project, and William D. Nicholas was one of the ex-service men who participated. There were about 3,300 applications filed for about 80 farms, as I remember it, and the successful applicants were determined by a lottery, as is usual in cases of that kind. On account of the very large number of applications there was more or less confusion, and that confusion resulted in a mistake being made regarding the rights of Nicholas in the drawing. The project manager thought that Nicholas was one of those who had secured a farm under the drawing, but this was a mistake. He telegraphed Nicholas, according to the regulations, advising him that he had been successful in the drawing. He found out too late, or after Nicholas had left Washington, that it was a mistake.

The CHAIRMAN. Is the Government responsible in a case like that? Mr. HAMELE. No, sir; the Government is not legally responsible. The damage was due to the negligence of the project manager.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that a claim like that ought to be paid?

Mr. HAMELE. I think so. I think it is in the same class with these others.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Was there any necessity for wiring Nicholas to come?

Mr. HAMELE. Yes, sir; the successful applicant has to come immediately and make entry at the local land office.

Mr. BUCHANAN. What do you call "immediately"?

Mr. HAMELE. Within from five to seven days. That is the usual time given under our notices. Applicants are notified that they are successful, and they must make application for entry at the local land office within a few days.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Of course, the justness of this claim would depend upon that absolutely.

Mr. HAMELE. Mr. Nicholas had to go on that summons or lose his right.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Within what time?

Mr. HAMELE. Within five or seven days.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Did he have to appear there within five or seven days, or did he have to leave home within that time?

Mr. HAMELE. He had to be at the local land office within that time. Mr. BYRNS. This was a formal notice given to him, on which he was expected to act. He was notified to appear at the local land office within the time specified, and if he failed somebody else would get the property.

Mr. HAMELE. Yes, sir. Each participant files an application, and those applications are used in the lottery. The successful man is notified to appear.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Was that notification sent him required by the rules and regulations?

Mr. HAMELE. Yes, sir; they are required to take up their rights at

once.

The CHAIRMAN. Does the notice say that he must appear?

Mr. HAMELE. Yes, sir. The public notice requires his appearance at the local land office.

The CHAIRMAN. Is the notice to the effect that he has been successful in the drawing, or does it say that he must appear?

Mr. HAMELE. The formal public notice issued by the Secretary requires the successful applicant to appear at the local land office

within a specified time, either five or seven days. He must appear at the local land office and make his entry, and if he fails to do so, the man next in the order of the drawing is given the right.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Where was this man?

Mr. HAMELE. Here in Washington.

Mr. BUCHANAN. How long would it take him after leaving Washington to get to this local land office?

Mr. HAMELE. About three days.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Then, he did not have much time to spare?
Mr. HAMELE. No, sir.

Mr. BYRNS. He assumed that it was correct?

Mr. HAMELE. Yes, sir. Moreover, he is supposed to go on the land and look it over before he makes his entry through the local land office, which would probably take an extra day.

Mr. CRAMTON. Do you think that this language, "on account of damages to or loss of privately owned property," is broad enough to cover this?

Mr. HAMELE. I think so.

Mr. CRAMTON. Of these three items, two would have to be paid from the reclamation fund, but the third one would be paid out of reimbursable Indian funds.

Mr. HAMELE. Yes, sir; the Mary Turnage claim would be paid out of Indian funds.

Mr. CRAMTON. It seems to me that claim No. 1 should not only be paid out of the reclamation fund, but that it should be charged to the Yuma project.

Mr. HAMELE. Yes, sir.

Mr. CRAMTON. It was incident to the operation of the project.
Mr. HAMELE. That is true.

Mr. CRAMTON. If it is charged to the reclamation fund, you will charge the amount where it ought to go, without legislative direction? Mr. HAMELE. Yes, sir.

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1924.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.

STATEMENTS OF MR. JOHN D. HARRIS, GENERAL AGENT AND BUDGET OFFICER; MR. E. M. KENNARD, ADMINISTRATIVE ACCOUNTANT; MR. GEORGE E. STRONG, CHIEF CLERK AND ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT.

CONTINGENT EXPENSES.

TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE.

The CHAIRMAN. For miscellaneous expenditures to cover the payment of telegraph and telephone bills, fiscal year 1923, you are asking $3.226.13. You had an appropriation for 1923 of $50,000. If these bills had been rendered before the close of the fiscal year, would you have had enough money to make the payments?

Mr. STRONG. No, sir; we would not.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there no way to control the amount to be expended by the Department of Justice for this purpose?

Mr. STRONG. The only way we can do it would be to issue an order that no telegraphing or telephoning should be done, but that would be certain to result in harm to the public service. We have to send telegrams all over the United States to United States attorneys, United States marshals, and to the representatives of the Bureau of Investigation.

We also have to telegraph to Alaska and sometimes to Hawaii. If we are about to apprehend some one, or want some one watched, the Bureau of Investigation will have to get into communication. Sometimes that can be done by telegraph and they are supposed to use the telegraph whenever it is necessary; but, oftentimes, it will be necessary to talk with the agent in charge, say, at New York, Chicago, or some place like that, and that requires a telephone call, which is usually quite expensive.

The CHAIRMAN. You see, this appropriation of $50,000 is for contingent expenses and for miscellaneous expenses?

Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. What did you do; just pay for the other things out of the $50,000 and then let the telegraph and telephone bills become a deficiency?

Mr. STRONG. No, sir. A certain amount was estimated as necessary for the telegraph and telephones and we expended on the basis of that arbitrary allotment on our best judgment of what would be necessary, and that was found to be inadequate, and, when we reached the end of the year, there was not enough remaining to prevent this deficiency. We are now taking steps to allow an excess amount for this telegraph and telephone, but I would say that the appropriation for miscellaneous expenses is right at the very edge of what our needs require, and whenever we have an increase in business, like we have had over the last year, in the work of our department, why it throws us off on this item.

The CHAIRMAN. You could have economized on some of the other things, however, could you not?

Mr. STRONG. It is quite difficult to economize beyond what we are doing. For instance, take typewriters; the average age of the typewriters in the Department of Justice is five and one-half years, and our allotment is $1,500 for typewriters.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the allotment for telegraph and telephone out of the $50,000?

Mr. STRONG. You mean for the present year?

The CHAIRMAN. For 1923.

Mr. STRONG. $27,972.72.

The CHAIRMAN. A little over one-half of the $50,000?

Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And still you run behind?

Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. For what was the remaining $23,000 used?

Mr. STRONG. For typewriters.

The CHAIRMAN. $1,500 for typewriters?

Mr. STRONG. Yes. Then we used for the periodicals and books of reference, and the repairs to the building.

The CHAIRMAN. Repairs-you do not repair the building, do you? Mr. STRONG. We make minor repairs around the building; yes, sir

The CHAIRMAN. I thought the Supervising Architect of the Treasury did that?

Mr. STRONG. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You occupy a building that is rented, do you
Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Does not the owner do that?

not?

Mr. STRONG. He is supposed to, but we make the minor repairs. The CHAIRMAN. What do you mean by "minor repairs?"

Mr. STRONG. If we want to cut through a door, put in a ventilator, and work like that, those are minor repairs and those are done by We are not doing that now.

us.

The CHAIRMAN. The Superintendent of Public Buildings and Grounds is doing that now?

Mr. STRONG. The Superintendent of Public Buildings and Grounds is doing that work. This money was handed over to him and he is doing that, looking after the elevator force, heating, lighting, etc., of the building.

Mr. LEE. Do they not agree to keep up the repairs and things like that which are necessary?

Mr. STRONG. Yes, they are doing that.

Mr. LEE. The men from whom you rent; the owners?

Mr. STRONG. We have a great deal of difficulty with them. We are in that building on sufference; they do not want to have us in there. They would like to have us get out.

The CHAIRMAN. They doubled the rent and you declined to make a new lease?

Mr. STRONG. They wanted $200,000, and we are paying $75,000. Mr. HARRIS. We did not double the rent; we paid what we thought we could get by with. They were not doubling the rent at all; they wanted us to pay $200,000 or $225,000, and we pay $75,000. The CHAIRMAN. You were paying $37,500?

Mr. HARRIS. $36,000.

The CHAIRMAN. And now they want $200,000?

Mr. HARRIS. Yes, sir. They claim they can rent it at $2.50 a square foot, I think it is, which would give them $250,000 net, to private tenants.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Do you have any review or supervision over the telegrams that come in, to ascertain whether there is any abuse in the telegraphing or telephoning?

I

Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir.

Mr. BUCHANAN. You know that is mightily easily abused.

Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir, I know that. When the accounts come in, go over them-when a telegram comes in, say a United States attorney, or some one sends in a telegram, if it appears to be unreasonable, unnecessary, why we can disallow their accounts, and I do that. Mr. BUCHANAN. It is easy to use the telegraph, when they could send it by letter.

The CHAIRMAN. Send it by mail?

Mr. STRONG. Yes. In those cases we disallow.

The CHAIRMAN. When you disallow, what happens? Somebody pays?

Mr. STRONG. He pays it.

The CHAIRMAN. It seems to me if they would watch the thing, they could do most of this work by mail.

Mr. STRONG. It is difficult in handling cases to get results by mail. Mr. BYRNS. Do you make many disallowances?

Mr. STRONG. Not many. Where we see a man abusing, we disallow.

Mr. BYRNS. Do you make any?

Mr. STRONG. Yes.

Mr. BYRNS. You charge it up to the man?

Mr. STRONG. You see, we pay for it and then charge it up to his account, and he does not get it back.

Mr. BUCHANAN. I see you had over $32,000 for the telegraph and telephone expenses for that department?

Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. It is over $33,000.

Mr. STRONG. You see, we have to exercise considerable control over the United States attorneys throughout the United States, also the agents of the Bureau of Investigation. We have to send our agents all over the United States and have to control them and to keep in touch with them through the telegraph and telephone, because sometimes an hour or two is rather important in watching a man or following up a lead.

Mr. BYRNS. As I understand, you had actually spent the entire allotment of $27,000 for telephones and telegraphs?

Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir.

Mr. BYRNS. This is purely a telegraph and telephone deficiency? Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have any jurisdiction over the district attorneys and courts?

Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Does this take in all telegraphing and telephoning of the department, in all its phases?

Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir. This takes care of our telegraphs to the field and their telegrams to us.

The CHAIRMAN. Does it cover the courts?

Mr. STRONG. Do you mean the judges?

The CHAIRMAN. The courts?

Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Does it cover the marshals?
Mr. STRONG. Yes, sir.

Mr. HARRIS. I want to correct that, Mr. Chairman, to the extent that the law provides these contingent appropriations shall be available for telegrams from attorneys to the department and from the department to the attorneys, to points in the field, the regular business; that is all. The judicial appropriation

The CHAIRMAN. What do you mean by "points in the field," as distinguished from the other?

Mr. HARRIS. From Chicago to Springfield, say.

The CHAIRMAN. Oh, yes. This only deals with questions where direct communication exists between the department here and the field?

Mr. HARRIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. STRONG. In many cases, we exercise quite direct supervision over the United States attorneys in the conduct of their cases and advise them what statutes are available, and precedents, etc. Mr. BUCHANAN. Do you do that by telegraph?