, posts, box shooks, etc. If this were moved by watet· from lowex·-river landings, substantial savings in transportation costs would be effected. Large quantities o! hardwood lumber are shipped to-day from Memphis, Tenn., for example. The present rall rates from Memphis as compared with water rates to typical upper Missouri River destinations on a basis of 3 mills per ton per mile are shown below :

Dt'Stination

Yankton ______ ---------- __________ --------- __ _ Sioux City _______ -------------------~---- _____ _ 0 maha _______________________________________ _

St. Joseph __ ------------- ____ -----------------_ Atchison ___ ----- ________ ---------------- _____ _ Leavenworth _________________________________ _

Rail rate Estimated on lumber water rate from Mem- from Mom-

phis (in phis (in cents per cents per

100 pounds) 100pounds)

47~ 34 32~ 29~ 29~ 29,Y2

19~ 19 16 13~ 13 13

Savings (in cents per 100

pounds)

28 15 16~ 16 16~ 16~

This is a fair example of what might be expected in the way of savings on lumber costs throughout tile upper Missouri lliver Basin from boat-line operation. Such saving would stimulnte . th~ use of southern lumber in the uppet· Missouri I.Uver territory and would undoubtedly result in the displacement of much lumber moving at present from the north Pacific coast territory, lJy southern lumber, thus materially increasing the tonnage which fi!ight be moved by river from the South and matet·ially lowering costs of building construction on tile farms as well as in the cities and towns.

SlJG.A.R, REFlJSEJ MOLASSES, COFFf:l'l, RICE, BAGG!XO, OYSTER SllElLLS, SEJIDDS,

ETC.

These commodities now move by rail from New Orleans. Tlle aggregate tonnage to six typical upper Misscmri River destinations exceed!:! 125,000 tons. In addition, these communities receive annually GO,OOO tons of sugar from other sources which might moYe from New Orleans if freight rates were favorable. As an indication of the savings which might result from use of. rivet" navigation we will cite only the rate on sugar from New Orleans, and for comparison !}oat-line rates based on 3 mills and 4 mills, respectlvely, per ton per mile. Tbet·e is no reason why freight of this kind could not be moved the entire distauce from New Orleaas to upper Missouri River po1·ts by wnter, thence by rail throughout the territory.

[Rates in cents per 100 pounds)

Rail rate on sugar

Estimated water rat~ from New 0 rleans

Destination from New Ba.'*ld on 3 Based on 4 · Orle.ans mills per mills per

Yankton_-------------------------------------Sioux City-------------------------------------Omaha ______________ -------------- ___________ _ St. Joseph ____ ---------------------------------Leavenworth _________________________________ _

Atchison _____ ------------- ___ -----------------

CE:\lE"YT A"YD LD!Iil

747\i 65 65 65 65 65

ton-mile ton-mile

29 2S 2472 23)11 23 23

39}2 38 32~ 31~ 31 31

The aggrC'gate tonnage of tl.Jese commodities used by only six upper Missomi River cities Is 121,000 tons. These commodities originate at points on the Mississippi River and may move partly by rail and partly by river. As illustrating the saving which would re.<;ult from river transportation, the following table shows present rail rat~>s on cement from Hannibal, Mo., and water rates based on 3 mills per ton per mile:

[Rates stated in cents per 100 pounds] .

Rail rates Estimated water rates on cement basod on 3 Saving from

llannibal mills per ton-mile

Destination

Y fln kton ___ ----------------------------------- 22 11Y2 10.Y2 Siou.x City ____ ---------------------------- ____ _ 17~ 10~ 7 Omaha_--------------------------------------- Hi 8 8 8 t. Joseph------------------------------------- 13H ~~ 8 Leavenworth _________________ ------__________ _ 14 5 9 Atchison __________________ : __________________ _ 14 5~ 8)11

As showing possibilities of rail nnd river navigation, the following table shows present rail rates from Kansas and Oklahoma and the rates which would result from use of the river from the nenrest pot·t to dostination, using as factors the rail charge to Kansas City, nnd 3 mills per ton per mile by ri"l'er beyond :

Destination

Yankton _________________ --------______________ _ Sioux City--------------------------------------Omaha_-----------------------------------------

SALT

Rail rates on cement

from Kansas-

Oklahoma

21~ 17 16

Estimated water rates

based on rail charge of8~ cents Saving to Kansas City plus

3 mills P.er ton-m1le beyond

15~ 6 H~ 2~ 12 4

The upper Missouri Rh'er citif's obtain over 80,000 tons of salt annually from Kansas mines, wlllch could be moved profltnbly by rail to the nearest river ports and thence by barge at substantial savings under the present rail rates.

IRON ,\XD STEEL PllODt:CTS

Tlle aggrC'gate tonnage moving from Pittsburgh, Ohio, Birmingham, and St. Louis disti·icts to only flve upper Missouri River cities to-day exceeds 75,000 tons. 'l'his is only a fraction of the total steel tonnage movt>ment to the upper 1\Iissouri River territory. 'l'he Chicago district to-day supplies the major part of the demand for steel in this tert·itory; but if river navigation were available nnd low riYer rates were in effect, lar·ge additional ma1·kets would be open to the l'ittslmrgh, l\labouing, anu other manufacturing districts adjacent to tile rivers, creatIng additional tonnage for river carriers and a1Ion1ing lower prices to consurnc.r·s in the upper 1\fissouri River territory, in competition with Chicago steel, which could also mO\'e by water through the draiua?e canal and the Illlnois River.

The development of upper Missouri Tiiver for navigation offers in some respects unique opportunities for pt•ofitable operation of boat lines, witil unusually large tonnage movement by river and fat·-reachin~ economic savings. Nowhere else in the United Stntes are the rail freight rates on the prime necessities of existence so high as are the rates paid by consumers In the territory tributary to the upper Missouri River. In no other part of the country are the average )Jauls so long for tram~portation of ingoing and outgoing freight. Nowhere else in the United States, for example, could coal be carried by river for such long distances nnd at such a saving on rail rates as into the upper ·Missouri River territory. The upper Missouri Hiver would transIlOrt freight originating not only in the lower Mississippi Valley but would handle a great tonnage of ft·eight of all kinds moving to and from the Southwest by rail, with an upper Missouri River port as the gateway between rail and w.ater. These peculiar conditions would uO'ot·d at o'llce upon the opening of river navigation opportunities for tt·anspot·tntion of a volume of tonnnge northbound which could not be approae:hed or hoped for on the upper 1\IlssiRsippl or even the lower l1b:;sisRipp1 or Ohio Rivers. Such large volume of northbound freight would be far greater in the aggregate than the northbound tonnage hn.ndl t'd to-day on the lower Mississippi lliver. In 1024 tl.Je 1\Ilssissippi River bat·ge line handled 440,901 tons northbound and 408,G02 tons southbound, total in both directions 840,G03 tons. The Yolume of northbound tonnage on the 1Jpper Missouri Rivet· would be sufficient to proville a return load for barges handling millions of tons of agricultural and other prodncts southbound. In fact, this partial survey of the prospective tonnage available for upper Missouri River navi~ation show!! possibilities almost beyond the power of imagination to grasp of savings In transportation costs on the p1·oducts of tile f:nm and factory southbound and tlle products consumed uy the farm and city dweller alike inbound.

The estimate we have presented of outbound nnd inbound tonnage to-uay is only a fraction of what may reasonniJly be expected in a com-

~926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 10139 paratively few years after river navign.tion becomes an accomplished

_fact. The upper l\Iissouri River territory is largely undeveloped, both agriculturally and industrially. It can not be expected to develop much further, in the present generation at least, unless relie.l' is afforded from the -present immense burden of high freight ratPs caused by the depend· cnce of this territory upon rail tram'lportution, Ion~ distance to markets, nnd high cost of railroad operation to-day. The West is in a precarious situation, agriculturally and industrially, because of these high transpor· tatTOn costs. Manufacturing industry is not growing. It is actually decr~nsing. Factories are leaving the upper Missouri River territory and are mo>ing nearer to the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, closer to the congested popnlation of the country, and where cheap rail and water transportation is available. The farmer is thus being moved farther and farther away from the consumers of agricultural products, and farther and farther away from the manufacturer that supplies him with his neeus. Stimulation of agriculture and stimulation of manufacturing industry in the upper Mis:;ouri River territory through lower transportation costs made available by the development of the upper Missouri River would increase prices of farm products, increase manufacturing · output, increase industrial population, thereby affording the farmer greater near-by conRumin~ markets. This would lead to further and more profitable agricultural development, and through the mutual upbuildlng of farm and city, through lower transportation costs, this territory may hope to achic>e its destiny as one of the most productive, prosperous, and populous regions of the world.

PANAMA CA.SAL

The opening of tbe Panama Canal has had a profound effect upon the industtinl development of the upper MisRouri River territory. Industries which formerly reached the intermountain and Pacific Coast States with tlleir prorlucts are no longer able to do so because low water rates through the Panama Canal make it possible for the far West to obtain goods . more cheaply !rom territory east of the Mississivpi River. Factories in tbe Middle West have been forced to cut down production and in some instances to close down entirely or establish branch factories nearer tbe seaboard on account of this competition. To-day, although the Middle West is geographically nearer the Pacific coast than any other industrial district east of the Rockies, it is economically and from the standpoint of transportation costs farther distant from the Pacific coast than any other part of the United States. Tlle advantages of water transportation arc drawing factories and population into congested areas close to water transportation along the coasts, and the great Middle West is, industrially speaking, drying up. Opening of the Missouri River for navigation will offer new hopes ancl new opportunity for industries in territory served by the upper Missouri -River to regain a portion of the lmsiness which they have lost to their com]ICtitors favored by water transportation through the Panama Canal. The ta-xpayers of the 1\!iddle West have cheerfully borne their share o! taxation for building the· Panama Canal and for the impt·ovement of harbors and channP.ls along the sea coasts, but they are determined that they shall not permanently be deprived of the benefits of the low transportation rates through the canal, and the opportunity of competing for business in Pacific coast territory with the industrial East. Only through the opening of navigation on the Missouri and MissisfJippi Rivers can the West be given an opportunity to develop trade in the far West. It is only fair that the Middle West should have this opportunity. It is a crying injustice that to-day our waterway dc>elopmcnts ba>e hcncfited only the eastern and western coasts antl severely handicapped the inllustries of the Uiddlc West.

LOCAL TRANSPORTATION

We have not attempted in this brief to gather statistics showing the possibilities of local tonnage movement between communities on the upper Missouri River. Undoubtedly considerable commerce of this kind would be dc>eloped not only between river towns but by river anti rail to and from local points in the 10 States. For years past there has been a limited amount of local river transportation north of Kansas City. For example, the town of Decatur, Durt County, Nebr., with a population of but 657 pt?ople, bas maintqined regularly, upon the unimproved river, boat transportation to and from Omaha and Sioux City. This local company for a number of years has bad one to two boats on the river operating to capacity. Last year transportation was preveuted

- by extremely difficult cl..tannel conditions at the ct·os:;overs, but the company hopes to operate again next season . The Chamber of Commerce of Decatur advises that in the year 1924, 203,000,000 pounds· of coal, building materials, livestock, and miscellaneous freight were received at towns in Durt County; 131,500,000 pounds of agricultural and miscellaneous products were forwarded. l\Iost of this freight would move by boat if the river were made permanently navigal>le.

THE EFFECT OF ROAD . UIP.ROVEME~T ON INLA:I'D WATERWAY TRAFFIC

It wUI be our purpose to define the relationship between the improvement of the highways· tril>utary to the potential river ports on the Missouri River above Kansas City and the development of the river itself.

In the early days when the MlsRonri TUver ranied considerable traffic a relatively small portion of the territory tributary to the river was ben efited by or contrilmted to such traffic. The distribution of merchandise so transported was limited by the distance which the unimproved roads of that period permitted, ancl was limited to a short distance from the river ports. To-clay we are in the midst ot an era of roau d vclopment and improvement, looking to a great system of permanently constructed roads. This development is carried on by the various local units of government and Is stimulated by the assistance of State and Federal Governments.

The attached map shows the permanently improved roads in 1930 which will be tributary to the potential river ports on the Missouri River above Kansas City. A study of a map of this project wlll show a complete network of arterial highways coordinated with an elaborate system of lateral roads. Large portions of' this system arc now completed. A very few years will see the entire completion of the system.

This map, which could not be inserted in the REcono, shows that the trend of development · of the arterial highways is toward the river; and the lateral roads lending into the main artNies, when completed, will form a very complete network of improved roads. The average farm will have a comparatively short haul to an improved highway leading directly to some river port. :\!any of the smaller river cities will be greatly benefited by this development, because port-to-port business can and will be developed to their advantage. ll'urthermore, the inland towns will prosper; first, because improved transportation facilities naturally tend to Increase business, and second, because the cheaper freight · rates macle available by river transportation will cause more money to be circulated in their territory, due to the saving in transportation costs to the producers. This is illustrated by the saving which the Kansas wheat farmers have realized in the past two years in shipping their grain via the barge line from St. Louis. The inland towns of Kansas have suffered no discrimination from the operation of the barge line. Therefore we may logically conclude that the development of the Missouri River north of Kansas City will prove to he a stimulant to lmsiuess In towns not only immediately tributary to the river but to all cities and communities throughout the 10 States.

When the npper Missouri River country was first settled, cities were built on the ri-rer through necessity for transportation. Wherefore the oldest and largest cities are river · cities. In building roads, these cities were given first' consideration. As a result, we have the entire hi;;hway system built with the main arteries leading toward and terminating at the river. A more ideal arrangement for river trnffic could not be had.

This development, togethrr with the high state of efficiency of the modern m0tor truck, furnishes an ideal means for the distribution and collection of commodities to be handled through the river ports. This increases many times the possibility of distribution over that which existed in the early uays of unimproved roads and ct·ude means of transport.

Regular tr-ucking service is now maintained from the potential river ports serving tile inland towns and the farms for a distance of over 100 miles. Regular schedules are maintained and depots have l>een established for the convenience of the patrons of these llnes. The Hon. Herbert Hoover, Secretary of Commerce, in a recent address at Kansas City, delivered before the Missouri River Navigation .Association, summed up the situation .in the following manner:

"The improvement of highway transport will make a large contribution to the first class of business. When we ·were dependent upon the horses and wagon for collection and distribution -to and from .the watersitle, the port-to-port business on our rivers was limitetl to a belt perhaps 5 or 10 miles wlde. With the development of our highways and motor trucks this belt has widened many miles and_ bas enormously increased the population wllo can benefit from port-to-port business."

The livestock market in Sioux City, Iowa, is one of the primary Uvestock markets of the United States. The receipts at the Sioux City stockyards over a period of years provide the basis for some interesting comparisons, particularly from the stanc!point of receipts by truck.

In 19:21 there were 2,654,000 head of livestock received in Sioux 't:ity, 6 per cent of these, or 159,240 bead, bcin~ receiYed by truck.

In 19!!4 the livestock receipts were 3,978,000 head, 14 per cent of this number, or 556,!)20 head, being received by truck.

In 19~5 · the receipts for the year were 4,670,000 bead, anu of this number 17 per cent, or 793,!)00 beau, were re<:eived by truck.

These figures indicate that in a four-year period tbc truck receipts at the Sioux City stock yards have nearly trebled. This increase has been due very largely to the fact that the roads in this territory have been improved to a point where it is more profitable to move livestock a given distance by truck than by other means of transportation.

As indicated above, in 1924, 14 per cent of the total receipts wet·e shipped by truck to the Sioux City market, each animal tra v~ling an

10140 CONGRESSION 1\_L RECORD-HOUSE MAY 26 average distance of 85 miles. From these figures it Is very logical" to assume that the distance which it is possihle to move freight to and from the potential river ports has increased from 10 miles, when the river was formerly used, to at least 35 miles from the river t ct·minals at the present time. Each year more permanent roads are being completed, wbich will permit even greater use of the highways.

By 1!>30 the more highly developed roads will increase the distance which can be profitably served from the potential river ports. This distance will be extended to more than 50 miles.

In presenting the figures above on livestock receipts we realize that there is a question as to whether or not livestock can be profitably moved on the river. '.rhe figures have been presented because an accurate reoord of points of origin of truck stock has been kept, whereas a record of points of origin of other lines of produce and m<>rchandise has not been kept. The figures show the approximate territory in which. sllipments of this character have originated and that other produce and merchandise bcur a definite relationship in that they originate in approximately the same territory.

In the table below wo are showing the principal crops in the first and second tiers of counties immediately tributary to the Missouri lliver from Kausas City to Yankton, the figures being taken from the 1020 Federal Census. The territory covered by tllis survey averages GO miles on each side of the river between Yankton and Kant:;as City, and shows a production of 12,951,224 tons. We make no claim as to the actual percentages of this production which would be handled on the river. We are merely using this schedule to "how tile vast production which is immediately tributary to 4V6 miles of the river from Yankton to Kansas City, all of lt being within easy trucking distance of one of the river ports.

A su1·vey of crop production (in tons) of the first and second tiers of count,ies immediately tl'ibutm·y to the Missott?·i River ft·om Kan3as City, Mo., to Yankton, S. Dak., ft·om data taken ft·om the 1920 Federal Census

Corn Oats Wheat Barley

South Dr.kota: First tier_--------------------- 297,897 60, 731 22, 451 998 Second tier------------------~- 395,596 131,823 39,539 5, 5!J1

Iowa: First tier ______________________ 1, 314,678 136, 163 144,442 10, 531 Second tier ____________________ 1, 135, 121 187, 581 77,374 13,4.03

Nebraska: First tier ______________________ 1, 231, 469 223,078 186,779 10,615 Second tier-------------------- 958,530 197, 7Z7 165, 2G!J 4,161

Kansas: First tier _______ --------------- 145,255 10, 257 104, 165 202 Secoml tier ____________________ 1fH, 432 17, H70 112,739 239

Missouri: First tier ____ ------------------ 427,150 12,700 116, 71i3 523 Second tier ____________________ 424,997 29,814 109,212 281

TotaL---------------------- 6, 467, 125 1, 007,749 1 1, 078,7231 46,544

Rye Hay

I Potatoes Other crops

. South Dakota:

First tier_--------------------- 277 175,95-1 1, 843 lli5 Second tier ____________________ 719 331,374 2, 740 827 Iowa:

First tier _____ ----------------- 1, 907 694, 745 13,452 27 Second tier ____________________ 2, 501 560,025 8, 4.34 16 Nebraska:

First tier--- ------------------- 2, 495 815, 015 14,715 1, 282 Second tier-------------------- 8,840 (;64., 149 11,348 1, 285

Kansas: First tier------------ ___ ------- 149 179, 772 12, 696 165 Second tier ____________________ 2·19 2.35,129 4, 518 253

Missouri: First tier ______________________ 922 265, 757 6, 821 13 Second tier----------~--------- 1, 393 304,508 4, 492 121

Tv tal ___ -------------------- 19,452 4, 246,423 81,059 4,144

Total for all crops, 12,951,224 tons.

There is no ques~ion but that a large portion of this production wlll go by river as soon as it Is made navigable. While we can not estimate the exact percentage, there is no reason to doubt that not only will this production be handled in that way but probably other products will also be added to the above-mention€d list.

Thus we see that the benefits to be derived from the improvement of inland waterways is very closely related to the improvement of tile highway system. The fact that an elaborate system of permanently tmproved roads will be practically completed as soon as it is possible to c0mplete any improvement on the upper Missouri indicates that the coordination of these two systems of transportation will prove to be a great stimulus to the territory served. As time goes on further improvements will be made in the inland portions of the Missouri Valley, thereby constantly increasing the field of usefulness of the relatively small amount of money required for .this 1.mpr ovem.ent.

We have stated that we do not estimate the portion of the 1~,000,000 tons of principal farm ct·ops produced in the first and second tiers of counties immediately tributary to the river between Kansas City and Yankton that would move by river transportation. However, we feel that .a substantial portion of this would find its way into the exportable surplus of these crops, because of the fact that they are directly accessible to the cheaper transportation made possible by th~>~

improvement of the river.

FINANCIAL COOPER,\TION WITH THE WAR DlllrARTi\IElNT IN H.IrROVlNQ THE

1\IlSSOUI.U RIVER

The suggestion often made in the past that there was "pork barrel" in the congressional appropriation for inland waterway develo}lment bas been proven to be without foundation, especially in so far as the Mississippi Valley is concerned.

Chief among the reasons for placing this great progressive step in its true light h as been the enlig!Jtenment of the entire people to the essential need for cheaper and increased transportation facilities and to the practical benefits which will accrue not alone to the Middle West but to all of the United States. Perhaps of second importance has been the actual demonstration on the part of the landowners and other intorP.sts along the river, who are especially benefited through control of the river's current, of their willingness to pay for the special benefits r eceived.

PROrERTY DAMAGE

li'or many years the Missouri River has annually taken its toll in valuable farms, eroding away from 7,000 to 8,000 acres each year of the fertile valley lands through which it flows. Add to this the loss of industrial, municipal, State, tailroad, and highway property and you will find an actual economic waste of over $2,000,000 annually,

As a matter of fact, the Missouri River has been a detriment to the valley rather than the I.Jenefit it should be. The river being, as it is, under the jurisdiction of the Fedt!ral Government and the project for its rolltrol being so gigantic In scope, thPre is no remedy which the local interests et1n hope to apply through their own efforts alone. The Federal Gov<>rnment recognized the inadequacy or the local interests to properly cope with a similar situation when It granted financial and supervisory cooperation In the levee and flood control work along the Mississippi and other rivers throughout the country.

LA:-10 PP.ESERVA.T0!'{ MERELY INCIDEXTAL

The farmers of the Missouri River Valley, however, are not requesting Federal aid In the improvement of the :Missouri River for the sole purpose of attaining the benefits which would accrue to them through the protection and reclamation of the adjoining lands.

Th0y r ea lize that in the near future the Feueral Gov0rnment, out of the very pressing and ever-increasing na tiona! necessity for the dovelopmeut of our inland waterways, must control and improve the channel, which means the protection of the river banks and the consequent reclamation of the adjoining property. nut they realize also that every year's delay means the loss of additional tillable area and other property, and a consequent d l•crease in produce and tonnage. They are anxious, therefore, to hasten the improvement through cooperating financially with the Federal Government .

The reclamation phase of the problem, however, while it will, without question, effect a very material saving and eliminate a great national loss, is only incidental to the main purpose of providing a system of water transportation for the more economical handling of the tonnage this section produces and consumes.

For this incidental benefit the citizens of the valley have already paid in part and have shown a willingne~s to pay further in proportion to the benefits received.

COOPEB.ATIO"" 0~ THE LOWER MISSOURI

From the available records it is fouud that on tbe lower Missouri River, from Quindaro Bend to the mouth, for which section an approvecl project has been adopted, there has been spent In 1024 and 1925 on river improvement and current control $1,012,000 in cooperation with the War Department, o:f which amount the department has paid, ont of · congressional appropriations, some $47-1,000, or less than 2G per cent.

The above expenditure does not include money spent by individual interests in locally protecting their property. It includes only those plans having approval of the department as fitting into or aidlng tile adopted scheme for making a navigable channel. Neither does it include the work done by the department in maintenance or in extensiou where no local interests were in any way to be benefited. Thus it can be seen that the amount of local funds contributed to the department over the past two-year period actually exceeds a total amount spent by the department out of the congressional allotment and should present very striking evidence that the people of the lower river valley are making a most substantial payment for the incidentn.l benefits received.

We understand further that there are already organized, or in process o:f organization, many additional districts or associations which have made offers to contribute to the department for the special benefit to

1926 CONGRESS! ON AL RECORD-HOUSE J0141 their territories. In fact, we believe that an inspection of the records will show that the cooperative policy as adopted by the War Department for tbe lower :Missouri River bas already proven its value in hastening improvement of the channel for navigation in a most eiiectlvo an~ economical manner. FUTURE EXTEXSION OF COOPERATIVE POLICY TO UPPJ<:R MISSOURI RIVER

· We -of the upper Missouri River know that the first step in the process of olltaining a through navigable waterway in the Missouri Valley lies in the early compkt.ion of the channel from Kansas City to the mouth, and we arc not asking for any action which might hinder tllat work or cause the diversion of funds necessary for its speedy completion. We do, however, present fot· your consideration that tl.Jought, that, through the immediate adoption of an approved project for the upper :Missouri River and the assuranee of acceptance in the near future by the Federal Government of contributed funds, the people could take advantage of the interim to prepare the necessary organizations through which the cooperation would be forthcoming at the time the Government is in shape to proceed with the improvement on the upper river.

There have already been organized on the upper river from Kansas City to Yankton, S. Dak., 19 districts, which have spent $942,000 in stabilizing the banks of the river without any Federal aid. The river towns, railroads, and brillges have also constrncteu bank-stabilization work at a considerable cost, the exact figures on which are difficult to estimate. The ·war Department has also from time to time spent various small sums in stabilization. Most ot this work, due to the fact that no project bas existed for this stretch of river and hence no available funds, bas been largely of a local nature, and little or· it bas hau proper maintenance. However, tllere still exists a large part of tlle work which, with a little Federal aid, through the extension of the cooperative policy now in force on the lower river, could be mnue a part of the general improvement plan which the department may adopt.

PROCEDURE AND POSSIBILITIES FOR COOPER.A'l'ION ON UPP:IDR RIVER

In order to raise any appreciable amount for cooperation, it is necessary to organize special river-pro tection !listricts and to finance their contril.mtion through the issuance of bonds. The legislatures of the States along the river have enacted laws authorizing such organizations. Due to the necessary legal steps, it will require some time to perfect such organizations. Hence the importance of obtaining immc!liate congressional approval of an a!lopted project so as to be really for action simultaneously with tbe desire for action on the part of the engineers of the War Department ii;t charge of the work. Once~_ p_roject for the upper river is approved we can begin o~r pre

liminary organization work, anu we have every reason to believe a splendid showing can be made.

l'~rom a canva~>s of the potential cooperation which might be made available we have procnreu the following data : ·

From Kansas City to Omaha, Nebr., 2GG river-miles; 2H4 000 acres at an average tnx of $10 pet· acre ________ $2, 840, 000

~peciul benefits' to towns, bridges, highways, and railroads (estimated)-----------------------------~---------- 1,500,000

Total----------------------------------------- 4,840,000 In this stretch of ri>er there are seven bridges and two new ones.

contemplateu.

From Omaha., Nebr., to Sioux City, Jowa-t 140 river-miles; 192,000 acres, at an average tax of pu per acre _______ $1, 920, 000

Special benefits as above set forth (estrmateu) ----------- 1, 000, 000

Total----------------------------------------- 2,920,000 Four existing bridges and two contemplated.

From Sioux City, Iowa, to Yankton . S. Dak., 86 river-miles; 89,000 acres, at an av~rage tax of $10 per acre-- 8110, 000

Special benefits as allove set forth (estimateu) -----------__ 5_o_o_,_o_o_o_ Total __________________________

7

______________ 1,J90,000

Gt·anu totaL___________________________________ 8, GuO, 000

In the financing and llnilding of the Panama Canal the Misr.::ouri Valley raised no question as to the especial benefit which the coast cities and territory woulu derive from tl.Jat great venture. The valley was willing to pay its proportionate share, recognizing the general good which the entire Nation, of which it is a part, would receive. In this project the rest of the Nation must recognize the general good to accrue to it, eRpccially in view of the fnct that the valley is reauy to assist In the project by paying, and paying most liberally, for the incidental nnd special benefits which its citizens receive.

CONCLU"SION

Finally, ns to other important phases which are pertinent to this inquiry, we quote from the masterful addreE:s by the Hon. Herbert Hoover, Secretary of Commerce, dclivereu at the Kansas City Navigation Conference, October 19, 1925.

AS ONE GREAT SYSTEM:

"Most important of all, we must envisage our inland waterways as great unified tranr.::portation systems, not as isolated units. We must conceive and attack their construction as a connected whole, not ns a

collection of disconnecteu local river an<l lake Improvement projects, as has been our habit in the past. Every great transportation system, whether rail, water, or highway, must consist of main trunk lines between great centers of population and industry, with collateral feeuers of gathering and distribution service."

The Government bas, by appro\·ul of the upper and lower Mississippi, the Ohio, and the Missouri River to Kansas City as navigation projects, recognized the <'Conomic necessity and economic justice of the Mississippi Valley system. The upp<'r Missouri River is the greatest feeder of this system. Assuredly, therefore, it should at the earliest possillle date be accepted as an approved project. The Mi!lule West as a whole is handicapped by reason of the cheap water transportation given to the east, west, and Gulf coasts through the operation of the Panama Canal. If the upper Missouri River fails of recognition at this time as an integral part of the Mississippi system, this great area will sustain an added discrimination and injury.

AN ECONOMIC NECESSITY

Quoting further from the aduress of Secretary Hoover: " Our agriculture and Industries are based on higher stanuards of

living than those of foreign #competitors, and if we would maintain . these standards we must secure the cheapest form of transportation of agricultural and industrial prouucts bot,h to domestic and world markets.

"Modern forms of development have made water carriage the cheap· est of all transportation for many types of goods. Broadly, 1,000 bushels of wheat can be transported 1,000 miles on the sea for $20 to $30, by large lake steamers for $20 to $30, by our mouern equipped Mississippi barge service for $60 to $70, and by the railroads for $J 50 to $200. These estimates are based not on hypothetical calculation llut on the actual going freight rates."

Anu further-FUTURE GROWTH OF TR.A.FJJ'IC

''I have said that our great railway gateways and terminals ftlr<'ady show signs of congestion from a traffic that bas grown from 114,000,· 000,000 ton-miles to 338,000,000,000 ton-miles in the last 2G years. At one-half this rate of gain, in another quarter century we shall need to provide an expansion of facilities to handle at least 525,000,000,000 ton-miles. Our present railways will lle wholly inadequate to meet that burden.

" The expansion of railway terminals to accommodate the growth of the next quarter of a century will be accomplished at enormously in· creased costs, due to the increase of land values in our cities.

"And the waterways, because they furni sh continuous terminals spreau along the whole waterfront of our towns, go far to solve tho problem of increased terminals and crowded streets.

"Furthermore, if we woulU provide for the 40,000,000 of increased population that this quarter of a century will bring us, we either must builu trunk lines of railway E:ystems or we must improve our water· ways to take part of the burden. I believe any study of the compara· tive capital outlay will show that to duplicate this waterway system by ralls would probably cost three times as much as to complete the waler• ways, which will move the goods more cheaply.

"Nor is tllis in any wise a statement that our railways must not b~ under constant development, for they obviously reach scores of miltions of people that are untoucheu by the wat<'rways and perform ruany services that our waterways can not undertake. And their imr•rove· ment can be accomplished only by safeguarding to them such earnings as will enable them to proYide increasing faciliti es and inerea:-; il1g efficiency.

"In these many years past there bas been an increasing battle between the proponents of rail and water borne traffic. No one cun read the uebates over the last half centUTy without feeling tll."lt the (lorni·. nant argument for improvemen t of our waterways bas been to club the railways in the matter of rates. ·

" On the other sitle, no one can study the competitive tactics of the railways against the waterways without conviction that at tirue they throttled water transportation by reducing railway ratPs llelow what they themselves could in honesty maintain.

NO EXCUSE TO-DAY FOR RAIL AND WA'l'ER BATTLE

"Regaruless of the merits or demerits of the contentions, there 1s to-day no excuse for continuing this battle between tlle railways and the waterways, for we face a periou when both are needed. We have had great battles over joint rates, but if we have a real system of internal waterways this problem will settle itself, for the day will come when the railways themsclYes will be seeking them.

"Nor do we neeu to overstate the importance of water-borne faclli· ties in relation to our other transportation systems-our railways and highways. Let us get into the proper setting. Taking the country as a whole, the railways and highways e~er must bear the major burden of our internal traffic. And there are many classes of goous which will always go by rail parallel with the waterways. But equally wrong are those who do not accord internal waterways a great and increasing future in transportation.

"And here is an old saying that is true: New transportation facili· ties creatE! business. Traffic breeds traffic. At one time in our his~ory

10142 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MAY 26 we practically abandoned highways and waterways for railroads. The invention of the gasoline engine has restored our highways and multi· plied their trade ten thousandfold. Yet the total value of passengers and goods on our railways has never been so great as now. Our rail· ways would be unable to handle the country's transport to-day without the aid of the highways.

"In the same way, with greater depths and with the improvements in craft, it is post!ible to restore our waterways. Nor will this jeopardize the prosperity of our railways, as some predict."

Wherefore this aSBociation respectfully asks that, based on the facts adduced at the bearing and supplemented herein, a favorable report be made to Major General Taylor, Chief of Engineers, and to the United States Board of Engineers, recommending for immediate adoption as an approved river project that section of the Missouri River extending from Kam'1as City, l\Io., to Yankton, S. Dak., and to such farther point on said upper river as by the War Department

· records and the facts submitted by this association is feasible and practicable.

Respectfully submitted. A. J. WEAVER,

Presf.dent Missouri River Navigation A.ssocnation.

The statistics quoted herein are taken from reliable public records. The estimates in each case are ~onservative anu reflect the best judg· ment of the committee-, based on the statistical information submitted. The committee is prepared to verify any of these data, and will be glad to furnish such other information as is desired.

C. D. Sturtevant, chairman (southbound tonn_age), president Trans-1\Ijssissippi Grain Co., Omaha, Nebr.; A. W. Donald· son (Yankton, S. Dak., statistics), Yankton, S. Dak.; It. A. Jacobson (Yankton, S. Dak., statistics), secretary Yankton Chamber of Commerce, Yanltton, S. Dak:; Ron Stewart Gilman (Sioux City statistics), mayor Sioux City, Iowa; T. A. Black (Sioux City statistics) , president Terminal Grain Corporation, Sioux City., Iowa ; Harrison Kilborne (road improvement and river traffic), general secretary Sioux City Chamber of Commerce, Sioux City, Iowa; Ben Evans (Decatur & Burt Co., Nebraska statistics), Decatur, Nebr.: Edgar M. Hoar (Decatur & llurt Co., Nebraska sta· tistics), secretary Chamber of Commerce, Decatur, Nebr. ; C. E. Childe (northbound tonnage), manager Traffic Bureau, Omaha Chamber of Commerce, Omaha, Nebr.: Chas. Beno (Council Bluffs statistics), president the John Beno Co., Council Bluffs, Iowa; Ron. W. K. James (St. Joseph statistics), Hill Crest Farm, St. Joseph, Mo. ; W. H. Fitzpatrick (St. Joseph statistics), manager Trame Bureau, Chamber of Commerce, St. Joseph, l\Io.; A. T. Willette (Atchison statistics), secretary Chamber of Commerce, Atchison, Kans.; J. C. Lysle (Leavenworth statistics), vice president J. C. Lysle l\Iilling Co., Leavenworth, Kans.; F. W. Jensen (Leavenworth statistics), manager Chamber of Commerce, Leavenworth, Kana; Lee Metcalfe (reclamation and co· operation),· reclamation expert, Kansas City, l\Io.

TllE HAUGEN BIT..L

Mr. SANDERS of Texas. ~fr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con· sent to extend my remarks in the RECORD by printing a short editorial on the IIa ugen bill.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas asks unani· mous consent to extend his remarks in the RECORD by printing a short editorial on the Haugen bill. Is there objection?

There was no objection. Mr. SANDERS of Texas. 1\fr. Speaker, under leave granted

to extend my remarks In the RECORD, I submit herewith an editorial appearing in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, of date May 23, 1926 :

THE HAUGE~ BILL FAILS

The failure of tbe Haugen bill in the IIouse serves notice to politicoagricultural economists that the country generally is not ready to permit harmful tampering with the economic system in the interests of a single group of farmers. That is what the Haugen bill amounted to.

Conceivably it might haYe resulted in benefit to the corn and wheat farmers of the :Middle West. Their interests are theoretically protected by the tariff, and the purpose of the Haugen bill was to give this theoretical protection a status of actuality. nut the cotton farmers of the South are not protected by a tarilr, and neither are the cattlemen of the Southwest. Neither are the pt·oducers of various other crops other than those Usted by the Haugen bill. In the !louse debate it became amply evident that the inclusion of cotton, hogs, and cattle in the list of commodities to which the Haugen bill would apply, was simply a bid for votes for the bill, and it was also thoroughly demon· strated that tllis bid ·was on the basis of an entirely supposititious benefit in_ return.

The fact is that the Haugen bill would have done worse than nothing for tbe cotton farmers and the hog and cattle raisers. It would have brought them no benefit, because their products have no tarilr joker

that can be 'employed to raise prices. It would, however, have increased the price of the grain which they must buy for feed. The Haugen utn is well disposed of, and no farmer who bas an understanding of the true nature of the farmers' problem will regret its timely demise.

We llave had too much experience with political tampering with economic relations to expect any marked coutributlon to agricultural restoration from Congress. The farmer's trouble is one that requires expert diagnosis and scientific treatment. We shall get that when business and industry join hands with farm leadership to study the problem, which is of vital interest to all.

LEASING OF PUBLIC LANDS IN ALASKA FOB FUR FARMING Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to

withdraw for the present H. R. 8048. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Oregon asks unani

mous consent to withdraw for the present II. R. 8048. Is there objection?

There was no objection.

ROOSEVELT-SEQUOIA NATIONAL PARK

Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Public Lands I call up H. R. 9387, n bill to revise the boundary of the Sequoia National Park, Calif., and to change the name of said park to Roosevelt-Sequoia National Park.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Oregon calls up the bill H. R. 9387, which the Clerk will report.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. lVIr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that

the bill may be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Oregon asks unanimous consent that the bill may be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole. ·Is there objection?

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, let me understand the par· liamentary situation. If this unanimous consent is given, then the bill is read, and, as I understand, there is no time for de· bate except under the five-minute rule?

The SPEAKER. That is correct. 1\Ir. HASTINGS. Then, l\fr. Sveaker, I object, unless I am

given some time upon an amendment I desire to offer. l\fr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, I have no objection to giving

the gentleman some time. How much time does the gentleman desire?

Mr. HASTINGS. I would like to have 15 minutes within my control.

1\'Ir. SINNOTT. That is satisfactory to me. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the

gentleman from Oregon that the bill may be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole?

There was no objection. Mr. SINNOTT. 1\:lr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that

the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. HASTINGS] may have 15 minutes in his control during the consideration of the bill, and that I may have 15 minutes in my control during the con· sidera tion of the bill.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Oregon asks unanimous consent that he may have 15 minutes within his control during the consideration of the bill, and that the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. HASTINGs] may have 15 minutes within his control during the consideration of the bill. Is there objection?

'l'here was no objection. Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that

the first rending of the bill be dispensed with. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Oregon asks unani

mous consent that the first reading of the bill be dispensed with. Is there objection?

There was no objection. Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield five minutes to the

gentleman from California [Mr. BARBOUR]. Mr. BARBOUR. Mr. Speaker, this bill is one which has been

before the Congress off and on for the last seven or eight years. It proposes to take certain lands from the forest reserves in tho State of California and make tllem a part of the present Sequoia National Park. The present park has an area of 252 square miles. It is proposed by this bill to add to the present park a total of 368 square miles.

Mr. RANKIN. An increase of how much? Mr. BARBOUR. It will eliminate, I will say to the gentle·

man from l\Iississippi, 16 square miles by making the boun<la· ries of the park follow the natural divides, the hydrographic divides, rather than the survey lines, as it does at the present time. This will cut off a few little areas here and there of the present tract that are not particularly park territory. After eliminating this 16 square miles and adding the 368 square miles which tbis bill proposes to add, the total area of the park

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 10143 will be. 604 square miles. It will more than double the area of the present park.

As I have said, this land which it is proposed to add to the park is all-owned by the Government at this time. It is all forestrel-iene territory. Tllis bill will not cost the Government a s ingle dollar in the acquisition of new lands if it is passed. There ar(}, however, in this proposed new area certain tracts of In1~d w!1ich are privately owned. Some of these tracts llave already l>cen acquired by persons wllo are interested in the passage of tllis bill, and they have been conveyed to trustees with directions to the trustees tllut upon tbc passage of the bill tlle!';e private areas silull be conveyed to tile United States Government.

Mr. HANKIN. How mucll will tllis increase the co t of maintenance per year?

Mr. BARBOUR It will possibly increase it to this extent: It may be necessary, and probably will be necessary, to have a few extra rangers to cover tlli::; additional territory, but there "ill not be required so many forest rangers, and. ns I understand, -the cost of the a<l<litionnl park rangers will be offset by the fe' er forest rangers tilat are needed., because the territory is now under the juris<liction of the Forest Scrvi<:e.

~ 1r. RJUTKIN. How about roads and driveways tllrougb it? Mr. B.dRBOUR. I will say to tlle gentleman it is proposed.

to make thit> a trail pa1·k and keep it a trnil park . . It is· now a trail park. The roads now leading into the park go into tile Giant Forest of the present park. This territory whicil it is proposed to add is in the higil mountains further up and further buck, and there arc no roads contemplated into tilis new urea at this time. It may be in tile future that some of the trails leadll1g to Monnt Wllitney and some of tile other points "~ill be improYed, and possibly made more available to tourh;t travel. Tilis will come under the general" park nl)proprlations which are handled each year by tlle Committee on Appropriations. It is not anticit)ate<l there will be any material increase in tile · cost of administering this territory because of tilis addition to Sequoia National Park.

.Mr. RATHBONE. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. BARBOUR. Yes. Mr. RATHBONJ•l Can the gentleman tell us what propor

tion of the total growtil of sequoia trees will be iucluded in this new prOt)O!'Cd park and bow muc:h will he outside of ·it?

Mr. BARBOUR. I can not state to the gentleman how much of the total. I will say that none of the sequoias in the present park will be eliminated. because of these cilangcs in the boun<laries of the present park, unlel:ls there may be a few tl·ees along the southern boundaries, an<l according to my recollection I do not think that any of those will be eliminated. I was tllrough that territory not long ago when it was proposed. in a former bill to eliminate three southern townships of the present park, and the result of our trip through there was that the bill was changed, retaining those three southern · townships because of the ma!:,rnificent growth of sequoias. Some of the sequoias are in Ilrivate ownership, but what proportion those in private ownership are of the whole, I can not sny'.

Mr. RATHBONE. What I am particularly interested in is the preservation of the sequoias.

The SPE.AKEll. The time of the gentleman from California bas expired.

Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from California three add.itional minutes.

1\fr. RATHBONE. I am particularly interested in knowing what effect, if any, this will have upon the preservation of the seqnoln trees, 'vblcb, I understand, are being cut in various parts of the State. Will this increase. in the area of the park have a tcnrlency to preserve them?

:\Ir. BARBOUR. I think the gentleman rofers particularly to the re<lwoods in northern California that are being cut. This will have a tendency toward tile preservation of the f;equoia gigantea, which is the tr<..'-e growing in the present Sequoia Parle.

Mr. ABERNETHY. I notice in section 7 of the bill that this is in honor of President Roosevelt, and you have changed. it to the Roosevelt-Sequo ia Park. As I understand, Sequoyail was a great Indian chief. "Why not amend. the bill so as to honor tile Indian chief as well as the Presi<lent of the United. States?

1\Ir. B.ARBOUR. The name of Sequoia is retained. in the bill.

:Mr. ABERNETITY. The park was originally Sequoia Park, nnd you change it and make it a dual name, but only in honor of one. Why not in honor of both?

1\ir. FREE. The name Sequoia is the name of a tree. Mr . .ABERr-.."'ETHY. It is also the name of a great Indian

chief. I understand the opposition on this side is to the change of the name because it is the only national park that

is named for an Indian. I make the suggestion in the interest of a compromise.

Mr. FURE. The park is not named after the Indian chief; it was named after the trees.

:Mr. C.ARTER of Oklahoma. But the trees were named after the Indian chlef.

Mr. BURTNESS. Will the gentleman yield? 1\lr. BAHBOUR. I will. . Mr. BUHTNESS. Can the gentleman tell us whether there

i :-; any special reason. wily this v.ark· in California should be pieked out as a 11ark to be used as a vehicle to honor the memory of President Roosevelt rather than a park in some other State where the Presid.en t lived or where there is a real sentimental reason tor it?

Mr. BARBOUR Let me say that a few year ago tilere was a proposal to name it "tile Roosevelt National Park." The proposal now is to name it "tile Roosevelt-Sequoia Park," and it originated with certain organizations in the eastern purl of the United States. It came originally from the Boone and Crocket Club, an out<loor ·organization that bad its head<Iuarters in 1 cw York. They suggested that tilis park should he named "the Roosevelt National Park," and a bill was introduced in Congress proposing to change the name to "the RooseYelt National Park." There were objections made on the part of ·Rome admirers of the Indian chief, Scquoyab. I understood and.Ilave reaHon to understand that we arrived. at a comvlete and thorougil UllLlerstan<ling that the name "RooseYelt-Sequoia National Park" would be satisfactory to all the parties interested and there would be no objection to it.

l\ir. ABERNETHY. I am making the suggestion in the interest of harmony .• There are men on this side who want to strike out the name Roosevelt. I would not be in favor of tllat. I think RooRevelt was one of the greatest men this country ever procluc:ecl, notwithstanding the fact tbat he ·and I were not of the same political ftlit.h. But here is the situation that confronts mo us a member of the committee. Here is a park named after a great Indian chief. Now, you are changing it.

Mr. FREE. I want to say again that tllis park was not named after the Indian c:hief but after the trees in it. Tile trees are spelled s-e-q-u-o-i-a and the name of the In<lian chief is S-e-q-u-o-y-a-h. ·

Mr. ADERNE'l'IIY. It seems to me tllat we -can get at it in this way. Iu line 7 lHld the words " aLso in honor of Sequoyah the great Indian chief." It seems to me that there should l>e no objection to that.

l\Ir. BARBOUR. And not change tile name of the park but leave it the Roosevelt-Sequoia National Park?

1\Ir. ABERNETHY. .And not change the name of the park at all.

Mr. BARBOUR. I have no objection to that. I will Atnte further that this area whicil it is proposed to add takes in what is conceded to he some of the finest and grandest seenery in the western country. It t11kes in Mount Whitney, tile higilest point in the continental United States. This bill bas the indorsement of the Set:.retury of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture. I am willing to accept the suggestion of the gentleman from North Carolina, but I do not want an amendment striking out the name of Roosevelt, for p0ople in all parts of the Uniterl States have npproved tllis means of honoring tile memory of Theodore Roosevelt, and I <lo not wish to assume the responsibility of a~reeing to an amendment that would stt·ikc out that name from this bill. I have no objection to the nmendment proposed by the gentleman from North Carolina LUr. ABERNE'.rJIY].

1\lr. RATHBONE. Mr. Speaker, will tLe gentleman yield? Mr. BARBOUR. Yes. 1\fr. HATHBONE. Is it not very appropriate to have tho

nnrne "Itoosevelt" connected with the park'/ Is it not a fact that it was under Theodore Roosevelt that the national policy of couAcrvntion really began and the earnest work wal:l starte<l along those lines? Does not that make it peculiarly 11ppropriat0 in this instance to Ilave Ilis name affixed. to this park?

Mr. BARBOUR. I think it does; an<l RO far as detrncting from tlle memory of tbc great Indian chieftain Scquoyail, I think it is a distinct honor to tlle cbieftnin to have his nnme linked with that of Theo<lore Hooscvelt in the naming of tlHJ park.

1\lr. BURTNESS. 1\lr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield.'? Mr. BARBOUR Yes. Mr. BURTNESS. Docs the gentlemnn agree with or dis·

a~rec with his colleague [Mr. FREE] , who claims that tilis }Jark iB not named at the present time in Ilonor of the In<lian cilieftain but of the tree?

1\lr. BARBOUR. Strictly speuldng, the park is not. The tree was named after the Indian cilieftain for no particular reasop. Tile botanist who gave the tree tbe scientific name, as

10144 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE l\fAY 26 I understand the story, was a great admirer of the Indian chieftain Sequoyah, and he called this California big tree sequoia gigantea, the sequoia part of it having no particular application at all. The name was applied to the tree because the man who named it was an admirer of this chieftain.

Tlte SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman f1·om California has expired.

:Mr. HASTINGS. l\Ir. Speaker, I offer the following amend· ment, which I send to the desk. Has the first section of the bill been read for amendment?

The SPEAKER. Tile entire bill has been read. Mr. HASTINGS. And is now open for amendment? The SPEAKER. It i!'<. There are one or two committee

amendments tllat sllould. be disposed of first. The question h; on agreeing to the committee amendments.

The colllrnittee amendments were agreetl to. The SPEAKER. Tile gentleman from Oklahoma oirers an

amendment, which the Clerk will report. The Clerk rend as follows : Amendment otl'ere<l by Mr. HASTr.xos: Page 1, line 4, after the word

"follows," strike out the r emainder of line 4 and all of lines 5 G and 7, and change the comma and insert a semicolon. ' '

l\Ir. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, the amendment which I offer will not change the text of the bill in any respect. It merely retains the name of Sequoia. It eliminates from the bill tile hyphenated name Roosevelt-Sequoia and retains the present name of Sequoia. I trust I may have your attention for a moment while this amendment is under consideration, so that I may tell you a little about wlw Sequoyah was and. about how much this means to the Indians of this copntry, and how much it means to the State of Oklahoma.

Sequoyah was born about the year 1770. That was prior to tile Hevolutionary War. He was born down there in the red hills of Georgia, before we had any Government, born in a tent of a -full-blooded Cherokee Indian woman. He did not know how to read or write the English language. Und.er those circumstances this Indian grew up to young manhood. He saw letters passing back and forth between white people of the country. He called them "tRlking leaves" an<l he challenged his neighbors and acquaintances that he could do the same thing for the Indians of the country. He set to work to invent an alphabet so that the Indians could communicate one with the other and learn to read and write. He invented the most complete alphabet that is known to history to-day.

It has SG characters. You can not misspell in the Cherokee language, because it has one character for every syllable. You have one character following after another forming a word. It can be read · at sight as soon as you know the characters and it can be pronounced. as soon as you know the alphabet: You can not possibly misRpell if you pronounce correctly. It i s the most complete · alphabet ever invented. By reason of this alphabet a new~paper was establLhed. The Indians communicated with each other. Proclamations from Washington concerning their affairs and public documents and matters of general importance were brought to the attention of the Indians. The New Testament and parts of the Old Testament, hymn books, and various kinus of tracts were published. It bad a splendid influence on the Indians, and as a result Sequoyah's tribe, the Cherokee, advanced rapidly and became one of the Fi>e Ci>ilized Tribes of this country. At one time the Indians, by virtue of a roving possessory right, occupied this entire country from ocean to ocean and from tile Lakes to the Gulf. They have receded before the advancing waves of civilization. They have yielded e>erything for civilization. Here is one of the greatest of all of the Indians, whose oame is perpetuated by one of these parks being named for him. It is argued that his name was first given to the tall trees. That is true, but authentic history records that these tall trees out in California were naQJed for Sequoyah, and the park was named for the trees, so that the park after all was named for Sequoyah.

When of about middle age Sequoyah moved from his old home in Georgia and went west to what first was the Indian Territory and later a part of the splendid State of Oklahoma.

In 1828 he visited w·ashington. His genius was recognized.. Resolutions were passed in his honor. He was presented with a medal. He was g~anted a ciru pension by his own tribe. A county in my district and State uears hts name. When the people of eastern Oklahoma, which was then Indian Territory, first started to form a State, instead of naming the State Oklahoma they gave it the name of Sequoyall in honor of this great Ind.ian and his achievement. Soon after Oklahoma was admitted to the Union in 1907 the legislature of the State passed an act to have his statue placed in Statuary Hall as one pf the two distinguished !!Jen f1~o-~ my _State. I s,ubmit n_q

good. reason has been shown why this amendment should not be adopted, or why the name of this plll:k should be changed. I have taken occasion heretofore to fittingly express my apvreciation of ex-President Theodore Roosevelt, and if this park were named for Colonel Uooseyelt I would not be here now advocating the change to Sequoyah. 'l'hat park is now named Sequoia. I 011pose, in behalf of the people of Oklahoma, in behalf of the Ind.ians of the nation of which Sequoyah was easily the foremost in this country, the change of this name. I appeal in all seriousness and. in all earnestness to the House, and I sincerely trust that this House will not take f1·om the name of this park the name of this splendid American, the Cadmus of his race.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Would it not be proper to name this park for both of tllese men, one of them a great Indian and the other a good Rcout?

.Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Roosevelt has a great many counties and a great many towus and many cities named for him, and I am sure that if ex-President H.oosevelt were living and here to-day he would not approve of this hyphenated name being applied to this park. I present this amendment and ltope that it may be adopted.

Mr. HUDSPETH. Will the gentleman yield? Ur. HASTINGS. I will. Mr. HUDSPETH. How long has this name been in exist~

ence, Sequoia? 1\fr. HASTINGS. Ever s ince the park was established. 1\Ir. HUDSPETH. How long has that been? Mr. HASTINGS. I do not recall just now. For many

years. Mr. WELLER. Will the gentleman yield? 1\:Ir. HASTINGS. I will. Mr. 'YELLER. I would like to know if the gentleman pre~

sented. this same argument before the committee which had this matter in charge?

1\.lr. HASTINGS. I did not know that the bill had been introduced or was pending before the committee until I found it on the calendar.

1\Ir. WELLER. I have listened with a great deal of atten· tion and with a great deal of respect to the gentleman's state~ ment about Sequoyah. It has been very enlightening, I assure the gentleman, but it does seem to me a matter of this kind, where the gentleman is so much interested in it as he is, and a distinguished ex-President's name is to be coupled in the name of this park, that the matter sllould not have been presented to the committee in the first instnnce.

Mr. HASTINGS. The gentleman is aware there have been some 12,000 bills introduced in this Congress. Let me repeat that I did not know that such a bill was pending before the committee. It was stated when I objected to this bill some two weeks ago that I had agreed to this cllange. A letter was referred to which I wrote in 1!)20, six years ago, in which I agreed to the change.

But that, as I recall it, was when they were trying to change the name entirely to Roosevelt Park. The bill so provided then as I remember lt-I may be mistaken about it; that was six years ago--the bill, as I now remember, was to cut out " Sequoia " and put in " Roosevelt," and the compromise re~ ferred to was to retain the name " Sequoia."

l\lr. BARBOUR. .Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? 1\Ir. HASTINGS. Yes. 1\Ir. BARBOUR. And this bill was introduced in accordance

with that compromise, with the understanding that that agreement was still in effect.

l\Ir. HASTINGS. "\Yell, I will say to the gentleman from California that I did not know anything about this bill until after it was introduced. ~

l\lr. BARBOUR. It is not customary for the chairman or members of a committee to go around and. notify eYery Mem· ber of the introduction of a bill.

1\fr. HASTINGS. Any agreement I made was in connection with . the bill six years ago, and not to this bill.

Mr. BARBOUR. That bill was in the identical language of this bill.

Mr. HASTINGS. What I Raid on agreement about a bill was about the bill that was introd.uced some six years ago, and not about this bill. I repeat, I did not know that this bill was introduced until after I found it reported and on the Union Calendar. As I recall it, the bill that was considered six year::; ago was a bill to take a way the name " Sequoia " and substitute the name of "Roosevelt" entirely, and the agreement then was to retain the two.

1\lr. BARBOUR. In introducing thiR uill we agreed upon the name "Roosevelt-Sequoia" in accordance with that agreement.

1926 OONGRESSION AL RECORD-HOUSE 10145 Mr. HASTINGS. What I nm afraid of is that this is only Amendment oliercd by ~Ir. Sr~NO'l'T: Page 1, line 7, strike out the

the first step in changing the name of tllis park and that in colon after tho wonl "States," insert a comma and adu the following: another year or two the name " Sequoia " will be dropped. It " and in honor of the Indian chieftain Sequoya.h, inventor of tho Cherowill be ~uc.:h easier to drop the name of " Sequoia" than to kce Indian alphabet." change it. What we fear is th.nt in a short time "Sequoia" Mr. BURTNESS. 1\fr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. will be eliminated and "Roosevelt" left as the one name. ·why The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Oregon yielu to insert the name "Roosev<'lt" here at all? the gentleman fi·om North Dakota for the purpose of making

Mr. ·sul\Il\IERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, will the g n- a parliamentary inquiry? tleman yield? 1\Ir. SINNOTT. I yield.

Mr. HASTINGS. Yes. l\lr. BURTNESS. 1\ly question was simply this: I take it M.r. SUMMERS of Washington. If the area of the Sequoia that the amendment offered by the chairman of the committee

Park is left and the nallle " Sequoia" is left and additional is simply a perfecting amendment to the language unu its adoplands are ad<led and the ad<litional name is ad<lcd, it <loes not tion woul<l not in any way eliminate the amendment that has seem to me that there can be any valid objection to it. For been offere<l by the gentleman from Oklahoma. one I want to say that I shall be very glad at any time to :fight The SPEAKER. Not at all. It would simply have prece- · any attempt to drop the name of " Sequoia." deuce in time of voting; that is all .

Mr. HASTINGS. Why does not the gontleman from Wash- Mr. ABERNETHY. ·wm the gentleman from Oregon yielu ington and the gentleman from California move to change the me a few minutes on this amen<lment? nnme of some other park to "Roosevelt," as, for example, Mr. SIN.~. -oTT. I shall just as soon as I ba·ve stated the Mount Rainier Park? You do not need to change the name reasons for the amendment. Mr. Speaker, there is no desire because you add a little additional territory to it. on the part of anyone to detract one iota from the great name

Mr. SUMMERS of Washington. This is a large area, the of Sequoyah. Sequoyah was a great Indian; be was a great gentleman shonld nnderstan<l. man, and he bad a great intellect. It seems to me that

1\!r. HASTINGS. It may be a large area . But no good rea- we add to his honar by linking ·his name with that of anson can be assi~cd why a hyphenate<l name, as the name other great American, Theodore Hoosevelt. [Applause.] A "Roosevelt-Sequoia," be given to this park, RO as &> .entirely great American; a great man and a great intellect. The present overshadow the greatest Indian name of all time. park, which has the name of Sequoia, has some 250 squa1·e

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield ? miles in area; we are increasing the p·ark by add.ing thereto an Mr. HASTINGS. Yes. additional 352 squruro miles. It seems to me that with this 1\Ir. T.JAGUARDI.A. I am n member of the committee that great addition to the park it is very proper that we couple the

framed this bill. I considered thiR bill simply in the light of names of these two great Americans. [Applause.] That is the an enlargement of territory. The question of the change of reason why I baye offered this amendment. name did not ,come up. . ~ir . CARTER of Oklahoma. WHl the gentleman yield?

l\Ir. HASTINGS. It was not emphasized? Mr. SINNOTT. Certainly. 1\Ir. LAGUARDIA. No; it was not emphasized at all. I do Mr. CARTER of Oklahoma. Let me ask the gentleman about

not think anybody in tbis House admires the career of Presi- the suggestion made by the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. dent Roo~evclt more than I do, and I agree with the gentleman HASTINGS] to the effect that he feare<l this was the first step from Oklahoma that the name of thi~ park should not be towar<l stri1..-ing the name of Sequoia from the park comh,YJ)henated. plet.ely. Does the gentleman know of any intention on the purt

:Mr. HASTINGS. On July G, 1917, the statue of Sequoyab of anyone connected with the parks or with Congre ·s to do was unveiled in Statuary Hall and speeches were made by that? Speaker Clark, the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, and all Mr. SIJ.\"'NOTT. No; I do not, and this is the first step that I of the Members of the Oklahoma delegation, inviting attention Jmow to give legislatiYe recognition to the great name and fame to the details of the life of this great Indian an<l the splendid of the Indian chieftain Sequoyah. services which he ren<lercd not only to his tribe but to mankind. Mr. CARTER of Oklahoma. May we have the gentleman's

A man of great native intellect and splendid courage, be wor<l that it woul<l be his policy to prevent that thing being contributed to the advancement and civilization not only the done? Indians of his own tribe but through them the Indians of Mr. SINN"OTT. It will be my object to try to remain in the surroun<ling tribes and nations. Congress for the next 50 years forr that one purpose. [Laughter

He hoped to find a univerRn.l language by means of which n.n<l applause.] all tribes of Indians in North ·America might communicate Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of the House, witb each other. I differed greatly in politics from President Roosevelt, l>ut ir-

In the early forties, during a visit with other tribes to the respective of that we all recognize<l him as one of the great far Southwest to become acquainted with their customs and outstanding Americans of history. I take it that linking these usages he was seb:ed with a fever an<l somewhere ncar the two names together is a great honor to both of these two dissweep of the great Colorado River and near this park whicll tinguished Americans. [Applause.] I am proud to be an bears his name, in an unknown cave, this Indhm philosopher humble instrument in giving . due recognition to this great and teacher, inventor, genius, an<l dreamer, fell asleep. How Indian chief. I would not have supported this bill if the genfitting that this park should be named for this lover of the tlcman from California ha<l not agree<l to the amcnrlmeut, before~t an<l the great outdoors, and the foremost In<lian not only I cause I feel that we have not honore<l the Indian race as much of his race but of all Inuian tribes. He was not only a great as we should in America. Indian and a splen<lid American, but when we take into con· I think we ought to a<lopt the amendment of the chairman of si<leration the circum:;tnnces of his birth, the meager advan- the committee. I do not think it woul<l be fair nor do I think tnges be ha<l, his achievement has not been excelled by any it would be proper to strike out the name of Roosevelt. I think nationality. we ought to a<lopt this amendment, and I think the gentleman

Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, I have a perfecting amend- from Oklahoma [Mr. HASTINGS] shoul<l feel proud of the fact ment which I wish to offer. that he is coupling up this great Indian chief with a Presi<lent

Mr. HOWARD. Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak with uf the United States, not an or<linary citizen, but a man who reference to this pe~ding amendment. is an out tanding American, a man who <lid as muc.:h a~ any

The SPEAKER. The g-entleman from Oregon is a member 1 other man to muke America for Americans, re~aruless of his of the committee. He will be heard first. politics. [A11plau~e.] I hope the Hou e will adopt the amen<l-

l\Ir. SI.l\""NOTT. ).fr. Speuker, I move on line 7, page 1, to ment offered by the chairman of the committee. strike out the colon an<l insert a comma, and insert the fol- Mr. CONNALLY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to strike lowing: "and in bonoe of the In<lian chief Sequoyah." out the la!:lt three wor<ls. I have no personal interest in this

Mr. CARTER of Oklahoma. Will the gentleman yiel<l? bill and <lid not know it was pentlin~ until a few minutes ago. Mr. SINNOTT. Yes. I hope the committee will adopt the arnen<lment offered by the ~lr. CARTER of Oklahoma. Would tho gentleman from gentleman from Oklahoma [.Mr. HASTINGS]. I speak to-day as

Orej!.on object to changing his amendment and adding "and un admirer of Thcouore Roosen~lt. Theodore RooseYelt's greatin hunor of the Indinn chieftain Sequoyah, inventor of the ness, gentlemen, is not depen<lcnt upon having a park nameu Cherokee Indian alpllnhet "? for him, nor upon sharing with Sequoyah such an honor. A

Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Spen.ker, I will withdraw my man who was world-wi<le in his fame, a man who wa8 one of amenument if that is put in. · the most vivi<l und virile characters in all of tile public life

1\fr. SINNOTT. That will be satisfactory to mP.. and public bistory of this Republic can have nothing o<l<lell to 'l'he SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the mo<li:fied amend- his greatness by splitting up the honor of naming this park

meJlt. anu calling it the Roosevelt-Sequoia Park. It is now the Se-The Clerk rea<l as follows : quoin Park; why change iP You decrease the honor ·both to

10146 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MAY 26

Roosevelt and to Sequoyah when you hyphenate it and make the park a monument to two men instead of to either.

I understand there are other bills pending SCE:king to honor the name of Roosevelt by connecting his name with some other great park, and I hope that bill will be adopted. I should not oppose such a monument to Theodore Roosevelt, but his greatness is not dependent, gentlemen, upon the erection of marble monuments or the naming of parks. His monument will live in the history of America when marble monuments are dust.

I remember Theodore Roosevelt, not as President-! never knew him as President-! remember him as I first saw him when he was a Rough Rider in 1898 at San Antonio, . Tex. I saw him ride into the city from his camp, booted and spurred, on his charger, with his hat at a rakish angle, the very incarnation of the dashing horseman and picturesque leader.

This great Indian Sequoyah-his tribe is fast passing away; I remember now a striking picture entitled " The End of the Trail.'' It is that of a p6or Indian on his pony, driven to the very edge of a yawning precipice. His pony's feet are set in the sod and his poor, bent figure is one of tragedy and of pathos that arouses the sympathy of any man who looks upon it-" the end of the trail" for the poor Indian.

. Let this monument to Sequoyah, a great Indian character, remain. Let this park b~ linked with the name of a great Indian. Here are the hills that the Indian knew. Yonder are the valleys through which he hunted. Here are the sequoia trees that grow in the park that bear the same name as Sequoyah, in whose honor the park is named. Why not leave this place of nature that brings back the memory of the wild days of the Indian-why not let it stand there as a monument to the Indian? Why split it up and call it the SequoiaRoosevelt Park?

I shall vote fpr any other park in honor of the name of Roosevelt, but do not destroy the honor to both of them by linking up the name of this park in hyphenated fashion. Roosevelt needs no poor tribute like this to add to his fame, but it will be a magnificent tribute by this Congress to the poor Indian whose tribe is disappearing, whose tribe now stands on the precipice at "the end of the trail." Let him have this refuge out there amidst the mountains .and the valleys and the streams and the wild game that the Indian knew. His spirit is there. Why not let his name remain there? I do not believe, if Roosevelt could look back from that land in which his spirit now dwells, he would })egrudge the act of this Congress in leaving this the Sequoia National Park.

1\Ir. WEF ALD. Will the gentleman yield? 1\Ir. CONNALLY of Texas. Yes. l\lr. WEFALD. The gentleman will remember thut President

Roosevelt never liked the hyphen. · 1\Ir. CONNALLY of Texas. I agree with the gentleman.

President Roosevelt w~s one of the bitterest opponents of the hyphenated American. -

Mr. COOPER of ·wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I did not know that the bill before us was to be up for consideration. l\!y attention had not been called to it until I came into the House a few moments ago.

Unlike the distinguished gentleman from Texas [Mr. CoN· NALLY], who has just taken his seat, it was my privilege to be intimately acquainted with Theodore Roosevelt. On more than one occasion I was honored, if I may be permitted to say it, with his confidence. On more than one occasion I was called to the White House; and sometimes, with other gentlemen of the House and Members of the Senate, I sat until late into the night with that remarkable man; and I would say to the gen· tleman from Texas that only those persons so fortunate as to have seen Theodore Roosevelt in consultation at such a time on a subject that he deemed of vital importance to the Nationaroused as I have seen him aroused--can have any real conception of his power and literally amazing mentality.

The gentleman from Texas says that Theodore Roosevelt needs no monument of bronze or stone. That is true. Roosevelt is immortal, the gentleman says, in the hearts of his counh·ymen. That also is true ; but the observation would apply equally well to two others of America's immortals, and yet we have the lofty shaft to George Washington and the })eautiful memorial to· Abraham Lincoln.

Mr. CONNALLY of Texas. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. Yes. l\fr. CONNALLY of Texas. Would the g(mtleman advocate

changing the name of the Washington l\lonument and having it a monument to George Washington and Chief Pushmataha or to George Washin~ton and Abraham Lincoln?

l\lr. COOPER of 'Visconsin. In reply to the question of the gentleman from Texas, I will employ the language that

Leonard Swett used -when a lawyer arose in court and propounded a similar inquiry. Twirling his eyeglasses, Swett said, "While the question of the distinguished gentleman is douMless very interesting, if is, unfortunately, not at all germane." ·

Without memorials of any kind, the fame of Washington and of Lincoln would be secure in the hearts of their countrymen, yet Congress in its wisdom has erected magnificent monuments to their memory. And you remember the words carved in the wall of the temple above the marble statue of Lincoln:

In this temple, as in the hearts of his countrymen, for whom he saved the Union, the memory of Abraham Lincoln is enshrined forever. ·

l\fr. Speaker, . it occurs to me that there are especial reasons why Oklahoma and all the great West should remember with gratitude the work of Theodore Roosevelt. Presidents before him had been petitioned to urge Congress to legislate so as to bring about the reclamation of the great arid regions of the West. Dut no President gave heed to these requests. Almost the first thing that Theodore Roosevelt did when he became President was to send his famous message urging reclamation. And not long after that he was equally forceful and successful in demanding conservation.

Has Oklahoma-has the great territory beyond the l\Iississippi-occasion to feel more grateful to any man than it should be to Theodore Roosevelt for his splendid work as the pioneer in securing the establishment of the great policies of reclamation and conservation?

These are the things-the reclamation and the conservation policies-which ought to bring him the lasting gratitude of every person who resides beyond the 1\Iississlppi River. Sequoyah was a great Indian. Theodore Roosevelt was from his early manhood a student of the Indians, a man who knew all about them, ·who loved them and honored them, honored their traditions. This uniting of the name of the father of the two great western policies of reclamation and conservation with the name of the great Indian is most appropriate.

The park was called Sequoia ; now it is proposed to more than double its area and to call it Roosevelt-Sequoia. The two names will live together and be held in honored remembrance })y their countrymen until time shall be no more.

I can think of nothing more . appropriate, nothing, Mr. Speaker, more beautiful, than this recognition by the American Congress of these two great Americans in this noble way. [Applause.]

1\fr. BURTNESS. l\lr. Speaker and gentlemen of the House, I yield to no one in my admiration for the man and in my veneration for the name of the lamented Col. Theodore Roosevelt. It is with some hesitation, therefore, that I rise to support the amendment of the gentleman from Oklahoma. I believe that if you will listen to my reasons you will not only sympathize with me in my purpose but, I trust, commend me therefor.

All of you familiar with the life and history of Theodore Roosevelt know that as a young man, none too healthy, not very virile, not very strong, he went out into the West to regain his health and build up his physique. Those of you who read last year as they were published the interesting letters between Colonel Roosevelt and Senator Lodge know something about " 'hat tb,e western country, what the Dakotas, meant to Theodore Roosevelt.

There is now pending in this Congress a bill which would establish in North Dakota what is sometimes called the Roosevelt Memorial Park and sometimes the Roosevelt Badlands Park. We are intending to get established there a nationat park, a national shrine, in honor of the memOI·y of Roosevelt, composed of that territory which he learned to love, a stretch of land including the ranches where he lived, including the creeks and the hills and the buttes, with· all tbe strange aud weird scenery and wonderful coloring that is found in the so-called badlands, and including those petrified forests, which Rre the greatest and most extensive, I believe, of the petrified forests found anywhere on the face of the earth. We are intensely in earnest in this purpose.

If the news goes out from this Chamber that some other national park has had its name chang·ed, hns been given a double-jointed name, linking the name of Roosevelt with the name of the Indian chieftain Sequoyah, our people out there in the West, those old ranchers who are still alive, who lived with Roosevelt, who loved him and revere his memory, will regret it indeed, for they are also very earnest in having that part of the country known ·forever as the ROosev·elt Dadlnnds Park. They desire it to become truly a national shrine. I have so much admiration for both Sequoyah and for Roosevelt

, 18~G CONGRESSION Ail RECORD-HOUSE 10147 that I believe each fs big enou~ll and each has rendered such rnl~::;pi<:ious services to America as to have a park named in his individual honor.

If Colonel Rooseyelt lla<l been askc<l before his death whetlJCr when tile time should come for this country to name a park in honor of his mem.ory, wllether he would prefer tile selection of an existing park in California which he had perhap~ vi. He<l a few times and connect bis uame therewith as a part of a hypheuatecl name connected with . tllat of a great Indian cllief or \vould prefer to have a park establislled in tile great NortlrweRt where be regained bis bealtb and where he lliml'elf te~tified that it was his living out there in the open. bis riding nnd hunting among the hills. his vigorous outdoor

_life which made it pos~ible for llim to lead tlle strenuous life he thereafter led, I believe he would unquestionably haYe iudicatecl hi .::: preference for the latter. The badlau<ls park in North Dakota should he promvtly established and dedicated to his honor. Let us not prejudice the proposal by changing the name of a p ark with an otherwise perfectly good and appropriate name to Roosevelt-Beqnoia. Let us wait till we pass favorable legislation for the Hoosevelt Bacllands Park.

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from North Dakota bas expired.

l\fr. II<HV ARD. l\Ir. Speaker and gentlemen, I presume that none of us will vote against this bill for the reason that it shall contab1 the name of the wonderful Roosevelt, but I <lo hope the House will be kind enough, and the author of the bill geuerous euough, to grant the request and accept the amendment of the genUemnn from Oklahoma an<l let the name of that wonderful Cherokee chief be retained as the name of the pnrk as a memorial to him forever, and to his memory alone. Tbose of you who have not been privileged to . be in near touch with the Indians do not understand. What have we done for them in tlle way of perpetuating the memory of tile remarkable ones among them? Very little. They are disUJ1pea ring very rapidly. l\iost of the tribes are gone. The Cherokees llnve almost disappeared. The memory of the wonderful SequoyRll still Jiyes, and ob, Mr. Speaker, let us keep

_ his name as a memorial in this park to the end that perhaps the constant re11etition of it throughout the years may bring to the Americnn people, and 11articularly to the Christian people, a desire to do just a little higher grade of justice than we have heretofore done to a people now driven by our crushing civilizn tion to the very door of racial denth.

:Mr. SINNOTT. l\lr . . Speaker, I move the previous question on the bill and all amendments to final passage.

The previous que tion was ordered. The SPEAKER. The question first comes upon the amend

ment offered by the gentleman from Oregon. The amendment was agreed to. The SPEAKER. The question now is on the amendment

offered hy the gentleman from Oklahoma. Mr. CONNALLY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary

inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. CONNALLY of Texas. Does the adoption of the amend

ment of the gentleman ·from Oregon in any way conflict with the amendment of the gentleman from Oklahoma?

The SPEAKER. If the amendment · of the gentleman from Oklahoma be adopted, it will strike out the language of the amendment of the gentleman from Oregon, together with the rest of the paragraph .

Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the language read as it will appear with my amen<lment.

Tile SPEAKER. The Clerk will read the language as it now stands, with the amendment of the gentleman from Oregon.

The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment by ~fr. SINNOTT: Page 1, line 7, after the word "States," strike out the colon and insert a comma and add the following, "and in honor of the Indian chieftain Scquoyah, inventor of Cherokee alphabet," so that tile amended paragraph will read :

"That the boundaries of the Scquuia National Park, Calif., are hereby changed, as follows, and that the park hereafter be designated the Roosevelt-Sequoia National Park, in honor of Theodore Roosevelt, late President of the United States, and in honor of tbe Indian chieftain Sequoyah, inventor of the Cherokee Indian alphabet."

The SPEAKER. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma.

The question was taken ; and on a division there were-ayes 26, noes 37.

So the ameudment was rejected. Mr. HASTINGS. 1\ir. Speal,er, I am going to ask unanimous

consent to change the spelling so the name· will be correctly

spelled Sequoyah where it occurs tn·ice in the amended section. Mr. BAHBOUH.. Mr. Speaker, reserdng the right to object,

I think that will be a mistake, I will say to the gentleman from Oklahoma, because the name there is spelled Sequoia.

Mr. HASTINGS. That is the right way to spell it. Mr. BARBOUR. It has beeu Sequoia and has been spelled

that way for 50 years. Mr. HASTINGS. The other is the correct way. Mr. RAH.BO GR. It will confuse things interminably. In the

amendment adopted the name will be spelled correctly, and that will make it clear.

Mr. HASTINGS. Both should be spelled the same. Mr. SWING. Theon you get back to the question of chang

ing the name of the trees. :Mr. BARBOUR. Still reserving the right to object, in the

present statute it is spelled "ia." ;\lr. HASTINGS. But this will change the law, and I am not

trying to change the law. I am trying to change the spelling. You are now stating in this section that you are naming this after the inventor of the Cherokee alphabet, Sequoyah. If you are, ou can not find any reason for spelling it otherwise than the spelling used in the Cherokee country.

1\Ir. BARBOUR. The amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon explains that. I do not know how the name came to be spelled differently but it bas been recognized for years that way.

l\Ir. HASTINGS. Sequoyah lived in my district; there is a county there by his name, Sequoyah, and his name was RIJelled that way. The trees were first named sequoia and they were misspelled. and there is no reason why it should not be spelle<l correctly.

A l\lEAillER. The park was named after him .and not the trees.

Mr. BARBOUU. Is it the gentleman's request that a change be made in the amendment offered-

l\Ir. HASTINGS. Boib places. Mr. FREE. 1\Ir. Speaker, in order to settle this, I object. 1\Ir. HASTINGS. 1\Ir. Speaker, I offer the amendment-The SPEAKER. The previous question has been ordered

on the amendment. · Mr. HASTINGS. Then, l\1r. Speaker, we will not have a

vote on this to-night. :Mr. CONNALLY of Texas. A motion to recommit will be

in order. The SPEAKER. A motion to recommit will be in order.

The gentleman can offer a motion to recommit. l\Ir. HASTINGS. 1\Il'. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent

to correct one other, and that is the words "the In<lian chieftain " should be out of the amen<lmeut. I want unanimous consent to strike that out. He was a great Indian and the inventor of the Cherokee alphabet. That will be historically correct.

1\Ir. TILSON. How is the name spelled on the monument out here?

Mr. HASTINGS. It is spelled "ya." It is not "ia." l\Ir. TILSON. The letter '' y." l\Ir. HASTINGS. I think it is just "a." The " .h" is there.

It is not spelled as tlle name is spelled in this bill. Strike out the words "the Indian chief." Will the Clerk read the words, so that I can get them?

The SPEAKER. The Clerk wiil read the last two lines. Tlle Clerk rend as follows: And in honor of the Indiun chieftain Sequoyah . .

The SPEAKER The gentleman from Oklahoma asks unanimous conseut to eliminate the words "the In<lian chieftain."

Mr. HASTINGS. \Vill that leave it "the inventor of the Cherokee alphabet"?

The SPEAKER. . Yes. Mr. HASTINGS. Will the author of the bill [Mr. BAnnoUR]

accept this amendment about the spelling? Mr. BARBOUR The name has been so long in every act

affecting that park and in the act creating the park" Sequoia "-that I can not consent.

l\Ir. HASTINGS. Then you will not pass this bill to-night. Mr. BARBOUR I can not accept the ameudment. It will

result in too much confu ion. The SPEAKER. The question is on the third reading of the

bill. The bill was read a third time. The SPEAKER. The question is, Shall the hill pass? Mr. HASTL TGS. ~Ir. Speaker, I want to make a motion to

recommit, with a motiou to strike out, using the language I offered.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman fl!om Oklahoma moves to recommit the bill. The Clerk will report his motion.

10148 OONGR.ESSION AL R.EOORD-HOUSE 1YI.t\.Y 26

The Clerk read as folloTI's: ~fr. HaSTIXGS moves to recommit the bill to the Committee on rublic

LandH with instructions to that committee to report the same back fortllwith with tllc following amendment: Page 1, line 4, after tile word "follows," strike out tile remainder of line 4, and lines 5, G, and 7 and cllange the comma and insert a colon.

l\fr. SINNOTT. Mr. S~nker, I make a point of. order that that is not in order. The House has just rejected the amendmeut.

The SPEAKER. The Chair thiuks that in view of the fact that the paragravh has l>een changed by unanimous consent the amendment would be in order only under those circumstances. The question is on the motion to recommit, offe'red by the gentleman from Oklahoma.

l\Ir. TILSON. l\fay I inquire if it is the gentleman's intention to ask for a roll call on this?

:l\Ir. HASTINGS. Yes; unless the change in spelling is made. l\lr. SINNOTT. 1\fr. Speaker, I move the previous question

on the motion to recommit. The previous question was ordered. Mr. TILSON. l\Ir. Speaker, I think the House should ad

journ, and not attempt to pass the bill to-night. LEAVE OF ABSEXCEJ

1\fr. G&E&~wooo, by unanimous consent (at the request of 1\fr. GARDNER of Indiana), was granted leave of absence, for 10 days, on account of the death of his father.

ADJOURNMENT

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Connecticut moves that the House do now adjourn·. The question is on agreeing to that motion.

The motion was agreed to ; accordingly (at 5 o'clock and 43 minutes p.m.) the House adjourned until to-morrow, Thursday, May 27, 1926, at 12 o'clock noon.

COl\fl\fiTTEE HEARINGS Mr. TILSON submitted the following tentative list of com

mittee bearings scheduled for .May 27, 1926, as reported to the fioor leader by clerks of the several committees :

COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN CO::\IMER.Clll

(10 a. m.) To promote the unification of carriers engaged in interstate

commerce (H. R. 11212) . COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

(10 a. m.) To amend the packers and stockyards net, 1021 (H. R. 11384).

SPECIAL JOINT COMMITTEE

(10.30, Room 347) To investigate Northern Pacific land grants.

00::\HIITI'EE ON THE JUDICIARY

(10 a. m.) To amend the national prohibition act, as amended and sup

plemented (H. R. 377). To amend and strengthen the national prohibition act of

November 23, 1921, supplemental thereto (H. R. 12215).

EXECUTIVE CO.MUUNICATIONS, ETC. 532. Under clause 2 of Rule XXIV, a communication from the

Pre::;ident of the United States, transll!itting a supplemental estimate of appropriation for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1926, to remain available until June 30, 1927, to enable the Chief Executive to carry into effect the "Joint resolution directing the Secretary of the Interior to institute proceedings touching sections 16 and 36, township 30 south, range 23 east, Mount Diablo meridian,'~ approved February 21, 1924 ( 43 Stat. 15) (H. Doc. No. 400), was taken from the Speaker's · table and referred to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed.

REPORTS OF COl\HHTTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of Rule XIII, 1\fr. DENISON: Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com

merce. H. R. 12168. A bill granting the consent of Congress to the Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne & Chicago Railway Co., its successors and assigns, to construct, maintain, and operate a railroad bridge across the Grand Calumet River ; without amendment ( Rept. No. 1307). Referred to the House Calendar.

Mr. LEA of California : Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. S. 2959. An act granting the consent of Congress to Lake :wa.shipgtol!- Corporation to construct a bridge

across Lake Washington, in King County, State of Washington; without amendment (Uept. No. 1308). Referred to the House Calendar.

Mr. COOPER of Ohio: Committee on Interstate and Foreig-n Commerce. S. 3931. An act granting the consent of Congress to the Board of County Commissioners of Trumbull County, Ohio, to construct an overhead viaduct across the l\fahoning Rin:•r at Girard, Trumbull County, Ohio; without amendment (Hept. No. 1309). Referred to the House Calendar.

l\Ir. NEWTON of ~.Iinne!:'lota: Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. S. 398D. An act to extend tho time for the construction of a bridge by the city of Minneapolis, l\Iinn., across the l\fississippi River in said city; without amendment (Rept. No. 1310). Referred to the House Calendar.

l\1r. MORROW: Committee on the Public Lands. S. 4261. An act relating to patents issued pursuant to decrees of the Court of Private Land Claims; without amendment (Rept. No. 1311). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

l\Ir. WINTER: Committee on the Public Lands. H. R. 12066. .A bill to add certain public lands to the Washakie National Forest, Wyo.; with amendment (Hept. No. 1312). Referred to the Committee of the ·whole House on the state of the Union.

1\fr. GRAHAM: Committee on the Judiciary. S. 1035. An act relating to contempts; with amendment (Uept. No. 1313). Referred to the House Calendar.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PRIV.A.TE BILLS .AND . RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of Rule XIII, 1\fr. UNDERHILL : Committee on Claims. S. 1727. An act

for the relief of the Carib Steamship Co. (Inc.) ; with amendment (Rept. No. 1314). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. BOYLAN : Committee on Military Affairs. H . R. 1690. A bill for the relief of Tllomns P. McSherry; without amendment ( Ropt. No. 1315). Referred to the Committee of the ·whole House.

Mr. REECE: Committee on Military Affairs. H. R. 1036!3. A bill to reinstate William R. Bleakney b1 w·est Point Military Academy; with amendment (Rept. No. 1316). Ueferred to the Committee of the Whole House.

PUBLIC BILLS A.ND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 3 of Rule XXII, public bills and 1·esolutions

were introduced and severally referred as follows : By Mr. SUTHERLAND: A bill (H. R. 12442) to ameud sec

tion 128, subdivision (b), paragraph 1, of the Judicial Code as amended February 13, 1925, relating to appeals from district courts; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By l\lr. McLAUGHLIN of Nebraska: A bill (H. R. 12443) to establish a Federal farm board to aid in the orderly marketing and in the control and disposition of the surplus of agricultural commodities; to the Committee on Agriculture.

By Mr. HOLADAY: A bill (H. R. 12444) to provide for the deportation of certain aliens, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization.

By Mr. RAINEJY : A bill (H. R. 12445) cxtendin~ the jurisdiction of the Mississippi River Commission to the Illinois River; to the Committee on Flood Control.

By Mr. ARENTZ: A bill (H. R. 12446) to authorize the cancellation and remittance of construction assessments against allotted. Paiute Indian lands irrigated under the Newlands reclamation project in the State of Nevada, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

By Mr. RANKIN: Joiut resolution (H. J . Res. 266) providing for the obserrance of the sixtieth anniversary of the first Memorial Day, and for other purposes ; to the Committee on the Library.

By Mr. SMITH: Concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 31) to provide for the printing of 10,000 additional copies of Senate Document 86, Sixty-second Congress, first session, entitled "Last Will and Testament of George Washington" ; to the Committee on Printing.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, private bills and resolutions

were introduced and severally referred as follows: By Mr. BEERS: A. bill (H. R. 12447) granting an increase of

pension to Ella V. Dell; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. By Mr. CHALMERS: A bill (H. R. 12448) granting a pen

sion to Elizabeth J . Heitzwebel ; to the Committee on Invalid Pen:sions.

/

I

1926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE .10149 By Mr. DYER: A bill (H. R. 12449) granting an increase of

pension to Christine Forbach; to the Committee on Invalid ·Pensions.

By l\Ir. EATON: A bill (H. R. 12430) grantilig an increase o.f. pension to Helen A. Ackerman ; to tlle Committee on Invalid Pen~ions.

Also, a bill (H. n. 12451) grnnting an incr(!ase· of pension to Elizabeth l\I. Hiclwy; to the Committee on Im·alid Pen~ions. - Also, a biU (H. R. 12452) granting an increase of pension to

Elizabeth A. Snook; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. By Mr. ESTERLY: A bill (H. R. 124.5S) granting an in

crease of pension to Mary Brady ; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

Also, a uill (II. R. 12454) granting an increase of pension to Eliza A. Kern ; to the Committee on Invnlid Pensions.

By 1\Ir. GIFFORD: A bill (H. R. 12455) granting a pension to Nllen P. Calder; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. JACOHSTEIN: A bill (H. R. 12456) for the relief of ClRra D. :Miller; to the Committee on Claims.

By l\1r. LOZIER: A bill (H. R. 12457) granting an increase of pen ion to Wealthy Ann Liuscott; to the Committee on Invalid. Pensions.

· lly l\1r. McLAUGHLIN of Nebraska: A bill (H. R. 12458) granting an increase of pension to Letitia Humphrey; to the Committee on Pensions.

By ::\Ir. MANLOVE : A bill (H. R. 12459) for the relief of Mabel Brown; to the Committee on :Military Affairs.

By :J\Ir. SIMMONS: A bill (H. H. 124GO) granting an increase of pensiou to Sarah Timerman; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

.BY 1\Ir. STHONG of Pennsylvania: A bill (H. R. 12461) gruuting nn increase of pension to Hannah Reighard ; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By 1\Ir. THOMPSON : A bill (H. R. 12462) granting an increu~e of pension to Mattie E. Price; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

· By l\1r. VINSON of Georgia: A bill (H. R. 12463) granting an increase of pension to 'l'haddeus :\1. Kelly; to the Committee on Pen:sions.

By Mr. WELLER: A bill (H. R. f21G4) granting an increase of vension to Jacob Bruno; to the Committee on Pemdons.

.lly Mr. WINTER: A. uill (H. R. 12465) granting an increase of vension to Edith McElhaney; to the Committee on Pensions.

By l\lr. WOOD: A bill (H. R. 12466) for the ·relief of Alfred -A:: ·winslow ; 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 us follows :

22H3. By Mr. BARROUR: Resolution adopted uy tlle California Federation of Women's Clubs, urging rigid. enforcement of the Volstead Act; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

22fl4. Also, resolution adopted by the California Federation of Women's Clubs, urging the continuation of Federal aid for highways; to the Committee on Appropriations.

2205. By l\lr. DHA..l\TJ.J: Petition from tile Southern Hard.ware Jobbers' Association, in annual convention at Atlanta, Ga., protesting against the inheritance t ax ; to the Committee on Ways and :Means.

2296. By 1\ir. LEAVITT: Petition of juniors and seniors of the Billings High School, Billings, Mont., favoring passage of the bill prodding for election of the Governor of Porto Rico by the citizens of that Territory; to the Committee on Insular Affairs.

22!H. By 1\ir; O'CONNELL of New York: Petitiop. of the Parker, Stearns & Co., of Brooklyn, N. Y., favoring the passage of Senate bill 2029 and House bill 8708; to the Committee on Interstate and. l!.,oreign Commerce. _ 2298. By Mr. PATTERSON: Petition of citizens of Gloucester City, N. J., protesting against the enactment into law of House bills 10311, 10123, 7179, or 7822, or any other compulsory religions measure; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

22!)!), By l\irs. ROGERS: Petition of George F. Fogg, 1C7 Oak Street, Wakefield, Mnss., and other residents of Massachusetts urging- consideration nnd p::1 ssage of House bill 4023 ; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

2300. By l\ir. THOMPSON : Petition of citizens of Delta, Ohio, protesting against the passage of any bills making compulsory Sun<lay observance; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

LXVII--639

SENATE THUilSDAY, May £7, 19£6

(Legislative da.y of Wednesday, May 26, 1926)

The Senate reassembled. at 12 o'clock merid.ian, on the expira4

tion of the recess. The VICE PRIDSIDENT. The Senate will receive ·a message

from the House of Representatives. MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. Chaffee, one of its clerks, announced that the House had passed bills of the following titles, in which it requested the concur4

renee of the Senate: H . R. 5385. An act to provide for the disposition of asphalt,

gilsonite, elaterite, and other like substances on the public d.omain;

H . H. G982. An act to amend sections 213 and 215, act of Murch 4, 1009 (Criminal Code), relating to offenses against the Postal Service, and sections 3929 and 4041, Revised Statutes, relating to the exclusion of fraudulent devices and lottery para4

phernalia from the mails, and for other purposes j H. R. 8377. An act authorizing the Postmaster General to

establish a uniform system of registration of mail matter, and for other purposes;

B. H.10132. An act to authorize the assignment of railway postal clerks and substitute rail't'·ay postal clerks to temporary employment as substitute sea post clerks;

H. R 12211. An act to amend. section 4009 of the ReYised Statutes ; and

H . n. 123G9. An act to amend the act entitled "An act authorizing the Postmaster General to adjust certain claims of postmasters for loss by burglary, fire, or other unavoidable cas· ualty," approved. March 17, 1882, as amend.ed.

ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED

The message also announced that the Speaker had affixed. his signature to the following enrolled bills, and they \vere thereupon signed by the Vice President.

S.108. An act for the relief of the Commercial Union Assurance Co. (Ltd..) ; tile Automobile Insur:mee Co., of Hartford, Conn. ; American & Foreign Insurance Co. ; Queen Insurance Co. of America; l!~ireman's Fund Insurance Co. ; St. Paul l!'ire & .Mariue Insurance Co. ; and. the United States Merchants & Shippers Insurance Co. ;

S. 511. An act for the relief of all owners of cargo laden aboard the lighter Linwood at the time of her collision with the U. S. S. Absecon;

S. GM. An act for tlle relief of Frank Grygla; S. G88. An act for the relief of .A.. T. Whitworth: S. 726. An act for the relief of Hilbert Edison and Ralph R.

Walton; S. 1208. An act providing reimbursement to J. 1\L LaCalle

for services as instructor at the United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, 1\Id., from October 1, 1914, to October 19, 1914;

S. 1223. An act for the relief of J. L. Flynn; S. 1224. An act for the relief of John P. McLaughlin; S. 1361 . .A.n act for the relief of the :i.\Iaryland Cmmalty Co. :

the United States Fid.elity & Guaranty Co., of Baltimore, Md.; and tl1e Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland;

S. 1415. An act authorizing and. directing the Secretary of the Treas ury to immediately reconvey to Charles :Murray, sr., and Sarah A. Murray, his wife, of De Funiak Springs, ]'la., the title to lots 820, 821, and 822, in the town of De Funiak Springs, Fla., according to the map of Lake De Funiak d.rawn by "V. J. Vankirk;

S. 1G51. An act for the relief of the widow and minor children of Ed Estes, deceased ;

S . 1792. An act for the relief of William Alexander ; Frank 1\I. Clark; George V. Welch; Grant W. Newton; William T . Hughes; Lucy V. Nelson; Frank .A.. Gummer; Charles E. Mulliken ; Leo 1\1. Rusk; Fred Falkenburg ; M:eary E. Kelly, 'William 0. Hall; Rufus L. Stewart; Hugo H . Ahlff; Paul J. Lin.ster; Ruida Daniel; Faye F. ·Mitchell; Dollie l\Iiller; Alfred Anderson; Gustavus 1\I. Rhoden; Marie L. Dumbauld; estate of Fred 1\Ioo<ly, deceased;

S. 1920. An act for the relief of the devisees of 'Villiam Rusch, deceased;

S . 2G33. An act for the relief of R. P. Rueth, of Chamita, N . 1\lex.;

S. 2674. An act for the relief of Kate T. Riley; S. 2702. An act to provide for the setting apart of certain

land.s in the State of California as an addition to the Morongo Indian Reservation;

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE - Congress.gov

Documents

Transcript of CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE - Congress.gov