CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE - GovInfo

•

1764 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE J .A.NU.ABY 20 Sabbath observance, and particularly House bill 78; to the use of the Navy; and the amount of high explosives necessary for said Committee on the District of Columbia. purpose, your petitioners are informed, is very smalL

2087. By Mr. TILLMAN: Petition of sundry citizens of Ar~ Since the establishment of said Navy mine depot the Government has kansas, asking for legislation increasing pensions for Civil War found itself in the possession of large quantities of high explosives veterans and widows; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. " consisting of T. N. T. and other high explosives, and your petitioners

2088. Also, petition of various citizens of Arkansas, protest~ are informed that they have now stored on thls tract of land about ing against the passage of compulsory Sunday observance bills; 22,000,000 pounds of T. N. T., some of whiC'h is in the storehouses to the Committee on the District of Columbia. already built upon said property, some in the open ; and that new

2089. By Mr. UNDERWOOD: Petition signed by E. C. Rid~ buildings are contemplated for the purpose of making thls a permanent nour and other citizens of Glenford, Ohio, in favor of an in~ storage. crease in pension to Civil War veterans and their widows; to Your petitioners realize the fact that it is necessary for the Gov~ the Committee on Invalid Pensions. ernment to ha>e a certain amount of high explosives on hand, and that

2090. By Mr. WOODRUFF: Petition of citizens of the tenth some place shcmld be allotted for thls purpose. And your petitioners 1.\fichigan district, against House bill 78, Sunday obser·vance bill ; would not object to this area being used as a Navy mine depot, as to the Committee on the District of Columbia. originally contemplated, but from information that they have the said

2091. Also, petition from citizens of Bay City, Mich., favoring tract of land is being changed and set aside as a place for the storage of legislation increasing pension of Civil War veterans and thP.il" large quantities of high explosives, and that some of the storage builddependents; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. ings now on said property, and others that are contemplated being

erected, are within 2,800 feet of the outside pro~rty line and not a

SENATE FRIDAY, J anruary 110, 19138

(Le[Jislative day of Tuesday, Jnnuary 1"1, 1928)

The Sen~te reassembled at 12 o'clock meridian, on the expiration of the recess.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE--ENROLLED BILL SIGNED

A me-ssage from the House of Representatives, by Mr. Haltigan, one of its clerks, announced that the Speaker had affixed his signature to the enrolled bill ( S. 672) for the purpose of rehabilitating farm lands in the flood areas, and it was thereupon signed by the Vice President.

CALL OF THE ROLL

Mr. CURTIS. 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 Sena~

tors answered to their names : .Ashurst Fess McKellar Barkley Fletcher McLean Bayard Frazier McMaster Bingham George McNary

~}:;:e 8iJ~h M!lc~i~d Borah Glass Neely Bratton Gooding Norbeck Brookha1i: Gould Norris Brou ·sard Greene Nye Bruce Hale Overman Capper Harris Phipps Caraway Harrison Pine Copeland Hayden Pittman Couzens Hefiin Reed. Mo. Curtis Howell Reed, Pa. Cutting Johnson Robinson, Ark. Dale Jones Robinson, Ind. Deneen Kendrick Sackett Dill Keyes Sheppard Ferris King Shipstead

Shortridge Simmons Smith Smoot Steck Steiwer Stephens Swanson Thomas Trammell Tydings Tyson Wagner Walsh, Mass. Walsh, Mont. Warren Waterman Watson Wheeler Willis

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

THE FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEENTH AMENDMENTS

an-

Mr. SWANSON. Mr. President, t11ere has been much discussion in both Houses of Congress, in the press, and in other places regarding the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments to the Federal Constitution. I desire to give notice that I purpose on next Monday morning, as soon as the routine morning business is concluded, to deliver an address on the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments to the Federal Constitution.

PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS

Mr. SWANSON. 1\lr. President, I present a · petition signed by citizens of Wil,liamsburg, Va., regarding the storage of explosives at Yorktown. It is not a very long petition, and for the information of the Senate I ask that it be ptinted in the RECoR.D and referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

There being no objection, the petition was referred to the Committee on NaYal Affairs and ordered to be printed iil the Rroo&D, as follows : To the honorable Senators an4 Members of the House of Representatives

ft·on~ Virginia in the Oon,gress of the U1~i"tca States: Your petitioners, the undersigned residents of the city of Williamsburg,

Va., respectfully call your attention to the fact that the United States of .America during the period of the war activities acquired a tract of land of about 10,000 acres lying between Williamsburg and Yorktown for the purpose, as stated at that time, of establishing a Navy mine depot.

Your petitioners understood the term "Navy mine depot" to mean a illace for the storage and handling of explosives needed for the current

much greater distance from the only main highway that there is leading down this peninsula from Williamsburg to Newport News.

Your petitioners, also being informed that Congress is now under-taking to definitely decide about some permanent arrangement for the storage of high explosives, respectfully request that you will carefully investigate the tract of land in question. And that if upon an investi~ gation it is found that it would be a detriment for this section of the country for the storage of such large quantities of high explosives that arrangements will be made for the removal of the excess amount of high explosives on said tract of land-if it should be shown that there is an excess-and that proper action be taken to guard the safety of the lives and the property of the people living in this community.

While your petitioners hardly think it necessary, still, they call your attention to the fact that this peninsula is the most historic portion of the United States; that large numbers of tourists are tlaily visiting this community; that this is not a sparsely settled country, but the historic town of Yorktown lies to the east of this Navy mine depot; that the city of Williamsburg lies to the west and is not more than 3% miles from the wester-n limits of the Navy mine depot; and that besides the residents of the city of Williamsburg there are two State institutions; namely, the Eastern State Hospital, containing in the neighborhood of 1,000 inmates, and the College of William and Mary, with about 1,200 students.

In consideration of the foregoing facts your petitioners urge that the Navy mine depot at Yorktown be not converted into a place for storage of high explosives in large quantities; that such storage constitutes n continuing menace and operates to retard the growth and prosperity of the community.

Respectfully submitted. V. 1-I. Teddy, H. 1\I. Stryker, W. E. Topping, T. C. Hall, M. W.

Foster, G. T. Brooks, R. S. Broocks, W. L. Thorpe, w. F. Low, R. W. Mahome, J. G. Warburton, B. I. Bell, C. c. Hall, T. T. Rogers, ID. M. Gwathryn, Clarence T. Casey, Julian L. Casey, Wllliam Wallace, F. H. Geddy, R. W. Lane, jr., W. A. R. Goodwin, Frank Armstead, J". S. Timberlake, A. G. Harwood, sr., T. J. McCracken, W. S. Hitchens, G. W. Brown, J. A. C. Chandler, Mrs. Alice Pollard Stryker, J. M. Henderson, John Garland Pollard.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas presented a letter from John R. Fordyce, of Hot Springs National Park, and a resolution adopted at the annual meeting of the Arkansas Real Estate Associa~ tion, at Little Rock, Ark., favoring the prompt passage of le!tis~ lation to create the Ouachita National Park in Polk and 1\I~ntgomery Counties, Ark., which were referred to the Committee on Public Lands and Srn-veys.

1\.Ir. KING presented a telegram from the Provo Conservation Association, signed by Mark Anderson, of Provo Utah remon~ strating against the passage of the so-called Smoot ' grazing bill, which was referred to the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys.

He also presented a resolution adopted by the board of gov~ ernors of the Salt Lake (Utah) Chamber of Commerce, protesting against further consideration of the so-called Swing~ Johnson Boulder Dam bill until certain suggested actions have been taken, which was referred to the Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation.

Mr. FRAZIER presented the petition of R. E. Swendseid, of Stanley, and 65 other citizens, all in the State of North Dakota, praying for amendment of the existing immigration law with the 1890 census. as the basis of computation, and protesting against a national-origin basis of computation, which was re~ ferred to the Committee on Immigration .

Mr. JONES presented a memorial of sundry citizens of Spo~ kane, Wash., remonstrating against the operation of the parcel post law as to the rate on postal cards and circular mail as being unjust and discriminatory, and requesting amendment

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1765 thereof so as to conform to the 1924 rate, which was referred to the Committee on Po t Offices . and Post Roads.

Mr. DEll..~~ presented a petition of sund1-y citizens of Chicago, Ill., praying for the prompt passage of legislation granting increased pensions to veterans of the Civil War and their widows, which was referred to the Committee on Pensions.

Mr. COPELAND presented a resolution adopted by the standing committee of the Marin·e Society of New York, N. Y., remonstrating against the passage of the so-called Jones government-owner-hip merchant marine bill, which was ordered to lie on the table.

He also presented a resolution adopted by the Near East Democratic Organization, of New York, N. Y., remonstrating against the ratification of the Lausann·e treaty between the United States and Turkey, which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

He also presented a resolution adopted by the Parent·Teacher Association, of Rockville Center, Long Island, N. Y., favoring the continuance of the maternity and infancy work under the United States Children's Bureau, which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor.

Mr. BINGHAM presented a resolution adopted by the board of officers of the State Council of Connecticut, Junior Order United American :Mechanics, protesting against the repeal of the national origins provision of the existing immigration act, which was referred to the Committee on IIDl1li.gration.

Mr. WHEELER. Mr. President, I present a brief submitted by the Anti-Monopoly League for investigation of American concessions abroad by the Senate Foreign ~ations Committee as provided in Senate Resolution 47, offered by me on December 12, 1927, which I ask may be printed in the RECORD and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

There being no objection, the brief was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and ordered to be printed in the R.Econn, as follows : Brief for investigation of Americans' concessions abroad by the Senate

Committee Qn Foreign Relations, as provided in Senate Resolution 47, by Mr. W!nrnLER, submitted by the Anti-Monopoly ~crue, Bliss Building, Washington, D. C. 1. Location of natural resources does not give a:ny prima facie right

to board or monopolize them. In an aide memoire Qf our State Department of January 6, 1909,

Inviting Mexico and Canada to send delegates to a conservation conference held' bere in February frf that year the statement is made :

" The people of the whole world are interested in the natural resources of the whole world, benefited by their conservation, and injured by their destruction. The people of every country are interested in the supply of food and of material for manllifaeture in every other country, not only because these are interchangeable through pro~ssetl of trade, but because a knowledge of the total supply is necessary to the intelligent treatment of each natio-n's share of the supply.

" Nor is this all. A knowledge of the continuance and stability of perennial and renewable resources is no less important to the world than a knowledge of the quantity or the term remaining for the enjoyment of those resources which when consumed are ineplaceable. As to all the great natural sources of national welfare, the peoples o:t to-day hold the earth in trust for the peoples to come after them. Reading the lessons of the past a.ri~ht, it would be for such a C()nference to look beyond the present t(} the future."

Although first steps were taken toward calling an international· conference on the allocation of natural resources, it was not held.

2. .Americans have secured control of natural resources in many parts of the world and are constantly striving to secure additional resources.

Americans control or own valuable natural resources, or have concessions, in nearly all important Central and South American countries,

' including Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Pero, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Guatemala, and Mexico. They have interests in Mesopotamia, Turkey, Russia, many parts of Africa, and elsewhere. They are the great financial power in Cuba, Haiti, and Porto Rico.

Americans' private investments abroad total about $14,000,000,000 and are increasing very rapidly. Much of these investments are in concessions for developing oil fields ·and mineral resources, construction

·work, and plantation development. 3. Concessions secured through fraud, force, or misrepresentation are

a source of international friction, endanger legitimate investments, and · are an incentive to war.

Prof. Charles Hodges, director division oriental commerce, New York University, has stated the situation tersely:

" In its broadest- sense a concession is nothing more or less than a contract entered into by two parties for the performance ot a speci1led purpose on terms which have been freely entered into and designed to confer mutual advantages. Unlike undertakings to which both parties are private· interests, the concession becomes an outstanding phase of mode:rn inte!"national relations because of the inequality between the parties to such an agreement. Unless the concession is granted by one

government to another government, there is it.n essential inequality between the parties. This is typical of the general run of rights, so that the relationship betw~n the parties to the understanding is that of two wholly d.i.frerent interests-one the sovereign state, subject only to the dictates o:f international law as a member of the community of nations, and the other the subject of another such sovereign state which itself may be involved only indirectly through its own nationals in such an undertaking.

" Concession diplomacy may be set down as the root of the evil in Abyssinia, China, or Nicaragua. It may be described as the economia side of the political struggles of industrial nations; as a commercial undertaking in which a business proposition is made into a political deal; as a private enterprise transformed into a diplomatic stake. The fo.reign office, not the business man, becomes the custodian of the equities involved.

" In other words, it fs not the fact of bnsiness development overseas whieh is sinister, but the political implications put bebind this economic expansion."

Also: "Until the PeoPles of nations deal with the larger aspects of foreign

policy in truly democratic terms, it seems to me that the whole question of the control of concession diplomacy is elusory. It is part and parcel ot so much mo:re vast a problem that it can not be detached from the greater political setting. In a word, to take the danger out of concessions is to remove the menace which attaches in a far larger degree to the whole trend of present-day diplomacy."

4. Concessions a.re in the nature of franchises or charters, which in the United States are matters of public record.

Among the most important acts of legislation in America are those requiring that . before public franchises and charters are granted there must be investigation and public records, and empowering the Interstate Commerce Commission to pass upon the issuance of securities by railroads. These acts are based upon the superior rights of the public to those of investors. Concessions granted by a government of a foreign country 'b) an American citizen to exploit a natural resource are of an even more important public nature, because they involve greater di1Hculty in adjudication of d.i1Ierenees of intent or interpretation than obtains at home beea.use of the greater dffficulty in bringing the matter. in dispute before a competent court satisfactory to both parties.

A charter or· franchise for operation of a natural resource, railroad, or public utility, moreover. is granted between more nearly equals-the governmental agency and the finan<;!ial interests. A " concession " ts granted by- tbe GQvernment to the citizen of a powerful nation in the case of the United States.

5. The United States, controlling two-fifths of the world's mineral resources, doing two-fifths of the world's work, and having about the same proportion of the world's wealth, is an object of hatred or envy, in most countries of the world. It can not afford to permit unrestrained selfishness of a few citizens to in>ol've it in warfare which can be localized oniy with great difficulty.

Dr. C. K. Leith, of Wisconsin Unh·ersity, in the October issue of Foreign Affairs, summarizes the relation of natural resources to production and wealth as follows :

•• The United States originates and controls about 40 per ~nt of the world's milwral production, and the United States and Great Bl'itain together control at least 75 per cent.

"By reason of their exploitation of power resources-coal, oiJ, gas, and water-the north Atlantic countries, counting both man power and mineral poweP, are doing annually five times the mechanical work of the combined total of Russia, China, and India, the three most populous countties of the world, though the population of the north Atlantic countries is only a third as great. With a fifth of the world's population, this group. of countries is doing about two-thirds of the world's work. The United States alone is doing about 40 per cent of the world's work, and its. next nearest competitor, Great Britain, about a quarter as much as the United States.

"This perspective reflects more or less the distribution of national wealth and the prevailing standards of living, as might be expected from the fact that wealth is essentially. a product of work."

Doctor Leith further comments accurately : "We are therefore witnessing the conflict of two powerful opposing

forces--()n the .one hand, world demand for raw materials, which knows no national boundaries and which is forcing cooperation in order that demand may be efficiently satisfied; on the other, the nationalistic forces, directed toward partitioning resources for national gain or security. Many recent international episodes are an expression of this problem, and more are in store."

6. The development and growth of great manufacturing interests demands greater community of interest with respect to natural resources and raw materials.

In 1920 the International Miners' Congress adopted th~ following resolution : " That there be constituted within a brief period an inter~ national office for the ilish·ibution of fuel, ores, and other raw materials indispensable for the revival of normal economic life., The League of Nations, through its economic committee, and the economic conferences have gi>en consideration to this problem, and the last

.1766 CONGRESSIO~ AL RECOR.D-8EN ATE JANUARY 20 economic conference approved the plinciple of an internntional allocation of natuml resources.

7. The necessity for an equitable allocation of the worJd's natural resources is recognized in one of the most practical of the famous •· fourteen points":

" The removal, so far as possible, of aU economic barriers and the establishment of an equallty of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance."

It was also stressed by President Wilson in his reply to the Pope's peace note, in which he stated:

"The American people * * * believe that peace shoqld rest upon the rights of peoples • • great or small, weak or powerfultheir equal rights to freedom and security and self-government, and to a participation upon fair terms in the economic opportunities of the world."

It is obvious that there can not be such " participation upon fair terms in the economic opportunities of the world," with the United States controlling 40 per cent and Great Britain 35 per cent-together three-quarters of the mineral resources of the world and using them to crush the rest of the world commercially. Xearly all wars have sprung, in. the last analysis, from trade rivalries and desire to secure natural resources.

8. Secret concessions, secretly arrived at by .Americans in conjunction with weak or corrupt Government officials, intimidated by the background of America's unlimited financial and military power, are a repudiation of every declared purpose of the United States in entering the World War, stamp us as hypocrites, and embitter the world against us.

The vigorous opposition to an investigation of America's concessions and making a public record thereof is the best and most conclusive proof that this should be done.

America's entrance into the League of Nations or her adherence to the World Court, or both, are relatively unimportant compared with .America's policy even as an " isolationist " Nation upon basic economic and fiscal policies. Should she challenge the rest of the world to an equitable and just policy with respect to natural resources controlled by American nationals, by example, no power could withstand this. A public investigation of American concessions abroad and repudiation by the Government of sanction for any concessions obtained fraudulently, by threat of force, illegality, corruptly or unmorally, would be more effective in insuring peace than adoption of any resolution outlawing war, or starting a Navy program to cost up to $1,000,000,000.

The test of America's integrity and sincerity in entering the World War is her intelligence and actions in ending the economic causes of war-of which looting of natural resources in backward countries is first.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Mr. TRA.l\IMELL, from the Commitee on Naval Affairs, to which was referred the bill ( S. 771) providing for the loan of the U. S. S. Di-spatch to the State of Florida, reported it without amendment and submitted a report (No. 103) thereon.

Mr. BRATTON, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the bill ( S. 700) authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to execute an agreement with the Middle Rio Grande conservancy district providing for conservation, irrigation, drainage, and flood control for the Pueblo Indian lands in the Rio Grande Valley, N. 1\.Iex:., and for other purposes, reported it with amendments and submitted a report (No. 104) thereon.

Mr. NORBECK, from the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, to which was referred the bill ( S. 1271) to more effectively meet the obligations of the United States under the migratory bird treaty with Great Britain by lessening the dangers threatening migratory game birds from drainage and other causes, by the acquisition of areas of land and of water to furnish in perpetuity reservations for the adequate protection of such birds ; and by providing funds for the establish· ment of such areas, their maintenance a.nd improvement, and for other purposes, reported it with amendments and submitted a report (No. 105) thereon.

INDIAN AFFAIRS-LAWS A:XD TREATIES

)fr. FRAZIER, from the Committee on Indian Affail·s, reported a resolution ( S. Res. 115), which was referred to the the Commiteee on Printing, as follows :

Resol1Jed, That the manuscript of the laws, agreements, Executive orders, proclamations, etc., relating to Indian Affairs, prepared under Senate Resolution 57, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session, be printed as a Senate document, and that 50 additional copies be printed for tile tise of the Indian Office and Indian agencies.

BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTION L ""TRODUCED

Bills and a joint I;esolution were introduced, read the first time, and, by unanimous consent, the second time, and referred as follows:

By Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas: A bill (S. 2693) authorizing the Secretary of ·war to convey

to the State of Arkansas certain lands forming a part of the Camp Pike area, in the State of Arkansas; to the Committee on Mill tary Affairs.

By l\Ir. SUDIONS: A bill ( S. 2694) to establish a. national military park to com

memorate the Battle of Bentonville; to the Committee on 1\fili~ tary Affairs.

A bill ( S. 2695) for the relief of Gilliam Grissom (with an accompanying paper) ; to the Committee on Finance.

A. bill ( S. 2696) granting an increase of pension to Jacob J. King (with acc-ompanying papers); to the Committee on Pensions.

By l\lr. DALE: A bill (S. 2697) for the relief of Hattie 1\I. 1\fc:M:ahon; to the

Committee on Claims. A bill (S. 2698) granting the consent of Congress to the

State of Vermont to construct, maintain, and operate a free highway bridge across the Clyde River at or neru· Newport, Vt. ; to the Committee on Commerce.

By Mr. BAYARD: A bill (S. 2700) granting an increase of pension to Annie

Richardson (with accompanying papers) ; and A bill ( S. 2701) granting an increase of pension to Rosalie

Schmitt Grotz (w~th accompanying papers); to the Committee on Pensions.

By 1\fr. DENEEN: A bill ( S. 2702) granting a. pension to Alfred Barker; A bill (S. 2703) granting an increase of pension to John S.

Baxoor; and · A bill ( S. 2704) granting an increase of pension to Elizabeth

Kille; to the Committee on Pensions. A bill ( S. 2705) for the relief of Harry Evans Nowland; and A bill ( S. 2706) for the relief of Arthur C. Lueder; to the

Commitooe on Claims. By Mr. FRAZIER (by request): A bill ( S 270'1) to provide for the clas"'ification of all un

allotted land of the Klamath Indian Reservation and to reserve for forest-production purposes all land primarily adapted to the production of crops of timber; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

By Mr. HARRIS : A bill ( S. 2708) granting a pension to Moina Michael ; to the

Committee on Pensions. By Mr. GOULD: A bill ( S. 2709) granting an increase of pension to Mary R.

Pendleton (with accompanying pape-rs) ; to the Committee on Pensions.

By 1\Ir. ROBINSON of Indiana : A bill (S. 2710) granting a pension to David Fisher (with

accompanying papers) ; to the Committee on Pensions. By l\lr. TRAMMELL: A bill (S. 2711) for the relief of Walter W. Johnston; to the

Committee on Claims. A bill ( S. 2712) authorizing the Secretary of the Navy to

present fonner Coxswain Patrick J. Murphy with a distinguished-seryice me-dal; and

A bill ( S. 2713) for the relief of Thomas N. Smith ; to the Cominittee on Naval Affairs.

By Mr. JOHNSON: A bill (S. 2714) granting compensation to James Ahern; to

the Committee on Finance. A bill (S. 2715) granting an annuity to AI'thur E. Nathanson;

to the Committee on Civil Service. A. bill ( S. 2716) for the relief of Andrew M. Dunlop ; and A bill ( S. 2717) granting compensation to Mary I. Latta; to

the Committee on Claims. A bill ( S. 2718) authorizing the establi ·hment of the Califor

nia migratory-bird refuge; to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.

By l\lr. WILLIS : A bill ( S. 2719) granting an increase of pension to Margaret

E. Morris (with accompanying papers') ; to the Committee on Pensions.

By :Mr. SHEPPARD : A bill (S. 2720) for the relief of David l\IcD. Shearer; to the

Committee on Claims. By l\lr. TYD~GS: A. bill (S. 2721) authotizing acquisition of a site for the

farmers' produce market, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

By Mr. METCALF : . A bill ( S. 2722) granting an increase of pension to Isabella.

Fleming Potts (with accompanying papers) ; to the Committee on Pensions.

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1767 By Mr. BROOKHART: A bill ( S. 2723) granting a pension to Wilbur B. Swofford;

to the Committee on Pensions. By Mr. McKELLAR: A bill (S. 2724) granting an increase of pension to Mrs.

Frank Browne ~!cConnell ; to the Committee on Pensions. By ~fr. THOMAS: A bill ( S. 2725) to extend the provisions of section 2455,

United States Revised Statutes, to certain public lands in the State of Oklahoma; to the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys.

A bill ( S. 2726) to regulate the payment of money to adult members of the Osage Tribe of Indians ;

(By request.) A bill (S. 2727) relating to the tribal and individual affairs of the Osage Indians of Oklahoma; and

A bill (S. 2728) to amend section 6 of the act of Cong1·ess approved February 27, 1925, entitled "An act to amend section 3 of the act of Congress of June 28, 1906, entitled '.An act of Congress for the division of the lands and funds of the Osage Indians in Oklahoma, and for other purposes ' ,, ; to the Comrni ttee on ·In dian Affairs.

By Mr. FESS: A joint t·esolution ( S. J. Res. 82) providing for the erection of

a public historical museum on the site of Fort Defiance, Defiance, Ohio; to the Committee on the Library.

FLOOD DISASTER 11~ VERMONT

Mr. GREENE introduced a bill (S. 2699) to authorize an appropriation for the relief of the State of Vermont on account of roads and bridges damaged or destroyed by the recent flood, which was read twice by its title.

Mr. DALE. Mr. President, as everyone knows, Vermont has suffered a great disaster from floods, and the Vermont delegation in Congress has agreed upon this flood relief bill. I move

. that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce. The motion was agreed to. ·

CASPER-ALCOVA RECLAMATION PROJE-CT

Mr. PIDPPS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill ( S. 1136) to provide for the storage for diversion of the waters of the North Platte and construction of the Casper-Alcova reclamation project, which was referred to the Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation and ordered to be printed.

SETTLEMENT OF .ALIEN PROPERTY CLAIMS

Mr. MAYFIELD submittef an amendment intended to be proposed by l:im to the bill (H. R. 7201) to provide for the settlement of certain claims of American nationals against Germany and of German nationals against the United States, for the ultimate return of all property of German nationals held by the Alien Property Custodian, and for the equitable apportionment among all claimants of certain available funds, which was referred to the Committee on Finance and ordered to be printed.

DffiECTION AS TO THREE O.ARGO SERVICES

Mr. JONES submitted a resolution (S. Res. 116), which was read and referred to the Committee on Commerce, as follows :

Whereas the United States Shipping Board has heretofore established under the direction of the merchant marine act three lines of cargo services from American Pacific ports to ports in the Ori-ent, one operating out of California, one ()Ut of Oregon, and one out of Waslllngton; and

Whereas these established lines have been built up during the past :tour years at an aggregate expense of over $4,000,000, exclusive of the cost of the vessels employed in such services, to where said lines are now practically self-sustaining ; and

Whereas the Shipping Board has determined to sell said three lines contemporaneously for private operation, under specifications and conditions which will make it impossible for any person or group -of persons primarily interested in any one line as an individual unit, to purchase and permanently maintain said line; and .

Whereas under said specifications as prepared and advertised, the bidding will be confined to persons or groups of persons desiting to acquire and maintain all three lines as a composite unit, thereby destroying the integrity of the lines as heretofore established; and

Whereas no intending purchaser can safely bid for a line as an individual unit without having entered into a combination with intending purchasers of other lines ; and

Whereas the specifications published by the Shipping Board will necessarily exclude from competitive bidding persons entitled to become purchasers and will confine the bidding to persons and groups who have ar'ranged monopolistic control of cargo shipping on the Pacific, all of which will result in inadequate prices for said services and in depriving the separate communities primarily interested in each line from becoming the owner and operator ot that line, thereby preventing snch ind1-

v1dunl communities from building up their trade and manufactures dependent upon oriental shipping; and

Whereas the sale of the lines under specifications as now advertised will inevitably result in a monopoly of shipping between American ports and the Orient: Now, therefore, be it

Re8olved, That the United States Shipping Board is requested and directed to pr~e.ed no furthell with the proposed sale of the tmee cargo services between American and oriental ports under the conditions and specifications now advertised for the reception of bids ou February HI, 1928, and that such advertisement be withdrawn and canceled, and, further, that new specifications be prepared after full opportunity o~ interested persons to be beard, which wUl enable any community prtmarily interested in any of the three lines to submit bids with such guarantees of protection as will enable such purchaser to maintain the line, and that such specifications of sale shall conform in all respects to the provisions of the merchant marine act.

PRINTIJ.\G OF PROCEEDINGS OF SOUTHERN RECLAMATION CONFEBE~CE

1\fr. FLETCHER submitted the following resolution ( S. Res. 117), which, with the accompanying papers, was referred to the Committee on Printing:

Resolved, That the proceedings of the Southern Reclamation Conference held 'In Washington, D. C., December 14 and 15, 1927, undet· the auspices of the Department of the Interior, Hubert Work, Secretary, and of the Bureau of Reclamation, Elwood Mead, Commissioner, be printed with illustrations as a Senate document.

LA...~S IN HARRISON COUNTY, MISS.

1.\f.r. STEPHENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for the present consideration of the bill ( S. 1425) to remove a cloud on title. The bill was reported favorably from the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys. It relates tn certain lands in Hauison County, 1\Iiss. A similar bill passed both the Senate and the House at the last session, but did not reach the· President in time to be signed by him .

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator from Mississippi asks immediate consideration of Senate bill 1425, which the clerk will read.

The Chief Clerk read the bill, as follows : Be 't enacted, etc., That the United States hereby relinquishes all

the right, title, and interest of the United States acquired by virtue of a marshal's deed dated August 21, 1848, in the following-described property situated in Harrison County, Miss., to wit: The west half southwest quarter section 30, township 7 south, range 10 west, and east half southeast quarter section 25, township 7 south, range 11 west, lying south of Bernards Bayou and containing about 150 acres.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, may I ask the Senator from Mississippi if the bill will lead to any debate?

Mr. STEPHENS. I think not. As I said, a similar bill passed both the Senate and the House at the last session, but it failed to reach the President in time for his signature.

There being no objection, the bill was considered as in Committee of the Whole.

The bill was reported to the Senat~ without amendment, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

W .ATER-POWER RESOURCES OF TENNESSEE

Mr. TYSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECoRD a very important letter addressed to me by the members of the Railroad and Public Utilities Commission of the State of Tennessee in regard to the methods of utilizing water power in that State.

There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the Rxoonn, as follows :

RAILROAD AND PL'BLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

Hon. L. D. TYSON,

OF THE STATE OF TE..,.NESSEE, :Z.lashuille, January 11, tm.

UnitecZ States Senate, WashingtonJ D. a. DEAR SENATOR: Replying to your favor of December 27, 1927, ad·

dressed to the Railroad and Public Utilities Commission of Tennessee, we respectfully submit the following as the attitude of the commission with respect to the questions mentioned in your letter :

It 1s a · matter of common knowledge that Tennessee is very rich in water-power resources. This commission bas keenly felt the great necessity ot preserving and protecting the rights of the State at the very beginning of the development of these resources. It is the opinion of the attorney general of the State of Tennessee, as well as of tbfs commission and of its counsel, that the State of Tennessee has invested this commission with power and authority to act in the premises. Having sought the advice of the attorney general and having fully and thoroughly considered the matter, on October 10, 1927, the commission passed an order, which was duly entered upon its minutes, copy of which order is herewith transmitted for your information as to its

1768 CO~GRESSIOX ~L RECORD-SENATE J ... ~XUAB~ 20 contents. This or11er f:ta tes as clearly ns llie commi:;sion and the attorney general and its counsel can do the att itude, po. itiou, and contention of this commission with respect t o the matter embraced in the order.

Thereafter, on November 1, 1927, the commis!'lion made a further order, after having cited various applicants fot· water-power rights to appear before it on tha t date, copy of which order is also transmitted to you herewith. This order also has the approval of the attorney general for the State and of the coun el for the commission.

Pursuant to the powers lodged in this commission by st atute in Tennessee, as the commission has been advised by the attorney general and its counsel, the commi ·ion prepared a form of application to be used by applicants for water-power sites, which form indicates the views entertained by the commission with respect to its powers and duties. A copy of same is likewise transmitted to you herewith. '!'his form of application was ready for distribution about the 1st of December last, and was mailed to the various prospective applicants for water-power sites. Up to the present time no formal application has been received by the commis ion.

Within the last few days a suit has been filed in the ·chancery court at Nashville by the Tennessee Eastern Electric Co., which challenges 1:he power of the commission, under the statutes of the State, to take and exercise the powers and jursidiction claimed by the commission and by the attorney general for the Stu te, as shown in the various documents hereinbefore mentioned and herewith transmitted. This bill in chancery also challenges the right and jurisdiction of the State itself with respect to the control over the development of water-power sites in Tennessee. It ma.r be that the recent suit wm have the effect of delaying the development of water-power sites in this State until the courts shall have finally acted upon the legal and constitutional questions raised in this bill. Since this bill undertakes to raise ques· tions with respect to the alleged violation of the fourteenth amendment of the Federal Constitution by the action already taken by this com· mis ~ion, it is possible that the case may ultimately be carried to the Supreme Court of the United States. Should thi be done, we fear that the development of the water-power resources of the State will be materially retarded. It i the sincere desire of the commission that everything possible be done to promote and hasten the development of the water-power resources of this State, provided always that in so doing the rights of the State and of its people be fully protected against exploitation on the part of those who at·e now seeking to secure these very valuable rights. The commission is ready and anxious at any time hereafter to at'ford to every applicant a prompt hearing and speedy determination of an questions raised in applications for water-power sites in Tennessee, and it here and now desires to make it clear that any delay in the development of the water-power resources of the State shall not be laid at the door of this commission.

Replying to that part of your letter wherein you inilicate some solicitude as to what effect the settlement of the question with respect to Muscle Shoals would have upon the granting of permits by the commission, it is 1·espectfully suggested that the action of Congress upon the question of the disposition made of Muscle Shoals may have a farreaching effect-perhaps a controlling effect-UlfOn the entire waterpower development on the Tennessee River above Muscle Shoals. We are trusting to you, and to Tennessee's other representatives in both Houses of the Congress, to protect and safeguard the rights of the State with respect to all these vast water-power resources above Muscle Shoals. Should such legislation be enacted by the Congress as to make all the other water-power sites on the Tennessee River above Muscle Shoals merely subordinate to or dependent upon the development at .Muscle Shoals, in our opinion untold losses would result to the people of Tennessee and to the State in its sovereign capacity. The commission views with alarm the possibility of the passage of such legislation as is r epresented by the Madden bill, so far as it attempts to interfere with the rights of the State of Tennessee through this commission to control and make disposition to independent companies of power sites on the Tennessee River or el ewhere within the boundaries of this State. This commission regards any attempt on the part of Congress to dispose of water-power sites within the boundaries of the respective States, independent of the action of the State, as an unwarranted invasion of the sovereignty of the State and an unconstitutional USUl'pation of the rights of the States and tire peoples thereof.

You inquire about how the commission is getting along with its proposition of making a charge for electricity generated by hydroelectric companies within the State of Tennessee, and express your approval of the underlying principle upon which the commission has based its action. The commission is gratified to know that you feel that it is "moying along the right line." For the reasons above set out, we may say that nothing has been done as yet, although the commission hopes that as soon as litigation is cleared away it may have an opportunity to put thm principle into effect. At this point it should be stated that if the commission is allowed t() go forward and require a reasonable charge per kilowatt-hour for electricity generated by the use of the State's valualJle water-power resources, a substantial sum would be raised annually and tu.rned into the treasury of the State to lighten the burdens of taxation and debt which in recent

years have grown very heavy. Such a charge is in no sense a tax upon the utility which enjoys the privilege of w::1ng the water power Qf the State, which belongs to its people and to the State in its sovereign capacity, but, on the other hand, is only compensation to the State and its people for a valuable property right whioh the State as sovereign owns and which it fuUy protects by its laws in its capacity as trustee for the people. It is nothing more nor le s than a lease charge, just such as the Federal Government proposes to exact for Muscle Shoals, or the State for any other State project. If the State should voluntarily and gratuitously confer upon the various corporations seeking to secure these valuable water-power sites the unqualified and unlimited power to develop them in their own way and without approval and supervision from any department of the State government, and if these companies should then be permitted to write into the rate base upon which is predicated the rate which they may charge for their products sold to the people of the State, the element of water-power value at an enormous sum, measured by the difference in the cost of generating electricity by the use of coal and steam on the one band and by water power on the other, it would result in levying a tax, in effect, upon the people of Tennessee aggregating millions of dollars annually and this commission feels that it would be false to its trust and recreant to its duty if it did not stand steadfastly for the rights of the people in the face of such tremendous possibilities. This is one of the questions raised in the recent suit above referred to. It is one of the propositions upon which this commission bas planted its feet and proposes to stand to the bitter end.

In :rour letter you have very kindly invited the commission to state its position with respect to the several bills that have been introduced in Congres , and in reply to this paragraph we desire to state that a bill bas been prepared along the lines of the McKellar-Garrett bill introduced in the last Congress, copy of which is herewith transmitted for your information, since this bill states clearly and definitely the attitude of the commission upon the subjects embraced therein. This bill bas the approval of the attorney general of the State of Tenness~t>, and was prepared under the direction of the commission and its coun.,el. Copies of this bill have been submitted to Senator McKELLAn, llon. FrNrs GARRETT, and Ron. CORDELL HuLL. The commission would uppreciate it if you would confer with the above-named gentlemen in regard to this bill.

Your inquiry as to what should be done in regard to the regulation of rates on power that comes into the State ft·om other l:itates, and power going out of this State into other States, is timely and important. It seems to the commission that one of the most important questions for the consideration of Congress is the enactment of legislation conferring upon some body, such as the Interstate Commerce Commission, power to regulate interstate rates for electric energy, just as has been done with respect to the regulation of passenger and freight rates on railroads, and rates on telephone and telegraph companies, etc. There would be no more danger of a conflict of authority in the regulation of interstate and intL·astate rates on electricity than there is in the regulation of freight and passenger rates on railroat:ls and other such subjects as have been covered by Federal and State legislation.

It Congress should fail to make any provisiQn for the regulation of interstate rates on electricity, hydroelectric companies in one State might transmit their energy to other States and charge enormous rates and thus deprive the State where the energy was generated of all right and power to regulate it and also deprive it of the benefit of the energy developed within its own borders. Take tle State of Tennessee as an illustration : It is rich in water-power resources. If the power sites are aU taken up and developed electricity may be sent out of the State and sold at such prices as the generating companies may fix, and the State would thereby be deprived of the benefits which would flow from the industrial development of this State; that is, manufacturing towns might be built up in Kentucky and Alabama rather than in Tennessee, and thus the people of the State would lose the full benefit of these valuable resources, in which the State as a sovereign has a clear and undoubted property right. Will the representatiYes of the people of Tennessee, whether in Congress or within the State, sit idly by and see the people lose this priceless heritage?

Again, in the absence of statutory regulation of interstate rates on electric energy, should the bydt·oelectric companies for any reason desire to do so, they might sell their power to the consumers in another State for less than the cost of production and recoup the losses thus sustained by the imposition of higher rates on consumers in Tennessee. For instance, they might organize subsidiary companies, manufacturing and otherwise, located in other States to which they ml-ght desire to sell (in a technical sense) their output at a mere nominal rate and at a substantial loss and thus evade the State of Tennessee and ignore its rights. Should such generating company be thns allowed to sen power to nonresident consumers at a loss, which would lle reflected in its net rate on its entire operation, and then appear before this commission and demand the right to fix rates within the State sufficient to recoup losses sustained on interstate business, the commission does not see an:r escape from the result which would thus inevitably follow, which is that the commission would have to either fix rates high enough to cover such

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1769 losse -because tbe commlssf.on would have no control over Its interstate transactions-and rates would have to be imposed upon the people of Tennessee which would necessarily and intentionally be excessive or l'lse the company would resort to the courts upon an allegation that the State rates were confiscatory and thus compel an increase in the rates to consumers within the State.

The entire subject is one of the most important, it not the most important, economic and legal problem now confronting the people of America. It involves the property rights of the people of the several States and likewise, which is perhaps even more important, involves the fundamental principles of State sovereignty and of the rights of the States to control and make disposition of their own resources. Legis-lation is needed by the Congress defining ~ limitations of the Federal power with the Constitution of the United States. Congressional legislation is also needed to authorize and require some rate-making body to fix and regulate rates upon electricity transmitted from one State to another. The various States or the Union will then find a clear field for the enactment of such legislation as will protect and safeguard the rights of their States and of their peoples.

The commission desires to thank you for the consideration shown it and to assure you that it will appreciate your cooperation and assistance, and that the people of Tennessee are alive and awake to this siutation and are watching with interest the efforts of their Representatives in Congress to secure legislation that will protect them and their posterity.

We beg to rema.ln, Sincerely yours,

TAX REFUNDS

1\Ir. HALE obtained the floor. Mr. HEFLIN. ~Ir. President--

HARVEY H. I!A..~NAH.

POBTEll DUNLAP.

L. D. HILL.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Maine yield to the Senator from Alabama?

Mr. HALE. I yield. 1\lr. HEFLIN. I ask unanimous consent for the present con

sideration of Senate Resolution 110. I have been asked by the Senator from Utah [Mr. SMOOT] and by other Senators to let the resolution go over and I have done so three or four times. It is very necessary that the Treasury Department may get to work on the names in order that it may furnish the list called for by the resolution to the Senate and the House of Representatives before the measure to which it relates cometS up.

1\.fr. HALE. The consideration of the resolution will require some debate, will it not?

Mr. HEFLIN. I think not. Mr. MOOT. I wish to make a statement in regard. to the

resolution, I will say to the Senator. Mr. HEFLIN. I do not think it will lead to any debate. Mr. HALE. In view of the statement of the Senator from

· Utah [Mr. SMOOT] I hope the Senator from Alabama will not ask ~or the present consideration of the resolution.

Mr. HEFLIN. Then I shall call up the resolution later. COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE THE SINKING OF THE SUBMABINlll

"s-4" Mr. HALE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the

Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 131) providil!g for a commission to investig~te and report upon the facts connected with the sinking of the submarine S-.t,, and upon methods and appliances for the protection of submarines.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the request of the Senator from Maine?

Mr. JONES. Mr. President, as I understand, the Senate took a recess on yesterday, and the request to have the unfinished business, Senate bill 744, temporarily laid aside continues without any further suggestion.

The VIOE PRESIDENT. The Senator is correct. ~. here being no objection, the Senate as in Committee of the

Whole proceeded to consider the resolution (H. J. Res. 131) which had been reported from the Committee on Naval Affairs with amendments.

The first amendment was, in section 5, page 3, line 2, after the word "duties," to insert "in such amounts and for such items of expense incident to the official duties as the commission in its discretion may authorize, notwithstanding the provisions of any other law or accounting requirements"; in line 9, after the word "expended," to insert "for the purposes of this resolution"; and in .line 13, after the word "commission," to strike out "which approval shall be conclusive upon the General Accounting Office in such amounts and for such purposes incident to its duties as the commission in its discretion may deem proper, notwithstanding any other provision of law," so as to make the section read:

SEC. 5. The members of the commission shall select a chainnan from among their number; they shall serve without compensation as such, but shall be paid out of the amount appropriated their actual and necessary traveling, hotel, and other expenses incurred in the discharge of their duties, .in such amounts and for such items of expense incident to the official duties as the commission in its discretion may authorize, notwithstanding the provisions of any other law or accounting requirements. Nothing herein shall reduce the pay or allowances of the commissioners selected from the Navy. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated the sum of $20,000, to be expended for the purposes of this resolution by such officer of the Supply Corps of the Navy as the Secretary of the Navy may designate, upon vouchers approved by the chairman of the commission. The President .Is authorized, upon request of the commission, to designate such personnel of any department or Government establishment, including the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard, as may be necessary to assist in carrying out the purposes of this resolution.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, in section 6, page 3, line 23, after

the word "than," to strike out " May 15, 1928," and to insert " March 15, 1928" ; in line 24, before the word " report," to insert the word " full " ; in the same line, after the word ~· President," to strike out "who shall" and to insert " respe2tmg that portion of the investigation referred to in section 3 hereof, and the President shall immediately," so as to make the sec-tion read :

SEc. 6. The commission shall, as soon as practicable, but not later than March 15, 1928, submit a full report to the President respecting that portion of the investigation referred to in section 3 hereof, and the President shall immediately transmit the same and all other reports of said commission to Congress, giving the results of its investi.,aation and its recommendations. All records of the commission, upon the completion of its duties, shall be deposited with the Secretary of the Navy.

The amendment was agreed to. 'l\.fr. SWANSON. Mr. President, I desire to offer an amend

ment to the joint resolution, in order :to have it pending, which I ask to have read at this time. ·

Mr. HALE. Very well, but I should like to make a statement · about the joint resolution.

Mr. SWANSON. Then, I shall withhold my amendment for the present.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, on the afternoon of the 17th o:f December last while coming to the surface just off the trial course near Provincetown, Mass., the submarine S-.t, was run into by the United States Goast Guard destroyer Paulding and sunk in 105 feet of water, with a loss of 40 lives. We are fainiliar with the details of the disaster and with the tragic death of the six men who were shut up in the forward torpedo compartment of the submarine.

As I said when I introduced a similar joint resolution in the Senate, the country was stirred by this disaster as I have never known it to be disturbed by any other naval disaster since the sinking of the Maine in the harbor of Habana in 1898. The eyes of the country were on the Navy in its efforts to save those six men. They were not saved. A very natural feeling of indignation grew up in Ule country, a feeling that all could not be as it should be with our Navy.

Congress adjourned for the holidays before all hope had been abandoned. I returned to Washington just before Congress reconvened and ca.lled on the Secretary of the Navy. I found that he was just ~bout to request the President to ask Congress for a sufficient appropriation to provide for a commission to make a thorough study of the question of safety appliances and methods used in the Navy in connection with submarines and to report its findings and recommendations for t.be future benefit of the Navy.

A naval court of inquiry had already been appointed, as the law provides. I told the Secretary of the Navy that it did not seem to me that this was sufficient; that the country would never be satisfied with a report made by the Navy itself. I suggested to him that to the functions of the commission which be was about to ask the President to appoint be added the function of making a full investigation into the facts concerning the sinking of the S-4. It seemed to me that combining the functions of the commission so that it would take into consideration and investigate not only devices for future security, but also the facts connected ·with the 8-.t, disaster was an ideal solution of the whole matter.

What we want to find out and what the country wants to :find out regarding the S-.t, disaster is whether the Navy was at fault or not at fault, and if it was at fault where does the blame lie. If the Navy was at fault it was because of one or more of several re~sons:

1770 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 20 First. Because the Navy did not supply adequate equipment

and appliances to assure the safety of the men on board submarines.' That is a matter. purely for experts to decide.

Second. Because the S-4 was lacking in some of the necessary equipment. That is a ina.tter also involved with the first reason and therefore would need expe1·t opinion.

Third. Because it did not use proper precautions in the trial tests of the S-4.

Fourth. Because it did not use every means in its power to rescue the men imprisoned on the submarine. That, involving as it does the. questions of salvage, is- a _ matter for experts and for experts only. In other words, the men who are qualified to pronounce upon the question of safety appliances and upon the question of security in the Navy are preeminently the men to pronounce also upon the S-4 disaster.

The Secretary of the Navy told me that for the commissionwhich he was about to ask the President to appoint he had already spoken to three civilian experts. The three men were:

John F. Stevens, civil engineer, New York City. I think the Senate is familiar with the record of Mr. Stevens. He was at one time engineer of the Panama Canal. He has occupied positions of trust and importance all over the country. Be is president of the American Society of Civil EJ1gineers. In 1925 he was awarded the Fritz medal for great achievement. He is one of the most prominent engineers in the country.

The second man named was W. R. Whitney, of Schenectady. Mr. Whitney is director of the research laboratory of the General Electric Co. He has been member of the United States Naval Consulting Board since 1915. That is the board of which Thomas A. Edison is president. He is a member of the National Research Council, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, fellow of the Academy of Arts and Sciences, and pre ·ident of the American Chemical Society.

The third man was Mr. Thomas A. Scott. 1\!r. Scott has been in the salvage business all his life. At one time he was president of th9 Merritt, Scott & Chapman Co. He is still attached to that company as a consulting expert and is probably the leading authority on salvage operations in this country.

Those are the three experts to whom Secretary Wilbur had written to ascertain if they would act on the commission which he was about to ask the President to appoint, if so appointed by the President.

Of course, the President makes the appointments on the commission ; but the Secretary had written to these men to ascertain whether they would serve if appointed, and they have agreed so to sene.

l\Iind you, Mr. President, these men were not asked to serve on a commission which was to act on the S-4 disaster. It can not be said by anyone, however hostile to this joint resolution, that this proposed commission of experts was a commission picked out to whitewash the Navy. Nothing of the sort was contemplated. All that they were to do was to go into the question of safety appliances to be used by the Navy for the future, and they were picked out on account of their great knowledge and their capacity for just this kind of work.

Besides these three, the Secretary was to recommend two naval officers. He considered that he should have one nQval officer from the line and one from the construction corps.

I have drawn an amendment, and I now send it to the desk, which I think is of considerable importance. It was not recommended by the committee. I did not have a chance to take it up with the committee. Some objection has been raised to the appointment of a committee of civilian and naval experts, on the ground that it would not be able to handle this inve::>tigation and to examine the witnesses. I ask the clerk to read the amendment which I offer.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Secretary will state the amendment.

The LEGisLATIVE CLEeK. On page 1, lines 5 and 6, strike out the words "three of whom shall be selected from civil life and two shall be retired officers of the Navy," and insert in lieu thereof the following: four of whom shall be selected from civil life and one shall be a retired officer of the Navy. Of the four members selected from civil life, one shall be a United States circuit or district judge.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection--Mr. SW~SON. Mr. P1·esident, I object to all of these

amendments. The VICE PRESIDENT. The question is-:Mr. SWANSON. Is the Senator from Maine through? Mr. HALEJ. No. Mr. SWANSON. We can not vote on amendments until he

surrenders the floor. Let the amendment be pending. The Senator can not hold the floor and have his amendments adopted without discussion. -

Mr. HALE. I had no intention of doing so. I desire to have the amendment voted on later.

Mr. SWANSON. Let it be withheld. The VICE PRESIDENT. If the Senator desires to have

the question put, he will yield the floor. Mr. HALE. l!r. President, if that amendment is agreed to

and this commission is appointed, we shall have a commis ion with two engineers, men at the very head of their profe~ sion in the country, men in every way competent to deal with this question ; one salvage expert, probably the leader in his line In the country : one Federal judge of the circuit or district court, whose whole training equips him to handle witnesses; and tOne naval officer-only one-whose naval knowledge will be an essential help, on the commission. I do not see how a fairer commission could possibly be appointed.

Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. Mr. President--Mr. HALE. Will the Senator let me finish my statement? Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. Certainly. Mr. HALE. Then I shall be glad to answer any questions. I do not see how a fairer commission could possibly be ap

pointed. I do not believe that a commission could be appointed that would have to a greater extent the confidence of the country.

In appointing it we do not give up any rights. Under the provisions of the joint resolution the commission bas to report to the President, and he has to transmit their report to us immediately. Then we have to act upon it and decide whether or not we will adopt it. If we do not want to adopt it, or if we want to change it in any way, we are at full liberty to act; and, if it is necessary to do so, I am sure that we will act.

The Secretary of the Navy approved my suggestion with regard to combi.lti.ng the functions of the commission, and he took up the matter with the President, who also approved it.

On January 4 I introduced in the Senate a joint resolution similar to this one; and Mr. BUTLER, chairman of the House Naval Affairs Committee, introduced the House joint resolution. The House, after making a few minor amendments, sent the joint resolution over to the Senate. The House passed the joint resolution without a dissenting vote. The Committee on Rules, to whom the joint resolution was referred, approved it unanimously. The chairman of the Committee on Rules announced that the Naval Affairs Committee of the House approved the joint resolution. I will say that there was no record vote on the joint resolution in the House, but people who were there have informed me that no one voted against it.

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. President, I desire to state that several members of the House committee are not in favor of the joint resolution.

Mr.· HALE. I did not say that the House committee was unanimous. I said that it approved the joint resolution.

The joint resolution came over here to the Senate, and tbe committee took up the matter. lly a very close vote the joint resolution was approved by the committee. The committee made several amendments, four of which are minor ones which clarify to some extent the language about the auditing of accounts. The fifth amendment advances the date of the filing of the report on the S-4 disaster from May 15, as the House had it, to March 15. We did this because we thought that with the probability of Congress adjourning early in June, sufficient time would not be left to take up any matters in connection with the report or to go on with a Senate or congressional investigation if it was then deemed wise to do so.

Mr. SWANSON. Mr. President, I hope the Senate will gi"re me an opportunity to submit in a fair, impartial, and judicial way the issues presented in this matter.

As the Senator from Maine has said, this country was shocked and stirred as it has not been stirred since the Maine was sunk by the sinking of the S-4 and the efforts made to save the unfortunate people therein. Never have I seen people more stirred, more interested. The Navy Department ordered an investigation under the law, which the Secretary of the Navy or the President had a right to order, and which they have ordered, and the investigation is now being made. That investigation, however, is being made by a board appointed by the Secretary of the Navy to report as to the derelictions of naval officers, and, as far as the Navy is concerned, where the responsibility, if any, lies.

Now, we have what proposition? That the Navy Department itself shall appoint a second board or commi sion to investigate and pass upon its own activities. In other words, this proposition is to constitute two commissions, to be named by the Secretary of the Navy, to investigate himself and his department.

I thought possibly the President would have some hand in the matter, but judging from the remarks made by the senior Sena,tor from M~ine t!!is work has already been done. The

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1771 Secretary o:f the Navy has already written letters requesting certain people named by him to investigate the action and conduct of his ·own department.

:Mr. HALE. Mr. President, I think the Senator must have misunderstood what I said. I said that the Secretary of the Navy sounded out these men to see whether they would accept if tlley were appointed, with a view of recommending them to the President; and it must be borne in mind that be called them for another purpose than the investigation of the sinking of the S-4.

Mr. SWANSON. In other words, the Secretary of the Navy bas already selected the court to pass upon the Navy Department in this matter.

Mr. HALE. But his department was not on trial before the commission he asked for.

Mr. SWANSON. I will get to that soon. I want to show the purpo e in this scheme. I want to show how the Senate is insulted; I want to show how the House is insulted; how your power is taken from you and a scheme devised in order to prevent any fair, impartial, and just investigation of the Navy by Congress in connection with this frightful disaster.

What is the proposition? On the 4th of January the Secretary of the Navy wrote a letter to the President. On the 4th of January the President sent a message to Congress. On the 4th of January, the same day, the chairman of the two committees of the House and Senate introduced a joint resolution which is embodied in this proposition that the President, through the Secretary of the Navy, who had already performed the work for him, shall select men-two retired naval officers and civilians-to determine who was responsible for this unfortunate occurrence.

The Navy Department has appointed on·e court to inquire into it, the court of inquiry, That inquiry is being held now. Why should the Navy Department be authorized to appoint a second court of inquiry to investigate its own transactions and its own performance and its own responsibility in this matter? That is what this proposition does.

You never see a proposition like this that' does not have around it something that makes it attractive. There are about 2,000 devices to improve submarines before the Navy Department. The Senate can not investigate them ; so they offered a proposition originally intended to authorize the expenditure of $20,000 to have this investigation made by civilians, which was all right, and which I favor. The President himself, without any authorization of Congress, appointed a board known as the Aircraft Commission to investigate aircraft and report to Congress, and Congress afterwards paid the expenses. He had authority to do the same thing in ·this matter. There was no limitation on his authority; and if his contingent fund was not sufficient to pay it, Congress would have paid it. That was the original proposition, to which everybody agreed, and to which I agree; but in order to avert an impartial investigation of the S-4 disaster by Congress they attach to the joint resolution section 3, which provides that this same commission · shall investigate all the facts, responsibilities, and occurre}!ces in connection with the sinking of the S-4.

Mr. HALE. Does the Senator say this would not be an impartial commission?

Mr. SWANSON. I say so ; yes. I say that no jury is impartial when the man who is to be tried before ~t has the privilege of naming the jury.

Mr. HALE. Naming them for an 'entirely different purpose. Mr. SWANSON. Let him name them for the purpose he has

in min~ to ascertain what improvements are needed. What I condemn is that under section 3 the individual would appoint those who are to tty his own responsibility.

Mr. HALE. .A.s I said before, the Secretary of the Navy is not to name the men at all. He simply would suggest the names to the President.

Mr. SWANSON. The Senator just told me that h"e has already written them and asked them to serve.

Mr. HALE.. Certa~ly; but he would have no authority to appoint them.

Mr. SWANSON. Does tlie Senator suppose the President would reject them unless he turned the Secretary of the Navy out? What is the scheme? On the 4th of January-all this was done in one day-the President rushed into it, rushed to send his message, rushed to Congress, and what was done in Congress when the matter was brought to the House of Representatives? It it> improper to speak in one House with reference to what has been done in another ; but since the Senator from Maine has stated what occurred in the House I will also. Here was something affecting the Navy. Here was a naval proposition, for the Naval Affairs Committee, but when it went to the House it was not referred to the Naval Affairs Committee. Op, no 1 Differences !lllght be P!ecjP.itated j;here.

It was refei'red to the Committee on Rules. The Naval Affairs Committee was deprived of its jurisdiction. The Committee on Rules is what is known as the partisan machine of the House. I have served there, and I know. This committee would take charge of it, and there they would have no discussion, and have no difference of opinion. The very fact that they would not let it go to the Naval Affairs Committee, the very fact that they would not let them consider it, the very fact that they turned it over to the partisan machine of the House shows the purpose in view.

What is my proposition? I ask that the clerk read it. I do not see how anybody can object to it. Let the joint resolution pass, but let us amend section 3. I hope the Senator will look at section 3.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Il.AB.ru:s in the chair). The clerk will read.

The legislative clerk read as follows: A joint committee composed of three Members of the Senate, ap

pointed by the President of the Senate, and three Members of the House of Representatives, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, is hereby authorized and directed to investigate the full facts of the sinking of the submarine S-1, in collision on December 17, 1927, with the United States Coast Guard destroyer Paulding off the Massachusetts coast, and the rescue and salvage operations carried on by the United States Navy subsequent thereto, to supplement the investigation now being made by a naval court of inquiry. And said joint com· mittee shall submit a full report to each branch of the Congress, giving the result of this investigation and such recommendations as it may see proper to make.

On page 2, line 17, after the word "the," insert the words "joint committee and."

Mr. SWANSON. Mr. President, this would not interfere with the Navy Department at all in getting expert testimony and evidence and judgments in connection with improvements needed on submarines. I am not saying that the President is going to appoint the commission. He is going to name whomsoever the Secretary of the Navy recommends, and he has already made inquiry, and we have been told the names of people who Will Sei'Ve.

I say that when the derelictions of any man or his department are on trial and to be investigated, we ought to have fair, impartial investigators, not named by the man himself. I do. not care how impartial these investigators are, I do not care

1

how able they are, the whole Anglo-Saxon idea of jurisprudence · is that ·a man shall not name the jury and judge who sit in his case.

The Navy Department has appointed one court of inquiry t() investigate this disaster. Why should it appoint a second? There is no necessity for it. If it desires ·to have this information my amendment will enable them to get it.

We recall the aircraft investigation. In that case the President appointed one Senator and two Members of the House. This is the first time in my life I ever heard of Congress abdicating its privileges, abdicating its power of investigation and consenting in. a matter that shocked the country that the' man and the department inte1·ested shall name the people to make the investigation.

I can recall that the suggestion was made in various papers, though it never was made in the shape of a resolution offered in: Congress, when the naval oil reserves were involved in recent investigations, that the Navy Department should appoint some experts, civilians and Navy people, to look into the naval reserves and see what was wise to be done, and what had been done with them. Is there a Senator here who believes that if that course had been pursued, the fraud, the corruption, the rascality that were disclosed in· connection with those naval reserves would ever have been run down and ascertained? If Congress had recreantly refused to discharge its responsibility and power and duty, and had turned the matter over to somebody else, Fall would have been saved, Daugherty would have been saved, and none of the fraud perpetrated in that connec-tion in recent years would have been disclosed.

I protest against any procedure like this. It is but an entering wedge; to do what? To deprive Congress of its power of investigation, to deprive Congress of its power of initiating these investigations, simply giving Congress the power of approval or disapproval of what other people do.

I ask that thi'ee Members of the Senate be named by the Vice President, and three Members of the House be named by the Speaker, to investigate, not submarine appliances, not future needs, but to impartially place the responsibility in connection with this unfortunate accident, where it ought to be. Do you tell me there is politics in it? The Vice President ;_s a Republican, and he would name a majority of that party. The Speaker is a Republican. and there could be no politics in it.

il772 CONGRESSIONAL RECOR.D-SENATE JANUARY 20

The only politics in it is an effort to have the Secretary of the Navy through the President, natne a commission to inv·estigate himself. I do not think that is right, I do not think it is proper, I do not think it would be the right kind of an investigation to start.

It is said that we can do this after the 15th of March. The proposal was to make the report returnable the 15th of May, but there was such a rebellion against that that it was changed to the 15th of March, and it was said that a report would come in by that time, and then Congress, if it was not satisfied, could make an investigation.

How is Congress ever going to be satisfied if it does not start the investigation now? The wreck is there, the evidence is being taken. To wait until April or May and then go back to the scene of this accident seems to me would be a fruitless and useless thing.

This committee ought to have been there at the beginning of the session of Congress. This committee ought to have been there and viewed this wreck. This committee ought to have been there to question the people concerned. This committee ought to have been there to place the responsibility where it ought to be, in a fair anu just and honorable and fearless way, in connection \.vitb this unfortunate affair.

I have ne\er criticized the Navy unjustly and unfairly. I have been criticized by people who said I was disposed to be too friendly to the Navy. But in this matter the Secretary of the Navy himself should have come and asked for an investigation, and should not have sent this letter to the President and then ·come to Congress in an effort to prevent somebody else than people directly or indirectly named by him making this investigation.

I have not criticized the Navy Department in this matter, :and do not propose to until I get the facts. There ·has been too much unjust criticism of naval people and naval activities. I know that Japan has accidents almost equal in number to

· om·s, and other nations do, too. We can not have this service without accidents. But when this country is shocked as it was when this accident occurred-as the Senator from Maine said, he never had seen the country so stirred-the country is entitled to an honest, fair, full, complete investigation, by people

·not named by ·the Secretary of the Navy, I do not care what their character is or what their reputation is. It is entitled to have somebody named by the Senate and named by the House to discharge their responsibility and their duty.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, mil the Senator yield? 1\fr. SWANSON. · I yield. Mr. HALE. I was going to ask the Senator if he could tell

me any other case where a Secretary of the Navy has come to Congress and asked for an investigation of a naval disaster?

Mr. SWANSON. Except this? · Mr. HALE. Any case where he has come before Congress

·and asked for an investigation. Mr. SWANSON. I do not remember any. Mr. HALE. The Senator said the Secretary ought to have

come to Congress and asked for an investigation. Mr. SWANSON. He ought to have told the Senator that he

hoped the Congress would investigate it, and if anybody in the Navy Department has done wrong, he should have said he wanted to know who they were, and to place the responsibility.

Mr. HALE. Does the Senator recall any case where the Congress has investigated a naval disaster?

Mr. SWANSON. I do not. I remember that when I was chairman of the committee, whenever four or five Senators wanted an investigation of any kind, I gave it to them.

Mr. HALE. That is not my question. Mr. SWANSON. And I generally found that the Navy was

exonerated. The more it opposes an investigation the more I am for it.

Mr. HALE. My point is that this is an entirely new departure.

Mr. SWANSON. It is a new departure. Mr. HALE. There never bas been an investigation of an

accident--Mr. SWANSON. We investigated the sinking of the Titanic,

and got good results. Mr. HALE. That was not the Navy. Mr. SWANSON. It was not the Navy, but the Committee on

Commerce, when the Titanic sunk, investigated the accident. The committee investigated that in order to place the responsibility, and great improvements were made along the lines of

· safety of ships. l\1r. HALE. Mr. President, will the Senator let me finish my

statement? - The PRESIDING OFFICER. · Does the Senator from Virginia yield fm·ther to the Senator from Maine?

Mr. inVANSON. I yiald.

Mr. HALE. I was going to say that there never has been an investigation by a committee of Congress of any naval disaster that I can find in the history of the Navy, with the exception of the investigation of the blowing up of the Maine in Habana Harbor. A resolution to investigate that diSaster was introduced in Congre .. s and was referred to the Naval Affairs Committee, but tbat committee did not take action on it. It referred the resolution to the Foreign Relations Committee. The Senator is objecting to this matter going to the Rules Committee of the House. The only similar case that has come up in naval history has been referred, not to the Naval Affairs Committee, but to the Foreign Relations Committee.

Mr. SWANSON. Of course they did not want to get the opinion of the Naval Affairs Committee on it. They wanted the partisan machine in the House to take charge of it and rush it through. The Senator says it never has been done. If it never has been done, it is time it ought to be done. We have heretofore been listening to the court of inquiry. If you are not going to investigate it, strike out section 3 and wait until the court of inquiry gets through. You knew the time had come when Congress was going to have an investigation of this in some way. We have had repeated accidents in the Navy that we have never investigated. I have not criticised any naval officer or any court of inquiry which has made any of these investigations, but this was so startling, so striking, that the Navy was satisfied a court of inquiry might not satisfy the country, so it fixed up a §Cherne to let the Secretary, through the President, name a second board to do the work wben he already had the board named. All I ask is to strike out section 3 and let the resolution go through and let Congress determine the proper way to conduct this investigation.

I repeat, I do not care who the members of the commis ion are. I have respect for the Secretary of the Navy and a kind regard for him, but I do not think he ought to name the commission who are to pass on the responsibility, activities, or derelictions of his own department. Is is contrary to every principle of jurisprudence that the world has ever known.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield 1 J\.lr. s ·wANSON. I yield. Mr. HALE. The Senator seems to ignore the point that

these men a1·e not to be selected in any way to act on the S-4 disaster.

Mr. SWANSON. But the Senator comes in and makes them do it to keep Congress from having an investigaiton. - If they are not appointed for that purpose, let section 3 go out, and let the Senate and the Hou e determine whether they will baye an investigation or not. That is all I ask the Senator to do. Does the Senator con ent to section 3 going out?

Mr. HALE. They were appointed because they were experts. Mr. CW ANSON. Will the Senator con ·ent to section 3 going

out and letting the Senate and the House have an investigation? Mr. HALE. I did not hear the Senator. Mr. SWANSON. Will the Senator consent that section 3

shall go out, and let the House and the Senate determine what they will do about an investigation?

Mr. HALE. Certainly not. The House has already decided what it will do.

l\Ir. SW l...NSON. Who? The Rules Committee, in the manner indicated by me, did it.

Mr. HALE. ~he Rules Committee could not adopt the resolution. Th0 House itself acted.

Mr. SWANSON. Now let me discuss another phase of the matter. There were six destroyers wrecked about three or four years ago. There was no investigation of that matter by Congress. Three or four submarines have been destroyed and there has been no investigation. Now, everybody knew this matter was going to be investigated and not left entirely to the naval court of inquiry. Nobody has interfered with the investigation .bY the Secretary of the Navy through his court of inquiry. It is not reasonable, it is not right, it is not ju!'lt to Congress or to the people involved, that we should name a second commission to investigate, which will be indirectly named by the Secretary of the Navy. All I ask is that the investigation shall be conducted by a joint committee of the House and Senate, in order to satisfy the House and Senate and to satisfy the country as to the responsibility for the affair. That is all my resolution proposes.

The Coast Guard ship Paulding is interested in this matter. The dereliction was due either to that ship under the Coast Guard or to the S-4 under the Navy. In determining the responsibility between the Coast Guard Service and the Navy service, does anyone think the Secretary of the Navy ought indirectly to name the commission to distribute justice between the two services? In the final judgment as to who is responsible, the Paulding o~ the S-4, the Coast Guard Service is en-

1928 ·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1773 titled to a committee selected by and composed of people not interested in one side or the other.

The Coast Guard or the naval service is responsible, and here is a proposition practically to let the Secretary of the Navy indirectly appoint a commission to determine the responsibility between the two services. I say it is not right, it is not just, it is not fair, and the Senate ought not to permit any such commission composed in that way to pass on the matter.

It is said that a circuit judge knows more about this proceeding than do the Members of the House and than do the Members of the Senate. It is apparently belieYed that a Federal judge !.n two months can equip himself with more knowledge and information I'egarding the matter than can Senators who have studied the proposition for 20 years. I say it is not a reasonable proposition to submit. I wish the Secretary of the Navy would telephone the senior Senator from Maine [Mr. HALE], who seems to father the proposition and

. not the Secretary, and tell him that he invites the fullest investigation by the House and Senate.

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

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Vir. ginia yield to the Senator from Arkansas?

Mr. SWANSON. I yield. Mr. HALE. I should be delighted to have the fullest in

vestigation, with the help we can ·get from this commission first. Mr. SWANSON. Oh, yes ; by a commission named by the

Secretary of the Navy. ·Does the Senator from Maine think · it is right for the department which is involved to write

around the country and try to get people to sit on that commission to determine a case in which they are involved? I yield to the Senator from Arkansas. -

· Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Mr. President, the duties of ·United States circuit judges and district judges are defined by law: I do not know of any other instance in which it has been proposed to require the judge of a United States circuit court to perform duties of the nature involved in this investigating resolution.

I would like to be informed why the Senator from Maine proposes to modify his resolution by an amendment offered by himself. The original joint resolution contemplates that two members of the committee shall be retired officers of the Navy. His amendment as submitted contemplates that one member of

· the committee shall be a retired officer of the Navy. His amend' ment also proposes that one of the other members of the com. mittee shall be a United States circuit or district judge. Mani- .

festly the duties of the committee are not judicial. I doubt the wisdom of imposing on judicial officers the duty of making. investigations of this character, namely, nonjudicial investigations. I think it is a bad precedent. I would like to be informed what prompted the Senator from Maine to change his attitude on the subject and to insic;;t now that the resolution be modified so that only one retired officer of the Navy shall be a me-mber of the co-mmittee, instead of two, as contemplated by. the original resolution, and that one other member of the committee shall be a United States judicial officer.

It is perfectly apparent, Mr. President-at least it is to me-that the duties of the committee are not judicial. It is perfectly clear that it is an effort to impose duties on United States judges which are not contemplated by the statutes creating the offices which those judges fill and defining the duties which they are to perform. I have great confidence in the

· judiciary of tbe United States. At the same time I think it is . II! questionable, not to say a bad, precedent to require a judge, ~Y a joint resolution of the Congress, to perform the duties of AD investigator in a case like this. _

Supplementing some of the remarks made by the Senator f.ro-m Virginia, if the investigation is to be of value it should be conducted, in so far as is possible, by those who are not gnder the domination of the department, whose activities are the subject of inquiry. It is never a sound policy to make a man or a representative of a department -under investigation ihe judge of his or its own acts or conduct.

I · would like to have the Se-nator from Maine tell the Senate ~by it is proposed now to change the resolution in the manner his amendment provides, if the Senator from Virginia will permit.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, if the Senator from Virginia will · yi,~ld, I shall be glad to explain.

Mr. SWANSON. I yield for that purpose. Mr. HALE. It was brought to my attention, after the com

mittee had reported, that there was some question in the minds · of some Senators whether' the commission, as provided for in

LXIX--112

the resolution, could handle the investigation of the S-4 and act properly in the matter of interrogating the witnesses.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Was the Senator in sympathy with that · suggestion?

Mr. HALE. I listened to the suggestion and I thought there might be something in it. The idea of providing for a judge was simply to have some one there whom no one could question, ":hose qualification~ no one could question. In so far as droppmg a naval officer IS concerned, I could see no objection to that. The board was never made up as a naval board in that way.

Mr .. SWANSON. Mr. President, this is the proposed scientific committee organized to give a deliverance in which the whole c?unt!Y ~ill acq~iesce ; the chief figure, a circuit judge, shall gJ.ve It six weeks study and make the deliverance which the whole country will accept.

:Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. And a Member of Congress is considered unfit for that purpose.

Mr. SWANSON. The Senator from Maine himself holds that the view of a circuit judge is better.

Mr. HALE. The judge is put there for a special purpose. Mr. SWANSON. What is he there for? Mr. HALE. To question the witnesses. 1\!r. SWANSON. A. question mark, to ask as to things about

which be knows nothmg? l\1r. HALE. There is a precedent for this. Mr. SWANSON. 011, there is no such case in the history of

the country. 1\Ir. HALE. On the 1\Iorrow Board Judge Dennison of Michi

?'an! acte~, a~_d he proved of great value to the board 'in makin"' Its mvestigation. !:>

. Mr .. SWANSON. T.he. Morrow Board was not a board to mvestigate ~Y. _dereliction involved in any accident and to place responsi~Ihty. It was a board to devise schemes and metho~s for aircraft. . The Presi9,ent appointed it without any au.thonty of. the Congress. He could appoint a commission in th1s case Without any authority of Congress. The President named upon the Morrow Board one Senator and two Members of Co~gress, and they helped to make the report. It was a splendid report. But why did be do that? It was not appointed to investigate an accident, but to recommend and advise as to the future of aircraft.

The Senator from Maine now brings in a resolution. and says he is the father of it and makes his suggestions with reference to it, by which it is made impossible to appoint a Senator and impossib-le to appoint a Member of the House and impossible to appoint indeed any one but a civilian. In other words, it is said by the Senator that the Senate and the House ought to refrain from serving on this committee when the Morrow Board, about which he boasts so much, was comprised of one Senator" and two Congressman, among others.

Mr. HALE. The Senator will recall that when we met in commit~e it .was suggested to the committee that if they thought It adVIsable, we could put on the commission a Senator and a Congressman.

Mr. SWANSON. I did not think it was advisable. I am not the father of this resolution. I think it is a wrono- procedure. I think it is nothing but an effort of the department to take away from the Congress all of its investigating power. I shall expect to see it followed, if it is adopted, by a resolution to let the President, through the Secretary of State appoint an ambassador and some international lawyer and a~ officer from the Army and another from the Navy to investigate the transactions in Nicaragua and to report to Congress . That will be followed by the appointment of somebody to investigate everything to be named by the President on the suggestion of the particular Cabinet member involved.

I have no antagonism toward the Secretary of the Navy, who is courteous and polite. I have a kind regard for him and think he has frequently been unjustly criticized. But I am not going to stand by and see the Committee on Naval Affairs, of which I am a member, and of which the Senator from Maine is the chairman and who knows a great deal about the Navy and submarines, abdicate its powers and refuse to exercise its functions -as a committee and allow a circuit judge to take our place because- he may be a little more apt in asking questions than is the chairman of the Committee on Naval Affairs.

Mr. BROOKHART. Mr. President--Mr. SWANSON. I yield to the Senator from Iowa. Mr. BROOKHART. The Senator from Virginia has raised

an important issue, and I think it is important that we get a clear statement of the situation. I am not in favor of yielding any of the powers of the Senate or of the Congress to investigate -the Navy. I will ask the Senator if the law does n&t now

1774 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 20· authorize the President to make similar investigations to that which is proposed here?

Mr. SWANSON. The President can do it. He exercised the power in naming the Morrow Aircraft Committee.

Mr. BROOKHART. He wants to make such an invesfiga• tion in this situation. Not being satisfied with the pending measure-and I think the Senator has reasons for not being satisfied-why does not the Senator offer his proposition as an amendment to the pending joint resolution and let us proceed with our independent investigation and thus in no way interfere with the President?

Mr. SWANSON. I am glad the Senator agrees with what I have done. I have moved to strike out section 3 of the pending joint resolution.

Mr. BROOKHART. Why is it necessary to strike out section 3? Why not let the President have his commission, with its own powers, and then provide for a congressional committee to investigate, too?

Mr. SWANSON. This joint resolution was brought in here by the chairman of the Committee on Naval Affairs, and it is said that there is no use for the Senate to proceed to do anything until after the 15th of March, when the report comes in which is provided for in th~t resolution. I offered an amendment in the committee to let us proceed at once to investigate the matter and was defeated by a vote of 9 to 8. If the Senator from Maine will consent now to let the Vice President name a committee of five and proceed with the investigation, I shall be glad. Will he do that?

1\'!r. HALE. I certainly will not. I think this resolution is illri~t .

Mr. SWANSON. Of course, tqe Senator was opposed to the Senate investigating even before the House submitted the proposition to us that we SUTrender our right, as they have done, to investigate. We tender a second p~oposal, namely, that a joint committee be appointed. That propo&"ll does not interfere with any other investigatio~ but is confined to the liability for the disaster to the S-4. If my amendment shall be a.dopted and a joint committee shall be named, that committee may investigate the S-4 disaster, and the commission appointed m~y also investigate· to find out how to prevent snell, accidents and to remove the causes of them. The proposal does not prevent them from looking into the question, and its adoption would not make us wait until the wreck is taken away.

Mr. BROOKHART. .M.r. President, as I understand the situation, I am with the Senator so far as the appointment of a congressional committee is concerned, but I do not quite understB,nd the necessity of striking out section 3.

Mr. ROBINSON of AI:kant?as. Mr. President, may I ask the Senator a question ?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Vir-ginia yield to the Senator from Arkansas? • ·

Mr. SWANSON. Yes. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Why should Congress create

two committees to investigate f;he S-4 disaster? Mr. BROOKHART. Because tl!e executive department has

~een fit-and it is a coo~inate department with Oongress-to ask for an investigation on its part.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Mr. President, as the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, the President of the United States already has plenary power to make any investigation of this ~ubject that he chooses.

Mr. SWANSON. If we strike out section 3----,.... Mr. ROBL~SON of Arkail&a.§. Just a moment. The manifest

object of this resolution is to prevent the adoption of a resolution providing for an investigation by a joint committee composed of Membe~ of the House of Representatives and Members of the Senate.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, I can not agree to that statement. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I want to emphasize in this

connection that the Executive as Commander in Chief of the Army and the Navy of the United S.tates already is endowed with just as much power as ~n be conferred upon him by any resolution Congress may pass, and that there can be no other motive underlying the insistence upon the pending joint resolution than the thought tl!at it would be absurd for the Congtess to appoint two investigating committees.

When this committee is appointed, if it shall be appointed, it ought to be permitted to make a complete investigation; but if the Senate has in mind a reservation that there ought to be an investigation by a committee of the Senate and of the House of Representatives, then we ought to compose this committee in such a way that the investigation can be made by Members ·of Congress.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, the Senator does not mean-Mr. SWANSON. Just a moment.

Mr. HALE. I should like to ask the Senator from Arkansas a question.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Certainly. Mr. HALE. The Senator from Arkansas does not mean,

does he, that the President can go ahead, appoint a com..m.L..~on, and spe-nd money for the expenses of the commission without congressional authority?

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. No ; the President can not incur debts or obligations without authorization by Congress.

Mr. HALE. So, then, it is necessary for him to request that authority?

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. A simple resolution authorizing the President to cause to be investigated this disaster and authorizing an appropriation adequate in amount would accom-plish all the purposes the Senator has in mind. .

The. real issue here is who shall make the investigation? Shall 1t be made by the members of the respective committees in charge of the responsibility of preparing and reporting legis.. lation to Congress, or shall it be made by a committee composed in part of members selected by the department whose activities are to be investigated?

Mr. SW A....~ SON. Mr. President, I am going to conclude in a moment, but I want the Senator from Iowa to understand '!hat my proposif;ion is. My proiJ?Sition is that the investigation of the S-4 disaster, the facts m relation to it, and the responsibility for it should be investigated by a committee of three Senators and three Members of the House appointed by the Presiding Officer of the Senate and the SPeaker of the House, and not to give the authority to the President, because he already has authority to investigate. We can give him the money, and then if he wants to have an investigation he can order it as Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy. He has that authority. What I protest against is for us to confer this .power upon him and withhold it from olll"'Selves. I am unwilling to be a party to a scheme in which a department can name its own investigators. Th~ Senator from Maine has said that the Secretary of the Navy had already written and asked certain ~entlemen to serTe on the investigating committee be-_ fore he mtroduced a resolution on this subject.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Who were the gentlemen asked?

Mr. SWANSON. The Senator from Maine named them earlier in the day.

Mr. H.A.LE. Mr. President, I have said that the Secretary of the Navy ~ote to certain gentlemen and asked them if they should be appomted whether they would be willing to serve on a commission as a patriotic duty for which they would receive no salary of any kind.

Mr. SWANSON. If I were to be tried by a jury and could name the jurym.e~ I would write and ask them, "Are you willing to make the sacrifice of sitting on the jury and see that I get justice"? That is the old scheme of packing juries.

Mr. HALE. The President may or may not select the gentlemen whose names have been suggested, though in all probability: he will. '

Mr. SW A.... ""X SON. But why did the Secretary of the Navy become so active before the President asked him to do any~ thing?

Mr. HALE. It was at the time when he was considering . the advisability of having a commission appointed.

Mr. SWANSON. That is right. He knew the object of it was to prevent a senatorial or congressional investigation.

Mr. HALE. Oh, no. I have already explained to the Senator that that ha.d nothing to do with the object of it. I have already explained they were to be app'ointed for an entirely different purpose. The Senator remembers.-- ·

Mr. SWANSON. I do not want them to take this question up. Proceed as it was originally intended and I will not complain.

Mr. HALE. The Senator remembers the purpose for whicll they were written to.

Mr. SWANSON. Yes; and I think it is a palpable scheme to let somebody named by the Secretary of the Navy apply a coat of whitewash, if that should be necessary, in this transaction if we do not confine the resolution to its original form and not extend it as now sought to include the S-4 disaster.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Mr. President, will the Senator from Virginia yield to me for a moment?

Mr. SWANSON. I yield. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I wish to say, Mr. President,

that I should think it would be very. bad policy for the Congress to authorize :m investigat~on of this particular subject by two different committees, for the simple reason that in all probability the findings of the two committees would be different. Imagine what would be the situation of the country if

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE - 1775 the President were authorized by Congress to appoint an investigating commission and the Congress proceeded to appoint another investigating commission, as suggested by the Senator from Iowa [Mr. BROOKHART], and the two commissions found the facts to be different and made different recommendations. The absurdity, to my mind, of such a suggestion appears on the face of it.

Mr. President, this disaster has created serious thought throughout the country. I have great respect for the Navy of the United States, great admiration for its personnel and for its record, but I do feel that it is of the utmost importance that whenever this subject shall be investigated the result of the inquiry shall have commanding force and effect not only with the departments themselves, with the Executive and the Congress, but with the people of this country who are profoundly interested in the subject matter of the investigation.

Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. Mr. President, I should like to ask the Senator from Arkansas if there is any question involved in this disaster that is not involved in any jury trial of an accident case or in any coroner's jury sitting in the case of a disaster?

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I know of no such question. Mr. GERRY. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Arkan

sas yield to the Senator from Rhode Island? Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. With pleasure, though I had

concluded, and I yield the floor. Mr. GERRY. Mr. President, am I recognized? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode

Island is recognized. Mr. GERRY. Mr. President, we have had, in the sinking of

the submarine S-4, an appalling disaster, which has shocked the people of this country. What the people are interested in and what they are entitled to know is whether the Navy Department could have prevented the disaster in any way; whether the department has been negligent; whether any naval officer has been negligent; and whether we can do anything in the future to prevent the recurrence of a similar disaster. The people want that information and they are entitled to have it.

I for one believe that no greater service can be rendered to the Navy Department than by a thorough investigation of the S-4 disaster and a finding that will be accepted by the people of the country as being fair and impartial and as having gone into every detail of that lamentable occurrence. I believe that the people will not be satisfied with an investigation such as is proposed by the Senator from Maine [Mr. HALE] ; and I am more than ever convinced of that fact since listening to the debate this morning. If we follow the course the joint resolution has traveled we can not help but realize that every effort is being made to prevent a congressional investigation. Apparently there is a desire to put every obstacle in the way of such an investigation, to delay it in every possible manner; for what reason I know not.

I started out, having my belief in the efficiency of the Navy, that the S-4 disaster was very likely one of those tragedies which are una-roidable; I hope that may prove to be the case; but when the head of the department is apparently attempting to name his own investigating committee and to conduct his own investigation, I can not help but feel that such an investigation will not be received with the same confidence by the public as would an investigation by a committee of the House of Representatives and of the Senate.

The Naval Affairs Committees of the House and the Senate are thoroughly familiar with the Navy; they are committees that make the recommendations for legislation for the Navy. They have studied the subject for years.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Rhode

Island yield to the Senator from Maine? Mr. GERRY. I shall yield in one moment. I wish merely

to finish the trend of thought I am pursuing. Then I shall be glad to yield to the Senator.

Although members of the committee have been intimately acquainted with naval affairs and naval legislation for years, and properly have charge of such legislation, there seems to be an intent here to prevent the legislative branch of the Government conducting an in-restigation.

Now, let us take for a minute the history of the resolution. The joint resolution, as first introduced, provided that the

report of the commission should be filed as soon as possible, but not later than May 15. In other words, this commission would have conducted an investigation and not reported to the President until May 15.

Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Rhode

Island yield to the Senator from Massachusetts? 1\Ir. GERRY. I do. Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. The original joint resolution

provided that no report should be made until next December. It was the House that modified it, making it May 15; but originally it was intended that this session of Congress should meet and adjourn without any report on this disaster.

Mr. HALE. No, Mr. President; I do not think that is so. It simply was not specified. I never heard that question brought up.

Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. It is already in the resolution that in part they are not to report until next December.

Mr. HALE. Did it not say" not later than" that time? l\1r. GERRY. Mr. President, I am discussing the joint reso

lution that was presented to the Senate and was referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs. That joint resolution said "May 15." The matter was discussed in the committee, and there was opposition to the joint resolution. Many Senators felt that there should be a full investigation, and they quite frankly resented the inference that the Senate or the House was not qualified to conduct these investigations. The chairman, at a subsequent meeting of the committee--and he will correct me if I am in error-amended the joint resolution so that it was to be March 15.

Mr. HALE. It was not at my suggestion; it was at the suggestion of the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. HowELL].

.Mr. GERRY. Well, then, at the suggestion of the Senator from Nebraska it was amended to read " March 15."

The original joint resolution did not call upon the President to transmit the findings of the commL~ion, if my recollection is correct, and left the discretion with him. Subsequently, as a result of the protests that arose by Members of this body, it was made to provide that the President shall transmit the report, artd that it shall be sent to Congress not later than March 15.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, I do not think I understand the Senator. The joint resolution which came over from the House said that he should "transmit the same."

Mr. GERRY. It did not state when. Mr. HALE. Does the Senator mean that the word "immedi

ately" was not in th"e joint resolution? Mr. GERRY. The word "immediately" was not in it. You

have amended the joint resolution so as to provide that it shall be done immediately. .

The entire committee was in favor of appointing a commission to make further investigations, or any investigations the President saw fit, in regard to the appliances and other devices for rendering submarines safer. There is no objection to that, and I feel that there is no objection in either body; or rather, I feel that either body would not only be glad but would insist on voting every necessary appropriation to develop further devices that would make submarines safer and less probable these appalling disasters. What a great many members of the committee objected to, however, was section 3 of the joint resolution, which gave to a commission power to investigate the S-4 disaster; and the Senator from Virginia [Mr. SwANsoN] has introduced an amendment to strike out this section and insert in place of it a provision that the Vice President and the Speaker of the House shall appoint a committee to investigate the S-4 disaster.

Mr. President, that it is the apparent intent of the department to take from Congress this investigation is to my mind very clear. Instead of hating a direct congressional inv'estigation it is developed that the Secretary of the Navy suggested to the President this method of procedure, that he conferred with the chairman of the Naval Affairs Committee, and the chairman has shown that he will suggest to the President, and the President will appoint five men of his choosing, including a district judge and a naval officer, and that this commission shall do work that to my mind should be done by the Congress. It is simply another example of the tendency of heads of the departments and of the executive branch of this Government to take over all power, and to prevent as much as possible the investigation of their departments by the Congress.

I do not feel that a commission such as this, whether we have a circuit judge on it or not, can be half as conversant with the Navy and the Navy situation as a committee composed of Members of Congress who have been studying and working for the Navy for years; and, frankly, I think the Congress has the right to resent the implied slight that anybody but a Senator or a Member of the House of Representatives should be on the commission. Apparently, the one desire is to prevent congressional investigation, or, at least, to delay it.

1776 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-8ENATE JANUARY 20! Mr. HALE. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator ;from Rhode

Island yield to the Senator from Maine? Mr. GERRY. One minute, and I am through; I wi,ll yield

the floor. · As I said in the opening of my remarks, I started out w'ith

the hope--and I still have that hope--that the deparbnent had done everything possible, that there was no negligence, and that this disaster was unavoidable; but I want that proved to the satisfaction of the House and Senate, and not only to the satisfaction of the House and Senate but to the satisfaction of the American people. I believe that can be proved in no better way than by welcoming a full investigation by their repTesentatives in Congress.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, does the Senator think he has to bother about the feeeling of the Hoose in this matter? Surely the House expressed itself when it passed this joint resolution unanimously.

Mr. GERRY. Oh, I have heard the Senator from Maine reiterate that all m<>rning. What did the House do?

Mr. HALE. They had three ho~ of debate, Mr. President, and after the three hours of debate there was not one man who voiced a protest against the passage of the joint resolution.

Mr. GERRY. Three hours of debate! I have been in the House. The Senator has not.

Mr. HALE. I was in the House when the joint resolution passed, just before it passed.

1\Ir. GERRY. I do not doubt that the Senator had a lot to do with its passage in the House. I am sure he did. I am sure he worked hard, and I am SUTe all the administration worked hard, and I am sure they did splendid work in the three hours. I congratulate him on what he has accomplished, if he is satisfied.

Mr. HALE. I do not think thete was any need to do any work in the House. I think the HotL..<::e saw the merits of the joint resolution.

Mr. GERRY. I may say to the Senator that apparently it is a case of the splendid working of a machine.

Mr. McKELLAR. A whitewash machine. Mr. BROOKHART. Mr. President, I still feel that the ques

tion is not cleared up as to the issue here. The Senator from Rhode Island conceded that there is no

exclusive right of investigation in the Congress. The Sena.tox from Virginia said the President bad the right to investigate this matter. The Senator from Arkansas said the President has that power now. Really, &,s I understand the joint resolution, about the only power granted the President that he does not have under the law is the appropriation of money to pay the expenses. I do not know of anything else that is added.

Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Iowa

yield to the Senator from Tennessee? Mr. BROOKHART. I do. Mr. McKELLAR. It seems to me I have seen in the papers

that the Navy Department is making an investigation now. Why should we formally give the department the right to make another investigation of the matter? It is making one now, as I understand.

Mr. GERRY. If the Senator will yield to me, there is already a court of inquiry.

Mr. BROOKHART. Wait; let me answer that question. I want one at a time, and I can not answer more than one at a time.

The Navy Department may be making a useless, senseless investigation. It may be that the one the- President wants to make is of the same character ; but those are questions for the department and for the President to decide. Either the Senate or the House has a right to investigate the matter if it is not satisfied with the other investigation. I will say that after the statements of the Senator from Vi:rg:inia and the Senator from Rhode Island and the Senator from Arkansas I stand ready to vote for any resolution to investigate this matter, either by joint committee of the two Houses or by a Senate committee alone; but, to my mind, that would not--

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

Ml'. BROOKHART. Yes; I yield. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. The Senator no doubt heard

the remarks which I submitted during the course of the address of the Senator from Virginia. Does the Senator think that the Congress ought to authorize two investigations and two expenditures for that purpose touching this disaster?

Mr. BROOKHART. First let me ask the Senator, does not the President have the power now to make this investigation?

l

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Absolutely; and if the Presi~ 1

dent says to the Congress that, in the performance of his duty ' as Chief Executive, or as Commander in Chief of the Army : and Navy, be is in need of funds to obtain the information that he desires, that the expense can not be met out of his contingent fund, I would Yote him any reasonable amount that might be necessary; and I want to point out again to the Senator from Iowa that it would be a very questionable thing for the Congress to create two investigating committees and to ta.ke the risk ·of different conclusions on the part of those two committees.

Whatever conclusion is arrived at ought to be authoritative, it ought to be commanding, and it ought to be made under such conditions that, if legislation is necessary, the recommendations of the committee or commission can be effectuated. It would be to my mind worse than no investigation at all if the President created. a commisskm and they reached a roncl usion that the disaster was dne to one state of facts and that that state of facts was unavoidable, and another commission reached the conclusion that the disaster was due to a different state of facts, .which were avoidable. The confidence of the country in the Congress would be shaken, if not destroyed.

There is no necessity for more than one investigation, provided it is a fair, compl,ete investigation. Why should CongresS hasten to authorize the expenditure of funds for two investigations and take the chance of different conclusi<>ns which would destroy the confidence of the country in the integrity of the investioo-a.tion, and prevent such legislation as might be actually necessary to prevent the recurrence of such disasters?

1\fr. KING. Mr. President--1\fr. BROOKHART. Mr. President, I will answer that propo

sition by a statement, then I will yield to anybOdy; bnt one at a time. I can see only one thing at a time.

I will concede that Congress should not authorize two investigations by Congress. That would be a foolish thing. I concede t.bat the Senate should not authorize two Senate investiga~ 1

tions, or that the House shoul,d not authorize two House investigatioilB. But the investigation proposed by this resolution is to be by the Chief Executlve himself. He did not have to submit to us the question of the appointment of the commission. The money is all that he had to ask for, but he submitted more than he was required to submit.

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

Mr. BROOKHART. Yes; for a moment. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. The Senator is bound to real

ize that there are many provisions in this resolution that are not related directly to the mere expenditure of funds by the Executive. The effect of this resolution is to clothe the President with power to create a commission under the authority of the Con~ gress to make this investigation, and in good faith, if the O<>ngress grants that authority, it ought to rely on it, and for my part I intend to do so. If the Congress decides that it ought to create the commission or the committee authorized under this resolution, unless it becomes manifest that the committee has failed to perform its duty, I do not intend to vote for an investigation by another committee, because notwithstanding the fact that the personnel of this committee is not to consist of Members of Congress, it is, nevertheless, in a measure a congressional investigation, because the authority for the investigation is in a resolution to be passed by the Congress, and the duty of the investigators is defined by the Congress. Therefore I say that if we pass this resolution of investigation-and that is the intention of the persons who espouse this resolution-it is to prevent or to avoid the necessity for another investigation.

Mr. BROOKHART. Will the Senator pause there? Let me answer that proposition.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I did not mean to take so muc,h of the Senator's time.

Mr. BROOKHART. The Senator from Virginia said, and I think the Senator from Arkansas said, that even though we held a congressional investigation, it was all right for this ~ommittee of experts to make their inveStigation from the expert standpoint, and to let us know the facts as they found them.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Will the Senator pardon me? I said that it was proper for the Executive, who is Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, to take any course he desired to take to acquaint himself with the true facts involyed in this disaster.

Mr. BROOKHART. He can submit the matter to Congress or not, as he desires.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Certainly. Mr. BROOKHART. However, he can not spend the public

money for an investigation without our consent lf{l•, HOWELL. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

..

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN .ATE 1777 1\Ir. BROOKHART. In just ~ moment. As I see this, we are

adding no authority in this resolution and providing for no inn~stigation that the Executive daes not have authority to make already. If I am mistaken in that, I shall certainly not consent to sm>render any of the power of either the Senate or the House to inYestigate anything they want to investigate.

Now, I yield to the Senator from Nebraska. 1\Ir. HOWELL. Mr. President, do I underst.and that the

Senator from Arkansas is favorable to the resolution as amended by the Senator from Virginia?

l\Ir. ROBIKSON of Arkansas. Yes; I favor the ~mendment proposed by the Senator from Virginia.

Mr. HOWELL. Does the Senator from Arkansas know that it proposes two investigations?

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Ko; I do not understand that. l\Ir. HOWELL. It does. It does not do away with this

commission to be appointed by the President, but it provides that the disaster shall be investigated by a committee of Congress.

1\lr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Yes; I · understand that. I think that is proper.

Mr. HOWELL. There would be two committees or commissions to report, under the provisions of the resolution as amended.

Mt·. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Under the amendment of the Senator from Virginia?

Mr. IIOWELL. Yes. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I did not understand that. Mr. SWANSON. Oh, no. If the Senator will permit me, I

take from this general commission the power to inYestigate the S-it.

Mr. HOWELL. Yes; but the Senator provides for two investigations.

Mr. SWANSON. No. The House has presented to us a proposition to let the Secretary of the Nary appoint a commission which shall investigate the appliances needed to improve submarines, and, in addition, to investigate the cause of the S-4 disaster. The position I take is that the commission should not investigate the S-4 disaster. A joint commission of the two Houses ought to investigate that. It is different work, different authorizations, and different things to investigate.

Mr. HOWELL. How can this proposed coill.IIli.s8ion properly report what appliances and methods should have been used and should be used in the future to avoid such casualties unless they know the ci.rcu~tances under which this disaster took place?

Mt·. SWANSON. So far as it pertains to their ascertaining fact which would be a foundation for future improvements, that is all right; but to ascertain and report as to whether the Pauldin-g was in fault or whether the S-4 was in fault is another matter. A scheme is presented to let the Secretary of the Na\y alone, through his· appointments, determine between the Coast Guard and the Navy.

Mr. HOWELL. Just a moment. 1\lr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Mr. Preo.ident--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Iowa

yield ; and if so, to whom? Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I merely want to make a brief

statement. The Senator from Iowa has been very kind. and if it will disturb him in any way I will not insist on speaking.

Mr. BROOKHART. I am not quite through. Had the Senator from Nebraska replied to the suggestion of the Senator from Virginia?

Mr. HOWELL. I want to reply to the Senator from Yirginia, if I might.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkan~as. Very well. l\Ir. HOWELL. The Senator from Virginia Emggest that

there is no connection between these two investigations. There is a distinct connection between them. How can the commission provided for in this resolution properly determine what supplemental submarine appliances and regulations should be adopted by the Navy to avoid and minimize similar casualties in the future unless the proposed commission goe · into the facts and circumstances of this di~aster?

Mr. SWANSON. If the Senator will permit me, I said in my speech that, so far as they want to improve the Navy, so far as they want to make recommendations, so far as they want to see what deficiency there was in the material and appliances, they would have a right to do it, but when it came to determining as to whether the Pattldi11g was at fault or whether the S-4 was at fault in this accident, I thought that all honesty required that they sl10uld have an impartial committee, and I provided for that.

:Mr. HOWELL. But. :.\Ir. President, incident.ally they would haYe to investigate the facts and circumstances in order to de-

termine whether even additional naval regulations were necessary.

Mr. SWANSON. If the Senator will permit me, incidentally they would, and I am giving them the instrumentality that you want. This resolution gives them absolute control of it, not as an incident.

1\Ir. HOWELL. 1\Ir. President, the Senate will have power to investigate notwithstanding the adoption of this resolution, if it sees fit to do so. Congress will have power to investigate irrespective of whether this resolution passes or not. I am for investigations upon all occasions, because I believe they are a tremendous safeguard in the conduct of government. If the President and the Secretary of the Kavy want an investigation, I say let them have it. Then let us investigate, if we are ultimately dissatisfied in the premises. There will be plenty of time after the 15th of March, before Congres ~ adjourns-about three months.

Mr. PITTMAN. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Iowa

yield to the Senator from Nevada? 1\Ir. PITTMAN. I have to go to a committee meeting, and I

want to ask a question. Mr. BROOKHART. Yery well. The Senator from Utah has

been asking for recognition for a long time, and I promised to yield.

Mr. PITT:.\1Al,. I agree with the Senator that the President has every power now included in this resolution. He can have any investigation he wants. I would be willing to vote for the resolution to authorize an appropriation of the $20,000 he asks for, or amend it to give him $100,000. if he ask for it. The only thing I do not want is to have this considered as a congres~ional committee instead of an executive commission. I do not want to be responsible for the kind of commission it is or for the acts of the commission. I do not want it said, when we start an investigation on our own hook, "By congressional act you have already authorized an investigation."

Having absolute confidence in the President of the United States, I do not favor telling him what kind of an investigating committee he shall have. I think this resolution is an insult to the President of the United States. With the full power to appoint any kind of an investigating committee be want:., with every power we give under this resolution, all that we do is to say, "We do not trust you to appoint your commission."

What I want to do is to strike out everything except the authorization of an appropriation for whatever amount he wants-he has asked for $20,000-to make any kind of an investigation by any committee that he may select, or in any manner that he ma:r choose, and lea>e it in that shape, because the rest of it is an insult to the President of the United States.

Mr. BROOKHART. I think I am in full accord with the Senator from Nevada.

Mr. ROBIKSON of Arkansas. :\Ir. President--The PRESIDING OFJ."ICER. Does the Senator from Iowa

yield to the Senator from Arkansas ? Mr. BROOKHART. I yield. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansa ·. What I want to make clear is

that under the procedure we seem about to take here we contemplate creating, under authority of Congress, two commissions to make this investigation. The President has power to make the investigation ; and, as I said before, I am perfectly willing to give him any amount of money he finds necessary to perform the duty of ascertaining the facts in connection with the disaster.

If we are to create a commis:sion under authoritv of Congress and tell the President who shall go on tltat commission and how the commission shall discharge its duties, as this resolution seems to do, then I shall certainly oppose creating another committee of investigation under the authority of Congress for the reason that I haYe already stated, that there is a danger that the two committees may make conflicting findings and recommendations, in which event the country will be worse off and the Navy will be no better off than before the investigations proceeded.

The President, as Commander in Chief, bas a duty to perform. He is entitled to obtain this inf01·mation. But he is not entitled to do it under the guise of a congressional committee. If he wants to proceed in that way, the Congress should constitute the committee in the way that it believes best.

I think Senators are overlooking the fact that we are about to create two committees of investigation. and that those committees may take an entirely different view of what are the facts and what are the remedies to prevent a recurrence of such disasters as that relating to the S--1- and it is that feature that I want to safeguard. If we pass tlle joint resolution in

1778. OONGRESSION AL RECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 20

the form in w.hich it is presented by the Senator from Maine. I shall still favor the creation of an additional joint committee of Congress or a committee of the Senate to make the same investigation, and I will think that it is the underlying purpose of those who propose the resolution to estop the Congress in a way from making any investigation of the subject by expressly conferring on an executi:\"'e tribunal the duty of making the investigation.

Mr. SWANSON. Mr. President, I offered in the committee-The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Iowa

yield to the Senator from Virginia? Mr. BROOKHART. Let me answer the suggestion of the

Senator from Arkansas first. The only part to be stricken out of the joint resolution is section 3, as proposed by the amendment of the Senator from Virginia.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Frankly, I think if the amendment of the Senator from Virginia shall be agreed to, the other features of the joint resolution should be so modified, as suggested by the Senator from Nevada [Mr. PITTMAN], as to give the President unlimited authority and adequate funds. We ought not to impose on the President the duty of selecting a committee from a limited number of individuals, and we ought to give him an entirely free hand to make his own investigation in any way that he desires. If we want a congressional investia-ation of the subject, we ought to provide for a personnel that e>will reflect itself in legblation here, and it ought to be composed of Members of the two Houses.

Mr. BROOKHART. I am absolutely in accord with what the Senator has said. I am entirely in accord with every word the Senator from Nevada has said. That is what I have been trying to say.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, would the Senator from Arkansas favor the joint resolution if it were limited merely to the appropriation of the necessary funds for the Pr~ident?

Mr ROBINSON of Arkansas. I have aid during the debate that i believe the duty is on the Executive, as Commander in Chief of the Navy, to inquire into the facts of the matter, and that I am perfectly willing to give him such funds as he finds necessary to enable him to make his investigation.

Mr. BROOKHART. it seems to me we have reached substantial agreement in the matter, and I can see no reason why the resolution should not be re-formed so as to give the President the full right to make the investigation he pleases and to have the personnel he pleases and to report to whom he pleases. We can provide the money, as we ·ought to do, for such an investigation. It will be the Executive's investigation and he alone will be responsible for it. We can then order another investigation and have one of our own for which we will be responsible, either as a committee of the Congress composed of Members of the two Houses jointly, or of the Senate alone. I feel that in the Daugherty investigation I contributed so~ething to determine the power of the Senate to make investigations.

Mr. KING. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Iowa

yield to the Senator from Utah? Mr. BROOKHART. I yield. Mr. KING. I am in accord with what the Senator from

Nevada said and what was said by the Senator from Arkansas, and I endeavored to get the floor several moments ago to make that statement. I am opposed to anything in the resolution other than the creation of the committee named in the resolution or amendment offered b;y: the Senator from Virginia. I do not ·think we should mention the President at all. I differ from my friend in that respect.

I have no doubt that the Commander in Chief has full authority to make such investigation as he sees :fit, and when be makes such investigation, or if he desires in advance to get money with which to make it, let him send a message to the Congress stating that he contemplates making such investigation and a~king for such appropriation. as he desires. F<?r instance, _q~1te recently he conceived the Importance of sending a comnnss10n to the Geneva conference, and later, when the funds were exhausted he sent a message to the Congress asking for an appropriation' to pay the commission. His first message asked for funds to pay the commission, submitted before it was created, and his second message, after the funds were exhausted, asked for funds for a continuation of the commission in subsequent negotiations at Geneva.

The President has full authority. If he desires to conduct an investigation, let him do so, appointing whom he pleases, when he pleases. I think that it is an infringement upon the pow~r of the President to limit the personnel of those wbom he w1shes to appoint. After ·he has concluded to h:aYe an investigation; let him send his message to the Congress if he has not the funds,

and Congress will give whateve~ is necessary. But instead of the procedure proposed in the present resolution let us appoint a commission, determine their limitations and their duties, and p1·ovide the necessary appropriation for their activities. That is all we need to do.

Mr. BROOKHART. I think the Senator from Utah is correct except in one particular. At the very beginning of the discussion the Senator from Maine· [Mr. IIALE] announced that the Presi· dent desired the investigation, so that in that official way at least, though not by any fo1·ma1 message, the President has expressed his desire for such an investigation.

Mr. SW ~~SON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. BROOKHART. Certainly. Mr. SW A.:..~ SON. To show the Senator what the proposition

is, I want to state what occurred in the Committee on Naval Affairs. I was willing for the President to have the money, as the Senator suggests. There is no objection to that. I offered a resolution in the Committee on NaYal Affairs providing that that committee, through its chairman, should appoint a subcommittee to investigate · the facts in connection with the sinking of the S-4, and it was voted down. I have always contended and I still say that it I can be giyen the assurance that either the Senate itself, through a special committee, or the Committee on Naval Affairs will investigate the sinking of the S-4, I am willing to give the President all the money he may need for his own investigation; but I am not willing to give the President money under an implied understanding that the Congress has surrendered its right and authority, as will surely be urged by some Senators, to investigate the sinking of the S-4. All of these propositions now contended for by those on the other side of the aisle will be used for the purpose of proving that surrender. If Senators favor my ·suggestion, let us have the chairman of the Committee on Naval Affairs accept my proposition as made before the Committee on Naval Affairs, that the President should be given the necessary money to proceed with such investigation as he wants to make in connection with the needs for reform and the needs for new appliances, and then let the Naval Affairs Committee of the Senate proceed to ascertain who is responsible as between the Pauld;ing, operated by the Coast Guard Service, and the S-4, operated by the Navy.

There is no reason in the world why we should let the Secretary of the Navy make the recommendation to the President and the President appoint a commission and not allow the Coast Guard to have any representation on that commission, when the issue is between the Coast Guard and the Navy as to which is responsible. In other words, it is proposed to let the Navy constitute the jury to determine the matter. I am not in favor of that. I am not in favor of it if the proposition should come from the Democratic side. I am not in favor of it if the proposition should come from the Republican side. I shall ask for a roll call on the proposition and give an opportunity to those! Senators who want to go on record as favoring the Navy Department, through the President, nami,ng its own jury to try the case, to then express themselves.

Mr. BROOKHART. 1\Ir. President, the Senator from Virginia evidently was not present when the Senator from Nevada ubmitted his proposition.

Mr. SWANSON. I heard the statement of the Senator from Nevada, and I am not willing for such a proposition to go through.

Mr. BROOKHART. His suggestion was not that we surrender anything to the Executiv~

Mr. SWANSON. I am not going to make a surrender in this matter and then let it be claimed later that because we haYe given the President the authority to do it, therefore we ought not to make the investigation until be has completed his investigation. That is the scheme. I insist that we allow the chairman of the Naval Affairs Committee to appoint a subcommittee to investigate and report on the sinking of the S-1, and then I sha1) consent that the President shall have all the money be wants for his own investigation.

1\Ir. HALE. I was not in the Chamber when the Senator from. Nevada [l\lr. PITT~!AN] made his suggestion. As I understanll,. he proposes to strike out all the wording of the joint resolution, and to provide:

That the sum of $20,000 be, and is he:reb:r, appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to pay t~e expen~ of a commission to be appointed by him to investigate and report~

Mr. McKELLAR. No, no! Mr. SWANSON. The Senator may be for that, but I am nat

for it. ·Mr. MoKELLAR. It tb.e Senator will permit me, I will state

exactly what I think the Senator from Nc-rada suggested: ·

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN.~..t\.TE 1779 That there is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any money

in tbe Treasury not otherwise appropriated, tbe sum of $20,000, to be expended by the Pre:;ident for the purpose of making such investigation of the sinking of the submarine S-1 as he may see fit.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. And to follow that with the incorporation of the amendment of the Senator from Virginia pror"iding for an investigation by a joint committee composed of members of the Committees on Naval Affair~ of the House and Senate.

1\lr. HALE. That is authorizing the Senate to do it and authorizing the President to do the same thing, is it not?

1\lr. ROBINSON of AI·kansas. No; it is giving the President, a Commander in Cl!ief of the Navy, the funds he desires to enable him to acquaint him~elf with the true facts in the case, and it is also p~viding for an investigation as contemplated by the amendment of the Senator from Virginia. That is a correct statement, as I understand it, of the suggestion of the Senator from Nevada, and that is my suggestion.

Mr. HALE. What would the President do? I do not under-tand the plan. What would the President's commission do?

Mr. McKELLAR It would make ·any kind of an investigation the President would want to have made.

Mr. ROBINSON of AI·kansas. The President can employ any agency whatever, ~s he can do now. He can take any course he chooses to pursue. The only reason wlly the app~opriation is made is that it has been stated here that he has not the funds with which to ascertain the facts. -- Mr. BROOKHART. Let me answer the Senator from Arkansas again. I think it would be contrary to the suggestion of the Senator n·om Nevada to couple such a proposition with the resolution just E;Uggested by the Senator from Tennes,ee. The Senator from Nevada suggested, and with that suggestion I am in full accord, that our investigation should be ou~s. independent absolutely of the Executive's investigation, and his independent tn relation to ours. Therefore, in the resolution it seems to me that we should only provide for those funds in a general way. I will say to the Senator from Arkansas that I stand ready to vote for his proposition.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. That is not the suggestion of the Senator from Nevada as I understand it, and it was not my suggestion. I must be deficient in my power of expression or I would not have to take the floor so many times to explain what I have been trying to say for an hour.

1\Ir. HALE. 1\Ir. President--Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. No; just a moment, please.

The President has the right as Commander in Chief to make an inquiry into this subject. That is an Executive investigation. If he needs funds to accomplish that purpose I am willing to give them to him in this or any other re ·olution. But I do think that there should be an investigation by a congressional joint committee, as provided by the Senator from Virginia in his proposed amendment.

1\Ir. BROOKHART. Let me ask the Senator a question. I am in full accord with all that he has stated; but does the Senator insist that the congressional investigation should be made as a condition or trade in any way?

1\Ir. ROBINSON of Arkansas. No; certainls not; but I do think that while we are dealing with the subject we should dispose of the whole matter and provide for the congressional in vP.stiga tion.

1\lr. BROOKHART. I am quite in agreement with that idea, and if an amendment should be offered providing for a congressional investigation in addition t& what we authorize the President to do, I am ready to vote for it.

Mr. SWANSON. That is exactly what we are trying to do. The House has passed a joint resolution to give the President $20,000 to conduct any investigation he wants. They ask for an investigation of the S-4 disaster and provide that the commission should be limited. My proposition is simply to say that the sin1.."ing of the S-4 shall be investigated by a joint committee of the House and Senate. Then the measm·e will have to go back to the House, of course. I want the Senate to express itself on the pl'oposition of whether it wants a joint congressional committee authorized by Congress, or merely. wants to let the Secretary of the Navy name the jm·y to try his own case. That is the issue so far as I am concerned.

Let the President appoint whomsoever he pleases. I am going to offer an amendment, and let it go to the Honse, for the appointment of a joint committee to investigate this subject.

Mr. BROOKHART. I would not interfere with the presidential investigation ; I would support it.

Mr. SWANSON. Arrange it so that the Pre8ident's commission may proceed. My proposition does not interfere with that. It is stated that the crux of the joint resolution is section 3.

1\.fr. HALE. 'Vhat has the President to do with this inves:. tigation?

Mr. SWANSON. I thought the President wanted to investigate everything in reference to the submarines, and that there were 2,000 devices which could be studied.

The Senator said in his speech that he had found that that was what they were going to investigate, and the Senator suggested that we should also turn over to them the right to investigate .the disaster in connection with the submarine S--~.

Mr. HALE. Precisely. Mr. SWANSON. The Senator from Maine was the man who

re<.'ommended that Congress should surrender its authority and its right of investigation, and that it be done by the department.

Mr. HALE. I do not consider that Congress is surrendering its authority.

1\Ir. GERRY. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Iowa

yield to the Senator from Rhode Island? Mr. BROOKHART. I yield to the Senator ft-om Rhode

Island. Mr. GERRY. Mr. President, our contention is very simple.

We want Congress to investigate the S--f disaster; for unless Congress shall investigate the results will not command the same confidence, nor will there be the kind of investigation which we think should be conducted. That is why the Senator from Yh·ginia (1\fr. SwANsON] proposes to strike out section 3 of the joint resolution. Section 3 simply refers to the S-4 disaster. Besides that, as has been brought out here, there was a desire to appoint a commission, as the chairman of the committee said, to investigate safety appliances and inventions that might prevent future disasters. 'Ye were quite willing to give the President an appropriation to go ahead and investigate as to such inventions, but when it comes down to the question of the S-4, we think Congress is the proper body to investigate.

Mr. COPELAND. llr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Iowa

yield to the Senator from New York? Mr. BROOKHART. I yield to the Senator from New York. Mr. COPELAND. · l\Ir. President, I wish to say just a word.

I have never known the people of my section of the country to be so stirred as they have been by this disaster. There is a feeling-and I believe it is universal-that somebodv is to blame. The Senate can not afford to ev-ade its responsibility. There must be an inv-estigation conducted by the Senate and the House of Representatives in order that the country may be satisfied that there is no such thing as a whitewashing of the situation. So I am in hearty accord with this proposal.

If the President bas no funds with which to carry on his investigation, let us give him funds, but of more importance i to have Congress itself seek to place the responsibility where it belongs. We can not afford to ev-ade or escape the responsibility which rests upon us.

Mr. KING. Mr. President, I am opposed to the joint resolution in the form in which is has been reported by the committee. First, it circumscribes the powers which belong to the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief of the Army and the Navy. It seeks to indicate to him the character of the machinery which shall be set up for the investigation. It states who the investigators shall be, one of whom shall be a judge--and that is very offensive to me-as was pointed out by the able minority leader.

It seems to me, Mr. President, that we need not concern ourselves in this resolution with any of the powers or functions or responsibilities of the Executive. Doubtless the President will make an investigation. He may select a judge; I do not know. He may select cirtlian experts; I do not know. That is for him to determin·e. When the President of the United States needs funds, if he does not already possess them, let him appeal to Congress and Congress will readily and speedily grant whatever the Pr~ident requires in order to conduct a full and complete investigation; but it seems to me that the resolution which we should adopt-and it should be entirely disconnected, as I have indicated, from the duties of the President--should merely determine the manner of selecting the committee.

I am in accord with the view suggested by the Senator from Virginia [Mr. SwANSON] permitting the Vice President to appoint three Members of the Senate, the Speaker of the House to appoint three Members of the House of Representatives ; that those six shall constitute a joint commission or committee for the purpose of making an investigation of this disaster ; and provide for them the neces~ary funds. 'Vhen that shall be done, that is as far as the resolution should go. I am opposed to mentioning the ·president ; I run opposed to determining

·'1780 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 20 whom he shall appoint or how he shall appoint them or to prescribing in any way the duties and re ponsibilities of a commission selected by the President of the United States, if he shall deem it wise to select one.

I would go further, howev-er, Mr. President, than the resolution or the amendment offered by the Senator from Virginia goes. I think the proposed commission should proceed tO" make a C()Illprehensive study of the Navy, its needs and its wants, and particularly of submarines and airplanes.

There have been a number of submarine disasters. Quite recently another submarine was sunk. A great many vessels were wrecked upon the Pacific coast. There have been, however, no adequate investigations made of these numerous disasters occurring during the past three or four years. I am advised that in a single instance only has the Navy Department even reprimanded any of those who are connected with these disasters. It may be that the disasters were entirely unavoidable but the public are not satisfied with the naval investigations which have been made in the case of these numerous disasters, and, therefore, I feel that a committee should be appointed by the House and the Senate, with full authority to investigate this disaster as well as former disasters, and to take into account ·the needs of the Navy and to make recommendations relative to these disasters and relative to the needs of the Navy.

Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President--Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for

a Question? Mr. KING. I promised first to yield to the Senator from

Tennessee, and then I will yield to the Senator from Connecticut.

Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President, I will ask the Senator, would it not be better for this resolution to appoint no commission at all, but merely to authorize the appropriation of $20,000 to enable the President to make any i,nvesti.gation that he may see fit, if he sees fit to make one? Then if the President saw fit to make an investigation, and wanted to use $20,000 for that purpose, all he would have to do would be to indicate that fact to the Appropriations Committees of the two Houses, and the appropriation would be forthcoming. He would have full authority to appoint anybody he pleased, and it would not be necessary to name the commission. Then, if the Congress desired to make an independent investigation, all well and good.

:Mr. KING. :Mr. President, I should prefer that that course should not be pursued. I want to dissociate, so far as possible, the executive from the legislative branch of the Government. If the President wants to make an investigation, let him indicate to the Senate or to Congress that he needs funds, and if he does not have adequate funds, Congress would very promptly grant the President whatever funds he desires ; but this resolution which we are asked to pass, in my opinion, should deal only with the creation of a joint commission, determining their powers and prescribing their limitations. and providing the necessary funds for them to carry on the investigation required. I now yield to the Senator from Connecticut.

Mr. BINGHAM. :Mr. President, may I remind the Senator that the President has done just what the Senator from Utah thinks he ought to do? If I understood the Senator from Utah coiTectly, he said that if the President needed funds he ought to come here and say so. Is not that precisely what the President did in his message of January 4?

Mr. KING. If the Senator regards that as an application by the President of the United States for funds, I am willing to vote for a separate resolution right now providing that a certain sum shall be appropriated out of the Treasury for the purpose of enabling the Executive at his request to conduct an investigation into the S-4 disaster. Then go on wi.th our resolution; but do not couple them together. That is the view thl\t I take.

Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. President, the President's mesgage was very brief, and if I may be permitted to do so, I should like to read the two short paragraphs of the message which he su~ mitted on the 4th of J anuru.·y last : To the 001tgress of t11e United States:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of the Na~ recommending that Congress be requested to authorize the appointment of a commission of experts for the purpose of considering the development of safety devices for our submarines, such commission to be empowered to cn.ll witnesses and to pay their expenses, and also to make such inquiry and investigation into the S-.P disaster as may be desirable.

I desire to call the attention ot the Senator from Utah to the next sentence:

1 recommend to Congress the passage of a joint resolution anthoriz,. ing the appointment of such a commission of experts, and that the sum

1of $20,000 be made available for the purposes stated.

In other words, the President lias already stated his desire:to appoint such a commission, and has in fact asked for the money to pay its expenses.

Mr. President, a little earlier in the debate the Senator from VIrginia [Mr. SwANSON] referred to the ract that the aircraft board appointed by the President a little over two years ago had done good work ; that it had congressional representation on it, and he referred to me in that connection. I should like to call the attention of Senators to one or two matters in connection with that investigation which they may have forgotten. Evidently the Senator from Virginia has forgotten the exact nature of that circumstance or he would not have referred to it in quite the way he did.

In the first place, there were some very serious accidents which had taken place. It was not merely a commission to recommend new types of aircraft ; it was a commission to look into a very serious situation wllich has arisen. Mr. President, you may remember that the country was aroused at that time very deeply by the disaster to the SMnanaoah, when the Navy lost a number of its able airship experts. The country was further aroused by the fact that Commander Rodgers in his attempt to make the :flight from San Francisco to Honolulu had been lost for some nine days at sea and had been given up for lost. Nevertheless, finally, due to his skill as a navigator, he turned up on th~ shores of Kauai. By sundry statements which had been made with regard to accidents that had taken place in the service the country was further aroused to such a point that very great publicity was given to the claims made by a then member of the Army with regard to the bad condition of affairs in the Air Service. So, in response to a similar state of public opinion as we have seen in this instance, the President-Congress not being in session, for this happened, 1f my recollection serves me correctly, in the early part of September, in the year 1925-the President did exercise his right of appointing a commission, a commission of nine. Later he asked Congress for an appropriation to cover the expenses of the commission. Had the Congress been in session when the accidents OCC111Ted undoubtedly the President would have done just as he has done in this case.

The accident to the 8-4 took place in December, and my recollection is that it was just before Congress adjourned for the holiday recess. At any rate the Congress was in session. So, instead of attempting to appoint a commission, as the Senato~ from Virginia suggested, without reference to the Congress, he did the natural thing of reminding Congress that an investigation ought to be had, that a commission ought to be appointed, that he would like to be authorized to appoint it, and requested that an .appropriation be authorized for that purpose.

The air board he selected in 1925 had congressional representation, one Senator and two Members of the House, as the Senator from Virginia has stated. I will confess that it seems to me desirable on all commissions of this kind that there should be a representative of each House of Congress, in order the better to follow thel progress of the investigation and later be able to repo-rt on the floor of each House what the recommendations of the commission were. and to explain them, and more or less to act as the advocate of the commission. I should like to see this commission increased from five to seven, to include one Senator and one Member of the House, or to see it enlarged to eight and include one Senator and two Members of the House; so as to make it possible for such rep1·esentation to be had. But the Senator from Virginia is not correct in stating that the suggestion of the Seuator from Maine that a Federal judge be appointed is establishing a new precedent, for that is precisely what the President did in appointing the aircraft board. .t

The aircraft board of nine was composed, among others, of one ex-Army officer, General Harbord, who was there to give u.s liaison with the Army and to represent the Army's point of view in this investigation. And may I :fnrt.ber remind the Senator at this point that the investigation was asked for by the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy in the same spirit in which the Secretary of the Navy has asked for this investigation? They wrote a letter to thel President asking him to appoint a committee of investigation. Congress was not in session, and so he appointed it. He put on the board also a retired naval officer, Admiral Fletcher, who had received the congressional medal of honor. He represented the Navy on that com· mittee. Also, as has been stated, the President put on a Senator and two Members of the House to represent the Congress, and it was a very useful thing for us who were on it to be able to know exactly what the commission was doipg.

Another member was an aeronautical engineer, corresponding: in this ca.se to one of the civi+ians suggested to. be appointed on thi~ commission. Another was a man who had been in charge Qf the aircr~ft bga~d, d~ing t!!e ~a!", and w!lO w~ entirely

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1781 familiar with the great growth .of the air services and of what bad been done in aircraft manufacturing during the period sine~ the war; the eighth was Mr. Dwight Morrow and the ninth was a Federal judge, who knew nothing about aviation.

The Senator has objected to the amendment offered by the Senator from Maine in regard to putting on a Federal judge, because he said the Federal judge would not know anything about submarines. · Mr. President, as a member of the President's aircraft board I want to testify to the very great service which was rendered on that board by the two members of it who admittedly knew nothing about the conditions in the Army and Navy· and the conditions in the Air Service, namely, Dwight Morrow, who was th,e chairman of the board, and came to it with an entlr:ely fresh mind, never having devoted himself at all to aviation, and Judge Deni-son, tl!e Federal j~dge, who came smilingly saying that this was an entirely new subject to him and that he knew nothing about it. As a matter of fact, the commission depended in very great degree upon the judicial character of th~ minds of these tw~ gentlemen who knew nothing about th~ ~ubject, who came to it with fresh minds, absolutely impa-rtial, an~ who gave to the investigation a judicial atmosphere and helped make it a great success. · I ~m surprised to hear certain Senators on the other side of the aisle say that there i& nothing judic.1al about this commission, nothing judicial about the investigation. It seems to me almost as though they had it in mind that if there is nothing judicia,! about it there ought to be something political about it.

In fact, they have told us that the people of the country would not be satisfied with an investigation by experts and by a Federnl judge, with one ex-naval officer to see to it that they had such expert advice as they needed. Personally, I think the Senators who have taken that position are mistaken. So far as I am able to follow public opinion in the State of Connecticut, they certainly are mistaken.

For instance, here is a brief editorial from one of the oldest country newspapers in the State of Connecticut, the Norwich Bulletin, ·a paper abo-ut 140 years old, an independent paper that ably represents public opinion throughout the eastern section of the State. Listen to what this old-fashioned newspaper says.

The editorial is headed: MAKE IT U!PA.RTIAL

There are Democratic Senators who want a Senate investigation of the sinking of the 8-4 instead of the impartial plan proposed by the President. It is impossible to look upon such a move as anything but partisan. The purpose is plainly disclosed in the very attitude that is taken.

Everyone must be desirous of having all the facts brought out in connection with that deplorable affair, and there's no question but what they will be; but there should be an equally broad desire tha~ such a matter should be kept as free from politics as possible. The clamor of Democratic Senators for their own inquiry, their chance to kick up a lot of claims and charges, like a raft of criticism that has been spread about through irresponsible statements and gossip only to have it shown to be without foundation, makes a poor impression.

From the political standpoint nothing would be better. But it isn't the political ends that should be served through such a misfortune. The inquiry already under way by the Navy is throwing valuable light upon the situation that existed and is indicating the conditions that prevailed at the time of the collision and the efforts that were made to raise the submarine. .

That inquiry promises to be in every way thorough and there is no question· but what the facts will be brought out, but for the purpose of having an inquiry by competent investigators, experts outside of the Navy, which is directly interested, the idea of an impartial board to conduct the same outside of politics and all other influences is what the situation requires. This it is believed the country prefers to a p<>litical inquiry regardless of the party sponsoring it.

I submit that that is also the opinion of a large part of the American public. They looked upon the action of the President in appointing an impartial air board consisting of experts, of ex-representatives of the Army and Navy, a Federal judge, and one or two private citizens, to investigate the Air Service, as very successful. They wish to see the same kind of thing done here. They believe that it will be done better by a commission of experts, as suggested in this joint resolution, than by a commission which is sponsored by a minority of the committee by a strict party vote. It looks to the public like playing politics with a very serious matter, and it seems to me that we ought to be careful before we, by our votes, condone the playing of politics in this rna tter.

The President has shown his desire to appoint an impartial commission. The Senator from Virginia [Mr. SWANSoN] over and over again says the Secretary of the Navy is going to appoint the commission. That is begging the question, Mr. Presi-

dent. The joint resolution lays upon the President of the United States the responsibility of appointing the commission, not upon the Secretary of the Navy, although by constant repetition, in accordance with that weD-known law of psychology which tells us that if you state a thing often enough people will come to believe it, the Senator from Virginia has almost convinced some Senators that the Secretary of the Navy is going to appoint this commission.

Mr. SWANSON. Mr. President, will• the Senator permit me to interrupt him?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Connecticut yield to the Senator from Virginia?

Mr. BINGHAM. I do. Mr. SWANSON. I got my information mostly from the

chairman of the committee, who said the Secretary of the Navy had alr.eady written and asked people to serve on the commission. I do not know what he meant by it. It seems to me he has been very busy in getting somebody to serve on this commission.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, I wish the Senator would quote me correctly.

Mr. BINGHAM. The Senator from Virginia has been very adroit in misquoting the Senator from Maine over and over again, until nearly everybody in this Chamber believes he has been correctly quoted.

Mr. SWANSON. I will ask the Senator from Maine what he did say.

Mr. HALE. I said that the Secretary of the Navy, before going ahead with a commission that he wanted appointed to investigate submarine appliances and equipment and to make recommendations for the future, had sounded out three men to see if they would serve on such a commission if appointed by the President.

Mr. SWANSON. That is all I said-that the Secretary of the Navy had been active in getting somebody to serve on the commission, and had gotten the names, and that no doubt the President would recommend whomsoever he had found to serve to suit him. All I said is what the Senator from Maine said. I did not know, until this morning, that he had been so active in getting his own jury.

Mr. BINGHAM. The Senator from Virginia has repeated his opinion so often that he actually belieT'es it himself.

Mr. SWANSON. Why, e\erybody believes it who knows anything about the natural course of things in Washington. Do you suppose that the Secretary of the Navy would write around and get people to serve on a commission to recommend to the President, and that the President would refuse to ap. point them? Not much ! The Senator is very innocent if he thinks that has ever occurred. His innocence · is refreshing, but it is dangerous to anybody who trusts him.

Mr. HALE. If the Senator will consider the list that he did write to, ·I think he will see that there will be no occasion for the President to refuse.

Mr. SWANSON. I do not know much about the list. Mr. BINGHAl\1. That is obvious. 1\ir. SWANSON. I do not know the circuit judge, but I know

I am willing to have three Senators named by the Vice President-there can not be any politicS' in it-and three Representatives named by the Speaker of the House to investigate this matter that involves two separate branches of the Government. You must remember that the Coast Guard is interested in this matter. It was a collision between the Paulding and the S-4. Do you not think, in all fairness and justice, that they ought to have an impartial committee, and not one named by the Secretary of the Navy, OI' named by the President on the recommendation of the Secretary of the Navy?

Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. President, the Senator must remember that in the aircraft investigation there were two separate departments concerned, the War Department and the Navy Department. Both asked for the investigation, and trusted the President to see to it that a proper personnel would be picked out; and the country was satisfied with the personnel which was picked out. It has never been called a partial committee just because the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of War asked for its appointment.

In order that I may not be accused of quoting one newspaper from one part of my State which might differ from others, I should like to read a very brief editorial from the Hartford Courant, the oldest daily newspaper published in America. This is a very brief editorial, written by an editor who is far from always having supported the President, but whose experience in writing editorials for the last 25 years in western Massachusetts and northern Connecticut has shown him to be keenly in touch with public opinion. I should like to call it to the attention of my good friend the distinguished Senator from Virginia.

1782 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 20 The editorial is bea.ded :

SENATE BLOCKS " S-4" INVESTIGATION

President Coolidge's recommendation that Congress authorize the appointment of a board of five experts to investigate the s-~ disaster and suggest improvements in submatille safety devices has struck a snag in the Senate Naval Affairs Committee. It is the contention of Democratic committeemen. who like most politicians can discover a disguised motive behind ~very l.amxrpost, that the President's plan represents an endeavor to 'whitewash" the tragedy and that the investigation should be held by the Naval Affairs Committee or by a special committee of the Senate. This is going pretty far afield to play politics.

A naval court of inquiry is now sitting in Boston, investigating the details of the 8-J, tragedy. Its work might be supplemented by an inquiry undertaken by a special committee of the Senate or by the Senate Naval Affairs Committee. But if the naval court may justly or unjustly be charged with prejudice, a senatorial committee might rather more justly than unjustly be charged with partisanship. To insure an unprejudiced, nonpartisan investigation of a disaster that has greatly stirred the country the President has sought the establishment of an obviously unprejudiced, nonpartisan board, composed of two naval and three civilian experts. The House of Representatives has given this plan its indorsement.

The Senate should hasten to do likewise. If Senators insist upon holding their own investigation thereafter, let them go ahead and hold it. But there is no doubting which investigiltion will ha-ve the confidence of the public. The public is fnny aware of the fact that the business and professional men who make up the Senate are as incapable of suggesting improvements in submarine construction as they would be of suggesting improvements in Einstein's theory of relati-vity.

Mr. President, as that editor has said, " This is going pretty far afield to play politics." There is no effort on the part of the Republicans, so far as I can see, to hav·e a Republican Senator put on this commission to "whitewash" the Navy. There is no effort to whitewash anybody in this. This is an effort to find out the facts, to secure a committee that tlle country will respect as being a committee of the highest grade of expe1·ts, with nothing to gain politically or in their careers one way or another by serving without pay on this commission· a committee whose findings will be respected by everybody ~ the country. The American people will know, when this commission finds either for or against the Navy, either for or against the Coast Guard, that tlley are finding what they honestly believe to be the facts, and that they are not attempting to play politics in this or any other matter.

It is too often the case that those of us who are in political ll!e are accused, justly or unjustly, of attempting to play politics. Far be it from me to say that a committee such as the Senator from Virginia bas suggested would attempt to play politics. Far be it from me to say that any member of that committee would endeavor to get himself on the front pages of the newspapers as the chief investigator, day after day asking stinging questions of witnesses, and securing such publicity as might aid him in securing his reelection to the Senate. Far be it from me to say that there is any politics in it at all. But if the Senator's idea is merely to have the representation of Congress on this committee, as was had on the air board, to which he referred, why, then, does he not limit it to one Senator-and I should be perfectly willing to have that Senator the Senator from Virginla himself-and one Representative, rather than to ha\e the entire committee composed of Senators and Representatives?

M.r. SWANSON. Mr. President, if there is any politics in this, it is the politics of trying to prevent a development of the real facts by a disinterested, uncontrolled committee of Congress. •

What is the politics in this? If the Navy Department has done nothing wrong-! am not saying whether it has or has not-why should it object to a full investigation? The politics comes in the effort to create a commission such as never bas been created before with the consent of Congress, a new departm·e. The politics is that the Navy Department do not want an impartial investigation by a committee named by the Speaker and Vice President. I say there ought not to be any politics in this investigation, so in my resolution I provide that the two Houses, head~ by vigorous Republicans, shall name the committee.

PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL A message from the President of the United States, by Mr.

Latta, one of his secretaries, announced that on January 19, 1928, the President approved and signed the act (S. 773) to authorize the President of the United States to appoint an additional judge of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of the State of Iowa.

CLAIM OF MABION LETCIIER (S. DOC. ~0. 42}

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. HAmus in the chair) laid before the Senate the following message from the President of ~e United States, whicl;t was read, and, with the accompanymg papers, referred to the Committee on Clai.ms and ordered to be printed: To tne Co-ngress of the Uni-tedJ States:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State recommending an appropriation for the relief of Mr. Marion Letcher, American consul general at Copenhagen, Denmark. It appears that on February 18, 1927, while Mr. Letcher was the responsible officer in charge, the office of the con ulate general at Copenhagen was burglarized and official moneys in a total equivalent to $252.93, for which Mr. Letcher is accountable,. were stolen. Notwithstanding the efforts of 1\Ir. Letcher, aided by the local police, no recovery has been made.

The conclusion reached by the Secretary of State has my approval and I recommend that the Congress authorize an appropriation of $252.93 to be paid to Mr. Letcher.

CALVIN CooLIDGE. THE WHITE HousE, J01nuary 20, 19U.

PERSONAL EXPLANATION-ALLEGED MEXICAN PROPAGANDA

1\Ir. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I had intended having some!hlng to say t~ morning about the misrepresentations regardmg myself relative to the controversy which took place on the floor of the Senate the other day after I had made a speech upon the Hearst-Catholic-Mexican scandal. The Washington Post of this morning contains a telegram from the mayor of Montgomery, Ala., to the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. RoBINsoN], in which he criticizes me. I have sent two telegrams to :Montgomery to get some information regarding that mayor. I do not now wish to interfere with the progress of the pending joint resolution; I myself am anxious that it should be passed; but on Monday, after the Senator from Virginia [Mr. SwANBO~] shall have finished his speech, I shall address the Senate in reference to this matter and in reference to the mayor of Montgomery and two or three whisky newspapers in Alabama that have fought me always politically and which have attacked me since this incident occurred here the other day.

I shall also have some things to say about some other newspapers. I intend that the truth about this whole subject shall go into the CONGJm')SION.AL RECORD, so that every man and woman in the country who is really an American, who appreciates to any extent the dangers of the Roman Catholic politi· cal machine in this country, can find the truth in this RECOBD.

I am not fighting anybody'~ religion ; I am willing for everyone to worship in any way he shall please ; but no reli~ous organization, be it Protestant, Jew, or Catholic, is goin~g to form a mighty political machine that worms its way into business and into politics and into everything else under the cloak of religion; a machine which attacks the pub-lic-school syste~ that would reunite church and state, and would open the doors of this country to the unfit hordes of foreign lands, the criminal refuse of Europe; and it is my business as an American intrusted with a position in this body, to stand and give war~ing, even if I battle by myself. I know I incur the displeasure of those who do not want to be interfered with. Those who compose that machine laugh in their sleeves at the complacency that they find among many Protestants who are sound asleep. I am fighting for religious freedom and to hold American institutions in their integrity and I am. going to continue to make that fight. I owe it to the American people, who are looking to this body to do the thing which is necessary, to let them know of the dangers that threaten.

COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE THE Sll\""'KKNG OF THE SUBMAJUNE "&-4"

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the consideration of the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 131) providing for a commission to investigate and report upon the facts connected with the sinking of the subma1ine S-4, and upon methods and appliances for the protection of submarines.

Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President, I offer a substitute for the entire resolutioo., and ask that the clerk may read it.

'l'he PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment offered by the Senator from Maine.

Mr. McKELLAR. I ask that my substitute be reported to the Senate.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the cJerk will read.

The CHIEF CLERK. The senior Senator from Tennessee offers the following substitute :

•

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1783 Strike out all after the resolving clause and insert the following: "That there is hereby authorized to be appropriated out of any money

in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated the sum of $20,000, to be expended by the President for the purpose of making any investigation he may desire into the sinking of the submarine B-4.',

Mr. WALSH of Massachu...~tts. Mr. President, in view of this long debate, I would refrain from speaking were it not that my silence might be misconstrued. The fact that this disaster occurred off the coast of Massachusetts and was extensively reported by the press of that State, has naturally created an unusual interest throughout the State of Massachusetts.

During the Christmas recess, while in Massachusetts, I wrote a letter to the chairman of the Senate Committee on Naval Affairs, in which I told him of the great public interest I had discovered, and, as a member of the Senate Committee on Naval Affairs, I asked that he call the committee together when the Senate reconvened and conduct an investigation.

I believed then, and I believe now, that it was the duty of the Senate committee, without any resolution, without any act of this Congress, to investigate into this dreadful disaster, a disaster which swept away the lives of 40 brave defenders of our country, a disaster which sent to the ocean bottom six human beings who lived for four days, and who constantly and steadily during those four days were sending a message by the code-tapping system to the rescue workers, asking only one question: "How long will you be? How long will you be?"

The chairman of the Senate Committee on Naval Affairs, instead of accepting my suggestion, according to ms own statement-and I make no criticism except to tell the facts-called upon the Secretary of the Navy and suggested to him that a commission of experts be appointed by the President to investigate this disaster.

Immediately upon the convening of the Senate, before I or any other Senator could offer any resolution, ~r before any Representative could offer one, and while my letter was pending before the committee, the President's message was presented to the Congress. It was known during the entire recess that the public sentiment of this country was such that an investigation would be asked for, either by some Member of the Senate or by some Member of the House of Representatives. But for the chief purpose, it seems to me, of preventing above all things a senatorial inquiry a resolution urging a civilian commission was requested.

Mr. President, let us speak frankly; it is proposed that we delegate the power of thi's body and of the legislative branch of this Government to an investigation by experts into what? What expert question is involved in the disaster of the submarine S-4? What expert question is involved other than is ·embraced in any accident upon which a jury anywhere in this land hears evidence and renders judgment? This case involves merely the questions of due care and negligence which jurors daily settle. What issue is here involved that requires any different kind of investigation than the most ordinary coroner's jury in any part of this country conducts?

l\Ir. President, what are the questions at issue? Three major questions would be involved in any inquiiy into the disaster of the S-4 submarine off the coast of Provincetown, l\Iass., on that fatal December day, the seventeenth.

First. Whose negligence caused the collision? Was it the officers of the submarine or the Coast Guard destroyer?

Second. Was the method pursued by the Navy Department in the rescue work that followed the collision prompt and efficient?

Third. Did the Navy Department, in view of its experience with previous submarine disasters, perform its fulL duty in obtaining all information available and taking all precautions necessary to prevent a reoccurrence of submarine disasters, and did it equip itself with the proper facilities for saving human life in submerged submarines?

None of these questions, it seems to me, involve expert knowledge. If they do, then our jury system of trying accident cases B,nd the coroner's jury system are failures.

The only technical question that I can see involved is possibly one, namely, What kind of apparatus, if any, is it possible for the Navy to possess which would promptly and expeditiously save human life in a submerged submarine?

If others want to consider themselves incompetent as Senators of the United States to determine who caused this accident, and whether or not proper methods were used to rescue imm~ diately six human lives entombed in the S-4, then I decline to be classed in that group of Senators. I deny that these questions are so momentous that only experts can give an answer to the people of the country. ·

1\Ir. · President, something more than an inquiry into a disaster is involved here. We are beginning the establishment of

a precedent that threatens the destruction of the power and the influence of this body. You know and I know to what extent the country has been complaining about the establishment and the growth of bureaus. From all political groups we hear a good deal of criticism against the growth of bureaucratic government in Washington.

Our people are ala1·med and disturbed at the exte-nt to which bureaus have been created and expanded here in Washington. They look with alann upon the wide and discretionary powers which we have delegf!ted to the&e bureaus which are far removed from personal contact and responsibility to the people. I share the ala,rm which the people maintain, but we have reached a much more dangerous condition, a still graver danger than the establishment of bureaus and the delegation of our functions to them if we are now to refuse the obligation to hold them to sb.•ict accountability and fail to courageously perform our solemn duty to supervise and investigate their administrative conduct.

To whom are these departments responsible? Whom do these bureaus and departments fear? They fear only the legislative branch of this Government. The people properly ask you and me why we voted thus and so, and for an explanation of all our public policies and acts. Are these bureaus immune from accountability to us? Are they not accountable also to the people, and to the people through the people's chosen representatives? Are we to abandon the policy of preserving the remnants of democracy left to the people of America? The only institution remaining to break down and check the natural tendency to usurp autocratic authority on the part of these bureaus is this body, the Senate. Put plainly and briefly, here is the proposition: Are these bureaus and departments to have their alleged misdemeanors and their omissions and their commissions investigated by some other authority than the delegated authority which under our Constitution is vested in the Congress?

I refuse, for one, to be merely a Senator who sits in the Senate to dole out money f·rom the people's pockets to the bureau heads and departments of this Government and seals his lips and denies himself the right to ask, "Have you efficiently managed your bureau or department, and has the people's money been prudently spent?"

If you want to declare that the only function of the Congress is to appropriate money, then I refuse to define my obligation and my conception of~ Senator's duty as simply that of tapping the pocketbooks of the American people.

Consider the humiliating position of a member of the Naval Affairs Committee who next month will be called upon to appropriate upon the recommendation of the naval authorities of this Government hundreds of millions of dollars yet such a member of that committee can not suggest to the Sec~etary of the Navy that he inform him how the submarine S-4 disaster happened. Are we to be told that is none of our business· that it is not the function of a Senator; that we are here' to give money, but we have no business to inquire into the efficiency of the Navy or the methods employed in the Navy to protect human life?

1\Ir. President, some one recently said-and I think it is one of the greatest tributes recently paid to the United States Senate-that this body is the only safeguard of democracy left in the American Government; that it is the one body that holds restr·aint and check upon the natural tendencies and excesses of bureaucratic government; and that it is the one body whose inquiries, investigations, and researches are feared by the executive departments of this Government.

Mr. President, I want to say now that this is the beginning of the end of real democracy if Congress abandons to other bureaus the accountability of its own creatures. When the roll is called each of you must declare your willingness to surrender your position in the watch towers, watching bureaucratic servants removed from direct responsibility to the people.

The issue here and now is, are we to abrogate our power, are we to surrender to a bureau of the Government the authority that is ours as representatives of the people to safeguard their rights? That is the real issue involved here. We are not dealing with mere property, but human lives-40 human lives, 6 of them entrapped for four long days pleading "How long will you be?" I say to you that the American people have a right to ask us "How long will you be "-how long must the American people wait for their representatives to have the courage to inquire into this disaster and to fix the responsibility and provide the means whereby it may never, never again occur?

Has it occun"ed to you that the investigation conducted by the proposed commission may be an investigation of ourselves, that this commission might properly find that the Congress of

. 178~ CONGRESSION A.L RECORD-SEN ATE the United States has failed to give the Navy sufficient m(}ney to provide itself with equipment and facilities for rescuing human lives, and that we ourselves are negligent parties to this terrible disaster involving great loss of human life? This, as well as the policy of excessive administrative economy, is possible within the scope of the resolution.

Mr. BINGHAM. Is that why the Senator is opposed to it? Mr. WALSH (}f Massachusetts. No; but I am opposed to

the President of the United States, for whom I have as high respect and esteem and regard as the Senator from Connecticut, appointing a commission to make an investigation that it is our duty to make. I am opposed to being charged by my constituents with neglect of a public duty as Senator of the United States by delegating my plain duty to an executive bureau. You slurringly cry out "Politics." I am amused at the charge that we alone are partisans, that the acts of the average Senator here are actuated by mere partisan motives. I venture to say, sir, that the average man in this body has no greater partisan motives in the performance of his public duty than any President of the United States, Democrat or Republican.

I resent the charge that you, sir, and you, sir, and I are mere partisans ; that in the investigation into the cause of the loss of human lives we would seek to ascertain how advantageous it may be to the Democratic Party or injurious to the Republican Party. I resent it with all tb,e power at my command, sir. I say that there is no more p:;rtisanship in this body . a.m(}ng the majority of its Members than there is in the White House, and I say that with profound respect and esteem for i~ present occupant. I say it of his predecessors, Democrat or Republican. The men who occupy tl!e high office of President are not snddenly immune from all consideration of party advantage or of party considerati(}n any more than Senators. · l\fr. President, I have talked longer than I intended. I simply want to say now what I thought at the outset in December and still think, that it was the duty of the Committee on Naval .Affairs of this body to start an investigation on its own initiative, without even a resolution of the Senate. I do not know for what business the committees of the Senate exist if it is not to i.D.quire into such charge; of alleged negligent regard of human life; and because I believe that, I still hold that it is the duty of the Senate to appoint a cominittee to investigate this disaster) that there is not a single expert issue here except one and even that involves the possible negligence of the NaVY, which is, Did the Navy exercise diligence to anticipate such accidents and provide itself with the necessary equipment, if it could be obtained, to save human life in the event of a submarine accident? If that issue does not involve the negligence of the Navy, I do not know what it does involve. That is the only issue, jt seems to me, in the whole matter that can be called technical

I shall vote for the proposal of the Senator from Virginia [:Mr. SwANSON] ; but I know what it means, and you, sir, know what it means. Since I have been here there bas not been, with an exceedingly few exceptions, resolutions to investigate departments of the povernment passed by the other branch of the Government. Even when we were seeking to investigate the notorious abuses of the Veterans' Bureau, where the moneys appropriated by the people to take care of disabled veterans were being squandered, we could not get the other branch of the Congress to join with us in the investigation. There is only one body left, there is only one safeguard, one safety valve, to protect the .American people against the possible arrogance of executive bureaus and departments, and that is this body, with its unlimited debate and with its open forum. I hope that we shall appoint a committee to proceed to do our plain duty, which is to inves'tL,<T3.te this matter.

It is not playing politics, but it is political perfidy to neglect one's public duty, to fail to do that which one ought to do, to fail to live up to the obligations of one's office. I consider it one of the obligations of my office to inquire into the manner and the way in which public money is expended, into questions of omission and commission of public duty by those who spend the people's money, into allegations of neglect in the matter of the loss of human life. I have no opini(}n as to how the accident happened. I do know, the public is aroused. I do know that all kinds of charges were made. I do know that 40 human lives have been lost.

Mr. President, I hope a resolution will be passed providing for a thorough and full investigation. I h(}pe and pray that the result of that investigation may be to restore our Navy to its high place and prestige, to that place which the United States Navy has always enjoyed, one of honor, one of respect, one of pride by all .Amerkan.s. 1 pray that it will be found th.at this was nothing but a pure accident th~:~.t no human means could have prevented and no human agency could ha_ye ~~pped.

and that every possible means was resorted to in order to save the lives of the men in that fatal s-.q.. Let us find the facts do our plain duty, and proclaim the truth to our employers and masters, the .American people.

Mr. President, to vote against a congressional investigation is to declare to the A.m.elican people that mistakes, inefficiency, or even misappropriations, omissions, and commissions of executive officials is not the business of this- body. I resent and resist the policy of alleged breaches of duty on the part of executive bureaus being investigated by other bureaus in the executive departments of our Government.

l\Ir. CARA. WAY. 1\fr. President, it is not common to insist upon a seat on the jury to detennine whether we om-selves have been remiss in our duties. The Navy has no right, as the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. BINGHAM] insisted, upon a representation upon the board which shall inquire into the conduct of the Navy. It is not in the interest of a fair and impartial inv~tigation that the accused party shall sit as a judge in that investigation.

All of us know, 1\.Ir. Pre,sident, how helpless an officer in the .Army or Navy may be if he undertakes to criticize his department. We have seen .Admiral Magruder demoted and attempted to be disgraced because he made some suggestions with reference to the organization of the Navy. We have seen him hounded and abused by two or three social climbers who happened to be in official position at the time when he appeared before a committee.

None of us want this investigation to be a partisan investigation. None of us want any advantage, because there should be no advantage. There ought to be no politics in the .Army and the Navy of these United States. There ought to be no advantage, therefore, to either side to conduct an investigation. It ought not to. be within the mind of anyon-e that they are willing to play politics with a shroud, and yet I know and every man in .America will feel, if the investigating committee shall be named under a resolution which gives to one man the power to name that committee and put men on it who owe obedience to the person who names him, that there will always be a lingering suspicion that all of the facts were not developed. I should always feel that way about it, and I know that (}ther people would feel that way about it.

I am thoroughly willing to acquit my friend the Senator from Maine [Mr. HALE], the chairman of the Committee on Naval Affairs, of any intention of playing politics in this matter. I entertain for him a very high regard. I am not unmindful of the embarrassing position in which he is placed if the Executive wants a resolution passed taking the investigation out of the hands of the Committee on Naval .Affairs.

I am not unmindful of the embarrassment to the party in power which does not always support a suggestion of the President who happens at that time to be the President of the United States. But this is a matter that ought to rise above such a thing.

I do not know whether the men who died by inches, begging for help and asking over and over again, " Will you be long now?" when the Navy went away and even lost the submarine for hours and those men died without succor, C(}Uld have been saYed under any circumstances or not, but I feel that the investigation ought to be made, and made thoroughly, that each and every man ought to have the right to speak his honest convictions without fear of future consequences to his own welfare, and I think that such an investigation would be made by no other than a committee of this body.

I rather hope the resolution will be finally whipped into shape to provide for just that procedure. It is important. It is just as important as anything can be, because one life is just as sacred as a million, and the mothers and fathers of the meDi who died in that submarine ought to have the fullest a.gsurance that they are going to know whether or not everything that could be done was done to Flave their boys. Nobody ought to want the investigation to be hedged about by possibilities that there will always linger in the minds of people a suspicion that n: full inv-estigation was not had.

I hope the resolution will he so amended that this body will make the investigation. ;

Mr. TRAMMELL. Mr. President, in view of the fact that I have a resolutiQn pending before the Senate in the nature of a Senate resolution, I wish to say just a few words on the subject of the amendment now being considered

I have felt ever since this terrible disaster that there should be a most thorough and searching investigation made by a congressional committeE>,., and that the investigation should not be made through the executive departments, although I have every confidence both in t.he President and in the Secretary of the ·Navy, because I know that they are both most estimable gen~en !!nd m,ost faithful and capf!ble public S€r!WtS.

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1785 But I think the circumstances to be such that the investiga

tion should be made by a committee that has no connection whatever with the Navy Department. Entertaining these views, wheu the matter was pending before the Senate Committee on Na-,al Affairs of which I am a member, I proposed to that committee that section 3 be stricken from the joint resolution which was passed by the House of Representatives, and that we recommend to the Senate the adoption of an amendment providing for a committee composed of two Members on the part of the Senate and three on the part of the House of Representatives to carry on an inve tigation of the disaster to the S-.~.. The particula1· suggestion which I made, having submitted in a written proposal to the Naval Affairs Committee was in substance identical with the amendment which we are now considering, with the one exception, that the pending amendment provides for a . committee composed of tbrt'e on the part of the Senate and three on the part of the House of Represen ta ti ves.

I am heartily in favor of the amendment as proposed by the Senator from Virginia [Mr. SWANSON], for, as I have stated, it is in line with the proposal which I bad previously made in the Naval Affairs Committee when we had this subject before us for consideration. I introduced only as a matter of expediency the resolution providing for a Senate committe_e. This pending proposal is, I think, preferable to that ei!lbra~ed m my Senate resolution, and I therefore hope that 1t wlll be adopted. . .

Mr. DILL. Mr. President, I shall not take much tlme ill the ditcussion of the pending joint resolution and the proposed amendment to it. I think, however, that the death of the men in the disaster to the submarine S-4, which aroused such deep interest amongst the people of this country, is so important a subject for investigation that Members of the Sena.te an!l Hou ·e of Representatives should have charge of any rnvestigation which may be made rathe~ than a co~sion su~ as is proposed by the original resolution. I vot.ed .~ the comm1ttee for the amendment of the Senator from V1rgrnm, and I shall vote for it when it comes up for action in the Senate. The death of these men is one of the most pitiable and terrible events that we have had in peace times. It was accidental. Who is to blame should be decided, if determination of that fact can be made.

But, Mr. President, I want to talk for a few minutes about another group of men who are being killed and \vounded and being placed in a position to be killed and wounded, as were the men who died on the submarine S-4, without any authority of Con~rress at all. I have sat here for weeks, now, awaiting action ~f the Foreign Relations Committee on the re ·olutions refen·ed to it regarding the presence of American marines in Nicaragua, and for my part I do not int~nd to remain silent longer simply because the committee has failed to act.

Marines are being sent to Nicaragua by the hundr~, and Nicaraguans are being murdered. They are called bandits because they would not sell their ammunition and thefr _right ~o fight for what they believed to be self-government ill the1r own country. In the current number of The Nation, the issue of January 25, 1928, appears an article on this subject -which I believe is more informative as to the real reason why the marines are being kept in Nicaragua than is anything I ha\e seen printed.

I would not be lmderstood as taking the position that the armed forces of this country should not be used to p~otect American life anywhere in the world, but I want emphatical~y to declare that I am opposed to using the armed forces of thls c-ounn·y to protect the investments of Americans in foreign lands where revolution is rife or where governments are not ~table.

The real reason why the marines are being kept in Nicaraaua-I will not at this time discuss the question why they went there-is to protect the property of Americans acquired as a result of speculative investments there, and, in addition to that, for the purpose of fastening new and more burdensome loans t~pon the people of Nicaragua.

Mr. BINGHAM. 1\Ir. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

.Mr. DILL. I yield. Mr. BINGHAM. Is the Senator not familiar with the fact

that the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party of Nicaragua united in requesting this Government to send marines there to help them organize a constabulary which would see to it that a fair election was held on the next occasion when they are to hold elections? Does not the_ Senator realize that that is the reason why they are t11ere now·t

Mr. DILL. I am familiar with the fact that the Liberals conceded the pre ence of the marines in Nicaragua after Mr. Stimson had told them that they would be paid in gold for the ammunition and guns whlch they possessed if they laid

down their arms ; I am a ware of the fact that the mal'ines · have been kept there under the pretext that they were to supervise and safeguard an election, but in reality they are there to protect the property of Americans who have investments there.

1\Ir. BINGH.<UI. Is the Senator accusing the distinguished head of the Liberal Party in Nicaragua of selling out?

1\fr. DILL. I say that the head of the Liberal Party in Nicaragua did not accept the proposal that the marines should stay there until he was offered gold for the ammunition and · guns which he had and be was informed that if be did not accept it that more marines and still more armed forces would be brought and be would be killed or driven out of the country. Sandino, who is called a bandit, was one of the Liberal leaders who refused to do that.

Furthermore, when the Senator talks about an election being held in Nicaragua under the domination of American marines, I remind him that we are doing more than preparing to supervise an election; we are ri\eting upon the people of Nicaragua the control of American business men who by loans and contracts are getting control of th~ banks and the customs duties of that country. I say to the Senator that, in my judgment, this is one of the blackest and foulest crime that has been committed against men who have enlisted in the armed forces of this country to protect its flag and to protect its people.

I now desire to read from the article in The Nation which I have mentioned. After explaining some of the details of the situation in Nicaragua, this article goes on to state:

There is opt>n talk of a new loan to Nicaragua, on terms which even the puppet Diaz rt>sents. It will be recalled that the marines kept President Diaz in office when he had lost all control over his own country. We did not come to his aid free. We compelled him to buy peace.

Antl when we bought the peace, instead of paying for the ammunition of the Liberals out of the Treasury of the United States. which of course we bad no right to do, we paid for it out of money borrowed from American bankers in New York; and the loan is based upon the Bank of Nicaragua and the customs duties of that country.

The terms of this loan are very interesting. Let me read further:

For a one-yea1· loan of $1,000,000, Diaz was forced to put a mortgage on the capital stock and dividends of the National Bank of Nicaragua-a corporation with a paid-in capital of $300,000 and worth twice that-and on the entire capital stock of the Pacific Railways of ~icaragua-worth more than the total amount of the loan ; to pledge the export mx on coffee, the new customs duties on tobacco, wines, and liquors, and the increased tolls on other commodities; to give thebankers a five-year option on new Nicaraguan loans; and to transfer to New York, for the benefit of the credit givers, the bank's and railroad's deposits-said to be above $400,000. The contract also provided that the money would be used primarily to buy (American) munitions and, apparently, to bribe Moncada-and would be expended under the direction of a special committee of three, two of the three b€.'ing Americans, one named by the State Department, the other by the banker .

That loan expires on March 31, although it includes a provision by which it may be extended for another six months. Negotiations are now un(It>r way for another loan to replace it and a1so to cover the enormous expenses incurred by Diaz in maintaining himself in power against the wishes of llis countrymen. Diaz signed that loan contract willingly enough. but apparently the terms proposed for the new loan are worse still-they stump even Diaz, who is reported. to be about to resign in disgust. A letter received by a certain large business houee in New York ·from another business house in Nicaragua asserts that the difficulties of the business situation there are not due to war depression but to the fact that the Diaz government is negotiating a loan with certain New York bankers to olltain money to pay the war debts and damages. and the Gowrnment does not want to accept clauses of the contract which the bankers demand, and therefore to force the Government to come to terms the bank bas stopped all operations with the exception of collecting. This, of course, us they control the customhouse revenues and the Banco Nacional de Nicaragua, establishes a short and vicjous circle. Currency is getting scarcer every day, and in the end it will all go to the Banco Nacional, for the customs duties are the most exorbitant ever heard of.

The uusint>ss man adds his prediction that the legislature will have to accept the bankers' terms. Meanwhile the state department, supporting the bankers, is demanding that the legislature also revise the Nicaraguan constitution to permit United States marines to Sllpervise the elections. A pretty l:msiness, indeed, for the Dnited States of America to be supporting! A fine cause to die for!

1\Ir. President, I hope that the Foreign Relations Committee will take some action regarding the resolutions referred to it. .

11786 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 201 and I hope also that nobody will think that because there has been no discussion of this subject on this floor for the past few days we are stunned into silence here; that we are not mbidful of the fact that American young men are being taken to Nicaragua and are being used there, sacrificing their lives if necessary, to protect the property of Americans, that they may keep it, and, what is more, fasten the more tightly the tentacles of another loan upon the people of that country.

Mr. BRUCE. Mr. President, I was going to ask the Senator from Washington a question, but he has taken his seat.

I do not claim to have given any exhaustive study to this question but there are just one or two interrogatories that I should llke to put to the Senator from Washington.

When a country like Nicaragua has invited an inflow of our capital, and our business men have established industries and acquired interests of one sort or another in it, and the time comes when Nicaragua is unable to protect the lives and property of our nationals within its limits, what does the Senator think that we should do?

1\lr. DILL. I will say to the Senator that I think when the Government of Nicaragua or any other country is in such a condition that the lives of our nationals are not safe it is the duty of this Government to use whatever force is necessary to get those people out of that country ;_ and. to that extent I have no criticism of what has been done m Nicaragua. What I am cliticizing here is not the use of our forces to get Americans out but it is the keeping of these armed forces there and sendina' more of them there, not merely to protect the lives of people who can not get out, but to put more lives there to be destroyed, if necessary. merely for the purpose of protecting the investments of Americans there.

Mr. BRUCE. Then the Senator would ha-ve our nationals scurry out of the country. like so many frightened rats, leaving perhaps every dollar in the world that they have within its limits to be the spoil of revolutionary forces?

Mr. DILL. Mr. President, I certainly am not in favor of using the Army and the Navy and the marines of the United States to keep our people in every country where revolution breaks out and enable them to profiteer on that country.

Mr. BRUCE. No; not in every country, because it is not necessary for us to maintain a military force in every country. Who ever heard of our sending marines to the Argentine? Who ever heard of our sending marines to Chile or to Brazil or to any other thoroughly stable and responsible c?untry of Sou~h America that is competent to protect our nationals and thenproperty?

Mr. WHEELER. Mr. President--Yr. DILL. Just a minute; I want to answer the Senator.

I want to say to the Senator that the doctrine presented here by the Senator would lead us to put our Army and our Navy in An!entina, Bolivia, or any other country if revolution were rife a~d were destroying the property of om· people. I will say to the Senator that we would not do it in a great, big country, because it would mean war.

Mr. BRUCE. Yes; if Argentina were Nicaragua or some other revolution-torn, distracted Central American country, I · would have our marines go to Argentina.

Mr. DILL. The policy in Nicaragua inevitably leads, if w~ follow it, to any- country on the American side of the world where revolution breaks out and Americans have property.

Mr. BRUCE. That has not been our history. I have just intimated to the Senator that occupations of foreign territory by our marines have been of a purely exceptional character. They have only taken place where there was no other course for us to take unless we were to forfeit the character of a self-respecting government.

Mr. DILL. I want to remind the Senator that never in the history of this Republic has a President placed the armed forces of this country in another country and kept them there for months almost a year now-not once-without the authority of Congr~. There have been cases where a President has gorte in to take out and save the lives of Americans ; but whenever he has wanted to keep the armed forces of this country in a self-governing republic he has come to Congress for authority. This is the one case where the President has disregarded Congress.

1\fr. BRUCE. The question in this case was not one for Oongress, it was one for the State Department, a question of recognition.

Mr. DILL. I agree with the Senator so far as protecting the lives of these people were concerned, but not as to the continued occupation of the country.

Mr. BRUCE. There has not yet been any such continued occupation.

Mr. DILL. What does the Senator call the fact that we have ,kept o~ tx:oops i,n Nicara.eooua,. ang when some of theJ!l encoU!!-

tered trouble we sent down a lot morel marines and announced that we would send still more? What does he call that, if t:ha.t is not occupation?

M.r. BRUCE. We were informed by the de facto if not the de jure ruler of Nicaragua that he or his government was unable to protect om· nationals and their property in Nicaragua. That situation was not only brought to our attention by Diaz, the then President (}f Nicaragua, but also by Great Britain, by France, by Italy, by Germany; and Great Britain practicallY. asked us to intervene, and informed us that she was about to send a warship to the coast of Nicaragua as a place of refuge for her nationals. What were we to- do under those circumstances. pray, except to send marines to Nicaragua?

I am glad that they were sent, and I am glad that when they were attacked there was one American officer-Major Hatfieldtrue enough to the honorable military traditions of his country to say, " With or without water, the marines never surrender ! ••

1\!r. DILL. Oh, well, the Senator can not get away from thiS argument by beginning to glorify the American marines. I never knew them to fail to follow orders or do their duty; but I want to know whether the Senator places the lives of Americans and the property of Americans in exactly the same class, and whether he puts on the same basis the protection of American life and the maintenance of troops there to enable Americans to make enormous profits out of their investments?

Mr. BRUCE. I deny that that was the motive of this Government. I deny that that was the motive of the President of , this country. I deny that that was the motive of the Secretary of State of this country. I deny that that was the motive ot ~ any responsible official of this Government.

Mr. DILL. Well, let us not argue about the motive. Let Ulf,

argue from the facts. The fact is that we went in on the theory' of protecting American lives, and we have stayed not only for! the purpose of protee.ting life,. because we could have brough~ our nationals out of there, but we have stayed to protect invest-! ments already made, and to permit our American citizens,~ American bankers to make still greater investments.

Mr. BRUCE. We have remained there for the purpose ot! supervising an election in a country which has practically neve:.:. known a free election, and of giving Nicaragua another opportunity, under more favorable auspices than have ever existed in her troublous past, to make of herself a real, self-governing; republican community. Does the Senator doubt _ fot" one mo-~ ment-I know he does 11Qt-that when we have performed our· function our marines will be withdrawn, as they were some years ago withdrawn?

Mr. DILL. I know that if the Senator had his way they· would be withdrawn by order of Congress.

Mr. BRUCE. If I had my way? Mr. DILL. If the Senator from Washington had his way. Mr. BRUCE. Oh ! I do not doubt it for a moment. I do not

doubt it for a moment, because I think I know very well~ with great respect to the- Senator, what his views about such a situation usually are.

Mr. DILL. I wish the: Senator would explain that statement. Mr. BRUCE. One thing is very remarkable to me. So far

as I can see, about the only elements in this country that do not approve of the action of our Government in relation to Nicaragua are the extreme pacifists and the radicals. Every time we are compelled to take any international action of any sort the cry of bitter disapproval goes up from these sources, and especially from the radical sources~ I sometimes think that the disapproval of our American radicals under such circumstances must be inspired by a certain degree of satisfaction that they find in the thought that our Government is facing a difficult and an embarrassing situation that affords them additional leverage for domestic agitation.

:Mr. DILL. Mr. President--:Mr. BRUOE. In the town tn which I live there is not one

single, S(}litary conspicuous individual, man (}r woman, who is usually believed to be a radical, who is not raising an outcry about our intervention in Nicaragua.

Mr. DILL. Mr. President, the Senator is trying to get away on the subject of radicals and reactionaries. I am willing to debate that with him at some other time, but the question of whether we are to pay for the right of Americans to make profits out of Nicaraguan investments with the lives of American boys is not a question of radicals and conservatives. It may be a question of whether you place human life about metal dollars, but in my judgment it is not a question of radicals and conservatives, except they be radical as to humanity or as to property.

Mr. BRUCE. I say that the present Republican administration is only doing in Nicaragua what every true Democrat in this country would deride and scorn a Democratic administrati,on fQl' not; doing Wlder the ~e conditions.

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE . 1787 l\Ir. DILL. I thank God no Democratic administration ever

did do it. l\Ir. BRUCE. One did do it. Did not President Wilson twice

send an armed force down to Mexico? 1\lr. DILL. Yes; and he withdrew them. l\Ir. BRUCE. The e marines of ours in Nicaragua will be

withdrawn in due course. Does any man doubt that? Mr. DILL. Yes; after they have been there for a year or

two. Mr. BRUCE. We have never gone into one of these turbulent

countries south of us except to carry a blessing with us when we went.

l\lr. DILL. The blessing of bullets. l\Ir. BRUCE. Bullets! l\Ir. DILL. The blessing of bullets is not the kind of bless

ing this country is in the habit of handing out to weaker people. l\Ir. BRUCE. Sometin1es a bullet in the bosom of a bandit

may not be a ble sing to the bal\dit, but it is a ble sing to the people whose peace he is harryin~

Mr. DILL. I remember there were certain people in Great Britain, and some in America, who thought that a bullet would have been good for George Washington. too.

l\Ir. BRUCE. We went· into San Domingo, into that distracted country, whose finances were utterly disordered, and with what result, pray? For the first time San Domingo soon found herself endowed with something that might be called a real cinlization. We restored those disordered finances. We established law and order. In all sorts of ways we gave helpful and enlightened adnce and aid to the Dominican people.

Mr. DILL. I do not want to enter into an argument about San Domingo. I want to keep to Nicaragua, and these investments on which we are trying to profiteer at the cost of the lives of American boys.

l\1r. BRUCE. And then, pursuing our usual unselfish practice, we retired from San Domingo and from that clay to this . he has enjoyed such a degree of peace as she has ne,er before known. We have gone down to Haiti, too, and, for the first time in its history, men and women can sleep n·anquilly in their beds at night without any thought of violence.

Mr. DILL. Does the Senator think we ought to go to China with American troops in order to make it peaceful there for everybody?

Mr. BRUCE. One of the most glorious episodes in the history of the people of the United States was when we w-ent to China during the Boxer insurrection, and our forces, with the forces of other civilized countries, put dow-n that insurrection.

Mr. DILL. Does the Senator think--Mr. BRUCE. And so grateful were the Chinese people to

us for releasing them from our share of the Boxer indemnity, that ever since, year after year, they have been using the money thus refunded to them for the purpo ·e of sending promising Chinese youths to this coun·try to be educated in our institutions of learning.

Mr. DILL. Does the Senator think we ought to keep marines in China until they have an election?

Mr. BRUCE. No; keep them there only so long as it is nece~ sary to promote the temporary objects that took us there.

Mr. DILL. But why should we be so kind to the people of Nicaragua, and guarantee them elections at the point of the bayonet, and not do as much for China? Is it because it would be such a big undertaking that the Senator forgets his principle of protecting life and property in China?

l\Ir. BRUCE. Did we not send a force of marines over to China a short time ago?

l\.fr. DILL. But did we keep them there for a year to hold an election in China ?

1\Ir. BRUCE. No; not an election. As far as Chinese constitutions are concerned, I do not know that such a thing as an election in our sense is known to it.

1\Ir. DILL. Would the Senator think we ought to send them to Italy to guarantee an honest election there?

l\Ir. BRUCE. Of com·se not, because Italy is a thoroughly civilized and law-abiding country, and a country fully prepared to as ume the responsibility in every respect of protecting the nationals of foreign countries.

Mr. DILL. But if they got into revolution over there, would the Senator favor sending American troops there to hold a free election?

Mr. BRUCE. Of cour..,e not. We could rest assured that a country like Italy would successfully deal in one way or another with a revolution in a comparatively short time.

Mr. DILL. But suppose .:he did not? Should we send them into Ru ·sia?

Mr. BRUCE. I ha\e no dispQsition to answer ·wild hypothese.

Mr. · DILL. But the Senator was talking about principle . He called me a radical, and I want to know how conservative he is now on the principle of establishing order throughout · the world with American lives.

Mr. BRUCE. I did not call the Senator a radical. He may as ·ume that I did if he choose .....

Mr. DILL. To whom did the Senator refer when he talked about a radical?

Mr. BRGCE. I say that, as far as my personal knowledge goes, every radical in this country, man or woman, disapproves of our entry into Nicaragua.

Mr. DILL. I do not particularly object to being called a radical.

Mr. BRUCE. I just wish that the committee now investigating those Mexican documents, of which I am a member could have its power so enlarged as to inquire into how fa; clandestine correspondence has gone on in this counh·v recently betw-een American radicals and communist!·, and radicals and communists in Mexico and Nicaragua. I should like to see, for instance, the letters of Madame Kollontai, the bolshevist emissary to Mexico, to citizens of this country during her sojourn in Mexico, which was, I believe, after she had united herself to her eighth or ninth husband. Ko I repeat, we may do so at some time in the future-though G~ forbidbut we have neYer gone into one of these harassed countries in the Caribbean Sea, or in Central America, except to confer benefits of incalculable value upon them.

Think of our intervention in Cuba. That is absolutely one of the finest things in human history. There was the Pearl of the Antilles. All we had to do was to reach o~t and grasp it, had the law of brute force been our only law. In the sense of conquest! it was ~uch a pri~e. ~s h~d been rarely offered to any people smce the dawn of. civilization. We went in; we helped the Cuban to secure their independence ; we drove the scour ... e of yellow fever out of their midst; we designed and hel~d them to construct a superb system of highways; in a hundred and one ways we brought to them the aid which only a highlv enlightened and powerful people long accustomed to the workings of free institutions can bring to a recently liberated people.

l\lr. DILL. The Senator does not compare--Mr. BR~CE. Then, with the reservation that we should

have the right to go back w-henever the condition of Cuba required it, we left her shores. Twice we ha>e gone back and each time have we returned to our own land and so grate: ful are the Cuban people for what we ha\e done for them that hardly had we breathed out note of defiance to Germany and her allies during the great war before Cuba, too, declared war upon Germany.

l\Ir. DILL. Does not the Senator think be has gone far afield in discussing the Spanish-American War?

l\lr. BRUCE. I hope it will never become necessary for me to ha\e to rei.' upon the Senator from Washington to determine how far I shall go, because he is headed much farther in some directions than I expect ever to go.

As an illustration of what our beneficent intervention meant to Cuba, only a few days ago the Cuban Assembly did a thin a

to which, so far as I am aware, there is no parallel in th: annals of the human race. Recollecting what was achieved for their country by that distinguished Anl'erican soldier and administi·ator. Gen. Leonard ".,.ood; the Legislative A...~embly of Ouba conferred an annual pension of $6,000 a year upon General Wood's widow. Surely the God of nations will not fail richly to recompense the people of Cuba for this nobly generous act. Indeed, our conduct to some of the countries south of us has marked nothing less than a new era in the history of mankind · and the people of Nicaragua will some day, I doubt not, be a~ grateful to us because of our intervention in Nicaragua and our friendly efforts to place her firmly upon her feet, as are the people of Cuba.

I am a Democrat, but I think that when the adminish·ation of my country is dealing with its foreign relations all feelings of partisanship, to which I usually respond, should cease at the w-ater's edge. I would not uphold the conduct of the United States in Nicaragua if I thought it was unconscionable or wrong; certainly not if I thought it was of the rapacious character that the Senator from Washington as~umes. But I do n~t think that any Secretary of State was ever more unjustly nu repre ented than has been our present able and upright Secretary of State, l\Ir. Kellogg, in this matter of Nicaraguan intervention. Has he done anything that Gro\er Cleveland would not have done?

Simply because there was a dispute over a boundary line between Great Britain and Venezuela. Cleveland proceeded almost to the point of def~·ing the power of Great Britain.

1788 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE J il"'"U .ABY 20 I Mr. DILL. Will the Senator let me can his attention to

what Mr. Cleveland did when there was trouble in Nicaragua.? Will he yield for a moment that I may point it out to bim?

Mr. BRUCE. It is unnecessary for the Senator to recall it. It is unnecessary for anybody to recall to me any salient feature of the administrations of that great, popular and party leader.

Mr. DILL. I think, with all due respect to the Senator's memory, that he has forgotten--

Mr. BRUCE. I will not be interrupted for that purpose. Mr. DILL. The ·senator rose to nsk me a question and he

never has allowed me to answer his question, because he is making a speech in my time.

l\lr. BRUCE. There can not possibly · be any dispute about the facts relating to the Venezuelan boundary. Cleveland, like his predecessors, was e\er mindful of what was due to the rights and dignity and responsibilities of this country in its dealings with foreign laws. None of us has forgotten the famous letter of Secretary of State Olney, during :Mr. Cleveland's time, written with reference to the boundary dispute to which I have just referred. The present administration, as I have said, is not seeking to do anything that Wilson did not twice endea yor to do in his relations with :Mexico. Nor did either Cleveland or Wilson do anything in our foreign relations that all American Presidents of every party have not been prepared to do when the honor and the safety of our country called upon them to do it.

I had not intended to be d1·awn into this debate at all, but I could not sit and hear motives imputed to American intervention in Nicaragua without opposing with all the energy of my nature what was said in that respect.

Mr. DILL. Mr. President, the Senator rose, he said, to ask me some questions and then proceeded to take the floor and refused to be interrupted in the midst of the questions which he was asking. But, I think, with a.ll due respect and regard for the Senator's great knowledge and ability and for his memory of Mr. Cleveland, on which he ptides himself, that I will dare to 1·ead, for the information of the Senator as well as others, what Mr. Cleveland said about some revolutions in Nicaragua.

Instead of sending troops into Nicaragua, instead of keeping them there and having numbers of them killed and wounded, in his message of December 4, 1893, he said :

· Nicaragua has recently passed through two revolutions, the party at first successful having in turn been displaced by another. Our newly appointed minister by his timely good offices aided in a peaceful adjustment of the controversy involved in the first conflict. The large American interests established in that country in connection with the Nicaragua Canal were not molested.

I expected the Senator from Maryland to talk about the Nicaraguan Canal, but the Senator did not place himself even on that ground, which to my mind gives the only excuse that can be offered for keeping troops there at all and, of course, even that is no justification_

The Senator from Maryland adverted to President Wilson's sending troops to Mexico. I want to read what President Wilson said about sending troops to Mexico. He sent troops to Tampico to protect American lives temporarily, but in a special message of April 20, 1914, he requested authorization by Congl'ess of his action in the following words :

I therefore come to ask your approval that I used the armed forces of the United States in such ways and to such an extent as may be necessary to obtain from General Iluerta and his adherents the fullest recognition of the rights and dignity of the United States, and end distressing conditions now unhappily obtaining in 1\Iexlco.

That is another Democratic President who had respect for the Constitution of the United States to the extent that he came to the Congress and asked for express authority to continue to use the armed forces of the country.

Congress met in December of this year, and up to this hour we have had no such request from the President of the United States. We have had an assumption of authority, and that assumption has continued down through the weeks and mo-nths we have been here. There is no- indication now that this privately conducted war is to end, but rather that the President intends to continue it, and Congress sits supinely by and gives Senators, such as the Senator from Maryland, so-me justification fo-r thinking that Congress consents to and appro-ves o-f the Pr·esident's course.

1\U'. BRUCE. When President Wilson decided to intervene in 1\Iexico he knew, of course, that that meant war.

Mr. DILL. What does this mean in Nicaragua? Mr. BRUCE. l\Iexico fs a country with millions of popula

tion, a country with very large resources in every re.'"'pect for carrying on war, and therefore, when no invitation in any

form had come to us to intervene in Mexico, it was perfectly ' natural that Mr. Wilson should have invoked the full war powers of the Government. But how different is the si~<ttion in Nica~·agua. Both organized parties in that country welcome our intervention They are only too glad to have our supervision of the election which is to determine which of them is to hold the reins of lawful power in Nicaragua. When Mr. Stimson went there--

Mr. DILL. Mr. President, I have the :floor. Mr. BRUCE. I thought that the Senator would interrupt :

me, and I thought that he would interrupt me just at that point.

l\Ir. DILL. Yes; I do not propose that the Senator shall make anothe1· speech in my time. The Senator from Maryland rises • and in my time proceeds to make a speech.

Mr. BRUCE. .Another case where "discretion is the better part of Yalor."

Mr. DILL. The Senator will have all the opportunity he wants. I did not interrupt the Senator by making speeches in his time. I might have risen to ask a question. I do not want the Senator to get so far away from the issue as he did a while ago when he went to discussing the war with Spain and glorified the American troops and the American Republic back through its history. I did want to- call the Senator's attention to the 1

fact, he having told us that Democratic Presidents did these ! things, that when Grover Cleveland and Woodrow Wilson, the only two Democratic Presidents Wf' have had in modern times, 1

wanted to use the armed forces of this country continuously in a foreign land they came to Congress and asked for the authority.

I want to remind the Senator of what Mr. Harding also had 1

to say on this subject. In bi speech during the campaign which 1

resulted in his election as President he said: Nor will I misuse the powers of the Executive to cover with a veil J'

of secrecy repeated acts of unwarrantable interference in domestic affairs of the little Republics of the Western Henri phere, such as in , the past few years have not only made enemies of those who shouldbe our friends, but have rightfully discredited our country as their trusted neighbor.

The Senator justHies at last the troops in Nicaragua because, ' he said, both parties invited it. The Senator, of course, is in a ' debate, and men in argument will always lean to their own side of the case; but I must call the Senator back to the history of the situation, which is that our troops went there to protect American lives and American property, and after getting in there they stayed.

Mr. Stimson was sent down there to buy off the Liberals by promising to buy their ammunition and their guns, and then they consented to it. Now, when Sandino and a little band of followers opposed to the interyention of this Government, oppose this policy, they are called bandits, and the Senator gets up here and glorifies the dying of American boys in the name of American investors who have properties there and who want to profiteer on them to the extent of getting stronger and greater loans than they already have.

Mr. BRUCE ro e. Mr. DILL. Does the Senator want to ask a question? Mr. BRUCE. Is the Senator in mind now to tolerate an

interruption? Mr. DILL. I will glacUy tolerate an interruption, but I will

not permit the Senator to make speeches in my time about the Spanish-American War and the Civil War and the Revolution. If the Senator has a question he desires to ask I shall be very glad to yield.

Mr. BRUCE. If the Senator wants a complete monopoly of speech he may have it.

~Ir. DILL. I do not want that; but I do not like to be driven off the :floor.

:Mr. BRUCE. Notwithstanding his often-professed hatred of monopolies of all sorts .

Mr. DILL. I think I wa pretty liberal to the Senator in. letting him question me and talk, too.

I do not care to continue the discussion, but I did want to raise my voice in protest against a continuation of the policy which has been carried on in connection with Nicaragua and to call again upon the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate to take some action regarding the resolutions which were presented here some weeks ago. I believe we have waited long enough. I believe it is the duty of that co-mmittee to take some action, one way or another, in order that we may have a chance in the Senate to express o-ur views by our votes on this po-licy o-f war against a little people down in Nicaragua.

Mr. BRUCE rose. Mr. DILL. Does the Senator want to- interrupt me?

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1789 .Mr. BRUCE. No; I thought that the Senator was going to

interrupt himself this t:ime. Mr. DILL. No. I am only golng to say a few more words and

then I shall ,yield the floor. >

I do not want to be misunderstood. I ha'\"e the kindliest feelings for the Senator from 1\Iaryland. - I have no objecUon to his personal characterizations of me, because when he adopts that course I know that he is at a loss for an argument with which to replY to the things that I have said, and he uses that means while he thinks of arguments which he may make. So I have no hard feelings about anything he may have said.

Mr. President, I believe there is an American policy which has been laid down by the Presidents of the country through its histOI'y. I believe that the keeping of the marines in Nicaragua to cover up the record we have used in Nicaragua is in violation of the precedents and historic policy of this Government. I believe that the Oongress should act upon the question whether the President asks us to do so or not.

I shall not take further time to discuss the subject now, but shall probably ha\e more to say at another time.

Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. President, in order not to take the time of the Senate I ask unanimous consent to have incorporated in the REcoRD as part·of my remarks in connection with the dis· cussion of the Nicaraguan situation the matter which I send to the desk. It refers particularly to foreign debts.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. RoBI SON of Indiana in the chair). Without objection, it is so ordered.

The matter· referred to is as follows~ The loan made to Dlaz soon a!ter his recognition amounted to

$300,000. This was r epaid out of a subsequent loan for $1,000,000 on March ~9, 192'Z. This million-dollar loan bears interest at 6 per cent per annum and the security consisted of a first lien on 50 per cent of the surplus revenues, plus a secondary Den on certain taxes, a first lien on all dividends declared by the railroad or the national bank (both the property of the Nicaraguan Government) and a first lien on the capital stock of the railroad and the bank. The proceeds of the loan were to be Used for the purchase of supplies, maintenance, equipment, and salaries of the armed forces of the Republic. The loan was for a term of one year with a proviso that one-half of the loan might · be extended for anot}J.er six months.

The department iB informed that tbis loan has been rapidly amortized, and the ·amount outstanding to-day is $538,379.88. .A payment is expected from the surplus revenues as Q-f JanlJfil'y 1, which has not yet been received, which it is thought will be in the neighborhood of $200,000, which would reduce the loan to about $338,000. It is expected that this balance will be paid oft' by Jul,y 1 next. This is the only money owed by the Republic of Nicaragua to American bankers.

Mr. BRUCE. Mr. President, I wish to add merely a few remarks. The real point of the disc'llSsion is that in view of the condition of disorder and lawlessness, not to say anarchy in Nicaragua, the President of the United States sent down to Nicaragua an able, accomplished, and highly experienced public man~ Mr. Stimson, to look over the situation and to do whatever could be done to bring the warring factions in Nicaragua to a peaceful understanding with each other. Mr. Stimson went. Diaz, the head of the Conservatives, was in control of the Government in Nicaragua or such government as there w~ The army of the Liberals, the other patty in Nicaragua, was in the field headed by General Moncada. Mr. Stimson got m touch with both of the Nicaraguan parties, the Conservatives and the Liberals. He experienced little difficulty in arrtdng at an understanding with the Conservatives, and by tact and address of a high order he succeeded in inducing General Moncada, the commander in chief of the Libel·al military forces, to persuade all his generals, with a single excepti-on, to lay : down their arms and to accept the p1·oposition of 1\lr. Stimson that there should be a free and fair popular eleetion held in Nicaragua under safeguards prescribed by the United States.

Of all the Liberal generals only one refused to lay down his arms, and that was Sandino, a man who for part of his life bad been a mere military adventurer, and who, therefore, of course, could only with difficulty be reconciled to the idea of bringing his calling as a soldier to an encr. I say that, carried . on as the operations of Sand.ino have been, they, when considet·ed in the light of his general character and career, can be classed as nQthing but the desulto-ry guerrilla warfare of a bandit chief ; that is all.

We must not forget that this man was for some years a lieutenant of the Mexican Pancho Villa, probablY one of the most murderous, atroci-ous -cutthroats that ev-er headed u band of marauders an~·where in Latin America. His headquarters, as I understand it, are appropriately enough, a. fox hole in the 'WOOds. I say " appropriately enough " because he and his like are nothing but ferre naturre. in my judgment, just as much

.L....'"U.X--113

so as a fox or a wolf or any other p1·owling animal of the wilde1·ness. He is a mere robber chief, and he and his irregular following alone are now opposing our efforts-our honest, generous, disinterested, wise efforts, and the efforts of the two political parties of Nicaragua to bring peace to desolate Nicaragua.

With Sanclino eliminated, there is no reason why our military operations in Nicaragua should not come to an end or why a peaceful election should not then be held there ; and it be determined in an orderly and authentic way whether the people of Nicaragua desire that their ruler should be a Conser·vative or -a Liberal.

Mr. WHEELER. Mr. President, will the Senator from Maryland yield to me?

Mr. BRUCE. Yes. Mr. WHEELER. Will the Senator tell me if he does not

think the benefits of the eighteenth amendment ought to be applied in Nicaragua by the marines? [Laughter.]

Mr. BRUCE. No, sir; the eighteenth amendment could not be enforced there; and I will tell the Senator why. Only a few weeks ago Sandino issued a proclamation that he would execute any one of his soldiers who took a drink, but he soon found that he could not enforce his order. That is always the history of prohibition. So be modified his order by grandiloquently stating that he would regard any man who drank liquor as a traitoT to his country. In other words, Sandino, like everybody else who has attempted to enforce prohibition, could not enforce it -even with rille or machine guns. So those soldiers of his who were to be summarily shot .if they ever took a drink again were let out with the harmless stigma of "traitors to their country," no penalty, ef course, of any kind being prescribed for that form of treason.

Mr. WHEELER. I was just wondering why the Senator was so bitter in his denunciation of Sandino; I did not know anything about him ; but now I . haTe learned the secret. It is probably because he is a prohibitionist. [Laughter.]

Mr. BRUCE. Perhaps he is a prohibitionist; he certainly is a characteristic one, so far as any ability to enforce prohibition is ~ncerned.

Mr. President, that is the way that the situation in Nicaragua strikes me. I followed the speech on this subject which the Senator from Montana delivered. I usually read his speeches, though I have found when I rea..d them that I never agree with his con.elusions. Still I keep on reading them, I will admit, because they are always bright, vivid, and interesting. Then I read that most -admirable speech delivered by the Senator from Connecticut {Mr. BINGHAM] on this subject, which, it seems to me, sums up the merits of the controversy about as well as anything that I have read for a long time.

Mr. WHEELER. Mr. President, I will inquire of the Senator if he has read the work of the Senator from Connecticut on the Monroe doctrine, entitled -'-'.An Ancient Shibboleth"? If he has not read that book, I would commend it to him. It was written when the Senator from Connecticut was a professor at Yale.

Mr. BRUCE. Mr. President, there is a great deal of difference of opinion about consistency. Some one, I believe, said that consistency is the bogey of little minds.

1\Ir. BORAH. The hobgoblin. Mr. BRUCE. The hobgoblin of little minds ; that is right.

The mind of the Senator from Idaho always retains everything that it receives. Someone else has said, "Consistency, thou art a jewel," and then someone else has said that the only men who never change their minds are fools. So the Senator may take his choice.

Mr. WHEELER. I have never known the Senator to change his mind.

Mr. BRUCE. 011, no; I do not want to put myself in the same class with the Senator.

Mr. WHEELER. And I am sure I do not want to be put myse1f in the class with the Senator.

· Mr. BRUCE. I am sure the Senator does not; it is mutual, I believe that is all that I care to say, Mr. President.

Mr. DILL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the REc.ORD, ·without further discu sion -on this subject at this time, a letter by John S. Hemphill to the President of the United States, relati'Ve to the killing of his son, who was one or the m.a1ines in Nicaragua.

'There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows : Mr. CALVIN COOLIDGE, FERGUSON, MO.

Wa81Lington, D. 0. DEAR MR.. PRESIDENT: According to dispatches of to-day-.Tanuary 3-

from Managua, my son, Sergt. John F. Hemphill, was killed in action against General ~andino's troops •

1790 OONGR.ESSIONAL RECORD-- SENATE J Al."\TU ABY 20 For the death o! my son I bold no malice against General Sandlne

or any of his men, for I think. and I believe that 90 :Per cent of our people agree with me, that they are to-d:;ty fighting for their liberty as our forefathers fought for our Uberty in 1776, and that we, as a Nation, have no legal or moral right to be murdering those liberty-loving people in a war of aggression. _ What we are doing is nothing less than murder, for the sole purpose of keeping in power a puppet President, and acting as a collector for Wall Street, which is certainly against the spirit and letter of our Constitution.

.My son was 29 years old, served 3 years of his third enlistment, survived honorable service through the World War against Germany, only to be officially murdered in a disgraceful war against this little nation.

)!y father served through the Civil War, both my grandfathers died in action in the same war, and I am proud of their records, so this is not from the pen of a red radical but from one who loves justice and fair play.

I have four sons, and if necessity arose I would be willing to sacrifice not only all :four sons but my own life as well in a war of defense, but I am not willing to shed one drop of blood in a war of aggression such as this one is.

You have lost a son and know the sorrow, and we as a Nation mourned with you. in your hour of grief.. Suppose that son had fallen as my son has, a victim of tlle greed of Wall Street, would you feel that the financial gain was worth the cost?

JOH~ S. HEMPHILL.

Mr. McKELLAR. 1\!r. President, I desire to ask the Senator fr<>m Maine does he expect a vote <>n the pending joint resolution this evening?

Mr. HALE. I will say to the Senator from Tennessee that I do not. There are several Senators on this side of the Chamber who wish t<> be heard on the joint resolution.

Mr. McKELLAR. I was going to say that I hope the Senator will let the joint resolution go over.

Mr. SWANSON. Mr. President, I hope the Senate will vote on the pending joint resolution this evening. I have been here for a week awaiting action on it. I stayed here all day Monday and all day Tuesday and all the other days the Senate has ~n in session this week. The Senator from Maine has been insisting on a vote on the joint resolution all the time, and said it would take but a few hours to dispose of it. Senators have all been here to vote on it, and I should like to have it disposed of.

1\Ir. HALE. I have tried my best, as has the Senator, ro secure consideration of the joint resolution and to have action taken upon it during the week, but on account of the discussion on the resolution of tlle Senator from Missouri [l\Ir. REED] we we.re unable to do so.

Mr. SWANSON. We have had a whole day for it. :Mr. HALE. There are some Senators who desire to discuss

the joint resolution, but when the debate took another course on a subject matter entirely different and the discussion on the joint resolution seemed to be dropped, some· of them went home. I refer to Senators on this side of the Chamber. There are several who wish to be heard on the joint resolution, so I do not think it will be possible to finish it to-night at any rate..

Mr. SWANSON. I will say to the Senator now that I will not consent any further to taking up the joint resolution until it can come up in regular course by displacing some other measure. I have, as I have said, waited all this week. I serve notice on the Senator that the next time he desires to have the resolution taken up he will have to get unanimous consent, and I am not disposed to give my consent.

Mr. HALE. I think it is a reasonable suggestion that at this hour of the evening--

Mr. SWANSON. It is not yet half-past 4 o'clock. 1\.lr. HALE. I think it is a reasonable suggestion that the

joint resolution may be laid aside now. There are other Senators who want to debate the matter, and they have requested that it go over.

l\lr. SW AJS"SON. I wish to say to the Senator that I ·will not give my consent to having this matter come up' until it comes up in the regular way by displacing other business. I do not intend to give unanimous consent. The measure was brought up to-day and discussed, with the understanding that it would be acted on before we adjourned. That, at least, was substan-tially the understanding. Now that understanding is changed by allowing the joint resolution to go over.

l\Ir. HALE. I had hoped very much that the resolution woold be passed to-day.

Air. SWANSON. It was my understanding that the joint resolution would be takE:-n up and would be discussed and disposed of.

Mr. HALE. I should be very glad to have the joint resolution disposed of now, but there are <>ther Senators who wish to be heard.

Mr. S'W ANSON. If they want to be heard, let them be heard. I repeat, I will not again give my consent for the joint resolution to be taken up. RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE-ADI)RESS BY SE1i'ATOR W .A.LSH OF MASSA·

CHUSETTS

Mr. WHEELER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous co-nsent to have inserted in the RECoRD an address delivered by the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. WALSH] on religious tolerance at All S()uls Unitarian Church in this city <>n last evening. It is a splendid speech .

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

From the earliest days of our history, religion has been closely associated -with the prineiples which brought our Nation into being and has continui:'d its growth and development until this day.

We are a God--fearing people. The first settlers upon the blE'ak shores, that skirted every harbor from New England to Virginia, were men and women dominated by firm religious principles. They came during the general pi:'rlod of the politico-religious struggle which df.'vastated Europe, which we call the Thirty Years' War, and they settled during the following 100 years of political and religious enmity. Even our later great flow of immigration came from countries In which some degree of suppression of the two most powerful human aspirations had molded men·s characters and embittered them.

What were lbey seeking? Merely the privilege of living their own lives in theiJ.· own way, inspired by a fervent zeal to be free politically and religiously. Here they flourished and became numerous and strong. Each group established a system of government in the several colonies, always a representative system. They centered their community life around their places of wor ·hip. Though the separate Colonies dlft'ered In customs, widely in l'€ligion, and somewhat in the details of their theory of government, when they saw their self-government and their social system menaced, they united regardless of differences in religion or t•ace, and struck out promptly for independence. After winning their independence through the snerifice of their common blood they set about to establish permanently, upon the soil of America, those principles which had Led them to dare the perils of an unknown ocean voyage, to take up an abode in an unknown wilderness.

Many of the Colonies bad manifested prejudice against those who dift'ered with them, but when they were thrown together by a common cause--liberty-they at onee realized the folly and stupidity of rcUgious intolerE>nC'c. Their common ideal of self-government and the "C"nion of the States, for the protection of their inalienable rights against the greed and jealousy of tile Old World, brought the dawn of religious tolerance to Ameriea. Upon the battle fields of the Revolution men for the fir. t time saturated the earth with their blood for a cause, other than that of merely satisfying the greed and selfishness of selfappointed rulers-a cause that made a subject the .citizen and the ruler. Then and there they learned that there was no inconsistency. between strong adherence to particular religious convictions and a. spirit of tolerance toward other religious beliefs. Upon this spirit the Union was built. Because we have cherished these ideals we have been blessed by the God of nations as no other people.

Are we to lose this priceless inheritance? Shall the enjoyment of free institutions and the benefits of the expunsion and diffusion ot religion and education make us forget the lessons of the past and permit the kindling on American soil of conflagrations of hate, prejudice, and bigotry? Never, while the spirit of '76 survives! .

Must we throw aside the respective creeds that im:pire each of us ·in our life of religious fervor and lofty purpose in order to live in peace and harmony? America must continue to show the world that her Government possesses the capacity that few other governments have enjoyed-the capacity to settle with peace and justice all the prolllems of race, creed, and nationality. Here in America it is not for one man to judge his brother in his religious opinions any more than in his social or political opinions. It is an American·s inalienable right to use his own judgment in every personal prolllem of life, responsible neither to man nor government, but to his God. Here we have learned that though creeds may vary and tenets of faith may differ, the funda· mental purpo~e of all religions bas been to teach man bow to live in harmony with his God and his fellow men, to the end that his soul may be worthy of eternal life; that the roes age of God to His human family · is not restrict~ by national or racial laws; that the love of God and love of fellow men are one and the same thing. All this is sttikingly portrayed in a beautiful inscription on one of our public buildings here i.n Washington, which read::~, " God made us neighbors. Let justice make us friends."

Prejudice and bigotry are peoducts of deficient information. They substitute passion for principle ; they destroy patriotism-for patriot· i.sm embraces amity; they sow animosity and antagonism and destroy CO<'peration.

It is not enough for us to be tolet·ant. Tolerant is an u!lhappy expression. It suggests " to suffer," "to bear with." Let us cultivate a more positive virtue. Let us speak of good will, which is an indispensable foundation for the brotherhood of man. Every religion

1928. CONGRESSIONAL R.ECORD-SEN ATE ll!79I rightly understood and practiced is a crusade of good will. America, that has attracted the heroic sons and daugh~rs of all the races of the world, enjoys more than any other nation the unique mission ·of becoming a broadcasting 11tation for world brotherhood. If America, where there has been the greatest mingling of the races and the greatest experiment of the ages, is to rise to tb~ sublime heights for which we believe she is destined-indeed, which she has already achieved-it is because w~ have striven to substitute justice and understanding for rivalry, jealousy, and prejudiee.

The creed ot America 1s that there is no mferiorlty a! religion and nationality.

Laws, leagues, and courts will never produce good wilL They may help, but love, justice, and charity implanted in the human soul ean alone make for lasting good wilL Religion, all religions, should stimulate love, justice, and charity and abolish bate, prejudice, and intolerance. We are on the way to lasting good will when priest, m.i.ui.ster, and rabbi can get together and deliberate not on the major things that divide them but on the major things that unite them. The next step i.s cooperation. If Catholic and Protestant can not respect each other's opinlDns, what will a pagan world think of Christianity? If Catholic, Protestant and Jew can not live together, there is an abandonment ().t that cbajity which all religions teach.

As in the World War and at the graTe of tbe unknown soldier, we asked not what class or caste Of' creed, we let down all barrier.s, we leveled all partitions, so as we move among the living and enjoy the blessings of peace and prosperity, let all these barriers disapp€:ar.

We most not confWle what we call religio~ rights with religions toleration. In this country we need not ask toleration for religion and its free exercise, for it is an inalienable right. We live in a country which happily gives no sanction to bigotry or persecution, and tolera· tion i~ not an indulgence bestowed upon us by the grace of government, bnt recognized as an inherent right. Our ideals of religious equality and justice are as fundamental a.s our love of personal libert;y and free speech.

Let us not be satisfied with mere tolerance of our neighbor, but let us make of him our friend. Good will is an expansive spirit that takes in enemies, suppresses jealousy, and embraces rivals; good will seeks the good of all peo-ple across all the barriers that c.a.ste and class and race can erect. The possession or absence of it is an elemental test of character. I never could understan-d the religious processes o! the man or woman, who would hasten to aid his fellow being, regardless of condi· tlon or creed, in suffering o.r poverty, yet would rob that same fellow being of the full enjoyment of that which was dearer and more priceless to him than anything in life; that for which he would willingly suffer pain and endure destitution, namely, communion with God in the manner his soul prompted. The one is surface or exterior charity, the other is spiritual perfidy.

Religious liberty is nothing more nor less than Christian charity. To be tolerant and charitable is to hate no man, to injure no man, to live in Jmnnony with all men; to assist so far as we can those who need aid, regardless of rellgious opinion; to practice the duties of citizenship "without favor to any religion or religious group, but with due regard to tl,le rights and principles of justice, to which all religions are entitled in a tree government.

The tolerant citizen does not limit his friendships and good will to those who only agree with him in ftrlth. The champion of religious liberty is opposed to all political movements that tend to control ~irltual conduct, and insists upon confining the jurisdiction of the Government to the protection of the health, happiness, and the in· alienable rights to life and property of the eitizen.

Rellgious tolerance, like political tolerance, prompts us to give every human being the utmost concession which trust, justice, and decency permit. No man can be classed as tolerant who entertains in his heart a hatred of all who ditl.'er with him on any religious doctrines, or who seeks to deny the American principles of political equality and religious freedom to all his neighbors. -

The words " brethren " and " fellow citizen •• are synonymous in the vocabulary r1f men seeking to promote good will and mutual under· standing.

We should not take too seriouslY the mov~ment:B of lawlessneEs, bigotry, and intolerance that from time to time appear in our fai-r land. The great heart of America is tolei:ant. The overwhelming sentiment of our people is to maintain unsullied our m~st priceless liberties-freedom of speech, freedom of the ballot, and freedom of the pulpit.

Underlying influences certain to appear occasionallY not only against religious Uberty but against our very form of government will nevel' penetrate below the surface into the fair breast of the Nation.

We have numerous forces and forms C1f tyranny and oppression outside the domain of religion to battle agairu;t and destroy. Every form of social and industrial injustice is an enemy of liberty; racial hatred Is a form of oppression ; monopolistic · combinations that enbanee the cost of living, lessen the purchasing powe of wages, and increase the already too great disparity of living conditions b~tween the rich and poor lead to economic slavery ; the possession of the country's rl!sources by a limited few may eventually mean for Ameri-ca what it

bas meant to other peoples of the world, the establishment of a dynasty of wealth instead of a democracy.

If we are to preserve the soul and spirit of America, we must c~k the present tendency of directing our governmental energy toward restricting instead of enlarging individual Uberty; toward bureauc.ratie instead of popular government. When governments carry this policy to any extreme they cease to adhere to true principles of Iibert:¥ and to remain democracies. Th~ and in. fact all our great polltical.l problems, involve no religious tenets.

The slave mind, which education and ~ligion should eradicate, ha-s< no place in a democracy. The slave mind has no vision and can not grasp the necessity of action when inaction means retrogression and disintegration.

The slave mind is fon:nd everywhere-on the platform, in the press, and sometimes in the pulpit; aye, it is found in public service and in politics. It applauds the cant of the demagogue and secretly encoul"ages the bigot. It votes for party labels and not principles. It follows blindly pa-rty leadership regardless o.:f the purpose and selfish interests of that leadership. It votes .for the party program in the halls o·f legislation and it votes the part;y ticket on election day, regard... less of convictions.

The slave mind remains sllent when one should speak, for fear lest the smile of favor o.f those in high places be lost; it follows tin! mob-for there are mobs of social snobbery and class privilege as w.eJl as nwbs of ignorance and lawlessness. ·

All nations have been cursed from time to time with movements, . temporary tn nature, hindering the onward march of the spirit of tolerance. When Jefferson advoeated the separation of the church and state he was denounced from platform and pulpit as an infidel, though he was at the same time spending his nights on the codification of The MoraLs of Jesus.

Less than .100 years ago a political party placed .a presidential candidate upon a platform having no other ruling principle than an appeal to a supposed prejudice against Freemasonry. Luter. masquerading as the American Party, a strong political organization made an appeal to the people in one or more presidential campaigns based upon religi()US :Lntolerance and prejudice against those of foreign birth. These movements failed because the principles whieh were espoused were subversive of ·our institutions; because a people so persevering in its fight for civil liberty will never waver when put to the test in its opposition to religious intolerance.

The American Protestant, the Ameriean Catholic, and the American Jew, and the· American of no religious creed must stand united in firm opposition to any intolerant movement which deprives any group ot equal rights under the law or ·curtails personal liberty of conscience or religion.

Let us, therefore, live in the sunlight of American liberty, hating no man who, because of his belief, may not agree with us. Let us live in harmony with all men, assisting, so fa:r a:s we can, th~se who need our help, regardless of their religions opinion ; practicing the duties of citizenship without favor to any one class or religious group, but with due regard to the rights and principles of justice for all.

Let ns live in unity with our neighbor and make of bim our friend, and remember that what is true of nations is as true of the individual---" Give to the world the best that you have and the best will come back to you. ..

.ADDRESS OF SENATOR JAMES E. WATSON

Mr. DILL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the REcoRD a speech delivered over the radio by the Senator from Indiana [Mr. WATSON], Saturday evening, November 5, 1927, at New York City, oo the subject af the achie-vements of the Federal Radio Oommis ion.

There being no objection, the speech was ordered printed in the REOORD, as follows :

A.CHIEVEMEJ\"TS OF THE RADIO COMMISStOK

It is my first duty, as well as my first pleasure, to make my grateful acknowledgments to Mr. Merlin H. Aylesworth, president of the ~a4

tional Broadcasting Co., for this opportunity to present as fully as possible within the brief time allot ted to me the achievements of the Federal Radio Commission.

I am not a radio engineer and I shall not venture to discuss the complex problems involved in that phase of radio transmission. Nor shall I attempt to set forth fhe use and the importance of this great ag.ency in our present daily a.ft'airs; its educational and cultural advantages; its utilization by business concerns of every eharacter and by farmers and others interested in the dissemination of information regarding all the problems relating to our farm life; the pleasure and enjoyment ' it brings to seven millions .of American homes that may listen to wtrnction every day and to entertainment every night by tbe best the Nation affords. This agency by Its ship-to-ship, its shipto-shore, and its shore-to~ship communications almost revolutionized ocean transportation, rescuing hundreds of lives and saving millions in money before broadcasting was dreamed of. Since that it has become the sonree of enJoymi!nt to the youth, of entertainment and culture to those of middl-e life, and of comfort and consolation to the

17~2 CONGRESSION ... '-\.L RECORD-SEN ATE aged of our land, and has woven i tself inextricably into the very fiber of our civilization. Nor shall I attempt to portray the mysteries of this force which has bt:>en projected to 500 feet of firm rock and a dozen feet of Si>lid lead, a force by means of which the voice of the orator and of the prima donna may be heard across t he continent swifter than the coming light, Certainly it is renewed evidence of the sublime fact tha t "God moves in a myst erious way his wonders to perform."

NOT BBOADCASTI~G ALO~E

As a whole, the public knows more about broadcasting than any other phase of radio transmission, but it is by no means the sole subject with which the commission ha,.s been compelled to denl. The law of 1927 places all the uses of radio, except alone those of various governmental departments, under the jurisdi ction of t he commis ·ion. These uses include all point- to-point stations, which form of transmission is yet in its infancy, but which is destined to become of tremendous importance in the immediate future, 2,000 ship s tations, 200 experimental stations, 16,000 amateur s tations. 340 land communication stations, and more than 100 tE>chnical and trade-school stations. with a great host of people clamoring all the while for a more efficient service and with an ever-increasing number demanding an opportunity to " get on the air.''

The radio act of 1027 became law on February 23 of this year. In sub tance, it provides that no apparatus shall be u~ed within the lJ nited States or its possessions to transmit energy or communications by radio except under Federal license. Authority to issue, with· hold, modify, or revoke radio licenses, and to make such re-gulations regarding radio transmission as are n!.'cessary in the public interest, is vested by the law in the commission for a period of one yen.r from its fir, t meeting, March 14, 1927.

'l'he law gives grl'at di ·cretionary power to the licensing authority. It is directed to issue licen ·e to applican ts " if public convenience, iuter~>st, or necessity will be served thereby,'' and thus it is their d~ty to d !.' tet·mine whether the public convenience, necessity, or interest serred by any given radio station is sufficient to offset the crowcUng which such a station inCYitalJly causes in the limited number of available wave length .

Similarly, the licensing authority may make changes in the wave lengths, authorized power, or hours of operation of any radio station ir, in its judgment, "such changes will promote pul.lllc convenience or intere t or will serve publlc necr>ssity." The power to revoke licenses i gi\-en "for failure to operate substantially as set forth in the licen e" and for various other specified cau. es.

Thi~. in brief, is the legal foundation upon which the F-ederal Radio Commission undertook its work. The exact nature of the ta k which fa ced it can best be unders tood if we look for a moment at what had happened to American radio broadcasting during the eight months immediately preceding the passage of the railio act of 1927.

CONDITIONS WHEN CO.MMISSIO~ TOOK CHA.ItGJ:

On June 30, 1926, there w~>re under the jurisdiction of the Depart· ment of Commerce G35 licensed broadcasting stations. Even with that number radio reception was by no means &1 tisfactory, and the department was disapproving practically all requests for new licenses, for changes of frequency or for power increases, on the unchallengeable ground that there was no more room.

Then, most unexpectedly, came the decision by a Federal court in the Zenith case. followed by an opinion of the Attorney General based on it, making it evident that the Department of Commerce bad no recourse but to approve any and every application made to it. Secretary Hoover did everything possible for any individual to do to preserve order, as ·Nell as private and public rights, in this great field of activity, but his bands were securely tied and be was rendered practically helples by this decision effectively to serve the _public. The Government is:ued a warning and an appeal, pointing out that public interest. absolutely required the maintenance of the radio situation approximately unchanged until a new law was enacted by Congress, and this appeal was seconded by practically all the responsible organizations connected with radio.

l)(>spite these warnings there followed nearly eight months of wholesale " air piracy.'' Publie opinion was most vehement against the "wave jumpers," but, as a matter of fact, they were not the ones responsible for the greatest trouble. Of the 535 broadcasting stations licensed as of June 30, 1926, there were only 86, or 16 per cent, who t(){)k advantage of the situation to change their frequencies.

Far more numerous, if not individually so troublesome, were the " power jumpers," 168 in number, or 31 per cent of the whole. Since 40 broadcasters changed both power and frequency, the toW.l number of those who helped themselv£>s during the eight months' period to privileges which had been denied them before the breakdown of t·egulation was 214, or 40 per cent of the entire list. Twenty-seven stations by some happy miracle, dropped oot; the remainder, 294, or 55 per cent took no advantage of the situation.

RESULTING CHAOS

After the decision in the Zenith case, practically holding that nobody bad any right to any wave JE:'ngth a.nd that the Secretary of Commerce had no authority to bestow an:r such right, there was an indlscrtmlnate

scramble on the part of those who had been denied the prlv11ege or erecting s tations or broadcasting on desired wave lengths to take whatever they wanted, and this resulted in a chaos so complete that nation~ \Vide interference and static and heterodyning almost destroyed the usefulness of this agency.

And so it was neither the "waye jumpers" nor the "power jumpers," however, that did the r~?al mischif'f. Scarcely was the ink dry on tOO Attorney General's opinion before this wild scramble to "get on the air " bE'gan before Congress could act. Bet ween July 1, 1926, and Febru:uy 23, 1927, the Department of Commerce found itst>lf compelled to license no fewer than 225 new stations. In eig ht months the total number increased 37 per cent, or up to 735 s tations.

In vain wet·e most vigorous p1·otests heralded throughout tbe land that there were no available fr equencie ; in vain were aunouucem!.'nts r epeatedly made that public interest was being ruthlessly sacrifked by the men who were rushing into a field already overcrowded. And it was not until the radio act of 1927 was approved that this utterly disa8trons scramble ceased.

rROBLEl\I TO BE SOLYED

Wbat was the new Federal Radio Commi ion to do with sach a ..; ituation? It was easy for irresponsible counselors to say, " Cut out hal! the stations.' ' but the law made no provision for revoking a license except for some unlawful act or for failure to obey the ordt>rs of the commission under the new law itself.

.And because congestion still exists and becau e reception in multiplied instances is now anything but satisfact ory we still have multitudes of people who insist on the commission summarily cutting off one-half of all the broadcasting stations in order to give the remaind~>r exclusive use of these channels of communication. But these impatient individuals must remembet• that there is something else besides the met·e physical and engineering aspects of the case to be considered. It would indeed be !.'asy for a competent engineer to sit down and work out a scheme that would ·olve the problem in accordance with this program, but it must be remembered that there arc legal qu!.'stions ot personal and property rights that can not be oYet·looked if the law is to be sustained.

1\Ioreov!.'r, thet·e are questions of justice and fair dealing involved, for the past ser\'ice of stations must be taken into consideration and it can not be forgotten that those granted the right to certain wave lengths and power and division of time by the commi sion, even under stre s of circum, tances, and who because of such grant investe-d money and established stations and acquired a clientele have ri~bts that everybody is bound to respect. Nor mus t it be forgotten that the rights of religious bodies are brought into the situation and that the contentions of labor organizations, and other associations of like character who insist on the right of free speech, simply must be dealt with and can not be cast into the scrap heap.

Putting the "wave jumpers" and the "power jumpers" all back where they were ou June 30-another favorite suggestion- wo11Id tuJ.ye accomplished nothing with regard to the 22a newcomers, who manifestly could not be put where they came from, as they had come. from nowhere. They were all new. To make matters still more complex, a few of the "jumpers," and a very few, though not many, of the newcomers, were clearly rendering a real and valuable service, quite within the intent of the law.

OTHER DIFFICULTIES

In recounting the complex and vexatious 11roblems that confronted the commission on its assembling, please remember that Congress, while it established the commission, failed to appropriate a dollar for Hs organization or its operation or its maintenance. So that when i.t met to begin its duties it was anything but a going concern. Its members were not even personally acquainted with one another, and the chairman had to call the first meeting by radio and wire from Peking.

There was .no clerical stn.fl' to handle the enormous volume of mail that poured in. The entire organization, necessarily very limited because of lack of adequate fn.nds, even to provide a su11icient corps of stenographers and clerks, to suy nothing of technical aides, hnd to be built up by the commissioners while they were carrying on the work, for the public demand for immediate action was so strong and so P.ntirely legitimate that delay was out of the question.

The commission's first step wa.s to segregate broadcasting from all other forms of radio activity, in order to give it immediate and practically exclusive attent1on. It is by no means clear that broadcasting is the most important part of the field covered by the radio act, but certainly it was the part which, from the standpoint of public conveni· ence, necessity, and interest, most nrgently reqn:ired action.

Then, in order to get the full benefit of the eountry's best-informed opinion on the subject, the commission arrang~ tor a. general publie eonference, to be hekl in Washington late in March, in the hope that suggestions might be there presented tol' the solution of the problem.

The conference was a magnificent suceess in showing the commission just how difficult its task was, for there was a confusion of tongues there almost equal to the worst staUo.. ·we were most forcefully reminded by the varied interests represented tbat the commission must

1928 CONGRESSIONAL REOO.RD-SEN.A.TE 1793 on no account widen tbe broadeasting band, that it must matntain a st>paration of at least 10 kilocycles between adjacent channels, that it must keep stations in the same community fully 50 kilocycl~ apart, that it must not require too much division of time. that it must not prohibit the nse of high powet; that it must not put more than a very limited number of stations on the same frequency. Only one question, re-iterated by the commissioners over and over again, remained unanswered : " How can all these admirable things be done? "

Mea.nwhlle the 60 days which the radio act set aside as a period of grace were pass1ng by; on April 24 every broadcaster in the country, unless relicensed, might contemplate the choice between a fine of $5,000 and five years in the penitentiary, the penalties provided by law for broadcas without a license. .Accordingly, as the applieations for new licenses came in, the commission issued temporary permits, good only until revoked or superseded. ·

The commission had prepared and mailed to all broadeasters the forms for application for new licenses, and these forms, executed under oath, provided much of the information upon which any new general reallocation could be undertaken until all of the 733 licensed broadcasters and the 300 or 400 new applicants had filed these forms with the commission, and there was notJway ilf compelUng anyone to file them before the 60 days of grace were up on April 24. As a matter of fact, it was April 27 before the colillllii;siiln had in hand tbe material nece& :sary as the basis for 8 general reallocation, and so, in order that broadcasting might go on for the next few weeks, the commissi<>n issued its temporary permits on the old basis. except in two respects.

TWO TROl:rBLFlSOME QUES'I:'IONS

During the uncontrolled period a number of broadcasters had deliberately violated the a..,oreement entered into with Canada whereby 6 of the 91 broadc'asting channels were to be reserved exclusively for Canadian use. No temporary permits were issued for these channels, and their complete and immediate eleara.nee was the commission's first definite achievement. Furthermore, about 120 stations had elected to operate on " split frequencies "-that is, on frequencies less than 10 kilocycles removed trom the nearest authorized one--so that each one was causing interference on at least two wave lengths. All of these

· wandering souls, under the tempo:mry permlta were put where they would make a little less trouble.

All the broadcasting applications were received and the temporary permits issued by April 27. Then began the 1rnrk Of reallocation. In theory it would ha-ve been de lrable for every station to have appeared before the commission and set forth itl; claims before it was reassigned, but .sueh hea.rings, even a.t the rat~ of two or three a day, Wi>uld have consumed more than a year, and m·eanwhfle the public would have had no vestige of relief-

It was determined, tberefore, to set up, as a basis for future developments, an immediate reallocation based on such evidence of ability to serve the public as was then available. That such an arrangement, involving more than 730 broadcasting ·stations, would be "tar from: ideal was perfectly obvious.

The making of this reallocation was a stupendous task, for not onty did the evidence regarding the public service rendered by each of the stations have to be weighed, but a place had to be found for each one consonant with its apparent merits, clear of local overlapping, and reasonably tree from distant heterodyning.

rHlll RUL WORK :B.EGUY

The new allocations -w&e announced on May 24, four weeks after the applications were all in hand, and wmt Into effect on June 1.5. There was protest on the part of some of the broadcasters, but tbe authority of the commission remained es.sentially unchallenged, and the allocations of June 15, modified in individual instance, appear to have established themselves beyond question as the basis for tbe future development of American broadcasting service, though many changes and reallocations have since been rendered necessary by sheer force of cir· cumstances.

On May 27 began the period of public bearings, a period which will continue throughout the life of the commission. Any broadcaster who is dissatisfied with llis assignment of frequency, or of power, or of time division may apply tor any change he wishes, provi~d only that bis application specifies tbe exact frequency, power, or time he desrres.

Since it is obvious tbat no sncb application can be granted without injury to some other station, every wave length being packed to capacity, each hearing becomes a definjte contest .among two or more pa.rti.es, and in this way the relative elaims of the statWns, on the basis of public service, are brought out. The same thing applies to interference between stations ; definite machinery bas been set up for hearings to remedy such conflicts.

Between May 27 and October 15 the commlssion held some 70 of these public bearings, m<l'St of them in Washington., although A f£w bearings were held by individual commissioners at distant points, thus giving ev.e1·rbooy an opportunity to be beard. As most hearings have involved at least two stations, and some of them as many as half a dozen, it follows that through this agency something like 1.50 broadcasting stations have already appeared before the commission and

publiely placed on the re~ords, under oaf.h. their l'ltatements .as to what they have done and are doing to serve public interest, convenience, or necessity. The fact that every hearing is open to the pubUe has been of great value in bringing every appplica.tion, and also every valid opposition to it, out into th~ open. The coiD.Drlssion halt not done- its work behind closed doors.

The hearings have provided t11e commissi011 with a vast amount of information, and in accordance with it many changes have been made in the or1g:ina.l allocations of June 15. Furthermore, practical expert.. ence, which 1s the only sure guide in such matters, bas shown many cases of serious interference, and in such ca-ses, wherever possible, the commission has acted under the " public convenience, necessity, or interest" clause of the law; and by changes of wave lengths, reduction of power, or further division of time has taken steps to rednce interstation interference to a minimum. Tb~s process is constantly going on ; every day or two the commission announces one or more changes, all designed ror the single purpose of providing better radio service to the American listener.

RESULTS S'GBST.L...-TIA.L AND DEFINITE

It should be made clear that, in the present stage of radio engineering. no ideal conditio.n for all the broadcast listeners is eoneeivable. It would require 10,000 broadcasting stations on the air to give all the lli!teners what they want when th~y want it, and then nobody could hear anything at all The aim of the commission is to give every part of the United Shtes a. reasonable variety of broadcast service, dependable and free from abnormal interference, and at the same time to safeguard the rights of the broadcasters in so far as they do not conffict with the rights of the listeners.

In some ways the greatest achievement of tbe commission has been the extraordinary improvement in the work being done by the broad>casters themselves. Knowing that the commission will judge them solely on the standard of public service, they have made notable changes in the character of their programs, and the records of the commission are full of instances in which, as soon as the commission's policy was made known, broadcasters hastened to replace programs of trashy entertainment by ones of real public value. Fm·thermore, the insistence on a strict maintenance of the assigned frequency has resulted in a mark~d improvement in the character of radio transmission. Whereas last February only a very few stations were equipped with adequate devices for staying on their wave lengths, there were to-day very few stations of any importance which have not such equipment.

Such, in brief, has been the work of the Federal Radio Commission during its first months. Much could be said of the loyal work done by its far too small clerical sta!f, of the generous aid given to it l}y the leading scientists a.nd engineers of the radio industry, of the splendid support of the press, of the fine ccoperation of most of the broadcasters themselves, of the invaluable assistance given by other branches of the Federal Government.

Its most serious bandicap.-more disturbing by far even than its shortage of fonds-was the prolonged illn.ess and death of one of its five members, CoL John F. Dillon, whose long experience, shrewd judgment, and unsw-erving courage were an incalculable help to his coJ... lene<PUes throughout the first 12 weeks; and very recently the unex.o pected resignation of Henry H. Bellows, woo because of previous knowledge and experience and an ardent lov-e of the cause had become one of the most UBefn1 m~bers of the commission and one of the best~ informed men on the sobject in the whole country.

The commission is by no means inclined to overestimate its aehievement so far ; it recognizes that there is much even in the broadcasting field yet to be done, .and the other and potentially greater fi~ld of pointto-point communication is as yet practically untouched. It feels, however, that it has definitely established its own authority to serve the public ·and that it ba..s provided· a basis for a progressive and orderly clearing up of the radio ~ituation. More than this, it hopes that in the performance of its di1llcult task 1t has won the confidence and good will of the broadcasters, of the radio industry, and, most of all, of the public. It is on the basis of public confidence that it has carried out the task intrusted to it by Congress in the administration of a very notable piece of national legislj}tion., the radio act of 1927.

.And it is my deliberate judgment, after a careful survey of the entire situation, that the Radio Commission bas fully justified its creation and that, notwithstanding the many disappointments that its decisions have occusioned, it ought to and will receive the unstinted support of a grateful people.

APPROPRIATIONS FOR DEPART:M:El_I;TS OF STATE, JUSTICE, ETC.

Mr. JONES. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the bill (H. R. 8269) making appropriations for the Departments of State and Justice and for the judiciary and for the Departments o.f Commerce .and Labor fur the fiscal year ending J"une 30, 1929, and for other purposes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Tbere being no <Ybjection, the Senate, as in Committee of the

Whole, proceeded to consider the bill. which had been reported from the Committee on Appropriations with amendme~ts.

.. 1794 CONGR.ESSION AL R.ECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 20 Mr. JONES. I ask unanimous consent that the formal read

ing of the bill may be dispensed with and that the bill may be read for amendment, the amendments of the committee to be first considered.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so . ordered.

The first amendment of the Committee on Appropriations was, under th'e subhead " Diplomatic and consular establishments, Tokyo, Japan," on page 8, line 7, after the word" made," to strike out "a part of this appropriation" and insert "available for the purposes of this paragraph," so as to read:

For the acquisition in Tokyo, Japan, of additional land adjoining the site of the former American Embassy and such other land as may be necessary, and the construction thereon of suitable buildings tor the use of the diplomatic and consular establishments of the United States, the said buildiilgs to include residences for the diplomatic and consular representatives, and the furnishing of the same, as provided in the act entitled "An act to authorize the Secretary of State to enlarge the site and erect buildings thereon for the nse of the diplomatic and consular establishments of the United States in Tokyo, Japan," approved February 21, 1925, $250,000: P1·ovided, That the unexpended balances of the appropriations for the acquisition of diplo· matic and consular establishments, Tokyo, Japan, available for the fiscal year 1928, are hereby made available for the purposes of this paragraph, all of which shall remain available until expended.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, under the subhead "Allowance for

clerk hire at United States consulates," on page 8, line 23, after the numerals " $1,645,000," to strike out "Clerks, whenever hereafter appointed, shall, so far as practicable, be appointed under civil-service rules and regulations," so as to read:

For allowance for clerk hire at consulates, to be expended under the direction of the Secretary of State, $1,645,000.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, under the subhead "Waterways

treaty, United States and Great Britain: International Joint Commission, United States and Great Britain," on page 23, after line 9, to insert:

For an additional amount for the waterways treaty, United States and Great Britain; International Joint Commission, United States and Great Britain, including personal services, procurement of technical and scientific equipment, and the hire, maintenance, repair, and opera· tion of motor-propelled and hor e-drawn passenger-carrying vehicles, $75,000, to be immediately available, which amount may be transferred by the Secretary of State, with the approval of the Secretary of the Interi0r, to the United States Geological Survey for direct expenditure.

l\Ir. McKELLAR. I offer an amendment to the amendment. I understand it is acceptable to the Senator from Washington.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The CHIEF CLERK. On page 23, line 19, after the word " ex

penditure," it is proposed to insert the following: Provided, That no work authoriz.ed by this paragraph shall duplicate

work done by any other bureau or department.

Mr. JOl\TES. I have no objection to that amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to

the amendment proposed hy the Senator from Tennessee to the amendment reported by the committee.

The amendment to the amendment was agreed to. The amendment as amended was agreed to. The reading of the bill was resumed. The next amendment of the Committee on .Appropriations

was, under the subhead " Miscellaneous expenses, Supreme Court," on page 37, line 3, after the words "United States," to insert "including rent of office for the reporter in Washington," and in line 5 to strike out "$18,874 11 and insert "$20,374," so as to read:

For miscellaneous exppnses of the Supreme Court of the United States, including rent of office for the reporter in Washington, to be expended as the Chief Justice may direct, $20,374.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 38, after line 15, to insert: Salaries and expenses of commissioners, Court of Claims: For salaries

of seven commissioners at $5,000 each, and for travel expenses, compensation of stenographers authorized by the court, and for stenographic and other fees and charges necessary in the taking of testimony and in the performance of the duties presctibed in the act entitled "An act to authorize the appointment of commissioners by the Court of Claims and to prescribe their powers and compensatwn," approved February 24, 1925, to be immediately available, $90,112.50.

The next amendment was, under the subhead " Penal and correctional institutions," on page 44, line 23, after the word

" of," to strike out " $150,000" and insert " $250,000," so as to read:

Uniteli States penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kans. : For the United States penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kans., including not to exceed $270,000, for salaries and wages of all officers and employees, $880,00Q .

The ap~roprlati.on of $250,000 for the fiscal year 1928 for a working capital fond is reappropriated and made available for the fiscal year 1929; and the said working capital fund and all receipts credited thereto may be used as a revolving fund during the fiscal year 1929.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 45, line 7, after the word

" of," to strike out " $250,000" and insert "150,000," o as to read:

The appropriation of $150,000 for the fiscal year 1928 for a workingcapital fund is reappropriated and made available for the fiscal year 1929 ; and the said working-capital fund and all receipts credited thereto may be used as u revolving fund during the fiscal year 1929.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, on pa~ 46, after line 16, to insert: Not exceeding $20,000 of the unexpended balance of the appropria

tion for the erection of a family building, provided for in the act making appropriations for the Departments of State and Justice, and for the judiciary, and for the Departments of Commerce and Labor, fot· the fiscal year ending June 30, 1928, and for other purposes, approved February 24, 1927, is hereby made available for the erection of a 9-foot wire fence on three sides of the school, approximately 12,000 lineal feet, to prevent trespassing upon the grounds of the schools and the escape of the inmates.

The amendment WSlS agreed to. The next amendment was, under the subhead " Contingent ex

penses, .. Department of Commerce," on page 50, line 15, after the name Patent Office," to strike out "$715,000" and insert "$735,000," so as to read:

For all printing and binding for the Department of C<>mmerce, including all of its bureaus, offices, institutions, and services in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, except the Patent Office, $735,000.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, under the subhead "Aircraft in

c-ommerce," on page 51, line 20, after the \YOrd "exceed" to strike out "$153,760" and insert "$193,760," so as to :Uake the paragraph read:

Aircraft in commerce: To carry out the provisions of the act approved May 20, 1926, entitled "An act to encourage and regulate the use or aircraft in commerce, and for other purposes," including personal services in the District of Cohtmbia (not to exceed $193,700 for the fiscal year 1929) and elsewhere; rent in the District of Columbia and elsewhere; traveling expenses ; contract stenographic reporting services ; fees and mileage of witnesses ; purchase of furniture and equipment; stationeq and supplies, including medical supplies, typewriting, adding, and computing machines, accessories and repairs; maintenance operation, and repair of motor-propelled passenger-carrying vehicles; purchase of not to exceed five airplanes, including accessories and spare parts, and maintenance, operation, and repair of airplanes, including accessories and spare parts; special clothing, weat·ing apparel, and similar equipment for aviation purposes; purchase of books or reference and periodicals; newspapers, reports, documents, plans, specifications, maps, manuscripts, and all othet· publications; and all other necessary expenses not included in the foregoing, $662,000.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 52, line 19, after the word

"exceed," to strike out "$37,400" and insert "$50,000," and on page 53, l~e 2, after the word "grant," to strike out " $3,209,-850" and rnsert "$3,684,850," so as to read:

Air-navigation facilities: For the establishment and maintenance of aids to air navigation, including the equipment of additional air-mail routes for day and· night flying; the construction of necessary lighting, radio, and other signaling and communicating structures and apparatus; repairs, alterations, and all expenses of maintenance and operation ; for personal services in the District of Columbia (not to exceed $50,000) and elsewhere; purchase, maintenance, operation, and repah· of motor-propelled, passenger-carrying vehicles, including their exchange; purchase of not to exceed five airplanes, including accessories and spare parts, maintenance, operation, and repair of airplanes, including accessories and spare P!ll"ts :md special clothing, wearing apparel, and suitable equipment for aviation purposes; and for the acquisition of the necessary sites by l~ase or grant, $3,684,850.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, under the subhead "Bureau of

Foreign -and Domestic Commerce," on page 54, line 6, after the name "United States," to strike out " $844,143" and insert

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE l795 "$904,143," and in line 7, before the word "may," to strike out " $63,625 " and insert " $75,000," so as to read:

P1·omoting commerce in Europe and other areas: Investigations in Europe and other areas for the promotion and development of the foreign commerce of the United States, $904,~43, of which amount not to exceed $75,000 may be expended for personal services in the District of Columbia.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 54, line 11, after the name

"United States," to sttike out" $458,817" and insert" $468,817/' so as to read :

Promoting commerce in Latin .America : Investigations in Latin America for the promotion and development of the foreign commerce of the United States, $468,811, of 'vbich amount not to exceed $113,800 may be expended for personal services in the District of Columbia.

The amendment was agreed to. The next ameftdment was, on page 54, at the beginning of line

14, to in ·ert "Promoting commerce in the Far East," so as to read:

Promoting commerce in the Far East : Investigations in the Far East for the promotion and development of the foreign commerce of the United States, $365,000, of which amount not to exceed $107,060 may be expended for personal services in the District of Columbia.

The amendment W"as agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 54, line 22, after the wo1·d

"exceed," to strike out "$8,500" and insert "$17,000," so as to make the paragraph read :

Promoting commerce in Africa: Investigations in Africa tor the promotion and development of the foreign commerce of the United States, $105,010, of which amount not to exceed $17,000 may be expended for personal services in the District of Columbia.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 55, line 13, before the word

" of," to strike out " $495,000 " and insert " $540,000," so as to read:

District and Cooperative Office Service: For all expenses necessary to operate and maintain district and cooperative offices, including personal sef'vices in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, rent outside of the Distl'ict of Columbia, traveling and subsistence expenses of officers and employees, purchase of furniture and equipm4!nt, stationery and supplies, typewriting, adding, and computing machines, accessories and repairs, purchase of maps, books of reference and periodicals, reports, doc~ments, plans, specifications, manuscripts, not exceeding $800 for newspapers, both foreign and domestie, for which payment may be made in advance, and all other publications necessary for the promotion of the commercial interests of th~ United States, and all other inddental expenses not included in the foregoing, $540,000, of which amount not to exceed $21,500 may be expended for personal services in the District of Columbia.

The amendment was agreed to. . The next amendment was, on page 57, line 18, before the word

"of," to strike out " $275,000" and insert "$290,000," so as to make the paragraph read :

Dome11tic commerce and raw-materials investigations : For all expenses, including personal se~•vices in the Distriet of Columbia and elsewhere, purchase of books of reference and pel'iodlcals, furniture and equipment, stationery and supplies, typewriting, adding, and romputing machines, accessories and repairs, medical supplies and first-aid outfits, reports, aocuments, plans, specifications, manuseripts, maps, and all other publications, rent outside of the District of Columbia, traveling and subsistence expenses of officers and employees, and all other incidental expenses not Included in the foregoing, to enable the Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce to collect and compile information regarding the disposition and handling of raw materials and manufactures within the United States; and to investigate the cOLditions of production and marketing of foreign raw materials essential for American industries, $290,000, of which amount not to exceed $121,520 may be expended for personal services in the District of Columbia.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, under the subhead " Bureau of

Standards," on page 69, line 15, after the word " field," to strike out "$10,000" and insert "$15,000" ; and in line 16, after the word " exceed," to strike out " $9,200 " and insert "$14,000," so as to make the paragraph read:

Color standardization : To develop color standards and methods of manufacture and of color measurements, with special reference to their industlial use in standardization and specification of colorants such at> dyestuffs, inks, and pigments, and other products, paint, paper, and textiles, in which color is a pertinent property, including personal serv-

ices in the District of Columbia and in the field, $15,000, of which amount not to exceed $14,000 may be expended for personal services in the District of Columbia.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment" was, under the subhead " Coast and:

Geodetic Survey," on page 82, at the end of line 21, to strike out "$311,640" and insert "$315,640," so as to make the para-. graph read :

Pacific coast: For surveys and necessary resurveys of coasts on the Pacific Ocean under the jurisdiction of the United States, including not to exceed $3,000 for construction of temporary shelter for the care of equipment and housing of personnel; $315,640.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 82, at the end of line 26, to

strike out "$26,000" and insert "$26,775," so as to make the paragraph read :

Tides, currents, etc. : For continuing «'searches in physical hydrography, relating to harbors and bars, and for tidal and current observations on the coasts of the United States, or other coasts under the jurisdiction of the United States, $26,775.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 84, at the end of line 4,

to sh·ike out" $88,000" and insert "$88,735," so as to make the, paragraph ~d:

Federal, boundary, and State surveys: For continuing the lines otJ exact levels between the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts; determining geographic positions by triangulation ancl traverse for the control of Federal, State, boundary, county, city, and other surveys and engineering wo.rks in all parts of the United States ; determining field astronomic positions and the variation of latitude, including the maintenance and operation of the latitude observatory at Ukiah, Calif., not exceeding $2,500 ; establishing lines of exact levels, determining geographic positions by triangulation and traverse, and making astronomic observa· tions in Alaska; and continuing gravity observations in the United States and for making such observations in regions under the jurisdiction of the United States and also on islands and coasts adjacen~ thereto, $88,735.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 85, at the end of line 9

to !!!trike out " $645,000" and insert " $650,000," so as to mak~ the paragraph read:

For all necessary employees to man and equip the vessels, including professional seamen serving as mates on vessem of the survey, to exe-cute ibe work ot the survey herein provided for and authorized by law .. $650,000.

The amendment wa~ agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 86, at the end of line 22

to strike out "$64,500" ~nd insert "$65,000," so as to make th~ . paragraph read:

Office expenses: For purchase of new instruments (except surveyin~ instruments), including their exchange, materials, equipment, and supplies required in the instrument shop, carpenter shop, and drawing division; books, scientific and technical books, journals, books of refer-ence, maps, charts and subscriptions ; copper plates, chart paper .. printer's ink, copper, zinc, and chemicals for electrotyping and photographing; engraving, printing, pbo.tograpbing, rubber gloves, and elec .. trotyping supplies; photolithographing charts and printing from stone and copper for immediate use; stationery for office and field parties; transportation of instruments and supplies when not charged to party expenses ; office wagon and horses or automobile truck ; beating, lighting, and power; telephones, including operation of switchboard; tele-.. grams, ice, and washing ; office furniture, repairs, u·aveling expenses of officers and others employed in the office sent on special duty in the service of the office; miscellaneous expenses, co.ntingencles of all kinds,. not exceeding $90 for street-car fares, $65,000.


Fisheries," on page 91, line 18, before the word "for," to strike out "$40,000" and insert "$47,000," and on page 92, at the end of line 6, to strike out " $360,000" and inserC" $367,000," so as to make the paragraph read :

Alaska, general service : For protecting the seal fisheries of Alaska, including the furnishing of food, fuel, clothing, and other necessities of life to the natives of tb,e Pribilof Islands, of Alaska; not exceeding $47,000 for construction, improvement, repair, and alteration of buildings and roads, transportation of supplies to and from the islands, expenses of travel of agents and other employees and subsistence while on said islands, hire and maintenance of vessels, purchase of sea otters, and for all exp<>.nses necessary to earry out tbe provisions of the act entitled "An act to protect the seal fisheries of Alask~

1796 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE JANU.ABY 20 and for other purposes," approved April 21, 1910, and for the protection of fisheries of Alaska, including contract stenographic reporting service, travel, subsistence (or per diem in lieu of subsistence) of employees while on duty in Alaska, hire of boats, employment of temporary labor, and all other n ecessary expenses connected therewith, $367,000, of which $100,000 shall be immediately available.


1\1ines," on page 96, line 5, after the numerals "$342,630," to insert a colon and "Pl·m'ided, That of this amount not to exceed $u00 may be expended for the purchase and bestowal of trophies in connection with mi,.ne rescue and first-aid contests," so as to read :

Operating mine rescue cars and stations: For the investigation and improvement of mine rescue and first-aid methods and appliances and the teaching of mine safety, rescue, and first-aid methods, including the exchange in part payment for operation, maintenance, and repair of mine rescue trucks, the construction of temporary structures and the repair, maintenance, and opemtlon of mine rescue cars and Government-owned mine rescue stations and appurtenances thereto, including the purchase and equipment of one mine rescue car not to exceed $45,000, a nd including personal services, traveling expenses and subsistence, equipment, anu supplies, including the purchase and exchange in part payment therefor of cooks' uniforms, goggles, gloves, and such other articles or equipment as may be necessary in the operation of mine rescue cars and stations, including not to exceed $14,.140 for personal services in the District of Columbia, $342,630 : Prot·ided, That of this amount not to exceed $500 may be expended for the purchase and bestowal of trophies in connection with mine rescue and first-aid contests.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 104, line 11, before the

word " of," to strike out " $250,000" and insert " $275,000," so as to read:

E conomics of mineral industries: For inquiries and investigations, and the dissemination of information concerning the economic problems of the mining, quarryiug, metallurgical, and other mineral industries, with a view to assuring ample supplies and efficient distribution of the mineral products of the mines and quarries, including studies and reports relating to uses, reserves, production, distribution, stocks, consumption, prices, and marketing of mineral commodities and primary products thereof ; preparation of the reports of the mineral resour·ces of the United States, including special statistical inquiries; statistical studies and r eports relating to mine accidents; and including personal ser v ices in the District of Columbia and elsewhere; purchase of furniture and equipment; stationery and supplles; type~·iting, adding, and computing machines, accessories and repairs ; newspapers ; traveling expenses ; purchase, not exceeding $1,200, operation, maintenance, and repair of motor-propelled passenger-carrying vehicles ; and for all other necessary expenses not included in the foregoing, $215,000, of which amount not to exceed $219,600 may be expended for personal services in the District of ColUlllbia.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. JONES. Mr. President, on page 105 I desire to C(}rrect

a total. I offer an amendment in line 22. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The CHIEF CLERK. On page 105, line 22, in the grand total,

it is proposed to strike out "$2,532,080" and insert" $2,557,080." The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was; under the subhead "Contingent

expenses, Department of Labor," on page 107, at the end of line 2, to strike out " $39,000 " and insert " $41,500," so as to read:

F~n· contingent and miscella neous expenses of the offices and bureaus of the department, for which appropriations for contingent and miscellaneous expenses are not specifically made, including the purchase of stationery, furniture and repail·s to the same, carpets, matting, oilcloth, file case.s, towels, ice, brooms, soap, sponges, laundry, street-car fares not exceeding $200 ; lighting and heating ; purchase, exchange, maintenance, and repaiL· of m otor cycles and motor trucks; purchase, exchange, maintenance, and repair of a motor-propelled passenger-carrying vehicle, to "be used only for official purposes ; freight and express charge , newspapers not exceeding $400, for which payment may be made in advance: newspaper clippings not to exceed $1,800, postage to foreign countries, telegraph and telephone service, typewriters, add!ng machines, and other labor-saving devices ; purchase of law books, books of reference, and periodicals not exceeding $3,250 ; in all, $41 ,500 ; and in addition thereto such sum as may be necessary, not in excess of $13,500, to facilitate the purchase, through the central purchasing office as provided in the act of June 17, 1910 (36 S tat. L. p. 531), of cer tain supplil's fo t· the Immigration Service, shall be deducted from the approprintion "Expet•~es Qf regulating immigration " made for the fiscal year 1929 and added to the appropriation " Contingent expenses, Department of Labor," for that year; and the total sum thereof shall

be and constitute the appropriation for contingent expenses for the Department of Labo-r, to be expended through the central purchasing office (division of publ~cations and supplies), Department of Labor.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, under the subhead " Bureau of

Labor Statistics," (}n page 108, at the end of line 8, to strike out " $222,500" and insert " $220,000," so as to read:

Salaries: For the commissioner and other personal services in the District of Columbia in accordance with the clllssification act of 1923, $220,000.

The amendment was agreed to. The reading of the bill was concluded. Mr. CURTIS. 1\II·. President, I offer the amendment which

I send to the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. '.rhe amendment will be stated. The CHIEF CLERK. On page 42, line 26, it is proposed to strike

out " $838,000" and to insert: • $957,000: Pr01Jided, That of this amount $119,000 shall be available only for the salaries and traveling expenses of law clerks for circuit judges.

Mr. JONES. That is estimated by the Budget, and I have no objection to it.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by the Senator from Kansas.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. JONES. On page 12, line 22, there was an omission. I

offer an amendment to correct it. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The CHIEF CLERK. On page 12, line 22, it is proposed to strike

out " $40,000 " and t(} insert in lieu thereof " $46,900." The amendment was agreed to. Mr. JONES. 1\Ir. President, on the authority of the committee

I am offering S"Ome amendments that really would be subject to points of order. Every one of these amendments was appr(}ved by the House committee and in the bill as they reported it, but points of order were made on the fl-oor and they went out. The Senate committee has considered every one of these amendments.

The first amendment is on page 39, line 26. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The CHIEF CLERK. On page 39, line 26, after the numerals

" $3,672,500," insert the following : Prov ided, That there shall be paid hereunder any necessary cost

of keeping vessels or ot her property attached or libeled in admiralty in such amount as tbe court, on petition setting forth the facts under o.ath, may allow.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. JONES. I offer another amendment on page 47, line 26. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The CHIEF CLERK. On page 47, line 26, after the numerals

" $2,350,000," insert the following: Provided, That hereafter contracts for the subsistence and care of

Federal prisoners, within the discretion of the Attorney General, may be made for a period not exceeding three years.

The amendment was agreed to. 1\Ir. JONES. I offer an amendment on page 62, line 3. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The CHIEF CLERK. On page 62, line 3, after tlle word " Cen-

sus," insert the following: without regard to the provisions of the classification act, for tl\e purpose of assisting in periodical inquiries : Provided, That temporary employees of the Bureau of the Census may be allowed leave of absence with pay at the rate of two and one-half days a month.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr .. JONES. On page 97, line 19, I offer the amendment

which I send to the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER The amendment will be stated. The CHIEF CLERK. On page 97, in line 19, after the word

" industries," insert the following: Provided, That section 192 of the Revised Statutes shall not apply

to such purchase of newspapers from this appropriation.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. JONES. And I offer a fw'ther amendment, on page 100,

line 14. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The CHIEF CLERK. On page 100, line 14, after the word

" fuel," insert the following: Pt·o-,;ided, That all moneys received from the sales of fuel shall be

credited to this appropriation and be available for the purposes of this paragraph: Provided ('l£rt1Le1·, That the requirements of sections 3711 and 3713 of the Revised Statutes relative to the weighing of coal and

1928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 1797J wood and the ge.pnra.te certificate as to the weight, measurement, or quantity of coal and wood purchased shall not apply to purchases by the Government fuel yards at free-on-board destinations outside of the District of Columbia.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. OVERMAN. ~Ir. President, I was on the committee that

considered this bill. A suggestion was made to me by one of my colleagues as to an amendment that ought to be put on the bill. I neglected to bring it up before the committee, but I do now, aml offer this amendment :

On page 27, line 11, after the word " agent," insert " who shall be appointed by and with the adnce and consent of the Senate."

This is the appointment of an agent who distributes $350,000 and appoints all kinds of clerks; and he ought to be appointed by and \\ith the advice and consent of the Senate.

Mr. JONES. I am willing to take that amendment to con-ference.

JHr. McKELLAR. Ought it not to include the counsel, too? Mr. OVERMAN. No; the agent employs the counsel. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing

to the amendment offered by the Senator from North Carolina. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. President, although I am a member of

the committee, I was unable to be present in the committee when the appropriation for aircraft in commerce was considered. I made inquiry of one of the members as to whether the request of the Assistant Secretary of .Commerce for Aeronautics of a sufficient sum to carry out the provisions of the . air commerce act had been granted by the committee.

.Mr. McKELLAR. To what page does the Senator refer? Mr. BINGHAM. Page 52. I' was informed that it had been

granted. I regret very much that I was misinformed in the matter, because I should have liked to lay the matter before the committee. When I was informed that his request had been granted I said nothing about it, and had my attention called to it only a few moments ago by the Asgjstant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics.

The paragraph on page 51, under the heading, "Aircraft in commerce," is the paragraph which includes the very appropriation for making possible that inspection of aircraft which the framers of the air commerce act and Congress at the time it was pass~ believed would do mo~ than anything else to inCl·ease safety in the air. I think all of us will agree--

Mr. JONES. I will accept the Senator's amendment. Mr. McKELLAR. What is the amendment? Mr. BINGHAM. I should like to have the amount increased

to the amount the Budget recommended, namely, $702,000 instead of $662,000.

Mr. McKELLAR. The Senator mean.-; that he wishes to have the $662,000, in line 11, page 52, increased to how much?

:Ur. BINGHAM. The Budget recommended $702,000; and 1 think we will all agree that the Budget officer is sufficiently " hard -boiled " not to recommend anything which he thinks iB not absolutely neees ary. I should like to increase the amount from the $662,000, which the House passed, to $702,000, which is· what the Budget reeommended; and the chairman of the committee says he will accept the amendment.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by the Senator from Connecticut.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. JONES. I ask rmanimous consent that the clerks be

permitted to ehunge the totals to corres{)(}nd to th~ action of the Senate.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, that order will be made.

The bill is still before the Senate as in Committee of the Whole and open to amendment. If there be no further amendment to be proposed, the bill will be reported to the Senate.

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendments were concurred in.

The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a third time.

The bill was read the third time and passed. EXEClJTIVE SESSION

Mr. CURTIS. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business.

The motion was agreed to, and the Senate proceeded to the consideration of executive business. After five minutes spent in executive session the doors were reopened.

REIMBtJRBEJ.{El.~ OF MONEY ADVANCED BY NEVADA.

The VICE PRESIDIDNT laid before the Senate a communication from the Comptroller General of the United States in response to Senate Resolution 106, agreed tO January 11, 19-.28, reporting relative to reimbU!_"Sement oi money advanced and

eXpended by the Territory or State of NeTada and ~sumed by said State in aid of the Government of the United States during the War between the States, which was ordered to lie on the table.

THE MERCHANT l!ARINE

Mr. JONES. I ask that the unfinished business be laid before the Senate.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair lays before the Senate the unfinished business, which will be stated.

The CHIEF CLER.x. A bill (S. 744) to further develop an American merchant marine, to assure its permanence in the transportation of the foreign trade of the United States, and fo~ other purposes.

ADJOURNMENT UNTIL MONDAY

:Mr. CURTIS. I move that the Senate adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and (at 4 o'clock and 45 minutes

p. m.) the Senate adjourned, the adjournment being, in accordance with the previous order, until Monday, January 23, 1928, at, 12 o'clock meridian.

NOMINATIONS Ercecufive 1wmina.tions received by the Senate January 20

(legi8lati1:e day of J(J!fl,uary 17), 1928 PROMOTIQ.;.~S IN THE REGULAR AB:MY

To be colonel Lieut. CoL Stephen Ogden Fuqua, Infantry, from January 14,.

1928. To be lieutenant oolcme~

JHaj. Charles Russell Alley, Chemical Warfare Service, sub ject to examination required by law, from January 14, 1928.

To be major Capt. William Francis Freehoff, Infantry, from January 14...

1928. . To be aaptai~tl8

First Lieut. Richard Brownley Gayle, Infantry, from Januat·y 13, 1928.

First Lieut. Jesse Benjamin Smith, Infantry, subject to ex--. amination required by law, from January 14, 1928.

To be first l·ieutenants Second Lieut. George Francis Heaney, jr., Coast Artillery.

Corps, from January 13, 1928. Second Lieut. John Humphrey Evans, Infantry, from January

14, 1928. MEDICAL CORPS

To be captain First Lieut. Stanley William Matthews, Medical Corps, from

January 17, 1928. MEDICAL .ADMINISTRATIVE CORPS

To be captains First Lieut. William Harvey Kernan, Medical Administrative

Corps, from January 12, 1928. First Lieut. Martin Douglas Mims, Medical Administrative

Corps, from January 15, 1928.

APPO:rnTMENTS, BY TRANSFER, IN THE REGULAR ARMY

FIELD .ARTILLERY

Capt. Harry Russell Evans, Infantry, with rank from July 1, 1920.

PROMOTIONS AND APPOINTMENTS IN THE NAVY

Commander Jonathan S. Dowell, jr., to be a captain in the Navy from the 1st day of November, 1927.

Lieut. Edward B. Roge1·s to be a lieutenant commander in the Navy from the 1st day of July, 1927.

Lieut. George R. Fairlamb, jr., to be a lieutenant commander in the Navy from the 11th day of September, 1927.

Lieut. \Valter C. Calhoun to be a lieutenant commander in the Navy from the 13th day of November, 1927.

Lieut. (Junior Grade) Walter S. K. Trapnell to be a lieutenant in the Navy from the 2d day of December, 1926.

The following-named lieutenants (junior grade) to be lieu-tenants in the Navy from the 3d day of June, 1927:

Michael H. Ka·nodle. Francis D. A. l!..,ord. The following-named ensigns to be lieutenants (junior grade)

in the Navy from the 5th day of June, 1927: Wilkie H. Brereton. James B. Hogle. Samuel G. Kelly. .Asst. Surg. George W. Cooper to be a passed assistant Slli'

geon in the Navy, with the rank of lieutenant, from the 2d day of June, 1927.

' 11798 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JANUA.RY 20 · Boatsw~in William S. Burns to be a chief boatswain in the Navy, to rank with but after ensign, from the 5th day of August, 1926. .

Boatswain Harold S. Bogan to be a chief boatswain in the Navy, to rank with but after ensign, from the 23d day of July, 1927.

Electrician Joshua V. B. Meeker to be a chief electrician in the Navy, to rank with but after ensign, from the lOth day of November, 1927.

Radioelectrician Anthony B. Pronier to be a chief radioelectrician in the Navy, to rank with but after ensign, from the 20th day of September, 1927.

MARINE CORPS

Capt. Egbert T. Lloyd to be a major in the :Marine Corps from tile 7th uay of September, 1927.

First Lieut. Merritt A. Edson to be a captain in the Marine Corps from the 21st day of December, 1927.

First Lieut. John A. Tebbs to be a captain in the Marine Corps from the 11th day of Janua1.·y, 1928.

The following-named first lieutenants to be first lieutenants in the Marine Corps from the dates indicated, to correct the dates from whi<:h they take rank as previously nominated and confirmed:

Jame ' .•. Monahan from the 25th day of July, 1925. John A. Bemis from the 28th day of July, 1925. Howard N. Kenyon from the 7th day of August, 1925. William N. McKelvy, jr., from the 11th day of August, 1925. Andre Y. Cherbonnier from the 7th day of September, 1925. William ,V. Davies from the 14th day of September, 1925. Bayard L. Bell from the 15th day of September, 1925. Vernon E. Megee from the 25th day of September, 1925. Auaustus W. Cockrell from the 27th day of September, 1925. James M. Smith from the 1st day of October, 1925. William H. Doyle from the 3d day of December, 1925. Ernest E. Linsert from the 19th day of .January, 1926. Orin H. Wheeler from the 27th day of January, 1926. Joseph DaO. Humphrey from the 11th day of February, 1926. EYerett H. Clark from the 24th day of February, 1926. Lewis A. Hohn from the 3d day of March, 1926. William 0. Brice from the 26th day of May, 1926. :b'rancis M. 'Vulbern from the 3d day of June, 1926. Edwin A. Pollock from the 6th day of June, 1926. Randolph :McO. Pate from the 11th day of June, 1926. Uornelius J. Eldridge from the 16th day of June, 1926. Lucian C. Whitaker from the 22d day of June, 1926. John R. Streett from the 27th day of June, 1926. l!'ranklin C. Hall from tbe 11th day of July, 1926. Beverley S. Roberts from the 15th day of July, 1926. Dudley W. Davis from the 27th day of August, 1926. John C. Donehoo, jr., from the 7th day of September, 1926. Raymond P. Coffman from the 14th day of September, 1926. Rolph B. DeWitt from the 1st day of October, 1926. John B. WeaYer from the 2d day of October, 1926. James 1\I. McHugh from the 5th day of October, 1926. Rupert R. Deese from the 31st day of October, 1926. Harry E. Dunkelberger from the lith day of November, 1926. Second Lieut. James P. Riseley to be a first lieutenant in the

:Marine Corps from the 9th day of November, 1926. Second Lieut. Clayton C. Jerome to be a first lieutenant in

the Marine Corps from the 15th day of November, 1926. · Second Lieut. Emery E. Larson to be a first lieutenant in the

'Marine Corps from the 20th day of November, 192G. Second Lieut. Robert L. Skidmore to be a first lieutenant in

the Marine Corps from the 30th day of November, 1926. Second Lieut. George J. O'Shea to be a first lieutenant in the

Marine Corps from the 8th day of December, 1926. · Second Lieut. Charles C. Brown to be a first lieutenant in the

:Marine Corps from the 31st day of December, 1926. Second Lieut. Frederick W. Biehl to be a first lieutenant in

the Marine Corps from the 3d day of January, 1927. Second Lieut. Eugene H. Price to be a first lieutenant in the

Marine Corps from the 6th day of February, 1927. Second Lieut. Lyman G. Miller to be a first lieutenant in the

1\Iarine Corps from the 13th day of February, 1927. Second Lieut. Ralph E. Forsyth to be a first lieutenant in

the Marine Corps from the 7th day of March, 192'7. Second Lieut. William 1\1. Mitchell to be a first lieutenant in

the Marine Corps from the 31st day of Ma1·ch, 1927. Second Lieut. James A. Stuart to be a first lieutenant in the

Marine Corps from the 9th day of April, 1927. Second Lieut. Pierson E. Conradt to be a first lieutenant in

the Marine Corps from the 14th day of April, 1927. Second Lieut. Howard R. Huff to be a first lieutenant in the

.Marine Corps from the lOth day of May, 1927. Second Lieut. William W. Orr to be a first lieutenant in the

Marine Corps from the 29th day of June, 1927 ..

Second Lieut. Oregon A. Williams · to be a first lieutenant in the Marine Corps from the 7th day of July, 1927.

Second Lieut. Clifton L. Marshall to be a first lieutenant in the Marine Corps from the 25th day of July, 192'7.

Second Lieut. Evans F. Carlson to be a first lieutenant in the Marine Corps from the 'ith day of September, 192'7.

Second Lieut. John W. Lakso to be a first lieutenant in the Marine Corps from the 21st day of October, 192'7.

Second Lieut. Harold C. Roberts to be a first lieutenant in the Marine Corps from the 22d day of October, 1927.

Second Lieut. Monroe S. Swanson to be a first lieutenant in the Marine Corps from the 23d day of November, 1927.

Second Lieut. Franklin W. R. Brown to be a first lieutenant in the Marine Corp.<; from the 21st day of December, 1927.

Second Lieut. Will H. Lee to be a first lieutenant in the Marine Corps from the 29th day of December, U>27.

Second Lieut. William E. Lee to be a first lieutenant in the Marine Corps from the 11th day of January, 1928.

The following-named noncommi '!::ioned officers of the Marine Corps to be second lieutenants in the Marine Corps for a probationary period of two years from the 20th day of January, 1928:

Corp!. Clinton E. Fox. Corp!. Louis C. Plain. Corp!. Harold R. Lee. Corp!. Robert L. Peterson. Oorpl. Karl K. Loutller. Oorpl. Paul Drake. Corpl. Walker A. Reaves. Corpl. George E. '\'\"illiams.

CONFIRM.ATIOX Executive nom·ination confinned by the Senate Jauua:ry 20

(legi,slatitve day of January 17), 1928

STEAMBOAT I5SPECTIOX SERVICE

Alexander 0. Calcott to be ;upervising inspector, third district.

HOUSE OF REPRESEXT_-\.TIVES FRIDAY, J awuary ~0, 1928

The House met at 12 o'c10<>k noon. The Chaplain, Rev. James Shera Montgomery, D. D., offered

the following prayer :

Eternal God and our Father, we thank Thee that Thou art the accessible and holy authority for all who come unto Thee. We would be earnest seekers for the power of the spirit of service to fulfill the duties and the privileges of to-day. Lift us far above all blame and need of praise by inspiring us to make our liv~ noble, our love of country l'a.cred, our loyalty beyond question, and our achievements a rebuke to ease. Blessed Lord God, help us to live among m·en as builders of all that tends for stability, order, and the very best productiveness in human life. Strengthen our ties of fraternity, broaden our scope of charity, and may our simple, holy faith have a fine fruition in all hearts. After a long while let us rest where all night is past and where the day has dawned forever. In the holy name of Jesus. Amen.

The Journal of the proceedings of y~i:erday was read and approved.

INDEPENDE...~T OFFICES APPROPRIATION BILL

Mr. ·wooD. Mr. Speaker, I move that the Hou._e resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill (H. R. 9481) making appropriations for the Executive Office and s-undry independent executive bureaus, boards, commissions, and offices for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1929, 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 9481, with Mr. DowELL in the chair.

The Clerk read the title of tbe bill. :Ur. WOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself one hour. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I will try as

be t I can, and as briefly as po sible., to point out orne of the salient features of the bill now before the committee for its con ·ideration.

In presenting the independent offices appropiration bill for the fi cal year ending June 30, 1929, I desire to make the fol-lowing statement: ·

The bill embrace:-: regular annual appropriationR for tile office of the President and for the independent e. ·tabli hments of the Government, and its order and arrangement follow the general outline submitted by the President in the Bud.get for the fiscal year 1929.

A detailed tabulation will be found at the end of this report showing the amounts appropriated for the fiscal year 1928, the

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE - GovInfo

Documents