congressional record-senate - GovInfo.gov

8918 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 compensation or any reduction in the rights now being en

.joyed by disabled veterans; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

7058. Also, petition of the vocational agricultural class, Mound City, Mo., protesting against the discontinuance or suspension of Federal funds for vocational education; to the Committee on Economy.

7059. By Mr. PARKER o! Georgia: Petition of Thomas L. Bailey and 38 other citizens of Georgia, urging the passage of railroad pension bill, H. R. 9891, and voicing opposition to House bill 10023 and Senate bill 3892: to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

7060. By !\.fr. RAINEY: Petition of Herschel H. Heaton and 64 members of the Jacksonville (Ill.) Chapter of the Future Farme~s of America, favoring appropriations for vocatjon<:!-1 education; to the_ Committee on Appropriations.

7061. By Mr. RUDD: Petition of J. T. Matchett Co., .Brooklyn, N. Y ., opposing the proposed tax on candy; to the Committee on V.lays and Means. . 7062. Also, petition of Adelaide Eller, 94 .Vanderveer Street, Brooklyn, N.Y., and six other citizens of the Greater City .of New York, with reference to tax on fountain pens; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

7063. Also, petition of National Casket Co., Brooklyn, N. Y., opposing the payment of the soldiers' bonus; to the Committee on Ways and Means. . 7064. Also, petition of George F. Arata, of New York City, favoring a tax on beer; to the Committee on Ways and 1\.feans.

7065. Also, petition of A. H. Stiehl Furniture Co., New York City, favoring the repeal of the eighteenth amendment and also legalize the sale and taxation of light wines and beer; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

7066. By Mr. SHANNON: Resolution of Tacitus E. Gaillard Post, No. 2069, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Kansas City, Mo., urging payment of adjusted-service certificates; to the Committee on Ways and M:eans.

SENATE TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 1932

<Legislative day of Monday, April 25, 1932> The Senate met at 12 o'clock meridian, on the expiration

of the recess. The VICE PRESIDENT. The Sen~te will receive a mes

sage from the House of Representatives. MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE-ENROLLED BILL SIGNED

A message from the House of Representatives by Mr. Chaffee, one of its clerks, announced that the Speaker had affixed his signature to the enrolled bill CS. 3570) to amend the· act entitled "An act confirming in States and Territories title to land granted by the United States in the aid of common or public schools," approved January 25, 1927, and it was signed by the Vice President.

RAILROAD MERGERS (S. DOC. NO. 86)

The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a letter from the Attorney General, submitting, in response to Senate Resolution 173 (submitted by Mr. KING), certain information relative to recent railroad mergers and the policy of· the Department of Justice with respect thereto, which was referred to the Committee on the .Judiciary and ordered to be printed.

CALL OF THE ROLL Mr. FESS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a

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

ators answered to their names: Ashurst Blaine Capper Cutting Austin Borah Caraway Dale Batley Bratton Carey Dickinson Bankhead Brookhart Connally Dill Barbour Broussard Coolidge Fess Barkley Bulkley Copeland Fletcher Bingham Bulow Costigan Frazier Black Byrnes Couzens George

Glass Jones Norbeck Glenn Kean Norris Goldsborough Kendrick Nye Gore Keyes Oddle Hale La Follette Patterson Harrison Lewis Pittman Hastings Logan Reed Hatfield McGill Robinson, Ark. Hawes McKellar Robinson, Ind. Hayden McNary Schall Hebert Metcalf Sheppard Howell Morrison Shipstead Hull Moses Shortridge Johnson Neely Smoot

Steiwer Stephens Thomas, Idaho Thomas, Okla. Townsend Trammell Tydings Vandenberg Walcott Walsh, Mass. Waterman Watson White

Mr. SHEPPARD. I desire to ·announce that the junior Senator from Utah [Mr. KmcJ is absent owing to illness.

Mr. GLASS. I desire to announce that my colleague the senior Senator from Virginia [Mr. SWANSON] is still detained from the Senate in attendance upon the disarmament conference at Geneva.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Eighty-seven Senators have answered to their names. A quorum · is present. The Senate resumes the consideration of Senate Resolution No. 199.

ALABAMA SENATORIAL CONTEST The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution

(8. Res. 199), reported by Mr. GEORGE and Mr. BRATTON from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, as follows:

Resolved, That JOHN H. BANKHEAD is hereby declared to be a duly elected Senator of the United States from the State of Alabama for the term of six years, commencing on the 4th day of March, 1931, and is entitled to a seat as such.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Mr. Heflin is entitled to the floor for two hours.

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President and Senators, I am deeply grateful to the Senate for extending to me the privilege of appearing in my own behalf and discussing my contest. I shall never cease to be grateful for the kindness and the justice that has been done me in this regard.

TPe Master said, "Know the truth and the truth shall make you free," and Pilate asked, "What is truth?" But he would not wait for an answer.

Every contest that comes to this body ought to be carefully and thoroughly investigated. I have not had such an investigation. My rights have been denied me to close my case. I have not been permitted to take testimony in the middle portion or in the southern portion of Alabama. At Birmingham, when we went down to take testimony in January, agreeing that a commissioner might preside, it was our belief, and probably I should say our understanding, that we would take testimony for weeks. On the second day of the first week, when we had no notice that we would have to cut off the investigation for the contestant, Senator HASTINGS sent a telegram, I understand at the instance of Senator GEORGE, that we could have three more days and no more and we must close our testimony. We had to dismiss a number of witnesses that were subprenaed for that week and we never had the opportunity to summon other witnesses in the middle and southern portions of the State.

Senator Bankhead was then given a week, and we have been denied the right of rebuttal. We have not been allowed to summon a single witness and take testimony to answer Mr. Bankhead's witnesses. Senators, I submit that such treatment of the contestant is without parallel in the history of this body. It embodies the idea of letting the contestee close the case, cutting off the contestant, saying "Your case is closed." What sort of justice is that?

We were not permitted to take the testimony regarding the primary at Birmingham, and that, as I understand, was under the instructions of Senator GEORGE. I am going to tell the Senate something about this case to-day that the Senate does not know and would not know but for my speaking here. I have always tried to be very frank and fair and honest and just, and I ask that treatment at the hands of my former comrades.

It was rumored that I would not be permitted to speak here, and three very prominent men said they would hire the biggest hall in the city for me to speak in if I was denied that right. It shows that the spirit of fair play is in our people, and it is fortunate that it is true. But I

1932 ·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD--SE.NATE

have permission to speak., and I am going to discuss some things of vital importance in the casa ·

I have told you what happened in January in Alabama. We fully expected to go to Montgomery~ the .capital of the State., and put the former governor~ Governor Grav~. on the witness stand. We expected to prove something importapt by him, which I shall discuss later. We expected to have probably 100 witnesses summoned there, very important witnesses. Then we expected to go to Mobile, in the southern part of the State, and take testimony, but we have not had the chance to do that.

When we -came back the chainnan of the subcommittee, Mr. HASTINGS, who has given a great deal of attention to this question, who has been very painstaking and very industrious and very fair, reached the point where he thought the case ought to go to the full .committee for advice as to what should be done further in the matter. He stated in his report that the contestant was still asking to have testimony taken, and when it got to the full committee Senator BRATTON and Senator GEORGE, of Georgia, objected-Senator GEORGE, who represents in part the State where my father was born., and in that State there are probably '500 to 1,000 voters blood relatives of mine. I have a brother, a minister of the gospel, Rev. M. R. Bellin, in that state. Senator GEORGE and Senator BRATTON favored closing the case; and, if it had not been for my good friend Senator SHORTRIDGE, who has always been a man of fairness and of superb courage and splendid ability-if it had oot been for him and his sense of fair play and his good fighting spirit, we would not have had an hour to consider the case at all any further.

The committee finally decided to refer the case back, to give us a chance to show what we wanted to do, and Senator GEORGE resigned his place on the subcommittee., as did also Senator BRATToN; both of them declined to serve4 That is the kind and cordial treatment that I have received from some of the brethren of my own party.

Then I was called upon to speak in the State so ably represented by my good iriends Senator GLENN and Senator LEWIS, to speak at Mount Morris, to the college students there, and lo and behold, while I was gone, the contestee and his friends on this side, by the aid of the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. BLAINE], decided to take action in my absence and closed my case.

Senators, I am appealing to the sense of fairness and to the courage of Senators in this body on both sides. My case has been closed, and I have never closed it. I repeat, I have never been · permitted to take rebuttal testimony. Hundreds of witnesses we had intended to summon and examine. My case is closed; the door is shut; the door is locked; and the key is thrown away. And these same Senators were kind enough on yesterday . to vote to deny me the right to come in here and be heard here. I regret that. It hurts me in here [indicating].

There was a little boy, a little stepson to a stepmother, whose father married a second time and had two or three children more. On Christmas the father bought some nice little shoes and other gifts for his children by his last wife. He brought them in. He had bought a pair of rough, brogan shoes for the boy. The boy put them on and sat there with his face in his hands, and tears ran down hio;; cheeks. His father said, "Why, what is the matter? Don't the shoes fit?" The boy saidJ .. They hurt me." The father said, "' Why, I thought they were large enough "; but the boy said, " They hurt me in here [indicating]." Sena~-ors, this hurts me in here [indicating].

If you kill off the courageous men in your party, if you destroy the spirit of independence in YOW' party, what have you left? Grover Cleveland once said, "What is the use of election or reelection if you do not stand for s-omething?"

The Senator from Nebraska [Mr. NoRRrsJ, strong, able American patriot, supported Governor Smith in 1928; I supported President Hoover. Did they read Senator NoRRIS out of his party? Did they deny him the right to run in his primary?

Senator Simmons, the ablest legislator who has served in this body in my lifetime from the South, supported Presi-

dent Hoover. Did' they undertake to read him out of lhe Democratic Party in North Carolina? No; they permitted him to run in North carolina.

My grandfather Heflin was born in that Sta~. and my g.ood friend the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. BAILEY] voted yesterday to seal my lips and deny me the chance to eome in here and speak in my own behalf, with the last opportunity that I would have to present my ease to those who are to pass upon it finally. ·

So Senator Simmons was not read out of his party; Senator NoRRIS was not read out of his party; but I was read out. Why? Because it was generally conceded by the Bankhead leaders that I would be nominated if I got into the primary, and the only way to keep me from being nominated was politically to assassinate me; and that is what that braren bunch on that committee undertook to do.

Senators, you are entitled to know something of the background of this primary before I discuss tbe legal phases of it. This little coterie down there was arranging to fix up a primary to nominate Mr. Bankhead. He was the onlY candidate suggested in opposition to me. He was suggested in 1920 and again in 1924. He did not get enough encouragement in 1924 to run. I had no opposition in 1924, but was nominated without opposition. So the governor of the State, a Democrat, sent his Recretary to poll too committee of 50 members and got pledges from 34 to vote for a fair-forall primary and inviting all Democrats in, regardless of what had taken place in 1928.

My former colleague, Senator BLACK, who on yesterday voted against permitting me to speak here, was ~c;trong against the machine then; he fought it to tbe bitter end, and issued a statement against its conduct that while he lives will ring around the State. I shall read it later. He was outraged at the eommittee's conduct. He wrote the committee a letter not to take such a stand; so did I, and so did a of the 10 Members from Alabama in the National House of Representatives do that. The governor of the State, both Senators, 8 out of 10 of the DemoCI·ats in Congress from Alabama appealed to the committee not to do it; but they took the action.

Now, what happened? When the committee met, the chairman of the committee, Pettus, an Alabama power attorney and a Mr. McQueen; another member who spoke to bar me, an Alabama power attorney, Lynn, who offered the resolution, an Alabama railroad attorney, put the resolution through.

Who voted on that committee? R. W. Patrick, from Norfolk, Va., who had formerly been a member of the committee from the Mobile district but went to Norfolk in 1927 and paid his poll tax in that State in 1928 and 1929. They took him to Montgomery on December 16, 1929, and voted him to bar me out of my party when he was a citizen and a voter of another State.

They had a man named Bugg. They filled a vacancy with him. He lived in my old district and was a newspaper man, an editor. He is the bitterest political enemy I have got in the State. Doctor Farguson resigned and they filled the vacancy with Bugg. If it had been in a eourtho'ijse, I eould have objected to him and he could not have served <>n a jury where my dearest rights were invo1ved; but they put this bitter enemy of mine· upon the committee and permitted him to vote at that meeting, violating by so doing the rules and regulations of the committee. Long, long ago they fixed the rule that in filling a vacancy at a present meeting the man who filled it could not vote, because they might get men to resign and fill these vacancies in order to put something over.

There was a man on that committee who was strong for letting down the bars. I referred to this in part 1 of the hearings. His financial stress and strain was relieved. He had been openly for letting down the bars, but he voted for putting them up. Another man on the committee who had borrowed money from a prominent man, who held his note, sat by him on the committee when he voted to bar me from Ule primary. I have discussed that in part 1 .of tbe hearings.

8920 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 Every Alabama Power Co. attorney in the State but two

were strong partisans of Mr. Bankhead; and yet Senator GEORGE and Senator BRATTON have got in their minority report a letter from a cranky old fellow down there who said he was for me, but the trouble with me was that I had lined up with the power company. I wondered when I read the letter why they were printing that rambling thing from that old fellow; but that was it; they were trying to shield and screen the contestee, who was their candidate. Every Alabama Power Co. attorney and the president of the company were all supporting Mr. Bankhead and opposing me, and that effort in the minority report was to make it appear that Senator Heflin was lined up with the Alabama Power Co.

Senators, when they got through they called the roll down there and voted to bar me. Bankhead partisans in the committee room clapped their hands and said, " We have got him where we want him now-outside the party"; and the work of political assassination for a time was complete.

Then what? Senator BLACK and I and others conferred. It was decided that the best thing to do was to go down there and stir up public sentimen.t and get the committee to meet and rescind its action. I went down upon a speaking mission. I delivered about 12 speeches and addressed

. over 60,000 Democrats. I polled them at every place I spoke-those who voted for Smith and those who voted for Hoover. I said, "All of you who repudiate the committee's action and want the action rescinded stand up and hold up your hands." I never had as many as five in any meeting_ to indorse the committee's action. Sweeping the State like wildfire, the committee's action was repudiated and wnat action did we get? The chairman of the State committee, this Alabama Power Co. attorney, said, "I do not care how many people protest; I am not going to call the committee together; that is settled." That was another step in the work of the political assassination of me.

Then it was suggested to me that there was a provision in the rules and regulations by which we could force the committee to meet on the request of 15 members. Twentyone had already voted on my side, so we could easily get 15 to compel them to meet and hear the protests of Democrats whose party it .was that was involved. What do you suppose we found upon investigation? We found that the chairman of the committee and his other Alabama Power Co. attorneys repealed that provision at that same meeting. My God, Senators, think of that-denying us every recourse where we could get away from the hand-and-foot-tied political machine! They repealed the proviston that allowed 15 members to force a meeting of the committee.

Does that look as though it was all fair, and there was nothing rotten and stinking about the action of the State committee? ·

These are the steps leading up to the most corrupt primary every held in my State. The primary itself reeked with corruption from beginning to end; but I am telling you how they reached it, what led up to it.

Then at a conference, where Senator BLACK sat with Judge Wilkinson and Hugh Locke and David J. Davis and Crampton Harris, they agreed that they would enjoin the committee, and that that was the proper action, and not mandamus, as the Senator now claims was the remedy. You can not mandamus in my State, under the statute in a case like mine. There is a statute against it; and I was surprised at the stand taken by the Senator the other day in what I thought was a very misleading speech.

I had nothing to do with this action. I was out on the hustings, condemning the committee's action, and trying to get up sentiment to cause them to rescind it. Judge Wilkinson, my chief counsel-the best lawyer in my State by all odds, and we have some very fine lawyers there-brought the action. He is my chief counsel in this contest. The other able lawyer associated with him was Frank Hampton, of North Carolina. They presented arguments in this case that are unanswerable, on behalf of the people of Alabama.

Who pays for the primary? The taxpa~rs. Should they be taxed to pay for an illegal and unlawful primary? No. Well, then, what was the step to take? To enjoin the committee and prevent the taxpayers' money from being spent in an illegal party program for Mr. Bankhead, myself, or anybody else. · What did the judge of the lower court bold? He held that

he did not have jurisdiction over the matter. Then the appeal went to the supreme court. What happened there?

Senators, I have told you that I was going to be frank and talk plainly. The intimidating power of the State exrcutive · committee threw its terrible shadow over that court. There is not the slightest doubt of that. It has been argued here by Senator BLACK that the court has passed upon the legality of this primary. I beg leave to differ with him. It is not true. They xrever touched it. They said they had no jurisdiction over it; and the able Senator from Delaware [Mr. HAsTINGs] showed the other day that the case they cited was not on all fours with the case of Wilkinson at Birmingham, the case that went to the supreme court. It is a different case entirely.

The supreme court of my State never have touched the merits of this primary case. They never have passed upon the provisions involved in that; but, just between us they "passed the buck." That is what happened. '

Four judges said, "We have no jurisdiction." But, you know, it looks as if God Almighty has some one man in nearly every responsible place who will stand up at the right time and cry out on behalf of truth and right and justice. Here is what was said by Judge W. H. Thomas, the ablest man on the bench, the most cultured and most courageous:

This case 1s here, and the taxpayers have a right to have a decision on the merits, and I am going to give it.

What did he decide? He decided that the primary was null anq void and not the kind of primary for which the taxpayers could be taxed.

Gentlemen, that has been settled in my State. A supreme court judge of Alabama held that. They never have declared that the monstrosity pulled off down there has been approved by them. It is not true.

Then what? Judge Thomas is one of three candidates, I believe, running for reelection; and this machine has got out a candidate against him to punish him and to kill him off because of the courage he displayed in doing his duty under his oath before God, and his duty to the taxpayers of the State who were being imposed upon by a monstrous primary born in sin. It is not right to tax the people of the State to pay for it, but they did. They did not stop then.

Mr. Bankhead knew what sort of primary he was running in. He had a hand in it. They tell you that he is innocent: that he has not had anything to do with it. Well, now, let us see. They tell you t.hat he issued a statement that he wanted me to run. He did have a statement in there, some time before the meeting of the committee, that it was all right with him for me to run; but as the committee meeting drew near, watch his conduct. He issued a statementSenators, get this-saying that some of the members had pledged themselves to him to vote to let down the bars. "But," he said, "I here and now release you from those pledges"; and he turned them loose for the Alabama Power Co. and the other interests to use them and work their will on me. He released them. He, in effect, said to them, " Go to it! If you want to take part in the political assassination, you are free to do it." Does that look as if he had anything to do with it?

What else? Mr. F. H. Creech, of North Carolina-one of the investigators for the Nye committee-went down to Mobile in his investigation. He encountered Mr. Frederick I. Thompson, editor of the Mobile Register and Alabama Journal, candidate against Mr. Bankhead in the primary after they barred me. The machine did not intend that he should have any opposition, but Thompson ran; and here 1s what he told Mr. Creech: Creech had it in his report, which was turned over to this committee; and I asked for the

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SENATE 8921 opportunity to smnmon Mt. Thompson, and that was de- Senator BLACK iii the primaty, issued a strong stateme:nt, nied me. · and he supported Bankhead. He said, ·" If this case is ever

What did Mr. Creech say that Mr. Thompson told him tried by a competent_ tribunal, · it is bound to declare the about this primary? Mr. Thompson told Mr. Creech that primary illegaL null, and void/' Mr. Bankhead had notice when he asked Chairman Pettus, of the State committee, that this conglomerate mess the State committee had cooked " What did you get out of the senatorial race for? I saw up was an illegal thing, an obnoxious, unlawful thing. · that you were going to be a candidate," Pettus said, "No; I · · But ·that is ·not all. From the highest court in the State was not going to be a candidate. I just did that to get two Judge Thomas sent down a ringing opinion. It sounded in votes out of Bankhead's congressional district "-that is, Mr. Bankhead's ears long before the primary. He had time John H. Bankhead-" on the State committee to bar Heflin then to get the committee to meet and rescind its action. and other supporters of Hoover_ from being candidates." Who But, Senators, they never expected this case to come here. were those two members? Ogden and Cobb. Well, they voted They thought that if they could steal 50,000 majority and to bar me, and Thompson told Creech that Pettus told him put it on my back, I would not contest. They did their best that Bankhead got those two votes. They voted to bar me to keep me from co~testing. I expected to put witnesses on from the primary. Does that not tie him in with it? the stand who would swear that ·they intended, if I would

But that is not all. Sam Childers, of Jasper, was a mem- accept what happened and go with them, they woUld beat ber of the committee, and Mr. Ogden, or one of the Bank- BLACK with me in 1932. "Go on and ~ke your medicine. head friends, went to see him and said, "John "-referring Get in line!" I said, "~ would not_ have any respect for to Mr. Bankhead-" wants you to vote to put up the bars." myself if I did that. I was honestly elected. The people of Sam Childers said, "I can not do it. I shook hands with this State are entitled to have their choice represent them. Arthur Fite and. Gibson "-the other members of the com- If I accept your skullduggery, your crookedness, and your mittee from that district, five in all-" and told· them that corruption, and permit you to _defeat their will and crucify I would vote with them to let down the bars, and I am going irie by ·waiting for a deferred election two years hence, I to do it." Then what? Then Ogden, or whoever it was, would never have any more respect for myself. So help me said, "John says that if Heflin gets in the pririlary he will God, I will fight it to the death. I will take it to the Senate. be nominated." There are, 1 think, enough honest men in that body to give

Senators, there is a picture of part of what took place me a fair trial, and that is the only body to which I can take down there-just a part. Did Mr. Bankhead have anything it and get a decision on this primary." to do with it? It has never been decided yet by a tribunal, except by one

·What ·followed? Judge Arthur Fite, a ·member of the judge on the supreme court bench down in Alabama. committee living in Mr. Bankhead's home town, appealed Senators, that is a brief picture of the primary; ·but it to him and told him that this thing would disrupt our does not stop there. I went out on the hustings and I said, party, that it was unfair and unjust and wrong, and said to "They have repealed the provision of the committee rule him, " Will you not join with me and others in asking the . which allowed 15 members to compel the committee to meet committee to meet and rescind it?" And Mr. Bankhead· and rescind its action. 'We can get no relief there. A rnadeclined outright to do that. Does that look as if he was jority of the supreme-c.ourt judges have said they have no 1·esponsible for it in any way? Was he using his influence to jurisdiction. The door iS shut in our f.aces there. One judge get me in? No, Senators; he was not. has pointed the way through the wilderness and I am fol-

'rhen Judge Fite said," If Heflin and Locke "-that is, the lowing the trail. It is an illegal primari, and the only thing independent Jeffersonian candidate for governor against the left to do is tO condemn it, repudi~te it, stay out of it." Alabama Power Co. candidate-'' have their names stamped What do you suppose happened in the primary? Out of on the ticket or written on it "-now listen-" the Democrats 340,000 · De~ocrats, 125,000 participated · in ·the prima.~:y. all have been invited in to vote in this primary under the That shows in advance where two-thirds of the Democrats committee's action. If when they come in they do not want were; and there were 50,000 Republicans on top of that. to vote for you or anybody else whose name is on the ticket, Three-fourths of them were for nie. There is the picture. · but want to express their own honeSt choice, will you permit What do you reckon happened then? Sep.ator BucK has them to write Heflin's name on the ballot and vote it? " been very glib in quoting what the newspaper · said, ··as has Mr. Bankhead said he would not. Senator BRATToN:· Newspaper reports following the primary

Then they said, "Suppose they do write it on, and he election said this vote and that was there. Let me tell you beats you in the primary ,-as I would have dorie, 3 or 4 what the newspapers said. With all the counties but one to 1-" will you, if he gets a majority, submit to his being heard from in the primary, and that a small county, Chocthe nominee and not ask yourself that you be certified. as taw, with a vote of less than 2,000, they said, "Banl¢ead the nominee?" Mr. Bankhead said, "No; I will not." has 81,000, Thompson 42,000, making 123,000 in all." And I

That is the trail of the serpent that is over it all; and yet give them 2,000 more from Choctaw. They would not have Senator BLACK would have you believe that Mr. Bankhead it, but I give "it to be fair, making 125,000 out of 340,000 had nothing to do with it. Senator BRATTON would have you Democrats, in the niost exciting and. bitter election held in believe that he had nothing to do with it. Why, he was my State in my lifetime. walking arounq with folded arms, an innocent abroad, in Did they announce the· results? No. What does the law the State when they were preparing to strike me down and provide?. That the Sta.te committee shall meet in the office politically assassinate me. All the while he looked on with of the .secretary of state at Montgomery. approval. I refer now to the report of Mr. Aarhus, investigator of

Senators, what occurred a little later on? After we saw the Nye committee; and, by the way, I want to say right that Pettus, the chi:l.irman, had announced in Chattanooga, here that Senator GEORGE and Senator BRATTON would not intimidating the supreme court, or seeking to do so, "If the consent for us to employ any employee of the Nye committee court does hold that Heflin's name shall go on the ticket, we to run down this evidence. Who else could run it down? have two other ways to keep him off "-that is, in the pro- U I had gone and consulted 50 men and. they told me how ceedings-what were they doing? They were admitting, as to get certain testimony, and then the opposition could they did all over the State-I could have shown it, and _m- deny me the right to go back and get it, ·who could pick tended to by 50 or 100 witnesses-that I would be nominated up the· lost trail and carry it through? But thiS is what if I got in, and the only way to keep nie out was to sfrike me Mr. Aarhus, one of the ablest and bravest and most honest down ruthlesslY, illegally, as they did. Mr. Bankhead had illvestigators who ever represented this . body in a field like n·otice that that primary was illegal. Senator ·BLACK, 'of tl:iat that, said. He said the executive committee did meet in the state, issued a strong statement showing beyond ·an ques- office of the secretary of state in the usual manner. tion that the primary was illegal and ·Un-Democratic arid ' The meeting was for some reason adjourned, and thereun-American. That is his language. Judge Anderton, an turn.S and records were taken to Selina; Ala.: by E. W. Pettus, able judge in Bb:.mingham, who is now a candidate against chairman of the State committee, and the returns were tab-

8922 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 ulated in the office of the tax assessor, and that to this date no public statement has been made as to the relative standing of each candidate. Not until September 1-from August 12-were the names of the successful -candidates made public, and then only the votes received by candidates for United States Senator and governor.

There is ring rule for you. There is bossism -and rank corruption gone mad. Why did they hold out those returns? Why did they not canvass them in the office of the secretary of state as of yore? They had to do some work on them. What was the matter? They said, "Heflin's followers have already repudiated the primary. Two hundred and odd thousand have stayed out of it. A hundred and twenty-five thousand have voted in it. We are beaten. The people will cry out 'You are already destroyed before the general election.' "

What did they do? Thompson wired Bankhead conceding his nomination--42,000 against 81,000. Then the boys decided that the vote had to be lifted up; it was rather feeble and weak. So they lifted it up and padded it; and when they wound up, they had nearly 200,000 participating in the primary, after weeks of working and maneuvering and figuring.

Then what occurred? Judge Horace Wilkinson wrote an open letter to the press of the State giving the figures, and he charged the State committee with padding the returns by over 40,000 votes, charged that they had lifted up the Bankhead vote. But they could not lift him without lifting Fred Thompson, because Fred did not want to be beaten 3 or 4 to 1. So they were good and kind-hearted; they would give Bankhead an increased vote, and they dropped a few over in Frederick's political pan. So they lifted his vote to about 57,000, and ran Bankhead away up yonder to one hundred and forty and odd thotWand, or something like that.

Judge Wilkinson charged that they had padded those returns. He gave the figures. They have not denied it to this day. That_ is the case they have here, which some of my friends were trying to railroad, and deny me a hearing over here on the Democratic side, men who ought to have known the inside facts about this case.

Now, I want to read a document appealing from Philip drunk to Philip sober, Senator BLAcK's statement. He declined to let my good friend Senator HAsTINGS read it to him the other day. You know, one of t:'le hardest jobs a man ever has in public life is trying to answer himself. This is what Senator BLACK said:

A study of the resolution convinces me the majority has acted in contravention of existing laws and statutes. The committee, in my judgment, has no legal authority to adopt one rule of qualifications for voters in the primary and another rule of qualifications for candidates In that primary. The rule must be uniform with reference to both. The law does not contemplate a special privileged class to run for office and a subordinate class who can vote but not hold office. Citizenship carries with it the right of an elector to vote and hold office. An attempt to abridge the sacred rights of citizenship 1s fundamentally un-American. If a citizen 1s barred as a candidate for political office, as party punishment, he must be barred as a voter. If barred as a voter, he must be barred as a candidate. This 1s clearly provided in section 612 of the Alabama Code of 1923, limiting the authority of the committee on this subject, as follows:

"All persons who are quallfied electors under the general election laws of this State shall have the right to participate in such primary elections, subject to such political or other qualifications as may be prescribed for its candidates." -

This law is not ambiguous. It is plain. It means what it says. A rule which bars a candidate bars a voter and vice versa.

He was ringing clear and true then. The Alabama Legislature evidently intended to protect ancient

constitutional liberties and privileges and prevent any small group from perpetuating a favored office-holding class over and above the average man. The committee did not wish to bar as voters those who failed to vote for Governor Smith. It 1s clear, however, that they have barred thousands of voters 1f they have barred them as candidates.

Listen to this: The courts should not be called upon to settle a question upon

which there can be no reasonable grounds for disagreements.

I commend that especially to the Senator from New Mexico [Mr. BRATTON], who looked so solemn the other day when he differed from this view.

Senator BLACK continued: It is a situation which calls for the best thought and action of -

all Democrats who respe.!t the ancient rights of citizenship and Who love the traditions and principles of the Democratic Party.

Senators, is not that a strong appeal for fair play and jitstice? How different that note sounds from the present utterances of my one-time friend who pleads the cause of the contestee on this occasion.

Then I added: Mr. Bankhead had read Senator BLACK's statement, and he had

notice from Judge Will1am H. Thomas, the only supreme court judge in Alabama who passed upon the merits of the case, and the primary provided for in Alabama by the State committee was 1llegal, null, and void, and Mr. Bankhead's name was never legally upon the senatorial ballot in Alabama.

Some Senators do not want to pass on this primary question. It must be passed on. I hope the Senate will have the courage to pass on it. I hope the buck will not be passed here, using the parlance of the street. I want Senators under their oaths to grapple with this problem and decide this question: Was that primary legal or illegal? We did not hesitate-myself among the number-to go after Frank Smith, a Republican. We did not hesitate to go after William Vare, a Republican. And I dare say, just speaking amongst ourselves, not to go any further, that if Bankhead had been a Republican, my friends over here on the Demo-' cratic side would have been almost solidly in favor of taking him out.

Who warned us against that thing called party spirit? George Washington, in his Farewell Address, warned against it. He said that party spirit was a most dangerous thing, _and that unless inspired by love of right principles, and a desire to promote clean and honest government, it led to all sorts of extravagances, of fraud and corruption, and would result in the destruction of human liberty. Washington warned us against that. When W. P. G. Harding, of the Federal Reserve Board, helped, with Wall Street, to bring on a panic in 1920, I was urged not to fight him because he was a Democrat and had been appointed by a Democrat.

My answer was that all crooks look alike to me, Democrats and Republicans. I led that fight single-handed and alone. When I started out there were four Senators with me in the fight-senator TRAMMELL, the able Senator from Florida, who, whether he agrees with you or not, has always had a sense of justice and fair play; Senator FLETCHER, of Florida, who has become an institution in that State, God bless him, the able, upstanding sta_tesman, he was with me; and Senator Simmons made the third that I recall. \Vhen I wound up that fight, there were 57 Senators who would not vote for Harding's confirmation. I drove him off of the Federal Reserve Board, and I am proud of the fight I made. It was one of the greatest in my career. I fight a crooked Democrat just as I fight a crooked Republican, and I want this case passed upon on its merits.

Senators, the primary was legal or illegal, and the Senate must decide. In the case of Parrish versus :Powers in Kentucky, Parrish· was nominated in the primary as the law required. The committee through another way put Powers's name on the ticket, a Democrat. Powers got the election and beat Parrish. Parrish contested. The Supreme Court of Kentucky held that Powers's name was never legally on the ticket; and although he got a majority of the votes cast, that Parrish was entitled to the office, and the court gave him the office.

We have legal processes in this country. We ought to have. We have law and order and legal methods of getting on the ticket, and-get this, Senator&-a nomination in my State is necessary to get on the legal ballot. You have to get on there as the law prescribes. If you hold, as the able Senator from California did on yesterday, and as the Senator from Delaware holds, that this primary was illegal, Mr. Bankhead takes his hat and goes back to the State and I

1932 -CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8923

serve in this body to which I was honestly elected in 1930, November 4.

Senators, there was never before a campaign like it in my State. We had a crusade. They could not buy the voters who were supporting me. The work was done at the election and after the election at the courthouse. There is where the skulduggery was done to me. Senator BLACK says that if all this crooked work went on, that I am accusing some of my managers. No; but I will tell you what I was advised of even before the election, that Bankhead's friends had some stalking horses saying they were for Heflin and if they were in there as managers he would get a fair count, and they got appointed managers for me. The Lord have mercy on me! Some of those fellows credited to me helped to steal the election for Bankhead.

Down at Tuscaloosa, where Judge Brandon is the probate judge, our witnesses swore that in the biggest precinct in the county, with six or seven boxes, a Democrat, my friend, was sitting in there with two Bankhead managers. They have three. This fellow was on the job and he was courageous and the election had not run over half an hour until they whispered around and called the judge out, and he said, "You come out of there," and he took him out and he put another man in, and Judge Wilkinson said, " Whom was the other man for?" He said he was a Bankhead man. That is the way I had a fair election-all three of them Bankhead men. I never had a manager in many of the places. Sometimes they gave me a clerk and called that representation, and the clerk sitting there with his eyes on the paper writing down names they called. He did not know whether they called them right or not. And so the game went on. They did the work in the general election that was started in the State executive committee and carried on in the primary.

N0w, what happened in the primary? Mr. Bankhead threw his hands up and hollered to the Nye committee that Thompson was spending a great deal of money, sending out literature to 400,000 voters. He wanted the committee to come down there and see if they could not stop Thorupson. The bunch that represented the State committee was too slick for anybody to catch them, but they wanted Thompson headed off. Then Mr. Bankhead was appealing for Federal interference, for which the Senator from Alabama [Mr. BLACK] has criticized me for asking the United States Senate to investigate the senatorial election in Alabama.

That is not all. In 1926, when Mr. BLACK was a candidate and Mr. Bankhead was running against him, he wrote a letter to the Reed special committee of the Senate, calling on them to come and investigate Mr. Bankhead and the others running against him, and was kind enough to say about Mr. Bankhead that it would not do any good to elect him; that if the Senate investigated him they would not seat him. In 1926 BLACK wanted help when the machine was in operation in my State. I have never courted its favor. I have fought it and always whipped it; and whipped it in 1930, and what did they say? "We do not care how big his crowds are. We do not care how many votes he gets. We have got the machinery, and we will get the election."

I have a number of witnesses here, Senators, who testified that they heard the Bankhead followers saying that they were going to steal the election from me. But before I get to that, I want to show you the most convincing thing in it all, if you needed anything to convince you that the primary of 1930 was illegal.

The Bankhead legislature, following that election, adopted an amendment giving the State committee the · power to fix two separate and distinct qualifications, one for candida~ and one for voter. They adopted that since the election of 1930. The statute now provides that the committee can have separate and distinct qualifications. Senators, as honest men, what conclusion are we to draw from that-honest, intelligent Senators-that they never had the power in 1930, but to make sure this time when they read me out again that they did have the power and to make sure if the ' Senate did declare the primary illegal that the statute as

now amended would stand hard and fast for such purposes in the future.

There never was as much skulduggery practiced in any single State that I know anything about. I will put those affidavits in, but here is the way they read. A witness says, "I heard So-and-so, a Bankhead supporter. say that Heflin will get the votes, but what they don't buy they will steal." We could have produced probably 500 witnesses over the State who would swear that--one of them from Judge Arthur Chilton, confirmed by this Senate not long ago as district attorney for the middle district of Alabama. He had come in from the field Saturday before the election on Tuesday. Mr. Tom Knight was then running for attorney general, and he had no opposition; we did not oppose the State ticket or the county ticket. We just had three candidates in the field. There were two or three county tickets out. Mr. Knight, the attorney general, said to Judge Chilton, " What do you think of the election? " He said, " Heflin's majority will be between 50,000 and 100,000. What did Mr. Knight say to that? He shook his head and said, " No; we have got the machinery and we know how to use it."

We expected to put Mr. Todd, a newspaperman, on the witness stand. He is sitting in the gallery now. We expected him to swear that Russell Kent, correspondent for the Montgomery Advertiser and the Birmingham News, supported Mr. Bankhead. He went to Alabama and came back two or three weekS before the election. He said, " They have not got a chance to beat Heflin. He will win his fight in a walk." He went back again and returned just a few days before the election. He said, "They have got it fixed. They are going to get him now."

Oh, Senators, you would not think all these things took place when you heard the speech of the Senator from Alabama-the junior Senator from A1abama-[Mr. BLACK], because I am entitled to the senior part of it myself. [Laughter.]

Senator BLACK told you that the State committee members had been reelected. Certainly. Whom did they have to run before? The same machine that read me out. It w.as the greatest machine arrangement you ever saw. Of course they were reelected in that circle where 125,000 Democrats operated and the other two hundred thousand and odd stayed out. We had nothing to do with it; we could not get in as candidate and refused to go in as voter. They would not let anybody in there to vote except the fellows who would vote for Bankhead. Of course they were renominated.

But it will not always be thus. If the Senate will do its duty, you will sound the death knell of that machine in my State. Human rights and liberties do not appeal to that machine. Right and justice have no place in their program. " Put it over! Put it over! " That is the slogan of that bunch. " Put down the coin." Do you know what I said all over that State? I said that I believed the ring spent $50,000 on that committee. I believe it, as God is my judgebought like sheep in the market place to barter away a man's rights. I have been in public life since my early young manhood, never obtained an office except through just, clean, and fair means, would spurn an office any other way. I have always fought in the open, and I have been rewarded by the people of my State. But when this effort was made to deprive tbem of their right to nominate me in their party, I unsheathed my sword and went into the field and fought them to the uttermost. Wpa~ happened?

In the last 19 days of the campaign this Bankhead bunch followed my speaking and kept close count of those who heard me, and they reported that 69,000 beard me in the last 19 days of the campaign. What do you suppose happened with their crowd? They were addressing 100 to 150 in the courthouse, and they were the same old fellows that went to all the meetings. They were like the fellow that Bill Howard, of Georgia, used to tell about in the House. The old fellow would get drunk every summer, and they would turn him oct of church and take him back and rebaptize him. They said they baptized him so often at the

8924 CONGRESSIONAL-RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 same place in the creek that all the old, horny-headed fish recognized him when he ca.rp.e back. [Laughter .J So they were the same fellows they mustered up to come in and hear the speakers and clap their hands, and everywhere I spoke they had to have an amplifier, and there was not a hall in the State that could hold them.

Fellow cit-fellow Senators, what did that mean? I was about to address you as " fellow citizens." Some of you will be soon. [Laughter.] There is nothing personal in that to either side.

What happened? Judge Wilkinson . and I went up to Gadsden. I was going to speak in the adjoining county. They had big placards saying the big guns, Bankhead and Miller would speak.

The radio was spreading the news out over seven or eight counties. The time for meeting arrived in a court room

• which seats about 480 people. There were about 435 in it, notwithstanding all this advertising over the radio and in the press. Judge Wilkinson and I sat in a hotel a hundred yards away. Mr. Bankhead was up speaking. He was telling them how grateful he was for this great outpouring of the people, talking over the ·radio to nine counties. Just. at that juncture the chairman, Jerome Fuller, an Alabama Power Co. man, jumped up and said, "Do not leave, gen:. tlemen; there are plenty of vacant seats in the rear." [Laughter.]

You have heard of hired funerals, have you . not, where, when a fellow dies, they employ mourners to walk behind the casket in the hearse? Well, that is what it looked like in that State. They had to get them up and drum them up to go out to a meeting. . .

How do you suppose they tantalized my forces-the brave crusading men and women of my State? They said, "We do not give ad-- how many votes he gets; he will not get the certificate of election." That is the atmosphere in which I made that fight. You know we got a lead on some of the work they were doing.. One of them was we got notes to the effect that they would "put me on the spot," and there was a big blue-pencil mark across that and in big letters," No." They were kind enough not to have me mur-

. dered. "No; do not assassinate him." Why? Do you want me to tell you why? They had already had notice from my side that if anything happened to me it would be "good-by"; and it would have been good-by to some of them.

This primary was cut and dried against me and for Mr. Bankhead. Mr. Bankhead ran against me in 1924. He wrote, I have been told, 15,000 letters with return postage and got back 11,000 telling him not to oppose me. He did not oppose me and I was nominated without opposition.

In 1928 I supported Hoover and Mr. Bankhead supported Smith. I said, " Give me a fair primary, and if the Democrats want to punish me for my course, I will take it like a man, with head erect and light upon my face"; but no; they said, " If you let him in, the Democrats will nominate him." That is what they have done; they have denied selfgovernment in my State; they have denied the right of Democrats to select the . candidate they wanted to select after inviting them into the primary to vote.

Senators will remember that in the old days of Rome, just before Rome tottered and fell amongst her beautiful hills and died, the decree went forth establishing two classes of people-the plebeians and the patricians. The patrician could vote and hold office, but the plebeian could only vote; he could not hold office. In Alabama they made me and those who supported Hoover . of the plebeian class. They said, "You can vote, but you can not ho1d office"; but to the others, the Bankhead group, including Senator BLACK, they said," You can vote and hold office." They set up that distinction in my State. It is un-American, undemocratic, unjust, unfair, inexcusable, and indefensible; that is what it is. Yet they tell you that it is all right; that the committee had a right to order any kind of primary. I was utterly astounded at the position taken by the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. BLAHTEJ. I do not see how a man of his ability could get off on the wrong foot so badly.

Senators do not understand the case. The Mayfield case is not at all like my case. What have they done in my case? Here [exhibiting], Senators, are the ballots. They are about from 14 to 16 inches long and ten inches wide. The have got the Democratic rooster and the Liberty Bell that we adopted as our emblem.

The slot in the ballot box was about from 4 to 4% inches long and less than a half-inch wide. In hundreds of instances those ballots were found just as clean and white as that [holding up a blank sheet of white paper], with the stubs untouched. no initials on them, folded in the middle, and lying in the box in sheaves. Could those ballots have been put into the box through the slot? No. How did they get in there? They got in there by the box being unlocked and they being put in by somebody who had no right to put them in. Those ballots are there in sheaves by the hundreds.

Vlhat are you going to consider that to mean-that they were trying to purify elections in my State; that they were sitting up of nights trying to give me a fair deal? Oh, how they did love me [laughter], when they were sitting up, losing sleep, monkeying with ballots and fixing them up for their dear friend, John H. Bankhead.

The State committee had ordained that he must be nominated; they manipulated it and fixed it. They ordained then that everybody should be whipped into line and I must be crushed. They saw that could not be done. In county after county the officials told them, " It is not worth while to fight him; he is going over." They said, "If you do not get into line "-listen-" If you do not get into line and help us to beat him, beat him any way, we will read you out. He is an independent running outside of the party." Before they got through with it they had the probate judge and the sheriff and the circuit clerk in 61 out of 67 counties openly, boldly, and brazenly supporting Mr. Bankhead and fighting me; and the word went down the line, " If you can not get it any other way, take it"; and they took it.

What else do we find? We find ballots by the hundreds folded Clean and tight. They had never been handled; they were lying in the boxes liloo that, in stacks [indicating]. What does that mean? That means that that box was fixed at the courthouse and swapped for the box that came in from the precinct. They are there; they speak for themselves. What does it mean? It means what I tell you.

Now, they marked many of these ballots, we find, like this. They were fixed in the pads. You do not vote that way. They tear off a ballot each time a man or a woman comes to vote, and the voter takes the ballot, marks it, and hands it in. These were fixed in the pads. I will show you what happened. They marked that ballot [indicating] in the circle under the rooster, and there is an indentation in the circle under the rooster on the next ticket, showing it was fixed and marked ·in the courthouse before the voters ever went to the polls. What did they do on the second ballot. They did not follow that course; they marked a cross mark in front of Bankhead's name. They alternated each tim.e. Do you know what the Bible says about that? It says: "Be sure your sins will find you out." So when you raise that ticket [indicating] the1·e is the indentation on the next ballot in front of Bankhead's name. Then they marked again under the rooster, and there is the indentation in the circle under the rooster, and on down we find that to be true. Senators, there never were as many varieties of methods employed to steal an election as were emplayed to steal this one from me.

I will tell you of another system which was employed. They changed a lot of the ballots that were for me by rubbing out the cross mark for me, and showing that a straight State ticket was voted, without voting for Senator. There were 5,000 of those. So I lost 5,000 votes by that method.

On tickets where the voters used a pencil mark for me, the mark has been erased. That is another method they employed. But this indentation business I am telling you about was smooth work. They never thought anybody would ever catch that up; but Judge Chilton, recently appointed district attorney, caught it. He took the first ticket off and, going to the light, saw that indentation on the second

1932 _CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8925 ticket, and so on. He traced I do not know how many That is what my sin consists o:f..:.._fighting for the good of hundreds of them. the people of Alabama, fighting for the good of the prin-

What else? These issues were not involved in the May- ciples of my party; not party machinery, crooked and cor- · field case; not at all. They have never been involved in rupt, but honest, clean, political principles in Alabama. anybody's else case that I know anything about. What do you suppose they did during that senatorial cam- '

Senator BLACK says that I failed to take steps to keep paign? They turned citizens down on jobs. They would Senator Bankhead's name off the ticket in the general elec- ask them, "Who are you going to vote for-Heflin or Bank- , tion. Senators, how weak and miserable is that argument! head?" "Heflin." "Nothing doing!" If the primary was void, it is dead; dead from the beginning. What did they do when the election was over? The govI could not breathe life into it if it was illegal-not voidable, ernor's office had printed a questionnaire that was given to but void; and it was. A supreme court judge said it was. every man and woman who applied for a job in the highSenator BLACK says it was. I did not have to take any steps. way department, where the Federal Government furnishes The law would not recognize a void thing, and the Senate half the money to build roads. The fifth question was, "For certainly will not recognize a void thing. His nomination is whom did you vote for Senator in 1930?" The State govnot worth 5 cents. After all they have done to procure his ernment's machinery has been drawn into this matter, and nomination and election it falls flat; it has not a leg to stand they are making people disclose the secrecy of their ballots, on-not one. and tell the machine fellows how they voted. That is what

Now, what else? The certificates of election. There must happened; and when people said they voted for me, they be three of them, one of which is sealed and sent to the said, "There is nothing doing." probate judge. What is that for? It is to be used if the One fellow down in Randolph County-my native countyC'ne returned to the canvassing board is lost or not -presented. a preacher with two or three children, asked them to give Another one must be posted at the polling place. But what him work. He and his family were about to starve. Their do we find? We find Mi. Bankhead's friends saying that highway man, who supported Bankhead, told him, "We they had to go into these ballot boxes to get the certificate have got your number. You will not get any work from of election. The law in my State does not require that; it us"; and this man of God was turned away. There is is not done. He says that is why these boxes were ·opened. nothing so pitiless and cruel as this machine in my State. Senator BLACK emphasized to you that there were 900 boxes Now, I want to touch on the question of absentee ballots out of 2,043 that were sealed when the agents of the Senate for a moment. -got them. Well, what does that mean? It disputes the I have · written to several States to find out how many other proposition that they had to open them in order absentee ballots were cast in 1930. The secretaries of to get the certificates of election. How did they get those state write me that the only way to get that information certificates of election? Answer that. How did they get the is from the counties, and I did not have time to do that; certificates of election from the 900 boxes that were sealed but I got them from Arkansas, most of them-half of them. when we got them? Is not that an interesting point? One There are 75 counties. Forty counties voted 1,200 absentee of two things happened. They got the certificate as the law ballots, making about 2,400 for the State out of 75 counties. requires, sent separately to the canvassing board and to the Arkansas has seven ~embers of Congress and we have nine. probate judge, or they had been fixed and sealed and locked There is that difference in population. How many do you at the courthouse already to be turned over to the agents of suppose they voted in Alabama for Bankhead? More than the Senate when they went down there. ten thousand!

Now, Senators, if you recall when I brought this contest I challenge Mr. Bankhead, Senator BLACK, or anybody to your attention here in January, 1931, I said I wanted else to show me another Southern State that ever in its these ballots seized as quickly as possible. Senator BLAC;K whole history voted as many as half that number. You took the position that the boxes were not being opened. can not do it! You can not do it! · You will remember that little colloquy we had. I in- Senators, there never was such a dragnet arrangement sisted they were opening them, that they were going into sent out to get in absentee ballots. Why, we showed by three the boxes. They had notice of my contest at midnight on or four witnesses that they employed a man in Shelby the night of the election. As soon as it dawned on us that County to go into Jefferson County, where Birmingham is; they h::td stolen the election in 57 counties out of 67 I gave and get up a hundred and odd names, applications signed, notice of a contest; and Senator BLACK said "No." He sent sworn to, absentee ballots fixed, and returned up there in a telegram or two down there to resent this " reflection " wholesale. That is not disproven. It is not disputed. They that I was making on the State. went out after them everywhere; and in their enthusiasm

Oh, how he and Senator Bankhead have grown enthusias- and anxiety to get votes for Mr. Bankhead what do you tic about how I was" reflecting" on the State! I am notre- reckon they did? They went to New Orleans and voted a fleeting on the State. God knows I would not reflect on that woman who never knew that she was being voted. She lived dear State. I was born in it, and in its sacred soil sleep the in Bullock County, Ala., 14 years ago-15 years, now. She remains of my ancestors. That State has honored me with - had been living in Louisiana all these years and is a voter nearly every office within its gift, and I am not through yet. there. We sent out questionnaires and this woman got one. The people of that State have been for me. They have been "Did you request a ballot?" It is against the law to provide kind and generous to me. Reflect on that State? No! I them without a written request in my State. "D.id you would give my life to protect its good name and its honor. request this absentee ballot? Did you get one? If so, for I am fighting for my State. whom did you vote?" "I never requested one. I never re-

I am fighting for the humble factory girl who stands all ceived one. I never voted. I am not a voter in Alabama." day at the loom and weaves, who was intimidated by the And yet her ballot is over yonder now in the sacred bosses of the mill to vote for Bankhead against me. I am ballot box, marked for John H. Bankhead for United States fighting for the boys who wear lamps on their caps and go Senator! And yet the Senator from Alabama, Mr. BLACK, down in the bowels of the earth to dig coal and iron. I am tells you that we have had opportunity to prove this and fighting for the farmer in the furrowed field, the merchant, that and we have not done it! I answer him by saying the clerk in the store. I am fighting for the school-teachers, there are 1,500 witnesses, and maybe more, that I would who were browbeaten in wholesale fashion, telling them they have called to show the most corrupt condition that ever got their jobs from the Democrats, and if they did not vote existed in any State in a senatorial election. for Bankhead they would lose them. I am fighting for a He told you I had this information, or a chance to correct fair deal for these people all down the line. I am fighting these names as marked for Bankhead and me, since Sepfor the day when the voters can walk up to the polls un.:. tember·. Let me tell you what occurred. afraid, unintimidated, undisturbed, cast their votes, and The appropriation gave out in August, and Congress did express their free will at the ballot box in every precinct in not meet until December. We could not do a thing. We my State. could not take testimony; and those working on the ballots \

LXXV--562

8926 CONGRESSIONAL ·RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 'here worked on without their salaries until Congress could If you do not want to say that the primary was illegal and convene. 'Ihat is how we have been handicapped. T'.aen that Bankhead should be unseated and I should be seated, I told you what occurred at Birmingham, when they stopped that it was tied up with the corruption and stealing of the us, shut us off, under the suggestion of Senator GEORGE and general election, refer it to the people of my state, where we Senator BRATTON; and Senator Black has never protested will have to have a special election in three months, and against that, nor has Mr. Bankhead. I really think, just let the people of Alabama say. That will settle this question between us, it was done at the instance of Mr. Bankhead, the once and for all; and with the skullduggery that they have contestee. practiced down there, and the people being acquainted with

The contestant has rights. He has a right to have a it, it will be exceedingly hard for them to repeat it and then fair deal. Senator BLACK said in the beginning that he the places that know the contestee now would soon know him wanted a thorough investigation if they were going to no more forever. What is wrong in that proposition? have one. '\Ve have not had it; and he was making his Mr. President, I am not going to. be able to close in 15 final speech the other day, when I do not suppose he had minutes. any idea that I would have a chance to say a word in The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The time of the contest-the Senate. ant will expire at 2.10 o'clock.

What did Mr. Aarhus say in his report? It is in my Mr. HEFLIN. I wonder if I could get a half hour more? letter to the committee, begging for time and money to Mr. NORRIS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent take the evidence. What did 1\fr. Aarhus say? He said that the limitation of two hours be dispensed with, and that Logan Martin, the brother of the president of the Ala- Mr. Heflin be allowed to conclude his remarks. bama Power Co., was present in a. meeting when Mr. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection? The Bankhead's candidacy was indorsed · for the Senate. Chair hears none, and that order will be entered. Mr.

What else did Mr. Aarhus say? I am prepared to put Heflin will proceed. [Manifestations in the galleries.] upon the witness stand 300 reputable witnesses to estab- The Chair must admonish the occupants that they are lish almost universal corruption in the State. I have not here by the courtesy of the Senate and must maintain had a chance to take a line of that testimony. I could order. not get Mr. Aarhus. Senators GEORGE and BRATTON Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I appreciate this courtesy would not let us have anybody who had had anything to and kindness on the part of a man with whom I have served do with the Nye committee. for many years in both branches of Congress, and I am writ-

My God, Senators! Does it not come with bad taste ing a chapter about him in my book, "Courage and Cowfor them to stand up here~ as the Senator from New ardice in Congress." [Laughter.] "Courage and Cowardice Mexico did yesterday, and tell you that I had had ample in Congress "-a euphonious title, and it will be a truthful opportunity to be heard, and had gone into all these document when I get through with it; and I am drawing a things, when you had not heard a word about what I very good picture of the Senator from Nebraska. I saw him have been telling you to-day, and you never would have when he first commenced to fight "Cannonism" in the heard it if I had not been permitted to speak? It is House. He was a progressive, able, brave fighter then, and unfair to me. It is unfair to the people of the state. It is he has kept it up all down the line. I believe he is about the unfair to the Senate. It is unfair to the Government. only one I know of who has been right on the trail all the If you put yourselves on record as approving this bastard time, the old " strike " dog from Nebraska. ' primary in my State, you have sanctioned that sort of Mr. President, there are many things that I will not have rotten, corrupt conduct for other States. You have set time to touch on, and I am not going to impose upon the a dangerous precedent. Senate any longer than I have to. I want to cite the Senate

The way for you to put down this sort of business is to to an editorial from the Southern Labor Review, published stamp it out now. The time to treat a cancer is in its at Birmingham. I do this because the minority report of incipient state. The time to treat disease is as soon as you Senators GEORGE and BRATTON of the subcommittee quotes find it has hold of you. Kill it out. Say to every man who an editoTial from it following the election in 1930, and runs for the Senate," We want that office open to the hum- that editorial said that the election wa.s over, that it was fair blest boy, whether he is a rail splitter like Abe Lincoln"- and that we should all accept the results and go on down the great humanitarian statesman who walked from the rail- the road rejoicing. That was before they knew what had splitter's place in the woods to the highest office in the gift been carried on in the nighttime on the night of the election of the greatest people in all the world. "We want that and in the days that followed all over the State. office open to them. Let them aspire to it. Do not let This is what they wrote a year from that time: somebody tell them, 'It is useless for you to run. The ma- [From the Southern Labor Review, December 2, 1931] chine is for this man,' or ' the machine is for that man.' " THE SENATORIAL siTUATION

They are already telling them in my State, those who have Next Monday wm bring the Hefiin-Bankhead contest before the courage and independence of spirit, "You had better take United States Senate. The eyes of the Nation will be focused on

t · ill th the Democrats in that body more especially. warning from what we did o Heflin. We W do e same It 1s the duty of every Senator, but more especially the Demo-thing to you "; and the result of it is to cow, to stifle, to crats, to see that no one becomes a Member of that body who stamp out the spirit of courage and true Americanism that obtained his certificate of election through law violation or fraud we have in this country. or corruption. The Senate and the Senate alone can drive fraud

It makes not much difference to you, as far as individ- and corrupt practices from senatorial elections by stopping the beneficiaries of such practices at the door of the Senate.

uals are concerned, whether Bankhead serves or I serve. The Senate in recent years has shown itself to be keenly sensiThe country could get along without either one of us; but tive on this all-important question. It has courageously chal-

G d 1 h h d ds k · thi ffi tl lenged and rebuked political crooks and corruptionlsts by holding my o · ow muc epen on eepmg s 0 ce spo ess, their candidate at the threshold of the Senate. Democrats con-clean, far above the crowd of corruptionists and the miasma tributed mat~rlally to those results. The purity of the ballot and of the plain. Hold it aloft and say, "If you aspire to that the integrity of tbe ballot box must be preserved inviolate. At a office, if you come into this body, you must come with clean time wben Democracy is making a bid for national confidence the hands. There must not be a spot on your certificate, and country will await with interest the attitude of Democrats toward

the Alabama situation. Democrats and Republicans alike should not a rotten thing in your record of election." When you stand solidly against the man and the forces that seek to obtain a do that, you will serve your country. seat in the Senate by 1llegal and unlawful methods and the prac

Do you know what happened in the Frank Smith case? tice of fraud, coercion, and corruption in senatorial elections. The Alabama senatorial contest is between two Democrats

You served notice on the money kings, "You can buy the Senator J. Thomas Heflin and Mr. John H. Bankhead. office, but you can not have it." What effect does that have? It wm be interesting to observe in this case whether Democratic "We will not put up the money, because they will not let us Senators are as willing to bar a Democratic holder of a certificate have the office if we bUY it." That is the answer to it, and of election as in the pa.st they have been willing to bar a Repub-

lican in similar circumstances. that is the appeal that is coming. to you to put this thing Mr. Bankhead's nomination and election were notoriously illegal, down every time it shows its h,ead. . • high-handed, and corrupt. The Nation will be interested in what

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8927 course Democratic Senators wi11 now take. It seems to us that they should show as much-yes; and more--anxiety to punish corruption when their own party is concerned than when .the charges involve the opposing party.

I have taken that position myself. It is my duty to drive crooked Democrats out, not to shield and harbor them; to keep my party clean. When I do that, I am serving my party and serving the country.

I ask again, suppose a Republican .had come here as Mr. Bankhead did, under a primary law violated as he has violated the primary law in Alabama, and it could be shown that the ballot boxes were in the hands of Republican supporters all over the State, that they had opened and entered them, that ballots were not self-proving, that some were numbered and sorne unnumbered; what do you reckon would have been done? Again I say, just between us, they would have voted him out of here before breakfast. I would have voted to turn him out myself, whether Democrat or Republican. If you show me that they opened ·over half the ballot boxes in a State, when the law required them to be sealed and locked and kept inviolate, to be used in a contest, opened up and displayed, as they were deposited on the night of the election, I would vote to turn him out. He has no business here. That is the situ~tion to a "T" right here to-day.

Yet my one-time friend, Huco BLACK, stood up here and told you they were not opening any ballot boxes down there. I do not think Senator BLACK really knew they were doing that. He did not know. He is just like a lot of good people down there who said to me, " Tom, I went down and voted and everything looked all right. I did not see them stealing any ballots and running off with them. I think the election was fair." I said, " They do not do it that way. They work in the night time, when you sleep. They call the ballots off wrong and the clerks put them down, and when they get through doing that, they tally up what the clerks have put down, and the ballots are put in the boxes and the tally sheet or the certificate shows 350 for Bankhead and 150 for me, and the ballots will show 400 for me and 100 for Bankhead. They are in the boxes. One certificate is put up outs~de. The other is sent to the courthouse, and the ballot box lS opened to . make the ballots correspond with the certificate." I said, "Is not that nice? " That is what happened ~o me, a thousand and odd ballot boxes opened and burglarIZed. Yet the Senator from Alabama [Mr. BLACK] just waves that aside and says," Why, just minor irregularities." It is a violation of the law, and there is a $500 fine for these violations. There are hundreds of them.

The Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. BLAINE] just waved that aside as being merely directory. Senators, directory statutes never carry a penalty. When a statute carries a penalty it is a mandatory act, and these are mandatory acts not directory. '

I suppose they would say, "Well, what is stealing ballots among friends?" [Laughter.] They needed the ballots, they knew where they were, they knew how to fix them and they did fix them. That is what happened. '

Here is an editorial from down there in south Alabama which shows just the situation. This paper could not be biased. . It has nothing, to do with the contest, except as it throws hght on a rotten condition in this matter in the state The editorial reads: ·

In looking over the names In beat 7-

This is down in Geneva County-In looking over the names in beat 7 we found the name of our

old friend, E. S. Sheehan, who used to work in the News-Herald office. He has been dead about five years. This put us to thinking, and upon further investigation we found the names of nine persons whom we remember to be dead. On the same it£Jt 1n beat 7 we found the names of 25 persons who do not reside 1n the county, and 25 others who do not reside in the State; some of them have been gone 10 years or more.

We do not think we are sufficiently acquainted ln beat 7 to detect the names of all who are dead or all the absentees· but on the basis of the number we detected we estimate that ·1~ the published list for the whole county are the names of 60 dead people and the names of 334 nonresidents----394-enough to hold the balance of power in the usual election in th,ls county.

That is in a little county, and that condition existed in 1930, and those people were voted in that election. -That

condition obtained all .over the State. They have not purged th~ polling lists in years and years and years. The case of the Louisiana woman shows that. She left Bullock County 14 years ago, but they are still voting her in Alabama, and she does not even know it. They are so rude and discourteous they do not even let a lady know when she is voting an absentee ballot in an election in my State. [Laughter.]

Senators, it is worse than you thought it was. Senator BRATTON and Senator BLACK told us that this would have to be a state-wide conspiracy; that these things seemed to be general. Certainly; that is our contention. They never intended to steal in a few counties and leave the others alone. They worked the system out. It is the smoothest scheme on record. Of course, they worked it out. Listen! Senator BLACK stood here and showed you how in north Alabama Bankhead got fifty-odd per cent of the votes and I got forty-odd per cent; in south Alabama he got fifty-odd per cent and I got forty-odd per cent; in east Alabama he got fifty-odd per cent and I got forty-odd per cent, and in the western part he got fifty-odd per cent and forty-odd per cent were for me.

Do you not know that it takes a smooth fellow in arithmetic to do that? People were voted just as they wanted to vote them. In some places it would be almost solid for me and a light vote for Bankhead, and in other places vice versa; but fifty-odd and forty-odd all over the State. . They got tr~t idea from the gambling machines. You go mto one of these gambling establishments and drop a quarter or half a dollar or a dollar in, you turn a crank, and your money is gone. A .fellow will say, "I will · try that again," and puts in another half dollar and cranks the machine, and that half dollar is gone. The proprietor says, "Ke_ep o~; your luck will change after a while." He keeps feedmg his quarters and halves in until finally it will shell out 75 cents to him. He gets it .and says, "My golly, I had better go before they take my clothes." [Laughter.]

That is what happened in Alabama with the machine. The gambling house always wins. You win sometimes a little but when the day is done and the machine is waited on and the money t~ke.n out, the house makes money every day. Why? Because It IS a machine that will not let the house lose· and that is the kind of a machine they had for Bankhead and Heflin. They had it fixed so that whatever the vote was it was running true to form in the four sections. Bankh~ad was always on top and I was on the bottom. But in the actual ballots cast I was on top. When they counted out the ballots Bankhead was winner.

Senators, it was the quietest situation following that election that you ever witnessed. No drum beat or sounding of the fife there. All was quiet and calm. You could see the Bankhead followers grouped around the courthouses. They were not clapping their hands for joy; they were not hurr~g ~nd celebrating. They were quiet, whispering around m little knots and groups; there was no rejoicing.

They phoned from all over the State to me and to Judge Wilkinson at Birmingham, "We never saw anything like it. The other side is not rejoicing; there is no handclapping no cheering and applauding." And old man Reese, do~ at ~u~w. Ala., wrote me a letter that explains it. He said:

Did you ever know of a thief going down the street in possession of stolen goods hollering about it?"

. That is the situation we had. They had stolen it, and they did not holler. Then what? They said: "Now, Tom, you are a brave warrior. You made a good fight. You ought to be satisfied getting 100,000 votes on an independent ticket." I said," Yes; I got over 200,000." They said," If you will be a good fellow and take your medicine, we will be back with you in 19:>2. You go out March 4, 1931, and just rest until 1932, and there will be no trouble at all. We will just put you right over." I would not accept the deal.

They said," Bankhead has 50,000 majority. You will have a hard time overcoming that." I said, "Yes; they could have given him .100,000 and got the votes from where they got the 50,000, JUSt as easy as they could have given him 50,000. I am going to take it to the Senate. We have a place, thank God, where sworn men· from sovereign States

8928_ CONGRESSIONAL- RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 of the Union will go to the bottom of it~ I am going to have the ballot boxes taken to Washington. I am going to take the election papers up there. I am going to have a thorough investigation, and when it 1$ over you will be · vindicated, ,I will be vindicated, and Mr. Bankhead and his crowd will be repudiated."

But what have we had done? Shut off before our case is more than one-third finished, denied the right to produce rebuttal evidence, or to go on taking testimony to prove the things we had laid out to prove. That is the situation we have.

I want to read a line about the law on mandamusing. Senators, you who are interested in this law proposition, listen to this statute from Alabama. Section 549 of the Alabama Code provides as follows:

No jurisdiction exists in or shall be exercised by any judge, court, or officer exercising chancery powers to entertain any cause or proceeding for ascertaining the legality, conduct, or results of any election except so far as authority to do so shall be specially and specifically enumerated and set down by statute; and any injunction, process, order, or decree from any court, judge, or officer in the exercising of chancery powers, whereby the results of any elections are sought to be inquired into, questioned, or affected, or whereby any certificate of election is sought to be inquired into or questioned, save as may be specially and specifically enumerated and set down by statute, shall be null and void, and shall not be enforced by any officer or opeyed by any .person; and should any judge or other officer hereafter undertake to fine or in anywise deal with any person for disobeying any such prohibited injunction, process, order, or decree, such attempt shall be null and void-

That is the State statute reply to Senator BLACK-and an appeal shall lie forthwith therefrom to the supreme court then sitting, or next to sit, without bond, and such proceeding shall be suspended by force of such appeal, and the notice to be given of such appeal shall be five days.

WhY, Mr. President, you can not get out a mandamus in my State against a primary. That matter was all discussed in the conference where Senator BLACK sat and they agreed that injunction was the process, and that was employed. One supreme court judge sustained it, and the other four merely passed the question by by saying they had no Jurisdiction over the case.

There is. another matter I want to bring to your attention. Here is a letter from Judge Wilkinson, my chief counsel, to me, April 24:

The press reports of debates in the Senate indicate that some attention is being paid to the proposition that you did not take any steps through the courts to prevent Mr. Bankhead's name from being on the ba,llot in the general election, or rather I should say that Mr. Bankhead's supporters are apparently stressing that proposition. I do not believe that any lawyer who has studied the case would claim- that there is any merit in that suggestion.

First, get it clearly before the Senate that under the law of Alabama nomination is a condition precedent to the appearance of one's name on the ballot. This is not the law in many States of the Union. It is the law of Alabama. It does not make a particle of difference whether anybody raises the question before the election. The law raises the question at all times and under all circumstances. There 1s no authority of law for placing a person's name on the ballot in a general election unless the person whose name was printed on the ballot was nominated in one of the·ways prescribed by the statute of the State.

Section 462 of the Code of Alabama is the sole authority for omcials in Alabama printing the names of persons on the ballot in a general election. That section of the code limits the authority of the omcer to cause to be printed on the ballot to the names of persons who have been nominated in one of the ways prescribed by statute. If Mr. Bankhead was not nominated in the way and manner prescribed by statute, then there was no authority of law for printing his name on the ballot in the general election. There was not only no authority for printing his name on the ballot but it was a violation of law to do so.

Mr. President, I shall include the remainder of that letter in my remarks.

The matter referred to is as follows: Second. If Mr. Bankhead's nomination was void, because he

was not nominated in the kind of a primary recognized by the laws of the State, as Judge Thomas so aptly expressed it, then no action or failure to act on your part could impart any vitality to a thing that never came into existence.

Judge Thomas very clearly holds, on page 267 of the Two hundred and twenty-first Alabama Reports, "that the primary election ·called is not the kind-of primary that may be held under the law and at public expense in the State of Alabama." If the Senate agrees with that, and it must do so or repudiate Senator BLACK,

who agreed with Judge Thomas, and Judge Anderton, who .supported Mr. Bankhead and who is now running against Senator BLAcK, then Mr. Bankhead was not nominated. The alleged pri_mary was an abortive affair. No nomination could come from it.

Not having been nominated, the law denied Mr. Bankhead a place on the ticket in the general election.

To argue that any failure on your part to prevent his name from being printed on the ticket affects the matter one way or the other, is to argue that your conduct must determine whether Mr. Bankhead's name was lawfully on the ballot in the general election, instead of the law of the land determining that fact.

It was up to Mr. Bankhead to get his name lawfully on the ticket or suffer the consequences of his failure so to do. You had a right to get your name on the ticket and run as a candidate before the people. Your candidacy did not in any way amount to a waiver of Mr. Bankhead's failure to get his name on the ticket. You could not waive it if you wanted to. The law and not some candidate determines whether a man's name is lawfully printed on the ballot. A failure to obj~ct does not change the proposition .tn any way. A thing that is void is void. Mr. Bankhead was either lawfully on the ballot or he was not lawfully on the ballot, and no conduct on your part can properly be looked to in determining whether his name was lawfully printed on the ballot. What the law said he must do, and what he in fact did, are the factors that settle that question.

You w111 of course make it plain that in every speech you made in Alabama you ·challenged the lawfulness - of Mr. Bankhead's nomination, and his right to have his name printed on the ballot in the general election. Mr. Bankhead was advised by Judge Anderton that any election held under the resolution adopted in December, 1929, "would necessarily be declared null and void on insistence of the party discriminated against " (pp. 49-50 my original brief).

Third. The Senate should be informed of that line of authority holding that a contest of the election is the only way in which this kind of a question can be raised. I do not have those authorities at hand, but I recall some of them in my investigations in the Supreme Court library at_ Washington. Courts have expressed themselves as being reluctant to stop the printing of a name on a ticket, as cases involving questions of that kind come up during the heat of a campaign and quite frequently the time · for deliberation is . very short.

Mr. Bankhead was nominated in August 1f he was nominated at all. Our supreme court was in vacation and did not resume until the last of October or early in November. It would have been an impossibility for you to have gotten a case through the supreme court between the date following the primary, when a certification of his name was attempted, and the date of the general election. I mention that to show the soundness underlying the rule referred to.

It is considered the better practice to decide these questions afterwards rather than before the election. For that reason you will find the authorities holding that a contest is the approved way of determining the lawfulness of a nomination, or rather that the lawfulness of a nomination is one of the things proper for determination in a contest.

Don't lose sight of the fact that every voter in Alabama was denied the right to write or stamp your name on the primary ballot, by an official ruling of the chairman of the committee.

The Senate should be impressed with the fact that the Democrats of the State were denied the right to nominate you and that you were denied the right to become a candidate.

It is as clear as the noonday sun that Mr. Bankhead was never nominated and for .that reason could not have been elected.

Elections derive their force and effect from conformity to law, not from the fact that so many persons participated in a performance that was called an election. There is no such thing as a voluntary election or a de facto · election. An election is valid or void. There is no middle ground. For that reason the alleged primary election was void, and being void it could not become the basis of a valid election in November following.

With best wishes, yours sincerely, · HORACE C. WILKINSON.

Mr. HEFLIN. We have heard much said here about there being no fraud and corruption in this election. Mr. President, we do not have to prove that a person was out buying votes to show there was corruption in the election. There are other ways to show fraud and corruption. Opening and going into ballot boxes in violation of the law is corruption. You are corrupting the very sources of the election power, the ballot box itself, with the ballots sealed and locked within it. When they break and go into that they are doing it for a purpose. They are guilty of fraud and corruption when they do that.

I think I have shown beyond question that Senator Bankhead bad knowledge of all that was done regarding the primary and was a party to it and is the beneficiary of it. Now, I want to discuss another phase briefly. I can only touch upon the different phases.

They said that · some of my own witnesses said, " Yes; the election was fair." "Were you there when the votes were

-1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8929 counted? " " Yes." " And it was fair and square? " "Yes." On cross-examination Judge Wilkinson asked, "Were you where you could see the names that were on the ballots?" "No, sir." "Then you do not know whether he was calling them correctly or not?" "No, sir." "You heard them called and if you were clerk you put them down?" "Yes, sir.'' "And they counted up what you ha!i on the sheet?" "Yes, sir." "Then you do not know of your own knowledge whether the names were called off the ballots right or not?" "No, sir.'' "Who called them?" "One of the managers.'' "Who was he?" "He was a Bankhead man."

Not in one instance in the whole State have we been able to find where a Heflin manager or representative called off the ballots. Senators, that is significant. If they wanted a fair deal they would have said, "Heflin has already given notice that if this election is stolen he is going to contest it. We want it to be so fair and clean and just that he will have no ground. Let this thing be fair. John Jones, you are a Heflin manager, call off these ballots. Then when you get through with them roll them as the law provides and seal them and lock them, and when we go to get them we will find them in that condition.'' That would have been fine. That is the way to hold an election. That is the way to have the proof so it will mean something when you bring it here. What is a ballot worth in a box that is opened when you bring it here? You can not tell who voted it. There were 58,000 not numbered at all. Half the others were numbered in some fashion and the other half unnumbered. How does that happen? Some were numbered with pencil and some with ink. How does that happen?

The law provides that they shall be numbered in ink, not that they shall be voted in ink. That impression has been made here, but it is not true. You can vote with pencil if you want to, or with pen and ink, but you have to number them with_ ink. Why? Because you can not erase an ink figure like you can a pencil figure. It was done to prevent the ballot-box . thieves from manipulating the election. That was the purpose of that provision. Now they stand here and do not deny they did not number them in ink. They say they numbered them in pencil and it does not make any difference. The law says it does, but these Senators say it does not. Which are you going to accept, the law or Mr. Bankhead's partisan supporters in this body? That is the question.

I want to cite to you some of this testimony and just what it means. Mr. Evins asked if the ballots were counted correctly. "Yes, sir." Then Judge Wilkinson cross-examined him.

Mr. WILKINSGN. You don't know whether the results were cor-rect or not?

Mr. DEMoTr. I know what they called out. Mr. WILKINSON. You took the results of what they called out? Mr. DEMOTT. I took the results of what they called out; yes, sir. Mr. WILKINSON. You could not see how the tickets were marked

as they were called? Mr. DEMOTT. No, sir. Mr. WILKINSON. Who called out the ballots in the box? Mr. DEMoTr. Grover Hancock. Mr. WILKINSON. Was he a Bankhead man? Mr. DEMoTr. Well, I don't know. I don't know how Grover voted,

but my supposition of it is that he was a Bankhead man. Arguments we got out of him once in a while, I suppose he was. I wouldn't think he would be for the other fellow.

Mr. WILKINSON. Did he argue for Bankhead? Mr. DEMOTI'. Yes, sir.

Then, again, Mr. Evins asked the question: Mr. EviNs. Were you present when the vote was counted? Mr. CooNER. Yes. Mr. Evms. Who called the ballots out? Mr. CooNER. I think Mr. Legree, manager for the Bankhead

Democratic ticket (seep. 617, book C), called the most of them. Mr. EvrNs. Did you look at them? Mr. CooNER. I saw them, but I did not look at every ticket; but

so far as I know, that box was all right. Mr. WILKINSON. The man that called the ballots that night was

a Bankhead supporter, wasn't he? Mr. CooNER. Supposed to be.

Then the next-this is from Senator HAsTINGs's minority views:

I refer next to section 3 of yoUT report-

This is Mr. Hampton's statement about that report-.. Efforts by corporations to influence their employees," to which I think the contestant has clear ground for exception.

We take exception to Senator HASTING's report on this particular point.

You state that there were i7 witnesses who testified that certain corporations were endeavoring to influence their employees to vote for Mr. Bankhead, but that you were not greatly impressed witli these charges. I am fo~ced to believe that the synopsis of the testimony which was submitted to you for the purpose of your report must not have clearly stated the substance of the testimony With reference to this charge. I hope that you and the committee wlll not be content until you read the testimony itself upon this point. To show you how impressive the testimony indeed was and just how outrageous were the conditions portrayed by the witnesses, I w111 refer briefly to the testimony of Mr. J. A. Greene, who voted in beat 21, Walker County-

That is Mr. Bankhead's home county-and who testified as to the pressure, influence, and intimidation brought to bear in Mr. Bankhead's behalf by the Alabama ByProducts Co., operating in that locality. The election there was held in the otfice of the Alabama By-Products Co. Mr. Greene's testimony begins at page 54 in book A. He was a watcher for the independent ticket headed by Senator Heflin. He testified that Mr. Miller, engineer for the Alabama By-Products Co., was one of the managers of the box. That Mr. Sherrod. commissary manager for the Alabama By-Products Co., was one of the managers of the box. That a man named Harve Davidson was known there as the "pistol man" for the Alabama By-Products Co., and acted as one of the managers and as the officer at the election, and stayed. around the polls talking and generally assisting in holding the election. That Davidson was what 1s generally known there as a "compa,ny deputy "-that is, that he had been appointed a deputy sheriff in the employ of the Alabama By-Products Co. He was known as the "pistol man," presumably because he went armed. With a pistol. The witness Greene stated that he presented at the polls his written appointment as a Heflin watcher and it was received by this " pistol man " for the Alabama By-Products Co., Harve Davidson, but that he, Greene, was not recognized and no attention was paid to his appointment as a watcher.

Yet you are told that I had representation at all these places.

Testimony upon this point was as follows: "Mr. WILKINSON. All right; now what happened when you pre

sented your watcher's certificate there? "Mr. GREENE. Well, not anything, except they just didn't appear

to pay any attention to. it; that 1s all."

Then Mr. Hampton said: The witness Greene further testified that the company deputy,

the "pistol man " of the Alabama By-Products Co., who was helping bold the election, cursed him and told the witness Greene that if he, the witness, was going to vote for Heflin he might "get his junk off of the company's land, pasture, fences, and all."

And yet Senators are told what a sweet, nice, balmy day election day was and how everything went off smoothly, with no intimidation, no coercion, no f1·aud, no corruption. Yet here is the " pistol man " lording it over the people at the polls and telling this man who was supporting me to get "his junk off the company's property," driving him away from the polls. That is what happened down there; and yet Senator BLACK says that Senator Heflin has had time to show corruption and fraud and intimidation and he has not done it. Well, here is a sample of it that we plucked down there in six days' examination of some of the witnesses. We were told on the evening of the second day that we would have to quit in three more days. We happened to get them to agree to give us four days, and then we had to dismiss hundreds of witnesses without even touching the bulk of our testimony in middle and south Alabama, which is still untouched, still ready to be produced to establish my case and close it in due and legal form. Th~ witness stated that he was at that time renting land from

the Alabama By-Products Co., upon which was located a pasture in which he was keeping cattle. This witness Greene further testified that his brother, Robert Greene, who was at that time working for the Alabama By-Products Co., voted for Senator Heflin-

Listen-and that two days thereafter the company discharged. him.

Yet Senator BLACK does not seem to know about this . . He is not as well acquainted with my side of the case as he· is

, , 8930 CONGRESSIONAL-RECOR~SENATE APRIL 26 with Mr. Bankhead's side. The cumpany discharged this man. In my State the law provides as a penalty for the intimidation of voter_s a fine of $500 and .imprisOnment if the judge sees fit to impose it. Have any of these people been prosecuted? Not one. Have they been indicted? Yes; in some places; and a Bankhead partisan judge has dismissed the indictments and no prosecuti9ns have been had.

That is anot..'b.er part of the trail of the serpent of corrupt politics in my State. Prosecuting attorneys have discharged county solicitors for supporting me. They did it in my .own home county. A young man by the name of Jackson, one of . the finest young citizens of my State, a good lawyer, and county solicitor, supported me~ -and the eireuit .solicitor fired him for doing that. Intimidation! There it is; rank. Coercion! Telling these people, ·" If you .are going to vote for Heflin, get your junk off the company property." His brother comes up, a free-born white man, standing at the threshold of that greatest of an places, the ballot box, to cast his ballot as he chooses. He is turned upon by the pistol man and told to get off the premises, to move out, to quit; he is discharged. That is the reeeption they got around the Bankhead polling place, and this was in Mr. Bankhead's home county.

I will tell you another thing they did down there. Th~y had a fake telephone in the polling place right on the table or the counter where they were holding the election. A Bankhead manager by the name of Williams would take up this phone tike he was talking to the outside and say, u Hello, hello; is that Hunts\1lle; . is that Gad~den?" "Yes." "How is everything?" "Everything is _going for Bankhead? , u That is good." " Everything is going for Bankhead?.,, "Yes." Then, "How ·is it down there? ·~-he is telling this, you know-~' It is going for Bankhead down here, too." "Is that so? " "Yes. Heflin has with-drawn from the race." That was right in Mr. Bankhead's home county, and this manager was a Bankhead manager and ·a Bankhead witness at Birmingham, and he was making the statement as voters came up to vote~ to frustrat~ annoy, intimidate them, reporting that Bankhead was carrying the State in great fashion, and that I was being beat and that I had withdrawn. That phone was not connected with any phone outside; it was a dead, dummy arrangement; and yet that went on in Mr. Bankhead's home county by .one of his managers. But Senator BLACK would have you tbink that the whole thing was a sweet-smelling geranium. [Laughter.]

The witness stated that the company's "pistol ma.n ~· was there when his brother voted and saw him v.ote for Senator Hefiin. The witness further testified that this company deputy or " pistol man" was active in the polling place supporting Bankhead and was watching how people voted, looking at their tickets.

That is in the evidence taken -at Birmingham. We have got a secret ballot or are supposed to have. You have got no right t-o intrude yourself upon the privacy of the sovereign citizen as he expresses his will at the polls, but here was a pistol man walking up and pryirig into these affairs and peeping over and watching how people voted, intimidating them. If he saw them voting for me, it meant the loss of their jobs. If they questioned his right to look at them doing it, they would lose their jobs. So they submitted. Senators, that is the situation we had, and this was in Mr. Bankhead's own county.

The witness stated that the company's officers, Miller and Sherrod, managers of the election, were both supporting Bankhead and tbat the conditions were .such that he, the witness, a Heflin watcher, left the polls in the afternoon, and he did not return because he did not think there was any use of going back.

Senators, an old Baptist preacher up in Shelby County voted an absentee ballot for me. His ballot is over here marked for Mr. Bankhead. The supervisors found it marked for him. When he went in to deposit his absentee -ballo~ what do you suppose he said? This gives you an idea of the general impression about what they expected the Bankhead managers to do. When he deposited his ballot he said, "Something told me that my ballot was a gone goslin "." And it turns up bere marked for Bankhead. What impres-

sion does it make on your mind that that man believed that his . ballot would not be counted as .ca-st? And he believed right. It iB here marked for Bankhead.

Senator BLACK tells you that in 13 or 14 instances a ballot voted for Bankhead turned up marked for me, and in 13 or 14 instances ballots marked f.or me turned up here marked for Bankhead--six in one .and half -dozen in the other; there is the old slot machine again. What is that for? To say, " Oh, well, both sides engaged in this practice. Heflin's people changed ballots to him from .Bankhead and Bankhead's people changed ballots from Rerun to :Bankhead., Now, let us ;aee about that.

Mr. Bankhead admitted before the committee that the county officers who controlled the election in 61 counties out of 67 were his partisan StiJlporters. Who were .in charge of the ballot boxes -on election day? · Two Bankhead men in every precinct except in 6 counties; they were absolutely in charge; they were in the majority. Who had charge of the ballots and the boxes after the election in 61 counties out of 67? Bankhead partisans-sberiff, probate judge, and circuit clerk-.an.d how could anybody change any tickets from Bankhead to me except it was done for a purpose~ to make it appear that these irregularities were generally practiced by Heflin's folks and by Bankhead's? I repudiate the suggestion; there is not a ballot tampered with in all the boxes that they can charge to me. My friends were not in control at the polls. They were not in control at the county courthouse. We never had access to the ballots. They had them all the time. So whatever changes have been ma.de, it lies at their door to explain, and they can not explain. That is what you have.

Now, a little further on the purchasing of votes. I want the Senator from Alabama to hear that.

With respect to paragraph No.2-

This is Mr. Hampton speaking to Senator Hl\STINGs-o! your report of the testimony, under the head o! "Purchasing votes," you state that there were 14 witnesses who testified either to the direct purchase of votes or the offer to purchase votes. but you conclude your paragraph by stating, "There is no testimony connecting Mr. Bankhead with the purchase of votes."

My good friend from Delaware just miscued on that a little. They do not have to connect him with it. If that were true, all you would have to do would be to supply the money to your campaign forces and go to Europe; and when you came back, the election would have been bought and then your friends could say, " Why, he had nothing to do with it. He was away when the theft and the purchase were made."

Newberry tried that. He said, " I did not spend all that money. My brother John spent it." But the Senate said, "Whoever spent it, it was spent in your behalf, and you al\e responsible for it, and you will have to pay the penalty." Finally, lashed and pursued by the gallant fighter from WISconsin, young BoB LA FoLLETTE's father, he resigned his place in this body and sought the tall timber in Michigan.

You do not have to connect the candidate himself with these things, although we have shown in the testimony that Mr. Bankhead .contributed money in January. The primary was not until August 12. He eontributed money in January, and the circuit 'Clerk who received it said this fund was raised to pay poll taxes; and the law of my State says that if you pay another's poll tax, you violate the law. There is a penalty provided for it. That is what was done.

We have a lead in Mr. Aarhus•s and Creech's reports of $3,500 that was spent through Congressman BANKHEAD's office in behalf of his brother up there in Lamar County, I ~believe it was.

We have a lead that $3,500 was sept through Congressman McDUFFIE's office, through llls secretary, in Clarke County, Ala.

We have a lead that Mark Black, of Luverne, in Crenshaw County, handled $5,000, and that another man down thereMcGovern, I believe-handled $5,000.

That is not an. We have a lead there thltt woul.O. startle the Senate and the country. Mr. Pettus, chairman of the

1932· CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8931 State committee, came to Washington to get some campaign funds from Mr. Jouett Shouse, chairman of Mr. Raskob's committee. Mr. Pettus came up and asked Mr. Jouett Shouse for some money for the campaign in Alabama for Mr. Bankhead. Mr. Shouse said he did not have very much money, and he needed it for the congressional districts, but he gave Mr. Pettus $1,000 and told him to go to New York and see Mr. Raskob. Mr. Pettus went to see Mr. Raskob, and Mr. Raskob told him, " I do not like the situation in Alabama. The people do not seem to be taking any interest in Bankhead. They do not seem to be for him; but if you will go back down there and raise $50,000, I will get up $250,000 more, and get it to you by the 25th of October to use in the closing days of the campaign."

We have not had a chance to follow up that lead by Mr. Aarhus. Senator GEORGE and Senator BRATTON would not agree to employ anybody, it made no difference what they had, who had ever worked for the Nye committee.

I submit that that position is untenable. I can not understand it. There it is---$250,000; and Aarhus, commenting on it, says," There must be truth in this." Pettus returned, and he called on Crawford Johnson and a banker down there, Oscar Wells & Crawford, another, and the Bardeleben Coal Co., worth a million dollars, each of. them, easily, to double their subscriptions, and they did.

We have not been able to follow up that lead; but the Senator from New Mexico, Mr. BRATTON, tells the Senate solemnly that I have had full opportunity to be heard and close, although these are the facts that I am giving you.

We have a lead on New Orleans. Mr. Creech, the other agent, has the notes where $800,000 was handled, giving the names of those who handled it and the names of the men in Birmingham who distributed it in the State. We have not had a chance to run that down. We do know that either two or three days after the election, Mr. Bankhead went to New Orleans. The papers announced his presence there immediately following the election. Whether there is any significance in that I do not know; but I am telling you what these investigators have upon the program for investigation that we have never had the opportunity to investigate.

Now for a little more of this purchasing of votes. The chairman said, " There is no te3timony connecting

Mr. Bankhead with the purchase of votes." Why, certainly not. You know that if a candidate would let them catch him buying votes himself, you would not have to hit him with a club. You could just thump his brains out. Of course, you are not going to catch a candidate connected with buying votes. Thump them out! You could not catch a child doing a thing like that.

Mr. Bankhead says, " I had nothing to do with it. I know nothing about it." .You do not have to connect him with it. It is enough to know that he got the fruits of it; and the Bible says, " By their fruits ye shall know them "; and it says another thing: "I brake the jaws of the wicked, and plucked the spoil out of his teeth." That is what I am asking for here.

They got away with this. They politically assassinated me with the primary machine they had, and ~.rr. Bankhead w~ nominated in a primary that was illegal and void, in a pnmary where all sorts of crooked practices were resorted to. They held back the returns for days and days and days· and instead of publishing them in the open, as always hereu;fore they go down to the secret tax assessor's office in Pettus'~ home county and count them there, and give out only the returns for governor and Senator on September 1. Why did they delay all that· time? Let them explain.

For ways that are dark and tricks that are vain Let Ed Pettus rise and explain.

He can not explain it. I would call attention in this connectlon

Mr. Hampton says---to the testimony given 1n book C with respect to the purchase of votes. and the offers to purchase votes in Jasper, Ala., Mr. Bankheads home city, and particularly to the testimony o! John w Madison, beginnlng at page 656 1n volume 3 o! the ofilcial report

of the testimony. Mr. Madison testifies that he was approaclied by Drew Argo, of Mr. Bankhead's home county, who inquired of him as to which senatorial candidate he intended to vote for. Upon being told that Mr. Madison intended to vote for Senator Heflin, Mr. Argo informed him that 1! he would vote under the rooster (Democratic) there was something 1n it for him Argo went on to inform Madison that he, Argo, was paying $2 e~ch for votes.

·I want the junior Senator from Alabama [Mr. BLACK] to get that.

Argo went on to inform Madison that he, Argo, was paying $2 each for votes.

In answer to a question, he informed Mr. Madison that he wanted Madison to vote for Mr. Bankhead and stated that he was making that offer in the Bankhead interest. Mr. Madison refused Argo's offer; but later on election day when Madison was in the sheriff's office in the courthouse in Jasper, Argo sought him out again and told him he would pay $4 each for the 5 votes in Madison's farilily.

That ought to be comforting to the junior Senator from Alabama [Mr. BLACK].

He told Madison he would give him scrip or an order that he could take to Phillips & Stanley's store and that Phillips & stanley would pay the money on the order. Phillips & Stanley's store according to the testimony, is in the same building in which Mr. John H. Bankhead's law offices are located, Mr. Bankhead's office being upstairs and that store being downstairs on the ground floor. Mr. Madison testified that for a period of an hour he stood around in Phillips & Stanley's store and watched people come from the courthouse, where the election was being held, and go in Phillips & Stanley's store and present scrip to Bill Stanley, who was paying out the cash upon the scrip.

Does not that connect them up with buying ballots? Yet Senator BLACK says we summoned witnesses from all over the State, and they proved nothing of corruption and buying votes. If he had just read this part of the testimony, he would have been better informed. .

Mr. Madison stated that he saw this sctlp being presented and money being handed out in return for it. Mr. Madison put the number of people that he personally saw present scrip and receive money for it at five or six. ·

Just one witness telling that he saw voters going into the voting place, voting for Mr. Bankhead, and taking scrip from Mr. Argo, and the scrip was honored down there by Phillips & Stanley in the building under Mr. Bankhead's office. They were paid the cash. Madison saw it-money received, bartering the ba:llot in Bankhead's own county in the State of Alabama!

Senators, if we had been permitted to get testimony down there for six or seven more weeks, we would have honeycombed that State with the most corrupt political machine s~tuation you ever witnessed. They shut us off, deny us the right to get the evidence, .deny us the money with which to do it, close the case in my absence, bring it to the floor of the Senate, and then stand here and assert that I had been heard on all the phases of the case 1

Senators, it is inexcusable and indefensible to make those statements here. They are absolutely untrue.

I want the t;ruth known to this body. I want the country to know it, and there is one place where they will know all the facts, and that is in a forum in my State, the state of Alabama. God bl~ss that dear old State. It has never turned its back on me, and I have never lowered my arm in battle for it, and, so help me God, I never will.

_They said it would be better for me financially and o~herWISe to aecept the verdict of the machine, fall in line with it, and go on, that they would return me to office. I would spurn such return to office. I do not want office that way. I do not want any person to vote for me who does not want to vote for me. I do not want a vote procured for me through the use of money or intimidation. It has never been done .. I would not pe~rnit it. I have been elected by ~he people m the free ex.erCise of their ballots for 27 years, m. the House and Senate, until a corrupt, purchased machine, purchased as you would buy a sheep in the market place. det~rmined to strike me down politically. . As ~ direct re~ult. of all this fraud and corruption and Illegality, a nommation came out of a void concern. :Mr. Bankhead's name was no more legally on that ticket in Alabama than the name of one who lived in another state and was not a candidate for the office.

8932 C.ONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 'This is what they said: " You go ahead and put him

over. and in the general election we will take care of it. We will give Bankhead such a majority, and we will do it so smoothly, we will spoil out the tracks of the ' trickters.' They will have a hard time proving we stole it, and Bankhead will stay up yonder and our conduct will be approved." Then in the future good-bye to all honest, God-fearing candidates. They will take possession and rule as they choose.

Senators, you must not do that. You want to smash this thing, crush it, put it down in its incipient state. If you put the stamp of your approval on it, you set a dangerous precedent. They will be rising up and saying, " Oh, well, you know what they did in the Heftin-Bankhead case. They did not prove this, and they did not prove that." We stand ready to prove it all. We stand at the door and knock to get evidence,. and we can not get a chance to produce it.

The case was closed in my absence. Did you get that? I was on the train returning Saturday night. Senator HASTINGS, chairman of the subcommittee, had been told by me that I was going out to speak in Illinois on Friday. He said, "Yes; go ahead; the subcommittee will not meet until Monday." Nobody contemplated a meeting of the full committee, and I left. I was sitting in the train coming home when I read, "Bankhead recommended favorably by 9 to 8 in the full committee.'' It was astounding to me, of course. I was somewhat interested, being the contestant. The committee had been called to consider the Dickinson resolution and the Bailey case; and while they were there, my " friends " decided they had a majority, and they put it to the test and voted to close the case, with me, the contestant, away.

I had never had notice of the meeting. My attorneys never had notice. We had had no agreement to close our case. We have not 'closed it yet. Yet they closed it and shut the doors in my face, and we are forced upon this floor to fight when my case has not been closed; and there are hundreds of witnesses down there who could testify to all these corrupt things, but we have not been able to get them.

Is that fair treatment? Is that the way to treat a contestant? Is that the way to treat a man who served in this body with you for nearly 11 years? And without boasting, I state that you can not point your finger to a single dishonorable act of mine. You can not point to a vote I cast that was not on the side of good government and on the side of the masses of the people of this country. I never lifted my voice or my hand in opposition to the great fundamental principles of my country and the welfare of the people of my country.

It is just a few months since 'I stood here in my own right; but I come back and find some of my Democratic comrades voting to deny me the right to appear here and say a word, after closing my case in my absence. It hurts me in my heart, I repeat.

This was election day that Mr. Madison was talking about, in Mr. Bankhead's home town. I read further:

This was on election day and while the voting was going on at the courthouse. It is true that other people had offices in the same building.

I, of course, do not contend that the testimony here given would convict Mr. Bankhead himself of bribery or that it definitely connects him with Argo's unlawful conduct. This much can be said, however, the offer to bribe was committed in Mr. Bankhead's interest, according to the testimony; and for the purpose of showing that the election wa.s corrupt, the result is the same whether the bribery was done by Mr. Bankhead's ~rder, knowledge, and consent or by his agents or supporters upon their own initiative. It is significant that 14 witnesses brought from the very limited territory covered in the Birmingham hearings testified as stated 1n your report, either to the direct purchase of votes or the offer to purchase them, and that in every case this bribery and attempted bribery was perpetuated in the interest of Mr. Bankhead.

Senators, there is not a scintilla of testimony that I or any of my followers violated the law. We were fighting to uphold it. There is not a piece of testimony which seeks to establish that I or any of my followers spent any money in trying to buy votes. They did put one witness on the stand down there, a Doctor McCullwn, a Bankhead witness, to ~wear that a fellow by the name of Leith offered him $500 to

support me and Judge Locke. Judge Wilkinson turned to the book, as the supervisors found the votes cast, and found that Leith and his wife had both voted for Bankhead and that McCullum himself had voted for Bankhead. They brought that miserable story in there, that one man had offered $500 to get them to support us. There was not a word of truth in it, and Judge Wilkinson on cross-examination said:

Are you the same man who had a store burned up there not long ago?

Yes, sir; I had one burned. You moved the goods out just before the store was burned, did

you not? Well, no, no. ~ell, the State marshal and adjuster would not pay you for 1t

unt1l you compromised. Is not that true? Yes; that is true. You can stand aside. , He was the only witness who swore that money had been

offered for us, and he almost admitted that he burned his own store for the insurance money. That is the trail of the crooked political serpent that is over all of this stuff. I will put some of these other references to the same character of doings in the RECORD.

Mr. President, let me show a little something about the ?ondition of sonie of the ballot boxes, how they were found, m some of the counties down there, the condition in which the supervisors found the boxes when they went to get them. The ballot box is supposed to be locked and sealed and the ballots preserved inviolate, so that if there shall be a contest, the ballots will show just what took place in the voting precinct .. But not so as to these ballots.

Here is the record of the county of Dallas, the county of the chairman of the State committee.

Precinct 36, box 6: Locked but not sealed. Precinct 36, box 3: Locked but not sealed. Box 4, box 2, box 1, box 5, in the same precinct, all locked

but not sealed. You know how easy it is to unlock a lock when you have

the key, but if you break a seal, that will tell the tale. So the seal was gone, and the box was just locked, and they had the key. So it goes all down, except as to eight boxes out of twenty-odd, I believe. That was in his home county; and thereby hangs a tale.

I spoke in the town of Selma to more people than there were voters in the county. I spoke to about 4,500 or 5,000. I polled the audience, asked that all who were going to support me to stand up, and asked those standing to hold up their hands. It was a glorious sight. After they sat down I asked all who were going to vote !or Bankhead to hold up their hands, and there 4 out of over 4,000. That was in this one county. They told me that I would carry the county by seven or eight hundred majority, but the Pettus crowd said, "He will get 700 votes.'' And they gave me 700. They are good mathematicians, I will say that for them. They said I would get 700 votes, and that is what I got. So the way the people voted did not count in the general election. . Here is the record of the county of De Kalb, which I car

ned by probably two or three thousand; but they gave it to me by three or four hundred.

Mr. Creech says: My first effort to check on the ballot boxes April 7 1931

Deputy Sheri.ff William R. Biddle stated that Sheriff Siw;_ey w: Pope was out on a raid and did not know when he would return· that neither he nor the sheriff had the key to the cell in which the ballot boxes were stored. Former Sheri1f L. J. Campbell had the key to this cell. That Sheriff Pope had never had this key.

Probate Judge George L. Malone related to .me some of the conditions existing in their county. I was impressed with the importance of the committee securing the boxes in this county.

Deputy Sheriff Biddle made an effort to locate former Sheriff Campbell and returned to the courthouse, stating Mrs. Campbell had received a telephone message from Mr. Campbell saying he was at some distant point and would not get back that day.

At 7 o'clock on the morning of April 11 I telephoned Sheriff Sidney W. Pope that I would be out about 9 o'clock to check up on the boxes and be with him to see they were delivered to the postmaster. He told me he would be prepared to turn them over for shipment.

1932 _CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE_ 8933 Now listen: On my arrival, and meeting the sheriff, he informed me of the

conditions having been changed since my telephone conversation with him. He had an order from the judge of the ninth judlclal circuit court-

A supporter of Mr. Bankhead, of course-restraining him from delivering the boxes until April 11, 12 o'clock noon. This order was extended to April 18, same hour, 1931, until further orders. It became more fixed in my mind that this county was the most important county out of the ·16 I had checked. We need positive information that the poll sheets are in the boxes with the other records.

What happened there? In order to keep this county out of our hands they pretended that they had a contest locally and would not let us have the boxes. We finally had to get an order from the Federal judge down there to get the boxes. And yet, according to the speech of the Senator from Alabama [Mr. BLACK] and the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. BRATTON] we have had a chance to do all things that were necessary to be done and everything has been done most graciously to serve us. We had to get these papers through a writ in the Federal court to ever bring them here at all. What else?

Down in the county of Bibb, which I carried by anYWhere from 1,000 to 1,200, they gave it to Bankhead by 700. In the county of Henry, which I carried probably by a thousand, and in the county of Houston, which I carried by a thousand to fifteen hundred, they gave Henry to me by less than 100 and Houston to Bankhead by over a thousand; and when we went down to get the ballots, what did they tell us? They said the ballots had been burned. And yet Senator BLACK and Senator BRATTON would have you believe that everything was· lovely and that everything was done to serve our needs and help us get evidence.

They violated the law. They burglarized these ballot boxes. They saw that I had carried those counties. They certified that Bankhead had carried them and they burned the ballots to destroy the evidence. That is what happened. What other conclusions can you reach? The law requires the ballots to b~ kept locked and sealed for six months. They were burned in December or January, as soon as my resolution was offered here to seize the boxes. Did anybody encourage them in burning them? A strong Bankhead supporter, Probate Judge Crosslin at Montgomery, Ala., the capital of the State, was quoted as saying that they could burn the ballots. The Montgomery Advertiser, a paper supporting Bankhead, had an article saying," When the Senate committee comes to Alabama to seize the ballots they will find nothing but ashes." And yet the Senator from Alabama, Mr. BLACK, and Mr. BRATTON would have you believe that all was lovely down there, and that nothing out of the ordinary had been done.

You can not find another contest like it in the history of our country. Cite me to another ·place where they laid ballots in by the sheaves that could not be put in the slot. Cite me to where hundreds of ballots were found neatly folded like money stacked in a bank in a pad, never unrolled or unfolded, just like they ·were in the original package. Find me a place where they opened and entered the boxes as they did in such wholesale fashion in Alabama.

Find me an instance where they burned the ballots as they did in my State.

Senators, what does the law provide? It provides that they shall have metal boxes with slots in them, and when they go to vote they shall put the ballots through the slot and at the end of the counting those ballots shall be rolled up. I will show you. Here is what the law provided, that they should roll up those ballots like this [illustrating] in gi-eat big rolls and then seal them. They used adhesive plaster in some places and wrapped and sealed them up, tied them, and put a sealed paper across there with the names of the three inspectors written on them. That is done according to Hoyle, according to law. Were •these done that way? No. They were not found that way. Who had tampered with them? They were in the hands of Bankhead managers and in the hands of Bankhead county officials all over the State with the exception of six counties.

Just one other matter on that line. Those Bankhead people down there who burned these ballots, of course, have never been prosecuted. · Not the slightest effort has been made to punish them. They were Bankhead supporters. They had charge of the county affairs. They had charge of the precinct affairs. The best way to destroy the evidence they had was to burn it and they burned it; and yet we are told here that everything was all right down there and that Mr. Bankhead has a clean bill of health and that there is nothing wrong at all in the certificate of his election.

I have shown that certain corporations sought to intimidate the voters. I have not the time to go into that except to tell you that we have shown that at the cotton mills in Alexander City, in Tallapoosa County, and other places, they sought to intimidate the workers in the mills who did not vote for Bankhead. They sought to intimidate the mine workers in st. Clair County and discharged some there who would not support Bankhead. They sought to intimidate t~em in Birmingham and in various other places over the State.

We intended to show by evidence that certain bankers had intimidated merchants, and certain merchants had intimidated farmers . . The banker told the merchant, "If you do not vote for Bankhead, we can not take care of your account any longer." The merchant told the farmer," If you do not vote for Bankhead, you will have to buy your goods somewhere else. I can not run you any longer," as they call it, "carry your account and supply you with provisions." The farmer said," I can not go anywhere else. You have a mortgage on all I have. I could not go anywhere else." "Then fall in line for Bankhead."

We have shown how they undertook to intimidate schoolteachers and we intended to show that all over the State they told the school-teachers that if they did not line up and vote for Bankhead they would lose their jobs. Sena-

. tors, we had one case of a fine young lady teaching school. They asked who she was going to vote for. She said, " I am going to vote for Senator Heflin. My fatber was for him and so was my mother." "But he is not a Democrat." "Yes; he is. He is as good, if not the best, Democrat in the State." " But he is running outside of the party." "You drove him out. He tried to run inside and wanted you to have a fair-for-all primary. I am going to vote for him." They said, "If you do, we will take your job away from you." She said, " I am supporting a widowed mother and my little brother. You would not take my job?" She cried and they told her, " If you vote for Heflin, you will lose your job." We were going to put her on the witness stand.

We had numbers of instances like that all over the State, acts of .intimidation galore, but somehow they were in a hurry to close the case; some on this side-the Democratic sid~specially were in a hurry to close it Was that prompted by party spirit? Was that prompted by the fact that Mr. Bankhead is an AI. Smith Democrat? Was the effort being made to use the Democratic machine to sustain a Democrat, whether he is right or wrong? If that is true, that is the wrong principle, and it can not stand up before the gaze of the honest electorate of the United States.

Highway employees were dismissed, precipitously thrown out, because they did not vote for Bankhead. Others seeking jobs were asked to sign a questionnaire, "For whom did you vote for Senator? "disclosing their secret ballots to those men who are holding up, in the interests of the party machine, a club over the head of every man and woman who sought employment in the State in these hard, depressing times. That is the fruit of this machine, and " By their fruits ye shall know them."

My supporters were annoyed and driven from the polls. Women testified at Birmingham that the situation was so annoying and distressing in Walker County and other places that they did not intend to vote any more unless those conditions changed, and yet they tell you it was all lovely down there.

Here is an incorrect qualified list for Tuscaloos·a County. They were allowed to vote regardless of whether their names

8934 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 were on the qualified list or not. · Senator HAsTINGs's report said:

In one precinct there were several persons who could vote at all the boxes in the precinct on the same day.

Senators, just think if that. I think in one beat they had seven boxes, so a man could go to box 1 and vote, and then to box 2 and vote, and to box 3, and so vote on around. What happened? They had a contest in that county before the general election, and I think it was 1,500 voters that were disqualified who had participated in the city election, and, Senators, those same 1,500 voted against me and voted in the general election November 4, 1930, no doubt.

Houston County is one of the counties where the Bankhead supporters burned the ballot boxes. They were Bankhead supporters in every county where the ballots were burned. No Heflin man burned a ballot. There was no violation of law by my supporters. Senator HAsTING's report shows that one of the Alabama State examiners of conditions in Houston County said that for the year 1929 there were 530 names published by tlie judge of probate as qualified voters more than were shown by receipts for the poll tax paid. Listen to a line from his report :

Incident to this investigation it 1s very evident to the casual observer looking over the lists of the people published as qualified to vote 1n Housto:n County that there are numbers of names of persons who were not only not qualified to vote for not having paid poll tax but numbers of names appear thereon of persons who are dead, who have moved from the county. The published list of qualified voters in Houston County is not an authentic one nor is it a list that could be certified as being correct.

That is in Houston County, one of the counties where they burned the ballots.

The door of opportunity was wide open for any designing person to perpetrate any kind of fraud within his desire or to change or to falsify the real true conditions of the list of qualified voters of Houston County.

We have shown that in some places ballots were marked for Bankhead before they were handed out to the voters. We have shown that ·Bankhead managers left the polls and went off and got ballots, marked them, brought them back, and voted them for Bankhead. We showed in one instanceit was amusing, though it was right grim to me-that to one of our watchers it was suggested that the Bankhead manager about 4 o'clock was going· out to get the vote of a certain person, and he was told, " You had better go with him and .see that he gets it." This poor fellow got it in his head that that was more important than staying there and watching and preventing them from stealing the election. He went traipsing off with this Bankhead manager to watch him get this one vote and bring it back; and he said when he got back they had the ballots all out on the table and were working with them. Judge Wilkinson said, " Did it occur to you that they had taken you ' snipe hunting '? He said, "Not until I got back." [Laughter.] And then it did occur to him. "What did you do finally?" "Well," he said, "I knowed they had done whatever they were going to do, and I just went on home."

Ob, Senators, the whole impression everywhere was that they were going to take that election; the word had gone forth to take it. They had said that all around the State, " Heflin's friends will cast the ballots, but we will count them; it does not make any difference how many votes he gets, he will not get the certificate of electton." We can prove that by 500 witnesses, a thousand witnesses, 2,000 witnesses-there is no telling by how many witnesses we could get that proved. I have the affidavits here, a few which I will put into the RECORD, in which the affiants swear that they heard Bankhead's supporters say, "Heflin will get the ballots, but he will not get the election." One of them said, " We will steal the votes from He:flili south of Birmingham as fast as they put them in the box." Oh, they are smooth artists, Senators; they know their business. The buying of an election has become for certain politicians the most . lucrative business in my State. There are 250 men in my

[State who· are under the domination of this machine who

can nominate any candidate for governor, United States Senator, or Representative. Just get that machine and they will fix it. One can vote the other way, but the ballot will not be counted that way. I want you to help my State get back on the high plane where ballots will be counted as cast. That is all I ask.

The affidavits referred to are as follows: STATE OF ALABAMA,

Walker County: Before me, the undersigned authprity in and for said county and

State, personally appeared J.P. Braden, who being by me first duly sworn deposes and says that dUring the 1930 senatorial campaign in Alabama he heard J. L. Johnson, election inspector at Jasper, Ala., say in substance and effect concerning the election as follows:

Mr. Johnson said that Hefiin might get the votes but Bankhead will get the otfice.

J.P. BRADEN.

Subscribed and sworn to before me, this 26th day of March, 1932. KENNETH L. JoNES, Notary Public.

STATE OF ALABAMA, Walker County:

Before me, the undersigned authority in and for said county and State, personally appeared S. S. Buzbee, who being by me first duli sworn, deposes and says that during the 1930 senatorial campaign in Alabama he heard J. E. Ross (coal operator) at Jasper, Ala., say in substance and effect concerning the election as follows:

M:r. J. E. Ross (a coal operator) said in presence of me and Mr. S. M. Hinton that they had the money and machin.ery with Bankhead and this would elect Mr. Bankhead regardless of how people vote.

S. S. BUZBEE.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 29th day of March, 1932. P. J. CoMART, Jr., Notary Public.


Before me, the undersigned authority in and for said county and State, personally appeared J. H. Nunnelley, who being by me first duly sworn, deposes and·says that during the 1930 senatorial campaign in Alabama, he heard H. Cam Smith at Jasper, Ala., say in substance and effect concerning the election as follows:

Said that if Heflln got three-fourths of the votes he would not get the otfice, because it 1s already settled in Bank.heand's favor. Mr. Marshall Lovelady and numbers heard Smith.

J. H. NUNNELLEY. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 29th day of March,

1932.


P. J. COMART, Jr., Notary Public.

Before me, the undersigned authority in and for said county and State, personally appeared S. S. Buzbee, who, being by me first duly sworn, deposes and says that during the 1930 senatorial campaign in Alabama he heard Berry Hutto (candidate for board of revenue) at Jaspex:, Ala., say in substance and effect, concerning the election, as follows:

Mr. Berry Hutto said " I'll steal them, buy them, change them, and do anything to make the rooster crow. I have done all this and I'm now ready. We'll beat Tom some way."

Mr. Frank Shaddix says he'll swear that he heard Mr. Berry Hutto say this 1n effect. Mr. Hutto was returning otficer, beat 23.

S. S. BUZBEE.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 29th day of March, 1932. P. J. COMART, Jr., Notary Public.

STATE OF .ALABAMA, Walker County:

Before me, the undersigned authority In and for said county and State, personally appeared S. S. Buzbee, who being by me first duly sworn, deposes and says that during the 1930 senatorial campaign in Alabama, he heard Richard (Dick) Bates, ex United States marshal at Jasper, Ala., say 1n substance and effect concerning the election as follows: .

Hefiln will get the votes but Bankhead has the machinery and it is oiled and greased and will give Bankhead the office. Mr. G. W. King also heard Mr. Bates say this.

8. 8. BUZBEE.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 29th day of March, 1932. P. J. CoMART, Jr., Notary Public.

Mr. Richard (Dick) Bates was returning otficer beat 2, box 2.

Personally appeared before me, M. A. Springfield, a. notary public 1n and for said State and county aforesaid, D. D. Wright, who, being by me duly sworn, deposes and says that he heard Roy Baird, a druggist in the town of Guin, Ala., say on several occasions during the campaign of 1930 that if old Tom Hefiin won the election for th.e United States Senate that they, the Bankhead

1932 CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD-SENATE 8935 crowd, would steal the election. Also affiant further says that he heard W. H. Cashion say that they were going to carry the Hamilton beat by 200 maJority for Bankhead or steal it.

. D. D. WRIGHT.

Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 22d day of March, 1932.

M. A. SPRINGFIELD, Notary Public.

Personally appeared before me, M.A. Springfield, a notary public 1n and for said State and county aforesaid, S. K. Henson, who being by me duly sworn, deposes and says that be heard Roy Baird and R. L. Crump say a number of times during the 1930 campaign that if the Bankhead crowd could not buy the election they were going to steal it, that they were not going to let old Tom Heflin have it, and also sa!d they had the machinery to do it with.

S. K. HENSON.

Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 22d day of March, 1932.

M. A. SPRINGFIELD, Notary Public.

Before me, the undersigned authority 1n and for said county and State, personally appeared R. H. Riddle, who, being by me first duly sworn, deposes and says that during the 1930 senatorial campaign in Alabama he beard A. M. White, Hartselle, chairman of the speakers' bureau, say in substance and effect, concerning the election, as follows: "There is no possible chance for Heflin. South of Birmingham they will count his votes out as fast as they are put in."

J. H. RIDDLE.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this -- day of April, 1932. I. J. KA.ENT, Notary Public.

Before me, the undersigned authority in and for said county and State, personally appeared Clarence Sums, who being by me fl.rst duly sworn, deposes and says that d~ing the 1930 senatorial campaign in Alabama, he beard R. V. Ford at Falkville, Ala., say 1n substance and effect concerning the election as follows: " Heflin may beat John Bankhead, but it will be taken away from him, like the election was taken from Herbert Hoover in 1928."

CLARENCE SUMs. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2d day of April, 1932.

V. 0. CLARY, Notary Public.

Mr. HEFLIN. Senators, it is a serious thing to strike a man down who has fought his battles in the open, as I have; it is a serious thing that a man who dares to defy the machine, with .its corruption, with its evil practices and wrongdoings, who tells it that he will not submit to it, and that he will fight it in the open, may be struck in the back and shot down like a dog, deprived of his rights, deprived of the right to have his own party brethern and sisters say to him whether he did right or wrong in 1928; to approve or disapprove his conduct. I was denied that right, and the man most responsible for that denial is John H. Bankhead, of Jasper, Ala.

If John H. Bankhead had told that committee, "Boys, I am not going to stand for this action; I will not take the nomination under it; it is unclean; it is illegal; it is null and void; you let Hefiin in and let us fight it out; that way is fair and good for the party, and it is right," the committee would have met and rescinded its action. There is not the slightest doubt of that. He could have done that. He issued a statement freeing the members who had said they were going to vote to let down the bars. That was an invitation to them not to do it. The State committee chairman told Fred Thompson that he was threatening to run for the Senate because he wanted to operate on Bankhead and make him get two votes out of his district to put up the bars against me; and he got them-Ogden and Cobb. That is the positive proof. The votes were delivered and the bars were put up against me. Then when Judge Fite called on him to join with me and others to get them to rescind that action, he refused to do it.

Then when the right was asked to give the voters the privilege of writing my name on the ballot so as not to discriminate against those who were supporting me, he ·said, "No; I will not even permit that." On top of that the chairman of the State committee said, "We will not leave

: any space on the ticket for the writing or the printing 1 of his name." That has always been done heretofore; there 1 has been a space left for that. He said," We will not leave

any space, and if his name is put on the ticket we will not count the ballots." .

Senators, did you ever hear of a more complete destruction of the rights of the sovereign people in a State? Demoerats, shorn of their party rights, clubbed over the head and driven out as candidates, invited in as menials to vote but not to . hold effice, asking for the pitiful privilege of writing the name of their choice on the ballots and refused by Bankhead, and the chairman of the State committee refusing to count the ballots? That is the most complete destruction of party rights that I have ever witnessed. They can not get a way from that.

We have proved that citizens were permitted to vote in other precincts than the one in which they lived. What do you think of that? But that is not all. \Ve have shown that the citizens of one county were permitted to vote in another county because they lived so far they could not get home time enough to vote. That was an accommodative arrangement fixed up by the Bankhead machine for Bankhead supporters. That was done in my State. We have shown tha~ in the testimony at Birmingham, with just six days to go upon, in which to get the witnesses and examine them. Then we were shut off.

What else? Hat boxes were used, just big paper hat boxes. One man swore that he heard a fellow in a drunken party at the Morris Hotel say, "Well, they are going to steal the election from Heflin, and I am going to help do it!' He said, "I have got two big hat boxes, one named Tom and one named John." That is John over there. [Laughter.] And he says," I am to burn Tom." So he was to burn my ballots, but they were to take care of John's and nurse them through their illness. He was going to burn Tom's. Yet Senator BLACK and Mr. BRATTON would make you feel that they had the nicest arrangement down there; that it was really a May-day picnic, and that they loved me so that they would make sacrifices to see that I had a fair deal.

When I heard the junior Senator from Alabama pleading the other day and putting up such a pitiful tale for Mr. Bankhead and his cohorts, I thought of St. John's boy, at Cullman, Ala .. a little fellow 6 years old. The father went home. one afternoon and found Mrs. St. John scolding the boy about something. She stamped her foot on the ground and said, " You little rascal, what did you do that for? " The little boy just sat there cringing, with head bowed, his hands folded. The father said, " Mamma, you ought not to scold that boy; he is a good boy/' The boy had been guilty of some wrongdoing, and the mother was trying to correct him. The father said, "You ought not to do that; he is a good boy; he comes over to the office and gets my mail and opens it _ up for me and helps me with it, and the other morning I Mard him humming a religious tune." The little boy could not stand it any longer; he looked up, started crying, and said, "And I am going to be baptized soon." [Laughter.] So you would think that that outfit was ready to be baptized soon. [Laughter.]

With all the ballot thievery and ballot buying and ballot burning and intimidation and coercion rampant in that State, it was such a nice and delicious situation you wou,Id think that these gentlemen were nearly ready to be translated. AB I heard this argument, knowing the situation as I did, I thought of the fellow at the funeral down there. They had had several deaths on Saturday, and on Sunday the hearse was busy taking caskets to this church and to that. It came to the funeral of an old roustabout who had been a very rough citizen; he had not lived the right kind of life by any means. His wife and children were sitting there. The preacher looked down and said, " The person lying in the casket in front of me was a good man." The old lady pricked up her ears and looked surprised. The preacher continued, "He was a good husband and a good fr-.ther." She looked startled. The preacher went on, "All in all, I will sat that he was a Christian gentleman." She says, "Ned, you go up there and lift that lid and see if that is your pa." [Laughter.]

So these things were going on at the hands of the bunch down yonder who stole the election from me, and theY.

8936 .CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· . SENATE APRIL 26 were described so beautifully the other ·day that I wanted somebody to lift the lid. and see if that was them. [Laughter in the galleries.]

The VICE PRESIDENT. There must not be demonstrations in the galleries.

Mr. HEFLIN. My watchers were threatened and prevented from doing their duty as election officers. They told my watchers in some places, "You have no right to say anything; you have nothing to do with it." Was that giving me fair representation? Not by any means.

Absentee voters were voted without their knowledge or consent. We have proved that some fellows came in to vote.They were told, •• You have already voted." "No; I have not voted." You have heard that story of the old days about the animals having a convention. They asked, "What method shall we adopt for voting? " One of them said, " We will vote by the· raising of the tail." ·· Another one of them said, " That will not do, the billy goat has done voted, and you can not tell which side he is voting on." [Laughter.] So with these absentee fellows. The voter presented himself or herself solemnly to vote, but what w·ere they told? They were told, " You can not vote; you have done voted." "I have not voted." "Yes, you did;· you· voted an absentee ballot." "r· have not done anything of the sort; I have never applied for one; !'have not voted one. I am here in person to vote. Where is my ballot?" "Here it is." "Will you let me have it?" In some instances they tore it up, ·and ib. otherS' they got it back, and it was marked' for Bahkhead. He said, "I will vote mine in person," and voted for me. -We had that down there, and yet they tell you that that was a glorious situation! Well, they are · mighty anxious to close it. You notice that, do you not? · They want to pull down the curtain on it and bid it good..:night. They do not· want the facts laid bare, because they do not smell good. · · ·

Think of absentees being voted when they never asked for an absentee ballot, never made the affidavit, but all that had been done, and their tickets fixed for Bankhead!

Why was that done, Senators? 'Because they did not believe that person was coming to the polls or that he would ever know that they had · voted him · for Bankhead. There could not be any other reason for it. There is no escape from that ·conclusion.

I mentioned Mr. Page being hired to obtain absentee ballots in ~ Jefferson County. He got over a · hundred, and took them up and got paid for them in Shelby County-Bankhead ballots. There is no dispute about ·that. He took a notary public with him. The law in my State requires that you have·to file a request in writing, it has to be of record, asking for an absentee ballot. Here was a man employed to go out and get them, take the blank affidavits and ballots and a notary public, fix them up on the highways and the byways, and bring them in by the hundreds for · John H. Bankhead.

In the report on the Tuscaloosa city election, 1930, the judge held that 900 persons voted who did not have the right to vote-900! They feasted on me just a month or so later in the general election. That is the county where the judge of probate said they opened the boxes to get the certificate of election; but he testified at Birmingham, on cross-examination by Judge Wilkinson, that .he did not have to go in there to get the returns; that there was no excuse for it. That is Judge Brandon, the former governor of . the State. He is the man, the judge of probate, who came and took the ·only manager I had out· of that box . . He never denied it when they put him on the witness stand-Judge Long, of Jasper, Mr. BankheadJs home town· and county. The witnesses swore that he came in .and abused a grayhaired, fine-looking man,' who strongly supported me; that Long looked at. him-he was. frustrating their game and hindering it-Long looked at him, and with an oath said, "G-- d-~ you! We'll remember you:• right in the polls, the boss of the county. . . - . -

That was in Mr. Bankhead's home town. That is · the probate judge of his county, where the courthouse ·was burned while we were investigating down there, and the

records destroyed. I think he admitted that he did not have requests for more than a hundred absentee ballots, and they probably issued seven or eight hundred.

Senators, this thing stinks to high heaven. You can not do justice to it in a speech in any reasonable length of time.

Persons were allowed to vote for Bankhead who had not paid their poll tax. Let me show you what happened at Birmingham.

Judge Wilkinson asked, " Are you a Bankhead manager? " "Yes, sir." "Were you there all day at the polls?" "Yes, sir." "You helped to count the ballots?" "Yes." "Did you let anybody vote there who was not on the qualified list? "

Now, get this point: "No, sir; not a one." "You are certain about that?"

"Not a one." Judge Wilkinson said, " I call the Senate committee's at

tention to the fact "-I remember one instance where 185 of those people voted who were not on the poll list. They voted for Bankhead, and their manager said that no person voted who was not on the poll list! Then who put those names in there for Bankhead, and where were they put in? . That is in the testimony.

Judge Wilkinson said, "Did you number the ballots?" "Yes, s!r; I _ numbered them myself." Judge Wilkinson said, "I ask tQe committee to look in that box and pr~cinct." The ballots are not numbered, and the managers of election swore they were numbered. Who put those ballots in the boxes that came here, and what became of those ·that the voter voted down there? They had skilled artists, the most skilled artists that ever assembled about the· ballot box; and they had hundreds of managers, smooth artists, who were not qualified voters in the precinct where they served. That is set out in Judge Wilkinson's argument before the committee. What do you think of that, Senators?

They said that those votes were counted on the order of the probate judge. You know the law required them to number the ballots . . In one county the testimony showed that the judge of probate told them not to number the" ballots. Why? Because if you do not number the ballots you can· not tell what ballot is yours. You may vote for me, but· the ballots are ·loose in the box; there are no numbers, and there are 58,000 of them here · with no numbers at all. · But if they ntimber them, as the law' requires-and as they. do in my State-if you vote first you are No. 1. Your ballot' is No. 1 and your name is No. 1. They ask you how you voted. You say, "I voted for Heflin." "What is your number?" "I voted first." "All right; find No. 1." They find your ballot, and there it is. It may be changed to Bankhead and it may be marked for me; but you can trace' it then. In some · of the boxes some of them are numbered and some are unnumbered. How are you going to trace· them? · · ·

Who monkeyed with these ballots after the election night? Senator HAsTINGs in his report says that absentee ballots

for 'Hefiiil were not received and counted in many instances. What would you do about that?

The probate judges permitted people to vote who had not paid the poll taxes. They voted for Bankhead.

Senators, here · is another significant thing: There is so much variety of stealing and skullduggery. The law requires the certificates of election to be signed by all three of the managers-John Jones, Bill Martin, and Sam Johnson; They must sign themselves, and sign the seal across the roll of the ballots, and sign the seal on the box when it is locked. What did we find in many instances? The same handwriting for various precincts, signing the manager's' name-one and the same handwriting. What did that mean? It meant that the seals were broken at the courthouSe and new ones were fixed up and put on and that one of the managers wrote the names of all three of them. They never had any idea that the ballots would come to Washington.

Another feature of it: I want to say frankly that some of the press down there said that with Senator BLACK on guard The Senate would never grant my contest; I would never get

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-_ SENATE 8937 anywhere with it; so they really never expected me to get anywhere. They never expected these ballots to come here. You see, I had only from December until the 4th of March; but I got it through, to their surprise. They never expected that. They were fixing 50.,000 majority, so that it would look so colossal that the Senate would say," Oh, well, I guess Tom is just sore about being defeated. Fifty thousand is pretty big"; and it is. If you knew that bunch as well as I do, you would know that they could give 100,000 or 200,000 majority just as easily. They do not have to have ballots voted. All they want is the paper and the boxes, and they had both. They used them, too.

The circuit clerk in Franklin County, Mr. Bankhead's district, admitted that he sent out requests for absentee ballots, and sent the money to pay for the affidavits made by the notary public. That was in the testimony ·down yonder; and yet they tell you that we have not any testimony showing anything except some little, frivolous, minor irregularities. The Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. BLAINE] referred to some of them as very minor irregularities-just like breaking into a ballot box and taking the ballots out of a thousand boxes! Why, what is that among friends? That is just raiding the Ark of the ·Covenant, the ballot box. That is treading on the most sacred ground in the Republic. That is stealing from the voter the only weapon he has with which to preserve his rights and liberties. They are supposed to be kept locked in that citadel until the Senate calls for them to examine them; but when Bankhead's partisans beat down the door and tore off the seal, so that they could examine them and tousle them and change them, what is that? A minor irregularity. It amounts to nothing.

Senators, if you do not put the right safeguards around the ballot box and the voter's rights, the time is not . far distant when the masses will be as the common herd, absolutely at the mercy of the tyrant with the lash in his hand and the contemptible political machine that dominates the whole thing. That is what you are coming to.

Ballots were accepted for Bankhead without supporting affidavits in many instances. Some of those championing the cause of Mr. Bankhead would say," Why, what is that? They wanted to vote." Yes; but the law provides how they can vote. They must be qualified voters. They must have the poll tax paid if they are under the age of 45. They have to be qualified. But here they go up to vote for Mr. Bankhead, and they are allowed to vote without having to make the supporting affidavit.

I have shown you in the Geneva County editorial that it has been years since the poll lists have been purged. Thera are probably the names of forty to fifty thousand voters upon the lists in my State who are dead, moved away, disqualified. How are you going to tell what the qualified list is? You have to help us by your vote here to clean house down there. We will have to have the poll lists purged in every county, and I pledge myself to the task.

The absentee voter must show that he or she is a qualified voter in the precinct and county and State, and make oath to the effect that he or she will be absent on election day by reason of his or her regular business. Yet they had people voting up there who live in another State and vote in another State, whose names are still on the unpurged lists in Alabama, and they are voting for Mr. Bankhead:

My recollection is that the supervisors found 560 who lived in other States. We called for the list. What do you reckon they told us about some of them? They said, " We have lost them." I think that occurred as to 11 or 14 counties. "We have never been able to get our hands on them." I suppose that was one of the minor irregularities.

We have not been able to communicate with them at all, but we got the lists of about 12,000 and we sent questionnaires to them. We got back answers to around 4,000, saying that they got them and they voted-! think fourfifths of them-for Bankhead. What else? In about 3,000 and more of the cases the postmasters had marked on the envelopes " Unclaimed," indicating that no such person lived at that address.

In 5,000 cases, I believe, no answer came at all. That made over six or seven thousand that could not be produced on the face of the earth, and I challenge 1\.!r. Bankhead to prnduce them. They do not live, they are not in existence, they are dummy voters. Over 6,000 of the absentee voters come in that class. Where are they? They do not even answer. No return of any kind comes back. What does that indicate? It indicates that the fellows who put thosf things over took these questionnaires and destroyed them; the thing was hushed up, and the story is closed, so fa.r as that goes. A little over 4,000 out of 14,000 responded to the questionnaire, leaving around 10,000 that could not be accounted for.

Yet they tell us that all was well; that it was a very fair and regular election. And Senator BLACK appeals for Alabama's right to elect her Senator. I appeal for the same right-not for the machine to manipulate the election and procure the 'election of a Senator but the right of the people of my. State to elect their Senator as they elected me.

If they bad defeated me fairly I would have accepted it. I have been defeated in political contests. I was defeated twice before I came to Congress: I came within one vote of getting the nomination in a convention once, and in a primary I came within a very few votes, and finally was elected overwhelmingly in 1904. So it did not mean so much to be defeated fairly in an election. That is all right. The voter has just as much right to reject a man as he has to promote and elect him. I understand that. But, my friends, I looked the people in the face in that campaign in my State, a perfect crusade in every county, the whole face of the earth covered with people wherever we had a meeting. They were Democratic crusaders bent upon the election of their candidate and a smashing of the machine. They went at it with the zeal of Christian crusaders, and the only way to manipulate the election was to do it by miscalling the ballots at the boxes, manipulating and changing the ballots at the courthouse, and swapping boxes.

Just one other thing in regard to the absentee ballots. I would like to have the other side show me where the State of Texas, the great State so ably represented by my good friends MORRIS SHEPPARD and TOM CONNALLY, Which bas many more votes than Alabama, ever voted half as many absentee ballots as voted for Bankhead in my State in 1930. I challenge them to show where any other Southern State with a population equaling that of Alabama ever voted onethird as many as voted for Bankhead.

My friends, these are serious things. They changed 5,000 votes cast for me, took them off my list and had them appear as 5,000 who did not vote for Senator at all. There were not 500 people who went to the polls in my State who did not vote for Senator one way or the other. They were hot, and hot to the collar. There • were not any neutral places down there. There were 5,000 of these ballots. They said," Do not give them to Bankhead; take them off Heflin and just leave them voting the State ticket." There w- ~e 5,000 like that.

What did they say about the general election? The day of the election · the Montgomery Advertiser said:

To-night there will rest in the ballot boxes of this State 250,000 votes.

And on that night, when the election was over, there were 250,000 votes in the boxes. They had had a report from the machine. The courthouse ballot fixers had told them. That is not all. Saturday afternoon before the election Tuesday Judge Chilton said one of the city gamblers told him that they had been advised that it would be safe to bet that Bankhead would defeat me by around 50,000 votes. He said, .. Why the change? You have been so fearful of the results you would not bet even money." They said they had a report, " It is all right. Bankhead's majority will be around 50,000." And his majority was around 50,000. Do these things mean anything? What do they mean? They mean that the plans were all made to steal it.

When the inauguration day came, what did they do? .The Bankhead Montgomery Advertiser, supporting him strongly •.

8938 .C,ONGRESSIONAL-RECORD~SENATE . APRIL 26

sa1d, "Let us not forget The state coiimiittee to·-day.- It deserves praise.'• I am giving the substance of what they said. "It deserves praise for its act in readfng Heflin and Locke out of the -party, for if the committee tad not read them out, Heflin would still be your Senator and Locke would be here to-day inaugurated as governor."

What is that? That is an admission that if the Democrats had had an opportunity they would have nominated m-e as their cholce for the Senate, but that they had been denied that· right, and they say the machine sllould be praised for putting it over. Nobody can deny that. These other supporters of Mr. Bankhead can not. That is a part of the political serpent's trail that is over it all.

I have already m~ntioned the legislature amending the primary law, and giving the committee the right now to do what they did in 1930, admitting that they did not have the right to do it then. The Senate is justified ~n that alone in declaring the primary null and void, and it ought to do it.

That is not all, however. Senator BLACK and Senator BRATTON made such a nice piea for Mr. Bankhead, stating how nicely he was arranging ..everything to see that I had a fair election. Let me show what he did. He .so resented interference with the machine in Alabama, and the program to put him in the Senate, that he had the legislature of my State pass a law authorizing the probate judges of Alabama, his partisans in 61 counties out of 67. to institute and carry on a senatorial investigation. He did that by solemn statute In the State of Alabama. He had the legislature pass a bill. I will never forget the startled look on the faces of the committee, even of my friend from Georgia, Senator GEORGE.

Senator WATSON, of Indiana, interrupted me when I was discussing it, when I was telling them that Mr. Bankhead had bad these probate judges authorized to institute this investigation, to carry it on, and that I would have to go and employ lawYers, if I recognized it, in 67 counties in the State to look after my interests, and that I was not able to do it, and that I would not recognize that thing. Senator VvATSON said, "Who did that?" I said, "Senator Bankhead," and Senator Bankhead nodded his head and sai-d, "Yes; I did it." That is not all. He said, " If the committee thinks that I ought not to let that go on, I can stop it."

Think of that, that he could set aside a statute, halt it, kill it, after it was solemnly enacted by the legislature and had the approval of the governor, a candidate, the product -of the regime, saying, "I can stop it right where it is." Senator HASTINGS looked up at him and said, " can you do •that?" He said, "Yes; I think I can."

Senators, what more do you want to convince you that my ·state is machine ridden and machine cursed, probate judges, partisans of Mr. Bankhead-and he admitted it-conducting an investigation involving me and my rights and your rights, and the rights of the people of my State, a partisan committee set up by solemn enactment at the instance of -Senator Bankhead? But Senator BLACK and Senator BRATTON would have you believe that Senator Bankhead had rendered me the utmost service, and had given a fair hearing .to get at the facts. I am giving you the truth, and showing you the fruits of the machine; and-

By their fruits ye shall know them.

What does the Bible say? If thine eye offend thee, pluck it out.

My state suffers from this stigma. Senators, it has to be removed. If you crush out the .fighting spirit of men of courage, who dare challenge these corrupt concerns, the day is not far distant when you will have a big political boss in every State, the people will be shorn of their power, and tyranny will come in apace. until our rights and liberties will be destroyed. Little by little and bit by bit you have to correct these things. Stamp this business out now right where you find it.

You could very well say to Mr. Bankhead, <>Go back. There is so much confusion, so much corruption, and fraud and deception and coercion and intimidation and skullduggery of every kind, burning of ballots, stealing of ballots,

changing of ballo~go back, you anct Heflin, run it out before the people of the State, and let them say who will come here to represent them, relieved of all this interference by the Power Trust. Some Senators will recall that when there · was an investigation in some of the lobby hearings, Senator BLACK connected John H. Bankhead up with the Alab&ma Power Co. interests.

They slipped a little line in the minority report that Heflin made a mistake in lining up with the power company. Was not that a smart thing? I think the solemnfaced Senator fr~m New Mexico had a hand in that, Senator BRATTON. That was a smooth little innocent-looking line that "Tom made a mistake lining up with the power company."

There were but two of the power-company lawyers from all over the State who supp(>rted me. All the rest of them, including the president of the company, supported Bankhead; and Aarhus says that his brother, Logan Martin, was in the .conference when they agreed on Bankhead's candidacy. They never had anything to do with my candidacy. No man has ever had a collar on my neck or ever told me what I could do or could not do. I have been a freelance in politics, supparting my party and fighting to hold it true to the purpose of its creation, never permitting it to be corrupt if I could prevent it, fighting corruption wherever I found it.

Now, in my State during the time I have been nominated without opposition, they have quietly crept upon us and built a machine that has got to be destroyed. I had no opposition in 1924 and not until 1930, so from 1920 to 1930 I had no opposition. We were not in the field knowing what was going on, and they built up this machine. They told you they had· the same kind of resolution in 1920. It is not so. I was not a candidate in 1922. They did not have anything like this ·resolution then. They did not have one in 1924 when I was renominated without opposition. They had one a little akin to it in 192ft Never until 1930 did they have one like this. I challenged it. I told them in the committee here that if they could produce a like resolution I would give them $100, and they could not do it. The law was violated in passing it. They knew they were violating it. They were relying on the power of the machine and the interests back of it to put it over down there, and they are relying on it here. That interest is at work here. I told one Senator about a mighty good man telling me that great pressure by the power concerns was being brought around here to drop my contest. I want the truth brought out and justice done.

Some of the same interest sat up there in the press gallery yesterday. They said,~' They ain't going to let Heflin speak.'' It just tickled them good. They represent that interest. When the vote said I could speak. two or three of the boys had to have smelling salts. It only applied to two or three. A vast number of them are all right. I have even quit calling them" hickory-nut heads." They are clever boys in the main, as I have said frequently.

I want to remind you of a prophecy by Mr. Bargeron. In 1920 I was a candidate for the Senate in Alabama. There were five candidates in the field. I led them all in 55 counties out of 67. The Washington Post always boasts of making the proper prognQstication about an election. It predicted my election in October, 1920, and I won. In 1930, in October, this same Bargeron wrote his prophecy in the Post and said, "As sure as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, Tom Heflin is coming back. They have no chance to beat him in Alabama. His election is a foregone conclusion." That is the substance of it. That was his prophecy.

Now, how do these newspapers get their information? They get it by writing to all sources, your friends and your enemies, those who differ from you and those who are indifferent. They get it from every angle. Then they consulted all and made up their minds. The conclusion by Mr. Bargeron was that I would be elected " as sure as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west." Is not that strange?

' 1932 _C.ONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8939 He had not consulted the machine. He told the truth about my election. I was elected, but, as they said, I would get the votes but' Bankhead would get the certificate.

Senators, we expected to show by Governor Graves, the governor of the State at that time, a Democrat, that he told me that they would steal the election from me. What does this show? The Democratic governor, knowing the activities of this machine ani the extent to which it would go, told me in advance that they would steal the election from me.

That is not all. He told a member of his staff, Judge Wilkinson, " Tom will get the votes, but the machine will steal them from him." WJ have not had a chance to put him on the stand. I asked the full committee to let me summon him. I hope I have· at least gotten my old colleague, Senator BLACK, to see something about this case that he evidently did not know before. . Here is a startling thing. There were but 19 boxes out of a total of 2,043 where the ballots were properly rolled and sealed. What did that indicate but a state-wide conspiracy to do a good job of it and do it all over the State? If you did not seal the boxes, you could rinlock them and go in and lock them again, and nobody could tell you had been in there. But if you sealed them you had to break the seal, and that told the tale. All three names are supposed to be written on it, and the seal would be torn in two, with one man having to write all three names; and they did that in many instances.

Senators, they had in the boxes brought here over 10,000 illegal ballots for me and nearly 30,000 illegal for Bankhead. That is some more skullduggery. How did they get any illegal ballots in there for me? They would not permit my friends to vote where there was any question raised regarding their right to vote. They harassed them and annoyed them at the polls. Nobody could vote for me who was not a qualified voter. They saw to that. But what was necessary when they were going to bring the boxes here? They opened them and fixed some of them so they would be called illegal for Bankhead and some would be called illegal for me, but fixing it so that by subtracting them he would still have a majority clear above the line. They fixed them, they are smooth artists. They know how to manipulate these things.

Mr. President and Senators, I want your very close attention to this important summary by Judge Wilkinson, my chief counsel:

The record shows that the following propositions have been established in this contest:

. 1. The .,Democratic primary in Alabama in 1930 was illegal and unlawful and Mr. Bankhead's alleged nomination was null and void.

2. Mr. Bankhead refused to do anything which would tend in any way to correct the illegal action taken by the Democratic State executive committee after he had been informed by Senator BLACK and other competent lawyers who supported him that the action of the committee was unlawful and that any nominations coming from the proposed primary would be null and vo1d.

3. The statement filed by Mr. Bankhead of his expenses during the primary did not comply with the Alabama law, and under that law he was not entitled to have his name placed on the ticket in the general election. .

4. It was as essential for_ Mr. Bankhead to be lawfully nominated as it was for him to be a qualified elector, in order to be elected in A!abam~. Nomination is one of the conditions precedent to being elected to office in Alabama.

5. Not being lawfully nominated, Mr. Bankhead was not elected. His name was unlawfully on the ballot in the general election.

6. Senator Heflin was regularly nominated as the statutes of Alabama require; his name was lawfully on the ballot in the general election held on November 4, 1930, and he received every vote that could be lawfully cast for United States Senator from Alabama in that election.

7. There are 2,043 boxes ln 64 counties in Alabama. 8. The boxes in three counties were unlawfully burned as soon

as an investigation of the Alabama election was undertaken. 9. The seals on at least 905 boxes were unlawfully broken and

the boxes entered prior to their delivery to agents of the committee in Alabama.

10. In 1,918 boxes (practically 94 per cent of the total) the ballots were not numbered as required by law.

11. There are 1,842 ofiicial envelopes, papers, etc., requiring the signatures of two or more election ofiicers, where two or more names were signed by one person in violation of the law.

12. There are 497 boxes in which the bal19ts were found folded and apparently bad never been handled by the election ofiicers.

13. There are 488 additional boxes in which the ballots were in their original folds, the ballots in each box being small tight folds and in many instances uniformly folded. The physical appearance of the ballots in these boxes refutes any suggestion that they were ever opened and counted on election night or at any other time before they reached Washington. ·

14. There are 228 boxes in which the tally sheets were not totaled.

15. There are 569 boxes tn which a list of the qualified voters, by which the election was held, which is required by law to be certified and secured in the box, was missing.

16. There are 576 boxes wherein the ballots were found loose in the box instead of being rolled, sealed, secured, and identified as required by law.

17. There were 651 boxe~ in which the stubs were not detached from the ballots, showing that these ballots were surreptitiously "stuffed" into these boxes, and law (code, sec. 494) requiring stubs to be detached from the ballots before they are placed in the box.

18. There are 1,119 boxes in which there was no sealed certificate of the results as required by law.

19. There are 543 boxes that contain ballots from which the stubs have not been detached, wherein the stubs were not initialed, showing- that these ballots never were ofiicial ballots, the law requiring the stub .of an ofiicial ballot to be Initialed by one of the election officers. (Sec. 493, Code of Alabama.)

~0. There are 429 boxes in which no certificate of results (reqUired by law t.') be sealed and deposited in the box) could be found in the boxes. Two hundred and thirty-five alleged certificates were procured from outside sources, leaving 194 boxes with-out any certificate from any source. .

21. There are 643 boxes in which no certified poll list-1. e., a list of the electors who voted in that box--<!ould be found. The law requires a certified poll list to be deposited in the box and the box sealed after the ballots have been counted.

22. There are 2,335 incomplete challenged oaths in the boxes. 23. There are 50 boxes wherein more ballots were found than

voters shown on poll lists. · 24. There are 82 boxes wherein the poll lists showed more voters

than ballots found in the boxes. 25. There are 23 boxes wherein the ballots now in those show

that the impression made in marking · one ballot was carried through and made an impression upon the other ballots. This shows these ballots were marked while the ballots were in a pad.

I have mentioned that. 26. The ballots of watchers on duty to see that the election was

fairly conducted, who voted for Hetl..in, were changed or swapped for ballots marked for Bankhead, without the watcher becoming aware of it, so artistically and so deftly was this fraud and thievery perpetrated.

Senators, there was a man in a precinct in Talladega City-! think his name was Carpenter-who they said was a manager for me. When the Bankhead managers got through with the count there they said, "Now, do you not think this election has been fair?" "Yes." "Well, will you not give me a written statement to the effect that it has been fair?" "Yes." So this Bankhead manager wrote out a statement:

This is to certify that this election has been fair-

And so forth. They got this fellow to sign it. Judge Wilkinson, my attorney, on cross-examination asked, "Well, why did you want to get this man to sign a certificate like that? That would indicate that you were practicing some skullduggery and you wanted a certificate from him." "Well," he said, "there was a good deal of talk round about stealing the election "-think of it-" and I just wanted his statement." "And you got him to sign it?" "Yes." "He is a Heflin man?" "Yes, sir; representing Mr. Heflin at the box." Judge Wilkinson turned and said:

I should like to call the attention of the Senate committee to the fact that Carpente1· was a Bankhead supporter and voted for him.

They were not only putting over such skullduggery as I have indicated, but they were attempting to prove that the election was fair by a witness and a manager supposed to be for me but who was really a Bankhead man.

At Tuscaloosa there was a man by the name of Tucker who was strong for me and was fighting for me that day. They even called the solicitor in to quiet him. He was protesting against the skullduggery practiced, and he was very zealous and enthusiastic for me. They. changed his ballot and when it got here it was marked for Bankhead. Senators, they were smooth artists; they knew their business.

8940 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRiL 26 Now, juet a few more of these cases and I shan be through

with this phase of lt, _and ~hall .soon be tbrough with all of it. Judge Wilkinson goes -on to tell how many challenged votes were ignored.

27A Ballots marked for Heflin and cast for Heflin are in the boxes now marked "for Bankhead, or a Ballkhead ballot has been swapped for the ballot originally marked and cast for Heflin.

'28. Ballots marked and cast for Heflin were not in the boxes when they were collected by the committee and have never been found.

29. Forgery was resortd to in order to cast absentee ballots for Mr. Bankhead. Many witnesses went to the polls to find on arrival that an absentee ballot had already been cast for them without their knowledge or consent.

Senators, let me relate an incident here. A poor exservice man, crippled, wounded on the battlefields of France, suffering in his home, wanted to vote for _me. Friends went to see him; they got him to fix up an absentee ballot; he marked his ballot for me. They took the ballot back to the courthouse. One of his friends, a comrade in the service, said, "Do you not know they will change your ballot? They will mark you for Bankhead 3ust as sure as you are born." "Well," he said, "I hardly feel able to go to the polls, but if you will come get me I will go in person; I will vote tor Senator Heflin." They went by his home and carried him to the polls, walked by his side, he leaning upon them. When he approached the ballot box the officials said, "You have already voted an absentee ballot." He said, "I have come €arly and I want to vote in person; give me that absentee ballot." Well, they did not' want to do it, but they did. He opened the ballot and found that they had changed it and it was marked for Bankhead. This poor boy in the vigor of health followed his fiag, he took it across the sea, helped carry it to victory on the battle front ln France, and brought it back covered all over with the glory of his valor. Crippled and wounded, advantage was taken of that boy who offered his life for his country, and his ballot was changed. He who had shed his blood and offered to die for his .country; who got up out of a sick bed to assert his right to vote f-or me, the friend of the ex-service men and the friend of the boys in the service; goes down to the polling place and finds in the hands of the Bankhead regime a forged ballot voting him contrary to his choice and for Mr. Bankhead for Senator. Senators, if they will go so far and stoop so low as to violate the faith of a wounded soldier and vote him under the dictates of the machine, my God, what is it that they will not do? I know what they will do and the people of my State know. They have been through this; they have understood what they will do; they have witnessed it.

Mr. President, I am going to print the other points made here by Judge Wilkinson at this point in my speech.

The matter referred to is as follows: 30. Appro-ximately 36,000 illegal votes cast have been discovered

.by the supervisor. How many more illegal ballots were cast we do not know at this time.

31. Ballots were handed voters that had been previously marked for Bankhead; they had been so marked when they were received by election officers.

32. Many witnesses testified that persons desiring to vote for Senator Heflin were challenged without cause and were so annoyed that they left the polllng place without voting.

33. In many instances a hat box or other similar box was used fns~ad of a regular ballot box, some of the ballots being put in the box and others being piled around tt.

34. Watchers selected by Senator Heflin were threatened and prevented from doing their duty.

35. Persons were permitted to vote without appearing in person. Managers left the polling place with blank ballots and returned with them marked and they were placed in the ballot box as though the voter had appeared in person. Some of these we:e sick, some were in hospitals, some were at the roadside in automobiles, and one person was 35 miles away. This was a widespread practice.

36. There were two instances where ballots were rejected over protest, one where 21 ballots were rejected., and another where '24 ballots were rejected. All of these were cast !or Senator HefU.n and counted by the supervisor ..

37. One person at least was employed to solicit persons residing in Jefferson County whose names were on the qualified list in Shelby County to cast absentee ballots. The testimony shows that there were 107 such persons solicited by one person and that 63 of them voted.

36. The iaw of Alabama provides that a person paying the poll tax of another shall be guilty o! bribery and shall be imprisoned

I

fur not less than one and not more than ftve years. Testimony shows that U was not only permitted, but it was the practice in Alabama to pay the poll tax or other persons. n is lmpossible to say how many persons voted whose tax had been Ulegally paid.

39. Tw.o pe11ions were permitted to vote who admitted to the officers that they lived in another county, but that it was too late in the day for them to get to their regular pollln~ place.

40. Thousands of persons were permitted to vote by absentee ballots who did not live in the county in which they voted.

41. Booths for the accommodation of voters were not furnished in accordance with the Alabama law.

42. In 5zr.3 election districts the oaths of the inspectors, clerks, and returning officers were not attested. ~. Six .bundred and thirty-four inspectors did not subscribe to

oath. 44. Four hundred and fifty-three clerks did not subscribe to

oath. 45. Three hundred and forty-nine returning officers did not

6Ubscr1be to oath. · 46. Six hundred and !.our inspectors did not certify to poll

11st. 47. In 140 election districts the poll list was. not signed by the

lnspectorsJ clerk&, or returning officer. 48. Thirty-one election districts where the committee was not

furnished the _poll · lists. The committee could not ascertain whether the 186 officers in those districts subscribed the oath or not.

49. The Legislature of Alabama passed an act since the 1930 election, and after this investigation had been begun by the committee, directing the probate judges of Alabama to investigate the Alabama election in 1930 for United States Senator. This was done at the instance of Mr. :Bankhead. Under the Alabama law the election is largely controlled by the probate judge of each county. Mr. Bankhead admitted that 60 out of the 67 of these probate judges were partisans of his.

50. The report of the supervisor shows that the election law of Alabama 1n the 1930 election was not fully complied with in a single precinct.

51. Irregularities of such substantial nature and so numerous vitiate an election without regard to direct proof of actual fraud.

52. Proof of widespread violations of the election law is prima. facie evidence of fraud and makes out contestant's case.

Mr. HEFLIN. I want to quote now a word or two from -the old war horse from Missouri who used to be here, Jim Reed. Referring to the minority report, Mr. Hampton, in his able speech to the full committee, quoted as follows:

Even if the legality of the primary were a proper matter !or the consideration of the Senate, the action of the people ln the general election has foreclosed consideration of it.

That is what the Bankhead minority report says. Let me answer the minority report upon this point. Says Mr. Hampton-

• • by quoting from one whose legal learning all will concede; a master of the law of elections, and one whose service to the cause of honest and clear elections can never be forgotten.

He goes on to say other nice things about Mr. Reed, and then he .quotes him as follows:

Mr. REED of Missouri. They [frauds in the primary, did not make him incapable of election to the United States Senate, but they made it improper for him to sit in the United States Senate, because one of the steps by which he secured his election was through improper methods used to get on the ticket .

Have I not shown here some of the improper methods, the reprehensible methods, the tyrannical and corrupt and the law-violating methods adopted by the contestee to get upon the ticket at all, and that, too, in the face of warnings from lawyers of great learning. Mr. BLACK was one of them, Judge Anderson was one of them, and Supreme Court J'udge Thomas, .of Alabama, was another. They all told him of the dangerous pitfalls in his path. " Do not tread that path, 'Mr. Bankhead; it is a void road; your primary is illegal, null, and void." And Anderson said, "If ever a competent tribunal passes on it, it is doomed."

Here we are at the judgment bar of the Senate and asking courageous Senators to pass on it, and I have no doubt they will do so. You can and should pass on the primary and declare it illegal, null, and void, and that I am entitled to my seat in this body.

I will refer again to the case of Parrish against Powers in Kentucky. Some Senators, perhaps, did not hear my previous reference to it. Parrish was nominated in the primaries as the law provided; Powers was not, but his name was put upon the ticket any way by the committee. A gen~ eral election was held. Senator BRATTON and Senator BLACK stated the election cured all the defects behind it, but that

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8941 is not so. A general election was held and Powers was elected; he received the most votes. Parrish, a Republican, took the case to the courts, and the court sustained his contention that he was legally nominated and Powers was not, and never was legally on the ticket. The case went to the Supreme Court of Kentucky, and that court held that Powers was never legally on the ballot and no legal ballots were cast for him; that all legal ballots cast for that office were cast for Panish; and Parrish got the office under the decision of the Supreme Court of Kentucky. Yet these Senators stand here and argue-and the Senator from Wisconsin took the same position-that all that is behind you just so the people come along and elect. Former Senator Reed of Missouri disposed of that contention. He goes on further to say:

Because one of the steps by which he secured his election was through improper methods used to get on the ticket.

If be can not be there honestly and legally, we can not afford to sustain him here.

Senator Reed said further: I am going to give the Senator my opinion and give it to him

very plainly. Does the Senator mean to say that if a man by any kind of fraud or corruption can get his name upon the ticket, and 1f thereafter he ls elected, he ls entitled to take his seat,

. although he never could have been npon the ticket except for that fraud and corruption, and that the vote of the people is final and conclusive, regardless of any fraud, chicanery, or corruption which may have been committed, does the Senator take that position? • • • I hold to the view that whenever any material step which a candidate for office takes in order to secure a seat in this body 1s a corrupt step, materially affecting the result • • • it is the duty of the Senate in protection of the country to say that that kind of fraud and corruption vitiates the election. That Is my view. To take the view that if a man can by bribery, by fraud, by corruption, by any kind of villainy, get his name printed upon a party ticket so that, although there may be great numbers of the people who vote their protests, yet in the general sweep of the election he 1s carried over with the tide he must thereafter be seated, is to open the door to every kind of fraud and iniquity; it 1s to say to every scoundrel who 1s at large, "All you have to do 1s by some means to get upon a ticket in a State that is largely Democratic or largely Republican and then by virtue of the very fraud which gave you that position you can finally land here and there 1s no power to prevent it.'' If that is the case, then the Senate is defenseless and rogues may as well begin their nefarious business in the open.

That is what Senator Reed said. That is enough on that point. I should love to quote his remaining statements on that subject.

Mr. President, there is a. quotation here from a former learned and able Senator, Senator Hoar, of Massachusetts. He talks about the ballot boxes being found open. Listen:

It makes no difference for the ·purpose of my point whether the ballot box was there In an exposed place for 12 hours or 12 days. Now, I do not claim that there is any evidence here that • • • any person entered it, opened that box and substituted other numbered ballots for the ballots which it contained. All I have to say is that an adroitness less tha.n that practiced for a less-important purpose in many ordinary cases of crime, robbery, burglary, and forgery could easily accomplish that result. Now we know how eager, how unscrupulous. how adroit, in many instances, are the means which are used to affect political contests. It 1s not the question whether the friends of the very respectable and very able gentleman who claims this seat did, or were capable of doing such a thing • • •. The interests o1 the sitting Member and of the contestant disappear before a question like this, which involves the interests of the American people in the establishment and maintenance of a strict, wise, and safe rule of public policy. It is not merely a question whether the recount was correct; it is a question whether you know and are sure that the thing counted upon the recount was the same thing that was counted, or should have been counted, at the time the original count was made.

There it is, over again, away back in Senator Hoar's day. Who can ten that these ballots in the boxes that were open were the ballots that were cast and counted on election day and night? You can not do it, Senators.

I have spoken at great length. I trust I have not wearied too much the. patience of Senators who have done me the kindness to listen. Soon I shall have finished. The case will be left for your determination. Others may speak without my having opportunity to speak in reply to them. I challenge them to refute the strong and mighty facts that I

LXXV--563

have laid bare here to-day, and I am not half through with the presentation. I could pick out various kinds of fraud and corruption that have been practiced and speak on this subject for 20 hours, 30 hours, I do not know how long.

We have not bad the opportunity to get one-fourth of the evidence in my State. My case is here before you upon the urgent insistence of the contestee, Mr. Bankhead, not by me or my counsel. By him and his partisan friends it has reached this floor without ever having been closed formallY by the contestant. That is a terrible indictment against those who brought it about; but the facts and the candor of the situation impel and compel me to tell the truth about it.

Some strange things have happened. The power interests have not slept one particle since this matter got going. They want to have it stopped, close it up, and let Mr. Bankhead keep the Senate seat. You know they do not like to be a party to putting somebody over and then have you come along and disturb the works. They want it left alone. They want to get control, not only in my State, but in your State; and that giant evil is going to be a great menace in this country.

I believe in giving the power companies a fair deal. I want them treated justly and fairly; but I do not want them to have the privilege of gobbling up the power sites in my State and every State in the Union and have them ..all owned in a little while by a gigantic power trust, to the hurt and injury of the masses in every State of the Union. I do not want that.

I have shown you the connection of Mr. Bankhead and his friends with the Power Trust .. If Mr. Aarhus's statement was not true, if I had been in Mr. Bankhead's place, I would have insisted that that evidence be run down and produced; but he bas not done it. If Mr. Logan Martin was not present in the conference when Mr. Bankhead was approved as a candidate satisfactory to them, I would have challenged them to produce the witnesses to establish that. If it was not true that Mr. Raskob said that he did not like the situation in Alabama, that the Alabama people did not seem to want Bankhead, they were taking no interest in him, but he would produce $250,000 if they would raise $50,000 more, I -would ask them to produce the proof. If they had asserted that $800,000 was handled in New Orleans, and that Mr. Bankhead made a quick visit to that city immediately following the election, I would ask them to go into that and explain it all. I would stand here and say, " Senators, I do not want an election that is tainted in any way. Let him go on and finish his case. Let him get all the evidence be can, sift this thing to the bottom, produce all the proof, close the case in the natural way, come in and let it be submitted and concluded by the contestant and the contestee, and then let the Senate vote." That would have been a much better way to handle it; but when the contestee insisted that the case be closed, it was closed.

Why, when the Senate first ordered the count of the ballots the contestee said: " There is no use counting them. There is nothing wrong. Do not bother the ballots." Then he said, " Do not let them count more than 10 counties. That will settle it." When they counted 10 counties, they found the condition so rotten that even Senator GEORGE and Senator BRA-TTON consented to go on and count them all; and the more they counted the more they found and the worse the thing got. They went through with the whole count and found the awful condition of the ballots, and reported on them.

There is a multitude of items in those reports-hundreds of them, thousands of them. There are law violations, not by the hundreds but by the thousands in my State, and penalties provided for practically every one of them. Still, these Senators have stood here, some of them reputed to be very good lawYers, and they have told you t.pat these were merely directory statutes, although they have severe penalties to them-fine and imprisonment. They tell you that they are just directory. That is not true, Senators. They are not directory; they are mandatory. They have a penalty attached to them telling what you have to do in the premises.

8942 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 They treat very lightly the matter of protecting these

ballot boxes. They do not seem to think it amounts to much that they have just opened a thousand and a little more. You know they do not want us to go into these things. They wanted us to close up the matter and be done with it. They reminded me of the story of an old negro down in Arkansas.

He had stolen a pig weighing about 70 pounds from Mr. Jones. He dressed tl}e pig nicely and took him home. They searched for that pig high and low and could not find him. They thought of old Sam's house out in the middle of the field. The sheriff and the deputy went out looking for the pig. They went in, and old Sam was sitting there rocking a cradle, with quilts tucked in at the head and foot and ~ides, rocking the cradle, singing, "Doan' you cry little baby; you'll be an angel by and by."

The sheriff and deputy said, "Sam, we are looking for that stolen pig of Mr. Jones." Sam threw up his hands in holy horror, just like you have seen here. He said, "Dar you go, white folks! You 'cusing me of stealing. Oat's the way it is: Old nigger sitting here, and his baby nearly dead with the pneumony, and you 'cusing him of stealing a pig! Oat's it--Lawd have mercy! "

They looked around in the closet and under the bed, and they could not find the pig. They came back and said, ".Sam, what have you got in that cradle? " He said, "It's my baby, and he's got pneumony." They said, "Well, we will look in there." He said, "No, sah! If de light hits him, he's gone." "Well," they said, "we are going to look in there anyhow"; and Sam said," Well, you let me get out. I doan' want to see my baby die"; and that nigger fled across the field with the speed of the wind; and when they pulled the quilts back, there lay Mr. Jones's pig. [Laughter.]

That is the way it is here. They closed this case while I was gone. They did not want me to pull the quilt off their contestee's baby, " 'cause the light and the air would kill it." He had machine politics "pneumony." [Laughter.]

That is the situation you have-an attempt to railroad it in the first place and let the probate judges who supported Bankhead try the case in Alabama. Senators, what was that provision made for? My judgment is that it was made to canvass the field, to intimidate my witnesses, to get statements from them, and to tell them, ' Don't you make a different statement to the Senate committee when it comes down here. You are already on record"; and this committee of probate judges was to nose around and find out who were my witnesses, confer with them, influence them, intimidate them, reach them somehow. It is without a parallel in the history of the Senate.

I challenge them, Mr. Bankhead and Senator BLACK, to name another State in this Union in all the history of the State that ever had a legislature undertake to interfere with the Senate's right and prerogative to decide a contest for a Senate seat. There is not a case like it in history; but you need not be surprised that it is part of the offspring of that dreadful machine in my State which must be destroyed. It has no right to exist. It is not supported by the people of the State. It is supported by filthy lucre that comes from concerns that are getting their power taxes reduced. Doctor Busbee, of ·Jasper, Walker County, writes me that they have reduced the power company's taxes in Alabama $2,000,000 since Bankhead's election, and that they saved them $15,000 in his, Bankhead's, county of Walker alone.

What is the result of it? Public schools are closing in my State, and children who need education are being denied it because favor-seeking corporations are getting their taxes reduced, and the Alabama Power Co. has had its taxes reduced.

Mr. President, on July 4, 1930, we held a great meeting at Birmingham. There were over 2,000 delegates from the State there on that historic day. We condemned the machine in Alabama, and set out to destroy it. We defeated it, but it controlled the election. machinery and got the office.

At the polls in November we carried our ticket by anywhere from 100,000 to 125,000 votes. They gave Mr. Bankhead 150,000 and me 100,000. My own opinion is that we

·voted about 340,000 votes. They put the others aside some-

where, and stood by the count they had fixed before election day.

The case is in the hands of the Senate. You are soon to pass upon it. I lay it upon the conscience and judgment of every Senator here have I had a fair deal in this contest.

When the Nye committee were doing splendid work in my State, through Mr. Aarhus and Mr. Creech, the money gave out and their work stopped, and the Committee on Privileges and Elections took charge in the Senate. Those men were withdrawn from the field. We have never had a ·chance to produce the testimony they had to produce. I repeat, Senator GEORGE and Senator BRATTON would not agree for us to employ anybody who had anything to do with the Nye committee to work on the Alabama contest.

Was not that a strange position for them to take? It was strange, indeed. Who else could run down and get that · testimony? That was equivalent to saying," You can not get it." We had no money with which to continue. The money gave out in August, and we did not have a dollar to work on until December. Then we went down and took the testimony in my behalf for six days. The contestee had the last six days, and the case stopped there. No rebuttal testimony was taken; no testimony as to middle and south Alabama. It was all shut out by the insistence of Senator Bankhead's friends on the committee on this side of the Chamber. They closed the case, shut the door, and told the contestant, " Your case is ended." Then they come here and say that I have been amply heard on everything. My former colleague, Mr. BLACK, says I have had all this time to summon witnesses all over the State. But I have not had a chance to summon them from anywhere except a few right around Birmingham, with only three days' notice before we had to close. Did you ever see any other contest handled like that?

Senators, some strange things have happened in this case. What happened at Birmingham? Here is a point I want to bring home to you. Mr. Bankhead's managers were on the the witness stand testifying.

" Were you there on election day? " "Yes." "Did you help count the ballots?" "Yes." "You counted them correctly?" "Yes." Judge Wilkinson then examined the witness. I want you to

get this, Senators. "You say you were manager?" "Yes." "You are a Bankhead manager?" "Yes, sir." "You helped to count the ballots?" "Yes." " What did you do with them when you finished counting

them?" " We rolled them and sealed them." " Where did you put them? " " We put them in the ballot box." "Then what?" "We sealed the box and locked it." " Did you number the ballots? " Those were witnesses of Mr. Bankhead on cross-examination by

Judge Wilkinson, my attorney. " For whom were you acting? " "Bankhead." "You are a witness here !or Bankhead?" "Yes, sir." "You swear that you numbered those ballots? • "Yes, sir." " Did you roll and seal them? " "Yes, sir." "Did you seal the box and lock it?" "Yes, sir." Then Judge Wilkinson cross--examined. I invite the Sen

ate's attention to the fact that these ballots were not rolled and were not numbered, and the box was not sealed and locked. Then Judge Wilkinson asked the Bankhead witness, the manager:

"If these ballots are not numbered and sealed and rolled, as you say, are they the same ballots that you handled that day?"

He said: "I do not think so." What do you do with that? Every witness of Mr. Bank

head's whom we questioned on that subject said that they

19:12 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8943

numbered the ballots, rolled them, sealed them, and locked the boxes.

What do Mr. Bankhead's attorneys and his partisans here say? That they bad to open the boxes and go into them to get the certificates. What do the managers, the witnesses, say on that point? Judge Wilkinson asked them the ques.tion:

" Where did you put the certificates of election? " "We gave one to the returning officer, the canvassing board, of

course, we put one in an envelope separate to go to the probate judge, and posted one on the door."

" You did that? " "Yes, sir." . "Was there any necessity, Mr. Witness, Bankhead manager, for

going into the boxes to get the certificate or returns?" "No, sir."

That is important evidence. Every one of them whom he asked swore that, and not a witness of his contradicts it.

Senators, what is the matter? The sheriff simply said, when asked by our investigator, " What is this box doing open?"

"We had to open it to go in there to get the returns." Senator BLACK says there were 900 boxes sealed when

they got here, and they did not open them. I ask if it is the practice in Alabama to put the certificate in the ballot box, why was it not necessary to go into the 900? Had somebody else ah·eady been in there?

Senators, some of you have heard the story about the Spanish War, where a negro said he had cut off the feet of n 20 Spains:" They said, "What?" He said, "I cut off the feet of 20 Spains." "What do you mean, nigger?" He said, "I just cut the feet off." They said, "Why did you not cut their heads off?" He said, "Somebody else had done done that." [Laughter.]

So somebody else had " done bin " in these 900 boxes. They had sealed them, and they are boasting of that here and saying, "There were 900 boxes that were sealed there. They are intact." If that is true, they have destroyed the position they have heretofore taken that they had to go into the boxes to get the certificates.

Judge Brandon, of Tuscaloosa, former governor, swore that it was not necessary to go into the boxes to get the certificates.

Senators, the most conglomerate senatorial election mess you have ever had anything to do with where a Democrat was involved has been this one in my State. I have not had a chance to finish taking testimony and close my ·case-prove my case, as I would like to, but it has stopped. It will be very nice for them to have their way in putting the machine candidate over. But, Mr. President, let me say this, you can not treat lightly the manipulating of and interfering with the ballot box. In its protection and safeguarding lies the safety of this Republic.

They approach it from different angles. They steal this election through the manipulation of absentee voters, they get it through voting dead men and women, people dead for years, but still on the poll list. They get it in part by voting people who live out of the State, who used to dwell in Alabama. They get it by intimidating people to vote for Bankhead. They get it by buying votes. They get it by corporate influence, influencing the employees. They get it by tlfe power of the State administration, saying, "If you do not vote for Bankhead, you get no job." They get it by various means. They tried everything, a little here and a. little yonder, this plan and that plan, and in the end it all amounts to a great deal in stealing an election.

You have to have one rule. You can not tamper with the ballot box. You are the guardians of the ballot boxes of my State in this campaign. It is up to you. The case has been brought here. You are the tribunal that has the right to try it, and none other. No court in my state is going to try it. The supreme court had an opportunity, and because of these influences I have told you about, just waived it aside by saying they had no jurisdiction.

Now the machine has a candidate in the field against Judge Thomas. The only one on the bench who has opposition in the primary to be held the 4th of May is the judge

who rendered a decision against the primary, and the power bunch and the crooked election Qunch are after him. They have decided he must be defeated. But he will not be.

In this case, Senators, MI·. Bankhead erected a scaffold on which to execute me. Haman did that on a former occasion for Mordecai, and when the truth was made known to the King, Haman was hanged upon the scaffold he and his tyrannical henchmen had erected to murder poor Mordecai. Out of the tricks and the trades of this bunch that manipulated this bastard primary, Mr .. Bankhead erected a machine on which they expected to murder me politicallY. There is a high court to which we can come, thank God, and that is the Senate of the United States.

Senators, you must have the courage to pass on that primary. You must have the courage to render your decision as to whether it was legal or illegal. I can not believe the Senate has any cowards in it. I do not think you will fail to try this case, and try it honestly. It is up to you. I do not see how it can escape your final decision. It ought not to. It is your duty to decide it. We have appealed to you to do it. Senator BLAINE has said you have nothing to do with it, that it is a case for the courts.

What are you going to do with it if the court sidesteps it? Is the Senate going to sidestep it, too? It makes no difference whether it is a case in Alabama, Georgia, Minnesota, California, or where, we are entitled to a decision on it, an honest, plain, courageous decision on it.

What- are you going to do about guarding the ballot box? It is more sacred to us than the palace of the king. It is the citadel of this Nation's life and strength. There, in that sacred institution, is the power that will preserve or destroy this Republic. It is the duty of every honest man and woman to lock hands around it, and then for the Senate to stand with drawn sword and say, "You can not enter here if you tamper with the ballots in these boxes. They are · sacred things." .

I read a story of the king's troops who had gone out to battle. Sir Roland, one of the bravest of them all, was assigned to the post of guarding the gates around the palace of the king. He was dreadfully disappointed. · He wanted to go out and be in the thick of the fight. Brave soldier, he loved his king, but he was told," You stand here and guard this gate and do not permit anybody under any excuse to enter the palace."

He stayed there. He could hear the charging war horses on the highway in the distance. He could hear the clash of sword with breastplate of the opposition. He knew they were engaged in the thickest of the .fight. He wanted to be there. He wanted to feel the thrill of actual combat out on the battle front. But the king had trusted him to guard the gate of the palace.

The first imposter that came was a man dressed in woman's apparel with a basket on his arm. He said, H Will you please, sir, let me come in to get some food for myself and starving children? We are friends of the king." ·He said, "I am very sorry, but my orders are not to admit anyone. I will have some provisions brought out to you." But that did not satisfy the imposter. Sir Roland bad food passed out between the iron palings and stood there with his sword and spear. In the folds of the woman's skirts worn by the imposter was disclosed, as he turned away, a sharp sword. If Sir Roland had opened that gate and been off his guard a moment, an expert swordsman would have slain him and the enemies of the king would have been in possession of the palace in a few minutes. But Sir Roland, true to his oath and true to his king, alert always, stood guard, and the man dressed as a woman went away.

In a Uttle while a soldier came in the uniform of the king's guard. His shoulder was cut with a sword. He said, " The king bas sent me in for treatment · and rest." Sir Roland said, "I can not admit you.'~ "But," he said, "the king sent me." He had on a uniform which he had taken from the body of a soldier of the king whom he had killed. Sir Roland rebuked him and said, "I fought all day after I was wounded worse than you are." He went away. He had a sword with which he expected to kill Sir Roland.

894-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 Later on in the afternoon an old man, apparently, with

bowed head and feeble step, white hair and white beard, came feebly walking up to the gate and appealed to Sir Roland's weakness. Sir Roland loved a beautiful sword. He displayed a beautiful sword with golden handle. The old imposter said, "If you will let me in, I will give you this sword. I am a friend of the king. I am weary of war: I want rest. I am old and feeble." Sir Roland said, "I would like that sword and I would love to possess it, but the king told me to guard the gate and I can not admit you."

Just then he heard the shouts of the king's soldiers coming home, coming home in triumph, loping their horses down the slope near the palace. One of them said, " Yonder is the old impostor now." They hurried up, pulled the wig off of this old man, and displayed a keen sword at his side. He was a young man and the best swordsman of the opposition. He would have slain Sir Roland if he got inside the gate and the troops of the opposition would have been in possession when the king and his soldiers returned.

That night as they sat down at the long feast table the king had a beautiful light thrown upon the one who had rendered the greatest service during the day, and lo! the light played upon the face of Sir Roland, who had stayed home and guarded the gate, who kept the palace, and all was well when they who fought in the field returned to their possessions inside the rron gates and wall.

Senators, the ballot box in my State is the citadel where the people deposit their expressed will. In those bal1ot boxes are the weapons that they used on election doy. They represent their rights and liberties, the greatest weapon known to free' men, the ballot, with which man will preserve his rights and liberties, and the ill use of which and abuse of which will destroy his liberty. "The ballot box," the lawmakers of my State have said, "is so sacred ·that when you get through with the ballots you will roll them tight and seal them, no more to be looked at except in case of a contest. If the contest does not come in six months, so sacred are these ballots that the sh-ertif must burn them in bulk without ever unrolling them to see how anybody voted." Sacr~d institution! "High sheriff, lift up your hand and swear by the gods that you will defend that ballot box and keep it inviolate; permit no one, Bankhead supporter or Heflin supporter, to invade the sacred precincts of the Alabama ballot box and open the door and go in and rifle these sacred instruments placed there by the hands of the voters, the sovereign voters of the State. If you permit this ballot box to be opened, you are unfaithful, an unworthy official. You are a criminal. You violate the law. Every time it happens there is a $500 fine and an imprisonment penalty beside."

What did they do? Did they. guard the gate like Sir Roland did? No! In 1,014 instances out of 2,043 they marched in the ballot-box burglars and took possession of the sacred Ark of the Covenant, the ballot boxes in my State. They were turned over to Bankhead supporters; they were manipulated by Bankhead supporters. None of these ballot boxes were opened by my supporters. That is the truth about it.

Senators, wbat are you going to do about it? I want to say this in conclusion. I have spoken at great length. I appreciate more than I can tell the Senate the kindness extended to me in this matter. I wish I could have had all my evidence and could have laid it before you in consecutive order from beginning to end. We have been denied that. I have been denied it at the instance of the contestee and his friends. Remember that. I have not been permitted to close my case because they have denied me the right to do it. I shall not soon forget the treatment of the Senator from Georgia [Mr. GEoRGE] and the Senator from Ne.w Mexico [Mr. BRATTON] when they got up in the committee andrefused to serve when this matter was referred back to give me a chance to get further testimony. I never witnessed such a scene and I hope I may never again. I do not think that was fair treatment that was ·accorded to me. After I was gone they decided to act again on the committee, and

during my absence Closed the case, and now it has gone to you.

Senators, you must decide it. I hope you will do what is fair and just in the matter. If you decide this case as you ought to, you are bound to declare that Senator Bankhead was never legally nominated, was never legally on the ticket, and therefore could not e elected. That is the first part you have to do with.

On the other hand, coming down to the general election, you will say, "Gentlemen, the trail of the serpent of corruption is over it aU. Why did you burglarize these ballot boxes? Why did you number some of them and not number others? Why did you number some with ink and some with pencil? Why did you leave 58,000 unnumbered entirely? Why did you vote these 14,000 absentee ballots when you can not produce the voters of over 4,000 of them? " These are some of the questions that you must settle.

Mr. President, I would like to have the privilege of inserting in the RECORD the papers and matters I have referred to at the points I have mentioned.

The' PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and that order will be entered.

Mr. HEFLIN. Senators, again I want to thank you. You know there is a verse of Scripture that reads like this: "The time shall come when a man's foes shall be they of his own household." That is a great old book, the Bible. "They of his own household." Here we have a situation where I fear some of my friends on the Democratic side are not going to be very enthusiastic in really trying this case. I wish I had time to review the record of the votes in the Smith and Vare cases. I would like to see how these same Senators voted. I recall how they voted, but I would like to see how their names appear in the RECORD. They were very eager and anxious then to put Smith out. They really made some good speeches about the importance and necessity of safeguarding the Senate and keeping crooks and criminals out. I remember how eloquent some of them were, and when I see them failing to enthuse over safeguarding elections in a Southern State, a Democratic State, I am astounded; I am disappointed at the position they take. Let us hold fast to the doctrine that Washington laid down and that I quoted to you to-day. Party spirit? He said we all have it to a certain extent. To a certain extent it is all right; but when you reach the point that party spirit will cause you to lose sight of the good of your country it is party spirit gone mad, and the liberties of your people will .be lost if you submit to it.

I have fought the corrupt doings of the party machine. In doing it I have fought for the good of my party and the good of my country. I have fought crookedness and corIuption in Alabama. I shall continue to fight it. I have been engaged somewhat in a lecture tour in the country speaking on "America at the Cross Roads," discussing economic problems and various things that affect the life of this Nation. I shall continue to speak for the good of my country and the perpetuity of the free institutions of my country.

·I love the Democratic Party. I have given devoted service to it from my youth time. I have done far more than any man that sits in this Chamber for my party in my State. I do not say that boastingly. I have done more in other States in the affairs of the Democratic Party than any Democrat who sits on this side of the Chamber. I have letters from the chairmen of the national committee, when the campaigns were over, telling me how they appreciated my services. I have fought the battles of my party. I have tried to keep it clean and honest. When I came up in 1930 and submitted my claim to the party that has honored me for more than a quarter of a century, I was denied the right to ~nter the Democratic household where my forebears were born and died, shut out and not permitted to go in and submit my claim. I said, "Let the Democrats punish me. If I have sinned, let my party punish me. If they approve what I have done, then it is the will of the party, and the party

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE "8945

approves it, and that settles it." They said, "No; if we let him in he will be nominated." They would not allow the Democrats to vote.

I make the further statement to you if they had let me in Mr. Bankhead would never have been a candidate. My staying out meant his campaign and whatever would follow to the gang and the machine. Mr. Bankhead is a very wealthy man. Mr. Bankhead had it in his power to let me in. Mr. Bankhead and his machine kept me out. Mr. Bankhead and his crowd in Alabama are responsible for all the skullduggery practiced at the polls and following the election.

They say the election in some places was all right. Certainly, it was in many places. Then where did this skullduggery take place? It took place at the courthouse after the election. How did it happen that the ballot boxes were opened? Senator BLACK says Bankhead county officials were not opening them. He did not know. I knew. I was getting the news about it, and when we would go after them we would find half of them opened and entered in the household of Bankhead's friends, and my evidence destroyed. I do not know whether the ballots they contained were the ballots voted by the voters or not, and the Senate does not know. They are there; they are fixed; and, of course, they tally with the returns down there when they are counted here. They fixed them there. I never expected that there would be much difference shown by the recount, but it was the only way we could find out how the ballots appeared when we got in charge of them.

Now, there you are, Senators. Over half the ballot boxes in my State were opened and entered by Bankhead's partisans. My case is bristling with evidence like that, all up and down the line, evidence which I have been unable to produce because my case has been closed, the door shut in my face, and shut at the instance of the contestee and his supporters on this side of the aisle, with the aid of my friend from Wisconsin [Mr. BLAINE].

That is the situation. Take my case, Senators. Many of you have rendered some good and signal service here. I wish that some many more years of useful service. The Senate is

.a great body; it ought to be true to its traditions, true to the great ideals of the great statesmen who have served here. It ought never to degenerate into a body of politicians who will register and carry out the designs of crooked politicians in the States. Here is one place where they must not enter.

Like Sir -Roland, you should guard the gate with drawn sword against all imposters. When they come and say that these were minor irregularities, tell them, like Sir Roland ·"Get back, you imposter." When they say that the uniden~ tified absentee voters were all right, tell them to get back. And when they come with ballots forged by the hundreds and thousands in the ballot boxes, tell them to get back. When it develops that half the ballots have been opened and the boxes burglarized, tell them to get back; tell them to come here with clean hands, with an honest certificate and all will be well, " but if you come here with the trail of the serpent of corruption and fraud all over it we will not accept you in the Senate; and if you get in, as soon as the truth is known we will lift you out and send you back."

Senators, be just and fair to me; be just and fair to the people whom I represent, the people who elected me. More than two-thirds of the Democrats and three-fourths of the Republicans voted for me. I was elected by an overwhelming majority. You see what a fix they have got the ballot boxes in. They had charge of the election, and boasted of it in 61 ~ounties out of 67. You can see what chance I had~ compelling a fair election and fair count under those conditions. Not only that, but they were boasting that they

, would steal the election from me. I stand ready now to produce more than 1,000 reputable witnesses in the State who will swear that prominent Bankhead supporters told them

,that I would win the election but that they were going to steal it from me. · Senators, I thank you for your patience, for your goodness in giving me this opportunity to discuss this matter in a

rambling way, and to give you somewhat a picture of the situation in my State. I am hoping and praying that you will stay with it and give attention to it until it is settled, and settled right.

William Jennings Bryan, the Great Commoner, said," No cause is ever settled until it is settled right." Another has said:

Great is the facile conqueror; Yet happy he, who, wounded sore, Breathless, unhorsed, all covered o'er With blood and sweat, sinks !oiled, but fighting evermore, Is greater yet.

And Byron has said: For Freedom's battle once begun, Bequeath'd by bleeding sire to aon. Though baffled oft is ever won.

I pledge you in this sacred place with my heart and my all,. where I served as best I could for over 10 years, that I w1ll carry on in the interest of good government. I pledge the people of my State, who have honored me all through these years, who are supporting me now loyally and holding up my hands as I am fighting to smash the worst political machine outside of Tammany and Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, that I will carry on, fight on and on and on until we have a clean ballot and an hon~t and fair count, until we break the jaws of the wicked machine and pluck the spoil from its teeth. Corrupt machine politics shall not control my State. I do not care how many recruits in this body it draws into its fold, Alabama shall be free; my State will walk again with unfettered step; her voters will vote as they choose and, by the eternal God, every ballot shall be counted as cast. I thank you, Senators. [Applause in the galleries.]

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Sergeant at Arms will clear the galleries.

Mr . . McNARY obtained the floor. Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. President-The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from

Oregon yield to the Senator from Delaware? Mr. McNARY. I yield. Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. President, I think it is quite im

portant at this point for me to make a statement correcting some things said by Mr. Heflin.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Mr. President I rise to a point of order. '

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. 'l;'he Senator will state it. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. The Senate is not in order. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senate will be in

order. The occupants of the galleries as they go out will maintain some semblance of order.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. President, Mr. Heflin stated correctly that· he was prevented from producing all the testimony that he desired to produce. Several times during his address he state~ that that was due to the activities of the Senator from Georgia [Mr. GEORGE] and the Senator from New Mexico [Mr. BRATTON]. I want to say that that is not correct. The suggestion of stopping the taking of testimony was made by myself and concurred in by other · members of the subcommittee. I think it is my duty to make that statement and to make it at this time.

One other point with respect to voting in committee at the. trn:e ~· He~n was away. At the time I received my notice 1t did not mclude the consideration of the Bankhead case, and I so told. Mr. Hefiin. The matter was taken up, however, and, finding that it was about to be taken up I attended the meeting. The vote came, however, upon the statement being made by Mr. Bankhead's counsel that he did not care to argue the matter. It was an executive meeting, and there was ·no advantage taken of the fact that Mr. Heflin was away. I think it is due the Senator from Georgia [Mr. GEORGE] and the Senator from New Mexico [Mr. BRATTON] that I should make that statement.

PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts presented petitions of 82

citizens of the State of Massachusetts, ·praying for the passage of the bill <H. R. 9891) to provide for the establishment

8946 CONGRE33IONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 of a system of pensions for railroad and transportation t!IDployees and for a railroad pension board, and for other purposes, which were referred to the Committee on Interstate Commerce.

He also presented a petition of sundry citizens of Cambridge and vicinity, in the State of Massachusetts, praying for the passage of legislation providing for full cash payment of adjusted-compensation certificates of World War veterans (bonus), which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented a memorial of sundry citizens of Boston, Mass., remonstrating against the imposition of a tax of a cent a shell upon shotgun shells, which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

Mr. ASHURST presented a telegram from" Walker," Tuba ·City, Ariz., favoring an amendment of House bill 10236, the revenue and taxation bill, so as to exclude Indian-made goods from the proposed tax on jewelry, which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented a telegram from Thomas J. Elliott, commander Department of Arizona, Disabled Veterans of the World War, Tucson, Ariz., protesting against proposed amendment of section 19 of the World War veterans' act, relative to the introduction of evidence by veterans, etc., which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

Mr. JONES presented a resolution adopted by the council of the city of Tacoma, Wash., indorsing the proposal for the appropriation of $5,500,000,000 for a public-works program, and the making of $3,750,000,000 of such proposed appropriation available for loans to cities, counties, and States for the construction of highways, streets, bridges, water supply, sewerage works, public buildings, etc., which was referred to the Committee on Commerce. · ·

He also presented a resolution adopted by Snohomish Valley Council, No. 19, Junior Order United American Mechanics, of Snohomish, Wash., favoring the passage of the so-called Moore bill, being House bill 10602, for the further restriction of immigration, etc., which was referred to the Committee on Immigration.

He also presented a memorial of sundry citizens of Chehalis, Wash., remonstrating against proposed reductions in the compensation of Federal employees or curtailment of the annual-leave privilege, which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations. ·

He also presented a memorial of sundry citizens, being postal employees, of Wenatchee, Wash., remonstrating against proposed reductions in the compensation of postoffice clerks, which was referred to th~ Committee on Appropriations.

He also presented petitions of sundry citizens of Bordeaux, Bucoda, Centralia, Elma, Malone, and Pe Ell, all in the State of Washington, praying for the imposition of adequate import duties on logs, lumber, shingles, and pulp, which were referred to the Committee on Finance.

Mr. COPELAND presented resolutions adopted by Tully Grange, No. 617, Apulia, N. Y., indorsing the so-called

. Sparks-Capper stop ali-en representation amendment, providing that aliens shall be excluded from the count of the whole number of persons in each State in apportioning Representatives in the several States according to their respec- . tive numbers, which were referred to the Committee on Immigration.

He also presented a resolution adopted by the executive committee of the American Asiatic Association, at India House, New York City, relative to Senate bill 7 and House bill 4648, providing for the deportation of certain alien seamen, and for other purposes, and urging revision thereof, which was referred to the Committee on Immigration.

He also presented a resolution adopted by Finger Lakes Council, No. 196, Junior Order United American Mechanics, of Ithaca, N. Y., favoring the passage of legislation providing more effective investigation of violations of the immigration law, which was referred to the Committee on Immigration.

He also presented memorials of sundry citizens of New York City and Larchmont, N.Y., remonstrating against the passage of legislation providing for the payment of ad-

justed-compensation certificates (bonus) of World War veterans at the present time, which were referred to the Committee on Finance. .

He also presented a resolution adopted by members of the College of the City of New York, Post No. 717, American ~gion, of New York City, N. Y., opposing the passage of legislation providing for payment of adjusted-compensation certificates (bonus) of World War veterans at the present time, which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented a resolution adopted by the New York Commandery of the Military Order of Foreign Wars of the United States, protesting against the payment of adjustedcompensation certificates (bonus) of World War veterans at the present time, which was referred to the Committ~ on Finance.

He also presented resolutions adopted by the Royalton Township Taxpayers' Association, of Niagara County, N. Y .• favoring retrenchment in governmental expenditures and the imposition of only necessary taxation, which were referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented a petition of sundry citizens of New York City, N. Y., praying for the adoption of immediate measures to end national prohibition, so that taxes may be levied upon liquor, which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented a letter from H. D. Wolfe, vice president of Revere Copper & Brass <Inc.), of Rome, N. Y., favoring retrenchment in governmental expenditures, and inclosing copy of resolutions adopted by the Rome CN. Y.) Chamber of Commerce · relative -to proposed building construction, which, with the accompanying paper, was referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

He also presented resolutions adopted by the executive committee of the Merchant Tailors' Society, of New York City, N. Y., protesting against the imposition of a tax on sales of securities, also against the payment of adjustedcompensation certificates (bonus) of World War veterans at the present time, which were referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented memorials of sundry citizens of Buffalo and vicinity, in the State of New York, remonstrating against the imposition of taxes on automobiles, gasoline, lubricating oil, and, in general, on the motor industry, which were referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented resolutions adopted by the Massena <N. Y.) Chamber of Commerce, favoring the passage of legislation providing for a tariff duty on ground wood and chemical pulp, and also legislation providing for a surtax on products which are being shipped into the United States and quoted f. o. b. United States ports at a price far under the cost of production in the United States owing to the depreciated currencies of foreign countries manufacturing such products, etc., which were referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented a letter from the president of the American Chamber of Commerce in France <Inc.) , Paris, France, inclosing copy of a resolution adopted by the members of that chamber in regard to the alleged discriminatory attitude of the French Government toward American exports to France in the application of its policy of limitation of imports by means of quotas, and also copy of an editorial from the Paris edition of the New York Herald of the 3d instant, entitled "Inviting Reprisals," which, with the accompanying papers, was referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented a memorial of sundry citizens of Kew Gardens, Flushing, Bellmore, and Brooklyn, N. Y., remonstrating against the passage of Senate bill 695, relative to veteran benefits, which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented resolutions adopted by members of the AmityVille Business Men's Club, of Amity-ville, N. Y., favoring the balancing of the Budget and retrenchment in governmental expenditures, etc., which were referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 89-17 He also presented resolutions adopted by Hudson Post,

No. 184, American Legion, of Hudson, N. Y., favoring the construction of an addition to the Hudson city post office, starting not later than July 1, 1932, which were referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

He also presented a resolution adopted by the Mohawk Regular Democratic Club, of Long Island City, N. Y., protesting against proposed reductions in the compensation of Federal employees, which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

He also presented a resolution adopted by the Buffalo (N.Y.) Teachers' Club, protesting against the suspension or curtailment of Federal aid to the States for vocational education, which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

He also presented a letter in the nature of a memorial from members of the Sodus (N. Y.) Young Farmers' Club, remonstrating against the proposal to suspend for one year payments for vocational education, which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

He also presented a petition of suncL.ory citizens, being substitute employees of the Schenectady (N. Y.> post office, praying for the passage of pending legislation for the relief of substitute employees in the Postal Service, which was referred to the Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads.

He also presented resolutions adopted by the Rome <N.Y.) Chamber of Commerce, favoring a thorough investigation in the interest of economy to ascertain if there is an immediate need for the erection of a new post office in the city of Rome, N. Y., with a view to determining whether such expenditure may be postponed to a later date, and that like investigation may be made as to other proposed post offices and public buildings, the erection of which is now contemplated, which were referred to the Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads.

He also presented a resolution adopted by the common council of the city of Oswego, N. Y., favoring the repeal of the eighteenth amendment to the Constitution, which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

He also presented resolutions adopted by the executive committee of the Merchant Tailors' Society, of New York City, N. Y., opposing the maintenance of the eighteenth amendment to the Constitution and the Volstead Act, etc., which were referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

He also presented a memorial adopted by the Somerset Woman's Christian Temperance Union, of Utica, N. Y., remonstrating against the adoption of any measure seeking to legalize the sale of beer, which was referred ' to the Committee on the Judiciary.

He also presented resolutions adopted by the City Missionary Union and the Woman's Union Missionary Society, of Oswego, N. Y., favoring the maintenance of the eighteenth amendment to the Constitution and its enforcement law, which were referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

He also presented resolutions adopted by the State Convention Qf the Reserve Officers' Association, at Albany, N. Y., favoring the making of a sufficient appropriation to provide inactive duty and :flying training for the air reserve combat pilots during the remainder of the fiscal year 1932, etc., which were referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.

He also presented a resolution adopted by San Antonio Chapter, No. 1, Disabled Emergency Officers of the World War, of San Antonio, Tex., favoring the · maintenance of the emergency officers' retirement act of May 24, 1928, as the permanent military policy of the United States, which was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.

He also presented resolutions adopted at the annual meeting of the board of directors of the Laundryowners' National Association of the United States and Canada, in relation to the subject of activitjes of the Government in business and governmental expenditures and economies, which were referred to the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments.

PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE

Mr. COPELAND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD copy of a letter written

to the President of the United States by an honored member of the New York State Legislature, Hon. Louis A. Cuvillier. It is a protest against alienating sovereignty over the Philippines.

There being no objection, the letter was ordered to lie on the table and be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

AsSEMBLy CHAMBER,

Hon. HElmERT HooVER, President oj the United States,

STATE OF NEW YORK, Albany, February 22, 1932.

White House, Washington, D. 0. MY DEAR MR.. PRESIDENT: It is apparent to my mind that Con

gress during the present session will pass a bill granting independence to the Philippine Islands. Of course, this bill, though in my mind is absolutely unconstitutional, will have to meet with your approval or veto.

Laying aside the question if these islands are a liability instead of an asset, and if the Ph111ppines will be well governed under their own leaders, it is a grave question if Congress has the right to grant independence to these islands. As you know, under article 3 of the treaty with Spain at the conclusion of the SpanishAmerican War in 1898, "Spain cedes to the United States the archipelago known as the Philippine Islands " and the payment of $20,000,000 by the United States, and by article 2 of the same treaty, "Spain cedes to the United States the island of Porto Rico and other islands under Spanish sovereignty in the West Indies, and the island of Guam in the Ladrones." This treaty was ratified by the Senate of the United States and received the approval of President McKinley on April 11, 1899. The United States conquered these islands in the war with Spain. Each and every acquisition of territory annexed to the United States, either on the continent of North America or its insular possessions, was acquired either by conquest in war or purchase, was ceded to the United States by treaties; the only exception was the treaty between Great Britain and the thirteen original States, which was negotiated in 1783 and afterward.s ratified by the Congress of the United States and received the approval of the President of the United States, Great Britain acknowledged the thirteen original States to be free, sovereign, and independent States, ·and, following, the acquisition of other territory by the United States was as follows: The treaty with France, 1803, whereby France ceded the French possession in the North American Continent know was as the " Louisiana Purchase," on the payment of $15,000,000 to France. The next treaty was with Spain, 1819, whereby Spain ceded to the United States East and West Florida and adjacent islands dependent on sa.id Provinces. The next treaty was with the Republic of Mexico, 1848, whereby Mexico ceded to the United states Texas, New Mexico, and Upper California. The next treaty was with the Empire of Russia, in which Russia ceded its possessions in North America, Alaska (1867). In 1898, by joint resolution in Congress to provide for annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the United States, in which the Republic of Hawaii ceded absolutely and without reserve the Hawatlan Islands to tb.e United States of America, all rights of sovereignty on said islands. The next treaty, 1904, whereby the United States guaranteed independence of the Republic of Panama for the purpose of constructing the Panama Canal. So you can see by all of these treaties the word " cede " is the predominant word that gives absolute title to these territorial possessions to the people of the United States forever.

The question may arise why the United States gave recognition to the independence of Cuba in its treaty with Spain; it did so because the United States, on April 12, 189!}, through Congress, declared war against the Kingdom of Spain for the purpose of securing the independence of Cuba, but no such condition 1s attached to the treaty with Spain as to the possessions of the Philippine Islands. In the event that you do approve of the resolution for the independence of the Philippine Islands, I am of the opinion that the Supreme Court of the United States will declare such resolution unconstitutional. In the case of Downes v. Bidwell (182 U. S. 271) the court said: •• Where the Constitution has been once formally extended by Congress to Territories, neither Congress nor the Territorial legislature can enact laws inconsistent therewith." The Supreme Court, in Murphy v. Hausey (114 U. s. 44), said: "The people of the United States as sovereign owners of the national territories have supreme power oveJt them and their inhabitants. In the exercise of this sovereign domain they are represented by the Government of the United States, to whom all the powers of government over that subject have been delegated, subject only to such restrictions as are expressed in the Constitution or are necessarily implied in its terms or in the purposes and objects of the power itself. • • • But in ordaining government for the Territory, and the people who inhabit it, all the discretion which belongs to legislative power is vested in Congress; and that extends beyond all controversy, to be deter-

. mlned by law from time to ttme, the form of the local government in a particular Territory and the qualification of those who shall administer it." The Supreme Court stated in United States v. Tagm.a (118 U. S. 380) : "The power of Congress to organize Territorial governments and make laws for the inhabitants arises not so much from the clause in the Constitution in regard to the disposal of and making rules and regulations concerning the Territory and other property of the United States as from the ownership of the counti·y in which the Territories are and the right of exclusive sovereignty which JJ?.USt exist in the National Gov-

8948 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 ernment and can be found nowhere else." The Supreme Court held in the case of Sere v. Pitot (U. S. Cranch 336): "The power of the Government and the legislating for the Territory ~ the inevitable consequence of the right to acquire and hold territory." The United States Court further stated in Door v. United States (195 U.S. 143): "Until Congress shall see fit to incorporate territory ceded by treaty into the United States, we regard it as settled • • • that the Territory is to be governed under the power existing in Congress to make laws for such Territories and subject to such constitutional restrictions upon the powers of that body as are applicable to the situation!'

It is assumed that Congress in attempting to grant independence to the Philippine Islands does so under clause 2, section 3, of Article IV of the Constitution of the United States, which states: "The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the Territories or other property belonging to the United States; . and nothing in this Constltution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claim-; of the United States, or any particular State." The United States court stated in Kansas v. Colorado (208 U. S. 89): "The full scope of this paragraph has never been definitely settled." Most of the States in the Union were originally Territories--Indiana, Wisconsin, Il11nois, Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas, Missouri, Michigan, Kansas, Nebraska, Utah, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Idaho, Washington, Colorado, North and South Dakota, Oregon, Iowa, Minnesota, Arizona. Can it be conceded that these States above mentioned which were originally Territories that Congress had the constitutional power to alienate, sell, and convey the same to a foreign power or grant them independence and autonomy beyond the control and sovereignty of the people of the United States and the Government of the United States; if so, there is no valid reason why the insular possessions of the United States as well as part of the domain of the United State's in North America should not be returned to the sovereignty of the nations that originally owned them under the treaties negotiated between the United States and these foreign states of the property and territory so ceded to the United States.

It seems to be a disposition in Congress to let the Ph111ppine Islands go to the mercies of • other foreign nations who will conquer them just as soon as the United States relinquishes its sovereignty over these islands. It appears that many members of Congress are glad to get rid of these islands on the ground of selfish commercial interests, claiming that these islands' products come in competition with the pro<;lucts of the States and also that the emigration of the Filipinos to the States has a detrimental efi'ect on the citizens of the States to make a livelihood. Such idiotic theory is not worthy of the thought of an ignoramus who does not know the first rudiments of government. These islands, both as to production of agriculture and mining wealth, if properly exploited, w111 be an asset to the United States and a source of great revenue, and I have no patience with the Vandenbergs, Hawes, and Cuttings theory about the Philippine Islands. If they and their like would read the history of these islands by the late General Wood, Governor General for many years of the Philippine Islands, I am sure they and Congress would have an entirely difi'erent view as to the independence of these islands.

Never in the history of the United States has it ever ceded territory once acquired by it. From a defensive point of view these islands are an absolute necessity. The Philippine Islands, with the Hawalian and some more islands, give the United States the absolute control of the Pacific Ocean, the same as Gibraltar gives control to Great Britain of the Mediterranean Sea. If the United States were to abandon the Philippine Islands there is a profound feeling in the United States that we will suffer not only a vast loss of prestige but of trade and commerce in the Far East; that to give up these islands would practically be to retreat the United States out of the Pacific Ocean. In view of the aggressive action of Japan in Manchuria and in China there are deep misgivings as to what would happen to Americans' interests in the Orient or to the Philippines themselves if the Stars and Stripes should no longer float over these islands. Japan for the past 500 years has had an eye for the possession of the Phllippine Islands. In 1590 the Emperor of Japan, IDdyaski, demanded of the Spanish governor general of these islands their surrender to Japan. The Spanish governor general ignored the Emperor's request, and these islands remained in the possession of the Kingdom of Spain until 1898, when they were conquered by the United States in the War with ~pain. Recent events in Hawaii have served to emphasize the importance of the strongholds of the United States in the Pacific and as a warning to the United States to beware of the false step in this direction, because if these islands are once out of the United States it is a question whether the white race is to abandon Asia; which, to my mind, would be a prelude to a vast uprising in India against Great Britain, and is one which concerns the civilized world.

Respectfully, LoUIS A. CUVILLIER, ·

Member New York Legislature.

PROTECTION OF ALASKAN REINDEER HERDS Mr. BARBOUR presented a letter from Mrs. J. E. Barbour,

of Paterson, N. J., relative to the protection of the reindeer herds in Alaska, which was referred to the Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs and ordered to be printed in the RECORD. as follows:

KlLBARCHAN, Paterson, N. J., April 25, 1932.

Senator W. WARREN BARBoUR, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. BARBOUR: I am writing you on behalf of the Eskimos of Alaska, to ask that you will lend your influence toward any legislation which will protect the reindeer herds for them. It is their only source of food, clothing, and financial support.

I understand that the natives are helpless in the face of organized corporations of white men, by whose cleverness, coupled with cupidity, are fast gaining control of all the herds of reindeer.

For the past 10 years they have been pleading for relief and the enforcement of the laws for their protection.

Thanking you for anything you may be able to do in this matter, I am,

Yours very truly, · K. N. BARBOUR.

Mrs. J. E. BARBOUR.

RE<PORTS OF COMMITTEES Mr. BINGHAM, from the Committee on Territories and

Insular Affairs, to which was referred the bill CH. R. 7233) to enable the people of the Philippine Islands to adopt a constitution and form a government for the Philippine Islands, to provide for the independence of the same, and for other purposes, reported it with an amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Mr. ROBINSON of Indiana, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the bill CH. R. 10277) to transfer Lincoln County from the- Columbia division to the Winchester division of the middle Tennessee judicial district, reported it without amendment and submitted a report CNo. 595) thereon.

Mr. STEIWER, from the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys, to which was referred the bill cs. 4070) to authorize the acquisition of a certain building, furniture, and equipment in the Crater Lake National Park, reported it with an amendment and submitted a report CNo. 596) thereon.

He also, from ·the same committee, to which were referred the following bills, reported them each without amendment and submitted reports thereon:

H. R. 9970. An act to add certain land to the Crater Lake National Park in the State of Oregon, and for other purposes (Rept. No. 597) ; and

H. R.10284. An act to authorize the acquisition of additional land in the city of Medford, Oreg., for use in connection with the administration of the Crater Lake National Park (Rept. No. 598).

Mr. NYE, from the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys, to which were referred the following bills, reported them each without amendment and submitted reports thereon:

H. R. 9591. An act to extend the period of time during which final proof may be offered by homestead entrymen CRept. No. 599); and

H. R. 10744. An act to authorize the issuance of patents for certain lands in the State of Colorado for certain purposes (Rept. No. 600).

EXECUTIVE REPORTS OF THE POST OFFICE CO~TTEE

·As in executive session, Mr. ODDIE, from the Committee on Post Offices and Post

Roads, reported favorably sundry nominations of postmasters, which were placed on the Executive Calendar.

BILLS INTRODUCED Bills were introduced, read the first time, and, by unani

mous consent, the second time, and referred as follows: By Mr. GEORGE: A bill <S. 4486) for the relief of Eddie B. Black; to the

Committee on Claims. By Mr. DILL: A bill (S. 4487) for the relief of Leo W. Hurley; to the

Committee on Military Affairs. By Mr. NEELY: A bill CS. 4488) for the relief of Frank W. Bailey; to the

Committee on Military Affairs. A bill (S. 4489) for the relief of Lydia A. Thompson; to

the Committee on Claims.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8949

A bill CS. 4490) granting a pension to James Mason; to the Committee on Pensions.

By Mr. COPELAND: A bill CS. 4491) amending the shipping act, 1916, as

amended, for the purpose of further regulating common car~ riers by water in interstate commerce of the United States engaged in transportation by way of the Panama Canal; to the Committee on Commerce.

By Mr. SMOOT: A bill (S. 4492) to provide for the vocational rehabilita

tion of the blind; to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds.

By Mr. FLETCHER: A bill CS. 4493) providing for the appointment of midship

men reserves to the United States Naval Academy; to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

By Mr. HAYDEN: A bill CS. 4494) for the relief of William J. Mason. jr.; to

the Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads. By Mr. CAREY: A bill CS. 4495) amending section 1 of the act entitled

"An act to provide for stock-raising homesteads, and for other purposes," approved December 29, 1916 Cch. 9, par. 1, 39 Stat. 862), and as amended February 28, 1931 (ch. 328, 46 Sta~. 1454); to the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys.

REVENUE AND TAXATION-AMENDMENTS

Mr. COUZENS submitted sundry amendments intended to be proposed by him to House bill 10236, the revenue and taxation bill, which were referred to the Committee on Finance and ordered to be printed.

Mr. METCALF submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to House bill 10236, the revenue and taxation bill, which was referred to the Committee on Finance and ordered to be printed. ADDRESS BY CLAUDE G. BOWERS AT THE UNVEILING OF THE STATUE

OF JAMES MONROE

Mr. COPELAND. Mr. President, at the old home of James Monroe there gathered yesterday a notable group of Americans. The occasion was the unveiling of a monument to the author of the Monroe doctrine. The address was made by that eloquent exponent of Democracy, Mr. Claude G. Bowers. It is so appealing, so stirring, that I crave the privilege of giving it to the American people. I ask unanimous consent that it may be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, and it is as follows: ADDRESS BY CLAUDE G. BOWERS AT THE UNVEILING OF THE STATUE

OF JAMES MONROE AT "ASH LAWN," CHARLOTIESVll.LE, VA., APRIL

25, 1932 Not often are ceremonies in commemoration of the distinguished

dead solemnized under circumstances more interesting than these here to-day. Here stands Ash Lawn, so long the home in which Monroe lived and meditated-designed by Jefferson, the idol of his heart. There looms the Norwegian pine he brought back as a souvenir of his services to his country in foreign lands. Here is the fam~us boxwood he brought home from England, which, like his fame, 1s green and more robust than it ever was before. Across this lawn he was wont to look up to the hilltop of the great philosopher of democracy to whose fundamental principles he was as unchanging as the North Star; for it was his wish that the home be built so that in the night he could. see from his windows·the light twinkling in the mansion of Monticello. Hither, many times the master of that mansion rode on horseback to discuss the perils and the problems of the times. It was on this spot, at the beginning of the memorable campaign of 1800 that was to end in the Jeffersonian triumph, which definitely determined that ours should be a democratic republic, that Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe secretly planned the strategy of the struggle.

And here we raise a beautiful monument with a romantic history of its own. When the sculptor was still young and ardent in his art, he was commissioned by Venezuela to make it for her capital, as a visible expression of her appreciation of Monroe. Into the molding of the marble went all the youthful ardor of the artist, and then came the British challenge to the doctrine of Monroe in the Venezuelan crisis, and the militant counterchallenge of Cleveland in the phrasing of Olney. That incident that so nearly led to war was closed with victory for the policy of Monroe, but the delicacy of the situation would have made the unveiling of the statue then seem to England as the salt;jng of a sore. And so the years have passed, and this exquisite bit of statuary has been treasured 1n the studio of the sculptor, who

came to love It with the passing of the years, as the favorite ot his youth.

Now we bring it home to-day to be unveiled in the presence of Piccirilli, to the house designed by Jefferson, where grows the boxwood planted by Monroe, and where looms the pine tree of his travels that threw its shadows on his sunny afternoons.

It is fitting, too, that this should be done in the presence of the governors of the various States, whose constitutional rights and sovereign dignity never had a stouter champion than he.

SACRED GROUND

All this is sacred ground. Within a radius of a few miles lived the immortal trio whose joint labors made ours a republic dedicated to liberty and human rights. On yonder hilltop 1s the home of Jefferson, the author of the :Oeclaration of Independence and the philosopher of democracy. Not far away, at Montpelier, dwelt Madison, the .. father of the Constitution." And here lived Monroe, the author of the doctrine that has preserved the American Republic from the interference of the European powers. These scenes were familiar with the figures of them all; for hereabouts they often sat under the trees on summer days in solemn converse on the problems of the hour.

There was something beautiful and rare in the friendship of these Plutarchian .men; nor was it solely a similarity in their political ideals that held them in these bonds. The ties of personal atiection were quite as strong. They loved each other for their virtues and found it east to pardon each other's faults. One by one they passed with popular acclaim to the highest honors of the Republic and wrote their deeds into the golden book of American achievement.

I have associated James Monroe with his two immortal friends because he would have had it so.

MONROE THE MAN

Among these three musketeers of democracy 1n America, Monroe was the outstanding man of action. He was essentially a fighter. The others might use rapier of finesse; Monroe preferred the battle-ax. He arrived at his conclusions through conscientious and meticulous research; but when his opinion had been formed, it was a conviction to which he courageously adhered. No one ever had to inquire where he stood on a controversial proposition-he stood openly in the forefront of the battle where the struggle was the fiercest.

There was nothing of the polson of envy in his blood. Even his momentary clash with Madison, when their ambitions met failed to chill the warmth of his affections for the man of Mont~ pelier. Even the unpleasantness with Jefferson over the rejection of the English treaty could not dimin1sh his love and admiration for the genius of Monticello.

We need not concern ourselves in the study of his character with the methods of the psychoanalylsts. It is enough to know that Madison admired and loved him; that Jefferson said "he is a man whose soul might be turned wrong side outward without discovering a blemish to the world." It is enough to know that John Quincy Adams, who, in his diary, scarcely permitted a contemporary to go unscatched, said that the mind of Monroe " was anxious and unwearied in the pursuit of truth and right,. patient in inquiry and contradiction, courteous even in collision of sentiment, sound in its ultimate judgments, and firm in its final conclusions." And that Lord Holland, whose drawing room and dining room in London were graced by the most remarkable characters of his time in literature, politics, arid art, found him "a man of candor and principle-diligent, earnest, sensible, and profound."

In his public character he was of Cato-like austerity; in his friendships he was all fidelity; and to his country he gave the whole of a robust mind and a devoted heart. ·

MONROE'S PRINCIPLES

Monroe was precocious 1n the development of hls political Ideals. Nature made him a Republican. He knew that God never placed a crown upon the head or a lash in the hand of• any man born of woman with the divine right to ride roughshod over his fellow men.

And nature and the frontier made him a Democrat. He knew that any government that does not rest upon the affections of the people because of its equal devotion to the common interests of them all is a usurpation and an imposition based on force or fraud.

He opposed the ratification of the Constitution as it came from the convention because of the absence of a bill of rights for the protection of the citizen against the abuse of power. · .

He believed in the sovereign rights of states; he opposed as dangerous the centralization of power; he demanded that political power in the Republic be disseminated among the people in their homes and not concentrated in some remote capital.

The political philosophy of Monroe was born of his passion for Uberty and human rights. That is the Americanism of the founders, and when it dies the Republic w.ill cease to live.

HIS FOOTSTEPS

It would be profitable if we had the time to tra.ce the footprints of this great man over the pages of our history.

There would be a thrill in the story of the youth of the Revolution-the gallant charge at Trenton, where he captured the artillery of the enem-y, received a bullet ln his shoulder he was to carry to his grave, and was glorified by the enconium of Washington.

We might pause to refiect on the prophetic vision of the young statesman, less than 30, who 1n the midst of a general 1ndifi'er-

8950 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 ence to the western country, framed the celebrated report on the American right to the navigation of the Mississippi, and to an outlet at New Orleans.

There is sheer romance in the story of his embassy to revolutionary France where, as lone ambassador, he received the fraternal embrace of the president of the convention in the tribunal whence only a few days before the outraged members had hurled the bloody Robespierre.

What American can not thrill to the tale of his rescue of Paine, the American patriot, from the shadow of the guillotine, and the story of the finesse with which he managed to save the wife of Lafayette from a bloody death without incurring the displeasure of the revolutionary government?

We should like to picture him negotiating for the purchase of the empire of Louisiana, 'filth a vivid realization of the imperial destiny of the nation, and taking his leave of Napoleon in the }>alace of St. Cloud.

It would be interesting to follow him to Madrid in his unsuccessful effort to purchase Florida, and then rejoice with him during his Presidency in the final consummation of his hope.

ORGANIZER OF VICTORY

But because of the slovenly justice done him on the page of history we must pause for a hasty review of the heroic part he played in the War of 1812. ·

He had entered the Cabinet of Madison as Secretary of State on condition that he have the utmost freedom in attempting a peaceable settlement of the differences between the United States and England. But England was arrogant and unyielding; and when the choice was offered between the supine surrender of our rights and war he joined the war party and became its leader.

It was he who finally framed the report on the situation of the Calhoun committee in the Senate, and he it was who phrased the war passages in the message of his chief. .

And so the war came, and reverses set in; and the energetic spirit of the patriot and the man of action chafed at the inaptitude and lassitude of the Secretary of War. Then came the black humillation at Bladensburg; the descent on Washington, and the scenes of vandalism there. In the midst of the resulting panic and military chaos James Monroe for three days seldom quit the saddle and did not change his clothes.

In that crisis in the Nation's history Madison turned to the strong man of his administration who held the portfolio of State, and, making him Minister of War as well, intrusted him literally with the preservation of the Nation's honor.

The moment the power was his he dynamitized the people, fanned their smoldering patriotism into flames, moved with iron courage and quick decision to his task, projected his energy and enthusiasm into the troops, found necessary equipment for the fighting forces, and, keenly conscious of the possibilities at New Orleans, he hurried every available resource to Andrew Jackson.

In that dark hour, aside from Jackson, the strong man of th.a Republic was James Monroe, who stiffened our resistance and revived our confidence. We rejoice in the glory of Perry; we glory in the triumph of Jackson; but there was a trio of masters in that strugg~e. and one was James Monroe.

THE PRESIDENCY

Thus the strong man of the Madison administration moved with logical sequence to the Presidency. With his ascension the Federalist Party cea~ed _ to be a potent factor in affairs. The brilliant company of its original leadership was gone, and its treachery in the second English war had discredited it forever. The Jeffersonian concept of the State was now generally accepted. No longer was there anything to fight about, and under Monroe the Nation entered upon the era of good feeling.

Happy were the people under his rulership. Two Jeffersonians before him had established the Government on a democratic basis of simplicity and common sense. There was rigid economy in public expenditures. The taxes merely measured the cost of govern-

• ment economically administered. The whole people, none too rich, and none in abject poverty, enjoyed prosperity and peace. Yes; there was peace in the land, and peace in the hearts of the people.

About the Cabinet table sat the strongest advisors any President has had since the first administration of Washington. Incapable of envy, and competent to hold his own in any company, Monroe summoned to his side the foremost intellects of the Republic. There, in the State Department, sat John Quincy Adams, the most adequately trained diplomat America had known-robust in mind and impeccable in character. There, in the Treasury, was W1lliam H. Crawford, one of the soundest, sanest, greatest statesman in the early Republlc, who barely missed the Presidency. There, in the War Office, sat Calhoun, with one of the most brilliant philosophic minds that our race has ever known.

It was more than the era of good feellng; lt was the millennium of the giants.

THE MONROE DOCTRINE

..And one wise, courageous act put upon that administration the stamp of immortality. With the setting of the sun of the Corsican genius at Waterloo all the forces of autocracy and tyranny began to strut under the euphonious banner of legitimacy. From the hour the people of Paris rose in wrath and battered down the Bastile the autocrats of the world had been forced to lower their minds to the vulgar consideration of the temper of their subjects. But now the Bourbons wer.e back from their travels and on the throne of France, and in Paris, Vienna, St. Petersburg, and Berlin autocracy was fortifying itself against liberty and human rights. Metternick and Tallyrand, the poison spiders of diplomacy, were weaving their web of legitimacy to hol_d back the onward march

of Uberty-loving men. Thus was wrought in a cold-blooded conspiracy against the peoples of the earth the alliance dedicated to the suppression of all revolts.

And just then the Spanish colonies ln South America, catching their inspiration from our revolution, were throwing off the yoke of Spain and taking possession of their governments.

Here was a defiance of the tyrannical alliance of the monarchs and their ministers; here an opportunity for the Old World forcibly to inject itself into the new. Here was an invitation for the combined autocrats of Europe to restore the lost colonies to the King of Spain and assert their right to interfere in the political affairs of the western world.

But deep in the hearts of our people was the determination that this new world would never submit to the dictation of the old; and it fell to Monroe to serve due notice on the monarchs and their ministers across the sea.

This he did in a message that ranks in significance with the greatest State papers of all time. He had pondered the problem presented by the chanceries of Europe; he had tested his conclusions on the minds of Jefferson, Madison, and Adams; and he sat down to the phrasing of the doctrine that was to become the fixed policy of our people.

And he phrased it as happily as Jefferson phrased the Declaration of Independence. Its strong, spirited, clear-cut sentences marched like battalions 'with bayonets.

Referring to the powers across the sea that had entered into this conspiracy of legitimacy, he declared that "we shall consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety.'' And, mindful of the threat to the newly acquired independence of the nations of South America, he served notice that "we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any .European power, 1n any other light than as a manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.''

That was all-but that was quite enough. Jefferson had given us a declaration of national independence; it was reserved for Monroe to issue the declaration of independence for the entire western world.

Thus it was that the hopes and plans of the Metternicks and Tallyrands crumbled like a house of cards before the bugle blast of independence sounded by James Monroe.

LAST DAYS

Thus was he crowned with triumphs when the father of the Monroe doctrine entered upon his few remaining years in private life. On yonder hilltop his friend Jefferson was tottering to his tomb between long lines of reverential pilgrims. Madison was gracefully growing old at Montpelier. And now Monroe, too, was added to the company of sages. He visited his dying friend at Monticello, and walked again in the garden at Montpelier with Madison. He presided over the Constitutional Convention of Virginia and accorde'd recognition to Madison on the fioor. He accepted service on the board of the university Jefferson had created for the training of the future leaders of democracy in America. But the twllight deepened rapidly, and, like Jefferson, on the Nation's natal day he passed to history.

A full century has passed; and now we raise this statue presented by the generosity of the sculptor to the Nation, among scenes beloved by Monroe, associated with memorable friendships; on the lawn of the home that witnessed epochal conferences that affected the course of history; and in a section of Virginia redolent of the memory of the three Plutarchian figures who more than any other made this a Republlc built upon the democratic concept of the state.

NOMINATION OF VALENTINE J. PETER-NOTIFICATION TO PRESIDENT

Mr. HOWELL. Mr. President, about two weeks ago Valentine J. Peter was confirmed as United States marshal for the State of Nebraska. It is desired that he should take office on the first of the month. Therefore, as in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that the President may be notified of the confirmation of his nomination:

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. As in executive session, out _of order, the Senator from Nebraska asks unanimous consent that the President may be notified of the confirmation of the nomination which the Senator has mentioned. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and that order will be entered.

EFFECT OF 10 PER CENT CUT ON INTERNAL REVENUE BUREAU

Mr. ODDIE. Mr. President, I ask to have printed in the REcORD a letter from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue showing the number of internal-revenue agents in each of the 38 field divisions and the number of zone deputy collectors in each of the 64 internal-revenue collection districts who will have to be dropped in case the 10 per cent cut ordered by the Senate in appropriations for the Treasury Department shall be made. The list is furnished at my request by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. I have already called attention to the fact that possibly $95,000,000 in internal-revenue collections will be lost if these reductions in the personnel are made.

. 1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENA:rE 8951 The PRESIDE!\TT pro tempore. Without objection, the

letter will be printed in the RECORD. The letter referred to is as follows:

APRIL 26, 1932. Hon. TASKER L. ODDIE,

Chairman Su bcommittee in Charge of the

Internal revenue collection districts--Continued

Collection district District headquarters

Necessary reduction

of zone deputy

collectoi'3 Treasury Department Appropriati on Bill,

Uni ted States Senate. :M:Y DEAR MR. CHAmli.L\N: In response to your verbal request of California:

yesterday I am submitting herewith two statements: The first ~~~~~==:=::::::::::::::::::::::: t~ t_~eJ:~::::::::::::::::::: ~ showing the number of internal-revenue agents in each of the 38 Colorado _____________________________ Denver __ ----------------------- 12 field divisions whose services would have to be dispensed with in Connecticut _________________________ Hartford________________________ 24 the event the 10 per cent reduction in the administrative appro- Delaware ____________________________ Wilmington_____________________ 4 priation for the Internal Revenue Service is made by the Congress Florida ______________________________ Jacksonville_____________________ i~

for the fiscal year 1933, and such reduction is to be applied to this ~~~~t::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~~~~~t~u~::::::::::::::=::::::: 5 branch of the field service; the second statement showing the Idaho-------------------------------- Boise--------------------------- 6 number of zone deputy collectors in each of the 64 interna.l-reve- illinois: nue collection districts whose services would have to be termi- First_____________________________ Chicago_________________________ 78 nated in the event of the enactment into law of the above-men- Eighth------------------------ Springfield______________________ 13 tioned 10 per cent reduction in funds and the application of such Indiana ______________________________ Indianapolis____________________ ~

reduction to the field personnel operating under the supervision of ~=sas-----~=======:::::=::::::::=::::- ~f~~~~::::::=::::::=:=::::: 14 the various collectors of internal revenue. Kentucky Louisville_______________________ 20

The information contained in these statements is based on the Louisiana::::::::::=:::=::=::::::::=: New Orleans____________________ 14 percentage which each of the two classes of employees concerned Maine _______________________________ Augusta________________________ 8 in each field office bears to the total number of these respective Maryland___________________________ Baltimore_______________________ 33

classes of employees in the entire field service, and these percent- ~rc~:~:~~==::::::::::::::::::=: ~~~~?t---~~:::::::::::::::::::::: ~ ages were then applied to the necessary reduction in personnel Minnesota ___________________________ St PauL_______________________ 24 which would have to be made by reason of the proposed reduction MississiJ?PL------------------------- Jackson_________________________ 7 1n administrative funds. Missouri:

Slight modifications in these figures would have to be made in First_____________________________ St. Louis________________________ 18 the actual accomplishment of a 10 per cent reduction in personnel Sixth _____________________________ Kansas CitY-------------------- 12

cost for the reason that in some of the smaller divisions or collec- ~e~r~~-_-::-=::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:~==::::::::::::::::::::::: lg tion districts where the territory to be covered is expansive and Kevada ___________ ___________________ Reno____________________________ 3 the population is sparse and widely scattered, it may be possible New·IJ,ampshire _________________ Portsmouth_____________________ 9

that no reduction in personnel could be made in such divisions or NewF~ey: Camden------------------------

~~~~~~~1 ~~ui~ :~:! t~v~~tZ:ad~~o:~~:;;!~ ~t.:!~~~e!u~~~c~ Ne:~J~~~~~======================== ~lli~~~ei<iue=:::::::::::::::::=: ~~ Sincerely yours, New York:

DAVID BuRNET, Commissioner. First ____________________________ Brooklyn ____ ------------------ 42 Revenue agents' divisions-Necessary reduction of revenue agents Second _____________________ ; _____ Customhouse., New York_______ t

579

to meet proposed 10 per cent cut in 1933 appropriation Third ____________________________ 250N:~~o~~ty-seventh Street,

Division headquarters: Fourteenth_______________________ Albany-------------------------- 36 Atlanta_________________________________________________ 10 Twenty-first _______ -------------- Syracuse_--------------------___ 2

261

Baltimore______________________________________________ 27

Twenty-eighth ___________________ Buffalo__________________________ 13 B st North Carolina ___ ------------------ Raleigh------------------------

0 on-----------------------------·------------------- 60 North Dakota ________________________ Fargo----------------------~---- 7 BrooklYll------------------------·-------------------- 34 Ohio: Bu:ffalO------~---------------------------------------- 19 First _____________________________ Cincinnati______________________ 17 ChicagO--------------------------------·--------------- 47 Tenth ____________________________ Toledo__________________________ 13 CincinnatL-------------------------------------------- 15 Eleventh_________________________ Columbus_______________________

3810 Cleveland

25 Eighteenth______________________ Cleveland ______________________ _

Col b . ------------------,.--------·-------------------- Oklahoma____________________________ Oklahoma City----------------- 15 um J.a_ ------------------------------------------- 5 Oregon ___ --------------------------- Portland ___ --------------------- 14

Dallas--------------------------------·---------------- 35 Pennsylvania: De~ver --------------·--------- _____ ------------------- 10 First_____________________________ Philadelphia____________________ 40 Detroit ________________ ----~----------________________ 29 Twelfth..-- ----------------------- Scranton ____ -------------------- ~ Greensboro ____________________________ ------------____ 10 Twenty-third-------------_______ Pittsburgh______________________

7 H lui Rhode Island._------------ ---------- Providence _____________________ _ ono U--------------------------------------------- 3 South Carolina... _____________________ Columbia_______________________ 7

Huntington____________________________________________ 9 South Dakota _____________________ AbecdeeD--------------------- 7 Indianapolis _________________ -----------------------

1214

1

~=~5500---------------------------- Nashville._--------------------- 17 JacksonvfUe------------------------------------------Los Angeles _______ -------------------_________________ 52 First ____ ------------------------- Austin------------------------- ~

t'h~m:::;~~======~~==~==========~==================== 1: ~:~t:~================~==~===== ~~!~~~~~~~=========:====~== • ~ Nashville ___________ .,: _______________________________ _:__ 16 Virginia_____________________________ Richmond __ ------------·-------- 16 Newark---------------~---------------------------- 32 Washington__________________________ Tacoma_________________________ 21

~=:~~I=~~~=~~~~-=-.=-.=-:_:-_:-::~_:-::::::==============~=== ~1061 ~~~~~======================== ~{ne;::;~~~~================= ~g Oklahoma ____________ : ________________________________ t----Omaha_______________________________________________ 20 TotaL-----------------------------------~------------------- 1.300 . Philadelphia _______________________ _:___________________ 54

Pittsburgh--------------------------------------------- 27 RichmonrlL------------------------------------------~-- 11 St. Louis---------------------------·-----·--------------- 24 St. Paul----------------------------··-------------------- 17 Salt Lake CitY------------------------------------------ 9 San FranciscO------------------------------------------ 25 Seattle------------------------------------------------- 22 Second New York-------------------------------------- 79 Springfield_____________________________________________ 8

Upper New York--------------------------------------- 70 VVichita________________________________________________ 7

Total------------------------------------------------ 906 Internal-revenue collection districts

Collection district District headquarters

Nere..<!Sary reduction

of zone deputy

collectors t

ABOLITION OF CUSTOMS DISTRICTS UNDER 10 PER CE1iT APPROPRIA• TION CUT

Mr. ODDIE. Mr. President, I ask to have printed in the RECORD a statement from the testimony of the Secretary of the Treasury before the subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee showing the customs district offices which will be abolished and consolidated in case the 10 per cent cut in appropriations in the Treasury Department appropriations bill ordered by the Senate is carried through.

There being no objection, the statement was ordered to be printed in' the REcoRD, as follows: UNITED STATES CUSTOMS DISTRICTS TO BE ABOLISHED UNDER THE 10

PER CENT CUT OF SEN.~TE

By abolishing the district of Indiana we can save $18,4.80. By abolishing the district of Iowa we can save $12,800. By abolishing the district of Colorado we can save $19,320.

Alabama_____________________________ Birmingham. __________________ _ By abolishing the district of Utah and Nevada we can save

12 $8,100. 5 By abolishing the district of Kentucky we can save $16,700.

11 By 'abolishing the district of Tennessee we can save $20,900. .Arizona--------------------------____ Phoenix., ____ --------------- __ Arkansas_____________________________ Little Rock.-------------------

• To meet proposed 10 per cent cut in 1933 appropriation. By abolishing the district of Nebraska we can save $15,140.

8952 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 In Missouri, by abolishing all of the ports in the district, ex

cept St. Louis, we can save $39,340. Duluth, Minn., place under Minneapolis, and we can save

$13 .600. Pittsburgh, Pa., place under Philadelphia, with a saving of

$19,100. San Diego, Calif., abolish and place under Los Angeles, $12,500. Providence, R. I., place under Boston, and abolish the port of

Newport, R. I., and we can save $24,000. Rochester, N. Y., place under Butfalo, and abolish the ports of

Utica and Syracuse, with a saving of $23,500. Milwaukee, Wis., place under Chicago, with a saving of $11,200. Mobile, Ala., place under New Orleans, and abolish all sub

ports: Birmingham, Gulfport, Pascagoula, and Biloxi, with a saving of $30,696.

You can place Bridgeport, Conn., under New York, and abolish the port of Hartford, and save $24,-300.

Ohio: Abolish the ports of Akron, Columbus, Dayton, Cincinnati, and Toledo, and save $54,160.

Wilmington, N. C., place under Norfolk, and abolish the port of Charlotte, and save $8,940.

You can abolish the port of Oallas and save $11,880. Abolish the port of Fort Worth and save $2,400. Abolish the port of Georgetown and save $41,080. Abolish the port of Atlanta and save $9,100. Abolish the port of Peoria at;1d save $4,400. Abolish the port of Alexandria and save $1,140. Abolish the port of Richmond and save $13,400. Abolish the port of Albany, N. Y., and save $16,600. Abolish the ports of Worcester, Springfield, and Lawrence, Mass.,

and save $27,000. Abolish the port of Grand Rapids and save $5,400. Abolish the port of Spokane and pave $7,200, or a total of

$520,676.

THE BANKING SYSTEM-ADDRESS BY SENATOR WALCOTT

Mr. KEAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that an address delivered by the junio1· Senator from Connecticut [Mr. WALCOTT] over the radio last night on the subject of our banking laws may be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the address was ordered printed in the RECORD, as fallows:

OPERATION OF BANKING LAWS

Need for banking reform, which may have been of interest to only a small number of people until recently, has been brought home to the entire country so forcibly in the last two years that no argument is required. to prove it. It is universally admitted that it is one of the greatest needs of the country. This recognition has come not only from the fact that during the past decade one-third of our banks, or about 10,000, have had to suspend payments and have tied up several billions of deposits for many millions of depositors, and left many communities without any banking service. It has also arisen from the popular belief, which is certainly based on fact, that the banks have played a part in fostering the boom and the wild speculation which engulfed the entire country and culminated in the crash in the autumn of 1929-from the effects of which we have not yet recovered.

To avoid, in so far as this can be done through legislative channels, the recurrence of such events, a subcommittee of the Banking and Currency Committee of the United States Senate, under the chairmanship of Senator CARTER GLASs, of Virginia, a coauthor of the Federal reserve act of 1913 and a former Secretary of the Treasury, has worked for nearly two years and has finally introduced a bill that, it is hoped, will bring about salutary reforms in our banking structure. In drafting this bill the committee has been handicapped by the fact that the banks of the country, working as they do in part under Federal law and in part under the laws of 48 States, have engaged for years in a competition in laxity, and that a law applicable only to national banks or to banks that are members of the Federal reserve system can always be evaded by giving up national charters or membership in the Federal reserve system. Fundamental banking reforms, therefore, can not be accomplished until all the banks ln the country that receive deposits are placed under uniform national supervision. But this will take time. In the meanwhile, much can be accomplished within the existing conditions, greatly to improve the management of the banks and to protect depositors and the country in general from such misfortunes as they have suffered from the banks in the past 30 months.

To do this the committee proposes: ( 1) To improve the actual management of the banks, (2) to strengthen the authority of the Federal reserve system, and (3) to facilitate and expedite payments to depositors at banks that are closed or will close in the future.

To start with the last point. Provision is made in the bill for the establishment of a Federal liquidating corporation, which will make it possible for depositors of closed banks to receive a part of their deposits much more promptly than is possible at present under a receiver. The importance of this measure to the general public can not be overestimated. When your bank closes and you suddenly find that the money on which you have counted for one purpose or another suddenly becomes unavailable, it is a serious matter. The bill establishes a corporation to which the United States Treasury, the Federal reserve banks, and member banks turn over a fund that will enable the corporation to convert

into cash at least a part of the closed bank's good assets and to turn the funds over to the depositors. When the assets are finally liquidated by the sale of investments or through the coHection of loans, the corporation will be reimbursed for its outlay and the remainder will go to the bank's creditors, including its depositors. The corporation's money is therefore a revolving fund and should be available permanently. It will consist of one hundred twentyfive millions from the United States Treasury, about sixty-five millions from the reserve banks, and about the same amount from the member banks. In addition, ~he corporation can issue about five hundred millions of debentures, so that it will have ample funds to do the important work for which it has been created. The benefits of this corporation apply only to banks that are members of the Federal reserve system. Nonmember banks, however, can obtain advances from the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, which has two hundred millions for that purpose.

In order to improve the condition of member banks, the proposed bill provides certain safeguards about the character and amount of investments the banks can make, limiting the amounts that they can invest in the obligations of any one company, so that they may not run the risk of having all their eggs in one basket or of diverting too large a proportion of their funds into enterprises in which directors or other persons ln.fluential in the affairs of the bank may be interested.

A great evil that has developed in the banking system in recent years has been connected with affiliates, particularly so-called security affiliates, companies organized to sell stocks and bonds in competition with private investment-banking houses. These companies, often owned and managed by the same people as the banks, are nevertheless independent corporations; and since they don't receive deposits and have no charters as banks, have authority under the law to do many things that the banks themselves are not permitted to do. In some cases this has worked with no harm to anyone and has even been advantageous. But in many cases these corporations, winning the confidence of investors by the name of the banks with which they are connected, have been the agencies for distributing securities that have not been good or that have been priced far above their intrinsic value. Furthermore, there have been cases where the affiliates have been used, through the medium of loans by the parent banks, for tl'ie purpose of investing the depositors' money in the kind of assets that the banks were not permitted to acquire. That 1s an evasion of the law and has caused many failures of banks and losses to depositors.

The proposed blll provides, first of all, that all such affiliates be subject to reports and to examinations, so that the supervisory authorities may be informed as to the relationship b'etween the affiliate and its parent bank and may prevent .the development of evasions and abuses. In the second place, the bill definitely limits (to 10 per cent of the bank's capital) the amount of loans that a bank may make to its affiliate, so that it can loan in that way only its own money, not the depositors' money, and can loan its own money only to a limited extent. In so far as afllliates engaged primarily in issuing or trading in securities are concerned, the bill provides that member banks in the course of three years must separate themselves from such afllliates. The business of 1ssui.ng, trading in, and marketing securities is very different from the business of commercial banking; it requires different types of men. It is clearly the part of wisdom to dissolve, after a reasonable interval for arranging the business without disturbance, the relationship between member banks, whose service should be primarily to finance current requirements of trade and industry, !rom their security affiliates, whose business has to do primarily with the direction of the country's savings through the sale of securities into permanent capital investments. It is believed that the proposed separation will greatly improve the banking situation. Many banks are undertaking it voluntarily and the others will have to fall in line under the provisions of the proposed law.

The b111 deals also with the subject of group banking, which has grown up rapidly, owing in part to the strict limitations imposed by our laws on branch bank.ing. Group banking means that a holding company acquires the controlling interest in a large number of banks, which it then runs more or less as a system of branches without the holding company being in any way subject to supervision. These corporations are created by State law and are not directly subject to regulation by the Federal Government, but in order to control their banks they must have the power to vote the stock of those banks. The bill proposes to require that any holding company, before it is permitted to vote the stock of a member bank, must submit to certain regulations about reports and examinations about loans from its constituent banks and about the character of its own assets.

While thus undertaking to regulate group banking the law proposes to increase the opportunities for branch banking by allowing a bank to establish branches anywhere within the State in which the parent bank is located, and in certain cases where it is clearly in the public interest, even in another State, but not more than 50 miles from the head office. While state-wide branch banking is thus authorized, such branches can be established only- with the approval of the Federal Reserve Board. There wlll be no danger, therefore, of a disorganized scramble for branches. Branches w111 be authorized only when their establishment wlll appear to be in the public interest.

The Senate committee fully realized that it is impossible by law to provide good management for all banks and that in the long run the safety and service of banks to their communities depends very largely on the quality of their management. AB a step to-

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8953 ward improvement 1n management, or at least toward the elimination of bad, dangerous, or dishonest management, the bill proposes to give the Federal Reserve Board the power, in extreme cases, after due warning and a hearing, to remove such officers or directors of banks as have persistently conducted its affairs in an unsafe manner. It is not expected that this provision will be often used, but its very existence will have a tendency to make bank management toe the mark.

Related to the problem of speculation is the practice which has grown up for corporations and individuals to lend theii funds, through banks, directly to the stock market. In 1929 a large part of the last phases of the speculative boom was financed by loans not made by banks but by nonbanking lenders through the banks. This had the bad effect of leaving a considerable part of the credit in the market outside the supervision or regulation of banking authorities. It made the problem of restraining speculation much more difficult. This practice is now prohibited by a rule of the New York Clearing House. But this rule may be revoked at any time, and this bill proposes to give it legal sanction.

In regard to the Federal reserve system the bill proposes to increase the independence of the Federal Reserve Board by removing the Secretary of the Treasury from its membership and to assure its competence by requiring that at least two of its members must have tested banking experience. Aside from that the bill proposes to clarify the authority of the Federal Reserve Board over any operations conducted by the regional reserve banks in the so-called open market-that is, operations that are not 1n the nature of loans--to its member banks and to invest it with special supervisory powers over all relations with foreign banks.

In order to strengthen the Federal reserve system in coping with undesirable speculative developments, the bill contains a section that makes it absolutely clear that a reserve bank is not obliged to lend money to a member bank just because that bank presents paper that is eligible for discount under the law and is acceptable as a credit risk. The reserve bank may, and under this section is required, to watch the general behavior of member banks and in passing on loan applications to take into consideration whether the bank has been conducting a safe business in the _service of its community, or whether it has engaged in undue expansion or in speculation in securities, commodities, or real estate. And lf a bank continuously engages in bad practices, the Federal Reserve Board has authority, after due notice and after gr,anting the bank an opportunity for a hearing, to suspend the bank from the use of the credit fac111ties of the Federal reserve system. In this way the Federal reserve banks and the Federal Reserve Board will be able to exert a powerful influence against the recurrence of speculative excesses among its member banks.

I firmly believe that the banking and credit conditions in this country will be greatly improved by the passage of this bill, the so-called Glass bill, that bank failures will be reduced, and that it will exert an infiuence toward greater stability in business and employment; in fact, in the country's entire economic life.

IMPAIRMENT OF THE TREATY RIGHTS OF THE UNITED STATEs-PRINTING OF EDITORIALS

Mr. CAPPER. Mr. President, on April 7 I introduced Senate Joint Resolution 140, which would declare it the policy of the United States not to·accept the legality of any situation created by a breach of the pact of Paris which might impair the treaty rights of the United States or its citizens, and which aLso prohibits the exportation of arms and munitions from this country to any signatory nation violating its solemn obligations under the pact of Paris ..

The widespread and intelligent interest taken in this resolution is evidenced by the editorial comments of leading newspapers. To assist in intelligent discussion of this im

:portant proposal and to inform the Senate and the American people of the editorial opinion expressed in various sections of the country, I ask unanimous consent that the editorials which I send to the desk may be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the editoriaLs were ordered to be printed in the REcoRD, as follows:

[From the Louisville (Ky:) Courier-Journal] A RESOLUTION FOR PEACE

Every peace organization and every sincere friend of world peace should study the resolution which Senator CAPPER, of Kansas, has

. introduced in the Senate, a measure carefully designed to put "teeth" in the Kellogg-Briand treaty. Building on the framework of the note which Secretary Stimson addressed to Japan and China last January 7, Senator CAPPER first proposes that the United States, along with the other signatories of the Paris pact, refuse to recognize the legality of any "situation de facto created by breach of the pact," or any "treaty or agreement brought about by means contrary to the covenants of the pact." This is the negative part of the measure, aimed at the results of a breach of the peace which has already taken place. The positive part, contained in the second section of the resolution, is a practical device for setting up a system of world peace. It provides that Congress should resolve that it is the declared policy o! the United States:

"That 1n case other nations, not parties to a dispute, have in open conference decided ·that any nation has committed a breach of the pact of Paris by resort to other than pacific means, and have further decided not to aid or abet the violator by the shipment to it of arms or other supplies of war, or to furnish it financial assistance in its violation; and in case the President determines, and by proclamation declares, that a breach of the pact of Paris has in fact been committed, it shall be unlawful, unless otherwise provided by act of Congress or by proclamation o! the President, and until the President by proclamation shall declare that such violation no longer continues, to export to the violating country arms, munitions, implements of war, or other articles for use in war, or make any trade or financial arrangement with the violating country or its nationals as in the judgment of the President may be used to strengthen or maintain the violation.

"That the President be requested to invite a conference of the governments signatory to the pact of Paris with a view to their agreement on a protocol or treaty supplementary to that pact which shall define the obligations of the several signatory powers in case the provisions of the pact of Paris be violated."

Senator CAPPER explains that his resolution is "intended to prevent the United States from becoming the accomplice of the aggressor by supplying it with the means for its aggression, or, on the other hand, from taking the whole responsibility singlehanded for holding the aggressor in check." He points out that "if the United States remains a potential arsenal for every violator of the Kellogg pact, then we can hardly hope for any major steps in real disarmament."

Congress, by adopting this resolution, would place the United States in the role which it rightfully should assume, that of the leader among nations toward the ideal of peace. ·At the same time the United States would run no danger of acting alone in opposition to military aggression, for this country would move only in concert with the other nations signatory to the pact of Paris, and then only by direct proclamation of the President of the united States. The ultimate result of passage of the resolution would be this: The other nations subscribing to the pact of Paris would have the assurance that the United States would not oppose them, and would probably act in concert with them, should they find it necessary to employ sanctions against an aggressor nation. A direct application of the case lies before our eyes. If the signatories of the Kellogg-Brland pact could have had this assurance last autumn, when Japan began its campaign of aggressive warfare in Manchuria, the signatory nations could have met and taken definite action against Japan. Instead the United States and other countries continued to ship nitrates and other products for the manufacture of ammunition to Japan, and the war continued.

The futility o! the pact of Paris as It now stands :nas been demonstrated all too clearly in recent months in the Orient. It was American idealism chiefly which inspired this pact. The practical application of that idealism, as the Capper resolution proposes, is the step which America must take if the pact is to have any further meaning in the affairs of the world. The work for peace has been partially accomplished. America should not be willing to see it slip back to the starting point through lack of action on the part of this country.

(From tha Springfield (Ill.) State Register] WORLD'S GREATEST ISSUE

• • • • Th·at the ba_cks of the taxpayers of America are bending beneath

the burden of costs of past and anticipated wars is at once apparent to the student whose eyes are open and who looks about him and understands the trend of the times.

The State Register offers no panacea and no specific formula, but that will come automatically if men and women worthy of being called leaders meet this issue honestly and courageously and assist in creating public sentiment favorable to the establishment of a peace understanding among nations which wm in no way jeopardize the interests or independence of the United States.

Senator CAPPER, of Kansas, has offered a resolution for an amendment to the pact of Paris which will in no way jeopardize the interests of the United States and which will not involve "entangling alliances," but which will give strength to this papermade unity of nations.

One point Senator CAPPER makes which Will commend itself to friends of international amity and international economic justice is to be found in the provision of his resolution that if a nation violates the tenets of the pact, the United States and other signatory nations will refuse to supply that offending nation with munitions of war or financial assistance.

That's getting down to the milk of the coconut. Once the war profiteer is curbed and the offending nation Is ostracized economically through a practical unity of nations which are bound together with a peace treaty with teeth in it, war will be discouraged, peace established, and the crushing burdens of war reduced.

[From the Boston (Mass.) Christian Science Monitor] " TEETH," AND TALKING IT OVER

The pact of Paris is proceeding through the normal stages o! idealistic legislation of that character from the position of a mere declaration of a highly laudable purpose on the part of its signa-

8954 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 tories to the formulation of some method of really effecting this purpose and of making it obligatory upon all concerned to join in giving it validity.

The newspaper headlines tell us that Senator CAPPER has introduced a resolution designed to "put t.eeth" in the Kellogg pact. It is a laudable plan. A mere enunciation of a highly moral and ethical attitude on the part of the nations of the world toward war as an instrument of policy is a pleasant indication of an improved public sentiment on the subject, but if it is to amount to anything practical in this day and generation when nations still covet their neighbor's markets, some sort of enforcement clause must be added.

Senator CAPPER in his resolution virtually follows the ideas set forth by Secretary Stimson in his note of January 7 to Japan and China. He would declare it the policy of the United States not to accept the legality of any situation created by a breach of the pact of Paris which might impair the treaty rights of the United States in any territory, nor to recognize any treaty or agreement brought about by means contrary to the covenants of the pact of Paris which· would impair the obligations of that pact. Furthermore, his resolution would provide for the prohibition of export of arms, munitions, or other articles used in war, to a country violating the pact. Finally, he asks that the President invite a conference of the signatories with a view to their agreement upon a protocol or treaty which shall set forth the methods by which the pact can be given effect.

The Senator's resolution goes a little further than the program urged upon the Government by a committee of the twentieth century fund, headed by Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler. In one respect the suggestion of this committee has a merit not found in the Capper resolution. For it asks that the signatories of the pact should at once enter into an approved protocol " whereby they will engage themselves, in the event of hostilities, actual or threatened, promptly to consult together with a view to determine upon measures of nonintercourse which would be appropriate to prevent the threatened breach of the pact or, 11 lt could not be prevented, to end hostilities and to restore the status existing prior to the breach."

This provision for a conference of the signatory powers prior to the imposition of any form of economic sanction upon a country charged with menacing the peace of the world is well worthy of incorporation in the Capper resolution. There are governments, and it is by no means certain that the Government of the United States is not among them, which w1ll hesitate to lay down in advance a program for the adoption of disciplinary measures against a nation which might well lead to war. There should be no government which would hegttate to adhere to an international agreement for a prompt conference on every instance in which war is threatened or actually begun by a nation oblivious of the obligations it assumed under the pact of Paris.

The purpose of Senator CAPPER's resolution is wholly admirable. Against its general tenor the only possible criticism that can be raised 1s that it might be dt.mcult to secure from legislatures so complete a gift of power for an administration facing the problems of threatened war. The interpolation or addition of the proposition that an immediate conference should be called at such a moment would possibly strengthen the resolution in many quarters where now it is likely to encounter vigorous opposition.

[From the Mobile (Ala.) Register) THE CAPPER RESOLUTION

Senator ARTHUR CAPPER's proposal to " put teeth in ~· the pact of Paris bids fair to become an historic document.

As Senator CAPPER himself points out, the proposal which calls for treaties supplemental to the Kellogg-Briand pact has Its origin in the recent troubles in Manchuria and, more especially, in the Stimson note of January 7.

Its actual application to the Japanese fracas will probably neyer be forthcoming, for by the time a conference of the signatories to the pact 1s called and definite action taken, the Manchurian question is likely to be listed under the head of historical rather than current events.

Neverthel.ess, the proposal of the member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has a vital if somewhat ironic significance.

On previous occasions this newspaper has referred to the Kellogg pact as America's private League of Nations. If there was any doubt of the truth of that mild assertion, the Capper proposal ought to be unassailable proof.

It 1s to be noted that the second seetlon of the CAPPER proposal 1s very like the articles of the l~ague covenant that deal with the action to be taken in the event a member resorts to war.

Article 16 of the covenant: "Should any member of the league resort to war • • • it shall ipso facto be deemed to have committed an act of war against all other members of the league, which hereby undertake immediately to subject it to severance of all trade and financial relation, the prohibition of all intercourse betwe.en their nationals and the nationals of the covenant-breaking state and the nationals of any other state whether a member of the league or not."

The second section of the Capper resolution: "And 1n case the President determ.lnes and by proclamation

declares that a breach of the pact of Paris has been committed (after other nations have already come to the same decision) tt shall be unlawful unless otherwise provided by act of Congress Ql" by proclamation of the President, and until the President

shaD, by proclamation, declare that such violation no longer continues, to export to the violating countt'y arms, munitions, implements of war or other articles for use In war, or make any such trade Ol' financial arrangements with the violating country, or its nations, as in the judgment of the President may be used to strengthen or maintain the violation."

The chief difference between article 16 of the covenant and the second section of the Capper resolution is that the United States has the right to form its own opinion of what constitutes a violation arid need not abide by a decision of the other signatories.

Here, in short, 1s the typical American conception of international cooperation.

The e1Iect of the Capper resolution, if adopted, would probably not be startling. The United States has been cooperating with the League of Nations during the Japanese di.tficulties just as much as have such formal members as France and Great Britain. The Capper resolution, to which in the course of time would probably be appended other guaranties, would only set up a second League of Nations. No one may prophesy whether it would be any more effective than th.e already existing international body.

But because the Capper resolution takes cognizance of the necessity of international cooperation and because it adheres logically to prevailing American sentiment, the . Senator from Kansas deserves both attention and congratulations.

[From the Newport News (Va.) Times-Herald) TEETH FOR THE KELLOGG PACT

_ In the light of developments ·in the Far East during the undeclared war between Japan and China the resolution o1Iered by Senator CAPPER, o! Kansas, ln the Senate yesterday ls of unusual interest to advocates of world peace. Under its . provisions parties to the Kellogg-Briand pact would declare an economic boycott against violators.

Throughout the whole Sino-Japanese tl'ouble-whlch, by the way, 1s not yet ended-it was apparent that something more than moral suasion was necessary to stop hostilities. Protests of the signatory nations were virtually ignored until Japan found China a harder proposition to deal with by force than she had anticipated.

There 1s little doubt that there would have been a different story had there been teeth in the Kellogg-Briand pact. Force is stopped more easily by force than by argument and pleadings, which the signatory nations found out when they applied moral suasion to the question in the Orient.

What might have be.en the outcome of the Sino-Japanese row, had the signatories to the peace pact use.d an international boycott as their weapon, is, of course, a matter of speculation. But the natural conclusion 1s that Japan would not have gone to war to stop a Chinese boycott when she faced a retaliatory boycott from a half a hundred or so nations scattered all over the world.

The Kellogg-Briand peace pact as it stands has only idealistic .. teeth." Senator CAPPER's resolution proposes to furnish an actual and potent weapon to supplant moral suasion. His thought, in view of the fate of the peace pact when it was invoked in the Orient, seems entirely in order.

[From the Asbury Park Evening Press] PEACE BY ACTION

Senator CAPPER's plan to prohibit this country or any of its nationals from aiding an aggressor nation with supplies of any kind is in complete accord with all scientific formulas of peace. The Kellogg pact and the 9-power pacific treaty outlaw war but do not provide any penalty for the signatory power that violates them. The League of Nations covenant outlaws aggressive belligerency and provides for the boycotting of the aggressor. The fact that this Nation does not participate in the league, however, virtually nullifies this sanction, for without the United States' cooperation a boycott would be ine1Iective. It would be useless for members of the league to boycott an aggressor nation while this country used its vast resources to produce the necessary supplies.

The past decade has taught that in the movement against war, just as in the campaign against crime, two steps are necessary. First, there must be definite rules or laws to prohibit war, and, second, there must be some sanction with which to enforce these rules. For years we proceeded on the basts that faith alone would enforce peace pledges, but Japan's violation of the Kellogg pact, the 9-power treaty, and the league covenant show the fallacy of this promise. Now it 1s clear that teeth must be placed in the laws outlawing war. And outside of war itself the boycott is the most effective method of opposing war. In urging its adoption Senator CAPPER has shown that he would support the ideals of peace with active forces.

[From the Bangor (Me.) Commercial} SENATOR CAPPER'S PLAN

Senator CAPPER has taken the initiative in an effort to extend the usefulness of the Kellogg pact and to place in that instrument the teeth that are lacklng. It was the evident belief of the framers of the pact that the declaration of the participating countries against war and promise to resort to arbitration before arms, would be sufficient to prevent war in which signers of the pact are involved. The period before disillusionment was not long, and Japan, in its operations in China, demonstrated how the vital

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8955 principles of the pact could be evaded. It is true that the world generally holds that Japan violated its clear agreement, despite denials from Tokyo, but it is equally true that the necessity for more firm action to back the pact is now seen.

The Capper resolution calls for an extension of the undertakings of the Kellogg agreement. He would declare it the policy of the United States not to accept the legality of any situation created by a breach of the pact of Paris which might impair the treaty rights of the United States in any territory, nor to recognize any treaty or agreement brought about by means contrary to the covenants of the pact of Paris which would impair the obligations of that· pact. Furthermore, his resolution would provide for the prohibition of export of arms, munitions, or other articles used in war, to a country violating the pact. Finally, he asks that the President .invite a conference of the signatories with a view to their agreement upon a protocol or treaty which sb,all set forth the methods by which the pact can be given effect.

The Christian Science Monitor finds the resolution a worthy one, but suggests that it might be improved by some provision that would endeavor to prevent a situation arising which would call for operation of the Capper resolve, that might prevent a threatened breach of the peace or result in causing a cessation of hostilities, if begun. A conference of the signatory powers to be called upon the advent of a threatening situation might have salutary effect in preventing the development of such conditions as recently were seen at Shanghai.

TAXES AND APPROPRIATIONs-ADDRESS BY SENATOR DILL Mr. BRATTON. Mr. President, this morning the junior

Senator from Washington [Mr. DILL] delivered an address over a nation-wide hook-up upon the subject of taxes and appropriations. It is such an admirable and interesting address that I ask unanimous consent that it may be printed in the RECORD.

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

It is an old saying that you can't escape death or taxes. Death comes but once and that is the end. Taxes come every year, and they are getting higher and higher. Taxes have become so high that the people are ready to revolt against paying taxes in many sections of the country and are demanding that taxes come down.

The cause of high taxes is big Government expenditures. The only way to lower taxes is to cut expenditures. The increase in Government expenditures during the last five years is almost unbelievable. During that period our population has increased but slightly. The value of property has greatly decreased because of the hard times. The income of our people decreased from $75,-000,000,000 to $50,000,000,000. Our country has been at peace. It would seezn that Government expenditures should have been reduced or, at the worst, should have continued about the same. But what are the facts?

From 1927 to 1932 the increases by departments of the Federal Government were as follows:

Let us see now just what the President has done and what Congress is doing to save the Government from bankruptcy.

In 1932 the regular appropriations were $3,732,000,000. The President recommended in the Budget that Congress make a 11 per cent cut, or $413,000,000, for the year of 1933.

The Democratic House of Representatives was not satisfied with that. It cut not only the $413,000,000 which the President recommended, but $126,000,000 more. That made total cuts of more than half a bil11on dollars below the appropriations of last year.

When these bills came to the Senate what happened? Senator McKELLAR, a Democrat from Tennessee, made a motion to cut 10 per cent more from the amounts approved by the House. The Senate has adopted that motion as to three of the large appro-priation bills. ·

It cut five and one-half millions from the Interior Department appropriations, twelve and one-half millions from the State, Justice, Commerce, and Labor Department 'J?llls, and eighty millions more from the Post Office and Treasury bill. If the Senate continues to make these cuts, it will cut $275,000,000 below the combined cuts of the President and the House of Representatives.

These combined reductions would amount to $800,000,000. That will still be $430,000,000 less than the total increases in expenditures from 1927 to 1932.

The following table sets out the appropriations for 1932, the Budget estimates for 1933, the appropriations in the House bills, with the exception of the War Department bill not yet reported to the House, and the totals of the bills already passed by the Senate.

Annual bills

Agriculture.-------------District of Columbia ____ _ Independent offices._---Interior __ ----------------Legislative ______________ _

Navy_-------------------State, Justice, Commerce,

and Labor_-----------Treasury and Post Office_ War----------------------

Total_-------------

1933 appropriations Appropria- Estimates, tions, 1932 1933

House Senate

$235, 665, 000 $188, 693, ()()() $175,408,000 $177, 424, ()()() 45,771,000 44,086,000 39,913,000 -------·-----· 1, 306, 196, 000 1, 041, 395, 000 985, 931, 000 -------------69,342, ()()() 56,895, ()()() 50,446,000 45,533, ()()() 28,127,000 22,517,000 20,214, ()()() -------------338, 262, ()()() 341, 677, ()()() 326, 3~0. ()()() -------------

139, 001, 000 129, 814, 000 124, 215, 000 111, 792, ()()() I. 104,586, ()()() 1, 082,575,000 1, 059,778, ()()() -------------

445, 773, ()()() ~~. 363, 009 -------------- -------------

3,732, 7Zl, ()()() 13, 319,020,000 2, 782, 249, 000 -------------

Total appropriations for all purposes for 1932 were __________________ $4,654,000,000 Total Budget estimates for all purposes for 1933 were_________________ 4, 601, 000,000

These statistics show that the President cut about $400,000,000 of this $800,000,000, and then the House and Senate cut another $400,000,000 more below the President's reductions. It was much more difficult to cut the second $400,000,000 than the first.

Now what is happening? Although the President says he favors those additional cuts by Congress, his own Cabinet officers are not cooperating with the Senate to make these cuts. In fact, some of the Cabinet members are attacking Congress for these big reductions.

.Army and Navy------------------Interior-------------------------Commerce._----------------------

1927

$678, 000, 000 59,000,000 31,000,000

151, 000, 000 156, 000, ()()() 24,000,000

Estimated totall932

$861, 000, ()()() 91,000,000 54,000,000

312, 000, ()()() 333, 000, ()()() 53,000,000

Increase

$182,000,000 32,000, ()()() 23,000,000

161, 000, 000 177, 000, ()()() 29,000, ()()()

What the President should do is to tell his Cabinet officers that he expects them to carry out the orders of Congress and limit their

26 expenditures to the sums appropriated. Then if they fall to do so he should fire them from the Cabinet.

~ When it is recalled that expenditures increased $1,230,000,000 in

Per cent

Treasury----------------------- __ _ AgriculturaL .•. __________________ _

1ustice __ --------------------------Post Office deficit_ ______________ _ Veterans _______________ ------ ____ _

28,000,000 391, 000, 000

195, 000, 000 784, 000, ()()()

167,000,000 392, 000, 000

100 the last five years, it would seem that surely these Cabinet heads 113 can get along with a reduction of $800,000,000. They will st111 117 have $400,000,000 more to spend than they had in 1927. 614 On Wednesday the House of Representatives will consider what 100 is known as the economy bill. A special committee of the House

___________ ,___ ___ __!_ ____ ..!__ ___ ___.!. __ working with the President has prepared this bill. It proposes to The average increase for all the departments, bureaus, and com- combine the War and Navy Departments and to give the President

missions for the last five years was 63 per cent, or a total increase power to combine and abolish certain bureaus in the different deof $1,231,000,000. partments. It reduces the salaries of the Farm Board, Shipping

These figures prove that this administration has been the costli- Board, and Railway Mediation Board to the same amount as the est luxury this Nation has ever known in time of peace. A Re- Interstate Commerce and other commissions. It also provides for publican Congress passed all of these appropriation bills. A a cut of 11 per cent in salaries of all Government employees and Republican President signed them. Republican Cabinet members ofll.cials receiving more than $1,000 per year, with the exception of spent the money. Federal judges. It is expected to save $200,000,000 to $250,000,000

AB a result of this wild orgy of Government expenditures, the per year. Treasury deficit last year was $900,000,000. This year it 1s $2,000,- It is probable that most of these economy proposals will pass, 000,000. Government expenses right now are $5,000,000 per day but let me call your attention to some of the difficulties both greater than Government income. In other words, we are going the President and Congress have in trying to pass this kind of in debt at the rate of more than $5,000,000 per day. Unless we legislation. cut these expenditures and provide for new taxes the deficit next We find that those who have been loudest in demanding re-year will be $3,000,000,000. duced appropriations, immediately become most active in oppo-

Is it any wonder the American people are crying out against sition to cutting the particular item in which they are interested. high taxes as never before in our day? Is it surprising the peo- Chambers of commerce that send long resolutions demanding ple by the thousands are writing Congressmen and Senators to cut cuts in expenditures, burn up the telegraph wires with protests Government expenditures and cut them to the bone? against closing some Government ofll.ce in their town or delaying

With a surplus in the Treasury and prosperous conditions, in- work on their new Federal building. creased expendltures would naturally be expected; but when hard School superintendents and teachers who have condemned the times came, there should have been a halt. extravagance of the Government are shocked and angered that

When Congress met in December, 1929, the panic was already Congress should lower the appropriations for the office of the nearly three months old. That was a warning. Instead of cut- director of education. ting appropriations, the President and Congress increased them Leaders of farmer organizations who have been loudest 1n detor both 1931 and 1932, with billions of deficits as a result. It manding lower taxes write and telegraph that Congress must not was no(until the people rebuked the administration by electing a cut the salaries of Farm Board officials nor interfere with approDemocratic House of Representatives that the administration priations !or their county farm agents under the Smith-Hughes started retrenching. law.

8956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 So I might go on enumerating one case after another showing

how the people at home who have insisted that the President and Congress must cut appropriations immediately become most aggressive in opposition to cutting appropriations affecting any Government activity in which they are interested.

I do not complain of these conditions. I am simply explaining them that you may realize how difficult it is to cut appropriations, once people have become attached to the Government pay roll, or a community is receiving money from the Treasury for some Government purpose.

In face of all these conditions, and with a view to serving the interests of all the people of this country, there is only one thing for Congressmen and Senators to do. They must set their faces like flint against all these protests and vote to cut appropiration after appropriation until they have reduced permanent expenditures by hundreds of millions of dollars.

If we do that, we can avoid many of the new taxes now proposed and still balance the Budget; but in no other way can we avoid additional taxes.

In addition to all these difficulties about cutting appropriations and providing new taxes to balance the Budget, Congress was confronted with another problem last week, namely, the report that England and other European countries do not intend to make their annual payment s on the debts they owe the United States. The failure of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to include that item gave rise to the report, although he announced that it would be considered after the conference at Lausanne.

The President gave these European debtors a moratorium last year. That cost the taxpayers of this country $250,000,000. This year it would cost $260,000,000. If these countries do not make their payments, then the American people will be compelled to raise this amount by additional taxes.

Regardless of party affiliations, Congressmen and Senators almost to a man are opposed to any more moratoriums or to cancellation of any part of the remaining debts. So long as England can spend $678,000,000 per year for armaments she can afford to pay the $171 ,000,000 each year as she agreed to do when we agreed to cancel all of the principal and part of the interest she owed us.

As long as France can spend $518,000,000 for war preparations she can afford to pay $45,000,000 per year, as she agreed to do when we agr~ed to cancel all of the principal and part of the interest she owed us.

As long as Italy can spend $269 ,000,000 for armaments she can pay $15,000,000 per year, as she agreed to do when we agreed to cancel all of the principal and half of the interest she owed us.

These conflicting interests and these cross currents of public opinion of which I have spoken have thrown Congress into confusion. At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue administration leaders watch the tickers of the stock markets as though they were a complete index to prosperity and also of the standing of the administration in the estimation of the people.

Everybody is blue. The economic situation is getting worse. Banks are still going broke. Unemployment is increasing. The Treasury deficit increases and in addition the ex-service men want two and one-half billion dollars in payment of the bonus now, although it is not due until 1945.

The critics all over the country are calling for leaders. Yet Wall Street newspapers and those who think in the terms of Wall Street cry "demagogue" at any public man who dares to plead the cause of the poor and speak for the unfortunate, for the unorganized, and for those who have been left out of consideration in the granting of governmental favors.

There is hope in the fact that the people can still think for themselves; that they can still change their President and their public officials by choosing new men who will try to build prosperity from the bottom up instead of having it trickle down from those at the top of the industrial _and economic structure.

To do that we must restore the value of the things people produce by providing more currency for the use of the people. The dollar is so high now that those who produce the new wealth can't get enough dollars even to pay taxes and interest on their debts, to say nothing of paying their debts or buying new goods.

When we have a President and a Congress who will make money plentiful, the people will have confidence again in the business of the ~untry. When we tear down tariff walls and establish a basis of exchange so that our money is on a basis of value equal to the money of other nations we shall have world trade again. Until these changes can be brought about the best thing to do is to reduce Government expenditures and avoid new taxes.

YOUTH'S STAKE IN THE NATIONAL ELECTION-ADDRESS BY TYRE TAYLOR

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD an address delivered to-day by Mr. Tyre Taylor, of Raleigh, N. C., president of the Young Democratic Clubs of America, to a mock convention held by young Democrats of Washington and Lee University at Lexington, Va., on the subject "Youth's Stake in the National Election."

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

- In recognizing my own very lim1ted capacity to analyze and deal constructively with the truly appalling problems with which we -are to-day confronted, I do not wish to be understood as in any sense apologizing for the very real existing concern of American

youth for the future of its country. It is not only fitting and proper, 1t is in the highest degree necessary that young men and women, who comprise more than half of the Nation's total electorate, should discuss and ponder and through serious study seek intelligently to understand the issues of the approaching campaign and election. It is proper that they should organize for this purpose, and if they should reach a common basis of understanding and agreement, it is also entirely in keeping with the spirit and tradition of our democratic system of government that they should seek to translate their views--and as I am sure many fervently hope-some of their unselfish and unwearied idealism into the settled policies of party and government.

I venture the assertion that the situation in which America and the world find themselves to-day has no even approximate parallel in the history of the human race. When, for example, has the problem of unemployment been aggravated by any factor approaching the proportions of the present displacement of hand by machine labor? Conditions were serious in Englal1d and other countries during the years immediately following the industrial revolution, but there was a tremendous difference; men thrown out of employment by the invention of labor-sa7ing machinery or for whatever cause had in that day one last recourse. Release, or possible release, from economic thraldom could always be had for the price of a steamship ticket. For the industrious and selfrespecting English laborer who finally found himself and his family face to face with starvation or the workhouse there was always America; while for the similar class in this country a vast and unsettled West beckoned with infinite promise.

Now, however, in a peculiar sense times have changed and conditions are different. There are n,o longer vast areas of rich land to be had for the asking, and if there were, the farmer can no longer hope to make a decent living farming. There are no longer new jobs in building railroads across a virgin continent or in new industries growing rich and great in a feverish race with an everincreasing demand.

Superficially at least the country seems to have grown up and grown old. Despair has supplanted hope. Uncertainty has supplanted certainty. Opportunity, in the old American sense of the term, seems to belong mostly to the past. · •

Consider another illustration of the basic and fundamental differences between · this and past depressions. When, in the history of the world, has anybody owed so much? From the humbler farmer, who mortgaged his land to secure a Government loan, to once proud and self -sufficient nations which bankrupted themselves in war the whole world is simply a seething, sullen, and resentful conglomeration of bankrupts, who, if they have the courage and heart seriously to attempt to pay their debts, are appalled by the economic barriers which stand between them and freedom. The farmer who went in debt $100 a few years ago now finds that by reason of the depreciation in value of the things he has to sell he in reality owes $200. Nations which owe each other and the United States are faced with the same problem. Tariff barriers prevent their paying their debts in goods. This has resulted in an attempt to pay in gold, which in turn has resulted in the virtual cornering of the world's gold supply by France and the ·United States. The inevitable consequence of this development has, of course, been to increase the value of gold and to diminish the value of commodities and goods.

This depression, therefore, bears no more resemblance to the ordinary cyclic depression of the past than the French Revolution bore to Shay's rebellion. One was a world upheaval-a definite transition period in the history of the human race, marking the passing of one set of ideas and institutions and the birth of a new age. The other was a purely local and temporary disturbance.

Perhaps the most devastating indictment that can be drawn against Mr. Hoover and his administration is that, knowing a world crisis was impending, he and his advisers resolutely refused to face the facts and persisted in a campaign to mislead the American people. As the stock market wavered in the summer of 1929 Mr. Mellon gave out his reassuring statements. " The business of the country is on a sound foundation," he said, in effect, and there would be a renewal of buying and another upswing in prices This would continue for a few weeks and the mru:ket would again hesitate. But again Mr. Hoover or Mr. Mellon would give out an optimistic interview, and again the American public would rush to buy, and prices would be pushed up additional points. Even after the crash, when it was, one would assume, perfectly clear to informed persons that America was moving into the shadow of a major economic eclipse, prosperity was represented to be "just around the corner." One prediction set a definite date; prosperity was going to return in 60 days!

As we look back over the past three .years it is difficult to reconcile the course of our Government with reality. It is a horrible dream or nightmare, we want to say. Such madness, not to speak of the bland indifference of this Government to the welfare of its people, does not belong in the realm of sanity and broad daylight. And yet let us observe the great engineer as he sets about building a bridge over chaos.

In the face of the solemn warning of 2,000 of the country's leading economists a Republican Congress passed, and a RepubUcan President signed, a tariff bill which has not only made America a hermit nation but has resulted, through retaliatory tariffs, in a virtual migration of American business and industry abroad. In considering the stake of young men and women in the elect1oll of 1932, let us ask this .question: Does the erection of an automobile or tractor factory in Ireland by American capital help ·or hurt your chance of obtaining employment and making a living? I

•

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8957 know that probably few of you ex~t to find a job in an auto-

. mobile factory, but I am using this as an 1llustration. Leaving entirely out of consideration its disastrous consequences to trade, the Hawley-Smoot tariff law, through the process just mentioned, 1s depriving hundreds of thousands of American citizens of the opportunity to work. Is this good or is it bad?

Then we should not forget, since I have used the term "bland indifference " in describing a Republican administration, that several billions of dollars' worth of highly questionable foreign securities were sold to American investors with the approval and even the connivance of their Government. In one notable instance a Department of Commerce attache had the temerity to cable that the government which was about to float a loan in the United States was probably insolvent. He was-this ·is all in the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD, lf you care to read it--he was reprimanded, the State Department promptly approved the issue, and another firm of international bankers pocketed a neat profit in commissions. The American people still have these bonds, and they are very handsome examples of the engraver's art, as the officers and directors of some of the banks which have failed during the past two years will bear witness. They will also bear witness, or the receiver will, that they have received no interest payments in some time, and that they would be glad to dispose of them at a bargain.

Is not that a pretty picture? The Government of the United States acquiescing in a fraud upon its citizens and taxpayers. One must agree with Doctor FESs that "this remarkable record of administration reflects a type of political leadership at the head of the Government rarely experien~ed in this or any other country."

But let us turn for the moment from consideration of these economic questions. The primary function of government is to govern. The Republican Party has been given ample opportunity to show what it can do on this score. It has been in uninterrupted control for 12 years. What is the condition of law enforcement in our land?

Simply this: That America 1s to-day overrun and overriden with gangsters.

Organized crime has developed to the point where it derides and defies government, and, arrogant in its own strength, even seeks to make terms with constituted authority.

When before has America suffered any such humiliation as this: " If the kidnapers of our child are unwilling to deal direct, we

fully authorize ' Salvey ' Spitale and Irving Bitz to act as our gobetweens. We will also follow any other method suggested by the kidnapers that we may be sure will bring the return of our child." I do not wish to be unfair about this and particularly would I avoid imputing blame or responsibility for a general condition to any individual. There has been too much public indifference to crime and criminals, and we must face frankly the truth that Government is powerless to cope with this problem without public support.

On the other hand, there does fairly attach, I think, to the chief positions of leadership in a democratic country such as ours some obligation to lead. And this grave responsibility may not be adequately discharged through the appointment of a commission or the prosecution and conviction of a gang leader for income-tax evasion.

In the breakdown of law enforcement and respect for law in this country I charge the Republican Party with an utter lack of any capacity for moral leadership. When Mr. Harding should have been sounding a trUit\Pet call to all right-thinking Americans to resist the spiritual disintegration and backwash of war, he was appealing for a " return to normalcy " and appointing a gang of thugs and thieves to high political office.

When Mr. Coolidge took over the reins of government he apparently experienced no sense of outrage or righteous indignation that corruption, pillage, and theft had been permitted to besmirch the national honor. Instead of driving the Falls and Daughertys out of office and lending the full weight of his position to putting them in the penitentiary, he almost reluctantly bade them farewell and changed the subject to talk-not practice, mind youbut talk of governmental economy. Presented with an opportunity to lead a crusade against the underworld forces which were threatening the very security, not to speak of the honor and decency, of our national life, he Ignored the issue and, while spending more money than ever, salved the conscience of an outraged people with platitudes and prattle about economy.

Mr. Hoover, presented with the same desperate issue, characteristically appointed a commission and then suppressed a part of Its report in the interests of a political expediency.

The time has fully come in this country, gentlemen, for us to do some serious thinking. I am not speaking now exclusively to young Democrats or old Democrats, or to any other class or group. I am appealing to every man and women-young or oldwho loves his country and has an intelligent interest in his own future welfare. You ask what can the Government of the United States do to remedy these conditions? It can do more than any other single agency or instrumentality in the entire world. It can call an international conference for tariff disarmament and write the treaties which w1ll end the present economic trench warfare. Commerce is a mutual process of buying and selling, and it can not surmount tariff barriers which make the cost to the ultimate consumer prohibitive.

The Democratic Party, if returned to power 1n both branches of the Government, will restore sanity in tariff legislation. The Republican Party has demonstrated that it can not or Will not do this.

LXXV-564

The Government can-and 1f the Democratic Party is given tltis mandate from the people--it will reduce the total cost of its operations.

Are you aware that out of a total national income of $70,000,-000,000 from all sources in 1930, $14,000,000,000 (or approximately 20 cents out of each dollar) were required to defray the expenses of the various Federal, State, and local governing bodies? This amounts to $100 for every man, woman, and child in the United States, and exceeds by $2,000,000,000 the gross value of -all agricultural production in the United States in the year 1929.

The Government can, as was demonstrated under Woodrow Wilson, become a fundamental and far-reaching affirmative force in the life of the people, making for respect for law, liberal humanitarianism in our economic and social relationships and sanity and perspective in our world outlook. In considering the stake young men and young women have in the approaching national election this factor, while intangible and difficult of reduction to concrete terms, is perhaps of paramount importance. We face in this country to-day not only the problem of restoring prosperity but of reconciling the consequence of a mechanistic civilization with human liberty. Let there be no mistake about this. We are just as definitely entering upon a new age in the world's history as impended during the years leading up to the French Revolution. How shall men control the machine? How may he protect himself against it? We can not go on indefinitely displacing human with machine labor and making no provision for the men, women, and children who find in this new economic order there 1s no place for them.

Judge Brandeis, of the Supreme Court of the United States, undoubtedly was thinking of this problem when he wrote the other day in a dissenting opinion:

"To stay experimentation within the law in things social and economic is a grave responsibility. Denial of the right to such experimentation may be fraught with serious consequences to the Nation. If we would be guided by the light of reason, we must let our minds be bold."

Shall this momentous problem be worked out by a political party in accordance with a political philosophy which holds, since Hamilton, that liberty exists for the few; or shall we intrust its solution to a party which holds that liberty exists not for one but for all men? Upon the answer to this question depends the happiness and well-being of your ch~ldren and their children and of all the generations in America for the next hundred years.

COTTON-ADDRESS BY BEN F. LOYD Mr. BROUSSARD. Mr. President, by request, I ask

unanimous consent to have inserted in the RECORD an address on cotton delivered by Mr. Ben F. Loyd, of Shreveport, La.

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

" The most formidable weapon against errors of every kind is reason," said Thomas Paine, author of the first unofficial declaration of independence written for the freedom of the American Colonies.

" Man is a reasoning being, but seldom reasonable," said Elbert Hubbard.

Immaru1el Kant, German philosopher, spent many years writing a book called Pure Reason. After he received the first copy from the printer and read it through, it has been said, he wrote on the last page a P. S.: "The thing does not exist."

All high-school students get a very understanding meaning from the late Mr. Noah Webster of the word "reason." I advise all of them after they find they are able to repeat the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer to see what Mr. Webster says about reason. I have all my life had some ambitions to know more about reason every day in every way as it may be applied to every contingency in our relations with everyday affairs. The reason I am going to talk about cotton to-night is because everybody else is, even the governors of all our Southern States have been talking about cotton for a month. · A few United States Senators and our President seem to be interested in cotton.

Now, my governor has done more talking than all of them put together, in face of the fact that on the 14th day of August he said he would not talk about cotton, neither would he call a conference for anybody else to talk about cotton. He said it would do no good. When he said it would do no good, he was wise far beyond his young and tender years. But no sooner had he uttered those words than he moved into his 12-cylinder Cadillac and drove to New Orleans; then began writing, wiring, printing, and broadcasting invitations for everybody to "come hither," we will talk about killing our king, "King Cotton," for one year. I am not in agreement with my governor on the subject of killing King Cotton for a ·year, and that is the reason why I am talking about cotton to-night. I know my governor about as well as I know my cotton. I know I have planted, plowed, and picked more cotton than he ever has or ever will. In the part of this State where my governor was born barefooted, and as a barefoot boy picked some cotton, they grew what we used to call "bumblebee" cotton-a cotton so small that a bumblebee has to get on his knees when he sips the nectar from its blooms.

Here I am pleased to inform those that do not know me as a cotton farmer or as having much to do with cotton for over 30 years, that my boyhood days were spent ~n a cotton farm in

8958 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 Ellis County, Tex. Th1s county held the record for 40 or 50 years as the banner cotton-growing county of the whole world. It held the record 40 years of producing more cotton in one year than a similar area in any cotton-growing section of the United States--about 156,000 bales, if I remember right.

My father lived in that county about 73 years of the 87 of his life. One bale was a crop of cotton for one farmer when he was a boy, and from fifty to a hundred when I was a boy, and to-day some Ellis County boys own a cotton farm in another county in Texas that they may grow 40,000 bales on, a few years hence.

I said I spent my boyhood days on a cotton farm. I mean every day that I could not find, make up, or hatch out some excuse to be somewhere else. I preferred to do anything about a farm or ranch than to have anything to do with cotton; yet my father managed, sometimes using quite forceful and persuading arguments, to teach me to plow, plant, and pick cotton until I could plow, plant, or pick as much as any hired hand about the place. In fact, he taught me more about the beauties, virtues, glories, and love for a cotton field than I ever cared to know.

His commands were as far as reason ever entered "into any of my arguments with him on ditierentials relating to or pertaining to the necessity of his or h1s seven sons' growing cotton for other nations of the earth to consume, as I thought then, for no financial reasons, and since have had few occasions to change my mind. .

For decades it has appeared to me that from the day the seed ~as planted until its fleecy staple was baled into th-e finest and fiossiest silklike fabrics, there was nothing but a bare and beggarly existence for everyone connected with the growing, picking, ginning, marketing, transporting, and manufacturing the thing named cotton; yet lt has been the money crop of the Southern States from the year the first bale was grown in 1620 to 1931, and made so by our slave-owning planters. The competition the slave-owning cotton grower had to meet when he sold his cotton was his brother slave-owning cotton grower on the next plantation or in an adjoining State. Sometimes these planters actually boasted about how low the cost they could grow cotton and as to the amount they could grow; that became a simple problem in mathematics or according to the number of slaves, mules, and cost of land they could assemble under one ownership.

Slave labor being the cheapest in the world, with new and fertile lands for the price of clearing, and the livestock needed growing wild in the woods near by were the concJJtions under which one of the world's leading industries was founded and bullded on American soil. Since 1865 free and white labor has not been able to fully overcome the sin of low prices made by slave labor ln the cotton-growing business, inherited from our pioneering and worthy ancestors. Often I have thought, "If the sins of the fathers were visited on the chlldren," truly the third generation after were still feeling the effects of the sins of slave labor.

The textile manufacturer, knowing that cotton was produced by cheap labor, was adamant against any demands of the growers of cotton for a profit-bearing price; and as there was only one manufacturer to about each thousand of the growers, he was the dictator of the price paid for cotton, dictator of the wages paid to American workers in the great cotton mills, because he had to compete with the lowest wage labor basis made goods in the world when he marketed the products of his spindles in competition with foreign textile-mill owners of England for over 100 years. There was, and is to-day, still a greater evil the American cotton grower, and the cotton ·manufacturer, has to compete against than cheap labor, either on American or foreign son, and it is the exchange value of the moneys used to buy cotton or cotton goods with, or sell cotton or cotton goods for, against the cheap money in foreign countries. An American silver dollar will buy three or four Chinese, Indian, or Mexican silver dollars, and these cheap silver dollars are used to pay for the foreign cotton and foreign-made goods; but in America an American silver dollar pays for just as much as a gold dollar. The thing that keeps American cotton as high as it might not be 1s that those countries have no cotton to export. It is this difference, or exchange rates on money, "a hocus-pocus" to most people, that the cause of the low price jute products shipped to America in such large quantities, more than the labor conditions where the jute fibers are grown.

I am fairly well acquainted with all the movements instituted in the past 50 years to improve the financial and social status of the American cotton and wheat farmers, and regret to state that 95 per cent of them died soon after the initiation fee was paid. Many of the reforms planned were by men of the best intentions, but they lacked breadth, width, and length in more ways than I can describe.

The most important and necessary part of any busin"6ss venture is to have it adequately financed, if it 1s to be successfully conducted. The cotton-growing business is possibly the largest business in the world considered from the number of people engaged and those dependents on it, 1n all its ramtfl.cations o! commerce, for their livings, and the most disadvantageously financed as far as the actual grower is concerned.

The magnitude of the raw-cotton crop in the United States at harvest time measured by money suggests figures well over a bllllon and sometimes two billions of dollars. In its manufactured state it comes back to the consumer at a cost of possibly five times the value of the raw product. Nearly one-fourth of the States of this Union, in which there live nearly 30,000,000 people, in the most favored area by climate, soU, and efficient methods for growing cotton in the world, have held the export monopoly on this product without profit for a hundred years. In the past

10 years the lands planted to cotton have been as low as thirty and as high as forty-six millions of acres, and produced as low as not quite 8,000,000 bales, and as high as n,early 18,000,000. When the crop is ready to harvest, there is invested in credits for supplies and money from three hundred to five hundred millions of dollars, plus most of the labor, investments in land, equipment, and Uvestock, representing not less than 50 per cent of the assessable wealth of all the States in which cotton is grown, and this vast sum of money is due when the gathering season begins.

When picking starts, the cotton farmer, as fast as he can sells his cotton, pays h1s retail merchant for his year's supplie;; the retail merchant pays the wholesale merchant and his local bank; the wholesale merchant pays the large balli:s in the cities where he is located, and these banks pay the banks in the great. financial centers of t?e country for loans they have made to assist, in the final analysls, the humble, honest, hard-working sons of the soil. All classes of tradesmen, from the smallest to the largest, and all classes of our population, from the poorest to the richest, have a helping hand in the producing of cotton. All that have assisted in any way have a natural, good, and solid reason to hope and expect that the farmer will get a fair price for his year's work; for with him, as with them, it's a year's work before he can have a pay day, or they can collect. The average cotton grower is usual.ly no more able to hold his cotton for a higher price any better than the weekly wage worker can hold his pay check from Saturday noon until Monday morn, and it's at this stage of the cottonprodu?ing business where the farmer loses his year's work, and somet1mes two, by not being able to hold his crop until nature's immutable laws force the demand to get around to the supply of a world-wide necessity. This is why and where all schemes and plans to help the cotton or wheat farmers have failed.

These people depend on their brother farmers of the northern and middle-western States for all the flour needed to make their daily bread, for a large part of their meats, as well as livestock, and a part of all the food they consume. The president of· one of the largest meat-packing concerns said 30 years ago he would rather have the South for his customers than all Europe.

When they make a short crop and are compelled to sell on a no-market value, they can not buy much of the flour that comes from the Kansas farmers' wheat, the fine mules that come from Missouri, or meats from the farms of the illinois cattle and hog raiser, and automobiles from Detroit. When the farmers of these Northern and Western States can not sell the only things they raise as their money crop, they can not buy what they need from their merchants of cotton goods or lumber that comes from the southern sawmills needed to improve and build their homes. When the factories of the North and the sawmills of the South slow down, then an army of marching vagabonds are seen all over the land.

Under the forces of the economic system by which we live and have naturally evolved in the past century there is hardly a county in all the United States that can live separate and apart from u.ll the other parts of the country.

As I said in the beginning, I hope I am talking to-night to both reasonable and reasoning beings. Some ask, Can the cotton grower survive by planting no cotton next year? I say yes; and the reason why? Because he has survived hereto!ore. He has survived droughts, floods, boll worms, and boll weevtls. In some places he builded monuments to the boll weevils many years ago. He has survived wars and pestilential diseases and even greater evils than any of these named have been survived by him. He has survived the low and no price evils.

I can remember when he survived after a large crop with the no-price evil 40 years ago or more. On Thanksgiving Day they all assembled in their houses of worship and gave thanks to Almighty God for the crops that He had made the lands produce, some thirty, some sixty, and in the case of cotton about three hundred fold. They reasoned with the Lord thus: That the sons of men, some of them our brothers, standing here 1n Thy presence, will not give us but a nickel-a pound for our cotton, but our most Righteous and Holy Father, Thou hast given us 2 bales, 3 bales, and sometimes 4 bales this year to sell for a nickel a pound, when last year Thou gavest us only 1 bale to sell at a dime a pound.

When the pious old New England cotton-mill owners heard the southern cotton farmers were going to render to the Creator the things due Him on Thanksgiving Day, they also had, as they always have had, their Thanksglving Day. They are the ones that have a monopoly on the bringing of Thanksgiving Day over to the New World on the Mayflower and depositing it under the rock of ages on the shores of the Atlantic for safekeeping.

They were thankful that the cotton growers of the South had enough of the breath of life still on hand to breathe and stand erect and be thankful for a nickel a pound for his cotton; and thus they reasoned through prayer that 1f he was so well satisfied with a three or four bales of cotton to sell at that price, where he had only one the year before, he could still live and render unto Cresar the very thing Cresar was looking for, which was cotton at 4 cents, and that 1s what they paid him until about George Washington's Birthday, when they raised the price to make him plant another large crop; and that was not all, they thanked the Lord for having the privilege of telling their employees that cotton is so cheap that it will not pay to weave it into cloth unless your wages are lower.ed, and for good honest measure you must add another hour to the day's work.

Now, there were reasons aplenty for thanksgiving-something more along the llne of what natural causes do for man's benefit.

Nature, it seems, has never loaded the human species very often with greater burdens than they were able to outlive. When

1932 CONGRESSIONA~ RECORP-SENATE 8959 disastlrs have occurred in the past-such as the droughts of ~gypt, in the days of Joseph-out of them· were born in the mmd of what we call a genius the science of irrigation. Since then there has been no such thing as crop failures in the valley of the Nile or any other valley where land was and is irrigated.

This gets us back to the saying that all reforms for the betterment of the ills that overtake us while on earth have come through the martyrdoms of our kind. Some one, sometimes millions, are crucified in some way before great wrongs are righted.

I have heard it said when mother nature needs one of a species or a new species of anything she produces a thousand. And again nothing is produced until it is needed; for instance, the milk never comes in the mother's breast until after the baby arrives. Just where " reason " enters into some of these aphorisms I have quoted let those who possess curiosity reason out to their own satisfacti~n. remembering that William Cullen B~yant's bid for immortality was cast in the first lines of Thanatops1s when he said "To him who in the love of nature holds communication with her visible forms, she speaks a various language." .

What I am thinking about is that out of the abundance of nature's magnanimous harvests, rich gifts to the peoples of nearly all the world this year, so much and so many of the material things essential and necessary for our comfort, happiness, and enjoyment, there are none that seem to know how to save, take care of, and preserve for future days, or righteously distribute to those that are sorely oppressed. It seems that there should be more cause and reasons to be giving thanks to the Almighty Power for what we have before us than to be assembling in mobs to give, and pray damns to fall on the heads of those, as far as I can perceive, who have had no connection or partnership what- . ever with any of God Almighty's plans or enterprises, not even by "remote control."

On August 8 the Department of Agriculture in Washington, D. C., gave out their first annual estimate of the cotton crop for the year 1931.

The information it contained from a financial sense was appalling. It deflated the price of cotton and put the hand of paralysis on many allied industries. I have not looked up to prove, but I dare say the invasion of Belgium in 1914 had no more disastrous effect on the South than the news from Washington that America would produce near 16,000,000 bales of cotton. Since that day many thousands of suggestions and solutions have been offered to remedy what appears to many as the greatest financial cataclysm that has overtaken the people of the South since the war of 1861, and it will be felt all around the world.

Some think that planting no cotton in 1932 wlll be the perfect panacea to forestall what seems to be due to come to pass. Some who are able in high places that could by their voice help out, allay and mollify whatever financial disaster that may happen to those engaged in the cotton industry, seem to not be seriously concerned.

Just one more night of feasting and. fiddling while a large part of the labors of American men and women are being consumed by the burning flames of poverty and bankruptcy.

I said a while ago, I was going to talk about cotton. I am also going to talk about a 10-year plan. Why not? Nearly everyone you meet has a plan to solve the cotton man's troubles. Russia has been getting a lot of free advertising about a "5-year plan." I know America can thrive equally as well or better on a 10-year plan for cotton and wheat, for it will take Russia half a century to grow as much cotton as they need at home, and 100 years to . raise enough wheat to give each Russian a loaf of bread a day, and they will eat more when they can get it.

My plan is, and there is nothing original about it, as follows: First. Let the voters of this country petition the President to

immediately convene Congress in a special 15-day session for one purpose only: To pass the necess~ry acts to empower the Secretary of the Treasury to sell one and one-half or two billion dollars of 10-year 2¥z or 3 per cent bonds or an amount sufficient to advance every cotton farmer 12¥2 cents the pound on cotton and 75 cents the bushel on wheat in warehouses and grain elevators. This on American-grown cotton and wheat, and these advances based on the high grades, lower grades according to the relative market value. The Government to have absolute control, and hold these commodities until a price of 20 cents the pound is received for the cotton and $1.25 per bushel for the wheat.

Second. When the cotton and wheat are sold, the advances and charges to be repaid, and in addition 10 per cent of the net or gross sale prices to be held by the Government for the purpose of forming a national cotton and grain corporation, or two separate corporations, one for cotton and one for grain. This 10 per cent each year for a period of 10 years to be handed back to the cotton and wheat farmers of the United States as the cash capital for corporations to be owned and controlled by them, and equivalent to approximately the average proceeds of one entire cotton and wheat crop. ·

Third. The 10-year plan to cover the limitations of production to consumption in an orderly, reasonable, and logical way. To study the possibilities, and probabilities, of other countries competing with the United States in the growing of cotton, and the manufacturing of cotton goods, the greater use of cotton goods in all the foreign countries, with import duties or tariffs sufficient to keep them, if it is possible to do so, from in any way competing with our cotton farmers, or our cotton factories on our own soil, let that soil be where it may, or wherever our flag may tly.

Fourth. Recompense or decompose the Farm Board, as now constituted, or constipated may be the better word. Appoint only farmers, bankers, or business men, whose interests are identical with the cotton industry to handle the cotton business, and the same class of men to handle the wheat business, with no authority to use or invest a cent of the funds entrusted to them in any way, except for the actual cotton and wheat delivered to them, and the expenses necessary thereto; prohibiting sale of the cotton or wheat in their care to any firm, corporation, or country that is in competition with this country, who may use American cotton to detlate values in this country, but other countries as well.

REMARKS

A 10-year plan, for the reason that many of the unknowing and unthinking part of our· citizens often talk of the competition of other countries, especially the Asians and Russians, with th1s country in the producing and marketing of cotton. China and India have been producing cotton since long before the dawn of civilization and do not now produce enough for their own use. The best and most reliable statistics at hand tell us that these two countries, with a population of something near a billion people, produce, and have been producing for the past 30 or 40 years, eight to ten million bales of cotton. This is approximately 1,000,-000 bales of cotton to each 100,000,000 of inhabitants. Russia, according to figures furnished by our Agricultural Bureau at Washington, for the year 1929-30 produced 1,310,000, and for 1930-31, 1,850,000 bales. Russia has a population estimated from one hundred and twenty-five to one hundred and fifty millions of people. The cotton-growing States of the United States have produced in the past 20 years, in round numbers, about 250,000,000 bales of cotton, something like one-half being exported, leaving for home consumption an annual average of six and one-half or seven million bales, or a million bales for each fifteen or twenty million people, making us the largest consumers of cotton in its varied forms of all countries of the world. We not only grow more cotton but no other country has been able to grow as good staples, save the Egyptian long staple used in a limited quantity in this country.

Here is a thought about other countries growing cotton in competition with this country. A few years ago the Dallas News sponsored prize contests in Texas for " More cotton on less acres." If just one-half the land in 150 counties of that State could be cultivated one year as the prize winner of those contests, John W. McFarlane, of Palestine, worked his acres, it is possible to produce over 100,000,000 ·bales of cotton in one season. .

These natural products of the soil can be preserved by wellknown methods for many years, as well as the fabrics and foods that come from them by conversion. A bushel of wheat or a bushel of cottonseed is of more value as measured by the thing called "money," than all the gold, silver, and precious jewels ever mined from the date of creation down to yesterday, if there was only the one bushel of wheat and the one bushel of cottonseed.

There are some who will say, "Why fix 20 cents the pound for cotton and $1.25 per bushel for wheat?" The average price per pound received by the cotton farmers for the past 10 years in the United States has been a little less than 20 cents. At this price, under the conditions which they have produced their annual crops, there was some visible profit or gain to the great majority of those engaged in the arduous and hazardous work of raising cotton and wheat to supply the needs of the earth's population .. There are those who will ask, " Why place the responsibility of financing cotton and wheat on the National Government in Washington?" I answer by saying that the National Government is the only organized institution that is big enough to carry on such an undertaking. The Government can get the money to do business with at 2¥z or 3 per cent, on as long or short a time as desirable. No other agency has ever financed cotton or wheat for less than twice the above costs for .farmers, merchants, and others holding cotton or wheat from a low or no market until sold, and then only for sho.rt-time arrangements. This is more than they can afford to pay. Cotton and wheat are better collateral for money borrowed than copper, silver, or gold bullion is, or ever will be. .

President Lincoln said it was the duty of governments to do the things for the people that it could do better for them than they could do for themselves, and I was taught to affirm that our Government is "of the people, for the people, and by the people."

Many able men claiming to be intelligent, some of them eminent lawyers, some our Congressmen and Senators, and several actually elected to the greatest official position of trust, power, and honor on this earth-Presidents of these United States of Americar-say we can not legislate values into commodities by law, and they will immediately walk into the Halls of Congress and make laws to increase their salaries. They will vote a tariff of 2 cents or more on a pound of sugar which the people must have, and then take the money to pay their increased salaries, plus all their kinsmen they c;an get on the Government pay rolls by the laws' orders. As a matter of fact and truth, every city, county, State, and National Government officeholder and employee has his wages fixed, stabilized, and often increased, and all guaranteed by laws.

There are in America, including the Army, Navy, and pensio:pers, some million or more of men and women getting their livings, including traveling expenses, directly from the Government. They are living under and by law. The wages and salaries of over 2,000,000 railway employees are fixed by a lawfUlly constituted railway board appointed by the President of this country, and this is not all. The railway corporations have rates made by law

8960 CONGRESSIQNAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 for hauling freight and passengers sufficient to cover and guarantee them fair return on thetr investments, plus all the watered stock and bonds they could issue and sell to the publtc before States and the National Government stopped them from practicing such unjust and immoral acts, though profitable, on simple:J;ninded and credulous investors of the country. The bonds and stocks of all railway and transportation companies in America are stabilized by the decrees of the law, and were made so within the past 15 years, and these very days they are beseeching the powers that rule the country to give them more, because they are not making enough, due to business stagnation and competition. I cite these instances to show to those that say we can not stabilize or put values, especially money or cash values, into things animate or inanimate, by law. About one man out of every six you meet on the streets is getting his gasoline and groceries by operation of the law, and about one day out of every six the workingman works goes for taxes as the laws demand.

I said recompose or decompose the Farm Board. Let me explain. I know little about the actual and detailed operations of this· subsidiary of our Government created for the purpose of giving advice and financial assistance to the agricultural masses of this country. I know there was voted at its disposal one-half a billion dollars for the purpose of stabilizing values of farm products. This money has been invested and loaned to cotton, wheat, corn, oat, bean; datry, fruit, and grape producers. It has done good, no doubt, far beyond what the average man is able to see or comprehend, but no agency could stabilize the values satisfactorily of eight or ten billion dollars worth of the products above named with one-half a b1llion dollars at their command, with enormous yields of the farms, with private corporate interests fighting and obstructing them every time they make a move to assist those for whose benefit the Farm Board was created. They have been sorely handicapped, but there is back and behind all they have done or can do a bar sinister that the members of the Farm Board have to keep them from being of material aid to those it was intended to help, and it is the letter and spirit of instructions to Congress by none other than the President, if what was printed in the New York Times in the year 1931, the month of August, and the day, the 15th, is true. Here is what it said:

"Two years ago when President Hoover proposed his plan for the creation of a farm board, he warned Con~ess that certain vital principles must be observed in the interest of the taxpayers as well as the farmer. Among those principles he listed the following:

"1. No governmental agency should engage in" the buying or price fixing of products.

"2. Government funds should not be loaned or facilities duplicated where other services of credit and facilities are available at reasonable rates.

·• 3. No activities should be set in motion that will result in increasing the surplus production ...

Is it possible that a President of this country would sign a bill creating a farm board, handing over to them $500,000,000 to aid (not give as <;harity) the great agricultural classes of this country, the bone and sinew of the land, and then say to them, " Behold my instructions: You must not buy or sell, either fix a price, loan moneys, duplicate facilities, give services or credit, when these acts on your part conflict with private interests already established"? Can t~ere, in all this enlightened country, be found one so moronish that he could not understand the meaning of these simple and plain words? What would any man think to hear of a father giving money to his son to go into a buslness and _ then say, "Son, do not go into any business where you find other persons engaged in the same line of endeavor"? That's exactly, according to the oracles given out from the ruling head of this Nation; and we have been wondering what was the matter with the Farm Board. It would have been of no use to the Farm Board had Congress turned the mints and money-printing shops over to them and they run them day and night coining gold or silver and printing paper currency year after year if they could not buy, sell, or loan on the agricultural products of the country.

The fallacy of any man, corporation, or government trying to boost the price of any commodity by buying or loaning money on a small fractional part of the supply is so foolish that whoever advocates or practices such a scheme ought to have his head examined by a pathologist and a psychopathist to find out how much of the elements of human nature and common sense he 1s endowed with.

Individuals and corporations operating as monopolies, trusts, or under " gentlemen's agreements " for profit, do so on the basis of controlling the major portion of all the supply of the goods, wares, and merchandise they sell or manufacture. The secret of their success (which is no secret) is in being able to control and hold the supply until the delllS.nd gets around to their warehouses before what they have to sell spoils on their hands, they knowing well in advance when the day will arrive.

Those words of President Hoover have completely denatured the work of the Farm Board as if it had never been born.

Something more about creating values by law. Not so long ago, I was on the bank of the Rio Grande River in Texas. There I stood on land in the United States that could not be bought for less than $500 per acre. Then I could face about and view, as far as I could see, thousands of acres of land just as fertile, warmed by the same sunshine, watered by the same clouds, from the same skies, only divided by an imaginary line down the middle of the river, that could not be sold for $5 per acre. The difference in

prlce or value being the d11ference in government on one dlde of the river and government on the other side of the river.

If we can not create values by laws, the makers of our Constitution made an awful blunder when they placed in section 8, Article V, of that document these words: "Congress shall have the right to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standards of weights and measures." This does not say whether they were to coin gold, silver, copper, tin, lead, or Iron. Anybody that does not believe the way that article reads, just hunt up a copy of the Constitution and read it. When this Constitution was made in 1787, there was not a gold or silver mine in the United States, and having known many Congressmen and Senators in the past, and knowing a few at the present time, I am wondering what they knew about the value of any kind of metals in those days.

A lot of them don't seem to know much about the values of money or metals now. The Constitution makers, I said, made an awful blunder. I want to explain the difference between a blunder .and a mistake. A mistake can be corrected, while a blunder can not. This one was made too long ago to try to think about changing.

Now, I am just foolish enough to believe that if my governor, Senator elect of Louisiana, can have a law passed that will quadruple the selling price of cotton in two weeks' time, that he can go on to Washington immediately and work on his brother Senators and have them help him coin up about 50,000,000 tons of scrap iron that is lying loose over this country and make it legal tender for all debts, private and public, including their salaries. The scrap-Iron and salvage business belongs to the Hebrews in this United States, and I can quote scripture to prove that they are God's chosen people. I know this would put new life into the junk business, besides help some dear Jewish friends that both myself and my governor-Senator are glad to call friends.

Can the Government fix and stabilize the prices of commodities? If I have not shown that ours has been doing it since it was founded, let me remind those of short memories that during the World War the Government of the United States of North America fixed the price of wheat, lumber, iron, steel, powder, horses, and mules, and added a dollar an~ ten cents per gallon to the price of whisky. It fixed the price of the pay for over 4,000,000 soldiers plus 4,000,000 insurance policies on their lives and is st111 doing it. It would take volumes to enumerate all the things that this Government fixed a price on, and they were high enough, and it paid off. It did more: It told us to not eat sugar on Monday, flour bread on Tuesday, nor burn coal on Wednesday, give to the Red Cross on Thursday, eat fish on Friday, subscribe for Liberty bonds on Saturday, and go to church on Sunday, and most of us did.

The same reasons for fixing prices then, in days of war, are just as good and more necessary now to help us keep the peace. History of governments are full of precedents telling us when and wh·ere they fixed prices, and· the prices of all commodities, including lawyers' fees and land rents, were fixed by the d.ecrees of one Roman Emperor. Interest on moneys was fixed at noting soon after the Galilean Carpenter threw the money changers out of the temple, and for a thousand years or more the penalty for loaning money at interest was death; and this law had the sanction of the established church. As a matter of truth, the church was both the gospel and the law.

The value of cotton ought not to vary a cent a pound and ·wheat 10 cents a bushel over a period of 1, 5, or 10 years. The Government can not guarantee to do something that nature has never done in -the way of producing abundant crops every year, but can stabilize the value and take care of the supplies of cotton and wheat for a term of years or as long as the people of this Nation desire.

All throughout the ages historians tell us that Mother Nature has had her fat and lean years, and the specters of want and famine are stalking abroad on some parts of the earth at all times, while at intervals, not so far apart, she fails to produce food over a vast territory for many years. When these catastrophes have happened, nations of people have perished almost to the last one.

These verities of nature as expressed may be a little far-fetched to mlliions of Americans, who have been so abundantly and lavishly provided with the best of all the comforts and luxuries of life for the past 10 or 15 years, not having to give a "thought about the morrow, what they shall eat, or what they shall drink, or wherewith shall they be clothed," unmindful of the days of the future when adversities may cause them to faint by the wayside while their strength is small. We have more than 25,000,000 of people not knowing to-day where their food is coming from tomorrow. We have 50,000,000 more depending on a weekly wage and salaries for their week's supply of the things necessary for life, not knowing whether or not the next pay check they will draw wUl have attached ·to it the dreaded dismissal notice.

The small interest and charges for carrying the entire cotton and wheat crops of this country for a period of one or five years would be a. small insurance to pay against the days when we may be surrounded by natural perils when our destruction would inevitably be near at h and. The reasons these things have occurred in the past are the same reasons they will occur again.

Ten million bales of cotton and 500,000,000 bushels of wheat ought to be in storage at all times in the country as a surplus to insure a steady supply of cotton for the people's needs, and wheat for food at even or steady prices regardless of whether crops are

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8961 sma.ll or large in any year or over a period of seve.ral years, and it should not be held in the clutches of a modern Joseph.

We have in America, on hand and in sight, cotton that ought to bring, at a fair value, near two and a half billion dollars, and wheat enough, und,er average conditions of the past 10 years, to bring growers near $1,000,000,000; yet in this, the richest country beneath the sh1ning sun, with a population of 125,000,000 people, these products of the farms have no market or exchange value. At the same time we boast of having about one-half the coined gold of the world in the vaults of the Federal reserve banking system that, when created, the originators said would make money or currency shortage forever impossible.

The day the National Government adopts a plan to valorize and stabilize the cotton and wheat crops of America for a period of 10 years will be the day when a new hope and new period of sane prosperity will be born into the minds and lives of millions who are looking now through the gloomy glasses of despair.

When the products of land and labor can not be sold or moneys loaned on them, the lands have neither sale nor rental value, and laborers turn beggars. In countries where there is no agriculture, they have no need for cities, railroads, banks, or stocks of merchandise. When the farmers and livestock growers prosper, then the merchant, the banker, and mechanic prosper.

The taking over by the Government of the cotton and wheat crops would put in circulation nearly two blllions of dollars at the springs or fountainheads of the mighty streams of commerce, and who can point to the individual who would not be benefited; and furthermore, who doubts its ability to do ~t when we know that within the past few months over $1,000,000,000 was handed out to those who enlisted in the World War 14 years ago, and on what kind of security? And in the face of the assertions of the Secretary of the Treasury, Hon. Andrew Mellon, that there was no money to give them, while thousands of checks were already being signed and paid before he finished saying there was nothing to pay with; and what was paid to these men is as a bucket of water dashed into a ri\'er compared to the sympathetic gifts of gold to the European governments that owed us $12,091,000, when peace was declared after the World War, and now owe us, we are informed by one authority, $7,740,000,000, and by another conclusion $5,888,000,000, and this payable in small driblets from now until some time near the year 2000 A. D., and this reduction of either five or seven billions of dollars was made without their paying a copper cent of the principal, or with tlle consent of the majority of the citizens of this Republic.

The United States holds a monopoly and will continue to hold it for many years to come on nearly every bale of exported cotton in the world; and if we are not big enough to prevent other countries from dictating the price they will pay us, we ought to go out of the cotton business and sink our merchant ships in the seas,• pull down the Stars and Stripes from the Capitol Building in Washington and .all sing-

Oh, Star-Spangled Banner, we weep until you wave Again in this free land, made by the blood of the brave-With sorrow we see you ftJrled in the home of slavesMade so by your being held in the hands of knaves.

We have in our midst at all times dldactors of what we call " The law of supply and demand.'' There never were as few words put into a sentence with more meaning, or as meaningless. It's a law that works going and coming, down and up, overtime and undertime. Some say there are powers in this law that Omnipotence can not overrule, but I say that the power of the almighty dollar vetoes it whenever it so wills.

A farmer understands the law to mean that when he has to buy anythlng, the man he deals with owns the supply, and he understands he must comply with whatever demands are made as to price and terms.

He further understands that when he is favored by nature with bountiful yields of wheat or cotton, producing enough ln one year to last the country for two or three years, he must accept less than the price of one year's supply for the two or three years' supply. He understands that when he fails to ptoduce what the country needs and must have for two or three years, no one contributes to his loss for efforts extended.

A higher and ancient law says that the demand for food and raiment is steady and constant, and history tells us that it has always exceeded the supply.

A still higher law dictates that there ought to be enough of the supply of protection and precaution on the part of all governments to guard the welfare of those 'that are engaged in the business of feeding and clothing the great majority of their brothers-in-k1nd.

I said there was nothing new about a " 10-year plan." The holding back of one-tenth of the net sale price of each year's crop of cotton and wheat for 10 years is equivalent to having the entire proceeds of one year's crop delivered back to the farmers as a cash-capital fund to form a national grain or cotton corporation. This plan may be new or novel to many, as applied to the economics of agriculture.

This would be the farmer saving up every tenth bale of cotton or tenth bushel of· wheat, which would be better than plowing up every third row when the Government had a mortgage on the first two rows, some one else on all the others, plus the Federal land banks' mortgage on the land, with not a chance that all the cotton or wheat gathered from all the rows will pay the taxes in many instances. And here let me digress for a moment to say something about taxes.

Just after the close of the World War we began the era of voting taxes and bonds for every imaginable thing that politicians inspired by profiteers asked us to vote. The farmer voted for bonds to build the $1,000,000 high-school building where the gradeschool building was sufficient. He voted for good roads and free bridges. In the cities and towns the banker, the money brokers, the business man, the laboring man joined hands and voted bonds and taxes under " Progress and prosperity " slogans. They said make business good and give labor employment. We increased taxes a hundred per cent and doubled assessments another hundred per cent, which quadrupled the taxes. When we voted these taxes and bonds, cotton was over 20 cents the pound and wheat was over $1.25 the bushel. Now it takes 16 bales of cotton to pay the taxes on the identical farm or 16 bushels of wheat where only 1 bale of cotton or 1 bushel of wheat paid the taxes 10 years ago.

This is an increase in the ratio of 100 to 1,600 as paid in cotton-16 bales to pay the taxes now that 1 bale paid 10 years ago. The people of no nation, no State. no city, no street, not even Wall Street, can stand up under such tax burdens.

Here is a concrete case that is strictly home grown. The parish of Caddo (called counties in other States) in which the city of Shreveport is situated, has not near as high tax rates as thousands of other localities 1n the country. Our State, parish, city license, motor vehicle, and gasoline taxes, approximate $6,000,000. We will produce 60,000 bales of cotton worth, at the present no-value levels, less than $2,000,000, and cotton is the big thing we have to sell. I dare mention the assertion that there are fifteen hundred counties in the South and West that can show similar conditions.

In the epochs of panics and depressions that have happened in tne past, it was cotton that had to bow down before the altars of gold. And more, there have been days in this country when, had it not been for cotton to draw gold from foreign governments, the Government of the United States would have been unable to maintain the much idolized and revered "gold standard" of money values, in order that a "cross of gold" should stand as the emblem of honest money among the enlightened nations of the globe. Cotton was the savior that had to be crucified to keep the kings of finance from losing their shining crowns.

The exports of cotton from America for a hundred years have exceeded in value that of all other commodities combined; and if the cotton growers had one dime a day profit for the days of hard labor spent in its production, it would take more gold to pay them off than this country has ever coined.

The supply of wheat wllerever grown is harvested within less than 60 days' time. The supply of cotton is gathered on an average of less than four months' time. The Chief Architect of all our earthly " scheme of things " never intended that we should consume, during the short harvesting of grains, all our lands supplied. If He had, there would have been no lasting and life-giving properties as lives in a single grain of wheat for a thousand years, as some declare. Cotton in warehouses, or sunk in ships to the bottom of the seas, remaining 25 and 50 years, when recovered and found in good condition, proves that nature must have predestined the formulae for preservation of the species said to have been made in the image of their creator by placing the near-everlasting concomitants in the foods that sustain their lives over long durations of time.

I can not say all I would like to say about price fixing, stabilizing, or valorizing commodities by governmental agencies this evening, because I can talk a week on the subject and then not say one-half that could be said pro and con.

There are those that are say1ng " Hands off by the Government in business"; but when we look for a reason for their utterances, we never travel very far to find it. They belong to the class that think they have an inherited right to pick the pockets of the public without license or restrain~. without giving value for what they receive.

When it comes to private agencies fixing a value on what I have to sell, so there is no profit to me and all to them, I will choose to have my Government be the arbiter.

When it comes to organized agencies or corporations, with unlimited capital in any business, for all they can squeeze and screw out of the unorganized masses, then I am for my Government stepping up and saying, "Thou shalt not.''

What is needed is for the producers of wheat and cotton to be advanced at least the cost of production, which will place new money into the channels of trade, and start the agricultural classes back into the business of living.

The South and West are begging not charity but a loan and protection on the best collateral that floats on the rivers' and oceans' commerce.

And I ask any man or woman that hears me this question: "If you owned all the cotton and wheat in this country to-clay,

and you could borrow the money to hold and store for 1, 2, or 3 years at 2~ or 3 per cent, would you sell at the low prices, dump into the sea, or plow up or burn every third row, or would you hold until the peoples of the country called for and paid you a fair price?"

I know what you will answer, if you have good, common sense with a mixture of reason. You will say that we will hold, because in these two greatest of all products that come from our farms, we have two redeemers that liveth.

In conclusion, getting down to present-day conditions, we behold business and industries stifled; laborers unemployed by the millions; fortunes of men, large and small, vanish as warm vapor in cold air; banks, big and little, closing their doors in every part of the country; people enduring all k1nds of hardships, and

8962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 due almost wholly to the cold and unsympathetic truth that all the staple, basic, and prime necessities for sustaining life, have no market or exchange value. We look about us and see about 50 individuals in these good United States absolute dictators of that many corporations, having something like 1,000 subsid.iaries earning fixed and guaranteed dividends and profits made by laws of their own designs, in excess of $2,000,000,000 annually, enough 1n two years to enable them, with only their profits and dividends, to draw from the Federal reserve banks every one of the $4,000,-000,000 stored in their vaults, if they choose so to do, just as Morgan & Co., with allied interests, did to the United States Treasury during Cleveland's second administration.

In the past decade there have been engrafted into the law books of the land (not by the consent of a majority of the free voters of our . Commonwealths) and sustained by the Supreme Court decisions, laws giving street-railway, light, power, water, and gas· companies, and all railroad corporations of America, the right to make rates and charges for services sufficient to them, and guarantee a "fair return" on their investments-" fair returns" meaning anywhere from 5 to 500 per cent, after charges for losses, deflations, and salaries larger than any Government ever paid to the occupant of its royal throne.

The audacious irony of the situation is they are not satisfied, and are asking, in the name of God, amen, for more in the face of world-wide depressions, ~nd when in this country the primary producers of wealth of the land are prostrate on their backs, almost unable to pray, sing, beg, or weep, much less fight for help.

It is a hard and unfair rule that gives te one class of men the right by "due processes of law" to take from their brothers the fruits of their toil and sufficient amoun1i to guarantee to them a sure, steady, and increasing profit on their stocks, bonds, and investments, and deny these same brothers the right to have a price for the foods they produce sufficient for them to have the bare necessities of life. It is the "golden rule" all right, with all the gold going one way.

Isn't it enough to make thinking men wonder and ask themselves just what kind or kinds of political and economic anachronisms are we living under? In this best of all possible governments?

JEFFERSON DAY ADDRESS BY FORMER GOVERNOR BYRD, OF VIRGINIA

Mr. GLASS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD an address delivered by former Governor Byrd, of Virginia, on the occasion of the Jefferson Day rally at the Willa~d Hotel in Washington, D. C., on April 13, 1932.

There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the REcORD, as follows:

Fellow Democrats, the words of Thomas Jefferson had an imperishable vitality which has carried them down to us. For 150 years they have profoundly infiuenced the political thought of the world, and their power sprang not from the personality of the speaker but from eternal principles which he perceived With the vision of an inspired prophet and translated into simple language. These principles were true not because he gave them. Rather he gave them because they were true. What was true of human nature then is no less true to-day.

But I do not believe that Mr. Jefferson would hold some of his opinions beyond change were he to return to us to-night. He was the most modern-minded of the builders of this Nation, and he would recognize to-day that the isolation of his time of bad roads and difficult transportation has been swept away on the wings of the airplane, and by the automobile and the speed of electricity. He would accept the necessity of interstate regulation of interstate operations, and he would broaden his views of sensible cooperation with other countries without sacrifice of the vitality of national sovereignty. But I do not think he would sacrifice or compromise a single fundamental principle that he proclaimed, for these principles are eternal and essential to the preservation of popular government in this country.

were Jenerson to return to Monticello he would be shocked to read the statement of a brilliant justice of the Supreme Court of the United States that to-day we face conditions worse than war, and he would be surprised to hear the successors o-f his old political enemy, Alexander Hamilton, after 12 years of their control of the affairs of the Nation, admit that the justice does not overstate the condition. He would learn that the Republican Party had not only built up and encouraged other monopolies by its policies, but that it had claimed itself to have a monopoly on prosperity. He could turn the files of the newspapers in the recent days of soaring prices and marvel at the bold assurances of the leaders of the Republican Party that we were permanently on that high-price level, and that it was no longer true that what goes up must inevitably come down; and at last he would read that vision seen by Mr. Hoover himself of a new America from which the Republican Party had actually abolished poverty. As he read on he would mark the collapse of prices, and the cries of the losers, and the losses of the victims, and the unemployment of the helpless, and even his powerful mind would be confused. How could a party of the best minds have lost its monopoly on prosperity, he would ask; and the Republican answer would be that somehow the ghost of Cleveland or Wilson had returned to the prosperity feast of good Republicans and scared prosperity away. Besides he would be assured by the Republican leaders that the pan.ic 1s due to international causes. ~· Jefferson

would be still _ more confused by this last explanation, for he would read elsewhere the Republican doctrine that America is self-contained and may live and prosper by itself alone without regard as to how high the tariff walls may be erected around us.

The conditions are indeed tragic and terrjble, but the Democratic Party can not win by merely placing the responsib111ty for the panic on the Republicans. The American people are in no mood to be patient with the ordinary play of politics. The American people demand that the Democratic Party show the power and the purpose to lead fn reconstruction and to liberat e and strengthen the courage and capacity inherent in the minds and hearts of the people that they may recapture their prosperity and rebuild their fortunes.

Bad a.s the conditions are, I do not consider the difficulties as great as those that Thomas Jefferson faced and fought and conquered. He made this a. popular Government with only the hopes and ideas o{ isolated and scattered people and a few associate leaders at his back against the determination of the brilliant Hamilton to place power in the possession of the privileged classes. Under his administration a struggling people saw wealth accumulate and taxes go down, and a mounting surplus become a. problem in the Treasury of the United States. This change Jefferson accomplished in part because of his insistence that the Government must be frugal; because of his hatred of publlc debt; because of his love of economy in publlc affairs. Were he to revisit us to-day I believe the condition of the publlc purse would be his primary concern. He would not only insist that expenses be reduced; he would not appoint a commission to consider the problem; but he would reduce them. Our great leaders in Congress, Speaker GARNER and Senator RoBINsoN, would have no stronger supporter than :Mr. Jefferson in their patriotic position that, although the Republican Party created the deficit, the Budget of the United States must be balanced and expenses of Government must be reduced.

DANGER OF ORGANIZED MINORITIES

Wherever one tries to cut expenditures there are scores of interested persons who deny that the cut can be made without great injury. But hard necessity has shown individuals and private business how expenses can be reduced. Of course every one recognizes that the largest items in the National Budget must be paid in bad as well as good times, but millions may yet be saved. One of the ways to save, Mr. Jefferson would say, is to take power out of the hands of organized and local minorities or blocs and turn it back to the majority of unorganized men and women who go silently about their own affairs and supply ultimately most of the money the Government spends. Mr. Jefferson hated every form of tyranny over the mind of man, and he detested special privileges. He believed that the rule of the majority had its faults and confessed its dangers, but he nevertheless believed that a representative democracy was the best government and that the decision must rest with the majority as a working rule of such government. He was right-eternally and fundamentally right--when he said, " The man in each locality kn9ws his own business better than any one else." Yet in our country to-day the decision often results from the activities of a small part of the voters, separated into different blocs, and organized and determined to win their own objectives by concentrating political pressure on Members of Congress.

Mr. Jefferson always gave his occupation as that of a. farmer. Agriculture was his hobby, and he did more for its promotion than any other statesman that ever lived. He believed that values come ultimately from those who work the soil; and how can the creators of wealth, these feeders of the Nation, regain a fair living unless they can market at a profit their exportable surplus? With one-half of our population dependent upon agriculture, when this great purchasing power is reduced, as it has been for the last 10 years, every maker of things to sell must suffer. Remember that over half the cotton, over half the tobacco, over a third of the copper, more than a fifth of the wheat and flour, a quarter of the agricultural machinery, more than one-eighth of the refined oil, and a tenth of the automobiles were exported in 1929. It is a fair implication from Mr. Jefferson's political writings that he would to-day work toward an international economic union and perhaps reciprocal treaties by which duties could be imposed to furnish reasonable revenue and at the same time to encourage the marketing of our exportable surplus.

PLATFORM SHOULD BE SHORT AND CLEAR

The platform written by the Democratic Party should be so clear and simple that the man on the street can understand it without calling in a lawyer to interpret its provisions. Our position on the tariff should be clearly stated.

Wars grow out of economic competition, and lives as well as dollars may be the price of tariff battles. Routes of trade and fiow of commerce concern the United States as deeply and as vitally as it concerns a human being to have his arteries and veins open and healthy.

Obviously the tariffs of the United States have contributed powerfully by example and effect to interference With the trade of the world. Following our example, there is no European nation to-day that is not to the lim1t of its -ability placing barriers against the interchange of commodities upon which the prosperity of international trade fundamentally depends.

We see to-day as a direct result of Republican policies our foreign markets closed, a reckless waste of governmental revenues; we see the farmer ruined because he has no market for his surplus, and our manufacturers, 1.n order to escape tarifl reprisals

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-. SENATE 8963 against American-made goods, erecting factories abroad and depriving the American workman of a job and our Government of taxes.

COST OF GOVERNMENT MUST BE LOWERED

Our governmental expenses, local, State, and national, have increased from three billions of dollars in 1913 to fifteen billions in 1931. This is an increase of 500 per cent in amount, an increase of more than four times per capita. To-day $1 out of every $5 we earn goes to 250,000 tax-gathering and tax-spencling agencies. Eighteen million of our citizens are now dependent upon tax pay rolls for their support. To-day the value of our basic commodities, the only source from which the wealth of our Nation is replenished, is much below the 1913 level. In agriculture the purchasing power of the farmer's dollar is only a little more than half as compared to 1913. Our foreign trade is back to the 1910 basis. Our governments, local, State, and national, can not continue to live in the boom days of 1929. lf we do, disaster will inevitably follow. The Democratic Party should declare for lowering our governmental costs--national, State, and local-to the ability of the citizens to pay. This can only be accomplished by less Government in busip.ess and more business in Government.

PROHIBITION SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO PEOPLE

And now for a moment let us discuss prohibition. The eighteenth amendment as such has not been indorsed by either the Democratic of Republican Party. The recent vote in Congress to resubmit the eighteenth amendment indicates that the division on prohibition is as sharp in the Republican Party as in the Democratic Party. I have throughout my public career supported dry legislation and advocated temperance. I believe that the open saloon and its evils, legally abolished by the eighteenth amendment, should never be permitted to return. I say this so that my position will not be misunderstood. The prohibition law and all other laws should be enforced, but we must recognize that no law is stronger than the public sentiment to sustain it. In Virginia I voted as a member of the State senate to submit to the people of Virginia a referendum on prohibition. My views on the national problem are identical. No problem has ever touched the lives and morals of our citizens more closely than prohibition. It should be removed from party politics and submitted directly to the people themselves for decision. The Democratic platform should declare for the enforcement of all laws, but an immediate task of the Democratic Party is to work· out the most fair and feasible method to carry the prohibition question to the people.

If the eighteenth amendment,. or a modification, is sustained "'by such referendum, a clear mandate will result to enforce the prohibition laws. I am opposed to any referendum unless it be conducted under the law of the land. I do not favor any plan that will permit_'the people of a particular State to vote that State out of the control of the Constitution of the United States while other States remain under the Constitution. I stand, therefore, upon these beliefs:

(a) That prohibition is the law and should not be nullified by deliberate failure to observe it; but

(b) That it is still a human law that may be amended or changed; and

(c) That as a question affecting the lives and habits of the people it should be decided by a popular vote by the people themselves.

No matter what plan is proposed, a constitutional amendment is necessary. I suggest an amendment to provide the legal machinery to permit the people themselves to determine this vexing question. The amendment could read as follows:

"The Congress, w~enever two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose an ·amendment or amendments to or the repeal of Article XVIII of the amendments t"o this Constitution, or to any future amendment or amendments thereof, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of this Constitution when ratified at an election to be held in each of the several States on a certain day, to be designated by Congress, by the majority of the electors voting thereon in three-fourths of the several States. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for the electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures."

This will enable--(a) When two-thirds of Congress desire, the question of there

peal or modification of the eighteenth amendment can be submitted to every qualified voter in every State on a day selected by Congress when no other election 1s held.

(b) Each State will vote as a unit, and three-fourths of the States, as at present, will be necessary to change the existing amendment.

As I see it, in no other way can the voice of the people in secret ballot be given expression. A constitutional amendment submitted to legislatures does not enable a direct expression from the people; neither does an amendment submitted to State conventions.

Regardless of my own individual views on prohibition or any other question of equal importance affecting the lives and habits and individual rights of the people, I am willing to stand firmly upon the fundamental democratic principle that the people them_selves have the right to decide it, and whenever desired by a substantial proportion of our people they should be given the opportunity to do so. It is not more police or more government but stronger convictions and law-enforcement spirit that we need. This means a revivification of honesty and courage, which will

require all the fortitude that Jefferson bequeathed us. I make this suggestion without thought of candidacy for any office but as a constructive effort to solve the problem confronting us.

Now, in conclusion, the Republican Pa.rty is discouraged; their hearts are failing them before the natio!l-wide criticism of their administration; but hope springs eternal in their predictions that we will divide and defeat ourselves. Our opponents will be disappointed. This country we love, thls people we serve, needs the Democratic Party to lead them out of the depths of depression. The ambitions of no individual will divide us, the dislike of no individual will be permitted to weaken our common strength. Sobered and stimulated by the shining example of the greatest Democrat of the ages, let us highly resolve that this party, dedicated to popular service, will select its leader and follow him without dividing reservations to recapture for all Americans the prosperity and happiness of a people to whom Jefferson bequeathed the power to control their Government.

GOVERNMENT AID TO CURE THE DEPRESSION-ADDRESS BY SENATOR TYDINGS

Mr. LEWIS. Mr. President, I beg to tender for the RECORD an address delivered in the city of Washington last evening over the radio by the Senator from Maryland [Mr. TYDINGS] on the subject of "How Government Can Help Cure the Depression." I ask that it may be printed in the usual way.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the address referred to will be printed in the RECORD.

The address referred to is as follows: It should be evident to every thinking person at this time

that what is needed to help lead the country out of its present long and serious depression, to lessen the injurious effects of unemployment, and to secure at least a partial return to prosperity. is some plan which will accomplish these altogether worthy results. It must be a plan which will provide work for the unemployed and by providing them with work, furnish them with purchasing power to buy the things people use and need, which our factories and farms will then be called upon to produce. It must be a plan which w1ll not further burden a public already groaning under an almost unbearable burden of National, State. city, county, and municipal taxation; and, lastly, it must be . a plan which can be called into play at once in order to stem the tide of adversity long before the cold winds of next winter are felt.

Can such a plan be devised and carried through which will accomplish these requisites to a return of prosperity and at the same time not burden the public with more taxes which they will find it difficult to pay?

My answer is an emphatic, "Yes; it can be done; it should be done; it must be done or grave consequences are in store for tAe country."

I have introduced such a plan in the National Congress in the form of an amendment to the revenue act, and this plan will shortly come up for a vote in the Senate of the United States.

It is my purpose now to explain briefly but thoroughly that plan in the hope that I may impress the country with its soundness and merit and secure enough popular support for it to insure its adoption by the Congress.

This plan 1s as follows. It provides three things: First. The creation of a bond issue in the sum of $1,500,000,000

to be liquidated at the rate of one-tenth of this sum per year, or, in other words, to pay off this loan at the rate of $150,000,000 per annum.

Second. It provides that with the sum of money obtained from the bond issue a gigantic construction program will be immediately inaugurated all over the Unit¢ States, embracing all of those construction projects already a,uthorized by the Congress. but for which no appropriation has as yet .been made, due to a shortage of national funds. These already-authorized projects embrace a building program of a billion dollars, which would be spent for labor and materials. In addition to this a further sum of $400,000,000 would be available tor the immediate construction of roads, river and harbor improvements, and flood-control projects. As stated, the whole program would call for the expenditure, starting immediately, of the sum of $1,500,000,000.

Third. The plan provides further that this huge bond issue of $1,500,000,000 shall be paid off entirely by levying a special tax of 24 cents a gallon on beer containing 2.75 per cent of alcohol by volume. To permit the sale of this beer the Volstead Act is amended, raising the a.lcoholic content it now specifies, of one-halt of 1 per cent, to 2.75 per cent. which is the point where scientists and the mectical fraternity unite in declaring such beverage is not intoxicating in fact.

It will be asked, "Would such a tax on beer in itself furnish enough revenue to the Federal Government to pay off the principal and interest of the bond issue without additional burdens upon the people in the form of other taxation? " My answer is "Yes," and I will attempt to prove that answer is true and accurate by quoting the figures of the United States Census Bureau.

In 1914, when the manufacture and sale of beer was legal in many parts of the country, about 1,980,000,000 gallons were consumed that year. Since then our population has increased, but even with this increase of population since 1914. assuming that there would be no more beer consumed now than then, a tax of 24 cents a gallon at the rate of the 1914 consumption of beer

8964 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE APRIL 26 would yield $500,000,000 annually. This is two and one-half times the sum required to pay for the yearly amortization or sinking fund requirement of the bonds, plus interest due, on the billion and half dollar issue.

In other words, if this beer were legalized, as stated before, and Instead of consuming approximately 2,000,000,000 gallons a year, as we did in 1914, we should now consume only 40 per cent of this amount, a tax of 24 cents per gallon on this amount of beer would yield approximately the $200,000,000 which would be sufficient to pay the $150,000,000 annually required for the sinking fund to amortize the bonds beside the interest upon those outstanding.

I believe that the consumption of beer to-day would be equal to that of 1914, but a consumption of less than one-half this amount would furnish ·all the revenue required to pay off the bond issue in full.

Again, the bill provides that the beer would be sold only in bottles, a revenue stamp being placed upon each bottle at the rate of 3 cents a pint.

It is provided that the money derived from this revenue tax on beer would not go into General Treasury funds. The Treasurer of the United States is directed to keep all moneys arising from beer taxes in a special fund, which would be used first to pay off the yearly amortization of the construction-bond issue, together with accrued interest. All amounts received from beer revenues in addition to that needed for the purpose of paying off the principal and interest of the construction bonds can be used for general Government expenses. It is estimated this additional fund would provide an added $300,000,000 not needed for constructionbond amortization, and this sum would make many of the taxes now contemplated to be imposed on automobiles, stock certificates, and the like unnecessary.

Now, let us look at the whole propbsition again: One billion five hundred mi1lion dollars to be spent for all kinds

of construction work is equivalent to ~10 for every person or $40 for every family in the United States. Many heads of families are now employed; so that, if this fund were confined to those unemployed-<>! which there are about 10,000,000 at the present time--the sum available for construction would be equivalent to about $150 for each of the 10.000,000 people now out of work, for which there is now no employment fund at all. As applied to half the unemployed, it would afford double this sum, or $450 per unemployed person thts year. . This huge sum of money would be paid, first, for all kinds of materials that would be needed in the various projects and for the labor necessary to manufacture them. Again, labor would be employed to construct these projects throughout the United States in the form of bricklayers, electricians, carpenters, architects, accountants, bookkeepers, and the like. The railroads would be called upon to haul the freight and the general effect would be to stimulate many lines of business apart from the pure construction of the buildings themselves.

In order to put through this plan, not one dollar of income tax, Inheritance tax, or taxes on automobiles, radios, refrigerators, cigarettes, or any other present governmental revenue would be needed. Beer alone would furnish sufilcient revenue to pay two and one-half times the necessary cost of the construction bond demands, which fact I think makes the plan sound and feasible.

And consider the extent to which all business would be benefited. The unemployed, now a nonbuying part of our citizenship, would come back into the markets and purchase food and clothing and all of the products of our country. Its effect would give business a much-needed upturn, which, in my judgment, we need before the harsh effects of next winter descend upon the country and upon our huge army of unemployed.

Besides, we know that large quantities of beer are being consumed anyway. We know that the racketeer, the gangster, and the bootlegger are taking tribute from the sale of illegal beer and are becoming enriched whi~e millions of law-abiding citizens storm the streets asking Qnly for an opportunity to earn a respectable living.

This ts one of the few commodities in America that is being sold in large quantities and which is not contributing a single cent toward the Nation's expenses. The Government is not getting a penny from beer racketeers either in taxes on their products or from the big incomes they are getting, while law-abiding citizens pay income taxes, and taxes are levied on many other commodities. Criminals are lining their pockets with beer revenues while Congress seeks here, there, and everywl1ere for something else to tax in order that Government income will be equal to its expenditures.

Therefore no one can deny, first, that the expenditure o! $1,500,-000,000 for varying construction projects which have already been authorized, and which will be built anyhow some time in the future, would not put many of the 10,000,000 of the unemployed to work?

No one can say that the tax on beer I have outlined is in confiict with either the spirit or the letter of the eighteenth amendment.

Who can say that the tax of 24 cents a gallon, which I have mentioned, will not furnish two and one-half times the amount of money annually needed to pay off the bond issue without any additional burden to our present taxpayers?

And who can say, if this plan is adopted, that it will not deal a deathblow to the gangsters and racketeers who are now getting rich while the Government can not pay its bills?

Here are some additional observations regarding the consequences of legalizing beer apart from those already mentioned:

A ~espected Harford countian. who has made a success of both farmmg and canning-at least up to now-recently shipped to a Baltimore grain-brokerage firm his wheat crop, consisting of 717¥2 bushels of wheat, for which he received a check in the sum of $180.60. However, the following expenses were incurred in producing the crop: reparing soil, sowing wheat, and harvesting _____________ $35. 00

~~~~g=======================~======================= ~~:gg Total--------------------------------------------- 150.00

Here the calculations stopped; there was no charge for depreciation of machinery, taxes, and other normal farm expenses· so without counting these latter charges, the farmer received' ap~ proximatel:V: 4 cents a bushel for his crop. If all things are considered, it lS doubtful if the grower of this wheat received such financial return as would permit him to break even.

Before the Senate Committee on Agriculture in 1917, when the food prod_uc~on ac~ was before the Senate, much testimony was taken Which is of mterest at this date when the food and commodity conditions are diametrically opposed to those prevaUing through war years. During the war the slogan was to save food and commodities; now the problem is how to use them. Dr. Deets Pickett, research secretary of the Board of Temperance Prohibition, and Public Morals, in the course of the hearing mad~ the following statement:

" In the United States census reports for 1910 volume 8 page 363, the consumption of coal by the brewing indt{stry forth~ year ended June 30, 1909, was shown to be '2,990,357 tons, or three and one-half times as much as the packers, six times as much as the printers and publishers, nine times as much as the manufacturers of boots and shoes, twenty-five times as much as the manufac-turers of men's clothing." .

There is widespread unemployment and distress in the coal industry; thousands of mines are closed.

A le~r from Mr. Hoover, now President, then, in 1917, Food ~~mt;rts;rator, contaf?s the following interesting observation:

the cessatiOn of brewing would effect a savina in grain of approximately 3,150,000 bushels a month • • .~. or 37,800,000 bushels a year.

There is more wheat than can be consumed in this country . Dr. Irving Fisher, of Yale University, president of the National

War-Time Prohibition Association, tn a statement which was read into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD by arid Senator Cummins, of Iowa, in 1917, makes the following observations concerning the question of railroad cars and transportation used by the breweries:

TRANSPORTATION REQUmED BY BREWERIES

Tons Raw material, 3,000,000,000 pounds of foodstuffs, equals_ 1, 500, 000 Required coaL______________________________________ 3, 000,000 Product, 60,000,000 barrels___________________________ 9, 000, 000 Total on teams and cars ____________________________ 13,500,000

All of which require hauling and over one-half of which require railroad transportation. This requires over 200,000 freight cars during a year, and uses several hundred locomotives constantly, and increases freight congestion.

The railroads are not prosperous, thousands of railroad men are out of employment and that both engines and freight cars are idle. .

Doctor Fisher, the eminent dry authority, in 1917, did not stop there, however; he vigorously took up the sugar matter with this poignant comment: "The breweries annually use 64,000,000 pounds."

Newspaper dispatches say it is largely due to sugar cli.fii.culties in Cuba that revolution there is imminent.

But Doctor Fisher, in 1917, moves on and deals with the brewery problem with more dynamic statistics. He says: "The breweries of the United States employ 65,000 men, but the total engaged in making, handling, and selling it is over 300,000."

I understand. that in the United States about 10,000,000 people are out of employment.

The courts have held and no less an eminent authority than avocatrix, the comely and sparkling Mrs. Mabel Walker Wlllebrandt, the supreme. court of the wine-grape industry, states that wine may be made in the home without legal consequence by using the product turned out by the California grape people. The agents and advertisements inform one that a choice of fiavors from sauterne to Riesling can be had. A test shows the ultimate alcoholic horsepower of these precious liquids runs around 15 per cent. However, while arrests of wine makers using the qualified products seldom ever occur, those who deign to make home-brew are not so fortunate and frequently find themselves headed for long vacations in Government hotels at Leavenworth and Atlanta.

In short, while legal to make 15 per cent wine without Government revenue, it is Illegal · to make 4 per cent beer even with it.

Meanwhile a deficit of approximately two and a half billion dollars impends 1n the Treasury and a new tax bill levying a billion dollars is to be laid upon the American people.

The last " beer year " showed there was a consumption of the cold amber liquid in these United States of 1,980,000,000 gallons. A tax of 25 cents per gallon would yield an annual Government revenue of approximately . $600,000,000. More, if now permitted, it would put coal miners to wor.k digging out those 2,990,257 to~

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 8965 which Mr. Pickett says the breweries annually required; more. it food and fuel, shelter and clothing, health and morale for some would put in use 200,000 freight cars and several hundred locomo- millions of Americans who have no jobs because private business tives constantly per year, which Dr. Irving Fisher says were neces- has been forced to cut down. sary for the transportation needs of the breweries; more, it would For instance, in Chicago, in January of this year, it was caluse up 64,000,000 pounds of sugar per year, and perhaP.s lessen the culated that more than one-third of the workers ordinarily emlikelihood of civil war in Cuba; and yet more, it would employ ployed were out of jobs, that the wage loss due to this fact was 300,000 men who, dry Doctor Fisher says, were used annually in $2,000,000 a day, and that the expenditure for food and fuel for the brewing business; and still more, again, it would pull the the jobless was $100,000 a day .. In other words, a cut down in Treasury deficit down to a figure where it could be comprehended. private business of $20 was producing an increase in public exBut what is more important to my friend from Harford County, penditure of $1. Since January the wage loss has increased, who sold his wheat crop for 4 cents a bushel, is that it will re- while the number of persons whose needs must be met, if at all, quire 3,000,000,000 pounds of foodstuffs per year, and, in the very from the public treasury or from private philanthropy has nature of things, return him a higher price for any he may raise increased also, but more rapidly as the resources of savings, of in the future. relatives, of neighbors, and of credit have been exhausted.

Far be it from me to argue the moral side of this matter, for that This single illustration of the increasing demand upon govern-would present the picture, no doubt, in certain quarters, of Bac- mentis merely an example of what is going on in practically every elms talking with Moses. However, it did seem to me that a wip- community in" the country, the figures varying with the varying ing out of the Treasury deficit, ending a possible civil war in effects of the economic crisis as determined by local conditions. Cuba, employing several hundred thousands of men now out of It is a trend that further confuses and complicates the considerawork, starting 200,000 freight cars and several hundred locomotives tion of what is always, in our country, a confused and complex clanking over the rails, and getting my farmer friend more than relation of private business to public business, of private phi-4 cents a bushel for his wheat contained some of the elements of lanthropy to public welfare, and, on the public side, the relations godliness. of the people and the taxpayers to their strat!fi.ed governmental

Every thoughtful person looks ahead to next winter with appre- structure, local, State and Federal. hension. The army of unemployed grows. Business further stag- The problem is made more difficult because of its huge propornates. A survey of the country shows much distress. In the tions. Measured in terms of the number of persons directly atState of Mississippi school-teachers have not been paid for a year, fected, it is the greatest calamity that has befallen the American and the State government has taken 25 per cent of all the land in people; in scope and complexity nothing to compare with it has that State for nonpayment of taxes. In Chicago school-teachers so upset the industrial world order since the industrial revolution and other municipal officials are unpaid. · Many munJcipal gov- began; considered solely as a problem of succor for the suffering, ernments are either laying off employees or not paying them due it is of a size tremendously larger than ever before has been known to lack of income. Banks have been failing. Thousands upon in the United States. Is it any wonder that the American people thousands of farms have been sold under mortgage foreclosure as represented by their governmental organizations, by their philand delinquent taxes. anthropic agencies, by their business institutions, by their news-

Question: Can we raise sufficient community funds, particu- papers, have been puzzled, confounded, and disturbed? larly in our large industrial centers, to properly feed, house, and [ At the same time, perhaps the most disturbing ·factor in the clothe the unemployed next winter? I hope we can, and, of course, entire situation is that the facts are not fully known; indeed, the those able will do their best; but States and State governments in existence of t}le problem is scarcely recognized in anything like many cases may then be unable to assist, while here in the Na- its true and menacing aspect, by many of the very persons and tiona! Capitol we are trying desperately to raise enough money to institutions upon whom the solution must depend. pay the Government's current bills, and there is no money now in From the point of view of the newspaper, and of the public as the Treasury which could be loaned to the States, the cities, or the well, this inadequate knowledge is in large part due to the lack of communities. What are we going to do with all these unemployed that sudden dramatic incidence that makes news. people next winter? Let us go back a little more than 60 years for another mustra-

My measure is, I believe, sound, simple, practical, and help- tion-and again to Chicago. In October, 1871, Chicago had ful. It provides work now for the unemployed. It increases no 300,000 people instead of 3,000,000. It was then that the widow present taxes. It is calculated to have ramifications helpful to O'Leary's cow kicked over the lantern and started the great conall business enterprises in America. The whole Nation will fiagration that constituted one of the major calamities of modern benefit. The construction program contemplates the building times. For two days the flames consumed their fodder and left a of structures we will build anyhow in the coming years, and city prostrate; a quarter of a tpousand dead, a hundred thousand which are now or will be needed shortly. It will help to alleviate homeless, they and another hundred thousand as well without the distress of next winter. And, if my proposition is not adopted food, and $200,000,000 worth of property destroyed. by the Congress, won't we be less prepared to deal with the It was sudden. It was dramatic. It was news. Let me quote matter of unemployment successfully? Or, may I ask, who has a from the last edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica: "A vast better plan to prevent the distressing future prospect? system of relief was organized and received generous aid from all

The issue is clear-cut. Shall the bootlegger or the Government, parts of the world. The money contributions from the United which needs it, get this money? Shall crime flourish and un- States and abroad were $4,996,782; of this, foreign countri~ conemployment exist, or shall crime be put down and unemploy- tributed nearly $1,000,000 (England half of this). These funds, ment be lessened? Shall we make the product of 2.75 per cent which were over and above gifts of food, clothing, and supplies, beer available in bottles and sold by the Government or sold were made to last till the close of 1876. Out of them temporary illegally by a. privileged few racketeers? homes were provided for nearly 40,000 people; barracks and better

Now is the time for action. When the snows of next winter houses were erected; workmen were supplied with tools and women have fallen, it may be too late to deal rationally with a. serious with sewing machines; the sick were cared for, the dead buried; situation. - and the poorer classes of Chicago were probably never so com-

In the interest of all who are out of work and in want, in fortable as during the first two or three years after the fire." That the hope of assisting their wives and children underfed and is the end of the quotation. After two generations we still think underclothed, and in the interest of what I hope will bring again of the Chicago fire as a major calamity. some measure of prosperity to all and relieve the Treasury of Sixty years later, in October, 1931, last October, Chicago had some of its deficit, the construction amendment to the revenue more than ten times as many people. Chicago's problem of the bill is offered in the Congress of the United States. relief of the unemployed had begun to give extraordinary concern

to those whose business it was to be concerned with such things EXCERPTS FROM ADDRESS BY LOUIS BROWNLOW as early as 1928, and that concern had increased rapidly through

Mrt t. r: FO~~- t~ R President, I a~kf unarumt·h oudsdrcon-19i!· Aprll, 1930, the jobless numbered 160,000. Then was set

sen o ave ~rm e m e . ECORD excerp . rom . ~a .ess up the governor's commission on unemployment and a fund of by Hon. LoUis Brownlow, drrector of Public . Admirustrat10n $5,000,000 was raised from contl·ibutions from Chicago people. It Clearing House before American Society of Editors at was believed to be enough to last from October, 1930, to October, Washington D. c. April 23 1932. 1~31. This was given over and above the amounts that were being

. ' ' . . ' g1ven by the county, by private family-welfare agencies, and by There bemg no obJectiOn, the excerpts from the address the private person-to-person contacts with the needy. Did it

were ordered printed in the RECORD, as follows: last? No. On July 18, 1931, that fund was exhausted. In Octo

ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

Among the things most commonly said these days in support of the well-nigh universal demand for reduction of governmental costs and reduction of governmental activities 1s this: "Private business has been forced to make cuts and government must follow suit." Within certain limits I have no particular quarrel with that, but at the very outset I would beg to suggest that private business has cut down when, as, and if the demand for its products, wares, and services has fallen off, and to point out that in many very important respects the demands on government have been tremendously increased by the very force of private business retrenchment.

One, but not the only one, of these demands on government that has increased, is now increasing, and inevitably will continue to increase for at least another 12 months, 1s for the provision of

ber, 1931, a new campaign for funds was started. This time the goal was set at $8,800,000, to last a year, but burdened already with the deficits incurred since mid-July. The people of Chicago were generous. They subscribed $10,500,000, nearly two millions more than the goal of the campaign. But by mid-December half of that money was gone. Local governments were handicapped by serious fiscal difHculties and Chicago turned to the State government. A fund of $18,000,000 was provided by the leglslature in the early part of 1932-to last through the year. This week the legislature at Springfield was told that Chicago must have another $20,000,000 to see it through the year.

To-day in Chicago about 600,000 persons, twice as many as lived l.n the city at the time of the great fire, eat only the bitter bread of public charity. Five millions of dollars forthcoming from the whole world for the fire disaster was made to last tive years. Sixty years later Chicago can scarcely make $5,000,000 last 60 days. And

8966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 are there new houses for the poor? New tools for workmen? New sewing machines for the women? None. Are the poorer classes more comfortable? No one who knows how a family lives on the diminishing dole that a financially embarrassed Government supports from a tax-striking public would dare to say so.

Yet the creeping paralysis of this calamity of 1931 was not sudden, however numerous the victims it engulfed. It was not dramatic, however tragic to its hundreds of thousan.ds of doomed. It was not news, in the sense that the great fire was news. It was and is a depressing and a deplorable fact, but it is not local to Chicago. There is the same tale to tell in hundreds of American cities.

From the beginning of American life, in the times of the Colonies the care of the destitute was assumed to be the obligation of the local unit of government until in a relatively few of the larger cities toward the very end of the nineteenth century it was taken over in part, but only in part, by private charitable agencies. Then there grew up in some of our more important urban centers a custom of devolving relief given in the homes of needy families upon private agencies, but usually retaining as a public duty the care of the destitute in institutions. In no two c1ties, in no two counties, in no two communities in the United States was the pattern of the division of responsibility precisely the same in organization, intent, or result.

Judging from the best figures that I have been able to find, it 1s unlikely that at any time in American history more than half of the money expended for poor relief was furnished by private agencies. Reltable statistics show that during the first two years of the present emergency 70 cents out of every dollar given for relief has come from public treasuries and only 30 cents from the generous private giver.

Last fall and winter, for the first time since the World War, the campaigns of the community chests were coordinated throughout the Nation and much publicity was given to the need for generous giving to meet the requirements of the unemployment situation-

Two hundred and ninety chests raised, if we include the estimated goals of a few still under way, for 1932 purposes a total of $100,000,000---a huge sum of money to be given for private philanthropy in times like these, and it came from the pockets of all classes of the people of these nearly 300 communities. But of this amount only 35 per cent, according to Mr. Allen T. Burns, executive director of the National Association of Community Chests and Councils, was intended to be spent for home relief of families. The other 65 per cent, says Mr. Burns, goes to such indispensable services as hospitals, visiting nursing, child welfare, crime prevention, and provision against the misuse of the immensely increased leisure time. Who shall say to Mr. Burns that the demands for the services represented by this 65 per cent have decreased? Not I.

That means that the campaign 13$t .fall and winter, with a few cities not coming in until this spring, raised by private subscription in the greatest national campaign for private unemployment relief ever undertaken a total of $35,000,000 in a coast-to-coast effort with the blessing of the President's organization and with the aid of the press and the radio and all the arts 'of publicity.

Was it enough? The State of New York alone will spend more than that in 1932 for this purpose. I do not know what the total will be, or can be, but I do know that public treasuries, local and State, will spend in 1932 much more than twice the total amount expended by private agencies.

Here intrudes another perplexing feature of the problem. What is paid out of public treasuries must come in from public taxation or from public borrowing which must eventually be repaid from taxes.

The burden of providing the bare necessities of life for the destitute lies as a legal obl!gation upon the local governmental unit in by far the greater part of the United States. Sometimes the township, sometimes the county, sometimes the city, has that duty to perform. Most of these governmental units derive most of their revenues from the general property tax, which in turn is levied and collected mostly upon real property.

What happens when a home owner no longer with an income exhatists his savings and is forced to turn for food to the public relief agencies? Does he pay his taxes?

What happens when a tenant no longer has an income, and turns to the public relief agency for food and for money to pay his rent?

What happens to the landlord when his tenants no longer can pay their rent?

In some places, no relief legally can be given to a family that has an equity, no matter how slender, in a home. So the family is forced to give up its home in order that it may find food. In some cities the relief funds do pay rents. If the funds are public that amounts to the city paying taxes to itself. In other cities the relief funds pay no rents. Sometimes the landlord says he can not evict the tenant, there is no other tenant in sight and the building will be sacked by vandals or torn down for fuel if it is left unoccupied. So the landlord has no income from which to pay taxes. In some instances land.lor$ who are still the owners of tenant-occupied houses have themselves been forced :to come to the city relief agency for the food that they no longer can buy.

Translated into the technical jargon of governments this means tax delinquencies. With mounting tax delinquencies local governments find it more difficult to borrow the money that they need to make up for the taxes they can not collect, and consequently more and more difficult to meet the need for unemployment relief.

It may be said that the local governments should cut out other expenditures to meet this situation. In many places, willingly or not, it is being done, but still this has not met t:l!e requirements of the major calamity of which I am talking.

Then ther.e is recourse to the State governments. Some of them, too, rely mainly upon the general property tax. Others have income taxes. New York doubled its income tax to meet the specific requirements of this problem for a year and in six months had to propose a bond issue in order to double the provision of money. Other States have diverted gasoline taxes. Others have invented or are considering the invention of new taxes.

But with all this the problem is not solved. It is not even in better case than it was last winter. It is worse now than it has ever been. Every student of it agrees that it will be mu..;h greater in size and scope next wtnter than it is now.

From some 40 cities, according to reports compiled by the Survey and by Business Week and quoted in the New York Times, the crisis of the exhaustion of local and of State resources for relief will come this spring and early summer; in some places at the end of April; in others in May; in many in June. In fact, it appears that few, if any, of the larger cities involved are financed for their needs beyond August.

The seasonal upturn in employment is disappointingly small. The seasonal drop in demands for relief is almost imperceptible. Experts in the field are agreed that even if employment conditions were to begin now to improve that th~ exhaustion of savings acd other factors will inevitably produce a greater number of persons who must be fed next winter than we had last winter.

There was, of course,- the appeal to the Federal Government. It was not a unanimous appeal; and although I have seldom read anything more significant or impressive than the hearings before the Senate committee on the proposals for Federal aid to the States, Congress did not see fit to heed. It may be doubted if it saw fit to read.

Nothing is settled with respect to this problem. It is difficult to find all the facts about it. There are profound and utterly sincere differences of opinion about methods of procedure in dealing with it.

I have my own opinion, but suppressing that I appeal to the editors of the country that they assign their very best men to an examination of the facts, and that without prejudice or preconception; that they give to the facts so discovered as complete and as wide publicity as tl1e delicate conditions of the country will permit; that it base upon these facts fairly faced and fully considered its opinion as to what ought to be done.

With the cause or with the cure, or with my notions of the cause or the cure, I have not dealt. I am content only if I am permitted to say that in my opinion the manner in which we deal with the crisis that we shall face this summer when funds are exhausted, the manner in which we shall make provision for the effects of this calamity next winter, may determine whether or not hungry Americans who can not find the work they desire above all charity will be fed; may determine whether or not if too much ahunger they will continue to suffer mutely or whether they will rebel against an order which has failed to find them food.

In my opinion, this is a profound social problem that can not be solved by reference to apparently inflexible divisions of the duties of government among 1ts several levels as ordained in the late eighteenth century.

It will be hard in the midst of a presidential campaign to see these new things clearly and without the confusion caused by party politics. But if we are to avoid the spread of this disaster from the social to the political field, I am persuaded that we all of us must make the effort to meet this situation calmly, coolly, and courageously.

RECESS

Mr. McNARY. I move that the Senate take a recess until 12 o'clock noon to-morrow.

The motion was agreed to; and (at 5 o'clock and 30 minutes p.m.) the Senate took a recess until to-morrow, Wednesday, April 27, 1932, at 12 o'clock meridian.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 1932

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

offered the following prayer:

Blessed Lord God, we pray to Thee, to whom we owe our first, our last, and our eternal allegiance. May nothing stand between us and our obedience to Thy holy will. Let Thy sympathy make us social, Thy love make us charitable, and Thy grace make us cheerful. So order our lives that they will respond to service and sacrifice. Endow us with the mind that sees the heights and with the soul that sounds the depths, and in all things keep us in harmony with Thy holy purpose. Spare our country from that poverty which kills the spirit that the physical nature may be preserved.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8967 Bless us with that spiritual adventure through which we may see the real wealth of life. In the name of Jesus, our Savior. Amen.

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

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

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

H. R. 231. An act to grant certain lands to the State of Colorado for the benefit of the Colorado School of Mines;

H. R.1231. An act for the relief of Grina Bros.; H. R. 1768. An act for the relief of Alvina Hollis; H. R. 4724. An act to confer to certain persons who served

in the Quartermaster Corps or under the jurisdiction of the Quartermaster General during the war with Spain, the Philippine insurrection, or the China relief expedition the benefits of hospitalization and the privileges of the soldiers' homes;

H. R. 4752. An act for the establishment of the WatertonGlaoier International Peace Park;

H. R. 5484. An act extending the provisions of the act entitled "An act to provide for the sale of desert lands in certain States and Territories," approved March 3, 1877 (19 Stat. 377), and acts amendatory thereof, to ceded lands of the Fort Hall Indian Reservation;

H. R. 5603. An act to authorize the conveyance by the United States to the State of Minnesota of lot 4, section 18, township 131 north, range 29 west, in the county of Morrison, Minn.;

H. R. 8084. An act for the protection of the northern Pacific halibut fishery;

H. R. 8914. An act to a'ccept the grant by the State of Montana of concurrent police jurisdiction over the rights of way of the Blackfeet Highway, and over the rights of way of its connections with the Glacier National Park road system on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation in the State of Montana;

H. R. 9598. An act to authorize expenditures for the enforcement of the contract-labor provisions o1 the immigration law; and

H. R. 10495. An act amending an act of Congress approved February 28, 1919 (40 Stat. L. 1206), granting the city of San Diego certain lands in the Cleveland National Forest and the Capitan Grande Indian Reservation for dam and reservoir purposes for the conservation of water, and for other purposes, so as to include additional lands.

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

H. R.1029. An act for the relief of Basil N. Henry; and H. R. 1770. An act for the relief of Senelma Wirkkula, also

known as Selma Wirkkula; Alice Marie Wirkkula; and Ber-nice Elaine Wirkkula. · ·

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

s. 332. An act for the relief of Samson Davis; S. 570. An act to exempt from taxation certain property

used by the National Society of the Colonial Dames of America, in the District of Columbia;

s. 669. An act for the relief of Chester J. Dick; s. 1335. An act to provide for the appointment of an addi

tional district judge for the district of New Jersey; S. 1562. An act for the relief of William S. Cook; S. 2409. An act to amend Title n of the Federal farm loan

act in regard to Federal intermediate credit banks, and for other purposes;

s. 2654. An act to allow credit in connection with homestead entries to widows of persons who served in certain Indian wars; ·

S. 3472. An act to amend the act of Congress approved June 26, 1912, entitled "An act making appropriations to provide for the expenses of the government of the District

of Columbia for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1913, and for other purposes";

S. 3477. An act for the relief of the Playa de Flor Land & Improvement Co.;

S. 3577. An act for the relief of Rolando B. Moffett; S. 3852. An act to amend section 2288 of the Revised Stat

utes, as amended, with respect to the taking for highway purposes of lands entered upon under the homestead or preemption laws;

S. 3864. An act authorizing expenditures from Colorado River tribal funds for reimbursible loans;

S. 3911. An act to authorize the Commissioners of the District of Columbia to close Quintana Place, between Seventh Street and Seventh Place NW.;

S. 3929. An act to authorize the Commissioners of the District of Columbia to close certain alleys and to set aside land owned by the District of Columbia for alley purposes;

S. 3953. An · act to amend the act approved February 7, 1927, entitled "An act to promote the mining of potash on the public domain ";

s. 4029. An act to restore homestead rights in certain cases;

S. 4106. An act to provide for the closing of certain streets and alleys in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes;

s. 4148. An act to permit the United States to be made a party defendant in certain cases;

S. 4165. An act to remove existing discriminations incident to certain land grants and to subject them to the same conditions that govern other land grants of their class;

S. 4190. An act for the relief of Thomas E. Reed; S. 4193. An act to authorize the issuance of bonds by the

St. Thomas Harbor Board, Virgin Islands, for the acquisition or construction of a graving or dry dock; .

S. 4416. An act to provide for the transfer of certain school lands in North Dakota to the International Peace Garden (Inc.);

S. J. Res. 36. Joint resolution to change the name of the island of " Porto Rico " to " Puerto Rico "; and

S. J. Res. 82. Joint resolution authorizing an appropriation for the expenses of the sixteenth session of the International Geological Congress to be held in the United States in 1933.

STRE.ET IMPROVEMENTS IN JUNEAU, ALASKA

'rb.e SPEAKER. This is Calendar Wednesday. The Clerk will call the committees.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas <when the Committee on the Territories was called). Mr. Speaker, I call up the bill (H. R. 5052) to authorize the incorporated town of Juneau, Alaska, to use the funds arising from the sale of bonds in pursuance to the act of Congress of February 11, 1925, for the purpose either of improving the sewerage system of said town or of constructing permanent streets in said town.

The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the incorporated town of Juneau,

Alaska., is hereby authorized ai?-d empowered to use the funds arising from the sale of bonds issued in accordance with the provisions of the act of Congress of February 11, 1925, for the purpose either of improving the sewerage system o! said town or of constructing permanent streets in said town.

SEc. 2. That the common council of said town is hereby authorized to direct the amount, 1! any, of the funds arising from said bonds that shall be used for either or both of said purposes.

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Yes. Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman make some brief

explanation of the purpose of the bill? Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. This is a request on the part

of the citizens of Juneau, Alaska. In 1925 Congress passed an act permitting this city to vote $60,000 worth of bonds. the money received !rom the sale of the bonds to be spent on an electric-light plant. Under this act the town council had the privilege of issuing $10,000 worth of bonds for sewer purposes. This bill proposes to give the city of Juneau, Alaska, the privilege of spending $30,000 on streets instead of sewers.

8968 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE APRIL 26 The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time,

was read the third time, and passed. On motion of Mr. WILLIAM~ of Texas, a motion to recon

sider the vote by which the bill was passed was laid on the table.

ISSUANCE OF MUNICIPAL BONDS OF PETERSBURG, ALASKA Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I call up the

bill (H. R. 6487) to authorize the incorporated town of Petersburg, Alaska, to issue bonds in any sum not exceeding $100,000 for the purpose of improving and enlarging the capacity of the municipal light and power plant, and the improvement of the water and sewer systems, and for the purpose of retiring or purchasing bonds heretofore issued by the town of Petersburg. -

The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the incorporated town of Petersburg,

Alaska, is hereby authorized and empowered to issue bonds in any sum not exceeding $100,000, to be used for the following purposes, namely: The -sum of $40,000 for necessary improvements to the municipal electric light and power plant, owned by the town of Petersburg, Alaska, and the transmission lines and distribution system and for the purpose of doubling the capacity of said electric light and power plant; the sum of $25,000 for necessary improvements to the water system and water supply and sewer system of the town of Petersburg, Alaska, and the distribution systems thereof; and the sum of $35,000 to be used to purchase or retire outstanding bonds of the said town of Petersburg, Alaska, which bear interest at the rate of 7 per cent per annum.

SEc. 2. That before such bonds shall be issued a special election shall be ordered by the Common Council of the Town of Petersburg, Alaska, and held in the manner pursuant to law after legal notice thereof, at which election the question of the issuance of said bonds shall be submitted to the qualified electors of said twon of Petersburg, whose names appear on the last assessment roll or tax roll of said town for the purposes of mun.icipal taxation. Not less than 30 days• notice of such election shall be given in a newspaper printed and published in said town, and of general circulation, before the date fixed for such election.

SEc. 3. That said election shall be conducted in all respects in accordance with existing statutes enacted by Congress and the Legislature of the Territory of Alaska, and the canvass of the returns of said election shall be as far as possible and practicable in accordince with the requirement of existing laws governing general or special elections in said municipaltty. Said bonds shall be issued only upon condition that a majority of the votes cast at such election in said town shall be in favor of the issuance of such bonds.

SEc. 4. That the bonds above specified, when authorized to be issued as hereinbefore provided, shall bear interest at a rate to be fixed by the Common Council of the City of Petersburg, Alaska. before the issuance of such bonds, and which said interest shall not exceed 6 per cent per annum, payable semiannually, and ~he 'same shall not be sold for less than their par value with accrued interest, and they shall be in denominations not exceeding $1,000 each, the principal to be due in 25 years from the date thereof: }'rovided, That the Common Council of the Town of Petersburg may reserve the right to pay off said bonds or any portion thereof 1n numerical order at the rate of not to exceed $15,000 thereof per annum from and after the expiration of five years from the date of issuance of such bonds as shown on the face thereof. The principal and interest shall be payable in lawful money of the United States of America at the offi.ce of the town treasurer of the town of Petersburg, Alaska, or at such bank or banks or such place or places as may be designated by the Common Council of the Town of Petersburg, Alaska, such place or places of payment to be designated and set forth in each of the respective bonds issued: Provided further, That each of such -bohds shall bear the written signature of the mayor and clerk of the town of Petersburg, Alaska, at the time of their issuance, and there shall be impressed thereon the official seal of said town.

SEC. 5. That no part of the funds arising from the sale of said bonds shall be used for any purpose other than that specified in this act, and such bonds shall be sold only when and in such amounts as the common council shall direct, and the proceeds thereof shall be dispensed for the purposes hereinbefore mentioned and under the orders and directions of the said common council from time to time as the same may be required for said purposes hereinabove set forth.

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Yes. Mr. STAFFORD. I understand from a reading of the

report that one of the purpose_s sought is to retire some of the present bonds which are paying 7 per cent and secure the money at 6 per cent. . Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Yes.

Mr. STAFFORD. -In view. of . the present condition of the money market as far as bonds and securities are. concerned, does the gentleman think a little town of this kind, remote

from· the United st~tes, will be able to obtain the money at 6 per cent?

Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. My information is that the individuals of this town will buy these bonds. That is the information I have. None of these bonds will be placed on the market.

Mr. STAFFORD. As I read the report I had some doubt as to whether they would be able to secure the money at 6 per cent.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. I am assured that all of these bonds will be bought by individuals living in this town.

Mr. STAFFORD. If they are going to be taken by the people of the town, who know local financial conditions, it may be they will have no difficulty in securing the loan.

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

On motion of Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas, a motion to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed was laid on the table.

MAINTENANCE OF GOVERNMENT WHARF AT JUNEAU, ALASKA Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I call up the bill

{H. R. 6713) for estimates necessary for the proper maintenance of the Government wharf at Juneau, Alaska.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. Mr. WILLIAlVfS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous

consent that this bill may be considered in the House as in the Committee of the Whole.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no .objection.

·The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of War ts authorized to

submit for the consideration of Congress such estimates as are in his judgment necessary for the proper ma.intenance of the Government wharf at Juneau, Alaska, ·constructed under authority contained in Public Resolution · No. 33, Sixty-ninth Congress, approved May 28, 1926.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I move to strike out the last word. Will the gentleman explain-which the report does not-to what extent this bill affects the former authorization as embodied in the act of May 20, 1926?

Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. I will say to the gentleman that when this wharf- was constructed, to be used by the Government, there was no department designated for the maintenance of the wharf. The time will soon arrive when it will be necessary that it be maintained. All this bill asks is authority for the Secretary of War to submit this in his budget in order t_o take care of the wharf in case it needs repairing.

Mr. STAFFORD. It designates the proper official to maintain the wharf. I have no objection to the bill.

The pro forma amendment was withdrawn. The bill was ordered ·to be engrossed and read a third

time, was read the third time, and passed. On motion of Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas, a motion to recon

sider the vote by which the b-ill was passed was laid on the table.

LEPERS IN HA WAU

Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I call up the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 361) to authorize the Surgeon General of the United States Public Health Service to make a survey as to the existing facilities for the protection of the public health in the care and treatment of leprous persons in the Territory of Hawaii, and for other purposes.

The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution. Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Ml·. Speaker. I ask unanimous

consent that this joint resolution may be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole. -

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker. reserving the right to object, I -think this joint resolution is of sufficient importance to require some consideration in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. I object, Mr. Speaker.

Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 361), with Mr . CooPER of Tennessee in the chair.

The Cl~rk read the title of the joint resolution. The first reading of the joint resolution was dispensed with.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8969 Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the

gentleman from Illinois [Mr. PARSONS], who prepared the report, to explain the joint resolution.

Mr. PARSONS. Mr. Chairman, this joint resolution is the outcome or the result of the consideration of the bill that was introduced by the Delegate from Hawaii [Mr. HousTON] concerning payments by the United States to the Territory for the maintenance of leprous patients in the islands.

At the beginning it was proposed that we pay the same per capita cost for the maintenance of lepers in the islands as at Carville in the United States. Of course, we were not taking on any additional appropriations and we wanted to go along in accordance with our professed faith in economy, and it was finally suggested by the Public Health Service that a joint resolution be submitted for the purpose of studying the conditions in the islands.

This joint resolution was prepared, in whole or at least in part, by the Public Health Service. They now have stationed in the islands sufficient eiJlployees to make this survey with-out any further cost. ·

In the preparation of this report they will contact the offices of the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Navy, the Secretary of the Interior, and the Secretary of Agriculture, so that when their survey is completed they can make certain recommendations to the Congress, to which they are directed to report on the opening day of the next session, as to whether or not the Public Health Service believes we should undertake to provide the same care for leprous patients in the islands that we do here in the United States. The joint resolution requires absolutely no appropriation, and the matter will be entirely up to the next session of Congress with respect to the action to be taken after the survey is made.

Mr. Til.JSON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. PARSONS. Yes. Mr. Til.JSON. How far does this change the present

policy? Mr. PARSONS. It does not change it at all. Doctor

Cumming, who is in charge of the Public Health Service, has had a great deal of experience in the islands and recommends this action.

Mr. TILSON. I had supposed that the real purpose of the joint resolution was to change our policy in regard to the care of lepers.

Mr. PARSONS. The joint resolution simply calls for an investigation or survey, and it is up to the Congress to act on any further recommendations.

Mr. Til.JSON. But the joint resolution is offered with the purpose in view of making changes, provided they are recommended.

Mr. PARSONS. Yes; if they are recommended. Mr. BANKHEAD. Does the joint resolution carry any ad

ditional appropriations? Mr. PARSONS. No. Mr. STAFFORD. But it looks forward to tlie National

Government assuming a burden now borne by the Territory of Hawaii.

:Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. PARSONS. I yield. Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. The situation is a very

interesting one. As the report shows, Public Act 299 of the Sixty-fourth Congress provided for a national leprosarium for all such afflicted persons in the United States, its Territories, and so forth. The Territory of Hawaii is a part of the United States. They have their own leper colony. The Public Health Service of the United States has an examining station in the city of Honolulu, and, as a matter of fact, I presume under existing law every pers.on afflicted with leprosy could move, at United States Government expense, from Honolulu to the leprosarium in Louisiana now. The expense of travel, of course, would be very great.

Mr. STAFFORD. It was never contemplated to have the leprosarium in Louisiana take care of patients coming from Hawaii. Hawaii is a separate institution, where leprosy was more general than in any other part of the country.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. If the law exempts them, then I am wr-ong in my assumption, but I have the law here quoted in the report. The lepers in the Hawaiian Islands are cared for by the people of the Territory, except for the public-health examining station in the city of Honolulu, and a proposal has come from the islands asking for relief. The proposal came in the form of a resolution passed by the Territorial legislature, which was referred to the Committee on the Territories; and this bill authorizes an inquiry by certain services, particularly the Public Health Service, as to what may be done. As a member of the committee, and as a member of the subcommittee on this particular joint resolution, I did not see any other way to work it out than to authorize the investigation, which, I assume, will be conducted by the proper Federal officials without any extra expense. Future steps will depend on the report to be made by these officials.

Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii and Mr. GREEN rose. Mr. PARSONS. I shall now yield to the Delegate from

Hawaii, who is in better position to know the conditions and will be able to answer any questions that may be asked.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield five minutes to the Delegate from Hawaii [Mr. HousToN].

Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. Mr. Chairman, this joint resolution is felt to be necessary by reason of the situation in Hawaii. The basic act with respect to the treatment of lepers in the United States provides that they shall be taken care of by the Federal Government. It is quoted at the bottom of the first page of the report in which the word " Territories" follows the word "States":

The existing authority for Federal care of patients afflicted with leprosy is based upon Public Act 299 of the Sixty-fourth Congress which reads as follows:

"SEc. 2. That there shall be received into said home, under regulations prepared by the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, any person afflicted with leprosy who presents himself or herself for care, detention, and treatment, or who may be apprehended under authority of the United States quarantine acts, or any person afflicted with leprosy duly consigned to said home by the proper health authorities of any State, Territory, or the District of Columbia. The Surgeon General of the Public Health Service is authorized, upon request of said authorities, to send for any person afflicted with leprosy within their respective jurisdictions, and to convey said person to such home for detention and treatment, and when the transportation of any such person is undertaken for the protection of the public health, the expense of such removal shall be paid from funds set aside for the maintenance of said home."

It is a fact that at the institution at Carville there is not at the present time enough room to take care of patients from Hawaii. Applications in due form have been made to the Secretary of the Treasury for the receipt of Hawaiian patients, but we have been answered that there was not room available for accommodation at Carville. The following correspondence was exchanged between the Governor of the Territory of Hawaii and the Public Health Service:

Dr. HuGH S. CUMMING,

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,

Washington, D. C., December 7, 1931.

Surgeon General United States Public Health Service, · Washington, D. C.

(Through the honorable the Secretary of the Interior.) DEAR DocToR CUlltMING: We have, as you know, approximately

700 leprous patients in the Territory of Hawaii. I beg to inquire as to how many of these patients you could

receive and care for at the United States marine hospital at Carville, La., under authority of the act of Congress approved February 3, 1917 (39 Stat. 872)?

Your early reply will be very much appreciated. Respectfully yours,

LAWRENCE M. JUDD, Governor of Hawaii.

HONOLULU, December 22, 1931. Delegate HOUSTON:

Following is a letter addressed to me, dated December 10, 1931, from Surgeon General Cumming of Public Health: " I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of December 17, 1931, making inquiry as to whether any portion of the 700 leprous patients in the Territory of Hawaii could be received and cared for at the United States Marine Hospital, Carville, La., under authority of the act of Congress approved February 3, 1917 (31 Stat. 872). In reply I regret to state that the iacllitles at Carville are sufficient only for leprous patients from the continental United States and

'8970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 Alaska. The rated capacity of the Institution 1s 372 beds, and there are at the present 361 leprous patients under treatment there. Applicants for additional admissions to Carville have been received and I anticipate that in a short time the institution will be filled to capacity. The Public Health Service building plan Includes provision for an additional hospital building at Carville, tor which, however, the appropriations have not yet been made. This building is designed not so much to increase the capacity of the institution as to improve the facilities, especially for the care of the insane and criminal cases, and would not, therefore, provide the necessa1-y facilities to admit patients from Hawaii; and 1f the Public Health Service were to assume the responsibility for the care of these patients it would be necessary to provide buildings and for their equipment and operation wherever located.

"Respectfully, .. H. s. CUMMING,

" Surgeon General." Hope th1s will be helpful in securing Fede::al assistance for the

Territory. Juno, Governor.

When the organic act for the Territory of Hawaii was originally passed about 32 years ago, a commission that was sent down there to investigate the situation and reported with respect to this matter that the Federal Government could do no better than to share in the expense then being incurred and carried on by the Republic of Hawaii for the care of lepers.

In 1898, in the Fifty-fifth Congress, third session, Senate Document No. 16, page 118, which is a report of the commissioners to arrange for the organic act, this sentence is used.

The Federal Government could not do better, either in point of economy or in point of effectiveness, at least so long as present conditions continue, than to permit this disease to be controlled through the local officers and existing machinery. But it would seem to be only just that the Federal Government should share in the expense ..

In the original bill which I introduced, H. R. 306, i~ asked that the Federal Government, as in the case of hospitalization of veterans, pay to the Territory a per diem that would in a measure reimburse the Territory for expenses of this hospitalization. But inasmuch as that involved a large sum, and because of the situation which required economy this year, it was felt that, although there was merit in the matter, a resolution to provide for a survey and to recommend legislation would be better under the circumstances.

Mr. BANKHEAD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. I yield. Mr. BANKHEAD .. I read a statement some time ago

which interested me very much with reference to the possibility of the Public Health Service having made considerable advance in the treatment of lepers by some new method. Can the gentleman give us any information whether medical research is making any practical advance in the elimination of the disease or in the cure for it?

Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. There has not been found any specific cure. Chaulmoogra oil has been used, but appears not to be a specific. Like tuberculosis, by proper treatment and care, which involves dietary treatment, the disease may be arrested. I am informed that at Carville, since its establishment in 1917, they have released 75 patients as being without menace to the public health.

Mr. BANKHEAD. They have made such progress that they have arrested the disease to such an extent that it is noncommunicable?

Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. Yes; it depends on when the treatment begins. The incubation period is said to average about seven years; it may be 2 years or it may be 20 years after inoculation before the disease develops to a point where it shows.

Mr. GIBSON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. I yield to the gentleman from

Vermont. Mr. GIBSON. This joint resolution simply provides for

securing information to lay before the Congress for intelligent action on the subject?

Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. The gentleman is correct. Mr. GIBSON. No appropriation is asked for at the pres

ent time?

Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. None. It may develop after the investigation that it LJ.ay be well for the Federal Gov- . ernment to take over in toto the receiving station, or it may be that the better plan for the Federal Government, as it does with reference to the hospitalization of war veterans in private hospitals, is to pay over a per diem for the patients cared for by the Territory.

Mr. GIBSON. And this has the approval of the Department of the Interior?

Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. Yes. Mr. GIBSON. It was drafted by the department and

sent here? Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. It was drafted by the Public

Health Service and has the approval of the department. Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. I yield. Mr. STAFFORD. Has the gentleman any information as

to whether the home in Molokai is peopled by anybody except persons resident of Hawaii?

Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. Asp. rule no one but residents of Hawaii may be received. They are persons, as a rule, who do not respond to treatment. They stay at the · receiving hospital as long as they respond to .treatment. If they no longer respond to treatment, then they are sent over to the other settlement on the island of Molokai.

Mr. STAFFORD. It is generally understood as the established policy of the Government that the States shall take care of their insane and other afflicted persons as a State burden. However, some years back we did recognize, in establishing the leprosarium at Carrville, La., that the disease is of that character and cases are so few and the treatment necessarily so specific that it would be better to undertake that as a national problem, and, accordingly, we lifted from the burden of the States, because of that condition, the obligation of taking care of these particularly unfortunate persons. But Hawaii is a rule unto itself. It had more cases of leprosy than were general throughout the country. If the same conditions had applied to our States here and they were as prevalent as in Hawaii, we would very likely have required each State to maintain its own separate hospital for the treatment of leprosy. I understand the purpose of the gentleman is to lift this proper load from the Territory of Hawaii and place it upon the National Government.

Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. The ba,sic law I pointed out to the gentleman from Wisconsin is that this is a function of the Federal Government. As a matter of fact, we had taken the burden and had assumed the burden before the Federal Government went into this matter; but may I point out to the gentleman that there are in the neighborhood of 14,000 troops in the island and about 4,500 men in the naval service. T}J.ose men after doing service there are distributed back to their homes on the mainland. We may never know, because we do not know how leprosy is tTansmitted, about the condition of those men. There is very little information of a scientific nature which is available. Therefore, because of that possible distribution from this focus, it is all the more necessary, as in all communicable diseases, that the Federal Government should interest itself in the matter. May I further point out to the gentleman that besides the institution at Carrville the Federal Government specifically takes care of the lepers in the island of Guam. The other day we passed the naval appropriation bill, in which an appropriation of $35,000 was carried for the little establishment on the island of Guam. That indicates that it is the established policy of the Government to take care of this situation, and it may be better done by the Federal Government than by an individual agency.

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman has referred, as a justification for lifting the load from the Territory of Hawaii and imposing it upon the National Government, to the fact that we have a large number of troops there that possibly may be affected. Are there many instances, and if so, how many, where our troops by reason of their domicile on the island of Oahu have been afHicted with leprosy?

Mr. HOUSTON of Hawaii. I am not in a position to say that, but I call the gentleman's attention to the statement

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8971 of Gen. Fox Connor, who was the commanding general of the Hawaii Department, to be found in the hearings, in which he states that it is very necessary that this matter should be gone into by the Federal Government, because of that particular situation.

The .commanding general of the Army in the Hawaiian Department in 1930 wrote as follows:

The control of leprosy in this Territory is manifestly a matter of great moment to the people of the United States. It 1s also of particular concern to the Army in view of the constant presence in this department of some 15,000 officers and men of the ~egular Army. Conditions here are extremely favorable to a comprehensive epidemiological study of this disease. However, the same conditions render its continued presence a menace to the community, including the personnel of the Army whose duty enforces residence in the Terri tory.

The following is the most recent resolution introduced in the Territorial legislature on this subject:

Joint Resolution No. 1 Joint resolution reaffirming joint resolution No. 8 of the sixteenth

regular session of the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii, requesting the Congress of the United States of America to pro-.. vide financial assistance to the Territory of Hawaii for the segregation, care, maintenance, and treatment therein of persons affiicted or suspected of being affiicted with leprosy Whereas there was adopted by the sixteenth regular session of

the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii Joint Resolution No. 8 requesting the Congress of the United States of America to provitle financial assistance to the Territory of Hawaii for the segregation, care, maintenance, and treatment therein of persons affiicted or suspected of b'eing afflicted with leprosy; and

Whereas there has been introduced in said Congress H. R. 306, designed to afford the relief sought in said Joint Resolution No. 8; and

Whereas said H. R. 306 has not as yet been favorably acted upon by the Congress; and

Whereas the Governor of the Territory of Hawaii has subsequently been advised by letter from the Surgeon General of the United States Public Health Service that, despite the obligation imposed by the act of Congress of February 3, 1917 (39 Stat. L. 872), it is impossible to receive and care for at the United States Marine Hospital at Carville, La., any leprous patients from the Territory of Hawaii, due to lack of present accommodations thereat; and

Whereas since annexation Hawaii has spent over $7,500,000 in caring for its leprous patients; and

Whereas the Hawaiian Coriunission appointed in pursuance of the "Joint resolution to provide for annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the United States" reported, as printed in Document 16 of the Fifty-fifth Congress, third session, as part of a message from the President of the United States that "the Federal Government could do no better, either 1n point of economy or in point of effectiveness, at least so long as present conditions continue, than to permit this disease to be controlled by the local officers and the existing machinery; but it would seem to be only just that the Federal Government should share in the expense "; and

Whereas 1n view of all these facts and in all fairness and justice to the Territory of Hawaii the Federal Government should extend its financial aid to the Territory in its endeavor to cope with this problem: Now therefore

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaif, That Joint Resolution No. 8 of the sixteenth regular session of the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii be, and it hereby is, reaffirmed, and the Congress of the United States of America is hereby · urgently requested to take favorable action upon H. R. 306, now pending before said Congress, or on some similar bill <iirected toward the same result.

Extensive hearings on the matter were held on the original bill introduced-H. R. 306-and the published record is dated February 5 and 15, 1932.

It has been said that this should be a State matter. May I not therefore point out that Hawaii unfortunately has not

• yet reached that exalted sovereign position. We would like nothing better than to be a State. A resolution asking to be allowed to form a State convention -has been adopted by the legislature, and we look hopefully to the time when there will be unanimity of opinion. If ever the argument as to State rights was not applicable, it is in the case of a Territory. Since the Federal Congress has full authority, and since it has established the principle of Federal control of this disease, it stands to reason that it should take steps to enforce the principle in a Territory.

The Territory has unflinchingly stood the charge up to the present, and has spent since annexation nearly $8,000,000 for this work.

I wish to express my appreciation for the very considerate and sympathetic action of the committee and the individual

Members in this matter. They may well rely upon the cooperation of Hawaii.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to -the gentleman from Florida [Mr. GREEN].

Mr. GREEN. Mr. Chairman, I believe the Delegate from Hawaii [Mr. HousToN J has. well explained the purposes of the bill. I think the people of Hawaii have made considerable progress in the treatment and control of leprosy; also progress has been made by the Government at Carville, La. Several questions confronted the committee. Among those is whether or not the property now held by Hawaii as- a leprosarium should be transferred to the Government of the United States in the event the Government should undertake to cooperate, and if so, at what price. Another question was whether or not we should contribute funds from the Federal Government to each patient. All of these questions confronted the committee. However, there was general feeling in the committee that the Federal Government should lend the same assistance to the citizens of the Territory of Hawaii as is given to the citizens of the States i,n this matter. It seems to me a very reasonable conclusion that a further study of the question should be made with the ultimate hope that Federal cooperation should be accorded, not only financial but through the medical authorities, to the end that the advances of the chaulmoogra treatment, or other treatment, may be carried on to further cure and success. I trust the bill will pass; it does not carry any appro.: priation but provides for a further study of the matter. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield three minutes to the gentleman from Washington [Mr. JOHNSON].

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Mr. Chairman, the study of leprosy is interesting, and it will pay the Members to read the hearings held in connection with this bill. I take these few minutes to pay a compliment to the Delegate from Hawaii [Mr. HousTON] for his care and effort in presenting to the Committee on the Territories fairly and efficiently all matters pertaining to the Territory whose people send him to Congress as their Delegate. I think he is a worthy representative of that island, which has so many problems peculiar to itself. In addition to the extraordinary problems, I might add the observation, based on long-time membership with the Territories Committee, that both Alaska and Hawaii are poorly treated as stepchildren of Uncle Sam, in spite of all that the ever-changing membership of the committee can do to have these outlying Territories better treated. The leprosy situation is a case in point.

Read Public Act 299 of the Sixty-fourth Congress, and you will see that Hawaii can claim the same Federal care and treatment of its unfortunate lepers that every leprous person in continental United States is given. But Hawaii pays its own leprosy bill, which since annexation has amounted to more than $7,600,000. Since 1915· or 1916 the United States has paid the bill for the care of lepers in continental United States, and Hawaii has the right to call for similar treatment. This bill shows, however, how Federal expenses climb. We took over from the States the Federal care and treatment of lepers because even those States, except Louisiana, which wanted to care for them, could not find any commtinity willing to accept a leper hospital. Now the whole bill for care is on the United States, and Hawaii under the law has a right to cut in.

The work of the Delegate from Hawaii [Mr. HousTON] is much more varied and very much more difficult than many imagine.

The chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. WILLIAMS], is willing and anxious to do his full part for fair and proper legislation for both Hawaii and Alaska. He is handicapped because laws for continental United States seldom fit Hawaiian and Alaskan situations. The chairman made a good selection when he named the gentleman from illinois [Mr. PARSONs] as the head of the subcommittee to investigate and iron out the leprosy situation. Mr. PARSONS has developed this substitute bill after much study. He deserves credit.

8972 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 Also, I thank the Delegate for dropping his plans for im

mediate payments and settlements and going along with the subcommittee.

Mr. Chairman, I have held my place on the committee all of these years-nearly 20-because, being a Pacific coast Member, I am anxious to do rp.y full part for the proper treatment and advancement and development of our two Territories-Hawaii and Alaska. One is our outpost and a producer of great commodity values as well as substantial revenues for the United States. The other is not only a producer but is a reservoir of treasure, undiscovered resources, and much of it a habitable place where in time 6,000,000 or more of our overflow population will live in comfort and contentment.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I ask recognition 1n opposition to the joint resolution.

The CHAIRMAN. Does any member of. the committee desire recognition in opposition to the joint resolution? [After a pause.] If not, the gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for one hour.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, this is an endeavor to have the camel stick his nose under the tent and throw upon the National Government a burden that properly belongs to the Territory of Hawaii. I can not criticize the Delegate from Hawaii for seeking to unload on the National Government these financial burdens that are properly a -charge upon Hawaii; yet, as I said in my colloquial discussion with the gentlemen, if the number of leper cases were as general throughout the United States as they are in Hawaii, we would not have undertaken the national hospital at Carvi.lle. Because the cases were so exceptional throughout the country, we found it was not advantageous to throw that burden, for humanitarian reasons, upon the respective States, but to undertake that load from a national standpoint. It was a burden that properly belonged to the States. There is no question but what, as far as Hawaii is concerned, it is so general throughout the islands, not by reason of the troops being there but because of conditions that prevailed before the United States ever took possession of the islands, that we are called upon, or the gentleman is seeking to impose that burden that is entirely local, upon the National Government.

Mr. KELLER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. I yield to the gentleman from "Little

Egypt." Mr. KELLER. I would like to know how the gentleman

concludes that this would have been a matter for the States instead of for the General Government?

Mr. STAFFORD. I did not think I would be called upon at any time by any Democrat, or any man who professed to be a Democrat, to explain to him that the care of the health is a matter pertaining solely to the States and not to the National Government. I would suggest that the gentleman read something of Thomas Jefferson, and after having read some works of Thomas Jefferson, if the gentleman then thinks the care of the health is a national function, I will give further consideration to trying to enlighten the gentleman on Democratic principles.

I am fundamental in my opposition, and I differ from the gentleman from Illinois in that everything that pertains to the states, of a local character, such as the regulation of the health, the regulation of the morals, belongs to the States and not to the National Government. The gentleman is counter to that proposition, especially in the control of the regulations of drinking beverages. The gentleman believes that the National Government should supervise conditions in lower lllinois, known as" Little Egypt." I do not.

The condition prevailing in Herrin County, represented by the distinguished gentleman who has made this report, is a matter that pertains to the State of Dlinois, and I believe the gentleman from Illinois believes in that principle, and does not wish to have the national Government invad~ the province that pertains particularly to his little district or some little foul spot in his district.

Mr. PARSONS. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. STAFFORD. I yield. Mr. PARSONS. I may say for the information of the

gentleman, while I have no brief either for or against Henin or Herrin County, which happens to be Williams County, it is not in my district.

Mr. STAFFORD. Then I acquit the gentleman of being obliged to represent that district which is sometimes guilty of the gravest kind of disorder.

Mr. KELLER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. I yield to the gentleman. Mr. KET.T.ER. With great pleasure I announce that

Herrin is a part of my district, and there is no better town in America than Herrin.

Mr. STAFFORD. But it sometimes gets off the reservation.

Mr. SABATH. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. Here is a real States' rights Democrat.

I yield to the gentleman from Illinois. Mr. SABATH. I did not know that that county was in

.the district represented by my colleague, Mr. KELLER. I know it has been inhabited by splendid people, wonderful people, and that law and order prevailed for many, many years, until prohibition came in. Ever since prohibition came in crime has been rampant over there, as well as in many other sections of the country. If the gentleman from Wisconsin will help us repeal the eighteenth amendment or modify the Volstead Act, from that moment on I know that 1a w and order will again prevail there, as well as all over the United States.

Mr. STAFFORD. Is the gentleman from Illinois making that request of me, when I have been a member of the subcommittee that has been continually considering that question? The gentleman should make his appeal to the gentleman who is counter to the efforts to bring about relief from these conditions down in Herrin County.

Mr. KEJ.T.ER. There are not any such conditions as that.

Mr. SABATH. The gentleman from Wisconsin is one of the outstanding advocates of the repeal of the eighteenth amendment and the amendment of the Volstead Act. I realize and appreciate that, but I simply say he should continue in his efforts so that we can force an early vote.

Mr. STAFFORD. Well, I am working day and night. Even when the gentleman is out in Illinois I am working day and night trying to bring it about.

Mr. SABATH. The gentleman knows that I have been working while he was still in Wisconsin.

Mr. STAFFORD. Oh, the gentleman has been working assiduously.

Mr. LINTHICUM. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. I yield. Mr. LINTHICUM. D9es not the gentleman think that if

the gentleman from Herrin would come in with the people who are opposed to prohibition it would help Herrin?

Mr. STAFFORD. From my knowledge of conditions, it would help any Democrat who believes in State rights in his return to this body.

Mr. KELLER. I thank the gentleman for the recommendation.

Mr. TILSON. Mr. Chairman, what is the matter before • the House?

Mr. STAFFORD. The question of whether the National Government should ·assume exclusively State functions.

Mr. TILSON. That is not what I have been hearing for the last 10 minutes.

Mr. STAFFORD. Or whether the Territory should continue to assume its proper burdens of local self -government. If the gentleman was awake-and I assume he is always awake-he realizes it was the gentleman from "Little Egypt" who started this excursion as to conditions in Herrin County. Naturally I had to acquaint him with some Jeffersonian principles. That is what misled me.

Mr. BOYLAN. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. Yes.

I 1932 CONGRESSIONAL. RECOR~HOUSE B973 Mr. BOYLAN. Direeting attention to the subject under

discussion, the gentleman knows that leprosy is a peculiar disease. It is singled out as an exceptional disease throughout the wo.rld. The gentleman would not want each state to have a leprosy hospital. would he?

Mr. STAFFORD. As I stated originally, if the conditions were so general as to warrant a leprosarium in each State, the Federal Government would not have been warranted in establishing a national hospital for such cases at Carville, La.; but it was because there were rather isolated cases, perhaps only one from a State, that Congress felt justified in having them collected and their treatment coordinated at Carville, La.

Mr. BOYLAN. The gentleman would not want them scattered all over the United States with an institution in each· State?

Mr. STAFFORD. Here we have, through the ingenious activity of the Delegate from Hawaii, an effort in seeking to impose upon the Federal Government a burden that is purely territorial and local in :its nature, and to which the United States has not contributed. It is not at all a burden that should be placed upon the National Government.

Mr. BOYLAN. Is it not a national menace? Mr. STAFFORD. The people are not staying away from

Hawait because there is leprosy there. Mr. BOYLAN. Is that why the gentleman is staying

away? Mr. STAFFORD. I am staying away for other reasons.

People have not been staying away from Hawaii all these years because there is leprosy there. I was over there years back.

Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to take up further time. I object to the Public Health Service trying to extend its activities to intrude upon matters that are purely local and throw the burden more and more upon the National Government. Every day we hear protests from the people at home against the burdens of National Government, and yet here to-day we are proceeding to consider legislation that will ultimately provide for an additional expense. I have registered my protest. . If the committee wishes to vote this resolution favorably, that is their privilege.

The CHAIRMAN. If there is no further debate, the Clerk will read the joint resolution for amendment.

The Clerk read the joint resolution for amendment, as follows:

Resolved, etc., That the Surgeon General of the United States Public Health Service is authorized and directed to-

(1) Institute a survey by otficers of the Public Health Service to determine the adequacy of facilities and extent to which provision i.s made for the protection of the public health in the care and treatment of leprous persons in the Territory of Hawaii, and to report upon remedial legislation providing for the further control and eradication of the disease in the Territory.

joint resolution <H. J. Res-. 361) to authorize the Surgeon General of the United States Public Health Service to make a survey as to the existing facilities for the protection of the public health in the care and treatment oi leprous persons in the Territory of Hawaii, and for other purposes, and had directed him to report the same back to the House with the recommendation that it do pass.

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

On motion of Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas, a motion to reconsider the vote by which the joint resolution was passed was laid on the table.

CALENDAR WEDNESDAY BUSINESS

Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that further Calendar Wednesday business be dispensed with.

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

There was no objection.

LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATION BILL

Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration of the bill <H. R. 11267) making appropriations for the legislative branch of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes.

The motion was agreed to. Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee

of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill H. R. 11267, with Mr. WARREN in the chair.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. The Clerk read as follows: Janitors under the foregoing shall be appointed by the chair

men, respectively, of said committees, and shall perform under the direction of the Doorkeeper all of the duties heretofore required of messengers detailed to said committees by the Doorkeeper, and shall be subject to removal by the Doorkeeper at any time after the termlnation of the Congress during which they were appointed.

Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to return to line 3, on page 14, in order to offer a committee amendment. ·

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Louisiana asks unanimous consent to return to page 14 in order to offer a committee amendment. Is there objection?

There was no objection. Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer the following com

mittee amendment. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Louisiana offers a

committee amendment, which the Clerk will report. The Clerk read as follows:

(2) Prepare an estimate of the cost of the construction and equipment of a receiving station and hospital for the care and treatment· of leprous persons, including the acquisition of neces- Committee amendment offered by Mr. SANDLIN: On page 14, sary grounds for the location of said station and hospital, and an line 3, strike out the following: " Norman E. Ives." estimate of the yearly cost of maintaining and operating such station and hospital. .

In the preparation of this estimate the Surgeon General shall ascertain from the Secretary of War, the SeCretary of the Navy, the Secretary of the Interior, and the Secretary of Agriculture whether any military, naval, or other reservation suitable for the purpose is available for transfer, to be used for the location of said station and hospital, and shall consider also the cost of the purchase of the present Kalihi receiving hospital, its equipment and supplies, including the acquisition of the ground upon which the hospital is located and including such reconstruction or additional buildings as may be necessary.

The Surgeon General shall report his findings and estimates on the opening day of the second session of the Seventy-second Congress.

Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Chairman, I will state that if this name is left in this bill and the economy bill becomes a law, the Invalid Pensions Committee would be left without salary for this position. By striking out the name, the committee will be permitted to have this position. I also understand from the chairman of the Invalid Pensions Committee that the present occupant of this position will not be disturbed if this name is stricken out and the economy bill does not go through as written.

The committee amendment was agreed to. The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move that the For clerk hire necessarily employed by each Member, Delegate, tt and Resident Commissioner, in the discharge of his otficial and

commi ee do now rise and report the joint resolution back representative duties, 1n accordance with the act entitled "An act to the House with the recommendation that it do pass. to fix the compensation o! otficers and employees of the legislative

The motion was agreed to. branch of the Government," approved June 20, 1929, $2,200,000.

Accordingly the committee rose; and the Speaker having Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the resumed the chair, Mr. CooPER of Tennessee, Chairman of last word. Perhaps my inquiry is not pertinent to the the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, I amendment just offered by the gentleman from Louisiana, reported t~at that committee had had under consideration the striking out the name of Mr. Ives, but I notice on page 17,

LXXV--565

., I

8974 CONGRESSIONAU RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 line 7, the name of a specific person. Does the gentleman's proposal also apply in this instance?

Mr. SANDLIN. No; it does not apply to Mr. Lewis. Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman repeat the real pur

pose of having the name of Mr. Ives stricken out? Mr. SANDLIN. He is a retired employee of the Interior

Department; and if the proposal of the Economy Committee is carried out, he could not serve in an active position.

Mr. STAFFORD. To which proposal does the gentleman refer?

Mr. SANDLIN. The proposal in the econ.omy bill with reference to retired employees being appointed to any other position in the Government.

Mr. STAFFORD. Does he occupy the status of one of the retired employees?

Mr. SANDLIN. Yes; he does. Mr. STAFFORD. What salary does he get as such? Mr. SANDLIN. He gets $1,200 as retirement annuity. The pro forma amendment was withdrawn. The Clerk read as follows: Sal~rles: Clerk, $4,000 and $800 additional so long as the posi

tion 1s held by the present incumbent; inspector under section 20 of the act approved January 12, 1895 (U. S. c.. title 44, sec. 49). $2,820; assistant clerk and stenographer, $2,400; for expenses of compiling, preparing, and indexing the Congressional Directory, $1,600; in all, $11 ,620, one half to be disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate and the other half to be disbursed by the Clerk of ·the House.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word. Will the gentleman inform the committee as to the maximum salary that the clerk of the Joint Committee on Printing receives under this or any other authorization of Congress?

Mr. SANDLIN. Four thousand eight hundred dollars. Mr. STAFFORD. Here you make provision for expenses of

compiling, preparing, and indexing the Congressional Directory, $1,600. To whom does that emolument go?

Mr. SANDLIN. It is paid out under the order of the Joint Committee on Printing. I do not know the individual or individuals who are paid from the amount.

Mr. STAFFORD. Does it go to the clerk of the joint committee?

Mr. SANDLIN. I do not know. Mr. STAFFORD. I suppose this is an additional emolu

ment to that which he is receiving as an employee on the permanent roll?

Mr. SANDLIN. I can not say as to that. The joint committee controls that fund.

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman does not know of· any person about the Capitol who is performing this character of work and receiving only $800?

Mr. SANDLIN,. I do not. Mr. STAFFORD. So naturally it would be assumed that

he is receiving some other basic pay and that this is an emolument?

Mr. SANDLIN. That could be assumed by the gentleman if he wants to assume it. To be frank with the gentleman, I do not know.

~rr. STAFFORD. The gentleman's acquaintance with conditions prevailing around the Capitol certainly would not lead him to believe that there are any employees receiving as little as $800?

Mr. SANDLIN. The amount is $1,600. . · Mr. STAFFORD. One-half to be disbursed by the Senate

and one-half by the House. Mr. SANDLIN. That is only the method of disbursement.

The total is $1,600. It is paid $800 by the House and $800 by the Senate. I think there are a good many around the Capitol working for $1,600.

Mr. STAFFORD. There may be stenographers employed by Members of Congress who receive that amount, but there are no political attaches who are working for the political establishment of the Government in responsible positions who get as little as $1,600.

The pro forma amendment was withdrawn. Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out

the last two words, and ask unanimous consent to return to

page 17, line 8, for the pilrpose of making a point of order on the item of $420, which is not authorized by law.

Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Chairman, for the present, I object. Mr. PATTERSON. Will the gentleman reserve his objec~

tion so that I can make a statement about it? Mr. SANDLIN. Yes. Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Chairman, this bill came out of

the Committee on Accounts about three or four years ago and was passed in the interest of the gentleman who held the position at that time, Mr. Ladd, but there has been no 7esolu~ion passed pertaining to the present employee holdIng this office. There is no law authorizing this $420, and I hope the gentleman from Louisiana will not object to returning to it because here we say we are in favor of economy--

Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Chairman, I admit the point of order would be good. if we should return to the paragraph, but let me make this statement:

The information the committee received was that when the salaries of the different positions of the Government here were gone over a few years ago, the salary of this place was not increased, because of this additional sum, and for that reason it is taken care of by this provision in the bill.

If I did not think this was a meritorious case and if I did not believe the employee was earning this salary I would certainly not object to returning to the item. I win say to the gentleman from Alabama that I am as much in favor of an economical administration of this Government as the gentleman is, at the same time I do not propose to cut the salary of some specific employee who, I believe, is earning every dollar he is receiving. If I had not believed this, I would not have allowed it to be written in the bill. I think this is a case where the employee should receive the salary, because he is earning it, and for that reason I would object to striking. it out.

The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard. The Clerk read as follows: For salaries and expenses of maintenance of the omce of legis

lative counsel, as authorized by law, $75,000, of which $37,500 shall be disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate and $37,500 by the Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Mr. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, when this item has been reached in the past, for several years members of the Committee on Ways and Means and others of the leading committees have taken the opportunity to speak in approval of the great help given to the Congress by this service.

I see none of such members here at the moment, and so I presume to do it by reason of the fact that this winter I have had unusual occasion to see and to profit by the very admirable, efficient, loyal work of this agency. I think a word of testimony to its value should be recorded, and at the same time I would recall that a dozen years ago, when this agency was young, there were Members who criticized its purpose severely and attempted to block appropriations for it. In this period it has won its permanent place in the institutions of our Government.

The Clerk read as follows: Capitol Grounds: For care and improvement of grounds sur

rounding the Capitol, Senate and House omce Buildings; Capitol power plant; personal and other services; care of trees; plantings; fertllizers; repairs to pavements, walks, and roadways; purchase of waterproof wearing apparel; maintenance of signal lights; and for snow removal by hire of men and equipment or under contract without compliance with sections 3709 (U. S. C., title 41, sec. 5) and 3744 (U.S. C., title 40, sec. 16) of the Revised Statutes, $120,000.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word. I direct my inquiry to the chairman having the bill in charge as to the principal item of expenditure of $120,000 for the care and improvement of the Capitol Grounds.

Mr. SANDLIN. I think I can give the gentleman the items. There is $73,000 for salaries and wages, $25,000 for a sprinkling system, $6,000 for sundry supplies and repairs.

Mr. STAFFORD. Where is there any sprinkling system for the Capitol Grounds?

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 8975 Mr. SANDLIN. The gentleman will notice that they have

started the installation of a sprinkling system. Instead of going around with a hand hose, they are putting pipes underground.

Mr. STAFFORD. I have never seen any sprinkling of the grounds by hand hose.

Mr. HARDY. If the gentleman will go out to the east front, he will see that pipes have been put through the grounds. They turn on the water and the ground is sprinkled automatically.

Mr. STAFFORD. I have never seen any sprinkling, and it seems to me that it has not been necessary on account of the climatic conditions, the abundant rainfalls during the summer season.

Mr. SANDLIN. The gentleman may have overlooked it. Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman says they are installing

an additional sprinkling system. • Mr. SANDLIN. To take the place of the hose system. Mr. STAFFORD. Have the grounds ever been sprinkled

by hose? · Mr. SANDLIN. My information is that they have.

Mr. STAFFORD. I have been around here with my eyes open, and I have never seen any sprinkling of the Capitol Grounds by hose. Of course, I take the gentleman's word for it.

Mr. SANDLIN. I acknowledge that the gentleman is a keen observer, but he has overlooked that.

Mr. STAFFORD. It may have been done in the night. Mr. SANDLIN. I have seen it done in the early morning. Mr. STAFFORD. What are the other items? Mr. SANDLIN. I have given the gentleman the items

$73,000 for salaries and wages, $25,000 · for the sprinkling, $6,000 for supplies and repairs.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the pro forma amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Capitol garages: For maintenance, repairs, alterations, personal,

and other services, and all necessary incidental expenses, $7,540: Provided, That the employees engaged in the care and maintenance of the Senate garage shall be transferred to the jurisdiction of the Architect of the Capitol on July 1, 1932, without any reduction in compensation as the result of such transfer: Provided further, That hereafter the underground space in the north extension of the Capitol Grounds shall be under the jurisdiction and control of the Architect of the Capitol, subject to such regulations respecting the use thereof as may be promulgated by the joint action of the VIce President of the United States and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the paragraph just read. My purpose is to get some information in regard to this expensive subterranean ·garage to the west of the ornate Senate Oflice Building. How much has been expended for the sole purpose of creating an underground garage for the benefit of automobiles used by the Senators of the United States?

Mr. SANDLIN. This garage was authorized under a special act of Congress. I have not the date at hand, but I will put it in the RECORD.

Mr. STAFFORD. Was there a special authorization, or did they proceed under some general authorization in an appropriation bill? I do not recall any special provision being incorporated in a general appropriation act or any special act of Congress authorizing the construction of a subterranean garage for the benefit of the Senators of the United States, involving an expense of more than a million dollars.

Mr. SAND~. In that act they adopted a definite plan which provided for this garage.

Mr. STAFFORD. I would like to see that, and also I would like to know the name of the person who originated the tunnel for the street cars approaching the northwesterly corner of the Senate Oflice Building.

I would say, offhand, that it took several hundred thousand dollars to provide for that subway I described as a tunnel a moment ago. I would like really to know who designed that proposal, and who approved it, and what the cost is. I know ~ufficient about the program to know that it has cost the taxpayers a mighty tidy figure.

Mr. SANDLIN. The gentleman Is correct. I have no quarrel with the gentleman. It was expressly provided by an act of Congress.

Mr. STl\FFORD. When was that passed? Was it a rider upon an appropriation act?

Mr. HOLADAY. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, this was carried in the general appropriation for the beautification of the Plaza between the Capitol and Union Station.

Mr. STAFFORD. As I understand it, the plan for the Plaza originated with the former Representative from Kentucky, Ben Johnson, who was then chairman of the Committee on the District of Columbia. It was the idea to condemn the property from the Union Station down to the Peace Monument and have it so arranged that tl].ere would be an unobstructed view to the Peace Monument to visitors coming by railway to the Union Station. Some one at some time has constructed an obstruction to that view, for the accommodation, perhaps, of the Senators of the United States who use automobiles.

Mr. HOLADAY. This is a part of the plan of the Park and Planning Commission. I may say to the gentleman that I opposed it at the time it was considered.

Mr. STAFFORD. I am very glad that the gentleman took that position, and I regret that he was unsuccessful in his effort to stop it. What was the ground of his opposition? I hope it was in line with what I regard as being an undue waste of public money.

Mr. HOLADAY. That was my position. I took the position that it was an unnecessary expenditure and a waste of public funds.

Mr. STAFFORD. Has the gentleman any information as to the total expenditure of that submerged architectural monstrosity?

Mr. HOLADAY. The cost of that garage was not so great. As the gentleman will recall, the building was built on about a level, and then over the garage on toward the Capitol it was filled in, so that the cost of the garage itself was not such a great item.

Mr. STAFFORD. Oh, I know that the granite facing on the bridge that crosses over the subway, for the accommodation of the street-car traffic, cost many thousand dollars. I am told that the entire subterranean structure has cost the Government over a million dollars.

Mr. HOLADAY. The Park and Planning Commission conceived the idea that the beauty of the whole project would be lost unless the street cars were submerged. It is one of the expensive and, as I consider, unreasonable plans that are constantly being forced upon the Government by the Park and Planning Commission.

Mr. STAFFORD. The Park and Planning Commission is. not pretending to take the street cars from directly in front of the Union Station. They are observed there, and yet merely for the casual transportation of street cars underground, a little more than a quarter of a mile away, they wish them submerged.

Mr. HOLADAY. I quite agree with the gentleman in his sentiments.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Chairman, I think after the landscaping is entirely completed, it will not be as ugly as the gentleman from Wisconsin suggests.

Mr. STAFFORD. But they have destroyed the prime purpose that Mr. Johnson had in mind, to have an unobstructed view for those who came here by the Union Station to see the Peace Monument.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. And the Capitol? Mr. STAFFORD. No; the Peace Monument. When they

were throwing up the dirt around the Plaza along B Street I inquired of some officials connected with the Capitol what the purpose was. They did not tell me the real purpose was to build a subterranean garage. I am not objecting to the Senators having a garage, but I think it would have been more economical to have a modern garage contiguous to the Senate Office Building rather than to have this structure which can not be justified.

8976 .CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 l\1:r. LAGUARDIA. I think by the time the gentleman

comes back next session and the landscaping is complete, it will satisfy his resthetic taste.

Mr. STAFFORD. I have not the resthetic taste of the Park and Planning Commission, which would destroy the prime purpose of viewing the Peace Monument and the equestrian monument erected by the Government in honor of General Grant. That is all obstructed by these resthetes who block the original purpose entirely out of view. As I said, the practical thing would have been to erect -a separate garage. I think the time is coming when we will have to erect a separate garage for the Members of the House rather than to have the automobiles scattered everywhere around the Capitol, but when we do, I hope they will not go to the extent of marring the beauty of the Capitol by the erection of some structure for the sole purpose of benefiting the street-car company.

Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Chairman, for the benefit of the gentleman from Wisconsin, this improvement is provided for in the act of March 4, 1929, entitled "An act to provide for the enlargement of the Capitol Grounds." One of the provisions is for the removal of the street-car tracks from Delaware A venue and B Street, and the relaying of them, and an underground structure extending from Delaware to New Jersey Avenue.

Mr. STAFFORD. Then I am acquitted in my own conscience of having neglected my duty, because it was passed before I entered the House.

Mr. SANDLIN. I am giving the gentleman the reason why we provided the money for this.

Mr. STAFFORD. I was under the impression that it had escaped me and that it had been passed through the House after my return to Congress. I withdraw the reservation of objection.

Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the paragraph and to appeal to my colleague from Louisiana to investigate the propriety of this and return to it later. J hope he will consider this request and look into the matter.

I think if he will investigate it, he will find it is entirely justifiable. To-day we start~d out with Calendar Wednesday, and we did not expect this bill to be read just now. Under those conditions, I feel the gentleman ought to grant us the privilege of returning to that, unless he indorses 1t entirely. The man there now is absolutely without any experience. This man was given that after years of experience, and he has built up the office.

Mr. SANDLIN. I have tried to make it plain to the gentleman that I do not know the man who is there at all. I never heard of him.

Mr. PATI'ERSON. The previous resolution was before our committee before I became a member, and we made a thorough study of it, and I think the gentleman will find that no more just request could be made.

Mr. SANDLIN. It has been explained to me by those present in the writing of the 1929 legislative pay act, and it was stated in our hearing that this was continued because this position was not increased in 1929 as the others were.

Mr. PATTERSON. That was not brought out before our committee when this original resolution was passed.

Mr. SANDLIN. I am not responsible for what was or was not brought out before the gentleman's committee.

Mr. PATTERSON. I am a member of the committee and I tell the gentleman that the resolution passed before the 1929 pay readjustments.

Mr. SANDLIN. Now, if the gentleman will pardon me, I do not talk very much, for the reason that the CoNGREsSIONAL RECORD costs about $46 a page to print.

Mr. STAFFORD. If the gentleman will yield, I am willing to have all my discussions on the floor eliminated from the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. If the gentleman thinks I am talking to get my remarks in the RECORD, I will ask unanimous consent to have them stricken out.

Mr. O'CONNOR. Mr. Chairman, I object. Mr. STAFFORD. I am here for the orderly discussion

o! legU;lation.

Mr. PATTERSON. The gentleman could not accuse me of taking undue time.

Mr. SANDLIN. This bill will not be completed to-day, and I will consider the request made by the gentleman from Alabama.

Mr. PATTERSON. I thank the gentleman; that is what I wish.

The pro forma amendment was withdrawn. The Clerk read as follows:

LmRARY BUTI.DING AND GROUNDS

Salaries: For chief engineer and all personal services at rates of pay provided by law, $46,960: Provided, That the Architect of the Capitol may continue the employment under his jurisdiction of Damon W. Harding, but not beyond June 30, 1934, notwithstanding any provision of the act entitled "An act for the retirement of employees in the classlfied. civil service, and for other purposes," approved May 22, 1920, and any amendment thereof, prohibiting extensions of service for more than four years after the age of retirement.

. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the proviso.

Mr. SANDLIN. It was explained to us that this gentleman had been working over there in this position ever since the Library Building was erected, and they thought he could give better service in this position than a new man. He knows where all the wiring of the building is, and it was stated he is a very valuable employee.

Mr. STAFFORD. But I believe the Committee on Economy is bringing in, as one of their recommendations, enforced retirement of all persons who are employed beyond the age of retirement.

Mr. SANDLIN. That is true. Mr. STAFFORD. Here they are singling out a special

individual. Let us get the picture. How old is he? Mr. SANDLIN. Sixty-five. There is now under contract

an addition to this Library Building. I know nothing about it except what the officials over there say about him.

Mr. STAFFORD. What officials, if I may ask? Mr. SANDLIN. The Architect of the Capitol, who is in

charge of that work at the Library. The hearings give a very· clear statement of it.

Mr. STAFFORD. What salary does he now receive? Mr. SANDLIN. Two· thousand six hundred dollars. Mr. STAFFORD. Now, the proviso would change existing

law so that this individual, beyond his retirement age, could be continued for another four years.

Mr. SANDLIN. I was mistaken. He has had two extensions. He is 69. This would extend him two years more.

Mr. STAFFORD. It has been heretofore extended two years?

Mr. SANDLIN. Four years. This would extend him until he is 71 years old, if this is allowed to remain in.

Mr. STAFFORD. I see the gentleman from Texas rising. Mr. BLANTON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. I will be glad to yield. Mr. BLANTON. Do I understand the gentleman from

Wisconsin to intimate that because a man has reached the age of 69 years he is no longer capable and efficient?

Mr. STAFFORD. I take the position that when a man reaches the age of 69, willing or not, he should be retired.

Mr. BLANTON. Then we will retire some of the ablest men in the United States. We will retire some of the biggest heads of big business in the United States. We would retire some of the ablest Senators who sit in the other end of the Capitol. We would retire some men who are much more valuable to the country than some of us youngsters are just now.

Mr. STAFFORD. There may be exceptional cases. When the virile, aggressive, pungent Representative from Texas reaches the threescore-and-ten period, which is far distant, I know he will still be serviceable, but the gentleman is exceptional.

Mr. BLANTON. Well, I take it that this man is exceptional. It is an exceptional case. This committee must have some reason for this. They do not come in here spasmodically and make recommendations to the House without some good reason.

.1932 CO~GRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8977 Mr. STAFFORD. Oh, this is a political employee, the

gentleman must remember. Mr. BLANTON. But a necessary one. They have passed

on the matter. The committee is making its recommendations to the Congress. The committee is composed of 35 Members of the House.

Mr. STAFFORD. And this man may be keeping somebody else out of employment. I will listen to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. SANDLIN. I will say to the gentleman from Wisconsin that Mr. Lynn, the Architect of the Capitol, said this:

The recommendation of the Architect of the Capitol is that he be retained until June 30, 1934, in order that we may utiliZe his valuable and highly experienced services during the period of the construction of the addition and annex to the Library of Congress. In order to insure this retention, it is the desire of the Architect of the Capitol to have the necessary legislation passed to continue his services.

Mr. Bond, who is working under Mr. Lynn, said this: Mr. Harding has been employed in the Library of Congress since

1898. He entered the service about one · year after the building was opened, and his service has been continuous except for the time when the Architect of . the Capitol asked that he be transferred to the Capitol in connection with the old House Office Building wiring. He has personal knowledge of everything pertaining to the electrical equipment of the building, and a lot of it is not of record. It is mentally preserved with him, and we feel that we would like to retain him at least until these two buildings are completed-that is the annex building and the addition-and the entire electrical equipment installed.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Louisiana has made a good case as to the retention of this individual who has in his possession certain technical information that no other man may have. I am sufficiently acquainted with expert builders to know that they acquire information about construction work that earn not be handed down. Therefore, I withdraw the reservation of the point of order.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word.

Apropos of what was embraced within the reservation of the point of order, and apropos of the continual effort to retire Government employees in the very prime of life and pay them big retirement fees and let them continue to draw big salaries, I want to point the attention of the gentleman from Wisconsin to the office in the rotunda of the Capitol where all the statues are placed.

Mr. STAFFORD. The chamber of horrors? Mr. BLANTON. Statuary Hall is its name. Over in the

corner presides Andy Smith, the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD clerk, who has been working for the Government loyally and faithfully in this Capitol for 57 years. He is 77 years old. He is on the job right now. He is able, efficient, energetic, and better qualified than any other man in the Nation to handle that position. Would you retire him, forsooth, because he is 77 years old? We know he is able to do his work, and we know that he does it well. And no man half so well qualified can be found to take his place.

I want to point the attention of the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. STAFFORD] to Hon. William Tyler Page, who, until we Democrats wrested the power of authority from our brother Republicans, was the clerk of this House-an able, efficient Clerk, than whom there has never been an abler one. He is a great historian and is one of the best-informed men in the United States Capitol, and is one of the loyal, patriotic citizens of the United States. He has been employed in this Capitol for over 50 years. Does the gentleman want to retire him because, forsooth, he has reached up in years?

For the benefit of some of our new colleagues who are serving their first term in this House I want to crave your indulgence long enough to give them a few facts about this faithful public servant.

William Tyler Page was born near here at Frederick, Md., October 19, 1868. He is one of the lineal descendants of Carter Braxton, signer of the Declaration of Independence. He was given his middle name because he is a collateral descendant of President John Tyler. He was educated in

the public schools of Baltimore and at the Frederick Academy.

William Tyler Page began his service as an employee of this Government on December 19, 1881, when he was appointed a page in the Clerk's office of the House of Representatives. He has been a faithful employee ever since, his service being continuous, and he has rounded out more than 50 years of loyal service to the United States. He was elected Clerk of this House on May 19, 1919, and continued in such position until last December.

William Tyler Page is senior warden of St. Columba's Episcopal Church, is author of Page's Congressional Handbook, and during the World War he wrote the American's Creed, which was officially adopted by the Commissioner of Education, who was authorized to select a creed.

I am sure that it will be worth while for me to quote from the remarks of Mr. Matthew Page Andrews, representative of the Vigilantes and chairman of the committee of award, the following:

In March, 1917, the city of Baltimore, through Mayor James H. Preston, offered a prize of $1,000 for the best creed. Committees were then appointed to pass upon the creeds submitted. These committees were (1) a committee on manuscripts, consisting of Porter Emerson Browne, Henry S. Chapin, Hermann Hagedorn, and representatives from leading American magazines; (2) a committee on award, consisting of Matthew Page Andrews, Irvin S. Cobb, Hamlin Garland, Ellen Glasgow, Julian Street, Booth Tarkington, and Charles Hanson Towne; (3) an advisory committee, consisting o! Dr. P. P. Claxton, United States Commissioner o! Education, and other national and State offi.cials.

Several thousand creeds were submitted to the committee on manuscripts prior to the closing o! the contest on September 14, 1917. Fifty of these were turned over to the committee on award, and "creed No. 384" was selected as the best. The envelope containing the author's name was opened in New York City March 6, 1918.

It was then disclosed that the author of No. 384 was William Tyler Page, of Friendship Heights, Md. [Applause.] His creed was selected because it was not only brief and simple but remarkably comprehensive of the best in American ideals, history, and traetition, as expressed by the founders of the Republic and its greatest statesmen and writers. This creed will be read for the first time by Doctor Claxton, United States Commissioner of Education, to whom I now present it on behalf of the national committee on award. [Applause.]

Chairman CLAXTON. The creed is as follows: " THE AMERICAN'S CREED

" I believe in the United States of America as a government of the people, by the people, for the people, whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed; a democracy in a republic; a sovereign Nation of many sovereign States; a perfect Union, one and inseparable, established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrified their lives and fortunes.

"I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it, to support its Constitution, to obey its laws, to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies."

This is a creed very fitting to be announced at this time, and the good thing about it is that it 1s not new, but it sums up the fundamental faith o! all of the greatest of our leaders from the beginning until now; a creed that can be recommended not only to those who may come from the shores of Europe or Asia to make their home among us and become of us but to those of our own flesh and blood who come from the shores of eternity to grow up among us and ta take our places and to carry on our institutional life and to support and defend the country.

I am asked to make this explanation, that the first clause"I believe in the United States of America," is from the pre

amble to the Constitution of the United States; that the second lllause, "a government of the people, by the people, for the people," is from the preamble to the Constitution of the United States, Daniel Webster's speech 1n the Senate of January 26, 1830, and Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg speech.

"Whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed," is from the Declaration of Independence.

"A democracy in a republic," is in substance from No. 10 of the Federalist, by Madison, and Article X of the amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

"A sovereign Nation of many sovereign States," from • E pluribus unum," the great seal of the United States, and Article IV of the Constitution of the United States.

"A perfect union," goes back to the preamble to the Constitution.

"One and inseparable," Webster's speech in the Senate of January 26, 1830.

" Established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity," from the Declaration ·at Independence.

" For which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes," from the Declaration of Independence and Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.

8978 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-l;IOUSE .APRIL 26. " I therefore believe it 1s my duty to my country to love it," 1n

substance from Edward Everett Hale, the man without a country. "To support its Constitution," from the oath of allegiance,

section 1757 of the Revised Statutes of the United States. "To obey its laws," from Washington's Farewell Address and

from Article VI of the Constitution of the United States. " To respect its flag,.. the national anthem, The Star-Spangled

Banner; Army and Navy regulations; War Department circular on flag etiquette, April 14. 1917.

"And to defend it against all enemies," from the oath of allegiance, section 1757 of the Revised Statutes of the United States.

That is part of the record, Mr. Chairman, of one of our faithful employees, and he has served in this Capitol for over 50 years. Why, it would be foolish to talk about retiring him simply because he will soon be 64 years of age.

Let me call attention to another loyal, faithful employee, who is 72 years of age, and who has been working here continuously since 1880-over 52 years, if you please. I refer to Sam Robinson. Who could do his work better than he does it? He comes on duty about 12 noon every day, when the House meets. and he works until about midnight every night. He is active, efficient, trustworthy, and thoroughly dependable. Before he retires each night all copy for the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD is in the Government Printing Office. Because of his splendid services we are going to provide in this bill that Sam Robinson is not to be retired. And I sincerely hope that no Member will oppose that provision.

Why, you might as well talk about retiring our present efficient Doorkeeper, Joe Sinnott, for whom we all have affection. He has reached the top and has started down the other side of the hill. Where is there a man in this Nation who could make a better Doorkeeper of the House of Representativ~s? He has served the House of Representatives at a time when we could pay him only a small salary, incommensurate with his manifold duties and the real value of his service, yet he worked loyally and faithfully in a menial position for years.

It makes me tired to see on this floor continually efforts being made to retire Government employees because they have served 20 or 30 years, or have reached the age of 45.

Mr. WITHROW. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. BLANTON. I yield. Mr. WITHROW. Did you not vote to unseat Mr. Page

and put another man in his place? Mr. BLANTON. I did that from the standpoint of party

regularity only. I knew when I did that that we were going to take care of him. When I did that we had already prepared a resolution that we were going to present here to take care of him, and our good friend Joe Rogers. If I had had my way on it, I would have put onto that resolution a further provision to take care of our former efficient Doorkeeper, Bert Kennedy, one of the best men we have had here in charge of that office, and also I would have taken care of our good friend Frank Collier, our former splendid Postmaster, who rendered able service to every man in this House, whether he was a Democrat, a Republican, a Socialist, or a Mugwump. [Laughter.] All of us liked him.

Why did we not take care of Bert Kennedy and Frank Collier·? The time has come when we ought to take that matter up and do justice to those two men. They are receiving a little salary the equivalent of that ·paid a janitor. I hope the very next bill that the Committee on Accounts brings in will be amended to carry an appropriate salary for Bert Kennedy and for Frank Collier.

Mr. MEAD. We have one or two minor employees over in the House Office Building who are in the same category. They ought to be protected.

Mr. BLANTON. Of course they ought to be; and I want to help you do it.

[Here the gavel fell.] The Clerk read as follows: For the Register of Copyrights, assistant register, and other

personal services, $249,380.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word. I assume the salary of the librarian is fixed by law?

Mr. SANDLIN. It is fixed by law at $10,000.

Mr. STAFFORD. He receives only $10,000? Mr. SANDLIN. Yes. Mr. STAFFORD. I was wondering what his salary was.

What does the Register of Copyrights receive, if the gentleman has that information?

Mr. SANDLIN. He receives $5,600. The pro forma amendment was withdrawn. The Clerk read as follows:

DISTRmUTION OF CARD INDEXES

For the distribution of card indexes and other publications of the Library, including personal services. freight charges (not exceeding $500) , expressage, postage, traveling expenses connected with such distribution. expenses of attendance at meetings when incurred on the written authority and direction of the librarian, a~d including not to exceed $62,010 for employees engaged in p1ecework and work by the day or hour and for extra special services of regular employees at rates to be fixed by the Librarian· 1n all, $180,000. •

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word. Did the committee make any reduction in the appropriation for the distribution of the card indexes which are now under consideration?

Mr. SANDLIN. No. It was · increased $9,500 on the explanation of the librarian that the work had increased.

Mr. STAFFORD. I believe this is a reimbursable item? Mr. SANDLIN. It is. There is a little profit. The pro forma amendment was withdrawn. The Clerk read as follows:

INDEX TO FEDERAL STATUTES

To enable the Librarian of Congress to revise and extend the index to the Federal Statutes, published 1n 1908 and ·known as the Scott and Beaman Index, to include the acts of Congress down to and including the acts of the Seventieth Congress, and to have the revised index printed at the Government Printing Office, as authorized and directed by the act approved March 3 1927, as amended June 14, 1930, the unexpended balance of th~ appropriation for this purpose in the legislative appropriation act for the fiscal year 1932 1s continued available for the fiscal year 1933.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word. For a long time I have been of the opinion that the Scott and Beaman Index wa.s not of much value to any persons except the West Publishing Co. and other law publishing companies. As I recall, in the last session of Congress there was some authorization to appropriate a considerable amount of money for bringing this index down to date. Certain persons connected with the Library of Congress have called my attention to the needlessness of this elaborate compilation, and, as I said, it is only utilized by some large law-book publishing houses.

Mr. SANDLIN. The index to Federal Statutes is directed by the act of March 3, 1927, as amended, and to carry out the provisions of those acts this appropriation is made.

Mr. STAFFORD. Has the gentleman's committee made any investigation as to the real need of this so-called Scott and Beaman Index? This is a large amount of money to keep extant a certain index of the Federal Statutes, and I have been informed it is of but very little current value except to law publishing houses. ·

Mr. LAGUARDIA. I thought it was just the reverse. I think the law publishers have a better index than we have.

Mr. STAFFORD. For that reason this is of very little value. We are giving this honorarium to some Government employees for the upkeep of a compilation of statutes that I dare say is never referred to by any Member of Congress.

Mr. SANDLIN. I will say that the legislative counsel uses this index a good deal.

Mr. STAFFORD. The legislative counsel is one of the beneficiaries of this compilation.

Mr. SANDLIN. No; the gentleman is wrong. It is done by the Library.

Mr. STAFFORD. Originally Mr. Beama:p., one of the legislative counsel, when employed by the Government as a member of the Library ·staff, received this gratuity to the extent of several thousand dollars. I haw been told by persons connected with the Library of Congress, and particularly the law library, that this is of very little current value.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8979 Here is another instance where the Government could

save money. We get started on something and some employee is desirous of having his hand in the public crib and keeps holding on to the purse strings and never gives up. I am quite certain if the committee would investigate this matter, even though it is authorized by law, they would not appropriate for it.

Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Chairman, it would certainly seem to me it is very important that the Committee on the Judiciary and the Members of Congress generally should know--

Mr. STAFFORD. Has the gentleman ever examined this index? ·

Mr. SANDLIN. I have never had occasion to examine it. Mr. STAFFORD. I have had it sent to me, and it is of

no current value at all. Not only that, but the cost of publishing it at the Government Printing Office is a waste of money.

Mr. SANDLIN. I am very glad to have the gentleman's suggestion and I shall look into it thoroughly.

Mr. STAFFORD. I brought the matter up for that purpose, so that next year when we are confronted with the same condition of a depleted Treasury as we are to-day, the gentleman will strike out some of these needless appropriations.

Mr. SANDLIN. Of course, the gentleman understands that the appropriation is made by authority of law.

Mr. STAFFORD. If it were not by authority of law, I would use the bludgeon of a point of order and strike it out.

Mr. SANDLIN. The members of the Committee on the Judiciary were instrumental in having this legislation passed and I understand they are favorable to its continuation.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. We use the established public works every time we have occasion to look up a Federal statute. I think every lawyer does this.

Mr. STAFFORD. There is not a lawyer in the country that uses it, and I dare say there is not a Member of Congress who uses this needless publication.

The pro forma amendment was withdrawn. The Clerk read as follows:

CONTINGENT EXPENSES OF THE LIBRARY For miscellaneous and contingent expenses, stationery, sup~

plies, stock, and materials directly purchased, miscellaneous travel~ ing expenses, postage, transportation, incidental expenses connected with the administration of the Library and Copyright Office, including not exceeding $500 for expenses of attendance at meetings when incurred on the written authority and direction of the Librarian, $9,000.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, on page 35, line 16, I move to strike out the words "traveling expenses."

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. BLANTON: Page 35, line 16, strike out

the words "traveling expenses."

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, I have just had compiled and sent to me an official, certified statement of the traveling expenses of the general counsel of the Veterans' Bureau since 1923.

It is astonishing that they would allow this man to attend all the various conventions over the country and thus waste a sacred fund that we set apart for that bureau to rehabilitate disabled veterans.

For the benefit of my colleagues, so they will have a picture of it before them, I ask, Mr. Chairman, unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks and to put in the RECORD this salary account and some other excerpts that I want to bring to your attention.

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

There was no objection. Mr. BLANTON. I wish you would read this in the RECORD

in the morning. Here is the letter from Gen. Frank T. Hines, Director of the Veterans' Administration, with the travel account of William Wolff Smith certified as correct, to wit:

Hon. THOMAS L. BLANTON,

VETERANS' ADMINISTRATION, Washington, April 25, 1932.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. BLANTON: This is in compliance with your request

of April 23, 1932, asking for complete information as to the travel performed by Maj. William Wolff Smith since February 1, 1923, regarding all trips outside of Washington.

Attached hereto you will find a summary of each trip made and a summarization of the total travel performed. The data furnished includes, by trips,. the period of travel, points of travel, purpose of travel, and cost of travel, the latter item being divided into the cost of transportation and Pullman, per diem, and other expenses.

The data indicates that Major Smith was on travel status during the period covered for a total of 562 days, the total cost involved being $7,510 .40.

You requested a special itemization of the trip performed to Paris. Major Smith made two trips to Europe during this period, and you will find inclosed photostat copies of the vouchers with supporting papers covering each of these trips.

The data submitted relative to Major Smith's travel is complete, with the exception of a trip made during the current month to Columbia, S. C., and Norfolk, Va. This trip was made in connection with war-risk litigation. The voucher has not as yet been submitted, and detailed information relative to this trip is, therefore. not available.

I trust that the information . submitted herewith presents the facts which you desire.

Very truly yours, FRANK T. HINES, Administrator.

Summary statement of travel, William Wolff Smith, period May 18, 1923, through March 11, 1932

Period

1923 May 18-23------------------------May 23-June 29_ ----------------A~. 22-Sept. 2-------------------

1923 Sept. 21-23------------------------0ct. 6-28.-----------------------Dec. 28-31------------------------

1924 Jan. 12-16 _______________________ _ May 17-25 _______________________ _

July 11-A ug. 11-------------------Sept. 12-2L _____________________ _

1925 Mar. 18--------------------------Apr. 1- 5.------------------------May 4-6--------------------------May 16-June 1..----------------Sept. 1-8. __ ---------------------Sept. 28--0ct. 12------------------0ct. 28--Nov. L------------------

1926 Mar. 24---------------------------

tf:.y ~t2i~~~~~~~~~~~--~--~--~--~~== == July H)-Aug. 10 __________________ _

Sept. 22---------------------------0ct. 8-15. ___ --------------------Dec. 3.-------------------------- .

1927 Jan. 7-12 .••• ---------------------Jan. 27-31. .... --------------------Apr. 20-May 16 __________________ _

Aug. 28-Sept. 4.-----------------Se:Pt. 9-0ct. 19 ...• ----------------

1928 May 15-21..----------------------July 9-12 ________________________ _ Oct. 2--21. _________ --------- _____ _ Nov. 22--24---------------------- -

1929 Jan. 12-16-------------------------Apr . 24--29.----------------------May 13-Jnne 4------------------Jnly 21-27-----------------------July 30--Aug. 2------------------Sept. 2-4.-----------------------Sept. 23-0ct. 7 _ ---------- -------Oct. 14--25.-----------------------Nov. 9---------------------------N ov. 12-20·----------------------Dec. 9-12·----------------------·-

1930 Mar. 25-Apr. 13.-----------------May 13-17------------------------June 29--July 6--------------------Aug. 9-13 ________________________ _

Trans· Num· portation

ber days an~-

Per diem

Other eJl)enses

6 $24.10 $16.00 26.00 29.00

$2.59 9.10 6.35

37 106.75 12 108.88

3 23 4

5 9 5

10

1 5 3

17 8

15 5

1 4

10 32 1 8 1

6 5

27 8

41

7 4

20 3

5 6

23 7 4 3

15 12 1 9 4

20 5 8 5

16.28 283.99 23.78

63.20 63.20

170. 00 66.05

2.14 48.27 40. 42

107 23 55. 86

116.92 58.44

11.00 90.00 15. 00

12. 60 21.03 5.35

18.00 5. 60 35.00 5. 60 20.00 ----------37.00 7. 50

18. 00 8.45 11.00 5.60 63 00 11 50 19.00 5.60 55.00 11.70 15.00 6._30

21.75 3. 00 ·---------40. 42 13. 00 5. 50

114. 43 37. 00 13.80 307. 29 145. 50 26. 83 21. 91 6. 00 3. 70 2 8. 85 45. 00 1. 00

7. 15 3. 00 1. 80

63.05 69.16

169.37 119.70 594.78

60.26 234.71 160. 16 ' 6.60

30. 00 27.00

153.00 40.50

196.00

34.50 150.00 70.50 13.50

8.15 5. 95

37.50 5.00

71.81

8. 95 20.23 17.05 100

70. 01 25. 50 6. 25 64. 31 28. 50 6. 55

132. 55 133. 50 33. 25 2 7. 50 33. 00 1. 50 18. 04 22. 50 1. 50 23. 78 15. 00 4. 00 39. 18 81. 00 3. 50 93. 11 63. ()() 8. 20

2. 22 ---------- ----------62.26 46.50 7. 85 23. 78 21. 00 5.. 70

131.86 63.20 56.09 42.03

112.50 22.50 30.00 24.00

16.80 4.85 4.95 5.30

Total

$42.69 141.85 144.23

39. 88 395. 02 44.13

86.80 103. 80 90.00

110.55

2.14 74.72 57 02

181.73 80.46

183.62 ' 79. 74

4. 75 58.92

165.23 • 479.62 31.61 54.85 11.95

101.20 102. 11 359.87 65.20

862.59

103.71 404.94 247.71 21.10

101.76 99.36

299.30 42.00 42.04 42.78

123.68 164.31

2.22 116.61 50.48

261.16 90.55 91.04 71.33

t Per diem and transportation allowed only for travel from London to Paris and return and for time consumed in travel and conferences.

.2 Gas and oiL

8980 ·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE APRIL 26 Summary statement v travel, William Wolff Smith, period May 18,

1923, through March 11, 1932----Continued

Period

1930 Aug. 17-26 _______________________ _

Sept. 27-0ct. 20-------------------Nov. 11-15 _______________________ _

1931 May 12-19 .. ---------------------June 12-20 .. ----------------------Sept. 16-29 _______________________ _

Nov. 16-30 •.. ---------------------1932

TransN=- portation days an~:n-

10 $76.94. 24 %30.95

5 63.20

8 67.38 9 216.19

14 97.75 15 76.37

Per diem

$54.00 132.00 22.50

40.50 52.50 67.50 55.00

Other expenses

$12.55 6.00 5.00

8.65 3.00

12.70 12.65

Total

$143.49 168. 95 90.70

116.53 71.69

177.95 144.02

Itemized schedule of travel expenses and other expenses incurred under stress of urgent or unforseen public necessity-Contd.

Date, 1927, and character of expenditure

Aug. 17. Baggage consisted of a trunk and two suit cases. The two latter were too heavy to carry. Receipts for the above travel have been lost and Jt is impracticable to secure _duplicates.

Amount

Transpor- Items tation other items than only t~~g~r-

TotaL--------------------------------····-------- $664.85 $24.. 00 ===='==== Mar. 8--1L _________________ ,: _____ _ 4 41.36 17.50 5.85 64.71 Total of column L--------------------------------------------- ---------- 664.85

TotaL._----_----.---••• ---. 562 ----1----~----t---- Total of column 2---------------------------------------------- ---------- 24.00 4, 435.16 2, 545.50 529. 74 7, 510.40

t Gas and oil.

Mr. BLANTON. The following is the expense voucher that William Wolff Smith turned in for his pleasure trip abroad, to attend the American Bar Association Convention, but much of which General Hines turned down and refused to allow, to wit:

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1. This form of voucher will be used in accounting for actual

necessary expenses of travel. Where an account is too large to be stated on this form, use continuation sheets, and fasten them together in the upper left-hand corner. Fill in the form on the back of this voucher, showing how transportation requests were used. Accounts must embrace each and every item of expenditure pertalning to the ·period for which the account is rendered.

2. Each account must be sworn to by the person rendering it, in the form of oath prescribed on the face of this form. Officers and employees traveling upon official business of the bureau, other than those receiving a per diem allowance, or mileage, in lieu of subsistence or actual expenses, under express provisions of law, are expected to travel as though on their personal business, and will be allowed their actual travel expenses, usual and essential to the ordinary comfort of travelers, as explained and embraced in the travel regulations of this bureau as published in General Order No. 18. The provisions of this order must be strictly observed in order to avoid suspensions and disallowances in the settlement of accounts. Copies of the order will be furnished upon application.

Itemized schedule of travel expenses and other expenses incurred under stress of urgent or unforeseen public necessity

Amount

Date, 1927, and character of expenditure Items Tra~por- other ~tton than Items transpor-only tation

July 11. Washington, D . C., to New York, N.Y., via Pennsyl-vania R. R. (Pullman included) __________________ _

Transfer of baggage, home to station, Washington._.-Tip to station porter, Washington ___________________ _

July 12 Tip to Pullman porter, New York_ __________________ _ Tip to station porter, New York _____________________ _ Transfer of baggage, station to hoteL ________________ _ Tip to hotel porter_ _________________________________ _ Transfer of baggage, hotel to dock ___ -- ---------------Tip to hotel porter. ----------- ----- -------- ----------Ti.P. to porter at dock ________________________________ _

July 12. Sailed steamship Berengaria New York to London __ _ Steamer chair ____________ ·------------------ ________ _ Tip to deck steward----------------------------------Tip to cabin steward _______________________________ _

July 19. Arrived in London (remained in London, July 19 to 26, 1924, inclusive).

July 27. Left London for Paris __ -----------------------------Jnly 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31, inclusive, spent in Paris in connec

tion with matters re French subrogation cases; re-imbursement for traveling expenses from July 27

$11. 91 1. 90 .25 .25 • 25 • 75 • 25 • 75 .25 .25

278.85 2. 00 5. 00 5. 00

35.00

to July 31, 1924, inclusive, at $4 per diem in lieu of subsistence.---------------------------------------- ---------- $20.00

Aug. 1. Left Paris for Naples ... -------------------------------------------------Aug. 7. Sailed from Naples for New York, steamship Duilio

(claimed fare from Paris to New York)_____________ 296.25 ----------

fillt?~li}~~~~===::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: i ~ :::::::::: Aug. 17. Arrived in New York-------------·-·········----------------------------

Tip to porter at dock--------------------------------- . 25 Transfer of baggage, dock to station__________________ 1. 00 Tip to station porter, New York._------------------- . 25 Left New York for Washington (Pennsylvania R. R.)_ 10.04 Tip to Pullman porter________________________________ • 25 Tip to station porter, Washington____________________ . 25 Transfer of baggage, station to home____________ ______ 1. 90 Reimbursement for traveling expenses July 17, 1925,

at $4 par diem in lieu or subsistence ________________ •••••••••• 4..00

TotaL·----------------------.--•• ---------------- ---- ------ 688.85

Mr. BLANTON. And here is a copy of General Hines's decision refusing to allow all of this account to William Wolff Smith, certifying that Smith went abroad for personal reasons to attend the American Bar Association Convention:

UNITED STATES VE'rE&AN's' BUREAU, OFFICE OF THE DmECTOR.

To AsSISTANT DmECTOR, Finance Service. From the DIRECTOR. Subject: Travel expenses-general counsel-re: Subrogation cases.

It would appear proper to me for the Government to stand the transportation expenses from London to Paris and return for the conferences referred to of July 28, 29, 30, and 31.

In view of the fact that the general counsel went abroad for the purpose of attending the meeting of the American Bar Association in London, and this attendance was for personal reasons, I do not feel justified in authorizing his transportation at Government expense to and from England.

FRANK T. HINEs, Director.

And here is the travel account for his other trip abroad that William Wolff Smith tried to get out of the Government, and did get the major part of it, to wit:

1927

Sept. 9

I ~

Sept. 10

Itemiz_ed schedule of travel and other expenses

Character of expenditure

Leave Washington, D. C., 12.25 a.m., arrive New York, N.Y. 6a. m.

Hotel porter (3 pieces) Washington, D. C, ____________________ _ Taxi to station from hotel, Washington, D. C ________________ _ Transfer of trunk: from Washington, D. 0., to New York City

dock (including 3 pieces baggage)------------------------ ----Station porter, tiP-------------------------------- _____________ _ Pullman porter, tiP-------------------------------------- _____ _ Station porter, New York CitY---------------------------------Taxi to hotel from station-------------------------------------Hotel porter, tip (arrival)-------------------------------------Tax:i to dock from hotel---------------------------------------Hotel, New York City (room)_--------------------------------Hotel porter Oeaving) ----------------------------- ___ -- ---- ----Transfer of trunk from boat to Cherbourg, France, to Paris ___ _ Dock porter (6 pieces) 25 cents each ___________________________ _

10 Leave New York City 10 a.m. steamship Leviathan. 16 On board Leviathan . 16 Arrive Cherbourg, France, 4.29 a. m .

Leave Cherbourg, France, 10.30 a. m. Arrive Paris, France, 4.20 p. m . Porter from boat to tender.------------------------------------Tender through customs to station ____ ________________________ _ Stateroom steward ______ -----------------_------- __ -------- ___ _ Dining-room steward .. __ --------------------------------------Deck steward _____ ----- ________ -----------------._----- _______ _ Cabin boy (shoe shine>-----------------------------------------Steamer chair_----------------------------------------------- __ Steamer rug _________ . __ .. ------ ____ . ____ -------- •••. ----- •• ___ .

Train porter (Pullman)_--------------------------------------Station porter (Paris)_-----------------------------------------Hotel porter (Paris) _______________________ . ___________________ _ Taxi from s~ation to hoteL------------------------------- _____ _

17 Taxi from hotel to Trocadero (convention hall), Paris; necessary on account of official papers being carried __ ------------------

18 ---- .d 0.--------------------------------------------------------19 ___ _ .do. ___ ----- _____________________ ----------- ___ . ___________ _ 20 ___ _ .do. __ --------- ••• _______________ -------- ___ ------- ________ _ 21 ____ .do. ___ ----------------------- ______ ---------------- _______ _ 22 ____ .do._------------------------------------------------------. 23 ____ ~do ________________________________________________________ _

24 ____ .do. ___ --------------------------------------- ____ ------ ___ _ 25-29 Paris, France.

29 Leave Paris 12 noon (personal business). Oct. 11 Arrive Paris 9 a.m.

Leave Paris 9.35 a.m. Taxi from hotel to railroad station, Paris ______________________ _ Hotel porter __ -------------------------------------------------Station porter._ ••• ----.---. __ -----••• ----•••• ------._--- __ • ___ _

Amount

$0.25 1.00

3. 30 . 25 . 25 .25

1. 00 .25

1.25 2. 50 .25

2.50 1.50

Franc& 20 20

$6.00 $5.00 $2.00 $1.00 $2.00 $1. ()()

Francs 10 10 40 30

16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16

30 40 10

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE Itemized. sch.edule of travel and other expenses-Continued

Character of expenditure

1927 Train porter (Pullman)_--------------------------------------Porter baggage station through customs _______________________ _ Customs to tender _____ ----------------------------------------Transfer of trunk from Paris to boat in Cherbourg (not in-

cluded in railroad ticket>-------------------------------------Oct. 11 R!l.ilroad furc Paris to Cherbourg, France ______________________ _ Leave Cherbourg 7.30 p. m.

12-17 On ste.unship Levhthan. Stateroom steward __ -------------------_----------------------Dining-room steward __________________________________________ _ Deck steward __________ --------- _______ --------- ______________ _ Cabin boy (shoe shine>-----------------------------------------Steamer chair--------------------------------------------------Steamer mg _______________ -------------------------------------

17 Arrive New York 10 a.m. • Dock porter (6 pieces>-----------------------------------------Transfer of trunk and baggage from dock to hotel, New York

City ______ -----------------------------------------------_ Tan, dock to hoteL ___________________________________________ _ Hotel port~r ______ ----- _______ --- ________ --- ___ --- __ -- _- ____ -__ _

18 New York City. 19 Leave New York City 12.40 a.m.

Hotel porter---------- ____ ----------------_----------_-----_----Station porter _____ ------ ___ -- ___ ------------_-_-_---_----------Taxi from hotel to station------------------------------------Pullman porter ___ ---------------------------------------------Arrive Washington, D. 0., 7.05 a.m. Taxi from station to hoteL------------------------------------Transfer of trunk and baggage _________________________________ _ Station porter __ -------------------------------____________ ---_ Hotel porter ___ -----------------------------------------------

~pt. 9 Per diem------------------------------------------------------10 To noon, $3; from noon to midnight, $3.5Q _____________________ _

ocf-2<f ~~ 1~ ~~g~flit~~~===================================== 12-16 5 days; at $7----------------------------------------------------

17 To 10 a.m., $3.50; from noon to midnight, $3-------------------18 Per diem ___________________ ------------------------------------19 _____ do ________ ------------·-------------------------------------

Baggage too heavy to carry (6 pieces).

Amount

t0.10 .20 .20

1. 42 10.00

6.00 5.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00

1. 50

3.00 1.50 .25

.25

.25 1.00 .25

LOO • 75 .25 .25

6.00 6. 50

129.50 3. 50

35.00 6. 50 6.00 3.00

Mr. BLANTON. And the following two documents executed by General Hines will throw some light to this trip abroad:

OCTOBER 21, 1927. Maj. WILLIAM WOLFF SMITH,

General Counsel United States Veterans' Bureau, Washington, D. C.

DEAR Sm: The travel order issued to you under date of August 2, 1927, is hereby amended for the purpose of • authorizing your detail in New York City, N.Y., for a period not to exceed two days !or the purpose of attending the ratifying convention of the American Legion, held in that city on October 18.

No additional transportation expenses are involved. Six dollars per diem in lieu of subsistence w1l1 be allowed (D. C.-Convention).

This travel order is issued in accordance with Public Act No. 600, making appropriations for the Executive Oftlce and sundry independent executive bureaus, etc., which states that not to exceed $4,000 may be expended by the Veterans' Bureau from the appropriation "Salaries and expenses, Veterans' Bureau, 1928," for the expenses, except membership fees, of employees detailed by the director to attend meetings of associations for the promotion of medical science and annual national conventions of such organizations as may be recognized by the director in the presentation or adjudication of claims under authority of section 500 of the World War veterans' act, as amended, including reimbursement to employees, for similar travel heretofore authorized, from the appropriation for the fiscal year in which the travel was_ performed.

Very truly yours, FRANK T. HINES, Director.

UNITED STATES VETERANs' BUREAU, Washington, November 3, 1927.

Maj. WILLIAM WoLFF SMITH, Room 1046, Arlington Building, Washington, D. C.

DEAR Sm: In the audit of your account for the period from September 9, 1927, to October 19, 1927, in which you claim $286, lt has been found necessary to make deductions in the aggregate of $18.19, as indicated below; therefore, your account has been approved in the sum of $267.81 instead of the amount claimed.

Prorate reduction to bring expenses within appropriation of $4,000.

For the director: HARoLD W. BREINING,

Assistant Director.

Mr. BLANTON. I want my colleagues to note that this William Wolff Smith, general counsel of the Veterans' Bureau, has been traveling all over the United States and Europe having a good time ever since he entered the bureau in 1923. And remember that he draws a salary of $9,000 per year and additional retired pay of $18.7.50 per month as· a disabled officer, when he had only 13 days' service before the arnust1ce. Note that he pays $5 t1ps on boats and $2 for

steamer chairs to recline in, and is generous with public money Congress gave the Veterans' Administration to use in granting relief to sick and disabled veterans.

I do want to commend the bureau for the fact that when he went to Europe they would not allow all of his expenses. They only allowed certain parts of same. General Hines cut the rest of it off, and I want to commend him for it. But he should not have allowed him to go at all.

It is ridiculous and absurd for every department of Government to let their little bureau chiefs travel all over the United States and Europe at Government expense. You will find that the travel account of almost every bureau chief or subbureau chief in the United States and out of it amounts, in some cases, to more than his salary.

This condition exists in every bureau; and if you will read the hearings of the subcommittees of the Committee on Appropriations in bringing out the various supply bills, you will find that the traveling-expense accounts that have been submitted are astounding. We must put a stronger limitation on them. They are going to banki'upt the Government if we do not stop them. I want you to carefully look over these travel accounts of William Wolff Smith.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. How is he getting along? How does he feel these days?

Mr. BLANTON. Well, he is taking up hospital space in Mount Alto Hospital now that some disabled veteran ought to be occupying. I have applications from bedridden veterans, veterans who saw the front with my colleague from New York [Mr. LAGuARDIA], who are aJ:Ilicted with wounds from shot and shell. They are bedridden now and can not get in a hospital and this great general counsel is occupying a room over there that they ought to have. He is not entitled to it by law and the Government ought not to be paying for it. If we made him go to a private hospital and pay his own expenses he would get well very quickly.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. We would at least find out whether he is well and able to perform his duties or is really sick.

Mr. BLANTON. When I was on the bench I was trying a murder case once, and I had a big bunch of veniremen summoned to pick the jury from, and there must have been 150 witnesses there, summoned from all over the State. Some of them were prominent physicians and surgeons who were away from their practice, and when the case was called the defendant was not there and his lawyers stated he was sick and could not be tried.

He was down at his home, 7 or 8 miles distant. They said he was unable to come to court, because he was very sick, and they produced a doctor's certificate. I called three of the best doctors in town and said, " You go down there, take a stretcher and the sheriff, and if the man is really sick, leave him there. But if you think he is simulating, if you think he is able to come to court, you bring him back," and they brought him into court on the stretcher. After the district attorney began the examination of witnesses he waked up and began to take an interest in the proceedings, and appeared as well as anybody. That is my idea of this man's trouble out to Mount Alto. He does not want to be tried. He does not want to answer some pertinent questions that I am going to ask him.

The Clerk read as follows: For any expense of the Library of Congress Trust Fund Board

not properly chargeable to the income of any trust fund held by the board, $500.

Mr. LUCE. l\1r. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word in order to call attention to the fact that once more the appropriation for the Library of Congress has received the approval of this body without criticism, barring only that of one minor function imposed upon it by Congress Itself.

Whenever one of the agencies of the Government succeeds year after year in thus fully meeting the approval of our Appropriating Committee, and of the House itself, it is testimony to the efficiency of the administration thereof that ought to have at least a word of recognition.

While I am on my feet I would like to get in the RECORD

another word of recognition. It may not be given in any

-8982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 official way but ought to be made as an acknowledgment of the gratitude of the Government for the beautiful building, with its wonderful collection, known as the Folger Shakespeare Library [applause], which was added formally to the attractions of the Capital a few days ago.

While the giver intrusted the care of this to the trustees of one of our colleges, it is in essence a gift to the Nation, a contribution to the culture of America that we may well here recognize with a word of thankfulness for the lofty spirit of the man who made a gift we shall always prize by reason of its adornment of the Capital, its contribution to scholarship, and its fitting tribute to the greatest of all the writers of the English language. [Applause.]

The Clerk read as follows: GovERNMENT PluNTING OFFICE

Public printing and binding: To provide the Public Printer with a working capital for the following purposes for the execution of printing, binding, lithographing, mapping, engraving, and other authorized work of the Government Printing Office for the various branches of the Government: For salaries of Public Printer, $10,000, and Deputy Public Printer, $7,500; for salaries, compensation, or wages of all necessary officers and employees additional to those herein appropriated for, including employees necessary to handle waste paper and condemned material for sale; to enable the Public Printer to comply with the provisions of law granting holidays and half holidays and Executive orders granting holidays and half holidays with pay to employees; to enable the Public Printer to comply with the provisions of law granting 30 days' annual leave to employees with pay; rent, fuel, gas, heat, electric current, gas and electric fixtures, bicycles, motor-propelled vehicles for the ~arriage of printing and printing supplies, and the maintenance, repair, and operation of the same, to be used only for official purposes, including operation, repair, and maintenance of motor-propelled passenger-carrying vehicles for official use of the officers of the Government Printing Office when in writing ordered by the Public Printer; freight, expressage, telegraph, and telephone service; furniture, typewriters, and carpets; traveling expenses; stationery, postage, and advertislng; directors, technical books, newspapers and magazines, and books of reference (not exceeding $500); adding and numbering machines, time stamps, and other machines of similar character; rubber boots, coats, and gloves; machinery (not exceeding $300,000); equipment, and for repairs to machinery, implements, and buildings, and for minor alterations to buildings: necessary equipment, maintenance, and supplies for the emergency room for the use of all employees in the Government Printing Office who may be taken suddenly ill or receive injury while on duty; other necessary contingent and miscellaneous items authorized by the Public Printer: Provided. That inks, glues, and other supplies manufactured by the Government Printing Office in connection with its work may be furnished to departments and other establishments of the Government upon requisition, and payment made from appropriations available therefor; for expenses authorized in writing by the Joint Committee on Printing for the inspection of printing and binding equipment, material, and supplies and Government printing plants in the District of Columbia or elsewhere (not exceeding $1,000); for salaries and expenses of preparing the semimonthly and session indexes of the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD under the direction of the Joint Committee on Printing (chief indexer at $3,480, 1 cataloguer at $3,180, 2 cataloguers at $2,460 each, and 1 cataloguer at $2,100); and for all the necessary labor, paper, materials, and equipment needed in the prosecution and delivery and mailing of the work; in all $3 ,000,000, of which $500,000 shall be lmmediately available, to which shall be charged the printing and binding authorized to be done for Congress, the printing and binding for use of the Government Printing Office, and printing and binding (not exceeding $2,000) for official use of the Architect of the Capi-

-tol when authorized by the Secretary of the Senate; in all to an amount not exceeding this sum.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word, and I do so to ask the chairman of the subcommittee a question. Are there many reductions made in appropriations this year-in the appropriation for the same activity in the last appropriation bill? I refer to the appropriations in the Government Printing Office.

Mr. SANDLIN. Not under the Printing Office. The appropriations for printing for the other departments are in other bills. These appropriations are for the legislative printing.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. In all the confusion, turmoil, excitement, noise, and stampede for economy we have heard and read in the newspapers that economies were going to be made in the public printing. I hope we have not arrived at that stage where it will be impossible for the people of the country to get any public documents on request. Does the gentleman know just how far this economy plan is going to

cut into the appropriation for the Government Printing Office?

Mr. SANDLIN. I can not give the gentleman the information. I am not a member of the Economy Committee. Their bill was not available until a short time ago.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. The gentleman will be on guard to see that as far as it is necessary the printing for the legislative branch and the printing for the Government will not be curtailed beyond necessity?

Mr. SANDLIN. I do not think there ought to be any economy that would interfere with the proper administration of any department.

The pro forma amendment was withdrawn. Mr. HARDY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the

last word. I think most of the Representatives do not understand the significance of this item which is carried in this bill. Last year $2,500,000 was carried and this year this has been raised to $3,000,000. The object of this item is to cover the cost of printing done for the legislative branches of the Congress. We have over here a publicprinting plant which does the printing for all departments of the Government. That plant is supposed to be operated at cost. All the work that goes through the plant is charged up at a certain figure, and all collected from it equals the amount paid out, with a profit of about $80,000 a year, which goes into the Treasury. It has been necessary to raise the amount of $2,500,000 to $3,000,000 because the smaller amount does not cover the cost of printing that we have had done for the Congress this year. I have been making some inquiry about this. In private industry a man who has a job of printing done wants to know what he is going to pay for the job before he gets it done.

In the Congress of the United States I have found nobody who has any supervision in any way, shape, or form over the amount of printing that is done for the Congress. A resolution is brought in authorizing a committee to have certain printing done. The chairman of that committee or the clerk sends the work to the Public Printing Office to be done. Nothing whatever is known about the cost of the job to be done. Cost has no determining factor with what is printed or how much. The result is that our printing bill mounts higher and higher each year. Of course, gentlemen have heard the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD talked about and its costing so much per page. It costs about $42 a page as it runs, and more when the copies are bound. That runs to about $600,000 in a session, and in a long session like this it will run nearer $750,000. The thought I have in mind is that no person, no committee, no authority in this Congress has ariything to say about how much printing shall be done or what the cost of the printing is.

Mr. SABATH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HARDY. Yes. Mr. SABATH. Under the rules of the House a certain

number of copies of each document is permitted to be printed. Does the gentleman maintain that the Public Printer prints any number that he desires in disregard of the rules and laws of the House?

Mr. HARDY. No; I do not refer to that at all. Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. That is all established by

a rule of the Joint Committee on Printing. Mr. HARDY. What I mean is how many pages of a docu

ment you are going to have printed. They do not consider the cost of these hearings before they are ordered. We do not consider the cost of anything here. We get done what we want done. Who sets the charges? The Public Printer, of course. He tries to set them at actual cost. The cost is high as printing goes, and there is a reason for this which I shall explain.

Mr. ARENTZ. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HARDY. Yes. Mr. ARENTZ. The other day the gentleman was speak

ing about the cost of hearings before the different committees and the amount of material that is inserted in some hearings which might j~t as well be left out. Along that line it seems to me that the committee, whether it is a subcom-

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8983 mittee or a full committee, should be able to audit its hearings and delete such portions as are either duplications or are useless, with the result that the argument the gentleman uses against some of these hearings would not lie. It certainly would be a saving in money if it is done.

I a.dmi.t that oftentimes these hearings contain a great deal of matter that is irrelevant and useless, but at the same time the committee could cut that down to a point where a.ll of the meat of the arguments would be in the hearings a.nd at the same time a saving effected.

Mr. HARDY. The gentleman is entirely right about it. I am not finding fault with any particular thing whatever, but I do want to call attention to the cost of things done for the Congress at the Public Printing Office. A page of 10-point type in hearings like the one I hold in my hand costs $5.22. If there are figures in it, it may cost $12 a page, and if there is heavy tabular work it will cost $21 a page. The average cost per page of hearings runs about $10.

I am going now to take the time to tell a few things about the public-printing plant. We have the finest jobprinting plant in the world, perhaps. We do about $14,-500,000 worth of printing annually in that shop, all done for Government activities. The printing plant cost about $4.,500,000 and the equipment has cost about $4,500,000. We have $9,000,000 invested in the plant. It occupies 22 acres of floor space. There are 404 typesetting machines, including 175linotypes; fast-running presses, every imaginable modem improvement and equipment that a printing plant could desire. They have laboratories for the testing of paper and materials, and they make their own printing ink. They have a fine modem photo-engraving plant for making cuts, and so forth. They have a large binding establishment. The plant is kept in the finest condition of any printing plant in the country. About $300,000 a year is spent for its improvement and in the replacement of materials. It employs 5,040 people. The best working conditions prevail there of any printing plant in the country. The job printers get from $1 to $1.05 an hour, the linotype printers $1.05 to $1.15 an hour with 15 per cent extra for night work, one and a half times that scale for Sundays and holiday work, 30 days' annual vacation, all of the holidays, and the Saturday afternoons off with pay. The Saturday afternoon off that we inaugurated last year cost $500,(}00 annually and added 6¥2 per cent to the cost of printing.

Jobs are under the civil service, and the retirement act gives the workers a feeling of security not felt in private industry.

Much of the work is done under high pressure, rush jobs that have to be gotten out regardless of cost. The business man back home is careful about having his work done so as not to have to pay extra for overtime for his work. Government officials and employees are not so careful. About 1,000 people are being employed at night-work rates at the public-printing plant at this time. This is what helps to make Government printing expensive.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment, which I have sent to the desk.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment by Mr. JoHNSON of Washington: Page 39, line 8,

strike out the period, insert a colon, and add the following: .. Provided, That all envelopes furnished for the speeches of Members shall be paid for at 10 per cent above cost."

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on that amendment.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I think it is a limitation. If the Members order speeches which are in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD to be printed for them in pamphlet form, the Members pay for those speeches. An effort was made some years ago by the Joint Committee on Printing to provide that the Members should also pay for the cheap manila envelope in which the speeches are placed.

Members are frequently charged that speeches are printed at Government expense. They are not. The envelope is given to the Member free of cost. It is a very small cost', it is true; but if the Members were obligated by an amendment like this to pay the trilling cost of the light-weight

manila envelopes in which the printed speeches are sent out, plus 10 per cent, they would be then free to say that the speeches were not printed at Government cost, and the Government would be the gainer 10 per cent above the cost of the envelopes. I had hoped that this would not be considered out of order. It will raise a little money for the Government. It will leave the Members of Congress in a correct position in their statements that they are printing speeches entirely at their own expense.

Only the other day I passed the minority or the majority room and I saw sacks and sacks and sacks of matter being sent out, undoubtedly political speeches made by Members. There should not be a cent of cost to the Government, as far as we can relieve the Government of this cost, in behalf of every Member who sends out speeches, whether he is engaged in an effort to retain his seat in the House of Representatives or to help the political party to which he belongs. I am quite serious about this, and I hope the amendment will be adopted. I do not care whether the saving to the Treasury is small or large. Probably it is simply one of these little leaks that no one watches.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Chairman, I urge the point of order.

Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Chairman, may we again have the amendment reported? ·

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will again report the amendment.

There was no objection. The Clerk again reported the amendment offered by Mr.

JoHNSON of Washington. Mr. LAGUARillA. Mr. Chairman, I press the point of

order. It is a limitation. Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Mr. Chairman, it is not

quite a limitation, but it is money saving. The CHAffiMAN. Does the gentleman make his point of

order? Mr. LAGUARDIA. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, it comes within the

third section of the Holman rule, which states that "or by reduction of the amount of money covered by the bill." On the face of it, it shows there will be a saving to the Treasury of the United States. Because of that fact, it is in order on this paragraph, which relates to the printing of envelopes as well as other printing for the use of Members of Congress and others.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Chairman, it does more than that. It provides for the sale of those envelopes at a profit. It is the same as if it provided for a fee for a service.

Mr. STAFFORD. To that extent it saves more for the Government. Under the provision of the Holman rule it is in order.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. It is so valuable for the membership that I hope the gentleman will not press the point of order.

The CHAIRMAN <Mr. WARREN). The Chair is ready to rule. The Chair does not think the amendment is germane, nor does the Chair think it comes within the meaning of the third provision of the Holman rule, because it does not seek to reduce an appropriation; but in the opinion of the Chair, it seeks to raise revenue.

Therefore the Chair will hold that it is not germane, and the point of order is sustained.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for three minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Washington?

There was no objection. Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Mr. Chairman, for a great

many years I served as a member of the Joint Committee on Printing. Back in the days when Champ Clark was Speaker and Woodrow Wilson was President a gentleman from Indiana, Mr. J:larnhart, brought out a printing reform bill from that committee. The rules in those days with regard to Calendar Wednesday permitted every single Wednesday in a. session to be used by one committee. That printing reform bill was used as a buffer on every Wednesday for two solid

8984 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 sessions against other legislation. It contained many desirable reforms. It would have saved millions of dollars. At one time, shortly after the armistice, by a rider to an appropriation bill, I saved six or seven million dollars in one year alone in an effort at printing reform. The method was changed completely.

Now, with reference to the amendment I have offered, I am sorry it is subject to a point of order, as at the moment I see no other way to offer it. If I buy $500 worth of my printed speeches made on this fioor and reported in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, perhaps with a small extension, should I not be able to pay $40 or $50 more for the manila envelopes as long as I am paying for the printing of the speech itself?

Mr. ARENTZ. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. I yield. Mr. ARENTZ. Does the gentleman not think the Mem

bers ought to pay for envelopes in which are sent out farm bulletins? If they must pay for the envelopes which contain their speeches, let us pay for all of them.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Oh, no. The answer to that is very simple. We authorized the distribution of certain Government documents, and they are printed by the Government, to addresses furnished by us on the theory that our constituents need the information in that bulletin. But if I send a speech, no one has asked me to send that speech. It is volunteered on my part. The speech may or may not convey some information of value, but it is mainly sent out in behalf of the Member. .

Mr. ARENTZ. No one asks you to send them a list of farm bulletins, do they? 1

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. And I do not do it, either, as a volunteer proposition.

Mr. ARENTZ. But some of us do. Mr. STEVENSON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. I yield. Mr. STEVENSON. I think the gentleman's amendment

is a very judicious one, except that I do not think the Members should be penalized by charging them 10 per cent profit.

Mr. SANDLIN. Let me suggest to the gentleman from Washington [Mr. JoHNSON] that I think a proper amendment to meet the situation would be the following: "Provided, That no funds appropriated herein shall be used to pay for envelopes to be used in sending out speeches."

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Will not the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee offer such an amendment himself?

Mr. SANDLIN. If the gentleman suggests s~ch an amendment, I shall accept it.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, to give the gentleman time to prepare his amendment, I move to strike out the last word.

Mr. Chairman, with all due regard to the criticism that is made by our friends the newspaper boys of Members sending out excerpts from the RECORD, I think it is of more benefit to the people of the United States than all the rest of the money that is spent by the Government. Members pay for the expense of printing the excerpts. And the small cost to the Government is negligible.

Suppose the big newspapers should get it in for our friend from New York [Mr. LAGUARDIA] because he voted with us to kill the sales tax, because he does this, or because he does that, and they play him up in an improper way before his people or before the peopl~ of the country. He has his redress. He can have reprints made of what he did say from the daily RECORD of this Congress and send it to the people, if he wants to pay for the printing of the speeches.

Suppose the dry people in the United States-and there are some of them outside of Congress as well as in, in lllinois and in other places-in Illinois on election day, in Illinois on primary day. [Laughter.] Suppose they get it in for our friend from New York because ·he is a wet and they played him up. He has got a right to show what his exact stand is. It is a very valuable right and of interest · to all of the people.

A very prominent newspaper reporter in the Capitol who reports for a whole string of papers told me the other day that they liked Senator SHEPPARD; that Senator SHEPPARD was one of the finest of fellows and was a personal friend, but their papers were wet and would not permit them to ever play him up in a proper way because he was an extreme dry. Is not that unfortunate for Senator SHEPPARD? But that situation does exist. The boys in the gallery take likes and dislikes to us because we are either for or against something they want. That is shown here and there in their little articles. They are human beings just like everybody else. We can not blame them; they are human. That is exemplified in the kind of articles they send out.

I used to think the Associated Press was the gospel. I believed everything I saw with "A. P." on it. Their representatives are splendid young fellows, but sometimes they take dislikes to us and their articles are colored by the way they feel at the time they write the articles. Associated Press dispatches were sent to the Dallas News and the San Antonio Express, two big papers in my State, about what once transpired here on the fioor, but the Associated Press article on that matter that appeared in my home paper was entirely different and did me a great injustice. When I checked the matter up with the papers it developed in this instance that when the national Associated Press article reached Dallas it was there rewritten and the part that went to my home was specially edited. That is the way they are handled.

The CONGRESSIONAL RECORD is a daily protection for every Member of Congress. It is a protection to the people the Members of Congress represent. Never take away the right of Congressmen to send excerpts from the RECORD to the people.

Did you know that I have had speeches of my colleagues printed at my own expense? I have had reprints made of speeches of different colleagues that struck me as being of outstanding value, that were in the interest of the people of this country, paid for it out of my pocket, and sent them to the people of the country. That is the way to let the people of the country know exactly what they want to know. Now, that the gentleman has his amendment ready, I will yield the fioor.

[Here the gavel fell.] Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I offer an

amendment. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. JoHNSON of Washington: Page 39,

line 8, strike out the period, insert a colon and add the folloWing: "Provided, That no funds appropriated herein shall be used to pay for envelopes in which speeches of Members are wrapped or mailed."

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment in that it implies an investigation on the part of the Public Printer to ascertain what goes into the envelopes.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. I reply to the point of order by stating that nothing is supposed to go into any franked envelope that is not an official statement from this RECORD.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Suppose we senq parts of the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD; what would happen in that case?

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair thinks the amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington is proper. The Chair overrules the point of order.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Mr. Chairman, may I say just a few words in support of the amendment? The cost of these envelopes in very large quantities will be very small. I imagine they can be bought now as low as 65 cents a thousand, and by paying that small charge the Members will relieve themselves of criticism, and it will be a trifling, petty charge.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. As the amendment is drawn, and we saw how hurriedly it was drawn, it does not do what the gentleman has in mind.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8985 I submit that we may draw envelopes to send out speeches

or any part of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. We may draw envelopes and send out any public document, but if we have reprints made-! do not know whether that is what the gentleman from Washington has in mind or not-of the GONGRESSIONAL RECORD, then it would seem that no part Of the funds appropriated shall be used for such envelopes.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. LAGUARDIA. Yes. Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. The gentleman says draw

envelopes. He means from the small stationery allowance? Mr. LAGUARDIA. No; I do not. I refer to manila en

velopes which are marked " Part of CONGRESSIONAL RECORD." I do not know what I will do to comply with the gentleman's requirements, unless I submit everything I send out to the Public Printer.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. I venture the assertion that the gentleman uses his stationery allowance in a month.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Oh, yes. Mr. SffiOVICH. How much would this save the Govern-

ment of the United States altogether? Mr. LAGUARDIA. I do not think it would be very much. Mr. SffiOVICH. Would it be $2,000 or $3,000? Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. It would be a great deal

more. Mr. SffiOVICH. How much? Mr. LAGUARDIA. The gentleman from Texas [Mr.

BLANTON] said it would not save the Government $5,000 a year.

Mr. SffiOVICH. How much does the gentleman from Texas say it would save?

Mr. BLANTON. It is such a bagatelle compared with other savings we might make. Let us go after the hundreds of Inillions of dollars of waste. Let us go after the big waste and not after these bagatelles.

Mr. ARENTZ. In our office we have a series of envelopes running from the Size of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD down to the smaller sizes. Does the gentleman refer to the medium-size envelopes or the smaller envelopes?

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Envelopes in which are placed the printed speeches of the Members, paid for by themselves, extracts from the RECORD which are sent to the public.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Now, gentlemen, I submit that after all we have certain responsibilities here as legislators. When I am requested to send out any part of the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD or the complete RECORD, or any public document, I do so as a part of my official duties. Therefore, I believe we should be provided with envelopes in which to send out those matters. I know there is a g-reat deal of timidity on the part of some of the Members by reason of this mania, this hysteria, and this insane drive for economy. I for one am not ashamed nor afraid. I am going to stand up and I am going to resist it because I -know the source from which it comes. I think it is wrong for the gentleman or anybody else to take the floor to-day and make a grand ... stand play on this question of envelopes. I do not know how other Members feel about it, but I say it is picayune, and I say it is unworthy of even receiving the attention of this House.

Mr. BLANTON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. LAGUARDIA. Yes. Mr. BLANTON. Right now I am getting several hundred

requests a day from people scattered here and there in all the States to send them copies of House Joint Resolution 355. Suppose I did not have the right to send them in Government envelopes? Suppose I had to pay for the envelopes in which to send them? I would not send them. Your constituents are writing me for them, and I send them. I paid to have extra copies of the resolution printed, but the Government ought to furnish the envelopes.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Every Member of Congress must go into his own pay to do some of the necessary research work connected with our legislative duties. Many Members specialize in certain branches of legislation and they get demands from all over the country and not alone from their own districts. I get mail from other districts, as the

gentleman from Texas stated, and other Members do. I get requests from all parts of the country as to matters in which I have taken an active interest. I could not afford to buy the envelopes necessary to send out all of the information that was requested of me with reference to the tax bill.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. If the gentleman will permit, I will ask unanimous consent to insert, after the words "speeches of Members, .. the words "printed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and reprinted."

Mr. LAGUARDIA. This is the third time we have had an amendment of this kind. Gentlemen, let us vote it down.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to modify my amendment.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Washington asks unanimous consent to modify his amendment. Is there objection?

Mr. SIROVICH. Mr. Chairman, I object. Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out

the last two words. I do not want to detain unduly the committee, but I would like to know precisely upon what· I am voting in connection with this proposition. I think it is a small matter and it may be there is no vast economy involved in the proposition, yet it does present a principle that might make an appeal to some members of the committee.

We have a stationery allowance or account of $125 a session, and I understand that when we draw these manila envelopes that are sent to our offices to send out bills and things of that sort, they are charged to this stationery account. Is that true?

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. I think not. Mr. BANKHEAD. I have not sent out a speech to my

district, except to two counties a few days ago, for 10 years, so I am not familiar with what goes on in this regard. I would like to have this explained so we will know exactly what is involved if the amendment should be agreed to.

I am not at all inclined to support the amendment unless it involves the proposition where a Member for political purposes wants to send out a vast number of speeches, aside from the employment of correspondence as to his usual official duties. In this event there may be some merit in the gentleman's suggestion that the Member ought to pay for it, inasmuch as it is a matter of promoting his personal preferment. Is that the question involved?

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Yes; that is it. Let me read the amendment as it would read if I may be permitted to amend it:

Provided, That no funds appropriated herein shall be used to pay for envelopes 1n which speeches of Members printed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and reprinted are wrapped or mailed.

This limits it entirely to paying the small cost of the envelope for the speeches that you do pay for.

Mr. STEVENSON. Mr. Chairman, how is this going to be determined? The printer or the people who wrap and mail these things would not wrap or mail them until the Member has some idea of how much the envelopes are going to cost.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. That is not it. The gentleman is the hard-working chairman of the Committee on Printing, and the gentleman knows that if a Member orders 1,000 or 5,000 or 20,000 speeches he gets an estimate of the cost and a bill and he pays the bill.

Mr. STEVENSON. And he would pay for these envelopes at the time he pays for the speeches?

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Yes; that is the whole purpose of the amendment.

Mr. STEVENSON. Has the gentleman taken out that provision that provided for payment of 10 per cent profit?

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. That is out of it. When he orders an estimate of the cost of the speeches, he would get an estimate on the cost of 'the cheap envelopes which ·the Government is now compelled to pay for.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Will the gentleman from Alabama yield? ·

Mr. BANKHEAD. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri. Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. The gentleman from Ala

bama said that the Members of the House have an allow-

8986 _CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 ance of $125 for stationery. If the economy bill passes, the gentleman can say that the Members formerly had that allowance.

Mr. BANKHEAD. Is that the contribution my friend desired to make to this debate?

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. The Economy Committee has edged in on the· stationery allowance and also on the mileage.

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington [Mr. JoHNsoN].

The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. JoHNSON of Washington) there were-ayes 6, noes 47.

So the amendment was rejected. The Clerk read as follows: No part of any money appropriated in this act shall be paid

to any person employed in the Government Printing Office while detailed for or performing service in any other executive branch of the public service of the United States unless such detail be authorized by law.

Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer a committee amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. SANDLIN: On page 41, after line 3,

insert the following new paragraph: " The Public Printer may continue the employment under his

Jurisdiction of Samuel Robinson, CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD messenger, notwithstanding the provisions of any act prohibiting his employment because of age."

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order. I think it would be rather charitable to really retire some of our good, old, faithful employees.

Mr. SANDLIN. Does not the gentleman think Sam is faithful?

Mr. STAFFORD. I like him as well as I do any person about the Capitol.

Mr. BLANTON. Oh, he is up here at nights until 1 o'clock.

Mr. STAFFORD. I sometimes think it would really be charitable to some of these old employees to really force them from the pay roll of the Government, so they may have a little retirement and not drop dead in their tracks.

Mr. SABATH. The gentleman knows that Sam is the youngest old man around the Capitol. ·

Mr. BANKHEAD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. I yield to the gentleman from Alabama,

and I recall the deserved tribute the gentleman from Ala-bama paid to the person under consideration. .

Mr. BANKHEAD. I want to say to the gentleman from Wisconsin that I agree with him that probably, as a general proposition, his attitude might be justified, but there is a matter not only of sentiment involved here with reference to this amendment, but this old man is peculiarly well acquainted with all the Members--

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to press the point of order, but the responsibility of his dropping dead or being struck by a passing automobile in his advancing years will not be upon me if I withdraw the point of order.

Mr. BLANTON. Sam would rather be struck dead than have his salary taken away from him.

Mr. STAFFORD. He would have retirement pay and good retirement pay.

I do not press the point of order, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the committee

amendment; The committee amendment was agreed to. The Clerk read as follows: In order to keep the expenditures for printing and binding for

the fiscal year 1933 within or under the appropriations for such fiscal year, the heads of the various executive departments and independent establishments are authorized to discontinue the printing of annual or special reports under their respective jurisdictions: Provided, That where the printing of such reports is discontinued the original copy thereof shall be kept on file in the omces of · the heads of the respective departments or independent establishments for public inspection.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I offer the following amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. Goss: Page 42, line 17, after the word

"inspection," insert a new paragraph as follows: "That in the expenditure of appropriations in this act each

contracting officer shall, unless in his discretion the interest of the Government will not permit, purchase or contract for within the limits of the United States, only articles of the growth, production, or manufacture of the United States, notwithstanding that such articles of the growth, production, or manufacture of the United States may cost more, 1f such excess of cost be not unreasonable."

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the amendment.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I offered the amendment to this appropriation bill because it appears in all the other bills. If there is a purchase of any large amount of supplies for the Government Printing Office, like paper and other things, they could carry out and function the same as other departments of· the Government. I recognize that it is subject to a point of order.

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. GOSS. I yield. Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman is quite well acquainted

with the fact that foreign sulphite is used in the manufacture of paper in this country.

Mr. GOSS. Yes. Mr. STAFFORD. Under this amendment, the American

mills, which buy raw Swedish sulphite pulp, would be barred from selling their product to the Government Print-ing Office. .

Mr. GOSS. Not at all; if the contracting officer feels that, in his discretion--

Mr. STAFFORD. In my city there are cardboard manufacturers who find it necessary to purchase foreign pulp: and they would be barred from contracting with the Government Printing Office to supply their manufactures.

Mr. GOSS. I think if the gentleman will examine my amendment, he will see that it does not.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I make the point of order that it is legislation on an appropriation bill.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair sustains the point of order. The Clerk read as follows: Purchases may be made from the foregoing appropriation under

the "Government Printing Office," as provided for in the printing act approved January 12, 1895, and without reference to section 4 of the act approved June 17, 1910 (U. S. C., title 41, sec. 7). concerning purchases for executive departments.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the paragraph. Mr. Chairman, I offered my amendment to the other paragraph because I thought that it would protect us better. I would like to hear from the chairman of the subcommittee.

Mr. SANDLIN. I made no point of order against the gentleman's amendment. The Government is making purchases of general supplies under the act of 1910, and this permits them to make the purchases without reference to that act.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order. The Clerk read as follows: SEc. 2. No part of the funds herein appropriated shall be used

for the maintenance or care of private vehicles.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, I make the point of order that there is no quorum present.

Mr. HARDY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment as a new section that I desire to offer following ooction 2.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, I make the point of order that there is no quorum present.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will state to the gentleman from Colorado that it was the purpose of the Chair at this time, the reading of the bill having been concluded down to the bottom of page 42, to recognize the gentleman from Louisiana to move that the committee do now rise.

Mr. STAFFORD. That will not prevent the gentleman from Colorado offering his amendment when the committee resumes its sessioxi.

The CHAIRMAN. It will not; and the Chair will recognize him for that purpose and for the purpose of having the amendment reported.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8987 Mr. HARDY. I think if the chairman of the subcommit

tee will permit the amendment to be offered now it will be a good deal better than to take it up to-morrow, when we have this large omnibus bill to consider.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order of no quorum.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Colorado offers an amendment, which the Clerk will report.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment by Mr. HARDY: Page 42, after line 25, insert a new

section, as follows: "SEc. 3. The salaries of Senators, Representatives, Delegates,

and Resident Commissioners shall be at the rate of $9,000 per annum during the fiscal year 1933."

Mr. BACON. Mr. Chairman, would it be in order to offer a substitute to that amendment? .

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman, of course, can offer a substitute; but the Chair suggests that the substitute be offered when the committee again resumes its session. The Chair stated that he was going to recognize the gentleman from Louisiana to move that the committee do now rise.

Mr. BACON. I ask unanimous consent that the substitute be read now for information.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection. the Clerk will read the substitute.

The Clerk read as follows: Substitute by Mr. BACON for the amendment offered by Mr.

HARDY: ' "After June 30, 1932, the compensation of Senators, Representa

tives in Congress, Delegates from the Territories, Resident Commissioners from Porto Rico, and Resident Commissioners from the Philippine Islands shall be at the rate of $7,500 per annum."

Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Chairman, I move that the committee do now rise.

The motion was agreed to. Accordingly the -committee rose; and the Speaker having

resumed the chair, Mr. WARREN, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that committee had had under consideration the bill H. R. 11267 and had come to no resolution thereon.

EVENING SESSION-RULES OF PROCEDURE The SPEAKER. Unanimous consent has been granted for

the consideration of bills unobjected to on the Private Calendar in the House as in the Committee of the Whole from 8 o'clock until 11 o'clock to-night, and it is the understanding of the Chair that they will be considered under the rules of the House in existence at the time that that consent was granted-that is, that one objection will be sufficient to prevent the consideration of a bill. The Chair thinks he should make this statement at this time because he is going to ask the gentleman from lllinois [Mr. RAINEY 1 to act as Speaker pro tempore to-night.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted as

follows: To Mr. IGoE, on account of illness. To Mr. CHAVEZ, for to-day, on account of illness.

RECESS Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House now

stand in recess until 8 o'clock to-night. The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 3 o'clock p.m.)

the House stood in recess until 8 o'clock p. m.

EVENING SESSION The recess having expired, the House was called to order

by the Speaker pro tempore, Mr. RAINEY, at 8 o'clock p.m. The SPEAKER pro tempore <Mr. RAINEY). Under unani

mous-consent agreement heretofore entered into, the House is now in session until 11 o'clock p. m. to-night for the purpose of considering bills, unobjected to, on the Private Calendar, commencing where the call left off on March 9.

May the present occupant of the chair suggest that from the point where the last call stopped to the end of this calendar there are 495 bills. On the 9th of March the

House remained in session until 10.30, and it was possible to call only 38 bills. The condition of the public business is such that it may be some time before there is another call of this calendar, and the present occupant of the chair desires to suggest to-night that if parties who object to bills will, as far as possible, make their objections and not reserve them, it will expedite business greatly; and if the proponents of bills desiring to explain their bills will ask permission to extend their remarks in the RECORD, and do it, we will be able to make some considerable progress to-night.

The Chair simply makes these suggestions. The Chair is powerless to carry them into effect, but he submits the matter to Members of the House and to their judgment and asks for their cooperation.

SENELMA WIRKKULA

Mr. PITI'ENGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to prefer a unanimous-consent request, by direction of the chairman of the Committee on Claims. The Senate passed on yesterday the bill H. R. 1770, with an amendment. By direction of the chairman of the Committee on Claims, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's desk the bill (H. R. 1770) for the relief of Senelma Wirkkula, also known as Selma Wirkkula, Alice Marie Wirkkula, and Bernice Elaine Wirkkula, with a Senate amendment and agree to the Senate amendment.

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

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, a question of order. Is the bill which the gentleman desires to call up the first bill on the Private Calendar?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. No. It is a bill which has already passed the House and the Senate, with a Senate amendment. The gentleman is asking for consideration of a House bill with a Senate amendment.

Mr. PITI'ENGER. The House passed the bill, H. R. 1770. When the Senate passed it, it placed on there the 10 per cent attorney's fee limitation, which was overlooked when the House passed the bill. There is no objection to the amendment. In fact, I want it on there.

Mr. STAFFORD. The only question is that we are not privileged, under the order of the House, to consider any business except bills on the Private Calendar. The gentleman can bring it up the first thing to-morrow morning.

Mr. PITTENGER. Well, it is a unanimous-consent request.

The SPEi\KER pro tempore. The Chair holds it is a unanimous-consent request. The House can do as it pleases.

Mr. STAFFORD. I have already examined the bill, and I understand the Senate amendment is the 10 per cent attorney's-fee clause. I shall not interpose any objection, but it violates the order of the House, which provided for consideration only of bills unobjected to on the Private Calendar after the star.

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

There was no objection. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The Clerk read the Senate amendment, as follows: Page 1, line 15, after "Minnesota," insert: ": Provided, That

no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection With said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notWithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conViction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000."

The Senate amendment was agreed to. ORDER OF BUSINESS

Mr. PARKS. Mr. Speaker, in view of what the Speaker has said, may I submit an inquiry?

The SP~ pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.

8988 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 Mr. PARKS. I understood it had already been agreed

that after to-night we were to have night sessions here to clear up this Private Calendar. Am I correct in that?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. There is no agreement as to that.

Mr. PARKS. I understood the statement had been made, as I read it in the RECORD that we were to have a session night after night until we cleared this calendar.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. No. That was to consider other business, the economy program and the legislative bill, but not the Private Calendar. The unanimous-consent request extended only to this evening, and then only until 11 o'clock.

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

FLORIAN FORD

The Clerk called the first bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 5940, for the relief of Florian Ford.

There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as fol-lows: ·

- . . Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and

he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any funds in- the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $175 to Florian Ford, in full settlement for his loss through the burning of his barn and other property, located on land under the police jurisdiction of the Crow Indian Agency, under authorization of Federal officers engaged in the capture of George Bolton on Octob~r 29, 1926.

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

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

MRS. G. A. BRENNAN The Clerk called the next bill on the Private Calendar,

H. R. 4244, for the relief of Mrs. G. A. Brennan. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the

present consideration of the bill? Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I object.

JUDD W. HULBERT The Clerk called the next bill on the Private Calendar,

H. R. 1921, for the relief of Judd W. Hulbert. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the

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

present consideration of the bill. · Mr. WEST. Will the gentleman reserve his objection? Mr. EATON of Colorado. I will reserve the objection. Mr. WEST. This bill for the relief of Mr. Hulbert is a

meritorious proposition. This bill has been reported before, and the case is one that has received considerable attention, and the facts in the case show that Mr. Judd W. Hulbert is entitled to the relief that is proposed in this bill. I would appreciate it if I may have an opportunity for my colleague, the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. DoXEY], who prepared the report on this bill at the last session, to make a statement in connection with it at this time.

Mr. DOXEY. I will ask the gentleman to state his objection if he will, please, so that if I can satisfy it I will be delighted to do so.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. The record shows that the bill has been here before; it has been objected to before. The man received settlement for his injuries, payable at the rate of $66.67 per month, and becoming dissatisfied with the amount of his monthly income, in 1922 he arranged for and obtained a lump-sum settlement of $2,542.73, which has been in his possession since April, 1922. Now he seeks to have the $66.67 reinstated and t~e full amount paid from the time the $2,542.73 would be paid him as if the $66.67 had been payable to him from April, 1922, to the present time.

He has had two adjudications and now wants a third adjudication. It seems entirely unfair to others who are in like circumstances for him to be permitted to make a guess in 1918, another guess in 1922, another guess in 1930 as to what he might be entitled to _receive as proper compensation for the injury suffered. ·

Mr. DOXEY. If the gentleman from Colorado will withhold his objection for a moment, I will brie:fly try to explain the cause of the guesses, as the gentleman terms them.

This old man was past 60 years of age when he received this injury. The only information of any kind that I have on it was obtained when I was a member of that committee. I am not now a member of that committee. As the chairman stated, we had quite extensive hearings. This bill was objected to at the last Congress, and after it was objected to the gentleman who objected;- after he ascertained the merits of the case, said he wished that he could withdraw his objection and that the bill could be passed.

Mr. Hulbert was awarded $66.67 by the Compensation Commission on account of an 80 per cent disability. According to the hearings and according to the record, this man was persuaded that the amount of his award was going to be reduced, although he was totally disabled; that his award was going to be reduced to $14 at once. We had witnesses before this subcommittee. We ferreted out the reasoa why the old man wanted a lump-sum settlement and we found it was due to rumors that his award was going to be cut down.

After he received the lump-sum settlement, which, under the law, couid be made him at that time, the committee determined that it was absolutely inadequate, that he had been imposed on, that he had been overreached, you might say, not so much by the committee but by possibly those who had advised him. Not only did we have Mr. Hulbert before us but we had the Government doctors examine him, and they reported unanimously that he was not only 80 per cent disabled but totally disabled.

The only relief this bill gives, which is a very nominal relief, is that of reinstating to the extent that he may draw the $66 less the amount of the lump sum paid him. That is the explanation of it. ·

Mr. O'CONNOR. Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. Mr. O'CONNOR. It is my impression that some of the

gentlemen in the House this evening are under the impression that we are operating under the old rule.

Mr. PATTERSON. We are, according to the statement of the Speaker.

Mr. STAFFORD. We will continue to operate under the old rule for some time.

Mr. O'CONNOR. I make the point of order that, the rule having been adopted on Saturday without reservation, the Private Calendar can not be considered under the old rule.

Mr. PARKS. But the agreement to have this night sesf:ion had been obtained prior to the adoption of that rule.

Mr. O'CONNOR. In that respect, whether or not an agreement was made as to the holding of the night session, on Saturday last we adopted a rule offered by the Rules Committee, of which I am a member, and with which rule I had considerable to do in offering suggested amendments--

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order. If we can not carry out the understanding under which we came here to-night, to consider these private bills, there is going to be no night session to-night. This afternoon the Speaker said that we would consider these bills under the old rule, which was in effect at the time we unanimously agreed to have this night session. If that is not going to be carried out, I am going to make a point of no quorum at this moment.

The SPEAKER pro -tempore. The Speaker made that statement, and the Chair has his statement before him.

Mr. BLANTON. That is the rule tmder which we are operating. That was the old rule in effect when we made this unanimous-consent agreement. We would not have granted unanimous consent if it had not been for the old rule, because we are not yet prepared to operate under this new rule. We are going to have to organize some machinery, and we are going to organize some machinery. We are going to stop all bad bills if we have to organize in the House to do it. ·

Mr. O'CONNOR. Mr. Speaker, I was not aware of the statement of the Speaker of the House this afternoon.. I

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8989 have no purpose in rising at this time except to see the regularly adopted rules of the House carried out. I know the gentleman from Texas has opposed this progressive rule, as we call it, for the consideration of the Private Calendar. I did want, however, to call the attention of the House to the fact that some day-and we have long waited that day-we must operate under this new rule. Now, if unknown to me the statement of the Speaker of the House this afternoon was that we are operating under the unanimous-consent agreement heretofore made, I withdraw my point of order.

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

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, much as I sympathize with this claimant and his claim, I must object in the interest of fairness to all. ·

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, we are operating under the old rule, are we not?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. We are. Mr. O'CONNOR. Mr. Speaker, to make it clear and so the

RECORD may show it at this point, I will state that we are now at this moment, at 8.14 p. m., on the 26th day of April, 1932, operating in violation of the rules of the House of Representatives.

Mr. BLANTON. I hope the Speaker will not so rule. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent

to proceed for two minutes. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I wish to say in -defense

of the position of the Speaker-in view of the criticism leveled against the ruling of the Speaker, as shown by the attitude of the gentleman· from New York here to-night-that the rule which was adopted late on Saturday, with hardly a corporal's guard present, provides that on Saturdays it shall be in order to consider bills on the Private Calendar. It does not prevent unanimous-consent agreements to consider bills unobjected to on the Private Calendar on ·any other day or at any night session, and that is the way we are proceeding to-night.

Mr. O'CONNOR. Mr. Speaker, nobody in this House respects the Speaker, his statements, or his submission of unanimous-consent requests to this House more than I do, and any criticism I make is not directed against the Speaker of this House; but I am saying that on Saturday last we adopted a rule which we have been struggling to adopt for years.

Mr. PARKS. Mr. Speaker, I ask for the regular order. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The regular order is, the

Clerk will call the next bill. GALLUS KERCHNER

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 2027, for the relief of the legal representatives of Gallus Kerchner, deceased.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I object. WILLIAM BARDEL

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 4408, for the relief of the estate of William Bardel.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I object. MRS. J. J. BRADSHAW

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 798, for the relief of Mrs. J. J. Bradshaw.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. There is a similar Senate bill on the Speaker's table.

Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to substitute the Senate bill for the House bill.

There being no objection, the Clerk read the Senate bill (S. 3095), as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he hereby is, authorized and directed to pay to J. J. Bradshaw and Addie C. Bradshaw, out of any money 1n the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $897 in full settlement of all claims against the Government for hospital and medical expenses and physical pain and suffering due to an injury Addie C. Bradshaw received by being struck by a United States naval ambulance 1n the city of Norfolk, Va., OJ?. or about September 10, 1927.

LXXV-566

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

A similar House bill (H. R. 798) was laid on the table. MAY L. MARSHALL, ADMINISTRATRIX

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 804, for the relief of May L. Marshall, administratrix of the estate of Jerry A. Litchfield.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, the Secretary of War recommends that the same action be taken in this case as was taken in the claim of George W. Boyer and that it be referred to a court. It seems to me this is the proper action to be taken in order that the matter may be adjudicated by the court. There was a companion case which was so submitted.

Mr. SNOW. The court fixed the responsibility. Mr. BLANTON. And how much damage was ascertained? Mr. SNOW. Whatever they claimed. Mr. BLANTON. Does not the gentleman from Maine

think we ought to take the same action in this case? Mr. SNOW. No; I think it would be very unfair to force

this widow to ~o into court and take the same action over again when the court has already decided that the United States was responsible for whatever damage there was, including damage to the barge.

Mr. BLANTON. Has the gentleman got that decision? Mr. SNOW. Yes; absolutely. Mr. BLANTON. I shall not raise any further objection. There being no obJeetion, the Clerk read the bill, as fol-

lows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and

he Is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated and in full settlement against the Government, the sum of $5,000 to May L. Mars~all. administratrix of the estate of Jerry A. Litchfield, who was killed on the night of December 7, 1925, in a collision between the barge Pine Grove and the highway bridge at Coinjock, N. C., while said bridge was owned and operated by the United States, and by the lowering of the draw of said bridge on the pilot house of the barge Pine Grove, in which said Jerry A. Litchfield ~as a passenger: Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act 1n excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be pa1d or delivered to. or received by, any agent or agents, a~torne~ or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connectiOn with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or. agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive, any sum of the amount appropriated 1n this · act 1n excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding.

SEc. 2. Any person violating the provisions o! this act shall be · deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviCtion thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

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

CHASE E. MULINEX

The Clerk called the next bill (H. R. 1230) for the relief of Chase E. Mulinex.

Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, as I understand the regulations of the department, they are allowed to credit these accounts up to $10,000 where there is any default or where any money is lost and the amount involved here is less than $1,000. With this precedent established in the Post Office Department, unless I can get some explanation of this matter, I shall object for the time being. .

Mr. STAFFORD. I hope the gentleman will withhold his objection.

Mr. PATTERSON. I withhold it. Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, we have passed a great num

ber of bills of this type where postmasters have had their funds in banks that failed, and they were only asking for the definite amount they had in the bank less the dividends that were paid them and with the assignment of remaining dividends to the United States. There is no question about this man being ow~d this money.

Mr. PATTERSON. Does not the Post Office Department have the right to credit this man in this amount, if they see

8990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--rHOUSE APRIL 26 tit to do so, and is not the limit larger than the amount involved in this bill?

Mr. BLACK. No. Mr. STAFFORD. I do not understand they have such

power. We have any number of bills of similar import here.

Mr. PATTERSON. They certainly do in cases of theft. Mr. BLACK. No. The department has recommended the

passage of this bilL :Mr. PATTERSON. I think they have the right to credit

his account, anyway. Mr. STAFFORD. No. Mr. PATTERSON. They have in the case of loss of post

age stamps by theft, for instance. Mr. STAFFORD. No; not in the case of loss of postage

stamps. Mr. BLACK. We have had a number of bills for all kinds

of cases of that sort. Mr. PATTERSON. But only up to a certain amount. Mr. STAFFORD. There is no general law pertaining to

any such policy. Mr. PATTERSON. No; no law, but a reglllation. Mr. STAFFORD. There could not be a regulation author

izing crediting such accounts in any amount unless it was based upon a law.

Mr. BLACK. I think the gentleman has made a good suggestion and there should be a law to that effect, but until we get a - general law I think we should pass these bills.

Mr. PATTERSON. I withdraw my objection in view of the explanation the gentleman has made.

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

Be it enacted, etc., That the Postmaster General be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to credit the accounts of Chase E. Mulinex, postmaster at Tolley, N. Dak., in the sum of $1,209.35, due the United States on account of the loss of postal funds resulting from the failure of the First National Bank of Tolley, Tolley, N. Dak.: Provided, That the said Chase E. Mulinex shall assign to the United States any and all claims he may have to dividends arising from the liquidation of said bank.

With the following committee amendment: In line 5 strike out "$1,209.35" and insert in lieu thereof

.. $529.33 in his postal account and in the sum· of $680.02 in his Treasury savings account."

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

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

DANIEL S. SCHAFFER CO. (INC.)

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 1419, for the relief of DanielS. Schaffer Co. Unc.).

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. BLANTON. I reserve the right to object. Mr. LINTIDCUM. Mr. Speaker, this is the claim of Daniel

S. Schaffer & Co. Unc.) who had three contracts for the building of Bancroft Hall and Isherwood Hall at the Naval Academy. After he made the subcontract with J. Henry Miller <Inc.), the principal contractor, the Government started to build other buildings at Holabird, Camp Meade, Dundalk, and so forth, and they let cost-plus contracts in these places, and through this action they fixed a higher wage than prevailed generally. The consequence was that the Schaffer Co. had to pay a higher scale of wages than :were paid at the time the contract was made.

Mr. BLANTON. The only point to be considered is whether or not, after we pass this bill, amended and reduced, according to the suggestion of the department, it will not be enlarged in another body. If the gentleman will

. assure us that he will see to it that the amount will not be raised somewhere else, that we will hold it to the amount the department suggests, I have no further. objection~

Mr. LINTHICUM. I will assure the gentleman that, so far as I can and so far as the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. GAMBRILL], whose bill it is, is concerned, we will do that.

Mr. BLANTON. And that if it is raised, you will bring it back and give us an opportunity to vote on it?

Mr. LINTHICUM. I certainly will. Mr. BLANTON .. With that assurance, I shall not object. Mr. PA'ITERSON. Reserving the right to object, I under-

stand that this party lost on account of the fact that he had to employ people at higher wages.

Mr. LINTHICUM. Yes. Mr. PA'ITERSON. Suppose that the wages had gone

down, did any of these parties ever pay anything back to the Government?

Mr. LINTHICUM. I never heard that they did, but I presume there are some people honest enough to do so. This matter was gone into thoroughly by the NavY Department and they have recommended the payment of this sum. They have cut off some $16,000 already. This company lost really $33,368.72.

Mr. STAFFORD. The difficulty I had in considering the bill after reading the report was whether Schaffer & Co. as subcontractors might not have had his damages included in the claim of the principal contractor, whose right was recognized under general law. The general law did not extend to subcontractors, but it did to the principal contractor. Where is there any evidence to show that this subcontractor did not receive his claim for damages through the principal contractor? .

Mr. LINTHICUM. I do not know whether the gentleman is acquainted with J. Henry Miller & Co., but they are large contractors, and they lost $48,000, which they never received from the Government, so far as I am aware. I am absolutely sure that this company did not get anything through J. Henry Miller <Inc.).

Mr. STAFFORD. Would the gentleman have any objection to the usual amendment with relation to attorney's fees?

Mr. LINTHICUM. I do not think there are any attorney's fees in this case; still, I have no objection.

Mr. STAFFORD. With that assurance, I withdraw the reservation of objection.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to substitute the bill S. 3270, an identical bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection. The Clerk read the Senate bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby

authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury of the United States not otherwise appropriated, to Daniel s. Schaffer Co. (Inc.) the sum of $17,765 to reimburse said Daniel s. Schaffer Co. (Inc.) for losses incurred by it during 1917 and 1918 as subcontractors for metal furring, lathing, plastering, and board lining in connection with the east and south wings of Bancroft Hall, of the grained arched ceiling of the mess hall and mess-hall extension of Bancroft Hall and of Isherwood Hall, both of said buildings forming a part of the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Md., the said contracts in connection therewith being known, respectively, as contracts Nos. 2416, 2416T, and 2437, and said sum is hereby appropriated.

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

The Clerk read as follows: Page 2, line 6, after the word •• appropriated," Insert: .. Pro

vided, That no part of the amount appropriated ln this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000."

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

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

THERESA M. SHEA

Tbe next business on the Private Calendar was the bill <H. R. 2033) for the relief of Theresa. M. Shea.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection?

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUS_E 8991 Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object,

so that the gentleman from New York [Mr. CELLER] may give me an explanation to some of the objections that I have. In the first place, I do not think this legislation ought to be considered until we have a statement from the claimant.

Mr. CELLER. The statement of the claimant is in the jacket of the bill.

Mr. MOUSER. If it is in the report, I have failed to find it.

Mr. GELLER. Last year when the bill was on the calendar it was objected to on the ground that there was no statement from the claimant in the record. I remedied that by requesting the statement, and she submitted the statement and it is in the papers in possession of the committee.

Mr. MOUSER. Is that statement attached to the report? Mr. CELLER. I do not know what happened to it in the

Claims Committee. It was submitted, and in that statement the woman outlined all the facts and circumstances of the accident. She was crossing this particular street at the intersection of what is known as Willoughby Avenue and Broadway, in the Borough of Brooklyn, in the city of New York, on this night about 10 o'clock. It was raining, and as she reached about the middle of the ·street, at the middle of the crosswalk, she was struck down by this truck, driven by somebody in the employ of the Post Office system, who did not sound his horn, who had no chains on his rear or front wheels, and who was driving at a rate of speed beyond the realm of caution. There was an eyewitness, a disinterested person, who brought out every fact the claimant indicated in her affidavit.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I shall ask that this bill be passed over without prejudice.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill will remain on the calendar if the gentleman objects, as a matter of course.

Mr. CELLER. This is a meritorious bill. We satisfied every objection that was raised. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. BLANTON] last year objected because it was not down to $2,000. We cut it down to $2,000. Mr. Box, then a Member from Texas, than whom there was no more distinguished and careful Member of the House, carefully sifted all of the evidence in the case and agreed to the claim being paid.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. MOUSER. Yes. Mr. BLANTON. Every objection that has been made here

by the gentleman from West Virginia and others of us has been met.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. BLANTON. The gentleman objected that there was

not a statement, and they got a statement from the claimant. Mr. MOUSER. The statement is not attached to the

report. Mr. BLANTON. It is in the files. They reduced it to

$2,000, which was demanded. It occurs to me that the bill ought to pass in its present form.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. CELLER. Yes. Mr. MOUSER. Has the gentleman any objection to an

amendment that this shall be in settlement of all claims against the Government?

Mr. CELLER. I shall gladly accept that amendment. Mr. MOUSER. As well as the usual attorneys' fees

amendment? Mr. CELLER. Yes. Mr. MOUSER. In view of the statement the gentleman

has made .I withdraw my reservation of objection. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to ob

ject. The difficulty I had at the last session, as shown by the report, that this claimant did not cross the thoroughfare, according to the report, at the intersection, but midway in the block, with a raised umbrella, and walked deliberately into a passing postal truck.

Mr. CELLER. That is what the driver said. Mr. STAFFORD. That is what the postmaster of Brook

lyn said of this accident.

Mr. CELLER. Oh, he simply repeated the story of his driver. You can not expect a man who drives a truck and runs down somebody to accept all of the blame. He was simply trying to excuse himself by making that statement. There is a statement here of 3t disinterested person.

Mr. STAFFORD. Yes; but she refused absolutely to give any testimony whatsoever to the post-office inSpector when he went there to get that testimony.

Mr. CELLER. That is not true. Mr. STAFFORD. It is according to the statement in

the report. Mr. CELLER. But the report is in error, because all of

the while the post-office authorities said there was no statement, the statement was in the record and was made as far back as 1920. I can give the gentleman my word for that, because I procured that statement from this Mrs. Coyle and put it in the papers of the Claims Committee. Why it was not seen by the department is beyond me; but because they

1 did not see it, they had no right to say that there was no statement. That is their negligence.

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman, upon his position as a Representative, states that there is such a statement and that this accident occurred at the crossing and not midway of the street?

Mr. CELLER. I do state that. Mr. STAFFORD. What does the statement of the claim

ant show? Mr. BLACK. That is not the statement of the claimant;

that is the statement of an eyewitness. Mr. CELLER. It is as I stated, that she was walking along

at the crosswalk and not in the middle of the block. Mr. STAFFORD. And from the gentleman's examination

of the facts he believes it was the fault of the postal chauffeur?

Mr. CELLER. I do. Mr. STAFFORD. I withdraw the reservation of the ob-

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

he 1s hereby, authorized and directed to pay to Theresa M. Shea, of Brooklyn, N. Y.; out _ of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $2,500 in compensation for injuries sustained on March 9, 1918, when struck and knocked down by a United States mail motor truck. -

With the following committee amendment: Page 1, line 6, strike out " $2,500 " and insert " $2,000."

The committee amendment was agreed to. Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following amend

ment, which I send to the desk. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment by Mr. MousER: Page 1, line 6, after the figures

"$2,000," insert the words "in full settlement of all cla.ims against the Government."

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following amend-

ment, which I send to the desk. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment by Mr. MousER: At the end of the btll insert: "Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act

1n excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on ac9ount of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000."

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

CHARLES C. BENNETT

The Clerk called the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 5235, for the relief of Charles C. Bennett.

.8992 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-_ HOUSE APRIL 26 The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the

present consideration of the bill? Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, reserving tne right to object,

the investigation shows negligence on the part of claimant. I may say, in view of the seriousness of the injury and the fact that, although the claimant was driving on the wrong side of the road, the operator of the Government vehicle suddenly turned across in front of claimant. If the gentleman will consent to an amendment reducing the amount of $5,000 to the actual amount of his expenses, namely, $2,174, I will have no objection. Otherwise I will be compelled to object.

Mr. SCHAFER. Mr. Speaker, in the last Congress I reported that bill after careful consideration and study of the evidence to the Claims Committee, which reported it unanimously. The War Department Board of Inquiry indicated that the Government was responsible by reason of the negligence of its agent, the driver of the car, and that board, after careful investigation and hearing, rendered a decision to reimburse Mr. Bennett in the amount of $2,174.60. Therefore it was not unreasonable for the committee to follow that evidence and that decision, together with the other facts, and recommend the usual amount that we pay in these cases, $5,000.

Mr. MOUSER. It is true the Government has already paid the claimant $565.75, simply recognizing a moral obligation. There is no evidence of negligence that would

·sustain a court of law to so instruct a jury. Mr. PATTERSON. Will the gentleman yield?

. Mr. MOUSER. I yield. Mr. PATTERSON. The statement of the evidence re

ferred to by the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. SCHAFER], who ~ooks very carefully . after these claims, is the thing that convinced me.

Mr. SCHAFER. I might state that the report of the Army Board, as incorporated on page 2 of this committee report, even recommended that the reimbursement be made to the claimant in the amount of $2,174.60.

Mr. MOPSER. I am willing to follow that recommendation, as I told the gentleman. · Mr. ·SCHAFER. · But the recommendation -of the Army Board, while establishing the liability of the Government, does not establish the amount that should be carried in the bill, because this House has uniformly adopted policies with reference to. the amounts to be carried in a bill· for these disabilities. I hope the gentleman will not try to overturn the unanimous report of the Committee on Claims, both in the last Congress and in this Congress, and try to overturn the findings of the Army Board as to liability. ' Mr. MOUSER. There are two bills on this calendar tonight that have been passed-by the Claims Committee, where the Government has already paid the money during the last session of Congress; so that does not mean anything.

Mr. PATTERSON. Reserving the right to object, will the gentleman accept an amendment reducing the per cent in the proviso from 20 to 10?

Mr. LAMBETH. No; I can not accept such an amendment.

Mr. MOUSER. I will ask the gentleman if he will accept the amendment I referred to? ·

Mr. LAMBETH. This is a case with which I am personally acquainted; and I think if the gentleman had studied the case as I have and as the members of the Claims Committee have, he would not · expect me to agree to any reduction in the amount.

Mr. SCHAFER. There is no use takiili up any more time. I shall not expect the gentleman to accept such an amendment, and I will not accept it as a member of the Claims Committee. We will soon have a chance under the ru1e recently adopted where one Member of this House will not prevent consideration of a meritorious claim like this.

I call for the regular order, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the

present consideration of the -bill? , Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I object.

FRANK BAGI.IONE

The Clerk called the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 4833, for the relief of Frank Baglione.


Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I think the amount is excessive. Originally the claimant entered a claim for $848, as shown by the report on page 2. He has already been paid $250. If the gentleman will accept an amendment making that amount $600, I will not object.

Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the author of the bill I would not feel warranted in accepting such a great cut. This boy is evidently permanently injured by an accident caused through no fault of his own.

Mr. MOUSER. There is no eviqence that this boy was permanently injured. He was attending schooL The only thing he claims is that he has headaches occasionally. His father is claiming the right to collect from the Government because of being away from his work several months. That is not a proper claim. It could not be considered in court.

Mr. BLACK. He was compelled to take care of this boy for 17 weeks. The mother could not do it. There is enough medical evidence to show that the boy is permanently injured.

Mr. MOUSER. There is-no evidence that he is permanently injured.

Mr. BLACK. Absolutely. Mr. STAFFORD. If the gentleman will yield, I came to

the same conclusion as the gentleman from Ohio, that there is no evidence in the report to show that this boy is permanently injured.

Mr. BLACK. The boy is continually having headaches, according to the report. He is doing his best to attend school.

Mr. STAFFORD. When I was in high school, I had continual headaches, but not the headaches I have at present.

Mr. BLACK. I insist the gentleman from Wisconsin has been giving headaches to all of us. [Laughter.] The evidence is that this boy is an ambitious boy, doing his best to get along in school, but he is having these headaches, which the doctors say are the result of this injury. I will not try to interpret all the medical terms in these various reports, but there is no doubt about it that for a long period of years this boy required medical attention. They say he is always having these headaches. I think the boy is entitled to the money. I will make a reasonable arrangement with the gentleman.

Mr. MOUSER. The original claim was $848, and he has been paid $250.

Mr. BLACK. That is the only amount that the department could take care of under the law. This is for the additional injury, the continuing injury, and for the 17 weeks that the father could not work.

Mr. MOUSER. I will be fair to the gentleman. Will he consent to make it $1,000?

Mr. BLACK. Make it $2,500. Mr. SCHAFER. Mr. Speaker, I call for the regular order;

there is no use bartering and trading over injuries. Mr. MOUSER. I object.

RESTITUTION OF EMPLOYEES OF POST OFFICE AT DETROIT, MICH.

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 5256, a bill for the restitution of employees of the post office at Detroit, Mich.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, it appears from the report that these supervisory ofiicials who are sought to be reimbursed under this bill were negligent in the performance of their duties. If such be the fact, what obligation is there upon the Government to relieve them, especially supervisory officials who fail to perform the duty of scrutinizing the work that is immediately before them?

M:r:. McLEOD. If the gentleman will read the last paragraph of the report by the Postmaster General, he will see that apparently there was no negligence.

Mr. ARENTZ. WilL the gentleman from Michigan yield? Mr. McLEOD. Certainly.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL EECORD-HOUSE 8993

Mr. ARENTZ. There have been a number of post-office bills; and in every case where there was a robbery or where there was an embezzlement, the post-office inspector has investigated and claimed that some of the men were responsible. They have not only collected from the bonding company, but they have hooked different clerks that may have been in contact with this embezzler from time to time, clerks who have absolutely nothing to do with the embezzlement.

Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Wisconsin is contributing a great deal through the careful scrutiny he gives these bills, but, as has been pointed out by the gentleman from Nevada, this practice on the part of the inspectors has grown to such an extent that it almost amounts to an abuse.

Mr. ARENTZ. The post-office inspector makes his investigation and seeks to fasten this onto clerks and assistant clerks, and the result is they are threatened with being fired if they do not pay. The purpose of this bill is to reimburse employees whose money has been taken.

Mr. McLEOD. There was one employee who refused to take the reduction in rank or contribute money. He was forced to take the reduction. The balance of them paid from $1,000 to $2,000.

Mr. STAFFORD. Is the gentleman satisfied that the supervisory official was not negligent in the performance of his duties? ·

Mr. McLEOD. I believe so. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reserva

tion of objection. There being no objection, the Clerk read the }?ill, as

follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and

be is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Peter Wiggle, the sum of $2,150.75: to Alden Catton, $1,821.92; to George D. Walker, $1,821.92; to James P. Murray, $1,000; to Charles C. Kellogg, $1,493.26; and to James P. Bacon, $1,000, these sums having been collected by the Post Office inspection department in the amounts named from these employees' personal funds to tnake up a shortage of funds embezzled by Charles E. Mussey, a clerk in the Detroit post office, and who committed suicide on August 17, 1926.

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

MARY MURNANE

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 5998, for the relief of Mary Murnane.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he 1s hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, and in full settlement against the Government, the sum of $609 to Mary Murnane, of New Haven, Conn., in compensation for injuries sustained January 19, 1926, in the city of New Haven, Conn., when struck by a United States Post Office Department motor vehicle: Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, with.; hold, or receive any sum <Qf the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

With the following committee amendment: Page 1, line 6, strike out "$609" and insert "$109."

The committee amendment was agreed to. The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time

was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to recon~ sider laid on the table. ALLOWANCE OF CERTAIN CLAIMS FOR EXTRA LABOR ABOVE THE

LEGAL DAY OF EIGHT HOURS AT CERTAIN NAVY YARDS

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 987, for the allowance of certain claims for extra labor above the legal day

of eight hours at certain navy yards certified by the Court of Claims.

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

ject, I want to call attention to the fact that this bill contains 91 pages. There are 1,377 claimants. It takes 89 printed pages to name all of the claimants and the different amounts they are to get. It involves $332,342.74 that will be taken out of the Treasury if this bill passes. I want to submit to our distinguished minority leader whether or not it is a wise policy to take up a bill of this stupendous magnitude and character, ]nvolving $332,342.74, and pass it in two minutes? There could be a dozen mistakes in the sets of 1,377 names of claimants in 89 pages and there could be a dozen mistakes in figuring out the amounts that are due each one of the 1,377 claimants. Does our distinguished minority leader, who used to run this House, think it is wise to take up a bill of this character and pass it in two minutes without even reading it?

Mr. SNELL. I will answer the gentleman if he will giw me time.

Mr. BLANTON. That is what I want to know. Mr. SNELL. In the first place, there is not a single claim

in this bill that has not been to the Court of Claims and been passed on.

Mr. BLANTON. How do we know they are correct? Mr. SNELL. They have been passed upon by the United

States Court of Claims. Every claim in this bill has been the:re.

Mr. BLANTON. Why, then, does not the Appropriations Committee make an appropriation to pay these claims?

Mr. SNELL. Because they have not been authorized, and that is the reason I am trying to get an authorization. As a matter of fact, I do not know a single claimant named in this bill; not a single claimant resides or votes in my district. ·

The only reason I have any interest in this bill is because a respectable workingman came to my office two or three years ago and said the Government is not fair to small claimants. I heard the gentleman's argument, and finally I said," Produce your proof." He came there and we spent an entire afternoon together in going over the matter. You can not find a black mark against these claimants from the beginning to the end, and what could I do except present these claims to the American Congress? This matter has been passed upon twice by the House, once by the Senate, and has been recommended and approved by every Secretary of the Navy for the last 40 years. Every one of these claims has been to the Court of Claims and passed upon by the Court of Claims. Now, the only question is: Is the Government going to pay small claimants or not? It does not make a bit of difference to me whether it is a claim of $2 or a claim of $200,000.

Mr. BLANTON. I want to say to the gentleman from New York that I am more anxious to pay small claimants than I am large ones. I never object to small claims.

Mr. SNELL. These are all small claims of workingmen in Brooklyn.

Mr. BLANTON. I want to say that these 1,377 claims-Mr. SNELL. There are only 600, as a matter of fact. Mr. BLANTON. This bill specifically names 1,377 claims. Mr. SNELL. Six hundred of them have been approved. Mr. BLANTON. I have carefully .counted them myself,

and there are 1,377 separate, distinct claimants named specifically in 89 pages of the bill.

Mr. SNELL. What difference does it make whether there are 6 or 600? These claims have been to the Court of Claims, and that court has passed on each individual claim.

Mr. BLANTON. The gentleman from Marion, Ohio, just called a~tention to the fact that we have on this Calendar two bills that were passed in the last Congress, and have been already paid.

Mr. MOUSER .• I say there are bills on this Calendar which have passed this House and the Senate and which have already been paid. If the gentleman from Texas does

8994 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE n~t see fit to object, as much a8 I dislike to do sci, l feel constrained to object. .

Mr. BLANTON. I would rather have the gentleman object, if he will do it. It would save me the trouble.

Mr. MOUSER. Involving, as it does, this large amount of money, I do not think it is proper legislation to be on the Private Calendar.

Mr. BLANTON. Then why does not the gentleman object to it and let us get it off of the Private Calendar.

M;. SNELL. How could it be considered otherwise? Mr. MOUSER. We could have a special rule for its

consideration.

a night session without reading, and without consideration, when it is 91 printed pages, and would take $332,342.74 out of the Treasury; hence I object to the bill

JAMES E. FRASER

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 1260. for the relief of James E. Fraser.

Mr. SNELL. You can not get a special rule for claims. That has never been done in the history of the Congress.

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman is mistaken about that. Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, it is refreshing to find a

new Member here who indicates that he will object to bad bills once in a while.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, here a certain sculptor entered into a contract with the Government to do certain work. There was delay connected with the inauguration of the work by reason of the building of the Memorial Bridge. I have had some difficulty in seeing wherein the Government should bear the expenst;

· to the extent of $17,000, for the delay in the construction of the Ericsson Memorial.

Mr. SNELL. There has not been a private · claim considered under a rule for years. I really do not care what you do with this bill. I am only interested in the principle in-volved here. - .

Mr. BLANTON. It is too big a bill to pass here in five minutes without reading and without proper consideration.

Mr. SNELL. That has nothing to do with it. If it is a proper bill and these claims are just, the bill should be passed.

Mr. MOUSER. These claims go back to 1878. Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, since no other Member

will object to the bill, I object. As I have unanimous consent to extend my remarks, I

want to give my reasons more clearly for objecting to this bill.

It embraces 91 printed pages. It seeks to pay 1,377 separate, distinct claims, with a specific amount for each claim, paid to different claimants, practically none of the amounts being the same. All of the amonnts aggregate $332,342.74, and if we pass this bill here to-night in two minutes without reading it and without debate, it will take out of the Treasury the stupendous sum of $332,342.74, to raise which in cash we will have to provide new items of taxation upon the already overtaxed people of the United States.

Let me mention just 2 of these 1,377 different claims, which are on page 87 of the bill. Here is one:

To Mary A. CUrran, executrix of the estate of John J. CUrran, deceased late claimant 1n his own right, and as sole heir of Murty Curran, deceased, $1,032.94. ·

Here is another: To Everett Gildersleeve, Emma Francis Hathaway, Josephine ,

Hewitt, and Ruth Clark, sole heirs of Samuel W. Gildersleeve, deceased, $873.33.

Mr. BACON. Mr. Speaker, may I say in reply to the gentleman that this contract was entered into on May 19, 1921, for a certain site. After the contract was entered into the Government changed its mind about the site and dillydallied around for three years. Meanwhile the contract was entered into for a specific cost. Through no fault of the sculptor, the man who contracted to build the fountain, but entirely through fault of the Government in delaying for three years the selection of the site, he sustained a loss of over $22,000. This bill is only for $17,000. So, in effect, he really contributes $5,000 to the cost of the memorial.

This biil has been before several Congresses and has received great attention from Colonel Grant, who makes a very strong recommendation in favor of the passage of the bill.

Mr. STAFFORD. With the statement of the gentleman from New York and after reading the report that the delay may h'ave taken away the profit of the sculptor, I shall not press the objection, if the gentleman agress to the customary attorney's fees amendment.

Mr. BACON. I agree to that. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reserva

tion of objection. There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as fol

lows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury 1s hereby

authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated and in full settlement against the Government, the sum of $17,003.37 to James E. Fraser, of New York City, N. Y., to compensate the said Fraser for losses swrered by him in the designing and ere-ction by the said Fraser of the Ericsson Memorial in the District of Columbia under his contract with the United States dated May 19, 1921, said memorial having been completed by the said Fraser and accepted by the United Stat~ November 29, 1927.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment off'ered by Mr. STAFFORD: In line 13, after "1927,"

insert a colon and the following: "Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated 1n this act

in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or To Ida M. Hoffacker, Susie A. Antrim, Margaret Meager, Fannie received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account Fort, Harry Tantum, Elmer Tantum, Fred Tantum, and Walter of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be Tantum, sole heirs of Henry N. Bennett, deceased, ~457.63. unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact,

Here is another one on page 80 of the bill:

Who here knows whether the above are "the sole heirs collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated. o! "D'e·nry N. Bennett, deceased," or the u sole heirs of Samuel . in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services ~ rendered 1n connection with said claim, any contract to the con

W. Gildersleeve, deceased," or "the sole heir of Murty Cur- trary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of ran deceased"? They might be, and they might not be the this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon consol; heirs. Remember, the above are just three claims. viction thereof shall be fined in any sum hot exceeding $1,000."

There are 1,374 other claims embraced in this 91-page bill, The amendment was agreed to. some payable to one person, and some of the claims payable The bill, as amended, was ordered to be engrossed and to numerous persons, and in many instances, to the pur- read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and ported sole heirs of persons deceased. a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

There are undoubtedly many errors and mistakes made regarding some at least of these 1,377 claims, and respecting some at least of these. 2,000 personages who are to be benefited by this $332,342~74 bill

Why a case in court involving $332,342.74 would ·be carefully tried by a bevy of good lawyers who would devote probably at least a week of hearing testimony.

These claims are 40 years old. It seems strang~ indeed, to me that if they are so meritorious they could not have been passed in the last 40 years.

I can not permit such a large bill, involving so many persons, and such a large amount of money, to be passed here at

JEANNETTE WEIR

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 1290, for the relief of Jeannette Weir.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I have carefully gone over the records in this case. My sympathy goes out to the family. The daughter of this woman ran into a truck and was killed. There was clearly no negligence on the part of the driver. However, due to the shock in the family because of the death of the child the mother suffered great mental anguish. One of her children died shortly after the accident. If the gentleman will agree

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8995 to amend the amount to $500, I am willing to permit the bill to go through without any objection on my part, purely on account of the circumsta;nces of the family.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, in the first place, the child is not dead--

Mr. MOUSER. One of the children in the family died. I do not mean to say it was this child that died.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. The gentleman ·is accepting the report of the Post Office Department. If the Post Office Department had made a report to the effect that the driver was responsible for this .child's injury, naturally, that man would have lost his position.

Mr. MOUSER. Yes. Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. The gentleman will find that

in any large city you can seldom get the Post Office Department to say that the driver is in any way responsible unless it happens, as very rarely happens, that the man is intoxicated.

Mr. MOUSER. There are other reports here where they say the driver was at fault.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. This child was crossing the street. There were no witnesses. The truck struck this child, and I am willing to admit that there is no evidence here to show that it was through the negligence of the Government employee, but there is no evidence to show that the child was responsible. There is some evidence in the file.

This bill has been before the House three times, first at $2,500, and I agreed to a reduction; second, at $2,000, and I agreed to another reduction, to $1,000, in the last Congress.

It has gone to the Senate twice; it has been cut down to a thousand dollars, and ·I can not agree to any further reduction.

Mr. MOUSER. Does the gentleman think that there is any evidence, as far as the record goes, that the driver of the Government truck was negligent?

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. I say no, as far as the report of the committee shows.

Mr. MOUSER. Then, there is no legal obligation on the part of the Government. There is nothing here but the mental anguish of the mother, and if the gentleman gets $500, that would seem to be liberal.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. As I have said, this claim has been twice reduced by the House, and I can not agree to a third reduction. The gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. ScHAFER] knows all about this claim.

Mr. SCHAFER. As the gentleman from Missouri states, the amount of the claim has been reduced, and if there had been positive evidence of negligence of the agent of the Government the amount recommended by the committee would have been $5,000. ·

Mr. MOUSER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. SCHAFER. Yes. Mr. MOUSER. Why does not the Claims Committee put

it in the report. There is nothing in the report showing any negligence at all.

Mr. SCHAFER. The Claims Committee can not print all of the evidence that is produced before the committee. On some bills the evidence is contained in a file 6 inches thick.

Mr. MOUSER. The Claims Committee could put in four or five lines showing a summary of the evidence.

Mr. SCHAFER. I suggest that the gentleman become a member of the Claims Committee, and one of us will resign.

Mr. MOUSER. Oh, the gentleman is unfair, we are trying to be helpful, and he is engaging in generalities. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my objection, and will offer an amendment later.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. I hope the gentleman will leave the $1,000 stand.

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

be is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $1,000, in full settlement of all claims against the Government of the United States, to Jeannette Weir for injuries sustained by being struck by a United States mall truck January 4, 1922. ·

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

The Clerk read as follows: ·Line 5, strike out the figures "$1,000 " and insert in lieu thereof

"$750."

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

amendment, the usual amendment relating to attorney's fees.

The Clerk read as follows: At the end of line 9, insert the following: "Provided, That no

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

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

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

R. W. DICKERSON The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R.

1292, to extend the benefits of the United States employees' compensation act to R. W. Dickerson.

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

ANNA LOHBECK The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R.

1322, for the relief of ~na Lohbeck. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. MOUSER. Reserving the right to object--Mr. STAFFORD. Reserving the right to object, the objec

tion I raised when the bill was up before was that the claimant was clearly at fault in this action.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. The reason the gentlemau from Wisconsin [Mr. STAFFORD] objected before is that he maintained the driver of the truck was not on duty. The gentleman diq not raise the question before that the claimant was at fault. There is nothing in the evidence to show that the claimant was at fault. On the contrary, it shows that the driver of the truck was at fault. The driver was on duty.

Mr. MOUSER. The gentleman from Missouri is correct in saying that the main question is whether the Army sergeant was ·acting in his line of duty.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. The driver was acting under instructions from his superior officer. The organization stationed at Jefferson Barracks, Mo., was at the rifle range, which is about 25 miles from the barracks. The men returned to the barracks, and when they arrived they discovered that they had left the cooking utensils at the rifle range. The officer ordered the sergeant back to· the rifle range to get them, and he was on his way back to the barracks when he struck this woman.

Mr. MOUSER. The question seems to grow out of whether or not he was within the line of his duty. In other words, in a court of law, if the master be held liable for the negligence of the servant, it will have to be shown that the servant was acting within the scope of his employment.

I find here a disagreement as to the actual facts, and I see that the same committee found that the sergeant did actually go on this mission with the knowledge of his superior officer-at least, he tacitly consented. I have a further question here as to whether or not in the gentleman's opinion $1,500 is excessive, considering the nature of the injury.

Mr. COCiffiAN of Missouri. This woman is permanently injured, and it is a deserving case and the bill should be passed.

Mr. SCHAFER. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman made a powerful argument in reference to the necessity of an agent

8996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-_ HOUSE APRIL 26 acting within the scope of his emploYment. I think we should all realize that when you serve in the Army or the Navy as an enlisted man you are subject to Army discipline, and you are within the scope of the Army employment 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and 365 days a year, and the gentleman from Ohio knows that from his experience in the .Army.

Mr. MOUSER. In view of the gentleman's explanatiop., as far as I am concerned, I withdraw my objection. The gentleman says that this woman is in need of nursing?

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. The evidence shows that the lady needs this money now that she is permanently injured.

Mr. MOUSER. I withdraw the reservation of objection. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation

of objection. The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and

he is hereby, authorized to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $1 ,500 to Anna Lohbeck as payment in full for personal injuries sustained by being struck by an automobile driven by Sergt. Wurrel Sturdivant, of th~ United States Army.

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

· ARTHUR H. TEEPLE

The next business on the Private Calendar was the bill (H. R. 1786) for the relief of Arthur H. Teeple.

There being no objection, the Clerk read as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the. Secretary of the Treasury be, and

he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money tn the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Arthur H. Teeple the sum of $154.10 to reimburse him for expenses incurred in procuring medical and hospital treatment as a result of injuries Incurred while engaged in mounted drill as a member of Troop E, One hundred and sixteenth Regiment Idaho National Guard Cavalry, at Camp John M. Regan. Boise, Idaho, June 15, 1927.

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

PINKIE OSBORNE

The next business on the Private Calendar was the bill <H. R. 2013) for the relief of Pinkie Osborne.

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

Be it e-nacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is her~by authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Pinkie Osborne, of Elizabethtown, Hardin County, Ky., the sum of $5,000 in full settlement of all claims against the United States for injuries arising out o! gunshot wound inflicted by the discharge of a machine gun in Elizabethtown on April 6, 1918: Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act shall be paid or delivered or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the ·provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined any sum not exceeding $1,000.

With the following committee amendment: Page 1, line 6, strike out .. $5,000 " and insert .. $2,500."

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

HEIRS OF HARRIS SMITH

The next business on the Private Calendar was the bill (H. R. 2038) for the relief of the heirs of Harris Smith.

Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that this bill be laid on the table, as the bill has already been passed~

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object in order to call attention to the facts in this case. I am not reflecting upon anybody, but this bill was reintroduced at this session of Congress, reported by the committee,

notwithstanding the fact it was passed during the last Congress and the money paid to the claimants. It seems to me there should be some check in the Claims Committee that would determine bills that are duplicated, which might escape the notice of the Committee of the Whole House or the Members of the House and result in a double payment by the Government.

Mr. BLACK. The chairman of the Committee on Claims called the attention of the House to this mistake. In fact, the bill might have passed if he had not done so.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill will be laid on the table.

HEDWIG GRASSMAN STEHN

The next business on the Private Calendar was the bill <H. R. 2042) for the relief of Hedwig Grassman Stehn.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right

to object in order to hear what the gentleman from New York has to say on behalf of the bill.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, this bill is the result of injuries sustained by this woman, who comes from Brooklyn. She was walking about 6 o'clock in the evening along what is known as the Shore Road in Brooklyn, adjoining what is known as Fort Hamilton. Numerous battleships and destroyers are apt to anchor right below the drive. An explosion occurred on the lighter Amackassin. As a result of the explosion the woman was hit on the left shoulder blade by some missile that came from the ship. A board of inquiry was had, composed of various Army officers attached to Fort. Hamilton.

They came to the following judgment, that the injury was. due to an explosion which toGk place on the United States Army steam lighter Amackassin as a re.Sult of fire on that vessel, while she lay at the dock at Fort Hamilton on December 5, 1920. That the injury was due to accident, not the fault of any officer or agent of the United States or any other person; that it was not the necessary result of military operations.

This, of course, was no accident due to any cause that could be attributed to the woman herself, who was peaceably walking along. It may be that there was no negligence on the part of the military authorities, but nevertheless the explosion occurred on this ship as a result of which this missile, this very large missile, as it was discovered later, lodged in her left shoulder. The injuries consisted of her right arm being broken, the right shoulder blade fractured, and bruises on the head. The injuries are believed to be permanent. As a result of that she is 50 per cent disabled.

The woman came down to see me some months ago, and I saw her. She insisted upon my seeing her injuries. She has in her left shoulder blade a huge hole about the size of two baseballs thrown together, right at the tip of the shoulder blade. She can not lift her arm. If corroboration is desired on that point, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. ScHAFER] also saw the injury, and I would ask the gentleman, in the interest of justice, to make a statement with reference to what he saw.

Mr. SCHAFER. I will state that I was a subcommittee that reported this bill in the prior Congress, and I had a little difficulty in the consideration of the bill because some lawyers from New York wanted to come down and see me. I told them I did not need to see them; that there was plenty of evidence in the folder. That is the reason why we have the 5 per cent attomey fee limitation.

The report indicates serious disabilities, and if the gentleman reads the physical condition as outlined therein, very carefully, I must corroborate the statement of my colleague that this woman is seriously injured. I have personally seen her.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Is $5,000 the correct amount? Mr. SCHAFER. Yes. That would be the amount, in the

judgment of the committee. Mr. EATON of Colorado. I withdraw my objection. Mr. SCHAFER. There are some of us who know that an

injury like this would draw ten or fifteen thousand dollars in a court of law. We have no opportunity to increase the

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8997 amount. Five thousr..nd dollars is only too little for an injury like this.

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

he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Hedwig Grassman Stehn the sum of $5,000 in full settlement of all claims against the Government of the United States resulting from serious permanent injuries due to the explosion of munitions on board the United States Government steam lighter Amackassin: Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 5 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 5 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

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

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. JOHN O'TOOLE

The Clerk called the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 2117, for the relief of John O'Toole.


Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Reserving the right to object--

Mr. STAFFORD. Reserving the right to object, this claim was heard prior to the compensation act of 1916, and I object.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Reserving the right to object---

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard. Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I ask for recog

nition. Mr. STAFFORD. I will withdraw the objection in order

to give the gentleman an opportunity to make an explanation.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Just a few minutes ago I had a bill on the calendar where a young man, Mr. Dickerson, lost his right hand in a machine at the Naval Academy. That man is now a resident of my district. He is married and has children. He was injured in 1916. The gentleman from Colorado [Mr. EAToN] objected to my bill. I asked for an opportunity to be heard and I did not even get that opportunity when objection was raised. Here is a bill introduced by the gentleman from Colorado, who objected to my bill, where the gentleman asks the same consideration for his constituent that I asked for mine and his constituent was injured in 1910. I would like to know from the gentleman from Colorado why he objected to my bill.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I want an ex

planation as to why the gentleman objected to my bill. Mr. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I shall have to

object, because I do not want any altercations on the floor to-night.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. I should like to know why the gentleman objected to my bill.

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman yield? Ml'. COCHRAN of Missouri. I yield. Mr. STAFFORD. Every bill that has been reported by the

Committee on Claims on the calendar at this Congress, seeking to extend the provisions of the employees' compensation act of 1916, for injuries occurring prior to that date, has been objected to, and the gentleman from Colorado is within his rights in objecting to the gentleman's bill, and this bill referred to an accident that occurred in 1910 and is objectionable for the same reason, and I object.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. So that is the reason the gentleman objected to my bill? Under the new rule I might be able to get consideration at a later date.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. That is all. There was no intention to deprive the gentleman _. from Missouri [Mr. COCHRAN] from explaining his bill. There have been anumber of bills of this type. None have passed. All have been objected to at this Seventy-second Congress when it appeared that the claimant was injured prior to the enactment of the employees' compensation act.

The SPEAKER pro tempo.re. Objection is heard. The Clerk will call the next bill.

ELSIE M. SEARS

The Clerk called the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 2189, for the relief of Elsie M. Sears.

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

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Elsie M. Sears, of Plymouth, Mass., the sum of $250 in full compensation for personal injuries and damage to her clothing as the result of an accident which she suffered, without negligence on her own part, on the 22d day of July, 1926, while in the Federal building in said Plymouth.

With the following committee amendment: In line 6, strike out " $250 " and insert in lieu thereof " $50!'

The committee amendment was agreed to. Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment, which

I have sent to the desk. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio

offers an amendment, which the Clerk will report. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment by Mr. MousER: In line 7, strike out the word

" compensation " and insert in lieu thereof " all claims against the Government."

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


WALTER E. SWITZER

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 2574, for the relief of Walter E. Switzer.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I object.

WALLACE E. ORDWAY

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 2777, for the relief of Wallace E. Ordway.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I object.

OWNERS OF STEAMSHIP " EXMOOR "

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 2841, for the relief of the owners of the steamship Exmoor.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $1,000 to Magee Bros. (Ltd.), of Philadelphia. Such sum represents the amount which was paid by them to the United States as security for an immigration fine on account of the landing from the steamship Exmoor at Philadelphia in June, 1924, of a Chinese seaman named Chow Fat, said sum having been declared forfeited by a decision of the Department of Labor dated August 23, 1924, but subsequently having been ordered paid back to them by a decision of the Department of Labor dated November 17, 1924, but which amount had been covered into the Treasury of the United States by the collector of customs at Philadelphia less the amount of expenses incurred.

With the following committee amendments: Page 1, line 5, strike out "$1,000" and insert in lieu thereof

"$950.33." Page 2, beginning with line 2, after the figures "1924,'' strike

out the remainder of the bill and insert " less the amount of the expense incurred."

The committee amendments were agreed to. The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third

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

8998 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 LAUREN GOSNEY

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 3375, for the relief of Lauren Gosney.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that

this bill be laid on the table. Mr. MOUSER. This is one of the claimants that has

already been paid. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the bill

will be laid on the table. There was no objection.

DAVID C. JEFFCOAT

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 3467, for the relief of David C. Jeffcoat.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman withhold his objec

tion? Mr. EATON of Colorado. I will reserve the right to ob-

ject. Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. EATON of Colorado. Yes. Mr. STAFFORD. As I read this bill the claimant seeks

the privileges of the employees' compensation act for an injury that occurred subsequent to the enactment of that law. I have prepared an amendment, although I do not know that it will be acceptable to the author of the bill. Perhaps it will remove the objection of the gentleman from Colorado. Perhaps the gentleman from Colorado is predicating his objection upon the fact that this injury occurred prior to the enactment of the employees' compensation act. I have prepared the following amendment as a substitute:

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

is hereby authorized to consider and determine the claim of David C. Jeffcoat as to whether he suffered an injury while emptoyed in the Postal Service compensable under the employees' compensation act, and occurring after the date of its enactment, in the same manner and to the same extent as if said David C. Jeffcoat had made application for the benefits of said act within the 1-year period required by sections 17 and 20: Provided, That no benefit shall accure prior to the enactment of this act."

Would that remove the objection of the gentleman from Colorado?

The purpose of this substitute is to vest in the Employees' Compensation Commission authority to ascertain whether the injury occurred after the enactment of the employees' compensation act; and if so, whether it is a compensable injury under that act.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. I was not mistaken as to the date this injury occurred. If it is the sense of the House that this type of claimant should be permitted to have compensation and that the statute of limitations should be waived, I think now is as good a time as any for the House to express itself and permit a bill of this type to be passed. I do not stand alone in the objection. I have not been alone in the objection. There are probably 19 bills of the same type which have been considered at preceding sessions to which objection has been made.

Mr. STAFFORD. If the gentleman from Colorado will permit, as I understand the legislative policy of those who have been called upon to review all bills reported on the Private Calendar, it is that if an injury has occurred subsequent to the enactment of the employees' compensation act and, perchance, the claimant did not know, or waived, his right to file his claim within a year following the accident, that we will vest in the Employees' Compensation Commission authority to investigate that claim to see whether the injury occurred under the terms of that act; and if so, to grant him relief from the date of the passage of the relief act.

That was the established policy in the last Congress, and although some bills were objected to at an earlier session by some Member of the House, I think those bills will be reached again and we will have a uniform policy to which, I believe, the gentleman will subscribe whereby a Government employee who has unwittingly failed to file his claim within the statutory 1-year period may have his day in

court. Perchance, he did not know that such a law exists, and because of that he should not be barred from the rights which the Government says he should have because of an injury which he suffered while in the service of the Government. The purpose of the proposed substitute is to insure that the injury occurred after the enactment of the workmen's compensation act of September, 1916.

Mr. PATTERSON. If the gentleman will yield, I want to support what the gentleman from Wisconsin has said. That was the policy which was adopted toward the close of the last Congress. If the substitute proposed by the gentleman from Wisconsin should be adopted, I think this would be a good bill and other bills in the same class would be good bills. I believe we should allow these people to have their day in court, where these injuries occured after the passage of the act.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Of course, the gentleman understands this is not a personal matter with me. From the beginning of this session it has been my personal view that this type of bill ought to be allowed to pass without objection. I am very glad that the gentleman and others who have spoken have suggested this policy, so that bills of this type which are reported by the Committee on Claims can be given favorable consideration, bills where the only right that has not been availed of by the claimant is that he did not come in before the statute of limitations expired.

Mr. PATTERSON. Let me say further to the gentleman that the distinguished gentleman from West Virginia, the minority whip of this House-than whom there is no more earnest or able Member-made a study of these bills. H.t made several speeches in regard to the matter and made quite a contribution. He came to the conclusion that these people should have their day in court.

Mr. SCHAFER. I now have a case pending before my subcommittee of the Claims Committee where a nurse, physically fit 100 per cent at the time she entered the Government service, was employed in a tuberculosis hospital taking care of active cases of tuberculosis. She came in contact with .these active cases in the course of her employment, and she contracted an active pulmonary tuberculosis while still on the pay roll. She did not know she could file a claim with the United States Compensation Commission, and her old dependent father and mother will be prevented from getting what is due them if the House is going to adopt the policy of not extending the statute of limitations. There is no use of the Committee on Claims spending any time in considering that bill if it is to be the policy of the House not to extend the statute of limitations under these justifiable circumstances.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Will the gentleman yield further?

Mr. STAFFORD. Yes. Mr. EATON of Colorado. Would it not be in order at the

present time to ask unanimous consent that there be reinstated on this calendar, immediately after the star for the next consideration of bills on the Private Calendar, the several cases of this type which during this session have heretofore been passed over, so that every one of these cases would have exactly the same consideration by this House which you are now proposing to give to this case? I submit it is only fair to each one of these claimants that this be done.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. EATON] has called attention to a fact that I think deserves the attention of the present Speaker as majority leader. Early in the consideration of this calendar objection was made by a certain Member of the House, who was ignorant of the policy that had been established by those who pass on these bills in review, as to giving a priv.ilege to those claimants who were ignorant of the act or who suffered injury subsequent to the enactment of the employees' compensation act. I hope at some future time, if we are going to have another night to consider bills on the Private Calendar unobjected to, and I hope there will be many, that it may be your pleasure to reinstate these eight or nine bills that were unwittingly objected to, similar in purport to the bill

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8999 that is now going to be considered without objection. I will give the present Speaker a list of these bills so he may consider asking, at some future time, the consideration of the bills that were objected to, which, as the gentleman from Colorado has said, should be passed as the present one is about to be passed.


Be it enacted, etc., That the United States Employees' Compensation Commission be, and it is hereby, authorized and directed to receive the claim of David C. Jeffcoat as if it had been filed within the time specified by the compensation act of September 7, 1916, as amended. Any payments to be made as compensation shall begin with the date of the passage of this act.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer a substitute amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFORD: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the fol

lowing: "That the United States Employees' Compensation Commis

sion is hereby authorized to consider and determine the claim of David C. Jeffcoat as to whether he suffered an injury while employed in the Postal Service compensable under the employees' compensation act and occurring after the date of its enactment, in the same manner and to the same extent as if said David C. Jeffcoat had made application for the benefits of said act wi~hin the 1-year period required by sections 17 and 20 thereof: Provided, That no benefits shall accrue prior to the enactment of this act."

The amendment was agreed to. The bill, as a~ended, was ordered to be engrossed and


ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAU.WAY CO.

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 3582, for the relief of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.

Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object.

Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, this bill is for the relief of a railroad which, by understanding with the Government, reconstructed some revetment work that had been washed by a flood of the river. The department recommends this bill. There is no doubt about the understanding; there is no doubt about the construction; there is no doubt about the Government engineers passing upon it; there is no doubt about the price of the job. The claim is here for one-fourth of the entire job, and it comes here with the approval and recommendation of the department. It is a just claim. If the railroad company had not done this, the Government would have had to do the job. It is a fair and just and reasonable claim, and I think it ought to pass. I do not think there is any question about the claim.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay to the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., out of any money in the United States Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $7,420.83 as a reimbursement to the said railway company of one-fourth of the cost and expense of work performed in 1923 in protecting the bank of the Missouri River near Eton, Mo., the same having been done by the railway company at its own cost and expense to meet an emergency, at the request of the engineer officers of the United States and upon assurances of said offi.cers that one-fourth of the cost of the work would be borne by the United States.


-Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay William Knourek, deputy collector of internal revenue of the State of illinois, the sum of $421, being the value of internal revenue stamps charged to him and stolen at Chicago, lll., in May, 1919.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment, in line 5, after the word "Illinois," insert "out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated."

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFORD: In line 5, after the word

" lllinois," insert " out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated."

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

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

LELA B. SMITH

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 3811, for the relief of Lela B. Smith.

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

to know why it is necessary to pass this bill; is she not entitled to something under the law?

Mr. CLAGUE. No; she is not entitled to it; that is, there is no law providing for it.

Mr. PATI'ERSON. Why should we make a special act for this woman?

Mr. CLAGUE. We have passed a dozen similar bills in the last few years.

Mr. M0USER. This is the customary amount allowed in these cases.

Mr. PATTERSON. Is there a certain amount allowed under the law?

Mr. MOUS~ No; nothing under the law, except what they may get in the form of a gratuity.

Mr. PATTERSON. Is she entitled to a pension? Mr. CLAGUE. No; this will be in full for all claims. Mr. PATTERSON. This man was a lieutenant. Mr. CLAGUE. He was a lieutenant in the Reserve Corps~

and was at Marshall Field when the accident occurred. Mr. MOUSER. He left a widow and five children with

practically no property. This amount is equivalent to six menths' pay, and is the amount which is customary to allow in these cases. He was killed in the line of duty, and due to no fault of his own.

Mr. PATTERSON. I have no objection. The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc .. That the Secretary of the Treasury is author

ized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Lela B. Smith, widow of Harry A. Smith, late lieutenant, Air Corps Reserve, United States Army, who was kllled in an airplane accident while in the line of duty at Marshall Field. Fort Riley, Kans., on October 1, 1929, the sum of $1,181.22, being a gratuity equal to six months' pay at the rate received by Lieut. Harry A. Smith at the time of his death.

With the following committee amendment: Line 6, before the word "lieutenant," insert the word "second ...

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

amendment. The Clerk read as follows:

With the following committee amendment: At the end of the bill strike out the period, insert a comma, and Page 2, line a, strike out the words " at the request of the add the following: " being in full settlement of all claims against

engineer offi.cers o! the trnited States and upon assurances of the Government of the United States." said offi.cers" and insert "with an understanding. The amendment was agreed to.

The committee amendment was agreed to. Mr. MOUSER. Now, Mr. Speaker, I offer the following The bill, as amended, was ordered to be engrossed and attorney fee amendment.

read a third time, was read a third time, and passed, and a The Clerk read as follows: motion to reconsider laid on the table. Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act

in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or WILLIAM KNOUREK received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account

The Clerk called the next bill. H. R. 3693, for the relief of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shAll be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact.

of Will1am Knourek. collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount approprlated.

9000 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 in this act in excess of 10 per cent ~hereof _on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

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

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

HARRY W. WARD

The Clerk read the nm~t bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 3812, for the relief of the estate of Harry W. Ward, deceased.

There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he

ls hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $75.41 to the estate of Harry W. Ward, deceased, of Redwood Falls, Minn., for actual financial loss sustained by Harry W. Ward, without negligence on his part, through refund already made to the Post Office Department, where.in postal funds for which he was responsible as postmaster at Redwood Falls, Minn., were on deposit ln the First National Bank at Redwood Falls, Minn., which said bank failed under date of ·July 21, 1925, and was liquidated, none of said sum being repaid from the assets of said bank.

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

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. W. A. BLANKENSHIP

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 4071, for the relief of W. A. BlankenShip.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. PATTERSON. Reserving the right to object, accord

ing to the report of the Secretary of Agriculture, · this man suffered no loss.

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Let me explain to the gentleman. This bill passed the last CongresS too late to be considered by the Senate. The fact is this .man's claim was $2,000. I forced him to strike out his claim for injury to his crops and injuries to his family. The situation is this: This amount of this bill has been reduced to the pitiable sum of $350.

Mr. PATIERSON. The Department of Agriculture takes the position, after investigation--

Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. I think these investigations have cost more than the $350. They stated that during the first session of the Seventieth Congress an identical bill was introduced, and so on, and on a request of the Committee on Claims the department made a report thereon and forwarded copies of the correspondence. The department's view, as stated in the letter, is that Blankenship may be entitled to $100; but they said that if it should be established that the slide would continue, he should be allowed an additional sum, not exceeding $350. I have seen this, the place and the damage, which in my opinion was fully $2,000, but I have not asked for any more special inquiries by Government agents. This man's bouse is damaged because the Government was building a public highway there and diverted a creek so that the ereek undermined his house, and the diverted water entered his meadow and changed his meadow into a swamp. I have seen the man's home some years ago; and so far as the house was concerned, not a , door would shut properly nor could a window be opened.

Mr. STAFFORD. I am sure the gentleman from Alabama just wanted to hear the explanation of the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. PATTERSON. Ob, I am not_ so sure about that. I ask the gentleman from New. York [Mr. BLACK] to make a statement.

Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman ought to agree to this. The department recognizes $350 in addition to the $100, provided there is satisfactory evidence warranting the payment of the $350. The Committee on Claims thinks there is such satisfactory evidence, but the gentlemap from Washington is not asking the $100 in addition to the amount stated in the bill.

Mr. PATTERSON. I withdraw my reservation of objection.

The Clerk read as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and

he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to W. A. Blankenship, of Randle, Wash., the sum of $350 in full settlement of all claims against the Government on account of damages to his property resulting from the construction of the Purcell Creek section, Randle-Yakima Forest Road project, Rainier National Park, Lewis County, State of Washington.

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

ENZA A. "ZELLER

The next business on the Private Calendar was the bill H. R. 4233, for the relief of Enza A. Zeller.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right

to object. Wlll the author of the bill accept an amendment in lieu of the committee amendment, in the approved form, which provides that no benefit shall accrue prior to the approval of this act?

Mr. MAAS. Yes; certainly. Mr. STAFFORD. Before that stage is reached, I reserve

the right to object. I would like to have the author of the bill explain bow mounting a horse at a camp on the part of a hostess is within line of duty of a hostess.

Mr. MAAS. She was on duty at the time, and it was a part of her duty to entertain these boys and keep up her own health. The War Department reports that there is no question that she would have come under the compensation act . had she filed a claim within the proper time. The reason she did not file the claim within the proper time was due to a defect in the X-ray machine at the post hospital. She did not . want to cause any trouble. They told her it was not going to be serious )Jecause of the defect in this equipment; but as time went on, she found that she bad a permanent injury, and she bas been rendered incapable of permanent employment since that time.

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman explain just .wherein the injury was in the line of employment?

Mr. MAAS. That was accepted. It comes under the terms of the compensation act, which provides that it is in the line of duty if it is not due to her own misconduct, and this was in no sense her own misconduct. It was a part of her duty, as she was expected to entertain these boys. and she was on duty at the time.

Mr. STAFFORD. There is no question that she was on duty at the time; but it seems to me that the duties of a hostess do not extend to getting on ho1·ses and riding around the country.

Mr. MAAS. Under the compensation laws, if you are on ·duty and the injury is not the result of your own misconduct, it is interpreted to be in the line of duty. That ~s recognized as the basic principle.

Mr. STAFFORD. I have some acquaintance with the real duties of a hostess, and I have thought her work was to entertain them around the camp. I did not think her duty was to mount horses.

Mr. MAAS. I happen to be quite familiar with this; and if the gentleman will permit, a part of the training of these boys is horseback riding. They found it was desirable to have the hostess able to ride and accompany these boys on the boat, and also in order to keep up her own health.

I hope the gentleman will not object, as this bill has passed the House once before and simply failed to be reached in ~~nate. ·

Mr. STAFFORD. I am willing to take the broad view that perhaps in her province of entertainment she should go horseback riding with the boys; but under reservation of objection, I will ask whether the gentleman will be :vming to accept the customary amendment, as follows:

That the United States Employees' Compensation Commission is hereby authorized to consider and determine the claim of Enza. _A. Zeller, on account of injuries sustained upon June 28, 1922, while

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 9001 employed by the War Department, in the same manner and to the same extent as if said Enza A. Zeller had made application for the benefits of said act within the 1-year period required by sections 17 and 20 thereof: Provided, That no benefit shall accrue prior to the approval of this act.

Mr. MAAS. Yes; I accept that. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the

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

he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $2,500 to Enza A. Zeller, employed as a hostess in the United States Army at Fort Snelling, Minn., as reimbursement for expenses actually incurred by her as the direct result of personal injuries received by her during the course of her employment at Fort Snelling, Minn., and as full compensation for said injury, the pain and suffering from the same, including loss of earnings, and any permanent disabllity resulting from said injury.

With the following committee amendment: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert: "That sec

tions 17 and 20 of the act entitled 'An act to provide compensation for employees of the United States suffering injuries, and for other purposes,' approved September 7, 1916, as amended, are hereby waived in favor of Enza A. Zeller, a former employee of the War Department."

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment as a substitute for the amendment, which I have sent to the desk.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. EATON of Colorado as a substitute

for the committee amendment: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert: "That the

United States Employees' Compensation Commission is hereby authorized to consider and determine the claim of Enza A. Zeller on account of injuries sustained upon June 28, 1922, while employed by the war Department, in the same manner and to the same extent as if said Enza A. Zeller had made application for the benefits of said act within the 1-year period required by sections 17 and 20 thereof: Provided, That no benefit shall accrue prior to the approval of this act."

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

a third time, was read the third time, and passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. Mr. BLANTON. During this entire session when the ma-

jority leader has asked for night sessions, he has asked for them from 8 o'clock until 10.30 p. m. For some reason, in preferring tb:e request yesterday, the gentleman stated it should continue until 11 o'clock p. m. Would the Speaker object to a motion to adjourn being made at 10.30, the usual hour for adjourning? We are all worked down.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would not object. Mr. BLANTON. The Chair will entertain a motion at

10.30? The SPEAKER pro tempore. Yes. Mr. BLANTON. I shall make that motion at 10.30.

MRS. LAWRENCE CHLEBEK

The Clerk called the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 4234, for the relief of Mrs. Lawrence Chlebek.


Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I have this bill marked for objection.

Mr. MAAS. What did the gentleman find objectionable in the bill?

Mr. STAFFORD. There was no fault on the part of the Government just because the snow fell from the heavens and turned into slush.

Mr. MAAS. I will say that all of the information is not available in the report. Even so, from the report, if the gentleman will examine it, he will find that there was negligence. The Treasury Department itself denies any negligence; but, as a matter of fact, they permitted snow and slush to remain on the marble steps. It is the common prac-

tice, certainly in all private buildings, to put sawdust or salt or ashes on those steps. This woman slipped because of the fact that the snow had been permitted to accumulate.

In addition to that, there was a faulty drain pipe which had been leaking. It was at a half-freezing temperature. The step was slippery. The ambulance driver and the police surgeon both testified that the step was in a negligent condition.

Mr. STAFFORD. How can the Government recognize the principle that we will be held responsible for accidents flowing directly from an act of God?

Mr. MOUSER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. MAAS. Certainly. Mr. MOUSER. I may say that I have a great respect for

the judgment of the gentleman from Wisconsin on these bills, but I wonder if the gentleman from Wisconsin has considered this claim. This claim goes further than an act of God. It will be my position to recommend claims that are worthy, just as much to object to those that are unworthy. But the act of God ceased on the outside of the building where it was snowing. The tracks of the people who had a right to enter that building for public business made these steps and marble floors slippery. It seems to me it was negligent, in view of that condition, not to put something on that floor so that the people would not fall down and break their necks.

Mr. STAFFORD. No amount of protection can prevent the accumulation of slush on the steps of Government buildings.

Mr. MOUSER. But this was inside of the building. Mr. MAAS. This was inside of the building. This was

not on the outside steps. It was snow that had been tracked inside.

Mr. STAFFORD. How frequent it is in my home city, through the winter season, for the slush or moisture to be tracked inside! The Government is not obligated to keep that floor mopped all the time.

Mr. MOUSER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. Yes. Mr. MOUSER. There are cases where business men have

left an icy condition in front of their place of business, without putting ashes or salt or sawdust there, where people have slipped, and those business men have been held answerable in damages.

Mr. STAFFORD. I know the law of Wisconsin, which does not hold a property owner to any liability by reason of the conditions of a sidewalk occurring through acts of nature.

Mr. MOUSER. Will the gentleman yield further? Mr. STAFFORD. Yes. Mr. MOUSER. Let me say further that the law is uni

form in all States as to there being no responsibility for acts of God; but after the act of God when human agency can enter in to save life or property, there is a duty then on the part of people to safeguard the safety of the public. This was on the inside of a Federal building; and because of the public bringing in snow as they entered, as they had a right to do upon public business, the marble steps became so slippery that this woman fell.

The department, in its report, admits responsibility. The matter has been decided on the question of merit. The objectfon is confined to the amount asked in the original bill, $2,000. Only $500 is asked here. Having in mind at the outset the admission of the department that they are liable, that this slush was on the inside of the building, on the stairway of the building, the only objection could be as to the amount. This woman was the mother of 14 children. I think if the sponsor of the bill would lower his claim to $500 that the Congress would pass it. There is in this record this additional fact, that the condition of the stairway was very dangerous, being wet and slippery from many peo-ple coming in and onto it out of the storm. It would seem that there must have been some duty there for some servant to mop up the slippery condition of the :tloor.

9002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 Mr. HOWARD. Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact I have

a sick friend here who has a bill on the calendar that he hopes to have reached, I call for the regular order.

Mr. STAFFORD. I object. JEFF DAVIS CAPERTON AND LUCY VmGINIA CAPERTON

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 4859, for the relief of Jeff Davis Caperton and Lucy Virginia Caperton.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, will the author of the bill accept an amendment to the effect that no benefit shall accrue prior to the approval of the act and in the form of other bills of like kind?

Mr. HALL of Mississippi. I have no objection to it whatever.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Then I have no objection. Mr. HALL of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous

consent that a similar Senate bill (S. 194) be considered in lieu of the House bill.

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

Be i~ enacted, etc., That sections 17 and 20 of the act entitled "'An act to provide compensation for employees of the United States suffering injuries while in the performance of their duties, and for other purposes," approved September 7, 1916, as amended, are hereby waived in favor of Jeff Davis Caperton and Lucy Virginia Caperton, parents of J. P. Caperton, who was killed August 24, 1918, at Nitro, W. Va., when a freight train backed into the ambulance he was driving while in the performance of his duties.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amend-ment.

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

1s hereby authorized to consider and determine the claim of Jeff Davis Caperton and Lucy Virginia Caperton arising out of the death of J. P. Caperton on August 24, 1918, in the same manner and to the same extent as if said Jeff Davis Caperton and Lucy Virginia Caperton had made application for the benefits of said act within the 1-year period required by sections 17 and 20 thereof: Provided, That no benefits shall accrue prior to the approval of this act."

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

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

KENNETH G. GOULD

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 4885, for the relief of Kenneth G. Gould.

Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman withhold his ob

jection? Mr. PATI'ERSON. I will; but I intend to object. Mr. STAFFORD. I understand there is a favorable re

port from the Secretary of War as to this claim. Mr. PATI'ERSON. But I understand this lieutenant took

the matter in his own hands; whereas if he had gone through the regular routine, this bill would not have been necessary. I see my colleague present, and I would very much like to yield to him, but under the circumstances I shall have to object.

Mr. HESS. This was the first assignment. this lieutenant had ever had. He was ordered from Cincinnati to the Walter Reed Hospital. Not knowing the regulations of the War Department he crated and· shipped his household effects to Washington and he paid for them the sum of $19~.50. The War Department recommends the payment of the claim. The bill passed the last Congress toward the end of the session but failed of passage in the Senate because of the lack of time.

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

Mr. PATTERSON. My fundamental objection is that a man who is an officer in the United States Army should know the regulations. He took the matter in his own hands, and therefore he should not be reimbursed.

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman will agree that when an officer of the United States Army, the Navy, or the

Marine Corps is ordered to change his station, he is entitled to an allowance for the shipment of his household goods.

Mr. PATTERSON. Absolutely . . Mr. STAFFORD. It appears from the report that this

young officer did not understand the regulations. Mr. PATTERSON. He should have understood them. Mr. STAFFORD. He is not being reimbursed any more

than he would have received if these goods had been shipped according to regulations. The Government is not out anything. This bill merely seeks to recompense him for the money he paid out.

Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, for the present I shall object.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Will the gentleman withhold his objection for a moment?

Mr. PATTERSON. Yes. Mr. EATON of Colorado. It appears that this bill is in

the interest of economy because this young officer saved the Government $20 or $25. This officer by his conduct saved the Government real money, even though that saving was not made in accordance with the exact regulations. Under those circum...c:tances does not the gentleman think he is entitled to be reimbursed for the money he spent? Does not the gentleman think he has learned his lesson and is entitled to get his money back?

Mr. PATTERSON. It will not hurt him to wait a few more days and learn more. For the present I object.

A. W. HOLLAND

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 5265, for the relief of A. W. Holland.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, as I recall this is a bill that is similar to many that might be presented in behalf of fourth-class postmasters in a growing country, where they need additional help. There is no question but what he was put to additional expense by reason of the growth of the office, but he received the benefit of the advanced position of his office. Why should we adopt an exceptional rule in this case?

Mr. McKEOWN. Unfortunately this man did not receive the benefit of it. He was appointed under a prior administration, and that has been the reason why he did not receive it.

Mr. STAFFORD. He received it for a short time, up to June 30, 1914, when he was ousted on account of politics, I suppose. ·

Mr. ARENTZ. If the gentleman were placed in the same situation and his office was made a third-class office, what would he do under the circumstances? Just permit the mail to take care of itself? With a town jumping from a few hundred to 6,000 he either had to employ extra clerks or let the mail pile up.

Mr. STAFFORD. Coming from the fast-growing and overpopulated State of Nevada, I am rather surprised that the gentleman has any concept of the conditions referred to in this bill. I will yield to the gentleman who comes from an oil-gushing district, where towns grow up overnight.

Mr. McKEOWN. I will state to the gentleman that this was the first big discovery and the town grew overnight to 6,000 population just like a mining town.

Mr. STAFFORD. I had some difficulty in bringing myself around to the conclusion that this man was giving the attention to the office that it required.

Mr. McKEOWN. Oh, he had to go to work and put in his own money and earn money for the Government and the Government states that the money was earned, but he did not get what was coming to him at all. He paid out $1,000 for clerk hire.

Mr. STAFFORD. Is this the .case where a doctor was the postmaster?

Mr. McKEOWN. Oh, he is called a doctor, but he is like a lot of lawyers who are called judges. He was not a doctor at all.

Mr. STAFFORD. Is he an Indian doctor or a horse doctor?

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 9003 Mr. McKEOWN. I do not think he is either one, to tell

the truth about it. Mr. STAFFORD. I was under the impression that this

doctor was not performing his duty as postmaster, but was running around the country with his pill case.

Mr. McKEOWN. No; he performed all the service he could.

Mr. STAFFORD. Upon the assurance of the gentleman that he did perform all the services required, including his pill practice, I withdraw the objection.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated and in full settlement against the Government, the sum of $900 to A. W. Holland in payment of extra services as postmaster at Drumright, Okla.., a post office of the fourth class.

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

KENNETH G. GOULD

Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to return to the prior bill, H. R. 4885, for the relief of Kenneth G. Gould. I understand from the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. PATTERSON] that he has received same additional information that would tend to make him withdraw his objection. · The SPEAKER pro tempore . . Is there objection to therequest of the gentleman from New York?

There was no objection. The Clerk read the title of the bill. Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, under reservation of ob

jection I wish to make this statement. Of course I knew there was no additional cost to the Government other than that which would have been involved anyway. This bill was introduced and sponsored in the House by our late beloved Speaker, Mr. Longworth. It passed the House last session, and since it does not incur any additional expense to the Government, and perhaps not quite as much, I withdraw my objection. ~


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States is hereby authorized and directed to pay, out of a.ny money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $186.17 to Kenneth G. Gould, lieutenant in the Medical Corps Reserve, as reimbursement for cost of shipment of personal property.

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

MARY AGNES RODEN The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 5592, to reimburse

the estate of Mary Agnes Roden. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to ob

ject, I would like to inquire of the chairman of the committee as to the policy of the committee in making recommendations for the payment of amounts of $5,000 to estates by reason of the death of the intestate. Does the committee consider whether there are any children surviving or any immediate heirs, or do they just appropriate the money for the payment of debts or payment to heirs in case there are heirs?

Mr. BLACK. I will say to the gentleman there have been times when we have made provision in the bill to hav~ the bill itself see to it that the heirs or the children are properly taken care of, but, generally, the committee would prefer that the minor children of an intestate be taken care of under the courts of their own State. In this case I have no particular evidence as to the family situation. There is no doubt, as the gentleman sees, that there is liability here and that the estate should have some compensation; but unless it were called to our attention that there was real need of protection for the children, through the congressional act, we would leave it to the State.

Mr. STAFFORD. Does the gentleman's committee investigate as to whether there are any children or any immediate heirs?

Mr. BLACK. This is one of those cases that was reported by a prior committee so that we had no subcommittee of our own committee on this bill.

Mr. STAFFORD. Some time ago there was· a bill introduced by our deceased Member, Mr. Rutherford, of Georgia, in which he sought to pay $5,000 to the widow of the deceased. The widow had only married the deceased a few months before, and the intestate left a number of children by a prior marriage. I took it upon myself to allot only a small amount to the widow, $1,000, and provided that $4,000 should go to the guardian of the children under a certain age. I do not think we should be overgenerous in paying $5,000 to an estate where there are no dependent children or immediate relatives.

Mr. Speaker, I object for the time being so that the committee may ascertain the facts in the case.

J. 0. WINNETT The Cle~k read the next bill on the Private Cale_ndar,

H. R. 6274, for the relief of J. 0. Wirinett. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. STAFFORD. I object.

J. M. PACE

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 8251, for the relief of James M. Pace.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, this bill seeks to reimburse

the postmaster for $21,476.99 alleged losses. I can see where the Post Office Department would not contest it, but I doubt whether it ought to be passed by unanimous consent, and I object. A bill that would take $21,476.99 out of the Treasury ought not to be passed in a minute, without . reading and

AMY TURNER

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 7308, for the relief of Amy Turner.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to issue a patent to Amy Turner, formerly Amy Byrnes, for the lands embraced in her stockraising homestead entry, Billings 028219, upon fulfillment of the usual requirements but without reference to her second marriage or the time of its consummation.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the e1ird time, and passed.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

WILL A. HELMER

The Clerk read the next bill on th~ Private Calendar, H. R. 1448, for the relief of Will A. Helmer.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I had this bill marked for

objection. I see the author of the bill is here, and I would like to hear some statement in favor of this claim. As I understand the case from the report, the Government during the war, shortly after taking possession of Camp Custer in Michigan. at Battle Creek, the home of the gentleman from Michigan, entered into an arrangement whereby the Michigan Central Railroad running parallel about a mile distant from the heights on which Camp Custer is located. agreed with the Government to lay a track up to the camp.

I understand that the quartermaster, or whoever the official of the Army was, became rather impatient and entered upon the land for the proposed right of way; that subsequently the railroad company did lay the track. Why did not the claimant pursue his remedy against the railroad company, which had obligated itself to secure this right of way, rather than seeking relief from the Government?

Mr. HOOPER. I shall be glad to answer the gentleman. There was a dispute between the Government and the railroad whether the Government or the railroad was the one to pay to this man damages, which the War Department ad-

9004 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 mits he sustained. Mr. Helmer, by long course of negotiations back and forth between the railroad and the Government, was led by the point where the statute of limitations runs against the claim. He has always claimed that the Government entered on the property without right, when everything was in a turmoil in the newly built Camp Custer, and that the Government acted arbitrarily, and I think the evidence proves it.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, under reservation of ob-· jection, I want to give further consideration to this claim. I make the point of order that there is no quorum present.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman withhold that for a moment?

Mr. STAFFORD. Yes. GOVERID4ENT SALARIES, 1893 TO 1931 COMPARED WITH COST OF

LIVING

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD by including some tables that I have had worked out on the expense of living in the city of Washington.

! The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker. in the accompanying series

of tables, the attempt has been made to show the trend in Government salaries in comparison with changing living costs during the period of almost 40 years, from 1893 to 1931. The year 1893 is used as a starting point simply because this is the earliest year for which the data regarding Government salaries are readily available, but the period is sufficiently long to give a fairly complete picture of the subject. For the earlier years, the information regarding cost of living is incomplete, but the figures used, as computed by Dr. Paul H. Douglas, are believed to be substantially accurate.

Table 1 compares the average salary of Government employees in the District of Columbia with the cost of living in the United States, and also shows the relative purchasing power of such salaries in terms of the year 1893 as a base. It will be noted that from 1893 until the beginning of the World War Government salaries in the District of Columbia remained almost stationary, the average being $1,096 in 1893 and $1,141 in 1915, whereas during this period cost of living in the District of Columbia increased about 40 per cent. Mter 1915 Government salaries rose steadily, and in 1931 were almost 90 per cent higher than in 1915. Meanwhile, however, the cost of living had increased very sharply up to 1920, and up to 1931 remained at a considerably higher level than salaries. As a result the "real wages "-that is, the purchasing power of salariesremained below the level of 1893 .for practically the whole period. The purchasing power of Government salaries was almost 50 per cent lower during the war period than it had been in 1893, and did not reach the earlier level until 1931, when the decline in living costs in combination with the wage increases of 1929 and 1930 brougHt the purchasing power of Government salaries back to the 1893 level.

Table 2 compares the trend of Government salaries in the District of Columbia with average annual earnings of salaried employees in manufactming industries in the United States. The latter figures are as compiled by Doctor Douglas from the reports of the United States Census and other authoritative sources. It will be noted that in 1893 the average Government salary was $1,096, as against $954 in private employment. By 1901. however, private salaries had become greater than Government salaries, and in general this disparity increased steadily up to 19?8, the latest year for which data regarding the private salaries are available. In that year it appears that Government salaries were about 70 per cent higher than in 1893, whereas private salaries had increased approximately 168 per cent.

Table 3 <and Chart 3) shows the trend of salaries of Congressmen over the period 1893 to 1931, in comparison with trend of living costs in the United States, and also computes by years the purchasing power of such salaries in terms of 1893 as a base. In 1893 the annual salary of a Congressman

was $5,000, having been thus ~tablished in 1866. In 1907 it was increased to $7,500, and in 1925 to $10,000. The 1907 increase was· roughly in line . With increased cost of living, but beginning with the extremely sharp increases in living costs as a result of the war, the purchasing power of the salaries of Congressmen fell to almost one-half of what it had been in 1893, and even the salary increase of 1925 did not restore equilibrium. As in the case of the salaries of Government employees, the purchasing power of the salaries of Congressmen was not restored to tts 1893 level until about 1931:

TABLE !.-Average salary of Government employees in the District of Columbia, and purchasing power of salary in relation to 1893

Year

1893-------------------------------1895_ --- ---------------------------1897-------------------------------1899_------------------------------1901_------------------------------1903 __ -------------------- ---------1905_ ----------------------------1907-------------------------------1909-------------------------------1911_------------------- ----------1913_ ---- -------- -- ----------~-----1915 _______ ------------------------1917 ------· -----------------------1918_-------------- ----------------1919_ ------------------------------1920 _____ --------------------------192L ---- _ ------------------- _ -----1922_------------------------------1923.------------------------------1924 ____ ---------------------------192.5 __ -----------------------------1926 ___ ----------------------------1927-------------------------------1928.-------------- ---------- ------1929 ______________________________ _

1930.------------------------------193L- ___ --------------------------

Average amount 1

$1,096 1,114 1, 073 1,009 1,040 1,067 I,065 1,090 1,105 1,109 I, 134 1,141 1,342

. 1, 381 1,494 1, 570 1,593 1,625 1,658 1, 708 1, 776 1,809 1,836 1,866 2,043 2,078 2,147

Salary index,

1913=100

IOO.O 1016 97.9 92.1 94.9 97.4 97.2 99.5

100.8 101.2 103.5 104.1 122.4 126.0 136.3 143.2 145.3 148.3 151.3 155.8 162.0 165. 1 167.5 170.3 186.4 189.6 195.9

Cost of living

index,' I893=100

IOO.O 97.0

100.0 102.0 108.0 116.0 115.0 126.0 121.0 132.0 137.0 140.4 204.7 241.6 249.4 270.5 229.9 219.2 224.2 223.2 230.3 230.5 223.4 222.4 221.8 213.6 196.0

Relative purchasing power o! salary,

1893=100

100.0 104.7 97.9 90.3 87.9 84.0 84.5 79. 0 83.3 76.7 75.5 74.1 59.8· 52.2 54.7 52.9 63.2 67.7 67.5 69.8 70.3 71.6 75.0 76.6 84.0 88.8 99.9

1 Sources: 1893 to 1915----Monthly Labor Review, June, 1920 (p. 21). Based on reports to the Commission on Reclassification; 1917 to 1927-Personnel Classification Board. Closing report of wage and personnel survey, Washington, 1931 (p. 221); 192d to 1931-Report of the Bureau of the Budget.

t Cost of living index numbers from 1893 to 1914, by Paul H. Douglas, R eal Wages in United States (p. 60). (These figures are for the country as a whole, separate data for Washington not being available); from 1914 to 1931, U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, converted to a 1893 base from Douglas's indexes, and are for the city of Washington.

TABLE 2.-Comparison of annual salaries of Government employees in the District of Columbia and annual earnings of salaried employees in manufacturing in the United States

Year

' 1893.------------------------------1895_ ------------------------ ! . --

1897-------------------------------1 gg ______________ _:_ ______________ _ 190L _____________________________ _

1003 ________ -----------------------1905_-- --------------------------1907-------------------------------1909. ---------------- --------------191 L __ ------ ________ -- __ ------_ --1913.----- -~--- --------------------1915_--- ---------------------------1917-----------------------------1918_ ----------------------------- -1919 __ ----------------------------1920_------------------------ ----1921_--------------------- ---- ----1922_------------------------------1923 ______________________________ _ 1924... _____________________________ _

1925_ -------------- ----------------1926 __ ---------- ---------- ---------1927-------------------------------192fL --_ ----- ----------------------1929 __________________________ _ 1930 ______________________________ _

193L------------------------------

.Annual salary .Annual earnings of sal

aried employees in manufacturing 1

.Average

$1,006 I, 114 1,073 1,009 1,040 1,067 1,065 1,090 1,105 1,109 I, 134 1, 141 1,342 1, 381 1,494 1,570 I,593 1,625 1,658

.1, 708 1, 776 1,809 I,836 1,866 2,043 2,078 2,147

Index, 1893=100 .Average Index,

1893=100

100.0 $954 100.0 101. 6 9i3 102. 0

97. 9 1, 006 105. 5 92. 1 1, 046 109. 6 94. 9 1, 048 109. 9 97. 4 I, 087 113. 9 97. 2 1, 121 117.5 99. 5 1,144 119.9

100. 8 1, 188 124. 5 101. 2 1, 277 133. 9 103. 6 1, 294 135. 6 104. 1 1, 327 139. 1 122. 4 1, 552 162. 7 126. 0 1, 765 185. f) 136. 3 1, 999 209. 5 143. 2 2, 243 235. I 145. 3 2, 236 234. 4 148.3 2, 164 226.8 151. 3 2, 223 233. 0 155. 8 2, 299 241. 0 162. 0 2, 348 246. 1 165. 1 2 2 407 252. 3 167. 5 J 2: 482 260. 2 170.3 J 2, 554 267. 7 186.4 ------------ ------------189. 6 ------------ ------------195.9 ------------ ------------

1 Douglas Paul H. Real Wages in the United States, f890-1926, p. 361. , Douglas: Paul H., and Jennison, Florence Tye. The Movement of Money and

Real Earnings in the United States, 1926-1928, p. 22.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD-HOUSE 9005 TABLE 3.-Salary1 and p11.1'chasing power of salary, of Congressmen,

1893-1931 country that prosperity was just around the corner. Mr. Hoover was elected President in 1928, the crash came in October, 1929, and now in 1932 Congress is seeking to repair

Annual salary of Congressmen 1 Index of Relative · the damage don~a stupendous undertaking that is causing

oost of ch ·

Year living in pur asmg much quaking.

t-----.----l the United power oi What is our trouble? Faith is gone. Fortunately, hope Amount

Index States 2 salary (1893=100) (1893=100) <1893= 100) lingers, and yet, referring again to this relief program, I

1893--------------------------. ----1895 .• -----------------------------1897-------------------------------1899.------------------------------1901.--- -------------------~------1903.------------------ ------------1905.------------------------------1907.-.----------------------------1909------------------------------1!111.-------------- ----------------1913 __________________________ ____ _ 1915 ______________________________ _

1917-------------------------------191 -------------------------------1919---------- ---------------------1920.-----------------------------.1921.------------------------------1922_ _________________ _

1923.------------------------------1924.------------------------------1925 _______________________ _

1926.------------------------------1927-------------------------------192.8 _________________ _

1929. -----------------------------1930_---- -- ------------------------I931_ ________________________ _

$5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 7, 500 7,500 1,500 7, 500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7, 500 7,500 7,500 7, 500 7,500 •

10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000

100.0 100. 0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100. 0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.n 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0

100.0 97.0

100. 0 102.0 108.0 116.0 115.0 126.0 121.0 132.0 137.0 1418 192.2 Z35.4 254.1 281.4 Z39. 3 225.8 230.8 230.4 237.1 236.4 233.1 230.4 230.5 220.9 199.9

100.0 103.1 100.0 98.0 92.6 86.2 87.0

119.0 124.0 113.6 109.5 105.8 78.0 63.7 59.0 53.3 62.7 66.4 65.0 65.1 84.4 84.6 85.8 86.8 86.8 90.5

100.1

1 Salaries of Members of Congress taken from act of July 28, 1866 (ch. 296); act of Feb. 26, 1907 (cb. 1635); and act of Mar. 4, 1925 (ch. 549).

'Cost of living index numbers from 1893 to 1914, by Paul H. Douglas, Real Wages in the United States, p. 60; from 1914 to 1931, U. 8. Bureau of Labor Statistics, converted to a 1893 base from Dongla.s's indexes.

SUGGESTIONS FOR BUSINESS RECOVERY

Mr. LAMNECK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD on the subject of business recovery.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. LAMNECK. Mr. Speaker, if faith were as constant

as hope, we might be able to get somewhere as a nation and as a people in our efforts to stimulate business recovery. I am rusappointed that there has not been a more favorable reaction to President Hoover's relief program. I am not seeking to discredit it. I gave it my indorsement and support in the hope and belief that it would stimulate business recovery, start the wheels of industry, benefit agriculture, and put idle millions to work.·

I believe still that it will be helpful in the end. However, it has apparently failed in the accomplishment of its chief purpose, at least up to this time-that of restoring confidence. There was a feeling of optimism for a while, but that apparently has died away, leaving a lack of confidence still, which is always a chief requisite to any undertaking that concerns the public welfare.

A balanced Budget, and some definite idea as to themcrease of taxes in amount and where the increase is to fall, would help the situation. Investigation of short selling, bonus legislation, extravagance and criminal waste in government, are also important factors in retarding progress.

Barring violations of the obnoxious prohibition . law, we are a law-abiding, peace-loving people. We try to be patient and want to be patriotic. Under existing conditions, the patience of the people is sorely tried and their faith severely tested. The average American citizen is in such a muddle at this time that he finds it as difficult to maintain his balance as it is for the Government to balance its Budget.

The people can not · be blamed for their lack of faith. They have been fooled many times. In 1928 Mr. Hoover said in his speech of acceptance that the Republican Party victory would mean " a job for every man/' William Green, president of the American Federation of Labor, protesting a sales tax upon the necessities of life, recently placed the number of unemployed in the country at 8,000,000 people.

In the summer of 1930, about the time the Hawley-Smoot tariff bill was passed, Republican Party leade?s assured the

LXXV-567

sometimes wonder whether the people have not reached the conclusion, in the absence of any appreciable results; that it is not just another " delusive hope that points the way to a distant· good." The Hoover program does not go far enough. It does not reach. It is only temporary in character,.and therefore affords no solid foundation upon which to build.

Our chief trouble, as I see it, is a lack of confidence in ourselves and our ability to do things. Our part in the war to make the world safe for democracy cost billions of dollars, to say nothing of the sacrifice of the very flower of young American manhood. That was a struggle for a principle at the sacrifice of millions of human lives in the allied armies. Now we are fighting depression, which involves the saving of human life and, in addition, improving our economic situation to afford the means of a livelihood for millions who are now feeling the pangs of hunger and asking only for a chance to work.

With a national wealth approaching $400,000,000,000, unlimited resources and unlimited·credit, we are in a position where we can relieve this situation and contribute to the immediate peace, happiness, and contentment of all the people. Two accomplishments are necessary. One is to apply credit or currency expansion and, second, to revise certain existing laws which are harmful.

It is argued that expansion of credit or currency will cheapen money. So it would, but it would enhance the price of all commodities and increase the purchasing power of consumers. The Nation1S Business and Business Week say that inflation is the cure that should be applied. It has been tried before with success, not only in this country but other countries. It would not endanger the gold standard but encourage business and finally bring us a prosperity that would abide.

If we are to have prosperity, relief legislation, temporary in character, must be supplemented by legislation of a definite, permanent character. It is said the Government is now borrowing $300,000-000 a day. That is not getting anywhere. The debt is only piling up. A final day of reckoning must come and the Government must prepare for that day. There are many sources of revenue available to avert this situation and, in addition, permit the lowering of taxes which are so burdensome upon the people. I will point the way in a moment.

Business recovery is absolutely necessary before we can have prosperity. When they can be brought back multiplied millions will find profitable employment. Until these millions are put to work and wages started there can be no prosperity. Employment of these millions will add to the purchasing power of the people.

The cost of government is staggering. This cost must be met by taxation. Business men all over the country are protesting, and only a few days ago called at ·the White House in great numbers to protest personally against taxes being• piled up, with no reduction in public expenditures. There are at the present time 1,552,000 Federal workers. The annual pay roll is $1,501,000,000 a year. The Nation's Business figures that this means 1 employee to every 50 voters.

American farmers alone. are required to dig up $777,000,000 dollars in taxes each year. That required a lot of digging with farm products at low-level prices. Only recently 60t000 farms, embracing a million acres of land, were sold for taxes in MississippL Railroads pay $400,000,000 annually. They are but little better off than the farmers. Those who smoke cigarettes and have no other virtue pay on cigarettes, women on cosmetics. and so on down the line. Bootleggers alone escape.

9006 CONGRESSIONAL -RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 . Home owners in American cities are having their troubles, too. Thousands are out of work and unable to pay their taxes and stand to lose their homes. Some one will say: " That is their fault." !t is not their fault. They are the victims of a situation over which they have no control. m-advised legislation is responsible for our present predicament and intolerable suffering. The way to remedy these conditions is to repeal the laws that have brought about these conditions.

The Hawley-Smoot tariff law not only paralyzed industry and prostrated agriculture, but has cost the Government ·more than a billion dollars a year in the loss of export business. Enforcement of the prohibition law is costing another billion dollars. Repeal of the eighteenth amendment and the placing of a tax upon intoxicating liquors would add more than a billion dollar& to our revenues. An additional $750,000 'could be saved to the people in the elimination of useless bureaus, commissions, and boards. These all total $3,750,000,000-a pretty sum.

With this legislation enacted into law, lowering tariff rates, adding the revenues from the liquor business, and the saving of hundreds of millions in the abolishment of useless functions of government, the Government would be in shape to square up all deficits and meet other pressing obligations, with enough left to help the bonus along. More important, ·perhaps, is the fact that with these revenues acquired taxes could be lowered and the people given a breathing spell.

This action is absolutely necessary to restore confidence. It is essential to business recovery. It is the one guaranty of a " job for every man," with all due apology. It is up to the Government to arouse itself from its lethargy and take the lead as a "go-getter." A word from the White House and cooperation along bipartisan lines, such as we have become accustomed to during this session of Congress, would turn the trick, lift the gloom, and sound the death knell of Old Man Depression. That is the one means by which Cono"Tess can do something to benefit the people, by which I mean-the people.

Banks, railroads, building and loan companies, insurance companies, and farmers to a certain extent, have already been provided for. If anyone is getting any benefit from Mr. Hoover's relief program, they are the people. It will take a long while for any good effects from this relief legislation to filter down to the man on the street. What he -needs is action on the program I have outlined to give us something substantial upon which to build. ·

There are other things which this Government could do and should do. It should mix less in European affairs and attend strictly to its own business in our domestic affairs. The Government at this time is competing with American citizens and American taxpayers in 250 lines of private business. This is not fair or just. If the Government can not keep out of private business in any other way, it should enforce the law in restraint of trade against itself, and, while it is doing that, it might give attention also to trusts and other combinations of great capital, which are denying to others all the rights which they claim for themselves, and would limit to themselves.

My comments on conditions and remedies up to this point have been more of a general nature, and I therefore desire to make some specific recommendations, as follows:

First. Provide credit for industry by amending the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, which would extend to business the same privileges that it does to banks. · At this writing credit facilities for business through the banks is practically at a standstill.

Second. Guarantee bank deposits, because, in my judgment, it is only by this method that we can absolutely restore confidence in the financial institutions. Bank failures and antihoarding campaigns will be things of the past if this proposal is enacted into law by the passage of the so-called Steagall bill.

Third. Pass the home loan discount bank bill, which would release hundreds of millions of dollars now frozen in the various building and loans throughout the country. This could be accomplished by the passage of the so-called Luce

bill recommended by President Hoover in one of his early messages to Congress.

Fourth. Embargo temporarily all basic commodities, such as wheat, corn, cotton, copper, oil, manganese, coal, farm machinery, and all farm products. The embargo should, of course, apply to all by-products of the basic commodities enumerated.

Fifth. Reduce governmental expenses by discontinuing a greater part, at least, of all Federal-aid appropriations to the States, and py the elimination of all unnecessary activities of the Federal GQvernment.

Sixth. Resume trade relations with Russia; protect these relationships with proper restrictions to avoid any dumping of Russian goods in the United States.

Seventh. Cause a moderate inflation of currency, which would result in the increase in commodity prices. This could be done by the issuance of currency against the gold reserve and by the Federal Government stabilizing silver by purchasing bullion at a specified price and issuing currency against the supply of silver· held by the Treasury of the United States.

Eighth. Provide mean.S for construction loans for home construction only. This could be done either through the building and loan companies, insurance companies, or by loans from the postal-savings accounts.

Ninth. Legalize and tax beer. The taxes raised from this activity could be applied in reducing the taxes against legitimate business.

These suggestions, if put into operation, together with what the Government has already done to relieve the present deplorable conditions, is in my opinion all that any government could do under the circumstances, and if they will not bring the results that we hope for, the future does not look bright.

FEDERAL AID FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION Mr. SUTPHIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent

to extend my remarks in the RECORD. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. SUTPHIN. Mr. Speaker, the Hon. A. Harry Moore,

Governor of New Jersey, in his inaugural address in January, 1932, made the following statements:

In this period of industrial depression we must turn attention to our agricultural resources, determinedly seek methods and resolutely adopt procedures that w1ll promote the full utillzation of these resources. My information 1s that the agricultural output of New Jersey could easily be doubled, provided needed help 1s given.

Mr. Speaker, I feel that the future of a part of the agricultural development of my district depends upon the help given to the agricultural department of our public schools through the Federal aid for vocational education.

I have received many protests from prominent educators in my district and I beg to call your attention to a few points brought out by one township superintendent of schools. The students in the vocational-education department of his schools are studying the following subjects: Agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry, and care of estates from the gardener's standpoint. President Hoover in 1923, while a. member of the Cabinet, stated:

There iS no better economy than the economy of adequate training for the pursuits of agriculture, commerce, industry, and the home.

The students who receive training in the vocational-educational departments of the public schools in my district find ready employment locally, due to the type of the territory.

There are 1,250,000 students in the public schools in the United States enrolled in the courses in vocational education. These boys and girls are receiving a good practical education and many of them will be unable to pursue their studies further than the courses offered in our public school system. Again quoting Mr. Hoover's remarks in 1923, where he states in regard to the cost of vocational education:

ThtS cost can not be regarded as constituting a serious financial burden upon the community. It 1s approximately the cost of a medium-sized battleship.

•

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 9007 m VAL AFFAIRS

00.30 a. mJ To authorize the President to dispense with unnecessary

naval shore establishments <H. R. 11333>.

The storm of protest aroused by the proposal or the Economy Committee to discontinue this appropriation has, I understand, caused the committee to reconsider, and they are proposing an alternative course, which to my mind is simply an attempt to slowly and surely abolish vocational education rather than destroy it by immediate action.

Many communities, relying upon the Federal Govern- EXECO liVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC. ment to keep its legislative promises, have erected build- Under. clause 2 of Rule XXIV, executive communications ings to provide the necessary equipment to teach these were· taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows~ students. In my own district, in one instance, these courses 541. A letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting a are so popular that the classes are already overcrowded and report dated April 23, 1932, fro~ the Chief of Engineers, space and equipment for three times the number of students United States Army, on preliminary examination of Steinnow enrolled is needed. These students are not children of hatchee River into Deadmans Bay, Fla.; to the Committee wealthy parents but in many instances of those who at . on Rivers and Harbors. present are unemployed. These parents derive hope and 542. A letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting a comfort from the fact that this great Government provides report dated April 23, 1932, from the Chief of Engineers, training for their children which they themselves are unable United States Army, on preliminary examination of channel to provide. The destruction of this hope and comfort in in Horseshoe Cove, Dixie County, Fla., from the mainland to the discontinuing of their children's vocational education will the Gulf of Mexico; to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors. further tend to increase the resentment already breeding in 543. A letter from the Secretary of War, .transmitting a. the hearts of many of these unemployed. They will say report dated April 22, 1932, from the Chief of Engineers, "Our Government has done little for us in this depression, United States Army, on preliminary examination of channel and now proposes to throw out the educational opportuni- from Beaufort Inlet, N. C., via the Inland Waterway and ties of our children. What can the future hold for them?" Neuse River to New Bern; to the Committee on Rivers and

· The American public school is doing more than any other Harbors. agency to make good citizens for the future, to perpetuate 544. A letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting a American institutions, and to establish American ideals. report dated April 22, 1932, from the Chief of Engineers. Let us not, under the guise of economy, break. down the con- United States Army, on preliminary examination of the :fidence and wholehearted support that the American people Hocking River for the distance it flows through Athens have always given our public school system. County, Ohio; to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors.

A survey covering five years shows that the money spent by the Federal Government is a paying investment. For example, a boy who elects to take vocational agriculture is required to devote six months in some practical work on the farm under the supervision of a teacher. Accurate cost accounts have been kept for the 5-year period to ascertain the labor income from this practical work. The total labor income from this source during a period of five years amounted to $23,637,924.25. Th~ total amount aPPropriated for this worth-while activity during this 5-year period was $10,418,460. Would it be good economy for the Federal Government to discontinue an activity which not only makes such a valuable contribution to the labor income of the Nation but which at the same time is training these young people for lives of usefulness?

It is my earnest and sincere hope that every Member of the House of Representatives will vote against this attempt to abolish the appropriation for vocational education entirely or to suspend or curtail it in any measure.

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion w.as agreed to; accordingly <at 10 o'clock and 30 minutes p. m.) the House adjourned until tomorrow. Wednesday, April 27, 1932, at 12 o'clock noon.

COMMI'ITEE HEARINGS Tentative list of committee hearings scheduled for

Wednesday, April 27, 1932, as reported to the floor leader by clerks of the several committees:

WAYS AND MEANS

(10 a.m.) Continue hearings on soldiers' bonus.

INDIAN AFFAIRS

00.30 a. m.) Tribal and individual affairs of the Osage Indians <S.

3085). LABOR

<10.30 a. m.) To amend the act approved March 3, 1931, relating to the

rate of wages for laborers and mechanics. emplo37ed by contractors and subcontractors on public buildings <S. 3M.'D.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BTI.LS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of Rule XIII, Mr. KNUTSON: Committee on Indian Affairs. H. R.

8393. A bill providing for payment of $100 to each enrolled Chippewa Indian of the Reci Lake Band of Minnesota from the timber funds standing to their credit in the Treasury of the United States; with amendment CRept. No. 1133). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Mr. RAYBURN: Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. H. R. 11246. A bill authorizing the Boca Chica Bridge Co., its successors and assigns, to construct, maintain, and operate a bridge across the Rio Grande at Boca Chica, Tex.; with amend.nfent (Rept. No. 1134). Referred to the House calendar.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of Rule XIll, Mr. MONTET: Committee on Military Affairs. H. R. 3037.

A bill for the relief of James J. Gianaros; without amendment (Rept. No. 1129). Refened to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mrs. KAHN: Committee on Military Affairs. H. R. 8669. A bill for the relief of George W. Edgerly; without amendment (Rept. No. 1130). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. MONTET: Committee on Military Affairs. H. R. 9053. A bill for the relief of Carl C. Baxter; with amendment (Rept. No. 1131). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. BLACK: Committee on Claims. H. R. 10107. A bill for the relief of Weymouth Kirkland and Robert N. Golding; with amendment <Rept. No. 1132). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 3 of Rule XXII, public bills and resolutions were introduced and severally referred as follows:

By Mr. SHANNON: A bill (H. R. 11615) to establish a holiday to be known as Jefferson's Birthday; to the Committee on the District o1 Columbia.

9008 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE APRIL 26 By Mr. CONDON: A bill (H. R. 11616) declaring Novem

ber 11 a legal holiday, to be known as Armistice Day; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. HASTINGS: A bill <H. R. 11617) to amend section 15 of the act of Congress approved July 17, 1916, known as the Federal farm loan act; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

By Mr. JOHNSON of Texas: A bill (H. R. 11636) to amend an amendment to the Federal highway act, approved ·May 21, 1928 (45 Stat. L. 683); to the Committee on Roads.

By Mr. TINKHAM: A bill (H. R. 11637) to provide for the promotion of janitors and cleaners in the Post. Office Department; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads. ' · By Mr. GffiSON: A bill (H. R. 11638) to amend section 7 of an act entitled "An act making appropriations to provide for the government of the District of Columbia for the fiscal year ending June 30; 1903, and for other purposes," approved July 1, 1902, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

By Mr. CARTER of Wyoming: A bill (H. R. 11639) to authorize extensions of time on oil and gas prospecting permits, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Public Lands.

By Mr. TINKHAM: A bill (H. R. 11640) to amend section 211 of the Criminal Code, as amended (relating to certain nonmailable matter); to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. TAYLOR of Tennessee: A bill (H. R. 11641) to protect national banks; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

By Mr. MONTAGUE: Resolution (H. Res. 204) providing for the consideration of House Joint Resolution 97, a joint resolution proposing to amend the Constitution of the United States to bar aliens from being counted in congressional apportionments; to the Committee on Rules.

By Mr. McSWAIN: Resolution <H. Res. 205) for the consideration of H. R. 11051, a bill to provide for the leasing and other utilization of the Muscle Shoal properties; and for other purposes; to the Committee on Rules.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS · Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, private bills and resolutions

were introduced and severally'referred as follows: By Mr. CULKIN: A bill (H. R. 11618) granting an in

crease of pension to Caroline E. Schmidling; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. FINLEY: A bill (H. R. 11619) granting a pension to Sarah Nantz; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. GRISWOLD: A bill (H. R. 11620) granting an increase of pension to Elizabeth R. Smith; to the Com-mittee on Invalid Pensions. ·

By Mr. HOOPER: A bill (H. R. 11621) granting a pension to Maude Holmes; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. JENKINS: A bill (H. R. 11622) granting an increase of pension to Mary Entsminger; to the Comniittee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. LOZIER: A bill <H. R. 11623) granting an increase of pension to Elizabeth Perry; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. MANLOVE: A bill (H. R. 11624) for the relief of Thomas A. Heard; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mrs. OWEN: A bill <H. R. 11625) for the relief of Aurora Booth; to the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. PARKER of New York: A bill (H. R. 11626) granting an increase of pension to Lovina Whitney; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. PARSONS: A bill (H. R. 11627) granting a pension to Jessie Carter; to the Committee on Pensions.

By Mr. REED of New York: A bill (H. R. 11628) granting an increase of pension to Emma Pierce; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. · Also, a bill CH. R. 11629) granting an increase of pension to Selena Luxford; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. SCHNEIDER: A bill (H. R. 11630) granting an increase of pension to Julia Don Levy; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. THOMASON: A bill (H. R. 11631) granting a pension to Rosa Wilson; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. VINSON of Kentucky: A bill (H. R. 11632) granting a pension to Cordie Brandenburg; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. GREEN: A bill (H. R. 11633) for the relief of George Preston Thomas; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. PEAVEY: A bill <H. R. 11634) granting an increase of pension to Sarah A. Dearborn; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. STRONG of Kansas: A bill (H. R. 11635) for the relief of George B. Barrett; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

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

laid on the Clerk's desk and referred as follows: 7067. By Mr. ANDREWS of New York: Petitions from

1,075 employees of the Buffalo post office, urging opposition to the several pay-cut measures being proposed for postal employees and President Hoover's economy (furlough) plan; to the Committee on Economy.

7068. By Mr. BOEHNE: Petition of C. T. Lamb Division, No. 414, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, of Petersburg, Ind., urging support of the bill known as the Parker bill; to the Co~mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

7069. By Mr. CULKIN: Petition of the Common Council of the City of Oswego, N.Y., urging the repeal of the eighteenth amendment; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

7070. Also, petition of Oswego Falls Corporation, Fulton, N.Y., and 20 other paper mills of central and northern New York, opposing any tariff legislation, countervailing, equalizing, or otherwise, on wood pulp or pulpwood; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

7071. By Mr. JENKINS: Petition signed by 23 citizens of southern Ohio, protesting against the passage of House bills 8092 and 8759, or any other compulsory Sunday observance bill; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

7072. By Mr. LINDSAY: Petition of the American Agricultural Chemical Co., New York City, Horace Bowker, president, opposing an increase of the Federal transfer tax on stock sales; to the Committee on Ways and Means . .

7073. Also, petition of National Federation of Federal Em·ployees, opposing the so-called omnibus economy bill for certain reasons; to the Committee on Economy.

7074. By Mr. MEAD: Petition of the Common Council of the City of Buffalo, favoring payment of the soldiers' bonus; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

7075. Also, petition of the Disabled Provisional Officers of the World War; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

7076. Also, petition of the New York State Department of the Reserve Officers' Association of the United States opposing reduction in military appropriations and favoring an appropriation sufficient to provide inactive duty and .the training of pilots; to the Committee on Appropriations.

7077. Also, petition of San Antonio Chapter, Disabled .Emergency Officers of World War; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

7078. By Mr. PARKER of Georgia: Petition of Dr. Walter E. Simmons, m,ayor city of Metter, and nine other citizens of the State of Georgia, urging the enactment of legislation regulating busses and trucks engaged in hauling passengers and freight; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

7079. Also, petition of William H. Berans and 53 other residents of Savannah, Ga .• urging the immediate payment of the remaining 50 per cent of the World War veterans' adjusted-service certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

•

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 9009 7080. By Mr. RUDD: Petition of Carroll S. Smith. New

York City, favoring the passage of House bill 11207; to the Committee on Economy.

7081. Also, petition of Baker, president Local 411, West Point, N. Y., opposing reduction of the Federal employees' salaries and payless furloughs; to the Committee on Economy.

7082. Also, petition of the American Agricultural Chemical Co., New York City, opposing increase of the Federal transfer tax on stock sales; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

7083. Also, petition of Cooperative G. L. F. Credit Corporation, Ithaca, N. Y., favoring tbe passage of the NorbeckSteagall bill; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

7084. Also, petition of M. J. Strathowe, Maspeth, Long Island, N. Y., opposing the suspension for one year of Federal aid for voc.ational education; to the Committee on Economy.

7085. Also, petition of American Legion Auxiliary, Queens County, N. Y., opposing reduction of hospitalization and compensation of \Vorld War veterans; to the Committee on Economy.

7086. Also, petition of Manahan Chemical Co., New York City, opposing the passage of the Muscle Shoals bill; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

7087. Also, petition of William J. Olvany <Inc.), New York City, favoring the passage of House bill 9975; to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds.

7088. By Mr. SANDERS of New York: Petition of Tony Ippolito and seven other World War veterans of Avon, N.Y., favoring immediate payment of the balance of the soldiers' bonus; to the Committee on \Vays and Means.

7089. By Mr. SELVIG: Petition of Cloquet Commercial Club, Cloquet, Minn., favoring enactment of House bill 8688, providing for a compensating duty to be paid on pulpwood shipped into the United States by countries whose currency is depreciated; to the Committee on Ways and Means ..

7090. Also, petition of Railroad Employees' National Pension Association, urging enactment of railroad pension bill, H. R. 9891; to the Committee on Labor.

7091. Also, petition of C. C. Stetson, St. Paul, Minn., favoring retrenchment of Gov~rnment expenses wherever possible; to the Committee on Appropriations.

7092. Also, petition of C. W. Bjorness, Helmer Gaustad, and others, of Henning, Minn., and vicinity favoring immediate cash payment of bonus certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

7093. Also, petition of Selmar Waldemar, Richard Berg, and others, of Henning, Minn., and vicinity urging immediate cash payment of adjusted-compensation certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

7094. Also, petition of Shipmasters Association of Duluth, Minn., opposing decommissioning of the U. S. S. Paducah and any cancellation of training cruises for Naval Reserve; to the Committee on Appropriations.

7095. Also, petition of Park Region District and County Medical Society of Minnesota, opposing House bill 7525; to the Committee on Appropriations.

7096. Also, petition of George Morek and others, of Skime, Minn., favoring payment of soldiers' bonus; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

7097. Also, petition of Minnesota Vocational Agriculture Instructors Association, numbering 75 instructors in Minnesota, urging continued appropriation to maintain valuable agricultural training; to the Committee on Appropriations.

SENATE WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 1932

(Legislative day of Monday, April 25, 1932)

The Senate met at 12 o'clock meridian, on the expiration of the recess.

The \liCE PRESIDENT. The Senate will receive amessage from the House of Representatives.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE

A message from the House of Representatives by Mr. Haltigan, one of its clerks, announced that the House had passed without amendment the bill (S. 3095) for the relief of J. J. Bradshaw and Addie C. Bradshaw.

The message also announced that the House had agreed to the amendment of the Senate to the bill <H. R. 1770) for the relief of Senelma Wirkkula, also known as Selma Wirkkula; Alice Marie Wil·kkula; - and Bernice Elaine Wirkkula.

The message further announced that the House had passed the following bills of the Senate, each with an amendment, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate:

S. 194. An act for the relief of Jeff Davis Caperton and Lucy Virginia Caperton; and

S. 3270. An act for the relief of Daniel S. Schaffer Co. <Inc.).

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

H. R. 804. An act for the relief of Mary L. Marshall, ad-ministratrix of the estate of Jerry A. Litchfield;

H. R. 1230. An act for the relief of Chase E. Mulinex; H. R. 1260. An act for the relief of James E. Fraser; H. R.1290. An act for the relief of Jeannette Weir; H. R. 1322. An act for the relief of Anna Lohbeck; H. R. 1786. An act for the relief of Arthur H. Teeple; H. R. 2013. An act for the relief of Pinkie Osborne; H. R. 2033. An act for the relief of Theresa M. Shea; H. R. 2042. An act for the relief of Hedwig Grassman

Stehn; H. R. 2189. An act for the relief of Elsie M. Sears; H. R. 2841. An act for the relief of the owners of the

steamship Exmoor; H. R. 3467. An act for the relief of David C. Jeffcoat; H. R. 3582. An act for the relief of the Atchison, Topeka

& Santa Fe Railway Co.; H. R. 3693. An act for the relief of William Knourek; H. R. 3811. An act for the relief of Lela B. Smith; H. R. 3812. An act for the relief of the estate of Harry W.

Ward, deceased; H. R. 4071. An act for the relief of W. A. Blankenship; H. R. 4233. An act for the relief of Enza A. Zeller; H. R. 4885. An act for the relief of Kenneth G. Gould; H. R. 5052. An act to authorize the incorporated town of

Juneau, ·Alaska, to use the funds arising from the sale of bonds in pursuance to the act of Congress of February 11, 1925, for the purpose either of improving the sewerage system of said town or of constructing permanent streets in said town;

H. R. 5256. An act for the restitution of employees of the post office at Detroit, Mich.;

H. R·. 5265. An act for the relief of A. W. Holland; H. R. 5940. An act for the relief of Florian Ford; H. R. 5998. An act for.the relief of Mary Murnane; H. R. 6487. An act to authorize the incorporated town of

Petersburg, Alaska, to issue bonds in any sum not exceeding $100,000 for the purpose of improving and enlarging the capacity of the municipal light and power plant, and the improvement of the water and sewer systems, and for the purpose of retiring or purchasing bonds heretofore issued by the town of Petersburg;

H. R. 6713. An act for estimates necessary for the proper maintenance of the Government wharf at Juneau, Alaska;

H. R. 7308. An act for the relief of Amy Turner; H. J. Res. 361. Joint resolution to authorize the Surgeon

General of the United States Public Health Service to make a survey as to the existing facilities for the protection of the public health in the care and treatment of leprous persons in the Territory of Hawaii, and for other purposes; and

H. J. Res. 375. Joint re&olution to provide additional appropriations for contingent expenses of the House of Representatives for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1932.

congressional record-senate - GovInfo.gov

Documents

Transcript of congressional record-senate - GovInfo.gov