INTERIOR DEPARTMENT APPROPRIATION BILL, 1925. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 4. 1924. UNITED STATES SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, D. C. The committee met, pursuant to call, at 1 o'clock p. m., in the committee room, Capitol, Senator Reed Smoot presiding. Present: Senators Smoot (chairman), Curtis, Phipps, McKinley, Harris, Jones of New Mexico, McKellar, and Neely. The subcommittee thereupon proceeded to the consideration of the bill (H. R. 5078) making appropriations for the Department of the Interior for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1925, and for other purposes. STATEMENT OF EDWARD C. FINNEY, FIRST ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. CONTINGENT EXPENSES, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR. The CHAIRMAN (Senator Smoot). What is the first item? Mr. FINNEY. On page 3, lines 8 to 10, there is an item reading: Examination of estimates for appropriations in the field for any bureau, office, or service of the department. This would impose a new charge on the contingent fund of the Secretary's office without making any increase in the appropriation. Heretofore occasionally we have had field examinations of reclarustion projects, or parks, or something of that sort made by Congres sional subcommittees or by other persons, and necessary expenses have been paid out of the appropriation of the particular bureau having charge of the activity. This item, put in in the House Appropriations Committee, as I say, would impose that burden on the contingent expense fund of the Secretary's office, and no increase has been made to take care of it. If it is to remain in the bill, we believe that the item for contingent expenses should be increased $3,000, making a total of $80,000 instead of $77,000; or, if the committee does not deem it advisable to make the increase, we believe that that language should be stricken out. Senator SMOOT. When you went before the Budget Bureau did you call attention to this? Did you desire any further estimate of $3,000? Mr. FINNEY. No, Senator; we submitted an item which would make each bureau liable for the particular cost incurred in its domain. This is a substitute, put in by the House Appropriations Committee, so that if this committee does not feel like giving us the additional amount, we should just like to have that stricken out. 1 Senator SMOOT. It is the law to-day, is it not? It is the wording of the law to-day? Mr. FINNEY. No, sir; it is not in the act to-day. This bill now reads: Examination of estimates for appropriations in the field for any bureau, office, or service of the department. That is entirely new language. Senator PHIPPS. This is not marked as new in my copy. Mr. FINNEY. On page 4 of the bill, at the end of line 2, after "laborsaving machines," we are asking that there be added the following: And also including not exceeding $450 for the purchase of newspapers, notwithstanding the provisions of section 192 of the Revised Statutes of the United States. At the present time, under that section of the Revised Statutes, we can not spend more than $100 for newspapers. The Comptroller General rules that that applies to both Washington and the field. Some previous Secretaries and Secretary Work for a short time paid out of the contingent fund some moneys for press clippings, averaging about $1,200 a year. We thought perhaps that was an unwarranted expense, so we ordered that discontinued; but we felt that we ought to be able to subscribe to a few newspapers in different parts of the country, so that we can find out what is going on in publicland and other matters. Senator SMOOT. You want $450 for that purpose? Mr. FINNEY. We ask for that much; yes. We are not asking for an increase of the appropriation, but we want the authority. That would be for both Washington and the field. Senator SMOOT. What is the next item? Mr. FINNEY. On page 5, lines 21 and 22, is a provision authorizing the making of certain purchases without formal contract in advance. Last year we were authorized to make purchases not exceeding $50 without formal contract. We asked this year that that amount be increased to $100. It had been suggested that possibly we should have $500, which is now authorized in two departments. Senator SMOOT. The House gave you $100. Mr. FINNEY. The House committee, however, amended our suggestion so that it reads, on line 22: Does not exceed $100 in any month. That is new, and that would mean that we could not make two or three $100 purchases without formal contract. All our purchases, the aggregate amount, could not exceed $100 in any one month. In other words, we could not make three $50 purchases, as we now can, without contracts; we could only make two $50 purchases in a month. Senator HARRIS. This would interfere with you, would it? Mr. FINNEY. Very much, Senator; because very often these are just purchases over the counter, you know, and we can not make formal contracts in advance. Business men do not want to do it. Our suggestion is to strike out the word "month," and have it read "Does not exceed $100 in any instance," and strike the "s" off purchases" and also off "services," in lines 21 and 22, so that it will read: When the aggregate amount of the purchase or the service does not exceed $100 in any instance. Senator SMOOT. What is the next item? Mr. FINNEY. On page 6, line 3, is an appropriation of $6,000 for expenses of inspectors. During the past we have had eight inspectors-two special inspectors who might be used in Washington, and six who were at large in the field. They were receiving $2,500 per year each, with the bonus in addition, and, of course, their traveling expenses. Secretary Work felt that eight were too many, and that if we had four really capable expert inspectors we could get along better, but he felt that we ought to be able to pay as much as $4,000 to get men of the right type; so, with the consent of the Budget and the House committee, we reduced the number from eight to four, and their salaries were to be taken care of under the general classification. Unfortunately, however, the committee cut the estimate for traveling expenses and general and other expenses from $12,500 to $6,000, which would not be enough to enable us to operate those four men during the year. That amount would just about pay their per diem allowance, $4 a day, and would not leave anything for railroad fare, stage fare, stenographers' services, and the many other expenses involved in investigations of various kinds. The Budget Office, by the way, approved an estimate of $12,500 for that purpose. Now we are asking, if possible, to have that restored. Senator SMOOT. To the full $12,500? Mr. FINNEY. We would like to have it. You had $12,000 last year, and they are running six or eight men out of that. Mr. FINNEY. As a matter of fact, we did not run them, Senator. We only had one for part of the year. Senator PHIPPS. I see you estimated for six this year, according to my marking here. Mr. FINNEY. That was the original plan, but that was changed afterwards, by our own request, to four. No; that would not be enough for us. If we kept four men at work all the year around, possibly we might get along with the $10,000. Senator SMOOT. All right. What is the next item? Mr. FINNEY. On the same page, in the following three lines-lines 4, 5, and 6—is a proviso inserted by the House committee: That the four inspectors shall not receive per diem in lieu of subsistence for a longer period than 20 days at any one time at the seat of government. That is a limitation under which we could not have one of these inspectors here for more than 20 days at a time. It might be that we would want to use him in reorganizing the bureaus, on work that would keep him here for three or four months, and we would not be able then to allow him any per diem in lieu of subsistence. We should like to have that language omitted. OFFICE OF SOLICITOR. The next item is on page 7, lines 16 to 17, under the heading of "Office of Solicitor." The bill, as passed, provides: For personal services in the District of Columbia in accordance with the classification act of 1923, $110,000. Senator SMOOт. That is new. Mr. FINNEY. That item heretofore, Senator, has been carried with the salaries specified. This comes under the classification. The estimate that we submitted, and the one approved by the Director of the Budget for this office, was $124,920. The Budget office struck off the $920 and we make no point of that. They recommended $124,000. We were heard before the House committee, and after the hearing it was reduced to $110,000. Senator PHIPPS. You had $100,300 for the current year. How are you getting along on that? Mr. FINNEY. No, Senator. Senator PHIPPS. Yes; that is right. The appropriation for the current year was $100,300. Mr. FINNEY. That is accounted for, Senator, by the fact that under this bill, which carries the reclassification into effect, there was an increase in pay for these attorneys in the solicitor's office. Senator PHIPPS. That is just what I am trying to get at. Senator HARRIS. How much of an increase is there? Mr. FINNEY. They are graded at various grades. The increase would be the difference between what we had last year and the $124,000. Senator PHIPPS. Taking $100,300 as the present appropriation, you estimate that a 24 per cent increase is granted these men under the reclassification? Mr. FINNEY. Yes, sir; that is what it would amount to. Senator SMOOT. No; I think you are mistaken. I think they figured up and gave you just what your increase was from last year, making $110,000. It will not be more than that. Mr. FINNEY. I am quite sure this will necessitate our dismissing some of those men and cutting down our force. Here is the present appropriation: Basic salaries for 1924_ Bonus for the year 1924. Total Total salaries under the classification, 1925, $124,920. $90, 950 9, 360 100, 310 That is based on the classification which has been made, Senator. Senator SMOOт. We have each one of them here. The increase under the classification act is $23,610. Mr. FINNEY. Yes. You see, these are all lawyers. Senator SMOOT. They are all high-class men, and that is where the increase has fallen rather than anywhere else. Mr. FINNEY, Yes. If you should take the average through the department, the percentage would be small; but here is a small office with high-class men doing a high grade of work. Senator HARRIS. How many are there, Judge Finney? Just how much does this increase the salaries, on the average? Mr. FINNEY. We have 24 assistant attorneys, 1 first assistant attorney, and 3 members of a board of appeals. The board of appeals men, 3 in number, receive $4,000 each. The first assistant attorney receives $3,000 at present. Senator HARRIS. What would be their salaries under this increase, if we grant it? Mr. FINNEY. The members of the board of appeals will receive $5,200 each. Senator SMOOT. I can give it to you here. Mr. FINNEY. The Senator has the figures there. Senator SMOOT. In grade 2, assistant professional, there are four of them; the rate is $2,400 to $3,000. In grade 3, associate professional, there are 11 of them, ranging from $3,000 to $3,600. In grade 4, full professional, there are nine of them, at salaries from $3,800 to $5,000. In grade 5, senior professional, there are four of them, with salaries ranging from $5,200 to $6,000. Mr. FINNEY. They all get the minimum now, Senator. None of them now are receiving higher than the minimum of the grade to which they are allocated; most of them less. Senator PHIPPS. You have answered my question. Mr. FINNEY. The reason why the House committee struck it out was at the suggestion of Mr. Taylor. As the public lands were decreasing, he thought we did not need so many attorneys. Secretary Work wrote Mr. Cramton, as soon as he learned of the cut, and said, referring to the table found on page 60 of the hearings, that the volume of work in that office is greater at the present time than it has been since the year 1916; and while the acreage of land subject to disposal is decreasing, that very fact results in sharper competition for the remaining land. Senator SMOOT. We will read it over. What is the next matter? Mr. FINNEY. I should just like to say that I am very familiar with that office, having worked in it, and I do not see how we can get along with a smaller force at the present time. Later on we may be able to do so. The next item is on page 93 of the bill, under the head of "Insane of Alaska." I am going to ask Mr. Acker to explain that. STATEMENT OF W. B. ACKER, CHIEF OF MISCELLANEOUS DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR. Senator SMOOт. Proceed, Mr. Acker. INSANE OF ALASKA. Mr. ACKER. On page 93, line 22, under the head of "Insane of Alaska," the suggestion is made to strike out "$150,000" and insert in lieu thereof $153,000"; and in line 3, page 94, to strike out "$600 per capita" and insert "$624 per capita. That grows out of the fact that on the 14th of December the department entered into a new contract with the sanitarium company at Portland, Oreg., which cares for the legally adjudged insane of |