The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Goldschmidt, please give the stenographer your full name and address.

STATEMENT OF MR. DANIEL GOLDSCHMIDT, CHAIRMAN EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE SOCIETY, STATE OF NEW YORK.

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. My name is Daniel Goldschmidt, and I am chairman of the executive committee of the Federal Civil Service Society, New York State.

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, this is my first appearance in Washington and I am a little bit awed by the vastness of everything.

There is a serious illness afflicting the civil service; the patients have explained to us their symptoms and we, the students, will tell you what in our opinion will prove a remedy, each from his own viewpoint, the result of his honest convictions, after deep and serious study and mature consideration. It is then for you to decide which is the best and proper remedy, for you are the doctors; and as there is no question as to the nature of this illness, all we ask of you is action, immediate action, before many more of your patients die. And, gentlemen, the simplicity with which this can be treated is plain, since it is not medical skill we need-only mathematical skill and as medicine, a small amount of dollars and a large amount of humanity, blended with sense, reason, and patriotism.

An average of $1,000,000 for 50 years will provide an annuity for the superannuated; that is, pay for back services during that period under a contributory retirement bill, as expounded by the Efficiency and Economy Commission and reported on favorably by Hon. William H. Taft, ex-President. However, the nature of the remedy is in your hands. In 1911 there were 6,523 employees over the age of 64; 1,852, or 1 in every 14, in Washington, D. C.; 4,671 elsewhere, or 1 in every 34; and to-day the estimated loss due to the lack of superannuation law is $1,500,000, or thereabouts.

I represent the Federal Civil Service Society of New York City, which has among its members employees from every branch of the Government service and who believe in a contributory form of retirement as the most plausible and just to the Government as well as to the employees.

We have here in this room honest, conscientious men who favor a straight pension, and maybe some who favor some other plan, but each and every one is here for but one real purpose; that is, to ask you gentlemen to enact some kind of a law that you in your wisdom can evolve from all the different ideas that are promulgated, taking perhaps the best of each and cutting away that part which is not so good, or adopting as a whole any particular plan here presented.

No matter how much our opinions differ as to plan, we ask you for some definite action, as there is a crying need for superannuation from all the heads of departments, as you also well know, and from the old clerks themselves come the plea for a pension or annuity, so that their last few years of life can be spent in peace and happiness, to prepare to meet their Creator. There are several plans, among which are the Perkins bill, an old-age contributory plan; the Gillette bill, an old-age contributory plan, with $600 maximum; the Austin bill,

an old-age contributory plan, with 15 per cent increase of salary; and the Hamill bill, a service plan.

I am here to advocate the contributory plan, where first the Government will increase our salaries in order to meet the advanced cost of living, and then from out of our salaries deduct a certain per cent as our share of the contribution.

As both the Government and the employees gain through a superannuation act, both should pay. So, the Government also should give a certain per cent equal to the employees. It can well afford to do this, as the very first year after the passage of an act, 6, 523 employees could retire, who earn a salary of $6,523,000. The pension of these men at only $600 per annum, if that should be the figure, would be $3,913,800, leaving a balance of $2,609,200 with which, at the minimum salary of $800 average, 3,262 clerks could be employed in their stead, who could more than do their work. Inasmuch as when an employee is absent his mates must do his work, so the lapsed and unexpended salaries should be added to the fund, which, should it become too large, the percentage of all concerned could be reduced one-half of 1 per cent. If the fund is not sufficient the percentage could be increased one-half of 1 per cent, and if needs be, until it reaches 3 per cent but no more. The salaries as they are at present could stand no deduction, as the cost of living, in the large cities especially, is almost beyond belief. Years ago $1,200 was a large salary; to-day an employee with two children can not live the life a Government employee should live; if he wants to bring up his children in decent environments he must sacrifice some of the other things very essential.

So hard is it to make ends meet that the departments are honeycombed with organizations-sick aids, burial clubs, mutual aids, loan clubs, savings societies, insurance against removal, resignation, etc., which proves that although a hardship, they are compelled by sheer necessity to provide against every contingency, or when trouble overtakes them they are overwhelmed. This, with helpful subscriptions from time to time, is a terrific drag on their salaries, especially in those departments like the Post Office, where every absence of one hour, even though it may be the first in 20 years, is deducted from the pay; where even absence through the death of mother, father, wife, or child is deducted, and no sickness is allowed for same.

Mr. DIES. What department is that?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. The Post Office Department.
Mr. DIES. Have they no sick leave?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. Nothing only

The CHAIRMAN. No sick leave in Washington?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. I do not know about Washington; I am not prepared to say as to that. I think they have.

Mr. DIES. What annual leave do those employees have?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. Fifteen days, excluding Sundays and holidays, There are departments where the employees receive 30 days sick leave, but such a thing in the post office department outside of Washington is unknown.

Mr. DIES. They have only the 15 days' annual leave?

33324-14--2

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. That is all, and every hour of absence caused by sickness or deaths is deducted.

Mr. DIES. Do they not have to work on Sundays?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. Sundays; but get a day compensatory time. Some men work every fourth Sunday, some men every second Sunday, and some men every Sunday and some once in a great while. Mr. DIES. How many holidays are allowed?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. Every holiday-oh, no; excuse me, Mr. Committeeman, I work every alternate holiday. I do not get it back. I am on this coming holiday and I have to work, and I get nothing back for it, because it is my day on.

Mr. DIES. I did not know that clerks had to work on legal holidays. Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. I dare say there are branches in the customs service where they never have a day off.

Mr. RUSSELL. Yes; that is true in the customs service.

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. Where an error may cause a clerk to be compelled to make good a loss, which, if it happens to be too great, the employee must throw himself on the charity of his fellow employees. Recently the Association for Improving the Condition of the Poor issued a statement and I have the clipping from a New York paper showing that the minimum income on which a person can maintain a family of five on a normal standard of living is $1,100 to $1,300 per annum; and I can safely say that it is less than is practically possible in decent environments, one reason being because they show $19.50 per month for rent and light. This was a test in a hospital tenement and can not stand a test in any other apartment, for that family would require at least three bedrooms, a kitchen, a dining room or living room, and I know of no part of New York City where in healthful and decent surroundings one can procure these five rooms, with light, at such a figure. They allow $1.35 per month for fuel-practically impossible; medicine, $28.83 per year, and nothing allowed for doctor or other medical attendance, births, or deaths.

These figures were the average for 27 families, and the purchasing on a cooperative scale increased the value of their money 25 to 30 per cent, which an individual can not receive the benefit of. Also, there was no charge for administration.

Mr. DIES. That item for fuel is $1.35 per month?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. Yes, sir; $1.35 per month, and I will give you later on the entire recapitulation.

For car fare 6 cents a day, while most men have at least 10 cents per day; household supplies for five, $33.21 per year.

Mr. LOBECK. You mean household supplies for a year?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. What department are you basing that on?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. This is a statement issued by the Association for Improving the Condition of the Poor of New York City, showing how it takes an income of $1,100 to $1,300 for a normal standard of living. Gentlemen, I will show you it is far below what it is practically possible to do. The next is clothing at $158 per year; and food $473 per year, while all other incidentals are figured to be covered by $35.40 for the year, making a total as follows for the year: Rent and light, $237.25; food, $473.77; clothing, $158.04; fuel, $16.42; lunches, $32.48; dues, $27.82; medicine, $28.83; ice, $18.25, which is 5 cents

a day, and I say to you on my word of honor that you can not buy a 5-cent piece of ice in New York. There is no such a thing, and a 10cent piece is the smallest you can purchase, that 10-cent piece of ice is a day's supply, but only cools the ice box, because when it is hot in New York it is very hot.

Mr. DIES. I know it is.

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. Then, car fare, $23.72; supplies, $33.21; and miscellaneous, $35.40; making a total of $1,085.19; and I trust that the man who had

Mr. DIES. What is the size of that family?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. Five-a man, wife, and three children—and I trust the man who had to get along on that had no appendicitis operations. [Laughter.] And I trust he did not have to buy eggs, because he must pay 60 cents a dozen a great part of the winter, and butter was 40 to 50 cents a pound.

Mr. DIES. Storage eggs were never as high as 60 cents in New York City?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. No, sir; but I will tell you in what are considered some of the cheapest stores, like Butler's and the Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., you pay as high as 37 to 45 cents a pound for that butter, and you pay as high as 40 to 50 cents for the eggs they sell at those places.

Mr. DIES. What kind of eggs are they?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. I dare say they must be storage eggs.

Mr. DIES. Can you say whether they are yard eggs or cold storage? Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. I can not answer that. I dare say that Butler and the Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. handle mostly storage eggs, but I do not know. I will not want to go down on record, because they might sue me for libel.

Mr. DIES. We will assume they were storage eggs.

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. That is probably correct.

Mr. DIES. Cold-storage eggs have not been over 40 cents, have they?

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. Oh, yes, sir. The price of eggs has been such in the past year that I, personally, speaking only for myself, could not at times afford to purchase eggs that ought to be provided for a family; I will have to admit it, although it might be a little painful to admit, that at times we could not have the eggs we should.

Mr. DIES. There are a good many men in New York in that fix, so far as fresh eggs are concerned.

I think you make a mistake when you constantly talk about the high cost of living in the cities, because the cost of living is high everywhere. You take the essential items of food and clothing and there is not very much difference in the small and in the larger cities. There is a little difference in eggs, it is true; very little difference in butter. Of course, the difference in articles of clothing is on the side of the man in the larger cities, because he has a better assortment and is in a position to buy them cheaper. I think you will find the cost of living in the smaller towns is not, probably, as great as it is in the larger cities, including rent and all the other articles, but you will find it is running quite close second in the large cities themselves. Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. I will take your word for that.

STATEMENT OF JENNIE L. MUNROE, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mrs. MUNROE. I think you will find that in the small towns and in the vicinity of Washington the people who live out there have little gardens and a few chickens, and it is a great help. We do not have that advantage in the city, because we can not have chickens, since they will not allow it.

The CHAIRMAN. That is true.

Mr. DIES. That is true. There is some difference.

Mrs. MUNROE. I happen to have a son who lives in the suburbs of Washington and he has two little children, and he could not afford to buy eggs, but he has a few hens and he is able to supply them with plenty of fresh eggs in that way.

Mr. DIES. Which shows his good sense.

Mrs. MUNROE. He is able to have fresh eggs when he wants them. Mr. LOBECK. The increased cost in living is mostly in the food products?

Mrs. MUNROE. Yes, sir; mostly.

Mr. LOBECK. Clothing is cheaper and what we wear is cheaper now than any time in my experience, and I have sold merchandise for many years.

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. That is perfectly correct.

Mr. LOBECK. We get better clothing for the same money than we ever did before.

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. Yes, sir.

Mr. SCOTT. How is it about women's clothing?

Mr. LOBECK. When I was a boy a woman usually bought alico, and when she bought an alpaca dress she was the talk of the community, and if she bought a silk dress she was the talk of the county. [Laughter.] Now we want to have silk dresses and alpaca dresses and the other fine dress goods; of course, they cost more than calicoes.

Mr. SCOTT. But dress goods of the same quality cost more to-day than they did 5 or 10 years ago.

Mr. LOBECK. No, sir; they do not.

Mr. SCOTT. I think you had better investigate that.

Mr. DIES. Where the shoe really pinches is on the items of meat, butter, and rent, and so on.

Mrs. MUNROE. And medical attention, because the doctors charge a great deal more than they used to.

Mr. DIES. And they can not do you as much good, either.
Mrs. MUNROE. No, sir; I agree with you.

STATEMENT OF DANIEL GOLDSCHMIDT-Resumed.

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. With your permission I will continue, gentle

men.

The CHAIRMAN. Proceed.

Mr. GOLDSCHMIDT. It will be observed that nothing is allowed for prolonged sickness, or loss of salary, nothing for pleasure, nothing for extra car fare, not a luxury nor an extra comfort, not a pipeful of tobacco or a 10-cent box of "Lofts Special" candy.