1930 476 and nom:

CON -· E • 10 AL RE 10RD-SE ATE 2729 Buchanan, commander, urging enactment of Senate bill 476 and Hou e bill 2562, granting increa ed pen ion to puni li­American ·war veteran ; to the Committee on Pen i ns.

3 55. AI, o, petition of P. C. Tyrrell and 75 other re ident.· of the city of Elgin, Ill., urging enactment of enate bill 476 and llou~ bill 2562, granting increu ed pen~'ions to pani. ·h-Ameri­can ·war veteran : to the ommittee on Pen ions.

3, 56. By l\Ir. 'ELVIG: P tition of Twin ity Milk Producers of Minnesota, urging enactment of House bill 6, to increa. ·e rev­enue in Minue ota from butterfat; to the 'ommittee on Agri­·ulture.

3 -7. AI , petition of ~1inne ota Farm Bureau Federation, upporting Hou e bill 6, and urging enactment of it for purpo e

of bringing c rtain cooking compound under definition of oleo­margarine: to the ommittee on Aaricultnre.

385 . Also, petition of Land O'Lukes reameries (Inc.), urg­ing prompt enactm nt of Hou e bill 6, who e purpose i to bring certain cooking compound under definition of oleomargarine; to the ommitte on Aariculture.

3 59. Al·o, re olution of t. Paul Goodwill Indu ·tries (Inc.), ur!ting oni!I'e to enact Hou · bill 7138, providing for the con­tinuan ·e of Federal aid for the vocational rehabilitation of di ·­abled per ·on. ; to the Committee on Education.

3 60. By Mr. THAT HER: Petition igned by Edward White­head and others, of Loui ville, Ky., urging incr a ·e of pen ·ions to pani. h War veterans; to the Committee on Pen ions.

3 1. By 1\Ir. WHITEHEAD: Petition of Colonel William alle Camp, No. 9, Department of Virginia, United vanish War

Veteran , Danville, Va., uraing the enactment of Hou ·e bill 256'~. for increa~e of pen ions to pani h-Americnn ·war veter­nn, ; to the Committee on Pen ions.

3 2. AI.·o, petition of W. W. Adam and other ·, of Halifax, Y u., urging the enactment of Hou. ·e bill 2JG2, for incr a e of pension to Spani h-American War veteran ; to the ommittee on r n.·ion .

3 63. By Mr. WILLIAM ' : Petition signed by I. W. Austin und 2 other re~ident of Iowa Park, Tex., praying Conare •. to pa leai.·lation to increa ·e pen ion to pani ·b-Amerienn vet­eran·; to the ommittee on Pen ion~.

3 64. By Mr. WHITTINGTON: Petition of H. M. Si. loff and other , urging Congre s to pn~ s the Spani h-American pension bill ; to the Committee on Pensions.

E ... :rATE FRIDAY, January 31, 1930

(Leg~lative day of Monday, Jamuary 6, 1930)

The enate met at 11 o'clock a. m., on the expiration of the rece .

CORRJIXJTIO OF THE BJOOORD

Mr. GILLETT. Mr. Pr ident, some time ago in di. cu ing an item of tbi bill relative to paint I ..,tated as to Holland:

In their schools nothing can be u ed except a product which i mnde In Holland.

I thought at the time that I bad ample warrant for my tate­ment and ·uppo ed it wa correct, but I have since been as­~ured, on authority which I can not que tion, that I wa mi taken, and that Holland does not prohibit in her chools, as I wa informed, the u e of the product of other countries. Therefore, I wi h to correct my tat ment as publicly a I made it, and I regret that I fell into the error.

DI P ITION OF UBELES PAPERS

The PRE. !DENT pro tempore laid before the enate a com­munication from the Acting ecretary of State, transmitting, pur uant to law, a list of u le papers in the file of the 'tate D partment which are not ne ded in the transaction of hu:ines · and have no permanent value or hi toric intere ·t, and a king for action looking toward their di po ition, which wa referred to a Joint Select Committ eon the Disposition of U ele Paper in the Executive Department .

The PRE IDENT pro tempore appointed Mr. BonAII and 1\Ir. WANSON members of the committee on the part of the enatc.

PETITIO~S AND MEMORIALS

Mr. VANDENBERG pre ented a petition of unclry citizens of D troit, Mich., praying for the pa. age of legi lation granting incr a· d pen:ion to Spani h War veteran , whieh wa · ordered to lie on the table.

Ile al o presented a letter in the nature of a memorial from the board of commerce of aginaw, Mich., r mon. trnting a~ain._ t the pu age of legislation to provide for the ~tablishment of ~hipping commi ioners at ports on the Great Lake , which was referred to the Committee on Commerce.

2730 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 311

Mr. TYDINGS presented the petition of Peter Buys, con­ductor, and officers and members of the Hagerstown Municipal Band, of Hagerstown, Md., praying for the passage of the so­called Army Band bill, being the bill ( S. 1011) to amend the act entitled "An act for making further and more effectu&l provision for the national defense, and for other purposes," ap­proved June 3, 1916, as amended, and for other purposes, which was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.

He also presented a petition of sundry citizens of Baltimore, Md., praying for the passage of legislation granting increased pensions to Spanish War veterans, which was ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. KENDRICK presented petitions numerously signed by citizens of Platte Valley, Saratoga, and Lander, all in the State of Wyoming, praying for the passage of legislation granting incre·ased pensions to Spanish War veterans, which were ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD presented petitions of sundry citizens of Bricelyn, Minneapolis, Robbinsdale, and Golden Valley, all in the State of Minnesota, praying for the passage of legislation granting increased pensions to Spanish War veterans, which were ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts presented petitions numerously signed by sundry citizens of Boston, Brockton, Chelsea, Everett, and Lynn, all in the State of Massachusetts, praying for the passage of legislation granting increased pensions to Spanish War veterans, whieh were ordered to lie on the table.

THE TARIFF ON CEMENT

Mr. VANDENBERG. Mr. President, the Michigan State Leg­islature bas unanimously adopted a memorial addressed to Con­gress in behalf of an adequate tariff on cement. It speaks for itself. I ask that it may be printed in the RECoRD.

The memorial was ordered to lie on the table and to be printed in the RECORD, as follows :

Whereas the State of Michigan is one of the largest cement-producing States in the United States, having 15 eement plants within its borders employing a great many wage earners ; and

Whereas many of the other--states of the Union produce great quan­tities of cement and employ many men in the production thereof, and this and the other States will likely increase the production of cement In the future due to the constant demand for this article; and

Whereas it appears from reliable sources that during the year 1928 about 3,000,000 barrels of foreign cement were sold in the United States, and that It cost American cement workers 216,540 days' em- · ployment and $1,414,910 lost wages, and that in addition railroad, · mining, textile, and other labor lost during the same year 300,540 days' employment and $1,627,830 in wages ; and

Whereas it bas come to our attention that this product is shipped into this country by many of the foreign countries without payment of any duty thereon in competition with our own industries and labor; and

Wb~reas we deem it essential to first protect the industry and labor of the citizens of our own State and country: Now, therefore, be It

.IJlesoZvecZ by the senate (the house of representatives concurring), That in justice to the 15 manufacturing plants in the State of Michigan manufacturing cement and the labor employed therein and the plants and labor in the other States of the Union, that the Congress of the United States ought to prohibit the importation of foreign manufac­tured cement Into this country without payment of an adequate duty thereon ; and further be it ·

Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the Ways and Means Committee of the Congress.

REPORT OF THEl PUBLIC BUILDINGS .AND GROUNDS OOMMI'ITEE

Mr. KEYES, from the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, to which was referred the bill (H. R. 6120) to amend the act entitled "An act to provide for the construction of cer­tain public buildings, and for other purposes," approved May 25, 1926 (44 Stat. 630) ; the act entitled "An act to amend section 5 of the act entitled 'An act to provide for the construc­tion of certain public buildings, and for other purposes,' ap­proved May 25, 1926," dated February 24, 1928 (45 Stat. 137); and the act entitled "An act authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to acquire certain land within the District of Co- · lumbia to be used as space for public buildings," approved January 13, 1928 ( 45 Stat. 51), reported it with amendments and submitted a report (No. 146) thereon.

REPORTS ~F NOMINATIONS

Mr. GREENE, as in open executive session, from the Com­mittee on Military Affairs, reported sundry nominations of officers in the Regular Army, which were ordered to be placed on the Executive Calendar.

Mr. PHIPPS, as in open executive session, from the Com­mittee on Post Offices and Post Roads, reported sundry post­office nominations, which were ordered to be placed on the Executive Calendar.

BILLS .AND JOINT RESOLUTION INTRODUCED

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

By Mr. DENEEN: A bill (S. 3372) granting a pension to Henry Burkitt (with

accompanying papers) ; to the Committee on Pensions. By Mr. STECK: A bill ( S. 3373) granting a pension to Elizabeth M. Emrie

(with accompanying papers) ; to the Committee on Pensions. By Mr. TOWNSEND: A bill (S. 3374) for the relief of William B. Thompson; to

the Committee on Claims. By Mr. TYDINGS : A bill ( S. 3375) for the relief of George F. Jones ; to the

Committee on Claims. A bill ( S. 3376) for the relief of Clayton Demarest, jr. ; to

the Committee on Naval Affairs. By Mr. BINGHAM: A biQ ( S. 3377) to authorize the appointment of reporters in

the court of the United States in the Territory of Hawaii and to fix their duties and compensation; to the Committee o~ the Judiciary.

A bill ( S. 3378) to provide for the exercise of sole and exclusive jurisdiction by the United States over the Hawaii National Park in the Territory of Hawaii, and for other pur­poses; to the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys.

By Mr. DILL: A bill (S. 3380) granting a pension to Lois Cooke; to the

Committee on Pensions. A bill (S. 3381) relating to su!ts for infringement of patents

where the patentee is violating the antitrust laws· to the Com-mittee on Patents. '

By Mr. ROBINSON of Indiana : A bill ( S. 3382) granting an increase of pension to Aletha E.

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

A bi.ll ( S. 3383) granting compensation to Clyde Harris; and A bill (S. 3384) granting . compensation to Virgil Vanest ·

to the Committee on Finance. ' By Mr. PHIPPS : A bill ( S. 3385) granting a pension to George W. Robinson

(with accompanying paperS) ; to the Committee on Pensions. By Messrs. PHIPPS, WATERMAN, CUTTING, BRATTON,

SHEPPARD, and CONNALLY: · A bill (S. 3386) giving the consent and approval of ConoTess

to the Rio Grande compact signed at Santa Fe, N. Mex~, on February 12, 1929; to the Committee on Irrigation and Reclama­tion.

By Mr. SHIPSTEAD: A bill (S. 3387) to provide that four hours shall constitute a

day's work on Saturdays throughout the year for all employees · in the Government Printing Office; to the Committee on Print­ing.

By Mr. GOFF: A bill (S. 3388) granting an increase of pension to Laura B.

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

By Mr. PATTERSON (by request): A bill ( S. 3389) to promote and aid in abolishing toll bridges

on Federal highways, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce.

By Mr. CONNALLY: A bill ( S. 3300) to establish in the Department of the In­

terior a national reclamation control service, to provide aiu to the States and their political subdivisions in the construction of improvements for the purpose of flood prevention drainarre and irrigation, and for other purposes; to the Co~mittee ~~ Commerce.

By Mr. GEORGE: A bill ( S. 3391) to provide for inspection and grading of to­

bacco by experts from the Department of Agriculture, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.

By Mr. TRAMMELl.~: A bill (S. 3392) to establish a dairy and livestock experiment

station in Florida; to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.

By Mr. JONES : A bill ( S. 3393) for the relief of Theophilus Steele; to the

.Com!llittee on Military Affairs.

19 0 CONGRE SIONAL RECOR.D-SENATE 2731 By Mr. BINGHAM: A joint r solution ( . J. Re . 132) extending the provi ions

of · •lions 1, 2, 0, nnd 7 of the act of Congre . ntitled "An act to pr \ide for th prot •tion of for st lnncl , for the refor ta­tlon of denuded nr a. , f r the exten ion of national fore ts, and for other purpo • , in order to promote the ontlnuous produc­tion of timb r ou lands chiefly uitnble therefor," to Porto IU •o; to the ommitt e on T rritorie and In. ular ffair".

FLO D WATF.RS OF THE MJSSl SIPPI BA IN

Mr. RAN DELL pre nted a paper ntitled " The Control, n. rvation, and tillzation of th Flood Water of the Mi ·-

1~. ippi Bnsln," prepared for the Nati nal Flood Cornmi ·ion, which was r ferr d to the Committee on Printing with a view to its being print d.

P ULATIVE PRICES OF COTTON

Mr. llARRI . Mr. Pre. ident, I read in this morning's Wa~h­ington Po t nn A. :ocJated Pre· tatem nt from New York in r gat·d to tton whi h cau d it to go down $2.50 a bale ye -t J'<lay, nn<l tho holc1lng ot ton lo t $50, 00,000 b cnu e of a tnt m nt mad by 'bairman L gge, of the F deral Fnrm Board,

who ught to have be n mnkiug tatement trying to hold up the prl · of cotton in tcad of <lepre. sing it. II rc i the state­m nt. h made, and I ran not under tand bow any man of juclg­n1 nt ould haYe mad it. I quote from the article in the paper which I referr d to :

tnt ment about cotton be

Without objection, it i so

tatem ut i n · :follow. : NEW Y RK COTTON

N~w Yo•tK, Janunry 30.-Th cotton market ran into urgent liqui­tlntlon to dny, wllh (lrlc l.lrenklug well below the 17-cent level for all d lh rl and to tb lowe t flgur · reached in tbe mark •t here ince th l.lig crop st•nson 1026 ·27. Mny contracts sol<l off to 16.32 cents n pound. or npproxlmnt ly 2.50 per bale belo\v ye terdny' closing quota­Hun, un<l clo cd at 1 .39. The general market clo cd at net decline of 34 to 43 points.

Th<> opening was bar ly teady nt a decllne of 3 to 5 point , with th (l<:llv montb oon bowing net lo ea of 15 to 30 point und r a r 'n wnl or th r c nt s lllng mov<'ment. OIIerlng. tapered otr some­wllat n prJce approached the 16:lh-cent level for May. There were rnlU' of v rnl points during the mld<lle of the morning on trade buylug noll coverln~. nccompanlell by talk of an impov d technical po ltlon and rumor that the otton ooperntlve A ociatlon wn plan­ning to l.luy on n cnl sutBcl nt to e tabll h a substantially higher level or prlc

'l'his udnlnc rn:-t Into n r newal of liquidation, however, and the mark •t w Ilk . n d n~uin during tll afternoon undPr heavy general sell­lug. This cnme from tor •Ign a well as dome tic sources, and stop

l1•r we•·c uncovC'red. on the d line, which seemed to be promoted by r<•portH f•·om Wn hiugton thnt the chairman of the Federnl Farm Board had Alnt d that while the new cotton m rkt>t agency now being formed wiH dt•al in cotton it does not contempln.te buying on a large scale or at fooU h prlc . March contract broke to 16.06, while July sold orr to

16.56 and October to 16.71, with active months showing net declines of 39 to 50 points at the lowest. Closing prices showed rallies of 8ome 5 to 10 points on covering.

Much of the day' selling was again attributed to the liquidation of old Jong accounts owing to the failure of declines to bring in more aggressive support, but some buying was reported late in the day on the improved technical po ltion of the market and an idea that the pre ent decline would aid the campaign for reduced acreage in the South. Liverpool cable advices reported that there had been hedging and general liquidntion in that market and said Manchester was bear­ish owing to a poorer demand of cotton cloth both for home markets and exports.

Exports to-(Jay, 8,104, making 4,913,897 o far this season. Port receipt , 15,051.

Futures

March·----------------------------------------------May _______ ------- ___ ------------ ______ ----------- __ _ July ___ .----------- ____________ --------------- ______ _ October_ •• _________________________________________ _ December.------------------------------------------

High

16.52 16. 7 li. ()() 17. 16 17.26

Low Close

16.00 16. 13-14 16.32 16.39-41 16.56 16.6~· 16. il 16. 2 16.91 16.00

Mr. WAT. ON. Mr. Pre ident, may I a .. k the . nator if this i a statement of Chairman Legge him ·elf or ·ometbing that a paper clid?

Mr. HA.RRI . It i from Chairman l.Rgge him elf. It says that the chairman of the Fe<leral Farm Board, not omebody el 'e, bad stated that-

While the new cotton-market agency now being formed will deal in cotton, it doe not contemplate buying on a large scale or at fooli h prices.

ne notifie people wbo are trying to cl pre the price ot cotton that hi board is not going to buy cotton on a large cale. Evidently they are waiting to get it at any price they want to pay.

Mr. WATSON. My under tanding is that that i what .. orne­body el e ha stated that Mr. Legge said, and i not the tate­ment of Mr. Len-ge him elf.

Mr. HARRIS. Ye ; the chairman stated it. l\Ir. '\\1AT ON. Where i hi tatement? Ir. HARRIS. This is the A sociated Pre · tatement.

Mr. "'AT ON. But where is Legge' stat ment? Do ,' the enator have Legge' statement it elf-not what ·omebody el·c tated Legge said, but what Legge him .. elf ~aid? 1\Ir. HARRIS. The A o iated Pre. tatement says that the

chairman of the Farm Board bad stated thi . Mr. WATSON. I under tand, but I would like to s e the

tatement it elf. Thi i simply what someb dy el ·e aid he stated. Where is hi official tatement?

Mr. HARRI . I will immediat ly take tbc matter up with 'bairman Legge and see whether he will deny it, or whether

be will give me authority to deny it. But he ought not to have made tll"i unwi~e tatement. Thi statement wa carried in ye"t rday afternoon· paperR, and he had time to deny it for to-day's paper , o as to ave thi · 50,000,000 lo · to the cotton people, and to have prevented the value of the crop being de­pre . ed in that way for the benefit of cotton . p ulatol's-and thi done, too, by the man wh ought to protect tbe cotton grower . His board wa created partly for that purpo e.

Mr. W AT ON. I do not know a thing about the tatement. I know that this i imply what ·omebody else ~aid Legge had .. tated. In the mail thi morning to many • · nat or, there was a letter aying that the Legge tatemcnt had been garbled. I do not know a thing about it, but that i the r a on why I a ked the • nator to produce the original tatement of the chairman of tbe Farm Board. Thi is merely au interpretation of it which may not be ju tified at alL

Mr. HARRIS. If it were not ju tified, hairmun Leage on yeNt •rdny hould have denied it o the mornina paper c uld hnv carried his denial. This is a statement from the New York otton Exchange, where cotton i forced up or down by uch tatements, and, a I said, it i an A sociated Pre tate-

ment. I think it mu .. t be true or else the chairman would not haYe allowed it to go unan wered without a denial in the pre ·s.

Mr. HARRISON. Mr. President, will tbe Senator yield? The PRE IDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from

Georgia yield to the S nator ft·om l\IissL .. ippi? Mr. HARRIS. I yield. Mr. HARRI ON. \Vhelher the Senator from Geor!tia has the

official tatement or not, the papers throughout the country carried tbi statement as a statement of Mr. Legge?

Mr. HARRIS. Ye ; and it has done $50,000, 00 damage, and it lla not been denied.

Mr. llARRISON. And in this morning's paper it has not been denied?

2732 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 Mr. HARRIS. No; and it has cost the men who have the

cotton on hand on yesterday $50,000,000. Mr. WATSON. It is the most remarkable thing I ever heard

of, that because a newspaper publishes something about a man in public life he should be compelled to rush into public print_ to deny it.

Mr. HARRIS. Let me reply to that statement of the Senator from Indiana. Three years ago an official of the Department of Agriculture made a statement that cotton was going down in price, and on that day the price went down $60,000,000.

Mr. WATSON. Yes; I remember all about that. I do not know anything about this statement. I am simply making an inquiry. I am not controverting at all what the Senator has said, but I would like to see the statement that Legge made so we can tell exactly what was in his original statement.

Mr. HARRIS. I promise the Senator from Indiana that we will have that statement to-day if Chairman Legge will give it to us. I will try to rea.ch him over the telephone imme­diately.

Mr. WATSON. We all know as a matter of fact that the Associated Press tells the truth about matters which it pretends to represent to the public ; but, after all, this is an interpreta­tion of something that Legge said by somebody who has merely written his understanding of what Legge's statement was. This morning there is a letter in the mails saying the statement was somewhat garbled. Therefore I would like to see the original statement.

Mr. HARRIS. It was regarded as being so authoritative that men on the New York Cotton Exchange forced down the price $2.50 a bale.

Mr. WATSON. Oh, yes; we all know about how they reduce prices on the cotton exchange.

Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. HARRIS. Certainly. Mr. McKELLAR. The Senator does not believe that Mr.

Legge is interested in keeping up the price of cotton, does he? I do not think there is anybody in the United States who knows Mr. Legge and knows what his record is, especially since he has been chairman of this board, who believes that he has the slightest idea or thought of keeping up the price of cotton.

Mr. HARRIS. I think the Farm Board thus far instead of being a help to the cotton growers has been a curse to them, because they fixed the price at which they would make loans on cotton at 16 cents a pound, which is lower than it has been in two years. The board said they would not advance more than that amount on cotton, which tends, of course, to fix the price at that :figure. This statement has done more harm to the cotton growers of the South than anything that has hap­pened in the last 25 years, except the statement of the Depart­ment of Agriculture three years ago, to which I have just referred.

Mr. WATSON. It is a very easy thing for somebody inter­ested more or less to make a statement about wfiat somebody else said and send the market up or send it down. I do not know anything about who made this statement, but if Chairman Legge made a statement of the kind, we are entitled to have the original statement and interpret it for ourselves. I do not believe in castigating somebody on the floor of the Senate for what somebody else says he said. Let us have his own state­ment and then we can criticize it ourselves.

Mr. BRATTON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. HARRIS. May I reply first to the Senator from· Indi­

ana? I have never yet criticized any official about any state­ment that I did not know was absolutely true, and I have never on the Senate floor criticized anyone unjustly. On the other band, I have defended men in this administration when they were charged in the Senate with things that I did not believe to be just. I do not believe in taking advantage of our position here to destroy a man's character, but here is the only place where we can get before the country a correction of the state­ment attributed to Chairman Legge, which has injured everyone who is holding cotton.

Mr. GEORGE. Mr. President, referring to the statement made by the Senator from Indiana [Mr. WATSON], a release was given out yesterday afternoon or evening, evidently au­thentic, in . which it was stated that Chairman Legge made this statement:

Reports of what the board contemplates doing evidently have been garbled. The board is not going to buy cotton or any other commodity at any _price. There has been no change whatever in the board's cotton loan policy. The board will continue to make supplemental commodity advances to the cotton cooperative association on the cotton loan-value basis announced October 21, 1929, and has no intention of calling loans they made to these associations.

I call the Senator's attention to this statement. It deserves very close scrutiny. The first sentence in it says that "reports of what the board contemplates doing evidently have been gal·­bled." There is no statement that the statement attributed to the chairman of the board by yesterday's press is garbled, but the statement is that "reports of what the board contemplates doing evidently have been garbled."

It is a most unfortunate circumstance when the chairman of the Farm Board permits unguarded statements to be quoted in the public press that must have a direct and immediate effect upon the price of a great commodity like cotton. Then when these reports are broadcast over the country the reply to them by the chairman of the board is not that he did not say something, is not that his language bas been misinterpreted, is not that his language has been garbled, but that " reports of what the board contemplates doing evidently have been garbled. The board is not going to buy cotton or any other commodity at any price."

Mr. WATSON. Mr. President, will the Senator permit an interruption at that point?

Mr. GEORGE. I will yield in just a minute. We have under­stood all the while, and those of us who are familiar with the farm marketing act certainly know that the board can not buy cotton or any other commodity. Those who are informed in the trade know that the board does not propose to buy cotton or any other commodity directly. If there is one mandate in the farm marketing act, it is that the Farm Board must operate exclu­sively through cooperative associations and associations of co­operatives. Hence the chairman of the board is justly subjected to the severest criticism when he makes any statement to the effect that the board does not contemplate buying cotton at a ridiculous price. Why did he not recognize the limitation upon his authority and say that the board is not to buy cotton at all, but that the board will operate and will continue to operate through cooperative organizations or associations and organiza­tions of these associations?

On the contrary, the chairman of the board gives out a state­ment which- the newspapers interpreted as meaning that the Farm Board is not going to pay ridiculous prices for cotton. When that statement is published the only correction made is to the effect that the reports of what the board- contemplates do­ing have been garbled. Then, Mr. Legge, the chairman, asserts­and properly asserts-the authority of the board under the law. The harm, however, Mr. President, the serious wrong, is the thoughtless statement, the careless statement at most, of the chairman of the board in giving out any statement indicating the purpose of the board to buy cotton at any price, when he knew full well that the board could operate only through co­operatives or associations of cooperatives. He must have appre­ciated the disastrous effect of such a statement as that, because the public does not, of course, discriminate between what the board will do and proposes to do directly and what the board can do under the law through the cooperative associations.

Mr. President, I merely want to call attention to the first line of a telegram from a cotton man in Georgia, in which be states:

Cotton sold lowest figure to-day since the big crop of 1926. In which year we produced 18,000,000 bales of cotton. Such

statements do affect the market ; they must affect the market. The effect upon the market of loose and unguarded statements such as Mr. Legge, of the Farm Board, permitted to be issued on yesterday is inevitable.

Mr. WATSON. Mr. President, will the Senator from Georgia permit a question?

Mr. GEORGE. I yield to the Senator. Mr. WATSON. I should like first to preface the question

with the statement that no doubt the representatives of the . Associated Press, who are in the habit of telling the truth, con­sulted the chairman and sent out the statement along the line of some others of his ; but when the market condition is consid­ered the exact language ought to be given, and not an interpre­tation of that language. That is the reason the Senator's colleague says he will furnish the statement.

Is money now being lent to the cotton cooperatives to stabilize the price of cotton at 16 cents a pound or at any other :figure?

Mr. GEORGE. Money bas been advanced by the board to the cooperative associations.

Mr. WATSON. Is it being done right now? Mr. GEORGE. It has been advanced at least to one such

association, and, I think to more than one cooperative asso­ciation.

Mr. WATSON. Does the Senator from Georgia know how much money has been advanced for that purpose? ·

Mr. GEORGE. I do not know how much money has b.een advanced.

Mr. WATSON. Does the Senator know how much money bas been advanced per pound?

19 0 CONGRE I 1!0 ~ L RE 10RD-SENATE 2733

Ir. GE ItGE. t think th maximum ad"Vance hn be n at the rate or lG cents n pound.

1\:lr. \YAT~ON. IH thnt now b in('f done? Mr. ' E >U 11. :My under. tnndin~ i that it i " now being

<lotH', hut thnt i"' not what I um complaining about. Mt·. " .AT •. I · th 'enator complaining about that price

or about the poli y? ~ Ir. 01•1 HGI•l ' hat i nnoth r qu , tion; I would not want

to ~o iut it; but I nm complaining about thL : nder the law t h I•\ •d£'rn 1 l!'n I'm Bou nl can op rn te only through cooperative . 'L'h bonr<l is op rating only throu"'h coop rntive '. Hence there I. · no J)O ible .·cus for u gn.rbled -tatcm nt-coll(: din~ it to be ,:urbl<'d- ·u~h a!-{ the pt· •ss cnrri d on ye terday aft rnoon from t hP <:hnh·nllm or th h a1·d. It was a ·lmple matt r f r him to any thnt tlte board would not buy cotton at all, but if l1e felt •nlll•cl UJ)On to mnk any Huch gtat m nt, he certainly ought not to hav(• ncldl·d that the uoard uiU not propo. e t pay any ridicu­lou){ or 11 ·Uti 1u. prlc f >r cotton. lle hould have content d him­s lf wll h th · tnt m nt of hi · authority und r th law. That authority i to ba ·k up coop rntive marketing a ;ociation and orgnnizntions of ~·uch ns ociati n., without any gratuitou: :tate­Ill • 1t upon hi. vnrt thnt th board would not engage in the pur· •hn:-; of cotton it ·clC for uny ridiculou price or for any price

in . <: !-IS of the market valu . Ir. III~ i LI . Mr. Pr Rid nt I very mu h regret thnt thi

in l1h ut llnli o • urr d. I hnv great r :pect for hairman J, •gg . I bclh v thnt h wnnt. to help u . Thi -tatement in th • parwr i nnfort unat . lie ought to call down the A ~ cia ted Pr ~.· if it 11:1. ""arblcrl hi: . tnt ·ment. I really think that Mr. V ggp i. more in sympathy with u thun tbe man on the b ard whu sp nkr-:; or who i Hnppo-: to "I ak for the 'otton Belt.

Mr. il'KiiJLI...AR. Mr. Prc~i<lent--'l'h PI !~HIDE T lll'O tt>mpor . Do . the cnator ft·om Ala­

bama yi ld to the •nntor from Tenn ee? M1·. IU~FIJI . I d . 1\fr. 1\1 'KELL R. Do s th , enat r from Alabama b •lieve

that Ml'. IJ gg hn the slight ~t knowlcd e about cotton or uhout the mnrk tlng of otton, or ev n about the effect of a tnt •ment that might b giv n out by him about the market or

th • HUHk<'t condition. ? Do the ' nator think that Mr. Legg und<•r:--;tand th :it uation nt all? I .· it not tru that Mr. L gge is uhsolutt>ly ign<,rnnt of th olton .. iluation and of the cotton mnrk t, nnd i · uot th 't t11ut cnu b :-<Hid for him that he did n t 1 uow what tb err t of hi own word would be? I not th. t th plain truth o the mnttt>r?

1\Ir. IUJJi'LI . Mr. Pr . ·lu •nt, I will .·ay to the enntor from T ~uu s•:c that Mr. L age is a very abl man. f cour~e. he tlo : nut know tb c ttou ~ilnation a· w ll a be does the grain sitnntion, hut I bav ha<l .om ·onferenc with him, and I wish to : ny to tb ' nator from T •un .. !-'ee that he manife ted great iutcn•Ht in the ottou produ(· r and he ct· a ted the impres. ion upon m and th oth r m mber:--; f the committe , who called

n him, that he wnutc<l to help u . He took an intere t in the Ritunli n au<l w nt along with u in the ugg . tions which we llllldt•.

'l' h ,. ry frnnk with my frl nd, Mr. Williams, of Oklahoma, who is Hnppo:-< cl to r •t)r<'l'ICnt otton on this board, has not, to m. mind, manif :t d th int r ·t tbut Mr. L gge has or that Mr. 'l'ean-ue ba, or tlul.t Mr. 'tone ha or that one or two other m mh('l\ of tb u ard hu ve man if ted.

Tb<• tnt mcut "hich hn · u n r •f rr d to b re i unfortunate. thiuk, perlutp~. If tb ~tat ment i corr ct, the enntor i'rom

T •nnt•.· · i:-; right in one particular, namely, that Mr. Legge clid not kn w tb iT ·t that a tntcment su ·h ns thnt would have uvon the markl't. It did hav i_

Mr. IIARlU '. lr. Pr ·ident--'l'lt PUE. II E T pro tcmpor . D the enator from Ala-

bama yield to th .._'enator t'rom Georgia? Mr·. HEFLIN. I will ;vi ld in a moment. It did ha"V a bad

<'fl' t. A cotton man tell'phon d me from N w York on y ter­day t lling me that th market bad brok n, and he complained nl out tb tntem nt hn ing n giv n out. It did have a bad ft • t. A tb nator from Geon,"ia. ha said, it has co t the

produ · rs milli n · of uollar ·. I had a tele~rnm from Ralph Jon·~. of orfolk, another cotton man, ·aying that the cotton mn"rh•t was n-oing to piec . Complaint i · being mnd all ar und.

Mr. Pr idl'nt. ther i not any doubt that cotton is elling to-clay ;25 n bnl b l w the cost of production.

Mr. M •KEIJLAR. Mr. Prcsid nt, will the nator yield to we agnin't

Mr. IIEFLIN. I yield to the enntor fr m Tenne ee. Mr. MoKIDLLAR. I dislike to interrupt the Senator o fre­

qu ntly, but is it not a fact that cotton, gene'ra.lly speaking, has b n going down ever since the board came into existence?

Mr. HEFLIN. That is, unfortunately, true. Cotton tO-day i . elling $25 a bale below the c t of production. Mr. Pr ~ident, that is an alarming situation. The gamulers in \Vall Street can ftouri h ; they can make their millions in a day ; but the farmer out yonder who toils the year through and brings in his crop at the marketing en on, i ompelled to .,ell it for $25 a bnle below the co t of production. uch a situation is simply outrag ou . The cotton producer i being impoverished.

If the chairman of the board made a tatement that the board were not going to buy cotton at a "fooli~h price," his . tatement can not be con trued in any other way than to mean that pre -ent p'rice are too high. My God, I hope he did not mean to say that. I want to give him an opportunity to explain the state­ment. We probauly will call him before our committee and give him an opportunity to explain it; and we will probably have Mr. Williams before us. I want Mr. \Villiams summoned b fore our committee and I want the committee to go into the whole qu tim::. If he ha not the proper bearing on the cotton bu i­nes , he ought not to be on the board any longer. The outh is entitled to have somebody on the board who is in ympathy with the cotton p'roducer and who will do whatever may be neee ary to keep the producer from being robbed of tbe fruit of his toil, or, at least, as the Senator from Arizona [Mr. A 'HURST] sug­g h~ to me, keep hi mouth closed on the e que tion . If be can not help, he should do nothing that will hurt.

Mr. HARRI . Mr. Presid nt--.Mr. HEFLIN. I yield to the Senator from Georgia. Mr. HARRIS. Mr. President, I have just called up hair­

man Legge on the telephone, and he ays that hi tat ment wa mi. ·under tood; that he made a statement that if the cotton cooperative had any idea of paying a much as 25 a hale more than what they are now paying that would be a fooli h thing. I do not want to mi quote him, and I a ·ked him to .. end me a written .. tatement here which could be read to the Senate. He agree<l to do that as oon a po ible, and when it bull be r eived I will a k that it may be read.

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, with that under tanding from the enator from Georgia, I do not care to discuss thi matter further at this time, except to ay that the Government owes it to the cotton produ ·er to go to their r <:u . The ongre:s ba the power, I think, to keep the cotton gamblers from roubing them of the fruits of their toil. If Government official ~ already in pla e will not u e the power and the money we put in their hand to this end, there mu t be a new deal on the Farm Board.

EXECUTIVE ~1ESSAGES

Sundry mes ages in writing were communicated to the Senate from the Pre: ident of the United States by .l.!!r. Lnttu, one of bi ecretaries.

PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL

A me age from the President of the Unit d States by :Mr. Latta, one of his secretarie , announced that on January 24, 1930, the Pre ident approved and signed tlle act (S. 967) grant­ing the consent of Congre s to the con. truction of a highway bridge aero~ the Hud on River between the citie of Albany nnd Rensselaer, N. Y.

CLA.IM OF H. W. BENNETT, A BRITISH SUBJECT (S. DOC. NO. 76)

The PRE IDE T pro tempore laid b fore the Senate the fol­lowing mes age from the Pre ideut of the United tates, which was read. and, with the accompanying report, referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and ordereu to be printed: To the Congress of the United. States:

I inclose a report received from the Secretary of State re­que. tlng the submi~ ion anew to the present Congr ~· of the claim pr ented by the Government of Great Britain on bebalf of Mr. H. W. Bennett, a Briti~h subje ·t, a~ain. t th "Gnited

tate · for reimbursement on account of lo~·~ •u.'tftined in connection with the rescue of urvivors of the U. . Cherokee, in February, 1919.

I concur in the recommendation made by the Secretary of tate and recommend that, a an act of grace anu without

I' f(>rence to the que tion of the legal liability of the United tates in the matter, the Congre s authorize an appropriation

in the sum of 253.50 in order to effect a settlement of this claim.

IlERBERT HooVER. THE WHITE HoUSE, January 31, 19~0.

EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the enate undry executive me ages, which were referred to the appropriate committees.

RECErVERSHIPS OF JOINT-STOCK LAND BANKS (S. DOC NO. 77)

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the enate a com­munication from the Secretary of the Trca 'ury, relative to I:eceiyera for joint-stock land banks and transmitting a draft of

2734 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANU.ABY 31 proposed legislation enlarging the authority of receivers, which was referred to the Committee on Banking and Currency and ordered to be printed.

Mr. VANDENBERG obtained the floor. Mr. BLEASE. Mr. President--The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from

Michigan yield to the Senator from South Carolina? Mr. VANDENBERG. I yield. Mr. BLEASE. Mr. President, I should like to ask, if it be

in order, to have printed in the RECORD the report of the Secre­tary of the Treasury in regard to receiverships for joint-stock land banks. If the documents shall be referred to the Commit­tee on Banking and Currency, where there has been sleeping for five years a resolution seeking to afford assistance and help for . the farmers who are being sold out of their homes, entailing great distress upon men, women, and children, I fear they will never see the light of day.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. What the Senator from South Carolina requests may be done by unanimous consent.

Mr. BLEASE: I will ask the Chair to wait until I say a word further. The Banking and Cur:r;ency Committee is concealing the whole thing. I ask unanimous consent that the report of the Secretary of the Treasury be published in the RECORD, so the people of this country may know what the conditions are.

Mr. FLETCHER. ·Are not the documents too voluminous to go into the RECORD?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair· will state that the record of the court which is transmitted is voluminous, but the letter of the Secretary of the Treasury and the accompany­ing bill are not long.

·Mr. BLEASE. I ask that all the papers be printed. There is so much trash put in the RECO'RD, I think that sometimes, at least, some real information ought to be given to the people.

Mr. SMOOT. Does the Senator desire that the whole of the court record go in the RECORD?

Mr. BLEASE. Yes, sir; because I have been trying for five years to get the Banking and Currency Committee to give the people of this country some information on this question, but without success, and every time anything comes up that is re­ferred to them, they put it in their refrigerator; and the people are being robbed every day. We ought to have information, and I am asking for it.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Let the Chair try to straighten out this matter.

The letter from the Secretary of the Treasury is not long, nor is the accompanying bill which he suggests to be enacted long ; but there accompanies the letter a complete transcript of the proceedings in the Federal court, which, in printed form, may be shown to the Senate by the Chair. Does the Senator from South Carolina desire all of this printed in the RECORD?

Mr. BLEASE. Mr. President, if it is not printed, and I can ever get my hands on it, I am going to stand here and read every word of it. Then it will be printed.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. BLEASE. It is simply hiding from the people the truth.

Let the truth be known, and the people will be free. Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. President, I think the Senator does

not have in mind the opinion of the court with reference to joint-stock land bank receiverships.

Mr. BLEASE. If it is not printed, so help me God, if I can ever get my hands on it I am going to take it during this tariff debate and read every word of it.

Mr. FLETCHER. Of course, that is already printed. Mr. BLEASE. All right; I am going to read it. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. WATSON. To what? The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from South

Carolina asks unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD the letter from the Secretary of the Treasury and all of its accompanying documents. Is there objection?

Mr. WATSON. Let me ask the Senator a question. Does my friend from South Carolina mean to have it printed in the CONGRESSION .AL RECORD?

Mr. BLEASE. :Mr. President, I mean this-and I apologize to the Senator from :Michigan for taking his time; I merely wanted to ask a question: I mean that we have been trying to get the truth about this farm land-bank situation for five years. The Banking and Currency Committee, I charge openly on this floor, have hidden it. Now, let them deny it. I have a resolu­tion there that I have been begging for years to have reported, and I can not get it reported.

Why should the truth be kept from the people? Let the people know the truth. This is Mellon's report. This is the highest authority. This is the best authority. Why should nobody in this country know anything about it except members of the Banking and Currency Committee? It will :t>e kept f~o~ ~yery

other Senator on this floor, and from the peo.ple of this Nation. As I said just now, and I repeat, every day we fill up the RECORD with trash. I help do it. Why should we J:;lOt have the truth sometimes?

Mr. WATSON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. BLEASE. Yes, sir; I always yield to the Senator from Indiana.

Mr. WATSON. I thank the Senator. Would he not be quite content to have it pririted as a public document instead of having it printed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. May the Chair state that it can be printed by the committee as a committee document.

Mr. BLEASE. But the committee will never do it. I have been trying to get them to do it for five years.

Mr. FLETCHER. I ask to have it printed as a public docu­ment.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered.

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. President, will the Senator from Mich­igan yield to me?

Mr. VANDENBERG. Yes; I yield to the Senator. Mr. FLETCHER. The Senator from South Carolina makes

the general charge against the Banking and Currency Commit­tee that they have been endeavoring to cover up things in con~ nection with these banks.

Mr. BLEASE. Mr. Preside11t, why does not the Senator's committee report out my resolution?

Mr. FLETCHER. I have voted to report the Senator's reso­lution from time to time; but!!. majority of the committee have felt that the Senator's resolution called for an investigation which the Farm Loan Board already had the power to make, and which they reported they were making. ·

Mr. BLEASE. Yes; but which they are not making, but are concealing the truth from those interested.

Mr. FLETCHER. There is nothing to be gained by it. Mr. VANDENBERG. Mr. President, I do not care to yield ,

further. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Michigan

declines to yield further. PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE

Mr. VANDENBERG. Mr. President, I do not desire need­lessly to precipitate another discussion of the question of Philip­pine independence at the present time; but, inasmuch as this vital matter is now pending for decision before the Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs, under promise to report to Congress during the present session, if any new proposals are to be submitted for the consideration of the Senate and the coun­try, they must be submitted now.

It has occurred to me repeatedly, in my study of the problem , as a member of the Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs, that some new proposal must be submitted if the cause of Philippine independence is to have a fair chance in this Con­gress. So great a cause should not be left wholly at the mercy of proposals for which there is little or no chance. Such pro­posals are futile gestures. Therefore, I am going to submit to the Senate this morning ~ new bill, which, for the time being, I shall ask to have referred to the c:ommittee; but for the in­formation of the Senate and the country I am anxious to make .a brief statement regarding its philosophy, its intent, its pur­port, and what I conceive tQ be its superl~;ttive advantage to the cause of Philippine independence and its wan·anty of earliest possible success.

I want to repeat that in my judgment the measures now pend­ing relative to this issue do not give the cause of Philippine independence a full, fair chance. The two measures pending are these: First, the so-called King bill, introduced by the distin­guished junior Senator from Utah, proposing immediate inde­pendence for the Philippine Islands. The junior Senator from Utah is an old and dependable friend of the cause of Philippine . independence; and in nothing that I say do I quarrel with his very splendid and earnest motives. The other proposition now pending is the joint resolution submitted by the senior Senator from Connecticut [Mr. BINGHAM], the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs, which calls for a mixed commission of Americans and Filipinos who shall sit next fall in Manila to review the problem all over again and resume the 30-year-old search for truth.

Mr. President, I am very certain that these two proposals do not satisfy a large body of public opinion in the United States. They do not satisfy my own conscience. I do not be­lieve we are justified in voting summary independence in the absence of indisputable proof that the adventure will perma­nently succeed. Therefore, I say again that the pending pro­.PQS~!§ are ~~lty ;in thei!: tailure to provide these proofs.

1930 co iRE~ IO ... AL RECORD-SEJ.. ATE 2735 Tll -called King bill, d man<ling immediate indep ndence,

woul<l r quit· u. to gu sB a to th economic and political elf-u.Di i ncy of th l'hilippin Island . It would rely upon specu­

lation uud propb ey for the warranty which we mu t po e os to th stability of tb government of tile i ·land und a to th '<.'Onoml · • lf-~uilideucy of the i land.· wb n we turn them loo. ' nv n tht•ir wu r l'ourc ... ~. Many of u.: f L that the deci­sion l~ too important, both to the Phlllvpine Lland · and to the

uit d ~tal •s, to pro c d in the fu · • of ..:ncb hazard~ . Mnny •f us favoring frt•<.>dom at the >arli ~t po~:ibl moment <U'e •on: •i('ll tiou ly fore d to d cline to ~ue. the problem out, be­'ll u~ wh n w tlnally 1 nve th Pllilippin ' we mu t 1 aYe for ''P . und w nm t not lNtvc with 11 Platt :uneuument in the

'<>r •Ht itnti.on of th new PhiliPJJine gov rnmcnt. We mu t, in olltC'r word. , lm w nr cis ly what \V do.

'l'ht. Joint ·esolutlou propo · d by the S nat r from Conn c­t I ·n.t I r lr. Br GHAM] I OlH?ll to much the ame objection. 'Vlul H pre:nm · utimat ly to .·ul>:titute facts for peculation in det~ l'miniug the • element~ that mu t be pr~ nt b fore the l'hilipJ1in . nrc saft•ly given th ir ind pendencc, ncvcrtbele~g it do s not n '<.' mpli~h thi · n t L'<.':o'Ult. It can not do so in the Y<'l 'Y nntnr of th ·n ~t·. \Vby not.'! Bcc~nt e th rc can be n pr •s •nt fa t whicb ·ufficc. 'l'lH.•re cun b no adequate inf r­mntlon ln advauce. 1'11 • only adequat information that the •on~rc ·s and tbe (' tmtry can bav i information that ~ows

out of a •tunl . ·p rl nc . ptimi ·tic nnticipatlon · alone will uot uliic<'. pinion~ ur not viuenr .

llow conlu anyh ely • ny in ndvan • thnt the Philippine nc-<".;. ·fully ·uu confront: the tariff wall of the United 'tates, for

ln ~·ttw · .. nnd ris nb ve thnt wall with their c mm r ial ex­ports. wh n they never have hnd a mom nt' · exp~ri nee in con­front in~ that hundi np Ul n their extcrunl trade? now can anybody Hay that they are conomically · lf-. uffi •ient until they have a full, fr , fair chan to prov that they ar . lf-~uffi­ci<•nt? They will ·oufront a condition, not a theory. So, in t'ouud pro f.: , mu t w .

Whnt, th n, 1 ne d <1? To my way of thinking, the thing thut i!S n u •d is nn iutt>rm lint J) rlod of practically complete autonomy, both politi<·ttl and ·onomic, p rmittlng a laboratory 1 .st, tt~ it W<'l' •, upon th . factor which mu ·t be re. olved favor­ahly hy UE~ if ' e nre ntitled to upport the gr nt adYenture of l,hilippin . inclep nd uc . In oth •r word~, w mu t know th 1' nlit i('!4. Thu. , nnd thu only, wlll the en u. of ind pendence b1\\' n fnir ~how, eltb r in ongr :: n w or in the ub equent <l stiny of th Philipvine 18lands th m lv . I peak for the"e rt>nlHie,.

'l'h '1' f r . Mr. Pr , id nt, I am intr <lu •ing thi ' bill this morning. . It propo~ s qun 1 independen ·e for a probationary rl nd . It creates immedint politiml and economic aut nomy whlch should lead to an ff ·ttHtl •limn.· in 104 . It p rmit the dl'V lotmt nt of , elf-1mtli 'icnci in the Philippine !:lands and t h d •monstrntlon of 1 h lr acl quate cxistenc to ju tify th tiling w ar a:k d to d . and which we ou~bt to do at the C'lll'li • l po~dbl m liD nt. It sub titut realities for conjecture. It immcdiat 'ly ~tabli!o;hcs the commonwealth of the Philippine Il'hllld~. nnd I>r ml · thnt it su ce. · tbr •ugh 10 year· of trial ~lln.ll produe the •ompl t withdrawal of Am rican so"'ereignty.

It may b ~aid that we hnv mad prom! e. bE'fore; but, Mr. I r sident, I r p •ut that proml!":e lucking con~tructive specifi­cntlon.· nr mer g(\stur :, and I nm fearful that the mov ment for <:ompl te Inti Jl md uc pending now in the ongr ~ will be just on mor snell g(.• ·ture. IT r L a pr !cram which i the cuhuinati )ll of th ·e lll'omi , witl1 . p cifications and a 'vur­rnnt ~· for Ill •tr ·fulfillment. It i l-Ub, lance, not shadow. It mny :.: m ·up •rlkiully lik anoth r po tpon m nt of indep nd­('11('(. But actually it will ha:t n in de ndence. Thi i a it­tutU on, aA tn·ov .n f r many y ar pa:t, iu whi ·h attempt at hn~t lend to nothing but eumulutiv a luy. Th sure t plan in th . long rnn will b th spee<li t.

Mr. Pr 'l:'id .nt, I would not have the pr :umpti u to offer this formulu :ol<•ly upon my own r . pon ·ibility. It i born originally of fur mot· f rmidnbl . cr d ntials. It i' a . tructure originally sk t ·h <1 in 1024 by th th n cr tury of \Var, Hon. John ,V. 'V(' ks. At hi r •qu •st, n bill drawn ulon~ th e line ~ , and i<IPntifh.d at-1 '. :l373, wu.: intro<ltl(' 1 into th ixty-ei ... htll Con­grt !4~ by th cli~tiuguiHh •<1 H uior C:'nntor from alifornia (Mr. Jon 'ON]. I hnv tnk n th ::;tru ture propo: d by the late ec­r ~tat·y W •ks, and I hnv., faithfully follow d it in the . ubmi -~-:ion of this n w proposal; but I bav refined and amplified it in u numb r of important clir ·tion which ar of advantage to t ht> l'llU~ f PhiliPilin ind pend nee, in the light of some of th tn·oblt m ·that hav developed sin<' 102-.1.

'l ·retnry W lr~ prop . ed a probationary period of 25 year . I am proposing a probationary l>'~riod of 10 y nrs.

The. propmml of 'ecretary \Ve k:;; did not touch the question o:C tnrd.l autonomy at all. 1-'herefor it did not permit this com-

mo~wealth of the. Philippines a fair opportunity to fit itself durmg the probatiOnary period into the protected markets of the world, nor to defend it elf against free competition with the world'· t1·ade.

I am injectinO' progres ive tariff autonomy into th1s probation period with a ratio of duties progressively increa ing during the d ·atle, so that at the end of the decade the Philippines will ha~e not ouly demon trated their economic independ nee and thetr economic self-sufficiency, but will be ready when they become wholly ind pendent to face the world on a basi which will warrant the expectation that they can permanently tand. Ind ed, we and they will have this factual a .. urance.

.1 have ~m_>vided a final plebiscite in the islands. I have pro­vided a llmrted opportunity for a veto in the Congre:;s in the e\·ent that the adventure bas glaringly failed to ucceed. But rtll th vre~umptions run in favor of the islands and their indep ndence.

In a g.eneral way I .think I have submitted an amplification of the \\ eek plan which ought to cba.llen~ the favorable con­'" id ration of tho e who are doubtful as ~ whether or not the Phili~p~t~e. I ·land are now or ever can be equal to the:--e re-ponstbllttre of self-"overnment. I have provided the pecific

me n · by which all such doubts may be resolved. Of ~our'e, ome one will imme<liately ay, What if the 10-year

exp~r1~nent _fail"? If it fail.-, th n it i demon ·trateu that prior pre<.·1p1tate mdependence mo._t certainly would have failed and w~ hav no right to launch the e far Pacific wards UPon a fa1lur . Better it is that failure, if failure there is to be should be known before it is too late. So vital a matter must not be left to chance.

t worst, if the gloriou adventure during the probationary d ade ·hould fall, the Philippine I ·lands will be infinitely nearer the reality of their ultimate goal, becau e they will be ju·t that much further along the road to-. ard the cr tion of. th~ir own adequate and efficient, economic, and political in­stitution. . At wo1 ·t, they will gain in tead of lose. On the oth r hand, if the adventure ucceeds-as I believe it would­the Filipino dream come" true.

There i no doubt in my mind about the obligation of the .:~merlcan people in thi respect. :ro one can deny the obliga­tion. The Jon s Act of August 29, 1916, specifically promi that a oon as stable government can be e tabli bed we are to withdraw our sovereignty from tb e far Pacific wards.

Mr. BI • HAM. Mr. Pre ident, will the enator yield? Mr. V Al""JDE ... TBERG. I prefer not to yield until I have com­

pleted my statement, but if the Senator wishes, I will. Mr. BINGHAM. The statement which the enator ha made

if it f?OOS uncballen"ed, a it so often ba , leads to misunder: tandmg. If the enator is as familiar with the hi tor:v of that

bill in the House as I b lieve him to be, he will remember that tb re was a very trenuou effort to put ju t that promi e into t!1e net it elf, and it wa defeated in the House of Repre enta­tive '. The inference wa put into the preamble becau e the Congre. s did not wish to put into the Jones Act what the

enutor ba ju t said the .Tone Act contained. Mr. VAJ\"DE~ BERG. Mr. President, I am quite a-. ·are of

that legi lative history. The fact remains that Congr indi ,_ putably has led the Filipinos to believe that they are to have their independence as oon as stable government is establi bed. The promise, furthermore, is written into numerous pronoun ·e­ments by both Republican and Democratic Presidenb> of the United tates.

Independence is not establi bed, however, purely upon the ba is of political te ts. Economic tests are necessary in addi­tion.

Mr. HAWES. Mr. Pre iclent--The PRE !DING OFFICER (Mr. FEss in the chair). Doe

t11e enator from Michigan yield to the enator from Mis­souri?

Mr. VANDENBERG. Ye ; I yield. Mr. HAWES. Before pa .. ing away from the declaration of

autonomy, it i a fact that on the only occasion on which Cou­gr·e did speak upon the subject of Philippine independence it did declare that they hould ultimately be given their inde­pendence. It was in the preamble, but it is a clear-cut tate­ment from the Government of the United tates. No matter what debate may have preceded that declaration, it i there, o that a child may under taud it, and it i the only expre · ion ever given by the American Congress, and it i o clear that it can not be di puted.

• Ir. VA ·DE.i. ~BERG. Mr. Pre ident, I thank the enator f t•

hi ob · rvation . I do not want to yield further, b eau e I am en. ible of the fact that I am intruding upon the tariff time

thi., morning, and my ole purpose i to ·ubmit the bill to the Senate with a sufficient statement to invite the ultimate con-

2736 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 sideration of Senators and of the country. It can be debated later at a more appropriate time. ·

I have said that in my mind there is no doubt regarding our ultimate obligation. Neither is there any doubt in my mind about our constitutional power to validate the promise we have made. I again call the attention of Senators to page 2594 of the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD, which contains a very splendid and illuminating brief upon this subject prepared by the Legislative Counsel of the Senate.

I have no doubt regarding the obligation, no doubt regarding our constitutional ability to meet it, but I entertain the doubt expressed a few mornings ago by the distinguished senior Senator from Idaho. I have his doubt as to whether independence ever will be given the Philippine Islands within this generation, and I emphatically share it if we proceed solely on the theory that they are to be precipitated some day into independence almost overnight. If we postpone all intermediate steps and persist in waiting until Congress is ready to grant summary independence, then in my judgment the Senator from Idaho is conect, and it is possible that the Filipinos never will be free. I am con­vinced that the best friend to independence is the friend who looks facts squarely in the face.

I can not vote for summary independence. I will not vote for independence simply to satisfy our own expedient economic needs; although one is, indeed, blind not to see that otherwise we face inscrutable economic perplexities. I will not vote to penalize the Filipino so long as he continues to live under the American flag. But I will vote to enlarge the measure of home rule in the Philippine Islands as the final chapter in the prelude to their attainment of complete independence which shall be both beneficent and permanent.

It is in this spirit that I submit the following bill. I present it as a philosophy of action and procedu~e rather. t~an. as. a detailed program of action. I have no pride of opmwn m Its detail. So gigantic an undertaking, involving the liberties of millions of people committed to our mercy and discretion, will require the consultation of many minds, but I dare to belie':e that it points the manner of the only effectual answer to this problem.

I ask that the bill be printed in the REconn for the informa­tion of the Senate and of the country, and referred to the Com­mittee on Territories and Insular Affairs.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the bill will be received and referred as the Senator has requested . .

Mr. NORRIS. Mr. President, I would like to ask the Sena­tor from Michigan a question.

Mr. VANDENBERG. I am very glad to yield. Mr. NORRIS. I would have asked this question before, but

out of respect for the Senator's request that he be not inter­rogated until he had finished, I withheld any intenuption.

I wanted to get from the Senator, if I could, a little elucida­tion of his bill in regard to the tariff. I suggest to the Senator that the observation he made in regard to the tariff was not plain, at least to me. Would the Senator yield to the Philippine Legislature the power of making a tariff during the 10-year probationary period?

Mr. VANDENBERG. The proposal permits the native legis­lature full and free right of action in tariff matters, as in all others. The expectation is that they will erect their own tariff system precisely as they would need such a system when they were independent, and then that we shall confront their tariff, and they shall confront our tariff, but it shall be done in a sort of progressive ratio; for the original period of 2 years, free trade, then 2 years with 25 per cent ?f the tariff both ways, then 2 years with 50 per cent of the tanff both ways, then 2 years with 75 per cent of the tariff both ways, and as a climax, a hundred per cent of the tariff both ways.

Mr. NORRIS. Let me see if I understand. The first two years, free trade?

Mr. VANDENBERG. That is correct. Mr. NORRIS. During the first two years we could not levy

any tariff against them and they could not levy any against us? Mr. VANDENBERG. That is correct. Mr. NORRIS. The next step is 25 per cent? Mr. VANDENBERG. Yes; 75 per cent preferential, to state

it inversely. Mr. NORRIS. That is, whatever our tariff is, they have a

75 per cent preferential, and whatever their tariff is against the world we have that preferential?

Mr.' VANDENBERG. That is correct. Mr. NORRIS. Then I understand. Mr. VANDENBERG introduced a bill (S. 3379) to enable the

people of the Philippine Islands to adopt a constitution and form a government for the Philippine Islands and to provide for the future political status of the same, which was read

twice by its title, referred to the Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs, and ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

s. 3379 A bill to enable the people of the Philippine Islands to adopt a consti­

tution and form a government for the Philippine Islands and to pro­vide for the future political status of the same Whereas the act entitled "An act to declare the purpose of the people

of the United States as to the future political status of the people of the Philippine Islands, and to provide a more autonomous government for those islands," approved August 29, 1916, declared it to be the purpose of the people of the United States to withdraw their sovereignty over the Philippine Islands and to recognize their independence as soon as a stable government can be established_ therein ; and

Whereas it is the purpose of the people of the United States imme­diately to test the political and economic eligibility of the Philippine Islands for the complete independence thus promised ; and

Whereas it is the further purpose of the people of the United States to withdraw their sovereignty over the Philippine Islands when this test is met : Therefore

Be it enacted, etc., That the people of the Philippine Islands are authorized, as provided in this act, to adopt a constitution and to form thereunder a government to be known as the " Commonwealth of the Philippines," which shall exercise jurisdiction over all the territory ceded to the United States Government by the treaty of peace concluded between the United States and Spain on the 11th day of April, 1899, the boundaries of which are set forth in Article III of said treaty, together with those islands embraced in the treaty between Spain and the United States concluded at Washington on the 7th day of November, 1900.

SEC. 2. The Legislature of the Philippine Islands shall draft the constitution and shall provide for its submission to ·the voters for approval or disapproval under conditions prescribed by the legislature, which will permit the people a full and free expression of their views.

The Governor General of the Philippine Islands may extend the regular session of the legislature for the necessary time to accomplish this purpose, or be may call a special session of the legislature for this purpose, and such session may sit for the necessary time. The session shall begin not later than 60 days after the passage of this act.

SEC. 3. The constitution adopted shall be republican in form and adequate to secure a stable, orderly, and free government, and shall contain provisions to the effect that, pending the independence of the Philippine Island.s-

(a) All citizens of the commonwealth shall owe allegiance to the United States.

(b) Every officer of the commonwealth shall, before entering upon the discharge of his duties, take and subscribe an oath of office, de­claring, among other things, that be reeognizes and accepts the supreme authority of and will maintain true faith and allegiance to the United States.

(c) Absolute toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured, and no inhabitant or religious organization shall ever be molested in person or property on account of religious belief or mode of worship.

(d) Property owned by the United States, cemeteries, churches, and parsonagej:'l, or convents appurtenant thereto, and all lands, buildings, and improvements used exclusively for religious, charitable, or educa­tional purposes shall be exempt from taxation.

(e) Trade relations between the commonwealth and the United States shall be upon the basis prescribed in section 6.

(f) The public debt of the commonwealth and its subordinate branches shall not exceed limits now or hereafter fixed by the Con­gress of the United States; and no loans shall be contracted in foreign countries without the approval of the President of .the United States.

(g) The debts, liabilities, and obligations of the Philippine govern­ment, its provinces, municipalities, and instrumentalities, valid and l:!nbsisting at the time of the adoption of the constitution, shall be assumed and pa1d by the commonwealth.

(b) Provision shall' be made for the establishment and maintenance of an adequate system of public schools conducted in the English language.

(i) No part of the public. revenues shall be used tor the support of any sectarian or denominat1onal scnool, college, university, church, or charitable institution.

(j) Acts affecting the currency or ~oinage laws shall not become law until approved by the President of the United States.

(k) Foreign affairs shall be exclusively in the control of the United States.

(1) All acts passed by the legislature of the commonwealth shall be reported to the Congress of the United States.

(m) The commonwealth recognizes the right of the United States to maintain armed forces in the commonwealth, and, upon order of the President, to call into the service of such armed forces all military forces organized by tbe commonwealth. ·

(n) Appeals to :B'edcral courts of the United States shall be as now or as may be hereafter proviued by act of Congress.

1930 o .... :rGRE~- ~ IO~TAI.J RECORD-. ENATE 2737 (o) Th~ nltt>ll !=:tat may ex rdse tb right to lntcrv ne for the

JH'<· rrvntion Clf th gov.-rmnent of the commonwealth and for t11e n111lntrnnnr of n governm nt nd •quate for the protection of life, prop­

rty, tttHI 1ncllvlt1unl llbrrty, nnd to the di cbnrge or it obligation~.

(p) 'l'hP. aulhol'ity of th • nltrd • tnt comml ·. ioner to the com-monw nlth of the l'hlllppln • , n provl(] d In thl. act, or as may bere­nitt•r br provld d by Cougt· .s. , . ·hull be recogniz d. • HE<.'. 4. When tlH' con tttutlou hns oo n adopted in compliance witn

1lt provl !on~ of this uct antl 11 lx! n duly ratified by the people of the Phlll[)tlht 1. 1nnd , a crrtitkd cnpy hall be ubmitted to the Pre. ident 11f th nitl'U 'lute. nnd to 'ongr · :for approvnl. If the Pre !dent nnd Congr<' . uppt·uv th constitution, or it the Pre ·!dent approve nnd ('Ougrc falh; to <II ·npprove it within three month of 1 glslative e · Hltut from the tlm or it ubml >~ion, the Prt>sid nt hnll certify such ruct to the Go crnor <: n ral of th Philippine I lands, who shall, within 3 clays nrtN· tlu• r •celpt or uch notHlcution from the Pre ident, it;. u n proclnmntlon tor the lcctlon of officers of the commonwealth. Tb 1ectlon shnll tnk place not earlier than two months nor latl'r than four month attN· the proc1amntlon by the Governor Genernl ord ·ring uch election. Wh n the election of the officers provided for undl'l' th con. tltulfon 11 b n belu and the re ults determined, the Go\:t'rnor G ncral o! th Philippine I lands huH c rtl!y the result of lh J tlon to the Pn· ld nt of the Unit d tntes, who shall thereupon IRsu a llroclnm tlon nnnounclng th rCSl.llts of the el ctlon, and upon the i uunc or such pro<.'lnmatlon by th Pa·t'Sld nt, the existing Philip­pine govc•rnment Rhnll tcrmlnnte and the commonwealth ball nter upon It ri •ht , rn·h·!l('gt• • powel'j!:, and duti s s provided under tho coth;titutlon.

Ir the Pt·r !dent or tnt s dl. approve the con-etlLutlon adopt d nntl rnti11 d in pursunncP of the provisions of this net, th n uch fact, to • ther wlth the obj ctlons, c mmunl nt d to the 1 ~Jslnturc, whl h shall con. lder aid objections aud ngnln submit tb r ~ult or its d lib ration to the President and

on rP H of tb Unit d tat . t~c. G. Th gov •rnm nt of th Pbilipplo I~lnnd hall provide for

1llP ord •t·ly tran fer of the functions of gov rnmcnt to the common­ltb.

'E . . Tl'llde r lations bet n the tate and the common-Wf'Ultb shall b upon the following ba 1

( 1) ur.lng the fir t and s cond yenr art r lh termination of the f'XI Ung l'hilll)Pin ~overnrnent all articl B coming Into the United tntes fl'om the l'hi111mln I lnnd. , or coming into the Phlllppine Islands from th Unltt'Cl Stat~., hall b ndmltted in ac rdnnc wltb the Jaw in force nt the tim or such t rmlnatlon.

(2) During the third nnd fourth y nrs after the termination of the rx\Hting Philippine ~rovct·nmcnl there hnll be levied, collected, and paid llpon nll nrtlclc corning Into the United , tate from the Ph!llppine J, lnntl nnd upon nil nrtlcleA coming into the l'hlllpplne Islands !rom the Unltf'd tnt s :25 p r ct'nt of the dutle which are r qulred by the r pc tlve government to be levi d, collected, and pnld upon like article import d from for lgn countries.

(3) Dtning the filth nnd lxth year after the termination of the xlstlng Phillpplnt' ~overnmc.>nt th re ball be levied, collected, and paid

upon nll nrtkl s coming Into the United tate from the Philippine l lnnds ana upon nil at·Uclcs coming Into the Philippine I lands !rom tll<' UnHcd , tatl.'. GO per cent of the dutle which are required by the r••f:lpcctlvc gov rnments to b 1 vied, collected, and pnld upon like ar­ticle Imported f1·om for •lgn countries.

(4) Du1·lng the R vcnth and c.>lghth years nrter the termination ot 1bc xlstiug Pllllipplnc governmt>nt 1b r Rhall be levied, collected, and pnla upon all nrtlcle. coming Into the> United States from the Philip­pine INlunds and upon all al'tlclt> coming iuto the Philippine Islands from th United tnt 7u per crnt of the duties which are required by the r pe tlve gov rnm nt to be lPvlcd, collected, and ·1ld upon like nrtick. imported !rom for lgn countrie .

(!i) Aft r the c. pirntion of the Jghth ye:1r nflcr the termination of the xlstlng l hlllppine government and untn the Philippine I. land b 'come lnd 1 •ndcnt or until ongre.. otherwise provid s, there sl1all be levi d, collected, and paid upon all articles coming into the Unit d Stnti'R from thf' llhiJipphle Islands nnu upon all article coming into the l'lalllpplue Islands from the United Stutes the rntes of duty which nre r qulrcd by the r sp clive gov rnmcnts to be levied, collected, and paid upon like articles hnpoa·tcd from foreign countric .

.me. 7. Prior to the <lute of Philippine intle}lendencc every duly ndopted amendment to the con. tituUon or tbe commonwealth shall be submltt d to th l're !dent and Congr s of the United States for approval. If the l'r sldeut and Congrcs. approve the amendment, or it the Pre. ld nt approves nnd on~rcss full to di approve uch nmend­m nt ~ ltllln one y nr from the time of it submi.~lon, the amendment a;llnll tnke tf ct ns a pnrt of ncb constitution.

S .. c. . The chi r e.x cutlve of the commonwealth ball make an annual r p rt to tb lt· ·!dent and Congress of the United · tate of the pro­c dlntrH and OIJ rntlons or the gov rnment of tbe commonwealth and llull make uch oth€'r r port a tbe Pr !dent or Congre s may reque t.

~·xn-173

SEC. 0. The Pr !dent ball appoint, by and with the advice and con· ~ nt of tbe Senat , a United States commissioner to tbe commonwealth of the Philippines, who shall hold office at the pleasure of the President or untU hl succc · or is cho. en and qualified. He hall be the r pre­sentative of the rr "ident of the United State in the commonwealth of the Philippine:, and shall be r cognized a such by the commonwenlth and by the commanding officers of the military forces of the Unit d

tnte and by all civil officlnl of the United State in the common· wealth. The President of the United States shall have authority to u. pend the taking effect of or the operntlon of any law, contract, or xecutive order ot the commonwealth which in his oplnton seems likely

to result in a failure of the government of the commonwealth to fulfill Its contracts or to meet its bonded lndebtedne nnd interest thereon or to provide for Its sinking funds or which seems likely to impair the re. rves for the protection of the currency of the commonwealth or may create international complications. The Prt>sident shnll, In any ucb en. , finally determine whethel' or not ucb law, contract, or

executive order shall go into or r main in etrect. It the commonwealth fa1J to pay any of its bond d or other lndebted­

n ;-; or the inter t thereon when doe, or to fulfill any of lts contracts, the United tate comml ·stoner shall immediately report the facts to the Pre id nt, who may thereupon direct the commi ·stoner to take over the custom. offices and adminbtratlon of the same, administer the sum , and apply such part of the r venue received therefrom as may he neces­sary tor the payment of ucb overdue indebtedness or for the fulfillment of such contracts. The United States comml loner shall annually, and at such other time as the Pre~ident may r quire, render an officinl report to the Pre !dent and Congre s of the United Stat He hall pcr·torm such additional duties and functions a may be lawfully delegated to him from time to time by the President.

The fir t United tates com mi.· loner appointed under this net , hall take office upon the inauguration of the government of the common· wealth. He shall be paid by the United States an annual salary of $18,000 and $12,000 for expenses.

SEC. 10. The Philippine government created under this act hall pro· vide for the selection of a resident commis loner to the United State~, who hall bold office for a term of four years beginning with the 4th day of March following hi election, and who shnll be entit1 d to an official recognition ns such by all departments upon pre entation to the Pr , ldent of credentials lgn d by the chief executive of nid i lands. He shall have a s at in the llouse of Repres ntntlves of the Unlt1 d

tate , with the right of deb te, but without the right of voting. His alary and expen c shall be fixed and paid by the commonwealth.

Until n re1;ident commi :;loner i elected and qualified under tbL<J s .c­tion, exi ting law governing the appointment of R(' _id nt Commi.' ion rs from the Philippine I lands ball continue In etrect.

~c. 11. Upon the expiration of 10 year after the termination of the ex.i ·ting Philippine government the people of the Philippine com­monwealth ball vote for or again t the independence ot the Phillppin s. The }('!tislature shall provide for the time anu manner of an election for uch purpose. to be held a oon as practicable after the expiration of such 10-year p l'iod. The qualified voter of the Philippine com­monwealth !'!hall be entitled to vote at uch election. It a majority of the vot cn~t ball be against Philippine lndepend nee the tatu or the Philippine I land shall continue as herein provided until otherwise defined by net of Congt·e s. If n majority of the votes ca t are ln favor of l'hillppine indep ndence the chief executive of the common­wealth shall so report to the Pr sident of the United tate . The Pre..:ident shall, a oon as practicable, submit such report to the on­gt't' s, together with his recommendations thereon. Unl s the on­gres., within three month of legislative session after the ·ubmi~. io'l ot the recommendations or the Pr ·!dent, adopts, by two-third vote of each House, a concurrent r<'solution di approving Philippine independ­ence, then the Pt• ~-;ident ball forthwith r cognize the commonwealth of the Philippines a a fr e and independent nation under the con­stitution then in force for the Philippine commonwealth : Provided, Tbnt the constitution bns been previously amend d to include ~;ucn

articles a the Pre ident d ems nee s ary Cor the ttlem('nt and nd­ju tment of all prope1·ty rights and other r >Jation between the 'nited States nnd the Philippine I ·lands nnd for the protection of all per­sonal and property rights of citizens ot the United States in the Phil­Ippine I~lands, including provision for incorporation of any o! uch articles In a permanent treaty with the United tatt' . Upon such recognition the Pre ident shall thereupon permanently withdraw and. surrender all right of possession, jurisdiction, and sovereignty exercised by the United 'tates in and over the Territory and p •ople or the Philippine Island .

' c. 12. Said Philippine commonwealth, on becoming independent of the United States, ns~ume nll continolng obligation· as. umeu by the United tates under the treaty of peace with pain c .. ding ,aid Philip­pine I land· to the United tateK

..?xc. 13. If tb Congre s of the UnitPd State by a two-third. vote of e. cb House disapprove of Philippine independence, the tntu · of th ~ commonwealth shall continue as herein provided until otherwise dt'fine I by act of Congr ·s, with n view to subsequent lndepcudeuce.

2738 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 31 SEc. 14. All laws or parts of laws applicable to t.he Philippine Islands

not in conflict with any of the provisions of this act are hereby con­tinued in force and effect until altered, amended, or repealed in ac­cordance with existing law by the Philippine Legislature, or by the legislative authority of the commonwealth, or by act of Congress of the United States.

THE FILIPINO IMMIGRANT SITUATION

Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. President, the other day the question of immigration from the Philippine Islands was brought up, and I think it was the Senator from Maryland [Mr. TYDINGS] who put into the RECORD some reports from California newspapers with regard to the situation in California.

This morning there came to my notice a very intelligent and dispassionate article by the professor of sociology of the Uni­versity of Southern California, Emory S. Bogardus, chairman of the research committee, Council on International Relations, with regard to the Filipino immigrant situation, published in the Pan American Progress for January. This article states the matter so clearly and dispassionately and states the Cali­fornia position so ably that although I do not care to commit myself either for or against any of the conclusions stated I am sure that those who are following this debate in the RECORD, particularly the articles which have been put in with regard to the question of the Filipino as an immigrant to the United States, will be interested in reading the views of Professor Bogardus. Therefore I ask unanimous consent that it be in­serted in tl;le RECORD.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? There being no objection, the article was oxdered to be printed

in the RECORD, as follows : THE FILIPINO IMMIGRANT SI'l'UATION

By Emory S. Bogardus, chairman research ·committee, Council on International Relations, professor of sociology, University of Southern California To understand the Filipino in the United States it will be helpful to

see him in two pictures or frames of reference: (1) In the light of his culture backgrounds, and (2) in terms of characteristic race reactions of Americans to members of races conspicuously different from them­selves in color and culture traits. The discussion may then proceed (3) to the main industrial relations of Filipinos in the United States, ( 4) to the Filipino immigrant's social relationships in this country, and ·( 5) to the proposed congressional act excluding Filipinos from the United States. (6) A new solution will then be proposed. Space per­mits only brief statements of each of these six phases of the Filipino immigrant.

1. Culture backgrounds : He who would know the Filipino immigrant must study him as a product of four major cultures. He is basically Malayan, ranging from ancient and primitive to highly developed tech­nical levels of culture. His people represent a strong Chinese infusion, of both culture and blood. Chinese business men have long cultivated the Philippine markets, and racial admixtures have occurred over and over. There have been three centuries of infiltration of Spanish and Latin culture, and racial admixtures of this type have been many. More recently there have been three decades of American (and Anglo­Saxon) educational, business, and political influence. The lfilipino thus is an interesting · combination of the oriental and the occidental. Malay and Chinese, Latin and Anglo-Saxon-a real cosmopolite. In him the East and West have met.

2. A race relations cycle: Another picture to keep in mind in consid­ering the Filipino immigrant is the characteristic American set of · reac­tions to conspicuously different immigrants-that is, to immigrants of noticeably different color or culture or both. This set of reactions may be called a race relations cycle. There is (1) sympathetic curiosity in strangers evidently away from home; there is (2) an indirect economic welcome as evidenced in high wages and superior living and working conditions, known as the American standard of living. There develops, on the other hand, (3) industrial antagonism aroused by the presence of numbers of immigrants willing to work for longer hours and less wages than American standards permit, and ( 4) social opposition, due sometimes to rapid invasion of strange immigrants, sometimes to culture traits of "invaders" that are deemed inimical to American principles of life, government, and religion, sometimes to invasion of American neighborhoods of these immigrants as home owners, renters, or even as church builders, sometimes to high birth rates. A fifth phase of this race relations cycle is (5) the spread of propaganda depicting the worst about the "invaders" and suppressing the best; a sixth is (6) the passing of restrictive or exclusion legislation against the immigrant race irrespective of their feelings or of the feelings of their home people. Another phase is (7) characterized by unfavorable reaction by the given immigrants, their home people, and their children. The Filipino tmml­grant has already faced the first four phases of this race relations cycle.

3. Industrial relations: Objections to Filipino immigrants were first voiced publicly in 1927 on the Pacific coast. At that time American workers began to protest openly that they were being supplanted by

Filipinos as bell boys, elevator boys, culinary trade workers, and as coastwise seamen. Organized labor in such States as California and Washington acted on these complaints, issued public remonstrances, raised the slogan that "they work longer hours for less wages," and urged the exclusion of further Filipino immigrant laborers from the United States. The American Federation of Labor in 1927 and again in 1928 memorialized Congress to this effect ; a bill was introduced into Congress -(House bill 13900) by Congressman WELSH in May, 1928, which would provide for such exclusion. Organized labor, the watch­dog of American labor standards of living, has taken the lead in urging Filipino exclusion. It has pointed out the dangers of the present un­limited possibilities of Filipino immigration and has contended that a million or two million Filipino laborers (within the range of possibility) would overwhelm American labor on the coast.

Until recently Filipinos figur~ more largely in urban than rural labor situations, but in May, 1929, W. J. French, of the California Commis­sion of Industrial Relations, reported that Filipinos bad succeeded to first place among immigrants in average numbers in 352 labor camps of California (inspected during April, 1929). Mexicans shifted back to second place.

Filipinos are not well fitted to do heavy work. They move from heavy rural labor to the lighter forms, such as work in asparagus, celery, onions, and to the lighter types of city activities already cited. They are ambitious to get ahead economically, but they have difficulty in maintaining good teamwork in their labor requests. Considerable seasonable unemployment among them is reported. Turnover is high. An influx of Filipinos above the demands for their labor is also evi­dent; this will doubtless have some eJrect in regulating the immigration of Filipinos (from both Philippines and from Hawaii).

The actual number of Filipinos in the United States is still not large. A conservative estimate may be placed at 75,000, with numbers around 7,000 in California centers, such as San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Stockton. It is further estimated that the annual influx to the United States is around 10,000, with a!fditional thousands entering the Hawaiian Islands annually-many of whom will later come to the mainland. It is the million or two who might come which disturbs organized labor and which urges labor to take an extremist stand of urging a change from the present unlimited immigration possibility to a complete exclusion of Filipino labor.

Many employers of labor, especially in Hawaii, are opposed in the main to Filipino exclusion. They want a large supply of cheap labor, and hence are alarmed at the exclusion movement.

4. Social relations: The Filipino immigrant h~,ts never been immune from attacks of American race prejudice, partly because of his oriental appearance. One of the latest illustrations of the problem occurred in Seattle, where the Filipino dub of the State university has tried to purchase a home for a clubhouse, but where, it is alleged, the pur­chase was prevented by "neighbors" who brought "pressure" to bear upon the American owner. Filipinos are denied status in many Ameri­can homes, except as laborers. They are denied admission to many types of social gatherings, such as the best class of dance balls. They are frequently made to feel an alleged inferiority.

Filipinos are in the United States, mostly as young men between 17 and 30 years of age. Only a small percentage are women, perhaps less than 5 per cent. As a result, they live in rooming-house groups, without family life. They are lovers of music and seek comfort with their musical instruments. They naturally become homesick. Quick response is made to a friendly attitude shown them by American young women. When the latter, out of a sympathetic interest in strangers away from home, take a kindly interest in the Filipinos, many of these wide-awake young men not only respond but persist in their attentions until the situation becomes embarrassing. There are numerous unfavor­able reports of this character.

For social life the Filipino is often induced to turn to the lower­grade dance halls, where he becomes the victim of " cheap " women. He turns to pool halls and gambling places, where he wastes time and savings. The need of recreation halls, club rooms, and home life for the Filipino immigTant is very great. Private agencies are doing good work, but the sum total of these opportunities is entirely inadequate.

The Filipino is charged with being unassimilable, but this generaliza­tion is hardly fair. His culture bas all been acquired, of. course, and hence is subject to change. He is already partly Anglo-Saxon and Latin when he comes. He brings and keeps a marked loyalty to the Philippine Islands, somewhat after the fashion of the Englishman's loyalty to his island home or the Canadian's loyalty to the empire on our north. If living and working conditions in the United States and if American attitudes are favorable enough, he is assimilable. If con­ditions and attitudes are unfavorable, then he can not be expected to change his loyalty. His assimilability depends largely on Americans.

The Filipino immigrant experiences a social adjustment cycle. The first stage is almost universally that of excitement, dreams of gigantic success, of education, of get-rich-quick, even of becoming an owner of a height-limit building. The second stage sometimes comes on rapidly, It is characterized by chagrin and disillusionment. Long hours of labor, much patience, periods of unemployment, prejudice thrusts are all expe­rienced. The third phase is either one of adjustment or complete dis-

CO.,.GRE IO ... L RECORD-. E ... .,. TE 2739 cotll'n ~'mcnt. Tb b ttcr educated are able to mnke the necessary ad­juHt m nt s, at 1 ast until th tr t>duratlon is compl ted and they are ready to rctum to tb islands. The 1 ss educated nnd the untrained often fail to snvf! money nnd b com stranded without havln.., made nny worth-· while Amcrirnn frlNlds. Th y sink in the mire of the cheap dancing hall nntl of "the •ambling joint."

5. L gl 1 tive nngl : The bill now before Con~re s declares the Flllpln to be an allen. inc he is not reco~nlz d ns a Cauca ian or nn African or of. frlcnn desc nt, he Is not ellgllM to citizen ·hlp, accord­ing to n • upr m ourt d c1 Jon in 1925 (ex<X'pt l<'ilipino~:~ who have .-rv d In the Am rlcun Nnvy three years). The new bill thus would

put lt'lllplno tn th cla. of "all n tnellglbl to citlz n. hip." The Unltcu Stute nlr ndy hns a lnw (1924) tntln" that aliens ineligible to it lz nHhlp ar cxclud d ( xcept Jim! ted clns , such ns student , oftl­

ciRl , viKltors). Ipso fncto, tbe Filipino would be exclud d from the T nit <1 tntel'l.

Whn t nr the merits of the m a ore? It 1 doubtle . true that Flli­plnoR nr • turnlshlng scrlou labor competition In limit d quart rs; that th r are n mUllon or two bo are pot utinlly nvnilabl a immigrants; tbnt tbc•y nr coming !a t r than the normal 1 bor demand su~g st; tb t there I con ld rable R ·nsonnl nnd other unemployment, together with economic dl nUsfac:Uon nnll mi ry ndurc<l by them; that some Filipino 1 nders In both the 1!';lnnd and the United tate. do not longer favor n larg immlgrn.tion of Fillplno to the United State .

'l'h pr ent ltuntlon provide for unllmlt d Immigration of Filipinos, whi<'h iR an .-:xtrnm sllunUon. To b ome frightened and go to the otht'r l'xtr mt:- and xclud all I equally unwi e. ome re·triction of Filipino lmml~rutlon, bow v r, Is doubtlP s nN!dcd, but bow hall it be fiN!IIr cl?

Th xclu!>!IOn plnn naturally otl'end Flllpino.. It lowers their tntus Jn tb yes ot the world. It com at n mo t unfortunate time-when 1bry or pnrtlculurly :tsltive nuout beJn .. deni d lndepend nee rep nt­

<lly. It vtolnteR the reHPl'Ct that a pow rful nation i exp cted to how 1 nmhlttous prot~g~s. To be d nlro Jnd pendence is bad enough, bot to b xcluded nl o is to hnv int~ult nddro to injury.

0. propos d R Iutton : '!'h plan to switch from one extreme to an-otll r, from unlimited immlgrotlon to exclu!>ilon, I revolutionary, not evO­lutionary. om . dc•ffnlte d('gr e o! octal control, however, e ms to be n dl'd. But control Jntl'instcully de'' loped wher the problem ol'iginates rat LH~r thon control lmpo d where the problem culminat s i socially Brlentlnc.

It mny h su~; • ted, therefore, that n .burenu o! emlgrntion, or similar ag nl'Y, b el:ltnlJll ·h d in the Philippine. . The Jlhlllppine LegislntUt·e nnd th ov •rnor G n ral could dcvclnp a procedure whereby migration to th Unit d tute nnd IInwnll could be controll d. No more pn ·ports n d b grant d thn.u concllUon in the United tates and Ilnwail would jm!tlry. Through the D partment of Labor in Wa blngton striaes could b rn rrl •d on with rt•f renee to l~iliplno labor condition on tbc coa t and Hl'l ntll.lc data b furnished to tlle bureau o! emigration nod the Gov •rnor General of the Pblllpplncs !or their guidance in issuing pa s­port . It tht• economic conditions in the Plllllpplne were developed IUHI wng opportunlti b tl r, Flllplno. would not s k to emigrate to th xtcnl thnt th y do now.

In lt'chruary, 19!..!0, Prt: !dent CooHdge and ccretary of tate Kellogg nnuounr d wllat amounts to a new immigration policy, bich may now be nppli d to th PlllUpplnc . They stat~ that lc •islation regarding Me. icnn inunlgntnt:, fot• ln. tancc, mu t take into con ideratlon the attltudl' or M •xlcun lend rR and o! the Mc:rlcan Governm nt; that tbc good will of M xlt•o is n mnjor pha e of the situation. Iu other words, th policy of tr<.'tl.tlog immigration legl ·Iutlon a purely n dome tic aliair wn r pudlalcd, und n new poUcy was inaugurat d of giving considera­tion to th attltud •s or the p •ople involved. It 1 logical that the l 1b1llpplnc gov •rom ut be ennbll'd to take the initiative and to solve the probl m Jnvolv d at lle ource, wh re it originate . It can thereby sav ltH own tntu. In the mattl'r. Inc it function under the jurl~­dlctlon of the Unil{•d tat s Ooverum nt, full protection can be accorded to th etnnd, rd of living or American workmen on the coast and else­wh t'.

){ GE l"llOlof: THE HOU E

A lllC'4 ·u~e from th lou e o! nepre entntive by Mr. Hnltl­~nn, n or its lt•rkA, nnnoun d that the IIom:;e bad pa . ed a bill (li. R 26) for the ncqui:ltion, C:;lUliJli ·bm nt, and dcvelop­nwnt of the G or~ Wn. hinoton M morial Par ·way along the Potomn from .Mount V rnon and Ii ort 'Va. hington to the Great Ji'all.', nnd to provid for tllc ncqui ition of lands in the Di tl;ct

f 'olumbin and th tnt of Maryland ancl Vir~inia requisite to lh compr h n ive park, parkw y, and playground sy tem of th Nntional 1tlPitul, in which it r que ·ted the concurrence of the 1nt .

E. llOLLI.D JOINT RE 'OLUTION SIG. ED

'l'hc ll ~. nr.,"C nl:o nnuonul! d t11at the peaker had affixed his slgnntnr • to th \nrollcd joint re-olution (H. J. R . 217) mak­ing nn uddltioual tlPllL'Ollriution for the support of the Federal

Radio Commis ion during the 1bcal year 1930 in accordance with the net approved December 1 , 1929, and it wn signed by the Vice President.

DI\'ERSION OF WATERS OF COLUMBIA RIVER

. Mr. DILL. From the Committee on Irrigation and Rc ·lnma­tlon I report back favorably without amendment the joint re.'o­lution ( . J. R . 130) re tricting the Federal Power orumil:; ion from i. ·uing or approving any permits or licenses a1fecting the Columbia River at or above the Grund Coulee Dam ite on the

olumbiu Hi\er. This i a unanimou · report of all the member of the committee, and I a k for the immediate con~idernti n of tile joint r lution. I do not think it will lead to any debate.

There b ing no objection, the joint re olution was cou:idere<l as in Committee of the Whole, and it was read, as follow:s:

Resolved, etc., That the Federal Power Commis ion is hereby dire ·ted not to i ue or approve any permit or licenses under tbe provision of the net of Congre appro\'ed June 10, 1920 (41 tnt. 1063, known ns the Federal water power act), upon or affecting the Columbia Riyer at or abo\'e the Grund Coulee Dam . He on the Columbia River bctwf en sa.Jd dam ite and the Canadian boundary line in the tate of Wa.·hlng­ton until the Chief of Engine rs of the War Department bas made a complete report to Congre f his ftndln;s a to the u of the wah~l·s of the Columbia RiYer ns n rc ult of the investi ... atlon now being con­ducted by the War Department under authority of Con~res~.

The joint r 'olution wa report d to the Sennte without amendment, order d to b engro ·~e l for a third reading. read the third time, and pa ~~d.

HOU E BILL REFERRED

The bill (H. R. 26) for the acqui ition, establishment. and development of the George 'Vashington :Memorial Parkway along the Potomac from Mount Vernon and Fort 'Vn 'hington to the Great FalL, and to pro¥ide for the acqui ition of land' in the Distri t of Columbia and the States of Maryland and Virginia requi ite to the comprehen ive park, parkway, and playground system of the .1. ·ational Capital, wa read twice by its title and referred to the Committee on the Di trict of Columbia.

PAY AND AU.OWA.::'CES OF COMMIS IONED PER O:S~ EL /

llr. Me I TEU. I submit a conference report on Senate Joint Re olution No. 7 and a k for its adoption. I wish to say that the enate attached an amendment to the joint resolution and that the Hou e bas rec ded from its opposition to the amendment. Therefore tbe adoption of the r port will merely maintain the position of the • ennte.

The YICE PRE IDE ~T. The enator from outh Dakota submit a conference report, which will be read.

The le!rl.Ja.tive clerk read as follows:

Tbe committee of conference on tbe disagreeing votes of the two Hou.-e on the amendment of the Hou e to the joint resolu­tion ( . J. Res. 7) for th appointment of a joint committee of the nate and Hou. e of Represeutath·e to inve~tigate the pay and ano·wance of the commi.: ioned nn<l enlisted p r onnel of the Army, Navy, Iarine <>rP~ 'oa ·t Guard, Con t and Geo­detic ·urvey, and Public Health rvice having met, after full and free conference have agreed to recommenu and do recom­mend to their re pective Hou. e a. follows :

Tbut the Hou e recede from its amendment to the title of said joint r~olution.

W. H. Mcl\l.A.sTER, DUNCAN U. FLETCIIER,

Managers Otl the pa1·t of t1w Senate. BERTB D II. SNELL, EDWD. ,V. Pou,

Managers on. the part ot the House.

The YICE PRE 'IDEKT. The enator from South Dakota a k unanimou con ent for the immediate con idera.tion of the report. I~ there objection? The hair hear non and tbe que -tion is on agreeing to the report. '

The r port wa agreed to. BE\'ISIO~ OF TilE TARIFF

The ennte, a. in ommittee of the ·whole, re umed the con-ideration of the _bill (II .. R. 2GG7) .to provide revenue, to regu­

lute commerce \Yith foreum countnes, to encourage the indu -tries of the United State., to protect American labor, and for other purpose ..

Mr. Mc .. IASTER. :Mr. President, I dc~ire to call up at this time the amendment I have offered with re pcct to cement.

Mr. MOOT. Mr. Pr sident, under the unauimou" con!O:ent and in accordance with the notice given thi. morning, we were to. tak~ up the ceD?-ent proYi ·ion, fo~nd on page 37, beginning w1th line 6, lUld gomg down to and Iu<:luding line 10, and indi-

•

2740 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 31 · vidual amendments are to be considered. There is no committee

amendment to that prov~sion. Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a

quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. FEss in the chair). Does

the Senator from South Dakota yield for that purpose? Mr. McMASTER. No; I do not yield for that purpose. 'l'he PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the

amendment offered by the Senator from South Dakota. The CHIEF CLERIC On page 37, paragraph 205, strike out all

of subsectiOJ.'! . (b) and insert in lieu thereof : (b) Roman, Portland, and other hydraulic cement or cement clinkers,

and white nonstaining Portland cement, shall be exempt from duty.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. McMASTER. For what purpose? Mr. BA:RKLEY. I have drawn an amendment to the para­

graph slightly different, which I desire to offer. Mr. McMASTER. I shall be very glad to have the Senator

submit his amendment and have it read. Mr. BARKLEY. I offer it as a substitute. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the clerk

will report the amendment for the information of the Senate. The CHIEF CLERK. As a substitute for the amendment offered

by the Senator from South Dakota, the Senator from Kentucky offers the following amendment: Strike out all of lines 6 and 7 and through the word "white," in line . 8, and insert the word "White," and on page 252, after line 21', insert:

Cement, Roman, Portland, and other hydraulic.

Mr. McMASTER. Mr. President, the removal of cement from the free list and the placing of this commodity on the dutiable list at the rate of 31 cents per barrel is an astounding proposal.

The prices of cement and steel have an outstanding signifi­cance in the economic structure of a, nation. Any attempt through the ta riff or through other means to increase the price of these two commodities have tremendous and far-reaching economic effects. ' Generally speaking, all money used in the purchase of these two basic commodities must be at once capitalized, and upon that capitalization interest or rental must be charged.

Wearing apparel and necessities of life which are upon a dutiable list are quickly consumed, and therefore are charged to expense. Cement and steel to a large extent enter permanent ~onstruction and therefore must be charged to capital account, on which there must be an annual interest charge.

When the farmers of the country issue bonds for the purpose of construction of concrete roads, for each thousand-dollar bond issued for the purchase of cement there must be an equal amount of money paid out during the life of a bond in the way of interest.

In the construction of great office buildings and the homes of the Nation the concrete used in connection therewith will endure from 60 to 75 years, and upon the purchase price of concrete there must be an annual rental charge, with the result that for every thousand dollars expended for cement there must be a rental charge of two or three thousand dollars before the investment in cement is charged off to depreciation.

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that a 31-cent duty per barrel upon cement would raise the price of all the cement used in the country by an equal amount, this w.ould be an addi­tionn.l tax upon the consumers of the Nation of $53,000,000 an­nually, and as a large part of this increased price must be charged to capital account it means that before that amount is finally liquidated through depreciation that the consumers of the country must pay at least another additional $53,000,000 in the way of interest or rental charges. The raising of the tariff by 31 cents would cost the consumers of the country approxi­mately $100,000,000 annually, which statement is based on the assumption that a 31-cent tariff per barrel would be added to the price of cement.

Later in the discussion I will endeavor to prove that this very condition will be brought about; but for the present I am using this as an illustration to emphasize the far-reaching eco­nomic effects of any attempt to raise the price of cement.

Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. McMASTER. I yield. Mr. SMOOT. I call the Senator's attention to his amendment

and ask him if he wanted the white nonstaining Portland cem ent--

Mr. McMASTER. I think the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. BAHKLEY] offered a substitute changing that. It was simply my desire to have placed upon the free list the original materials that are now on the dutiable list.

Mr. SMOOT. That is whl:!,t I wanted to know.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from South Dakota modify his amendment?

Mr. McMASTER. Yes; I am willing to modify my amend­ment in that respect and accept the amendment of the Senator from Kentucky.

If a duty of 31 cents a barrel on cement shall be added to the cost of all cement which is sold in the United States--and I wish to say that later on in the discussion I shall endeavor to prove that that will be the actual condition which will re­sult-that additional duty of 31 cents a barrel will mean an increased cost to the consumers of America of $53,000,000, and in addition to that they must contract interest or rental charges of another $50,000,000, which for all practical pur­poses would mean that the duty of 31 cents would be an in­creased cost to the consumers of America of nearly $100,-000,000 a year.

The general situation of the cement industry, as revealed by its history, does not justify a tariff of 31 cents per barrel. Under free trade for this commodity, the history of the industry as a whole presents a healthy condition. It is a history of marvelous expansion and uninterrupted growth. Its history reveals great financial profits.

In 1922, under free trade, the total domestic production of cement in the United States was 117,000,000 barrels. The total American production in 1928 was 175,000,000 barrels. The imports in 1922 were 600,000 barrels and the imports of 1928 were 2,283,000 barrels. These figures reveal that during those six years there was an increaEe of 58,000,000 barrels of Ameri­can production against an expansion of 1,600,000 barrels of im­ports. In other words, during that period American produc­tion increased by 45 per cent, while imports increased approxi­mately 26 per cent.

The cold facts are that the imports of cement in 1928 were equivalent to only 11,4 per cent of the total production of the cement in the United States.

Also, in 1928, while we were importing approximately 2,200,-000 barrels, we exported 800,000 balTels of cement. The record also stands undisputed that the only points in the United States in which foreign cement comes into competition with domestic cement, are at the principal seaboard cities. The record further reveals that for all practical purposes, foreign cement can not be transported by rail from seaboard points to any interior point, excepting only such short distances as it can be hauled by truck. The reason for that situation is that the railroads have purposely formulated their rate structures to prevent the transportation by rail of imported cement to even short dis­tances to the interior, for, as a rule, the westbound freight from the Atlantic seaboard on cement is higher than east­bound freight for equal distances.

'l'he record conclusively shows that imported cement can not, under any circumstances, penetrate the interior of the coun­try, and is confined to the seaboard cities, and for the country as a whole, foreign competition in cement is unknown and such

co~E~~~t~~~ ~e::~~s:~~~facturers of the country, excepting at seaboard cities, have insurmountable barriers erected for them through the economics of high freight rates, protecting them from foreign competition, which leaves their market undis­turbed so far as foreign competition is concerned. Therefore, it is manifestly evident that the cement manufacturers, while they enjoy at the present time almost a complete embargo, insist that a tariff wall should be erected for them which abso­lutely prohibits the importation of any cement whatsoever, so that they shall be free and unrestrained to regulate, dominate, and control prices, not to the advantage of the public but for their own selfish gains.

The manufacturers who have been most aggressive in de­manding this tariff are located in Pennsylvania and New York. The three principal cities in the North which are subjected to foreign competition are Philadelphia, New York, and Boston. In the cities of Philadelphia, New York, and Boston there are annual imports of 710,000 barrel-s of cement.

The mills located in the Lehigh district, New York, and Maine have supplied those cities, having an output of 52,000,000 barrels of cement annually.

During hearings before the Finance Committee on this sub­ject the Tariff Commission provided for the use of the Senator from New Jersey, Mr. Edge, a tabulation of production costs of cement for American as well as foreign mills, including trans­portation charges at various cities in the United States and the selling price at the same point.

I wish to insert in the RECORD a table furnished by the Tariff Commission, showing the delivered cost and selling price of American and imported cement at seaboard cities.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered .

1930 CO~ T RESSIO ... .,. ~ L RE ORD-SEN ' TE 2741 TI1e scltNlul~ of prices l. n~ follow._ :

Proclucttotl coats oJ cement oj Amaica11 auct Belgian mills

Tho The Thi differ-

Actu- prl p~ice It is en co alloss of B 1- IS lower be-

per gian lower than tw en cement than domes- Belgl-

at o.lonc- the do- tic nand .\meri-the! Ide m tic costs can de-prices dock price by livered at by costs

nre

3 ' 6 8

Ctnl! Ctnt& Ctnf& Ctnl! Doston ----.---- ---- 47 23 70 $1.77 78 N w York ••••••••• 9 33 42 1. 77 55 I'hlltvl !phi ------- I!) 45 36 1. 77 4!) Chl\rl Lon ••••••••• 61 30 91 1. 73 93 Oahl" ton .••••••••• 6 28 34 1.83 38 B mnout. •••••••• 25 9 34 1.83 45 I)ortl tlll, rl"t··--- 45 30 75 L93 2 Oroys liar or,

w b ____________ 26 2.1).) 56 82 1. 93 04 R lttl ---·--------- 20 2.15 25 51 1. 93 73

1 Profit.

in-

obj ction, it i o

f ~elllnA pric · i a follow · : N t price prr barrcZ f. o. b., indudinu baua

SEAllOARD Bt•ston. , Ia~:~~---------------------------------------------­·~ Ynrk-------------------------------------------------

?i!!m~~I?'~~~-:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ •urt lntul, r ,., -------------------------------------------­

lS 11 t t 1 . \Yn. h---------------------------------------------J:->LA.·o

•) 0 2:23 2.35 2.25 2.05 2. 15 2.30 2.40

h•Yt'lanil. Ohlo------------------------------------------- 2. 44 1'11 I hnr •h. Pn-------------------------------------------- 2. 24 ('hie· \~o. 111---------------------------------------------- 2. 25 Indlnnupollll, Jnd------------------------------------------ 2.39 l'Nirin. 111 ------------------------------------------------ 2. 42

tt:nj~~l~· ~fl~u:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:~! 1\Ir. Icl\IA TER. In thrr word~. c~ment wa selling in the

city r 'hi 'lH~o at • 2.2j n barrel and accot·ding to the Tariff ormuiR ·ion s tlgm·cs if th y w re lo. ina 0 cent · a barr l in

th city or cw ·orl th y would l1av b o lo ·ing 7 c n in th city of .,hicn,.,.o. It i · w •ll known that the United tates

t cl rporatlon hn mills lo at d in the vicinity of Chicaooo, thnt the freight rnt ... upon cern nt in tho. mill to the city oi

l\icag ar nlmo~· t itl ntically the sam a· the freight rate from th I.chi,.,.h Vnllcy di ·trict to the city of New York. En~l'youc know. that tlwre i;; not n barrel of foreien em nt wlJich ·an r •ach Chicago, that th • "{;nit d tutes teel Cor-

poration In the city of Chicaao is ab olntely free and untram­meled ~·o far a· for i •n com }etition i.· concern d. " ... e know that the United State· Steel Corporation i · one of the most ~upel'l>ly managed bu ine ·. in ·titution'"' in the ountry. We know that it dominat •s and control the pric s of every ·om­ntodity which it manufacture.. We lmow that no competitot· dare CrO! s it pathway bccan if it did it would be immediat •ly de ·tr yc<l. 'Ye know that the United Stnte~ teel orpora­tion i not in lm ine. ·.· for its health, hut it is in llu...:in s: for JH'Ofit, and ther fot·e when it old cement in hi ·aooo at '2.25 a barr 1 it was making a profit and that profit went to :--well the million of dollar~ of diYidend which are annually paid to its ~to ·kholder~ .

Aaain, the Tari1! Commission inform u. that on thi::: ame day, in the city of Philadelphia, the Lehigh Valley ~o. was selling cement at 2.35 a barrel. The Lehigh Yalley o. was complaining that it wa · Leing cru:hed by for •ign com petit ion, ~Y cement which wa. beina :hipped in from Belgium, and yet 10 that .. arne da)' c<>ment wa selling in the city of hi ·ago for .;2.25 a barrel, 10 cents le:~ per barrel than it wa · being solei for in the city of PhilatlelJ)hia. And yet in hicago, a I :--nid before, there i no for ien competition; not a barr 1 of foreian cement can penetrate to the city of hicago.

In the city of New York in 102 there were imported 21:2.000 barrel of cement. The city of New York conswn npproxi­mately 12,000,000 barrel of cern nt annually, and all tllo .. e 12.000.000 barrel of ement were . up}Hi d by American pro­ducer~, with the exception of 212,00 barreL- which were ~~rt~ •

According to the Tariff ommi .. ~ion's figure , the B lgian manufacturer" would have 55 cent~ per barrel advantaae in price laid down in the city of New York over American pro­ducer ; that i~, tho were the figur ~. of cour e, which were uhmitted by the manufacturer them eh·e., but not verified by

the Tariff Commi ion. The cost of B l""ian c ment laid down in the city of New York wa. .,1.77 per barrel, a cording to this tntement, and the lling price i 2.23. Thu , according to the~e figure , the Belgian produc r are given an advantag of 46 cent" per barrel, a , ngtlinst a lo~s of 7 cent per barr 1 for th American producer. mmon en e dictate · that if the B 1-gian producers had an advantage of 46 cent a barrel on ement laid clown in the city of New York, they would have floodetl the city of New York with their cem<'nt; but what is their 1' ·orcl of achievement? They were able to ell but 212, 00 barrt>l.· of cement. ..:::0 far a the record.~ are concern d, Belgian protlueet·s w re overwhelminaly cru~h d in their competition with dome:-otic cement. Struggle a they migllt, out of 12,000,000 barrel they ould ell only 212,000 barrel.·. '.rhe Belgian manufacturer. in

the city of New York did not even make back-door competition with the American producer . All the Belgian manufactur rs obtained in the city of New York wer . imply the crumb that fell from the ta.bl of the American produc r .

When the Tariff om mi.. ion, through it report, tell u ~ that the dome~ tic producer w re lo ing 9 c nt · a barr 1 in the •ity of New York when c ment wa sellina at 2.23 a barrel, the Department of Labor infotm u' thnt for that year the l!l29 averagf' elling price, or the whol ale price of cement in the United tate~, wa: .;1.65 a barrel. Of c ur ·e, that figure in­cluded the profit· on tbiL commodity ..

'l'hen we have the Lelli"ll Valley di. trict hipping it ·em nt to New York; adding to $1.65 about a 40-ccnt fr ight rate would bring a price at N w York of $2.0~. whi h includetl a profit, and yet they old it at 2.23, bowing that, in addition to the re!!lllar whole~ale profit, they had an advantage ther of 18 cent a barrel.

However, there is trong r evidence of a still more convincing nature which ari ·es to refute and confound the cement indu:try in it · greedy but bold effort to b fuddle the mind of Members of ongre in reference to thi que ·tion. The fir.,t funda­mental que tion i : I the price of cement to-day above normal? The an wer to that que tion i" of primary and determinative importance in deciding whether special aid hould be giv u to this industry by further increasing the price to the con urn r.

The wholesale price of cement before the war in 1913 was 1.005 per barrel of 376 pounds. In April and May, 1020, the

prke was $1.65 a barrel, showing an increase of 67 per cent oYer pre-war price .

The average increa. e of prices in general during that period a officially a certained and reported by the D partm nt of Labor in 'Vbolesale Pric s, April, 1020, was 38.7 per cent as repr ented by the Commodity Index of Whole~ale Price . Hence, to have kept pace with the general rise in the 1 Yel of prices cement would now be entitled to a pl'ice of 1.394 or 26 cents less per barrel. At $1.65 per barrel it"' price is 1 .4 per cent excessiYe as determined by the general rise in the level of price

2742 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 It is generally accepted as sound economics that if the prices

-of articles are above normal governmental agencies should not · be employed further to increase the price, and if more factors of competition are tending to reduce prices to normal the Govern­ment should not take any action to discourage or prevent their operation. As to the cement situation, let us apply the universal rules of economists which have been applied in practically all of the civilized countries of the world in determining "prices, indexes," and so forth.

Mr. President, at this point I ask unanimous consent to insert in the RECORD a table showing the index prices of various produets manufactured in the United States by commodity groups showing the prices from the year 1913 to the :rear 1928, coYering all commodities, farm products, foods, hides and leather products, textile products, fuel and lighting, metals and metal products, building products, chemicals and drugs, house furnish­ing goods, and miscellaneous.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The table referred to is as follows:

Hides All com- Farm Foods and Textile Fuel and modities products leather products lighting

products ---------------

1913 __ ---------------- 100.0 100.0 100. 0 100.0 100.0 100. 0 1914 .. ------ - --------- 97.6 99.6 100.8 104.1 95.3 92. 3 1915 __ __ - -- --- - --- - - -- 99.6 100.0 101.9 110.9 94.4 84. 5 1916. ----- - ----------- 122.5 118. 0 117. 9 137.2 122.9 121.2 1917-- ---- - --------- -· 168.3 180. 4 162.8 181.8 172.3 171.9 1918. --- - ------- ------ 188.1 207.0 185.5 184.6 239. 4 178.1 1919 . . - · ---------·-- -- 198.6 220.4 201.7 255.7 236.1 170.1 1920 .. ---------· ------ 221.2 210.8 214.0 251.5 287.6 267.0 1921. _____ ------------ 139.8 123.6 141.1 160.4 164.9 157.9 1922 .. ---- -· ----- · ---- 138.5 131.2 136.4 153.6 174.9 175.0 1923 .. --------- · ------ 144. 1 137.9 144. 4 153.0 194.2 158.7 1924 ___ ----------- - --- 140.5 139.9 141.7 148.9 186.2 150.1 1925 ____________ -- -- -- 148.3 153.6 156.1 154.8 189.0 157.4 1926 .. -· -------------- 143.3 139.9 155.8 146.8 174.5 163.1 1927--------- --------- 136.7 139.0 150.3 158.4 167.0 141.1 1928 .• -------- - ------- 140.0 148.1 157.3 178.7 168. 1 135.1

1929 January ___ ___ -------- 139.3 148.1 153.9 166.8 168.2 134.6 February ____ ________ 138.5 147.4 152.8 160.1 167.7 132.6 March ______ ---· _____ 139.7 149.8 152.8 159.0 167.7 131.5 ApriL __ ___ __ _______ _ 138.7 146.7 152.2 158.4 166. 7 131.5

All com- Metals I B 'ld. Chern- House Miscel-and metal Ul mg icals and furnish-modi ties products products drugs inggoods laneous ---

1913 ... - - - - ----------- 100.0 100. 0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1914.-- - ----.- - --- - - -- 97.6 88.3 92.9 101.5 100.9 96.6 1915 . .. - - - ----------- - 99.6 95.0 94. 4 139.7 99.5 93.3 1916.- - --------------- 122.5 128.3 119.2 200.4 109.1 108.1 1917-- - --------------- 168.3 165.9 155.6 205.7 131.8 131.1 1918. --- --- -- - -------- 188.1 150.3 173.9 227.3 165. 7 144.4 1919 . . -- -------------- 198.6 144.2 203.9 195.8 188. 1 149.4 1920. - -- - - ------------ 221.2 164.5 264.7 205.4 251.9 179. 9 1921..- --------------- 139.8 129. 4 171.8 143.4 200.7 117.3 1922 ____ ____ _________ - 138.5 113.3 171.6 125.1 183. 8 99.7 f923 . - - --------------- 144.1 120. 4 191.7 126.1 193.4 106.1 1924 __ - --------------- 140.5 117.1 180.4 123.3 186.3 102.6 1925 . .. ------------- - - 148.3 113. 7 179.4 126.9 183. 1 122.3 1926. ----------------- 143.3 110.1 176.4 124. 7 177.6 107.4 1927-- - -- ------------- 136.7 108.1 164.6 120.4 174.4 96.6 1928 __________ __ ------ 140.0 109.9 165.3 119.1 173.0 89.2

1929 January ___ _________ __ 139.3 114.1 170.4 119.6 171.6 86.5 February ___ --------- 138.5 115.0 172.0 119.8 171.6 86.4 March.------------ -- 139.7 117.2 172. 5 119.2 171.4 85.9 ApriL __ __ -- --------- - 138.7 117. 2 172.7 118.3 171.8 85. 1

Mr. McMASTER. Taking these 10 groups, which, for all practical purposes, include all commerce, there was an average increase in price from 1913 of 38.7 per cent. At this point I wish to insert in the RECORD a table showing a comparison of each group price in 1913 ·and each group price in 1929 on the percentage basis.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, permission is granted.

The table referred to is as follows :

April In-l------,,..----l c(~:e Weight

1913 1929 cent) - - - ---------

All commodities. ___ ------------------------------ 100 138.7 38.7 100.00 Miscellaneous. ________ ___________________________ _ 100 85.1 6. 35 Metals and metal products ___________ ____________ _ 100 117.2 17.2 13. 17 100 118.3 18.3 1. 76 100 131.5 31.5 16. 18 100 146.7 46.7 21.25 ~~:~i~~lfi:g~~~~============================== Farm products . . ____ _____________________________ _

Foods _______ __ ______ ____ -------------------------- 100 1&2. 2 52.2 22.53 Ilides and leather products _______________________ _ 100 158.4 58.4 3. 65 Textiles. ___ ___ ______ ____ -- __ ------_----------- __ -- 100 166.7 66.7 7. 96

100 171.8 71.8 1. 93 100 172.7 72.7 5.18

House furnishing goods. ____ ----------------------Building products .. . ------------------------------

Mr. McMASTER. The outstanding facts shown by these tables are that the price of building products, which include cement, is 72.7 per cent higher than in 1913 and the percentage of increase over 1913 is greater than that of any other com­modity group. Cement, together with textiles, broke all ex­tremes in 1913 and continues to this day to be an extreme illus­tration of the abnormality of prices introduced by the World War. In view of the fact that the average price of all com­modities is 38.7 per cent higher to-day than in 1913 and that the price of cement is 67 per cent in excess of the pre-war price, is there anyone bold enough to desire to take governmental a c­tion further to increase the index price of cement? As a matter of fact, in justice to the consumer, every reasonable effort should be employed to reduce the prices of cement rather· than to in­crease the prices of that commodity.

The following table was obtained from Mr. Lewis, a former member of the Tariff Commission, and one who is known as a thorough student of the tariff question. Many of the facts which I now desire to state were obtained directly from Mr. Lewis, and in certain instances I quote him verbatim. I wish at this point t~ insert the table in the RECORD. It gives a comparison of the number of establishments, number of salaried employees, number of wage earners, horsepower, salaries, wages, cost of materials, supplies, cost of fuel and power, and other informa­tion. ' affording a complete picture of the situation.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the table will be printed in the RECORD.

The table is as follows :

(1) Number establishments . ____ ___ ------------------------(2) Number salaried employees. _------------ -- -- ----= ------(3) Number wage earners _______________ __ _____ ___________ _ (4) Total (2) and (3)--------------------------- - ---------- ­(5) Horsepower_------------------------------- __ --------- -(6) Salaries __ _____________________________ __________ _______ _ (7) Wages. _____ ____ __________________________________ --- __ _

(8) Total (6) and (7) .. - ---- -- ------------------------------(9) Cost of materials, supplies, etc _________________________ _ (10) Cost of fuel and power. _______________________________ _ (11) Total (9) and (10) _ -----------------------------------­(12) Value of products: Cement _____ __________________________ $80,533,203

Other products______ __________________ 21, 317,277

1914 1927

133 4, 032

27,916 31, 948

490, 402 $6,065, 341 18, 192, 282 24,257,623 31, 715, 136 30, 271, 662 51,987,000

161 6, 556

36,322 42,884

1, 069, 390 $16, 331, 585 53, 110, 745 69,442,331 59, 495, 154 60, 516,871

120, 012, 025

TotaL __ ___ --------- c---------------------------- 101, 850, 480 293, 565, 293 (13) Value added by manufacture __________________________ 49, 769, 646 173, 553, 268 (14) Production (unit)_---- ---- -- - - ------------ ------------ 87, 257,552 175, 330, 201 (15) Total of costs reported=plus (11)--- - ---------------- - - 76,244,623 189,454, 356 (16) CapitaL .. --- - ---------- -- -- -------- ------------------ 243,485,046 '271, 269,259

I 1919.

Mr. McMASTER. From the foregoing information certain de­ductions can be made as to the relative increase in basic costs as compared to the relative increase in price since 1914.

At this point, Mr. President, I wish to insert in the RECORD a table containing those deductions. It will be interesting to state two or three of them here. First, the percentage to value of products of costs for wages, salaries, material, fuel , and power in 1914 was 74.86, while in 1927 it was 64.5, a decrease of 13.8 per cent, which, of course, is in favor of the capital inyest­ment.

Second, the percentage of "value of products" available for dividends, and so forth, including depreciation, advertising, mis­cellaneous, and so forth, in 1914 was 25.14, while in 1927 it was 35.5. So if the table is examined all of the figures are in favor of the yea'r 1928, so far as profit in the industry is concerned. I ask that the entire table may be inserted in the RECORD at this point.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The table is as follows :

I Increase 1914 1927 (+)or

decrease (-)

(1) Percentage to value of products of costs for Per rent wages, salaries, material, fuel, and power in_ 74.86 64.5 -13.8

(2) Percentage of value of products available for dividends, etc., insurance, depreciation, advertising, miscellaneous, remaining after deducting (~plus (11) from (12) in each year_ 25.14 35.5 +41.0

(3) Productive e ciency of employees: Number of barrels (units) per employee. (Note f) .: ___ 3, 414 4. 241 +24. 2

(4) Value of product, per employee. _______________ $3, 188 $6,846 +114.8 (5) Value added (to material) by manufacture, per

+160.0 employee. ________ -_- - -----_----------_------ 1, 557 4, 047

1030 00.;.. ... RE SIO.;..:r L RECORD-SE .... :r.A.TE 2743 Mr. Mt. 1A TI~R. Mr. Pre ·ident, the immen e expansion of

th iududry, pby leal and financial, i quite apparent upon an JnHp 'li n of th ubo e figure:':. It will be noted that effective­n '~ ot the employ e ba • incr a d from an annual product of 3,4H barr 1 tu 1914 to 4,241 barrels in 1927, nn increa e of 24 p r nt; that th "value add d to the mnterinl by manufac­ture " per mployee increa cd from 1,557 to $4,047, an increa e of 100 p r c nt, hil the total incr asc in value of the product p r mploy wns 114. p r cent.

'l'urniu:r to Ut p •rc •ntuge of wage~, alarie , raw material, nn<l IWW< r to "valu of product," we have the following com­

nrison · bet we n t11e years 1911 and 1927: ] lr:it, p 'l'C ntag of : larics and wa•re. to "value of product"

in lOH ·ns 2:t 2; in 1924 it wn 23.<H. Th p rccntnge of mn t rial and fn 1 to "value of product"

in 1914 wn r.:t.04 p r nt; while in 1027 it wa 40. 6 per cent. 'rh p r entage of both f tb above to the" value of pr duct"

in 1914 wa~ 74. 0, and in 1027, 64.50. It wlll b obf-l rv d that ·a~ . and salarie con titut d 23.8

p r · nt or th .. value of product·" in 1914, and 23.6 per cent in 1027, nnd that th mnterlal, fuel, and power co t percentage, w1Ji 'h wn Gl p r ent in 1914, drop 1 to 40.8 p r cent in 1927. 'VIlg und nlari . · per nta • r •main d virtually the arne, whll material , fu 1, and p w r co t increa ed by 29 per cent compar •d with tbe valu of product .

ro · co.'l d cren~cd fr m 74.7 p r cent to 64.5 per cent, a d lin in th prop rtion of nb ut 43 p r cent.

PRICES TESTED BY COST

t· fi cting on the n rmn lity or r nsonabl ne of the l>re ·ent f cem ut, tb dnta pr . nt d arc now applied:

Per e<>nt Inr.t'<'lt c ot ~<'nl'ral prJ • , April, 192 , ov r 1913--------------- 3 . 7 InN n.· in prt<' of hnrr 1 CC'm nt in 1929 over 1913------------ 67. 0 Incr n c in c t , 1914-1 27, for wn • , salarl , material, fuel,

nnd power----------------------------------------------- 5LO Th .:-; tandard · in applicati n to the y ar 1929 give the fol­

lowillg pri Jmllcntlons a to a r a onabl price for cement: Jlrl<• or bnrrt"l c m nt, 1914------------------------------- 0. 927 I<:qulvnh•nt price, 102 , commodity index price level ____________ 1. 394 A ·t uul 11rlc p r bnrr •1, 102!) ________________________________ 1. 650 rrlc . t 2 , b d on co . t tncren e of 51 p r cent in 1927 over

1!)14--------------------------------------------------- 1. 390 lmpol'l , nv rn • • prlc of 102 ------------------------------ 1. 341

It 1. vid nt that tb prt> ent price of cement 1 exce. ive. At 1.6ll, 1t · • cls both th comm n level of prices and tb c st tnn lnrd by 26 nt11.

'l'hls is the p •ulial' c incld nc : In view of the fact that th pr . ent pl'i<•e of c ment ex cd the commodity index price and al th pri e at which it hould be according to the actual d du tion of th 1lgur whi h hnv been placed in the REOORD, it nlmo ·t c rr pond to the 31 cen a barrel that the cement manufnctur r ar now a. king for cement. In other word , what doe' that prop .•al mean? It means that the manufac­tur rs in tlH' int rlor f the country are able to maintain, be­caus& f for ign comp titlon, that 26-cent exc s price of

m nt; nnd ac ~rdingly the manufactur rs located in the con t citi ar n 1 ing for the duty, not to protect their industry but to prot ct that exc :-' price of cem nt. It is a strange coin­Cidcnc of tl~ure .

•urtll r e nminntion of the evidence will reveal that abnor­mal 1n<le. pric s of cement are not occasioned by unu nal or

traordinary onomic condition but are occa ioned by the abnormal ability of the em nt Trust of the United States to control and eli t t prices and to plunder the public.

It 1 trn tltnt a c urt d ckion ab olved certain cement com­pnnie ft'om t h hn rg of pric 1l ing; but. neverthele , that d . •L.:;ion, no doubt, wns r nder d b cnu e of the inability of the court to n tch the <'l'ment pr due rs red-banded in the net of price fi In~. The . tuhborn nnd irrefutable fact remains that in any giv n point in the United tat s cement may be pur­chased lai<l down nt that point !rom a mill located 100 miles .away or 2 mil . away or 300 miles away at identically the

·• fl: me price. All rnnuuf ctur r of cement have a uniform price at n giv n p int. l!~r igbt rates or di lance do not matter.

Th r may b tho.· who are so un ophi Ucated a to believe thnt that price is th re·ult of the 01 eration of onomic law. It i tru thnt n finely woven philo ophy bas been pun in con­nedion with the 11rice or cement to the e. tent thnt any tand­at·diz d arti ·le of like quality or ize naturally gra-vitates to­war n ornmon prl •e 1 vel. In rtain instance that i true; but if that .. nme nll were to be applied to petroleum products t11at lriclC!'<' nt dr am would be quickly dispelled. There is JWOhnhly n mor tan<lnrdiz d product in the world thnn gaso­liu . In fa t, n arly <'V ry tate in the Union has law p ci­:tyiug what gruuc of gasolin shall be ld as n tandard quality;

and yet the fact remains that when oil prouuction in this coun· try was at its peak, when oil was flowing out of the ground so fast that the great oil companies ere frantically trying to provid reservoirs for the storage of the oil in order to save it, the price of gasoline to the con umer remained the same, and in one or two periods of o-verproduction the price of gasoline to the ' con umer actually increa ed ; ·yet, of cour e, yon never coul(l . "'O into a coutt and pro-ve that the price of ga oline was fixed. 1

Y t every boolboy in America know thnt the ~.:: tandard Oil Co. of New Jer ey and the old sub. idiaries of the Standard Oil Co. of New Jer~ey, which have parceled out the United State., dominate and dictate the price of oil in tho ·e r gion where th e variou companie operate.

Cement price· are fixed behind clo-ed doors, regardle~ of any court decision ; and tbc;e abnormal price-index value of cement to-clay are not due to xtraordinary conditions in indu try but ar due to the price-fixing ability of the Cement Tru t in squeezing abnormal profits from the public ; and tbe final proof of that tatement i borne out by the actual financial condition of the principal companie:; producing cement in the United States.

PROFITS IN THE CEME.'T l."DCSTRY

The manufacture of cement is not an unprofitable indn~try. Moody's Index report for 192 giye a li t of 45 dome tic man­ufacturing e tabli ·hments of sufficient importance to attract the attention of general investor . Ten of the ·e give no data upon which conclu. ion may be formed, while 35 companies are more or le · completely reported. Two how a lo .

Mr. TYDI~G . Mr. Pr~ident will the enator yield? The PRE IDI~G OFFICER. Doe the enator from outh

Dakota yield to the Senator from Maryland? Mr. McMA TER. I do. Mr. TYDIXG . Will the Senator state whether or not hi

r .. earcll upon tbi que tion ha. shown that the State along the Atlantic eaboard are in any different category thnn the States of the :Middle West and the far "?est?

Mr. McMASTER. I think, as I stated before in the di cu .. -ion, it i an agreed fact that the only comp tition in the United

States in cement, where the competition i felt, is actually at the eaboard citie . That statement is true.

Mr. TYDI G . Mr. Pr ·ident~ will the Senator yield !or another que lion?

Mr. MeliA TER. Ye . Mr. TYDir·G . I have been told, and I think the figur s

them elves show, that the seaboard State do have a problem which is not present all over the country. I hould like t sny to the Senator that there are cement plants in my tate which have been in the band of recei-vers for ome time. What might be their problem perhaps would not be the problem for the whole -country; yet th y do have an exceptional case, in that they come into competition more than the ""est with this imported cement.

Mr. McMASTER. As stated in the di cu ion previou ly on the 1loor, the grrot cement plant in the northea t part of the country, manufacturing 52,000,000 barrels of cement, have com­p('tition of 700,000 barr 1 in the citi of Philadelphia, _ ·ew York, nnd Bo ton. Tbat is, out of 52,000,000 barrel. of produc­tion 700,000 barrel of c ment enter tho ports. Then again, in reply to the enator from Maryland, I will say that often­times there are many problems that confront an industry in addition to foreitm competition. I shall show later on in the di en sion that in the case of a great cement company in this country, that ha been a. king for an increa e in the tariff on cement, its difficultie w re not due to foreim competition, but they were dne to the mismanag ment of the company it., If, through combinations and the organizntion of oth r companie. and through watered tock. There are many, many factors that may enter into the trials and tribulations of an industry that have nothing whate-ver to do with foreign competition.

Now, let u take up the earnings. As I tat d at the tart, of the e 35 companie reporting there

were 2 which actually reported a lo. s--1 occa. ioned by Mis-1 sippi flood ; the other plant was a new plant that had ju..;t

begun operations. There were 10 plant t11at reported only -very moderate profits. Then, in addition to that, there were 10 other plant , or 28 per cent of the total number reporting, which made profits fully up to what bu:-;ine.., inve. ·tment is u nally exp ted to ~how; but 14 of the 35 companies, or 40 per cent of the entire number, showed unu ual and extraordinary profit .

The Lehi b Portland ement o. began bu ine"s in 1 97. It now conducts 20 plants, lo at d in Pennsyl-vania, New York, nnd everal other States, a very large proportion 1 ein~ near tide­

water and meeting any foreign competition pr<'. ented. Thi company has paid dividend.· conUnuulls l'in<·e 1 !)9, rnn"ing o ·ten.ibly usually from 3 to G per c nt, although from 1914 to

2744 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 1927, 7 per cent dividends were paid and in 1916, 8 per cent. The amounts are ostensible only. The holder of an original 100 shares in this corporation has been continuously receiving stock dividends, increasing his holdings substantially. In .1900 a stock dividend of 128 per cent was distributed; the next year, another 58 per cent; and at various intervals since further divi­dends ranging from 20 to 100 per cent, the last, in 1928, being the creation of a 7 per cent preferred cumulative-stock issue of $22,517,400 in shares having a par value of $100 each, all of which were distributed as a division of profits to the holders of the capital stock of the corporation. The company's divi­dend on common stock in 1928 was 5 per cent and the dividend for the first six months of 1929 was at an annual rate of 5 per cent.

Mr. BLACK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield there? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from South

Dakota yield to the Senator from Alabama? Mr. McMASTER. Yes. Mr. BLACK. The Senator gave the amount of that stock

dividend, but he did not give the percentage. Mr. McMASTER. 'l'he percentage was 100 per cent. This

was a preferred-stock dividend. 1\fr. BLACK. In 1928? Mr. McMASTER. In 1928. Mr. NORRIS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? 'l'he PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from South

Dakota yield to the Senator from Nebraska? I Mr. McMASTER. Yes.

Mr. NORRIS. I wonder if the Senator offhand, without making a computation, ~an tell us the total amount of stock diddends for this one company? .

1 Mr. McMASTER. I have not a pencil to make certain deduc­' tions, but I will make a statement in the RECORD which will

I forcefully indicate how prosperous this industry has been on the investment of a stipulated amount.

An original investment of $5,000 in 1899 in Lehigh common has grown, through stock dividends during the 29 years of the company's history, to 3,243 shares of common and 1, 711 shares of 7 per cent cumulative preferred. In other words, during this period a total of $256,236.60 in cash dividends and stock divi­dends has been distributed to the owner of the original $5,000 worth of stock

Mr. BLACK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for another question?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from South Dakota further yield to the Senator from Alabama?

Mr. McMASTER. Yes. Mr. BLACK. Does that statement show the stock dividends

of the entire consolidated Lehigh cori1panies, or do they do busi­ness as subsidiaries? I am not familiar with that.

Mr. McMASTER. 'The statement I am giving here is ·a state­ment made by a brokerage firm in New York, Frank H. Crehore & Co. It is the consolidated statement. There is no question about that. That is, all companies or interests owned by the Lehigh Portland Cement Co., of course, would be incorporated in that statement.

Mr . .BLACK. That would include all mines, wherever they were located I assume.

Mr. McMASTER. Yes; although the financial statement that I have does not indicate that they own any mines. They may own them; I do not know; but there is no evidence that I have been able to obtain that shows that they own mines.

At this point, Mr. President, I wish to insert in the RECORD a statement of the stock dividends on both the common and the preferred stock which have been issued by the Lehigh Portland Cement Co. since its organization.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it ~s so ordered.

The matter referred to is as follows: DIVIDEND RECORD 01r LEHIGH PORTLAND CEl\IENT CO.

Since November 26, 1897, the date when the Lehigh Portland Cement Co. was incorporated, cash dividends have been paid on the common stock as follows :

Year

1899_---------- ------------------- -· ------------------------1900_-------- --·-- -- -- --------------------------------------190L _______ ----- ___ -· __________________________ ---- ___ --· __

1902_--. ---- -· ------------------ ---·-- ----------------------1903_- -- -· ------------------------------------------ -· ------1904---. ------------------ -·-- -·-- ---.----------------------Hl05 _______ --------------- __ -- _ ----------- ---·- -------------1901L _____________________________________________ ------ ___ _

1907--------------------------------------------------------1908 __ - ------------- -· --------------------------------------

Amount paid

$21,000.00 48,000.00 80,250.00

111,420.00 111,810.00 112,200.00 112,200.00 226,806.00 216,952.50 303,270.00

Rate

Per cent 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 3 4

Year

1909 _______________________________________________________ _

~~~~ = = = = = = = = == == = = = == = = = == = = = = = = = = ==== == = = == = = = = = = == = == = = === 1912 _______________________________________________________ _

1927 = === :: =~ :::::::::::: == ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Amount paid

$475, 905. 00 475,905.00 475,905. 00 250,850.25 545,871.00 596,415.00 596,571.00 795,428.00 873,615.00 582,360.00 873,615.00 873,615.00 873,615.00 873,615.00

1, 137,251.25 1, 565, 718. 00 1, 573, 968. ()() 1, 576, 218. 00 1, 576, 218. 00

Rate

Per cent 6 6 6 3 6 6 6 8 6 4 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7

Since incorporation the company has paid the following dividends in common stock on its common stock : '

Year

1900-----------------------------------------1901_- ---------------------------------------1902_----------------------------------------1906_- ---------------------------------------1907-----------------------------------------

~~g= == ==~===== ==== ======== == = == === ==== ====== 1923_-- --------------------------------------

Amount paid ~moun.t ll~id in common m cash l!llleu Rate

stock of f~~;;~nal

$448, 000. 00 463,000.00 432,000.00

1, 870, 000. 00 2, 276, 900. ()() 4, 852, 200. 00 2, 938, 800. 00 4, 467,250.00

$1,825.00 3,250. ()() 7, 787.50

Per cent 128

58 32

100 60 50 20 25

Since incorporation the company has paid the following dividends in pre.ferred stock on its common stock : Year 1928:

Amount paid in preferred stock ___________________ $22, 517, 400 Rate----------------------------------PeT cent__ 100

An original investment in 1899 of $5,000 for 100 shares of Lehigh common has grown through stock dividends during the 29 years of the company's history to 3,423 shares of common and 1,711 shares of 7 per cent cumulative preferred.

During this period a total of $256,236.60 in cash dividends has been distributed to the holder of this original investment.

Mr. McMASTER. Further to illustrate and to emphasize their earnings, an original $100 of stock has increased to $3,420 in common stock, plus $3,420 in 7 per cent cumulative preferred stock; and the dividends at present on the common are 6 per cent, with a 1 per cent extra dividend, or actually, on the basis of the original stork issued, $478.80 a year on each original $100 investment, or nearly 479 per cent.

In 1905 the Santa Cr'uz Portland Cement Co. began business on the Pacific coast. It has a daily output capacity of 8,000 barrels, or 2,900,000 barrels a year. The holder of $1,000 of its original stock now has $1,130 in stock through stock dividends upon which he is receiving 10 per cent a year. The lowest mar~ ket quotations for 1927 make his holdings worth $1,847.44. The company's capital stock sold at from 86lh to 100 in 1928, which, on a par value of $50 basis, would make an original investment of $1,000 worth $2,249 at the lowest quotation during 1928.

My particular reason for mentioning those two companies is that one is in direct competition with foreign cement on the east coast, and the other is in direct competition with foreign cement on the west coast.

Now, we will take an interior company, although it has plants in the East, too. In 1916 the Sandusky Cement Co., on the Great Lakes, took over a business that had been established in 1892. It has an annual capacity of 5,000,000 barrels with plants in Ohio, Illinois, and Pennsylvania. It owns a s~all railroad and other pieces of property. This company has not issued any statement since 1924. It then had stock at $100 par value which was paying 12 per cent in dividends. In 1925 a 100 pel: cent stock dividend was distributed aggregating $3,673,200. The following month the entire capital stock of the Toledo, Angola & Western Railway, a company property, was distributed to the shareholders $4.08 for each share of their cement stock at par. In December of the same year a further dividend of $4 a share in first mortgage securities of the railroad was distributed and the cash dividend was reduced from $12 to $11. In 1926 and 1927, 12 per cent was paid on this company's stock. An origi­nal $100 share in this company is now worth in the market $250, and is drawing the equivalent of 24 per cent in dividends. In addition, it~ owner has received $8.16 in railroad stock and

1!l30 O .. TGRES IO .... I.J RECORD-SE~TATE 2745 nml railway bond, o thnt l1is

1-' 'l'liJil ATLAS I' ltTLAND . Jil:\J'E~T CO.

(lncorporatt d 1 flO)

• 'hiCt 1 !l , the y nr when the Atln l'ortlnnd enwnt 1uc·nrpornt <1, en b dlvld<>nd bnvc be n pnid on the common follnws:

].

) IJOO ---- ----------------------- •• --- ••••• 100 I ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 2 ••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••.

1\lO:l •••••• ••••••••• ----- •• --- •• ---------­l\J 1.-•••• ----- •• -- ••• --- .• -- •• ---.----- . lll ~ -- -------· ----.- -· --- ---·-· ---.-----. l\100 --- ••• ----.----. ·-· ··-· ••••••••• ··-·-

1{107- ----------- --- •• - ••• -- -· •••••••••••• J{l~ --- ••• --.- ·- ··---- -- ••• ------ •• - •• - -­Jil()IJ _-- •• -- ••• ··-- ---- ••• ·-. -------.--- •• 11110 ---- ••• - -------------.------ •••• ····-

)!110 1\111) •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• JOIU (' pt mb rand Dec miJ r) ••••••••• 1020-- •• -- •••••••• --- •••• -------- •••••••• J(J21 .-•• -- -------.--- ••• -------- ••••••••• l (J\!2. - - •• -- •• ------------------ ••• ----- •• 1023------------- ••.••••. ---- ...... -•.•.. 1!124 -·······-··········--------·········

1\IU ' •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 !126.-- ----- ••• ------.----- •••••••• --- ••• 1' Zl . ---···-············-················

Amount paid Annual rate

2, 502 • per rent (2 quar­te. ).

1 , 08( 4 per cent.--------202. M2 ••.•. do __ _________ _ 00, 000 4 per cent and 6

per c nt e tra. 243, 00 4 per cent ________ _ 291, ~9 ••.•• do._----------340,000 ..... do ___________ _ 425,000 4 per cent and 1

per cent extra. r. 0, 000 per cent. ••••.••• GbO, 000 ..... do •.•••.•••.•. f-1«), 000 •••.• do ___ ________ _ 4:!0, 000 per cent (to May

1).

41,271

41,271 60,000 60,000

63, eoo 85,000 85,000 85,000

5,000 5.000

85,000 110,000

(1) -n . ooo ·s·ii&-ciini::::::::: ·--iio:ooo 550,000 ••.•. do............ 110,000

Q, 000 ( per cent......... 165 000 6CO, 000 •.•.• do............ 1611,000 702,000 ..... do............ 1 ,000

1, 3<H, 00 4 per cent and 2 217, 00 per cent.

1, 650, 234 ' 2................. 2.5, 117 2, 475,351 $2 and $1 extra.... b2.'i, 117 2, 475,351 ....• do............ 25, 117

15,GM,633

1 Common dlvld ud 'U!-!pen<led on account or f'XI~Iulitur~'S for plant t~ustom1.

• ln , 1025, pnr value of common <·han 'l'd f1·om 100 to no pnr on bnlil. or 3 n ·w liar ·s ror 1 bn of old. Stock dlvtd nd in ommun on ·ommou to ·k: I)er ent

1 H~O ---------------------------------------·--------- fiO 19~2------------------------------------------------- 20 l ~3 ------------------------------------------------ 10 102J ·----------------------------------------------- 12~

'l'hrough stock dlvld nd o.nd suu~crlptlon nn original in\c tment of 100 sbnre: In 1 l) bas grown to uppro lmutely !!,000 hure , and bn r celvcd $:~7,t)31.07 in cu ·h income.

Qunrt rly pr •ferr d dlvld nd · ot the rat or per cent annually 111\\' b en paid r gularly lucc incorporation.

Dlvid •nels bnve be n palo regulnrly during 192 .

fr. t , fA TER. Thot is om finnncial rl'(:Ord for a com­}lany th t f 1 tllnt it d ·Ire further }lrote ·tion t th ex-11 m: r tll on.·um rs of tb country.

A lllOm •nt ago om ne said that po . ihly the condition of c·ou1pdit lou on th coast w r ditfer nt from tho..:e in the in­t rl t\ nnd thnt u ac ·ount of that ·ome ·ompnni may be in 11nuudt\l difli ·nlty. ~'hnt. is tru , nn<l I under ·tand that the 1' •Hu~:lv ni.- i ie ment orporation ha. compla!nc<l that it is unuble to am diviu nus be au: of foreign competition, that the company 1 b ing cru.-hed, and therefor they bave ·ompl in d bitt rly U"ain t the prevailing ondition of fr

trude lu cem •nt. llow v r, wh n w go into the hil-'tory of the 1' nnsylvnnin- i ie ement Corpor< lion, w fiucl reYenled there th • r lt.'On why they are having fiuuncinl diliicultie , and that

tOJ'Y will rev al that tho. c uilllculti did not ari!4e from f reign om petition. ~'he 1' unsylvanin-Dixie C ment Corporation in 1926 was

formed throug-h a on. olidation of fout· c mpnnies-tbe Dexter :Portland Cement o., the Clinch1leld Portland Cement Co., the

Dixie Portland Cement Co., antl tbe rennsyl•anin Cement o. After those compuni s were or"'tillize<.l anu placed under one managem~nt, they had a total annual capacity of 10,000,000 barr •l·. Let U' now g t nt the comparative 'tatemenL.

The comparative property Talues in dollar~ per barrel ca­pacity for the renns~·Ivnn ·a-Di ·ie Cern nt orporation, which 1 th new organization, wa 2.60 per barrel, but the average of tb indiYidual prede<'es.=or ompanies was only 1.31 a bar­r 1. .bowing an increa e unller con. olidation of 1.20.

1.'he huildiua,;:, equipm ·nt, and o forth, of the P nn. slnmia­DL·ie rporation were carried on the boo!·- under the new org-anization at 26,000,000, but all of the similar property, that i~ lnnd and building., under the old companie , was can·ied on their book at 13, 00,000, repre ·enting an increa ·e of over $12, , in that item alone.

G in r further into th analysi ~ of tbeir comparative :::tnt -ment., w find that thi n wly organiz d company, the Pennsyl­vania-Dixie ement Corporation, on J'uly 31, 19~6. had current a·· of 7,799,000, and the tatement of the predece~sor · wa practically the am . ~-\ I tated bef re, the building~ and tlle land account of the new company wa 26,0 ,000. and that of t.b old company wn only ,.13,000,000.

Again, we go to the item of firt mortgage bond. . The :fir t mortgage bond· of the newly organized company put in their appearance in the amount of 13,000.00 , while the old <·om­panie had bond of the value of 2,200,000.

The preferred tock of the newly or:rnnizetl company wa. 13,000. 0, while the old companie-.: all combined had pr ferrcd

stock of only 1,951,000. I will a~k that the d tailed ~tatement in regard to the r­

ganizntion of tbi company be in~erted in the RECORD. Th re being no objection the tatement wa · ordered to be

printed in the REcoRD, n · follow~ :

PENN YLYA,'JA-DlJ IE CEME.'T ORPORATJON

(Incorporated eptember 16, 1926, under tbe law of Delaware) Acquir <1 tbe plant , otber n · til, and n :sumed the llabilitie · of Dext r

Portland Cement Co., Clinchfit>ld Portland Cement Co., Dixie Portland Cement o., Pennsylvania 'ement o.

n ported productive capacity of all tbe"e plants, 10,000,000 bnrrels. Oomparatit•e prope,·ty ,;aluation ~n dollars pc1· barreL capacity

Penn yh'ania-Dixle ement Corporation ______________ _ 2. tiO 1. 31 Predece ·~·or companle (noted abuYe) -----------------

-----~

lncrea ·e under con. olldation (per barrel)------------- 1. 20 =====

P un:ylvanin-Dixie Cement Corporatlon-l:md, buildin~., rquipiuent--------------------------------------- 26,053,446.00

Prrclcc .··or compnni!' (noted nboy )-land, bulldin~!'l, NJUipment------------------------ --------------- 13, 1~0.~0i.30

Incl'NI e uuder con:olidation ________________________ 12, noa. :!!lS. G1

Prtbli lied tatem nt howino ·increa ea property t·aluation and capitali­zatiol

A ETS

Tou 1 curr<>nt a& ets (includes miscellaneous). _____ _ ProJ)<'rti . : fncludc lnnd, building:.<, and quip.

mcnt. ...... -···-- ----····· ·····-· ----······ ··-··· Totnln. cts ........................ ......... .

UABIUTIES A.'D CAPITAL

Total current liabilitic (includes r scrv ·>---------BONDED J 'Dl!BTEDXE

Fir.-t-mortgage bonds .• _ ...••.•..••........ -------­

CAPITAL AND SURPLUS

Preferred stock .••••..••..••••.•.•.....••....•..••.. Comn1on stock .••••••.•••••••.•.•.•••••••..•••.•... Surplus ..••........ ·····--····-····-·····-····-····

Totalliabilities and capital .................. .

Pennsylvania­Dixie Cement Corporation, July 31, 1926

Predeces or compani

notau abo,·e, July 31, 1926

r----------1----------I==== I==~~::::::

~---------1-----------

1\Ir. :McM.A TEU. I hn'\'e here n conden .. ed stat ment of the fir t companie ·-t11nt L, in their original condition-and n c:on­den. ed ·tutement of the new company in reference to the itt'ms which I baye named.

Mr. NORRIS. Mr. Pre .. id nt, will the euator yield? Mr. McMA TER. I yield. Mr. NORRIS. A I under tand the enator, this company·.­

statistics, which the euntor ha. just been nnalyzin", show that this company, which claim to be in bad. financial condition, at the time of the con~oli<l;ation of the various elements of which

2746 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 31 it is composed injected somewhere between $25,000,000 and $40,000,000 worth of water, upon which they have not been able to make returns. I s that about the fact?

Mr. McMASTER. The Senator is quite correct in his state­ment. There was injected at the time of the organization of this new company anywhere from $25,000,000 to $35,000,000 of watered stock, and it is upon that watered stock that they are now asking for a duty of 31 cents a barrel, which they will take from the consumers of the United States in order to pay divi­dends on that stock to their stockholders.

Mr. KEAN. Mr. President, the Senator has just referred to $35,000,000 of stock. I would like to know whether he could tell me the value before the consolidation of the companies were put together?

Mr. McMASTER. I have quoted the values alternately. I have given the balance sheet of the four companies as individual companies and then I ha~ given the balance sheet of the new company as it was organized, in the same year, one day after the organization.

Mr. KEAN. Of course, it makes no difference whether the value of the company after it was organized was $2.50 a barrel or $1.25 a barrel, as far as earning on the value of the company is concerned.

Mr. McMASTER. The Senator is quite correct in that state­ment, but if stocks have been watered and preferred bonds have been issued, necessarily there must be increased earnings to pay dividends upon the common stock as well as the preferred stock and the bonds. ·

Mr. NORRIS. Mr. President, as I remember the figures, the mortgage bonds before the consolidation amounted to something over $2,000,000, and immediately after the companies consoli­dated the mortgage bonds amounted to something over $13,000,-000. That is only one item, however.

Mr. McMASTER. An $11,000,000 increase in that item alone. Mr. NORRIS. Yes. . Mr. McMASTER. The figures I submitted a while ago as to

the Lehigh Portland Cement Co. were, of course, the figures for 1928, and I have a clipping from the Public Ledger under date of September 12, 1929, which states :

LEHIGH PORTLAND CEMENT CO.

After provision for Federal income tax and depreciation, the net earnings of Lehigh Portland Cement Co. available for dividends on out­standing preferred and common stock for the year ended August 31, 1929, were $3,676,051.48. After deduction of preferred dividends paid there was available for dividends on issued common stock $2,167,854.23, or $4.81 per share.

What does that statement of earnings mean? It means that just a year before this company declared a stock dividend on preferred stock of $22,000,000, increasing that by doubling the amount, and yet under the earnings of 1929 they were able to set aside a reserve to pay the 7 per cent dividends upon that stock, .and then, in addition to that, on all of the common stock there were dividends available amounting to $4.81 a share.

It occurs to me that the Lehigh Portland Cement Co., which complains of competition in Philadelphia, has certainly had a marvelous financial record, so far .as dividend earnings are con­cerned ; and so far as these companies are concerned there is no need of an increase in the tariff of 31 cents a barrel upon cement.

Mr. President, the major imports of cement into this country come from the little country of Belgium. Seventy-four per cent of imports into this country originate in Belgium. We sell to Belgium annually $111,000,000 worth of manufactured and agri­cultural prod~ts. We buy from Belgium about $75,000,000 worth of manufactured and agricultural products.

At this point I want to give the specific figures in reference to the pilrchases of Belgium from the United States. They buy from the farmers of the United States $25,720,000 worth of wheat, $16,885,000 worth of cotton; and I particularly want the southern Senators to bear that item in mind, that they purchase from us $16,885,000 worth of cotton.

Gasoline and kerosene, $5,000,000; crude copper, $4,000,000; automobiles and parts, $4,000,000. Yet, Mr. President, not only are we attempting in the tariff bill to put an embargo upon cement, to take from the little country of Belgium the business of exporting cement to the United States, but also we propose to put an embargo upon brick and practically an embargo upon plate glass which is imported from Belgmm, too. We may con­tinue that policy indefinitely. It may be that we feel we can continue to sell to Belgium $111,000,000 worth of products annually and then put an embargo upon the small amount of imports which she sends to the United States; but if we con­tinue that policy we will ruin the Belgian market for American farm products.

COST OF LABOR

There is one item in connection with cement production which I desire to emphasize. We are often told, of course, that we need the tariff on account of low wages in Europe. Low wages do not necessarily mean low cost of production. I wish to call attention to the fact that it is only a short· time ago that the president of the United States Steel Corporation said, "We can compete with European countries, not in spit e of high wages but because of high wages." "Cheap foreign labor" does not presume low cost of production. This appears precisely in the case of cement, comparing British and American wage costs, the Belgian not being available. This low productivity running with low wages is found to be true in other industries as well.

While wages in the United States are much higher than in European countries, the productivity per worker is so much higher in the United States that the labor cost in this country is much less.

The following quantities were produced for each $100 paid out for labor :

Bituminous coaL---------------- __ ------------------tons __ ~~~en t: -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-:_ -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ -_-?ba~~~~ = = Pig iron ______________ ---------- ___ ------- ________ __ --tons __ Paper and paper board _________________________ short tons __ Wall paper __ -------------------------------------- --do __ --

United Great States, 1925 Britain,1925

63 15,839

300 81 6 2

33 8, 559

233 41 6 2

The value produced for each $100 .thus paid out for labor also corresponds with the above.

The following values were produced for each $100 paid out for labor:

Bakery products_---_--------------------------------------Confectionery __ ____________ __ ------_------------------- _---Cotton spinning and weaYing ______ ~------------ - ----------Woolen and worsted goods---------------------------------Cordage, twine, etc ___ -------------------------------------Knit goods ______ -------------------------------------------Boots and shoes ___ ---------------------------_---_--------_

United England, States, 1925 1924

$273.00 315. 00 180. 00 172.00 232.00 211.00 197.00

$268.00 270.00 175.00 192.00 182.00 194. 00 166.00

Workers can not in the long run receive as wage earners more than is produced. Wages must be paid out of the product, and if the natural production or income is small, wages will be small. It is because product per wage earner, 4,206 barrels per em­ployee in the United States, 1,540 barrels per employee in Eng­land, is high here and low there, that the wages differ. The wages are not as high here as the product. It is high prices then, not high wages, which the tariff sales tax is intended to pro­tect.

Thus the story of the cement industry reveals its constantly increasing production, the continuity of its prosperity over a number of years, its ability, through its price-fixing system, to maintain abnormal index prices over 1913, greater than any other commodity, and in view of the fact that the United States Steel, whose financial power is almost unlimited, that the Le­high Valley Co., with all of its powerful resources, a tendency of the future for the control of the cement industry to become more and more concentrated into the hands of the few but pow­erful-in the light of this evidence, it will be apparent to the average mind that if a duty of 31 cents per barrel is levied upon cement that eventually cement will be increased throughout the country by 31 cents per barrel, laying a burden of $53,000,000 upon the consumers of this country, and that, combined with the fact that the purchase of cement is charged to capital and must bear additional interest charges which will make the an­nual costs to the country of more than $100,000,000, one-third of which will be levied upon the farmers of the country, this is no time or place to levy a duty of 31 cents per barrel upon cement.

As I have said, the major imports of cement come from Belgium. A total of 75.7 per cent of importations of cement in the year 1928 came from that country. The total exports of all commodities to the United States by Belgium in 1928 were $75,-000,000. Our exports to Belgium amount to $111.000,000, so that our sales to this country exceeded by $36,000,000 tb.e amount which we purchased from Belgium, or 50 per cent.

We have already restricted Belgium's sale of plate glass in this country and are seeking to further restrict her sales of cement, when the trade balance in cur favor is 50 per cent. A yery serious condition arises when we attempt further to in.

1930 CO.r GRE SIO .... AL RECORD-SENATE 2747 cr a .·e the balance of trade in our favor, for mo t assuredly from •v •ry cc nomic standpoint further re. triclion of Belgium imports will curtail the pur ha.Jng power of Belgium for Amer­ican ommodlti s.

Dut·iu:; the year of 1928 the farm r of thi country sold to n lgium 2.1,000, 0 worth of wheat and 16,000,000 worth of c tt n, b ides mnny million dollar ' worth of manufactured product .

1 r 'Si<.l •nt noo"Vcr, with a k n di c rnm nt o! sound economic in our trade relation with foreign nations, . ays:

In d terminlog chang a ln our turHT, we mu t not fall to take Into ac ount the broad inter . ts or the country a a whole and such lntere ts 1ndu<l our trncle r •l tions with other countl'ics. It is obvlou ly unwl e protl'ctlon which sncTific • the gr uter amount of employment in ex­ports to gutn a 1 Stler amount Of employment from imports.

Both political pnrtl have championed the interests of the fanncl'. . Belgium 1 • a lib ral purchaser of the farm products of Am rica, uno now c me the proposal to r trict importations of c rucnt fr m Belgium, a well a brick and plate gla , which 1nevitnbly will tend to d . troy the purchasing power of Belgium p ople for American farm product. . Not only that but it will tend lo cr ate within their heart and mind" rc entment and hatr d of everything American, wheth r produced in the factory or on the farm. , and we propo e to take thi action for the sole purpose of furth r nrichiug the cement industry which has

xpnn<.l d and u v .lop d by leap and bow1ds and which throu..,.h­out th y Ill'S bn. njoy d great prosperity. This propo~nl mc1u1 · we ore king to drive away a mo t liberal purcba er of :farm product , tbu~ limiting the market for those products and at t11 • ame time impo ·ing in the end further burdens upon the fnrm populntion in it purcba es of cem nt.

El,.bt n per cent of nll of the cement products in the country 1 n umed on the farm ; from 20 to 25 per cent is con umed in tll nstructlon of the highways, and one-third of the high­way bill is p· id by the farmer~ .

\Vitb th index price of c mcnt abnormally high O"Ver the price of 1913, it is pr sumptiou ness on the part of the cement indu. tt·y to se k furl her advauta"'e nt the expen. e of agriculture, aud gt· •d and s lfkhne . ought to l1av some limits, and t11e J>r po~nl to inaugur. te a policy which will further increase the

. 'hi of em nt to the farmct· , b . ides tending to destroy the D I Inn mark t for farm products, i a propo itlon that is indt'f n. ible und unwarrant d.

Mr. fOOT. Ir. I)r . ident, I de. ire to a k the enator from out h akotn if he will oot agree to an amendment to bi

am ndwent carryin" Ule .following provision of the law as it i to-day?-

Provldcd, That it any country, d<>pendcncy, province, or other subdi­vision of governm nt imposes a duty on such cement imported from the Unllcd tates, an qual <luty shall be lmpo ed upon such cement coming into tll Unit d Stnte from uch country, dependency, province, or other subdivision ot go> rnrn nt.

Tbnt i the countervailing duty. 1\!r. BARKLEY. I under. tund that it is, but it is really not

eff ctiv , becnu. more than 9 per cent of all the c ment coming into th Unltcd State comes in fr e of duty, nod b ides that the nute has uniformly stricken out the countervailing duties up to <lnte in all or the provl ion . I e no reason why we hould vary the practice at tl1Is time In thi ca e.

Mr. S fO T. I am going to ask that the countervailing duties be r in tnt d.

Mr. B I KLEY. I und r· tand, but the S nate ha eliminated th m altog th r, where we have voted on them so far, and I do not . · why we shoul<l make an e. ceptlon in the en e of cement.

Mr. M T. D . the enator pref r that I bould offer it when I offer the others?

Ir. B Rl LIJJY. I think it would be better, becnu~ e if the nnt d ir to chnnge it attitnd u to countervailing duties

ultog lh r, let the cbnnge be applicable to all of them and not Jn thi en nlone.

Mr. MO T. Then, I wlth<.lraw my request. Mr. BAIU~LEY. I wlll say to the S nator that If the Senate

s fit to change its attitude, I will have no objection. SPECULATIVE PRICES OF COTTON

Ir. IIARUI '. Mt·. Pr ident, this morning I and other eon­tors from the cotton-growing tate criticiz d the tatement which 'hnirman L gge bad mad whi h r <.Juced the value of cotton in the hand of outhern farmers by me 50,000,0 0. I t I •phon <1 Mr. Legge to know if the statem nt was true, and I hav his rcvly, whl h I will a k to ha"Ve read, together with th statement of tbe press scrvlc is~ued yester<.Jay afternoon. I wish to ay tbnt th tatement was unwi ~ , was uncalled for, o.nd tb tIt cost us millions of dollars even in the way be put it.

The VICE PRE !DENT. Without objection, the clerk will read, as requested.

The 1 gi lative clerk read as follows:

Hon. WILLI.AM J. lliRRis,

United States Senate.

FEDERAL FAllll BOABD,

W~llington, Janua'1f 31, 1930.

DEAR SE. ·ATOR HARRIS : The only foundation for reports carried In pre dl patches of ye. terday afternoon was an answer that I ronde to a question or a new ·paper man at an informal conference I held with pre representatives.

I was al'ked as to the truth of a published report to the effect that the American Cotton Cooperative As oclation was going to buy several million buies of cotton at from $20 to 25 a bale above the market price. My reply was that the Farm Board was not going to buy any cotton; that the cotton as ociation was going to be ready In a !ew days to deal in cotton, but that I did not think it would do anything as !ooll b as that. Later in the day on being informed that reports of what I said apparently had resulted in a further decline in cotton price. , the inclosed press release was issued, making clear that the board is not buying cotton or any other commodity at any price, nnd that its cotton-loan policy is unchanged.

Yours very truly, AL!:X. LEGGD,

01,airman Federal Farm Board.

[Federal Farm Board, Washington, D. C., Thursday, January 30, 1930. For immediate release. Press service, No. 1-19]

Commenting on pre s dispatches from New Orleans to the effect that cotton prices have declined '12 a bale there a a result of a statement by him to the etfect that the Federal Fat·m Board will not buy cotlon at prices higher than the market, Chairman Legge said :

" Reports of what the bonrd contemplates doing evidently have been garbled. The board is not going to buy cotton or any other commodity at any price.

" There has been no change whatever in the board's cotton-loan policy. The board will continue to make supplemental commodity ad­vances to the cotton cooperative a sociations on the cotton-loan value basis announced October 21, 1!>29, and has no intention of calling loans nlready made to these a sociations."

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Pr i<.lent, I w~h to say that in the law cr >ating the Farm Board I wa the author of an amendment, which wa adopted, mnking it a penal offense for anyone in the D partment of Agriculture or any other department of the Government to give out any tatcment predicting that cotton will go down in price. Even with that provi. ion in the law creating the Farm Board here i the chairman of that board who make a statement which costs the cotton farmer of the

uth, on the amount of cotton on band to-day, 50,000,000; in oth >r word , the amount of cotton on band to-day is worth r:o,ooo. 00 Ie s to-day than it was before. 1.'be r ason why I offered sucll an amendment to the bill

when it was pending in the Senate to mnke it an offense for anyone to give out such a statement wa · because about three years ago a repre entative of the Agricultural Department gave out a statement which reduced the value of cotton on hand in one day $60,000,000, and in ubout three weeks it went down over

100,000,000. But even with that provision a part of .the Jaw, here i a statement by Chairman Legge which reduces the value of cotton $50,000,000. Anyone familiar with conditions that affect the price of cotton would have known such stat ment would have enabled the speculators to depress the price of cotton. The cotton grow rs of th outh have ufi'cred finan­cially heavy los s the past few years, and this last statem ut of hairman Legae is a great blow to my ectio~.

Mr. CONNALLY. Mr. Pre ident, the Senator from Georgia [Mr. HARRIS] bas jut cau ed to be read a letter from l\Ir. Le"'ge, chairman of the Federal Farm Board, purporting to ex­plain an interview which he gave to the new ·paper men on ;yel'terday, which Mr. Le"'ge admits ha cau ed a considerable de­cline in the price of cotton. I hope the Ilntience of the Senate will not be seriou ly abru ed if we pause a moment in the con­sideration of the tariff bill, over which we l1ave been fighting now for almo t a year to con ume a few moments--and I ..,hall not detain the nate long-with reference to the conditions existing in the cotton market-the market for one of our great stapl product .

\Ve have been devoting almo t a year to the con~ideratiou of the tariff-to do what? Theoretically to aid the producers of America, tlle men who toil, the men who work. If anywh re there can be gathered together a group of a half dozen men who want a tarff on ·orne specific article, in some ca es only pro­duced by two or three factorie , the Senate of the United tutcs pau in its con ideration of international relations and matters of war and peace to con ·ume 11 month before the committees of Congress and before the sessions of the House aud the Sen-

2748 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 ate to exercise the power of the Government to prize up the prices which shall be charged the consumers of America in order to benefit some particular industry.

This session of Congress was called for two purposes : One for the relief of agricultur'e and the other for a limited revision of the tariff. We were told that the administration bill for farm relief was to be a panacea for all of the ills of the farmer. A Federal Farm Board has been appointed; it has now been

· functioning theoretically since last August. Wheat is a great political crop; wheat is grown out in the Middle West and the Northwest, in a section where political unrest frequently is manifest. The Federal Farm Board long since organized a stabilization corporation for the wheat growers. Representa­tives of the cotton States appeared before that board shortly after its organization, and from time to time until the present moment, urging that the board take steps to organize a stabili­zation corporation for the purpose of engaging in stabilization operations in the cotton market. At the present moment the board announces that, under its sponsorship, there has now been undertaken the organization, through cooperatives, of a cor­poration, with a $30,000,000 capital, a capital sufficient to stabilize the cotton market for about a second, if it were in a condition where stabilization operations were undertaken. The board has been, according to my view, quite indifferent to conditions in the cotton market practically since its organization.

On yesterday the press carried a news item to the effect that the price of cotton broke to a new low level. Why? Largely because of a statement purporting to have been made by Mr. Legge, chairman of the board. I quote from last night's Asso­etated Press dispatch, as follows:

A dispatch from Washington quoting Chairman Legge, of the Farm Board, as saying that, while the cotton-marketing agency would deal in cotton, it did not contemplate buying on a large scale or at any foolish prices, attracted wide attention and seemed to have had a bearish effect in the late selling.

Mr. President, whatever may . emanate from the Federal Farm Board with reference to the cotton market necessarily is going to be interpreted either as a bullish influence or as a bearish influence, dep€nding upon the tenor of the statement.

Mr. Legge, in his letter to the Senator from Georgia [Mr. HARRIS], disavows any desire that his statement should have that effect, but what does the chairman admit? The chairman of the Federal Farm Board admits that he held an informal conference with newspaper men. i wonder what is the di:l.fer­ence between an informal conference and a formal conference with newspaper men? It is presumed that the informal con­ference is one held orally, and that a formal conference is one where a statement would be given out in writing: I suggest to the chairman of the Farm Board that in the case of a market as delicate and as sensitive as is the cotton market he ought not to give out oral statements that would be subject to dispute as to what took place in those conferences. ·

Mr. Legge admits in his letter that the publication of his supposed interview did have the effect of bearing the cotton market, to the injury of every cotton producer in the United States. What does he say? He says:

I was asked as to the truth of a published report to the etrect that the American Cotton Cooperative Association was going to buy several million bales of cotton at from $20 to $25 a bale above the market price. My reply was that the Farm Board was not going to buy any cotton-

In the first place, the chairman was not asked whether · the Farm Board was going to buy any cotton, but he was asked as to whether the cooperative corporation, still in process of formation, was going to buy any cotton, and his reply was:

That the Farm Board was not going to buy any cotton; that the association was going to be ready in a few days to deal in cotton, but that I did not think it would do anything as foolish as that.

The implication which the reporter no doubt drew from Chairman Legge's statement was that the cooperative corpora­tion was not going to buy any cotton above the quoted price.

Mr. President, if the Farm Board is to continue to operate only through the cooperative associations which deal in cotton, which compose only about from 4 to 5 per cent of the entire number of cotton producers in the United States, the ordinary cotton producer will receive practically no benefit from the existence and activities of the Federal Farm Board. The only solution of the problem from the standpoint of the cotton pro­ducer is that the Federal Farm Board shall aid in the organi­zation of a cotton stabilization corporation, and put at the disposal of that corporation sufficient capital whereby it may be able to step in the market in a situation similar to that which exists to-day and buy sufficient cotton on the open market

to stem the tide of decline until cotton reacts at a fair market figure.

Mr. President, the 1929 cotton crop amounted to about 14,347,000 bales; the annual domestic consumption of cotton is about 15,300,000 bales. In other words, instead of there really being a surplus of cotton production in the United States, last year the United States produced less cotton than our domestic consumption. Yet in the face of that fact, on account of the indifference of the Federal Farm Board, on account of its timidity to do anything to stabilize the market in behalf of the producers, cotton prices have declined steadily until at the present time they are the lowest, I believe, of the season.

Mr. President, when I voted for the aclminstration farm relief bill I was laboring under the impression that the Federal Farm Board was to be the spokesman and representative of the pro­ducers of agricultural commodities; I thought that the Farm Board and the representative of the cotton industry on that board and the representative of the wheat industry and the representatives of other agricultural classifications were to assume somewhat the attitude of attorneys for the growers, in order that the growers might have an opportunity to receive ~ fair price for their products based upon the standards of pro­duction and consumption ; but, so far as cotton is concerned, the Farm Board, instead of being the attorney for the cotton farmer, has rushed into court and pleaded him guilty on each occasion when the opportunity has presented.

I want to do justice to the Farm Board, and say that it did, however, render the cotton producers some service when it adopted the loan-policy basis of 16 cents per pound ; but the Federal Farm Loan Board renders the cotton producer a dis­service when the chairman of the board informally gives pub­licity to statements which can be . distorted, which are probably garbled in the interest of those who are seeking to bear the cotton market and force it to new low levels.

Mr. President, this situation illustrates the necessity for the Senate, when the tariff bill goes to conference, to stand fast in behalf of the agricultural debenture plan now a part of the tariff measure.

Let us suppose for a moment that we now had the debenture plan in operation. There comes a rapid decline, an unauthorized decline. Mr. Legge admits that the decline in the cotton market is unauthorized. He says his statement was the cause of the decline. Mr. President, if the mere statement of the Federal Farm Board chairman can cause a decline of from $1.50 to $2 in the market price of every bale of cotton in the land, not based upon economic conditions, .not based upon supply, not based upon the volume of demand, it only illustrates the fact that the market is a delicate and a critical market. If that is true, we have now presented one of those emergencies of which we have heard so much in this Chamber and the other one fo"r the past eight years--emergencies caused by artificial conditions wherein the Government ought to exert its power to aid the con­sumer. If to-day we had the debenture system in operation, Mr. Legge, recognizing the injury that his statement has caused to the cotton industry, could immediately put on the debenture in the case of cotton, and raise the price back 2 cents a pound, or $10 a bale.

Mr. SMITH. Mr. President--The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Texas yield

to the Senator from South Carolina? Mr. CONNALLY. I do. Mr. SMITH. I desire to suggest to the Senator that he is

giving one side of a statement of a fact which I am sure he would like to balance. If the chai"rman of the F arm Board has the power through an unfortunate statement to bear the market, a fortunate statement or a friendly statement as to their deter­mination to aid cotton would by the same token put it up.

Mr. CONNALLY. I will say in response to the suggestion of the Senator from South Carolina that of course he is correct in that. Mr. Legge, as chairman of the Farm Board, knows what the production of cotton was in 1929. He knows that we pro­duced less than we consumed here at home ; and if he is the business man that he is reputed to be, he knows that when we are producing less cotton than we consume in the domestic market the price ought not continually to decline.

Mr. BRATTON. Mr. President--The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Texas yield

to the Senator from New Mexico? Mr. CONNALLY. I do. Mr. BRATTON. As I understand, the statement of Mr. Legge

was purely prophetic in character, and was altogether dicta. I wonder why he made such a statement.

Mr. CONNALLY. I am wondering, too, I wi1l say to the Senator from New Mexico. According to Chairman Legge, the only reason why he made it was that some enterprising and inquisitive newspaper man rushed up to Mr. Legge and asked

1930 CO ... GRESSIO ... :rAL RECORD-BE.._ .A.TE 2749

the

that th Farm ?

t. tement of Chairnwn

I wn n kl'd n · to the tt·utb ot n publi. h c1 report to the ctrect that the m t•lcnn otton oop ratlve Association wn going to buy several mllllon bnlr ot cotton at from 20 to 25 a bale above the m:ukct prlc . My r ply wn tbnt the Fnrm Board wa. not going to buy any cotton-that the otton a . ocintlon was going to be ready in a few days to d nl In colton, but that I did not think 1t would do anything ns f oll:h ns thnt.

· A fooli h ~ · wlmt? Why, to buy cotton. The con truction wa., how v t', to buy cotton at from -0 to .. 25 a bale more thnn the mnt·ket price.

Tll n he • ays : Lat r tn tlle day, on b lug informed that reports ot what I said ·

nppnrnntly hnd r ultcd in n further decltne fn cotton prices, the 1n­c1o. <'d pt• r 1 11 c wns 1. ued making clear that tlle board f not buying cotton or any other commodity at any price and that its cotton­lo n policy is unchnn ed.

Evi<l ntly what he wa intendin..,. to convey to the public was that th boat'd wn not buying cotton at all; but the con truc­tlon that wu put on it wa. that tile b ar<l was not buying c tton at from ~0 to $25 a bale more than the market price, and that that was til fooli h thing to which he referred, when

Yi<l ntly l1e meant that the foolish thing was that they would buy ·otton nt any price.

Does not the Senator think that is a reasonable construction? Mr. ONNALIJY. I will answer the Senator. Mr. WATSON. I think perhaps it would have been better it

the statement bad not been made at all. Mr. CONNALLY. Evidently the Senator from Indiana de-­

fended many ca es before he came to this body. He draws a di tinction there that would do credit to any criminal lawyer undertaking to extricate from the clutches of t11e law one who had been . hown by the State's evidence to be in a very bad fix.

:\h·. ... liTH. Ir. Pre ident, if the enator from Texas will allow me, I do not think the enator from Indiana ha anal:\'zed thi tatement corr ctly. ·

He a~ I-s the enator from Texa if the Farm Board ba · any power under the lnw to buy cotton. The Farm Board has not; but it has the p wer to e:-:;tahli h corporation that can buy cotton, and can buy wheat, and they baYe bought wheat; and the natural inference would be that this corporation to whieh the enator from Te.·a~ r fers will, when proP< rly organized, be in the market.

.1.Tow, notic the language of the chairman of the board. Ju~t notice how he u ·es interchangeably the word ·• Furm noard " and "cooperati>e as ociation ":

I wa r.:;ked a to the truth or a publi bed r port to the effect that the Americnn Cotton Cooperath·e A ociation was going to buy .. ev •ral million bales of cotton at from 20 to $2;) a bale above the marl•et price.

Mark you, he aid be wa. n ked ~P cifically if the cooperative a ·~ociation wn going to buy cotton at that price.

My reply was that the Farm Board was not going to buy any cotton-

Mark you, the fir t qu tion was whether the cooperative was goin to buy any. Why hould he go out of the way to create confu •ion by ...,aying that the Farm Board wa not aoing to buy any cotton at any price? Now, mark the very next entence:

Th t the cotton a sociatlon was going to be ready In a few dny to lll'al In cotton-

Making the implicati«>n that, when set up, it could do the thing· that be denied were going to be done by the Farm noard, which he bad confu~ed with the cotton a ociation.

But that r did not think It ould do anything as fooll 11 n that.

A. fooli.·h as what? Go in and buy cotton? They were not going to buy any--or ao in and l.my cotton at from 20 to 2u a hale above tbe market price? .

There i not a man h re who knows what ha.· alPauy oc­curred who i not a'''are that 'enator from the ..... ew Englantl • tate~, one nt len. t, and another one from Delaware, at d two or thr e from the South, a~ked the board to do that identical thing.

I hope the enator from Texas will bear with me a minute. The Farm Board ha not the power to buy cotton, but it has the power to make a loan ba i , which it ex rci...,ed in Novemb r. We went to the board and a. k d them, in view of the fact that t1 tatemeut from the board would largely tabli h the mark t price, whether they would not raL it to 2 cent a pound. I am here to te tify that memb r..., of the board im1 re . ·ed me a beina willing to do that, and not only willing, but that they :aw the r a onablene~s of the request.

I do not waut to take the en a tor from Texa~ off hi, fept; but any man who i familiar with what ha tran. ·pi red knn\Y. the power the board have to mal(e a loan ba. i which would be equivalent to a sales price, and that they have exm· Led it, nml e ·erci ·ed it in such a manner-not intentionally on their part­but in 'Uch a manner that it ha re~ulted in ab..:olutely brcnk­ing the market and demoralizing the whole set-up of th or­dinary American market. During my own time to-day I hall ' quote from the fact and let any man draw his conclu -ion that the Farm Board's attitude in fixing the lG-cent basi. for y­inch staple had the re .. ult-not intentional on their part-but bad the result of playing into the hands of the bNn., d moraliz­in,., the cotton market and reducing the plice until this morn­tog New York, I believe, quoted May cotton at 15. , the low ~t price since the enormous crop of 1926.

:Mr. \VAT SO .. T. Mr. President, may I nn wer the Senator's que tion?

Ir. CONNALLY. The Senator a ked me one, and I thought I had better answer it. But I will yield to the Senator, tbou<•h I want to fini h as oon as pos ible.

Mr. W AT ON. That is all right. Mr. C01 TNALLY. Let me .,ay to the Senator from Indiana,

if he i intere.ted in an answer, the Senator from· Indiana propounded an inquiry a to whether or not it wa not rea!"Oll· able to assume that Mr. Legge ~aid thut it would be fooli ' h to

2750 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 buy cotton at any price rather than to buy at $20 to $25 above the market. Is that right?

Mr. WATSON. Yes. Mr. CONNALLY. I think the most charitable view of the

matter is to take the other view, that Mr. Legge said that, of course, if either the board or the corporation went into the market to buy cotton, it would be, according to his view, foolish to buy it at $20 to $25 above the market price. I assume that that is what he meant.

Of course, we all know that technically the Farm Board can not buy any cotton or wheat, but it is purely technical that they can not do it, because the very law under which they are operating provides that while the board itself technically can not deal in commodities, it shall be a part of the duty of the board-nobody else can do it-to set up stabilization corpora­tions through the cooperatives, and that the Federal board shall loan to the cooperatives sufficient capital out of the Treasury to finance these stabilization corporations. What for? For ornamental purposes? It is for the purpose of going into the market and buying and selling in times of emergency, because that is the only time when the Federal Government is supposed to intrude itself into private business.

Let me say to the Senator from Indiana that the public does not distinguish between the action of the F'arm BoaFd and the action of its servant, the stabilization corporation, which is to be organized and operated by the cooperatives. They do not make that fine-drawn distinction. The newspaper men may know the difference, and doubtless do, the operators on the Ne\Y York Cotton Exchange may know the distinction, but the public at large does not draw the distinction between the Fed­eral Farm Board and its subsidiary, I might say, the cotton or the ·wheat stabilization corporation. Anybody knows that the attitude of the Farm Board is going to react on the cotton stabilizat:on corporation. If the Farm Board says, "No; we are not going to buy any cotton or permit any cotton to be bought, we are not going to buy any corn or wheat," we know that is going to be the policy of the stabilization corporation. So when Mr. Legge makes the statement that the Farm Board is not going to buy any cotton at all, it is interpreted everywhere on earth that there will not be any operations in cotton either by the Farm Board or by this corporation which is under the Farm Board.

'\Vhat does he say? He says in his amendment, in his cor­rected statement, later on in the day:

The board is not going to buy cotton or any other commodity at any price.

His amendment simply reiterates and reaffirms the harmful element that was contained in his first statement. He said:

My reply was that the Farm Board was not going to buy any cotton, that the cotton association was going to be ready in a few days to deal in cotton, but that I' did not think it would do anything as foolish as that.

The S€nator from Indiana says that when he said it was not going to do anything as foolish as that, the implication was that the stabilization corporation was not going to do anything as foolish as buy cotton.

Mr. McNARY. Mr. President--The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Texas yield

to the Senator from Oregon? Mr. CONNALLY. I yield. Mr. McNARY. I am very much interested in the able dis­

cussion of the Senator. Does he mean to imply that the cotton cooperative association about which he speaks is a stabiliza­tion corporation organized under the provisions of the marketing act of 1929?

Mr. CONNALLY. I will say to the Senator that I have not seen the articles of incorporation of this new corporation, but I understand it is formed by a lot of cotton cooperatives as a supercooperative to handle their crop, and technically I do not suppose it complies with the requirements of the act as to cot­ton stabilization corporations.

Mr.-McNARY. Will the Senator permit me to make a short· observation along that line?

Mr. CONNALLY. I am glad to yield. Mr. McNARY. I have been in a meeting of the Committee

on Al)propriati<.:•.ns all morning, and I came into the Chamber just in time to hear the remarks of the distinguished leader on this side, the Senator from Indiana [Mr. WATSON]. I think his observations are not only technically correct but actually correct, so far as the proper interpretation to be placed upon the remarks of Chairman Legge are concerned. _

This is not a stabilization corporation; it is merely an asso­ciation of cooperative organizations. There is only one in­strumentality under the provisions of the marketing act that

can acquire a surplus, and that is a stabilization corporation. It is not an instrumentality created by the act, but by the cooperative associations. They must first select an advisory commodity committee to consist of seven. After that is done that committee asks for a charter for a stabilization corpora­tion, which has a dual function-first, of acting as a marketing agent, and, second, of acting as a purchasing and storing agency.

What Mr. Legge evidently told the newspaper boys-and un­questionably they made a true report of the interview-was that he did not expect the board to acquire any cotton, because the board has no authority so to do; secondly, that this mere cooperative- organization would not be foolish enough to buy any cotton, because they did not have the power so to do.

That is the only interpretation to be placed on that article. If the Senator please, while I do not want to intrude upon his time, I am making no defense of this situation, because I know the cotton market is a delicate institution. I know a few things said by a man high in power may cause an injury to the market, a decline in the price of cotton, which is all too low to-day.

As one more or less conversant with this marketing act, I have thought that there sh-Juld be a stabilization corporation to function under the act. In many statements I made on the floor of the Senate during the consideration of that great measure I repeated it as my opinion that the heart of the whole act was the stabilization corporation, and if I had one word of criticism to be made of the board it would be that it

· has not conformed to the marketing act of 1929 and established a stabilization corporation which might have done the thing which probably should be done to-day and which, in my opinion, Mr. Legge thought ought to be done.

I simply wanted to make that observation as to the interpre-tation of the act.

lVIr. McKELLAR. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? He. CONNALLY. I yield. Mr. McKELLAR. Regardless of the technicality, regardless

of whether they have done too much under . the act or done too little under the act, the result is that since this act has been passed and this board has undertaken to deal with the cotton situation at all, cotton has constantly gone down, and it is now very much lower in price than when the board was appointed. In other words, instead of this board, under Mr. Legge's direc­tion, having done the cotton market any good, instead of having stabilized the market in any way, it has constantly depressed the market, in my judgment. -

Mr. CONNALLY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Oregon for the interpolation of his remarks. I know he is thoroughly familiar with legislation along this line. But the Senator's remarks in essence are that the act which he fathered, and which was rammed through the Senate by the senior Sen­ator from Indiana, the Republican leader, is so technical that nobody can get any benefit out of it except the members of the Farm Board and their salaried assistants.

I quite agree with the Senator from Oregon that there ought to have been a cotton stabilization corporation. I urged the Farm Board almost immediately after its formation to under­take steps to organize a cotton stabilization corporation, be­cause the whole theory of the legislation which has been spon­sored by the Senator from Oregon for the past 8 or 10 years has been based on the idea that in times of surplus we had to buy and hold the cotton and wheat and feed it out into the market during the slack period. Unless some agency is set up to take care of the surplus by going into the market and acquiring it and then feeding it out over the slack period this farm relief legislation is nothing but a hollow mockery, nothing but a sham, nothing but authority to appoint an executive com­mission to inquire into the condition of the farmer until after the necessity for doing something for him politically shall hav~ passed.

Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I want to ask the Senator a question in view of what the Senator from Oregon has said. A $30,000,000 corporation has taken out a charter, as I under­stand it, I believe under the laws of the State of Delaware; what does the Senator from Texas understand that to be? Is it not a compliance with the law to set up a stabilization cor­poration for the cotton business?

Mr. CONNALLY. I will say to the Senator that I understand from press reports that the corporation which has been organ­ized is nothing more than a supercooperative, which has as its members subsidiary cooperative associations.

I ask the Senator, so far as the Federal Farm Board is con­cerned, has it accomplished anything constructive along the lines we planned? The cooperatives could have organized a supercooperative without auy Federal Farm Board. They cou:d have organized it months or years ago.

1930 IO .... A.L RECORD-SE~T-6- TE 2751 Mr .• :\lrrn. 1\lr. Pt ·idt>nt, I would like to c 11 the nator':

nt t<•ntion to th • Ca ·t that, nccordiug to my information, the pre·-nt orA"nnizntiou, in proc of ompletlon down here at the

lwndqunrt •r · of tb Jj'nrm Board, i l>n · •d exactly on the same plnn uucler which th ~ wh at corporati u wa · organized. Tb y lmv'c gott('ll th~ir· churter un<l r the law f D Jaware, I b liev , th •y hav(! npJ>Oint •d tlleir advisory coun ·el, and that wa not th' ,. • ·ult of the m ·tiug at Mcmphi , it wa. a r sult of a n1 tin of the del "'ttte duly cho ·en who met right here in 'Va!'hington. Thi or~nnizatiun, a" I uud r tand it, was per­f t <1 h •t·e In thi city, autl in accordan e with the rule and r ·~ulations laid down in th law, and i practically identical in chnJ'ttt'tC'r with th whe11t corporation. I believe that to be true; I nm incli1wd to thint~ it can e ub. tantiated. The Senator fl'om Indiana LMr. W.AT o. ] ju.t baudetl me a new. paper in whi ·11 th r • i. a rt'J>ort to the ff t that the wheat orporation is in t h mark •t l uying ' heat at • 1.2- a bu. hel. The en a tor from 'l' •.· .tH lmvw. and v ryone el e ·ho ha · ever familiarized llim:t.?lf with the pr ~ent furm marketing act know~ that the :--~tabilization orporalion" have th . 1 ow r, under rtain circum­stan :-1, to ~o into th market and di po e of whatever farm JH' du ·t tbf'y nr or aniz d to deal with.

Mt'. ' ALLY. I will ay to the enator from outh Caro-lina that th r i. n gr at deal f difference, a I under tand it, h •tw .n th two corv ration . The corporation now being or­~auiz d und 1· the Iemphi vlan i one that ha th arne pti.n­clpl '~ a th · op rativ ·. They are n t pennitted to a out iut tll g n~ral murk t and buy. The tabiliz:. tion cor1 oration on th other hand, if orguniz d under th farm relief act, may not only band! th c tt n but it may go out in the open mark t ttnd buy aud ~" 11 c tton for the 1mrpo e of tabilizing the price.

1\11'. Sl\IITII. o th Senator have that officially, that the t-up doe· not contemplate the purcha e and ' le of

[Mr. Icr ABY] and from the pre · e in ~rror. Unle · it i:, however, tabilization c rporation a t forth

to the income-tax payer~. It "a~ demon trated here in dehate on the debenture plan that that plan for all a"riculture would hut out of the Treasury of the United State" only about 150,000,000. By the adoption of that plan we would help all

agriculture and yet we would not eriously embarra:- the Trea ury.

Mr. President, there i one other thing that the Congre s ou ht to do if it wants to help the producer" of cotton and other aaricultural producL The Hou:;e of Repre~entatiYes ln t year pa ed a bill undertaking to regulate the cotton ex­·hanges of the land. The Senate defeated the bill of the Sen­

ator from Arkan a [Mr. CARAWAY] relating to future~ mar­kets. I claim in thi pre ence that the cotton farmer will never get the full mea. ure of his rioht untler economic laws until the ongr s in the exercise of it power pa s an act putting the cotton exchange under practically the ·arne re-triction as tho e which the grain exchange· operate at

the pre ent time. 'orne year· ago ongres. ena ted a men ure laying tlown l'Ules

and regulations for the operation of grain exchange. , • nd my information i that that act has had a very benefi ·ial eff t upon the gmin market o far as rapid fluctuation. are ton­cern d. The pre.; nt ituation illu trat the neces Hy for an act which '·ould me ke penal fictitiou operations on the cotton exchan"e. The present ituation is an artificial one. _To one claim that there i more cotton in the world to-day than there wa. y terday morning. No one claims that cotton intrin. i<:ally i. worth less to-day than it was ye terday morning. No one claim that by any chemical proce~ the fabric of cotton bas deteriorated ince ye. terday morning. .lTO one claim the world i. any less in need of clothes to wear or automobile tires to use in peedina over the highway than it was ye terday mornina. Yet we have a market..., en ·ith·e, ... o re pon ive to every .. tate­went, whether authorized or unauthorized, that we find that the idle vaporing of the chairman of the Farm Board, talking to a new~paper reporter in an informal conference, a mere re­mark in an informal conference, ha had the effect f depre ing the prite of every bale of cotton in the United States-yea, in the world-about 1.5() to $2.

I submit that that m re fact illu trates the nece .. ~ity for orne act to curtail and to regulate fictitious operation on the New York Cotton Exchange o a to make it a criminal offen. e to permit traddling or to permit other operation of that char­act r which all men who have studied the que. tion or who have ever read any of the hearing of the investigating conunittees know are not based upon actual tran~action in cotton, but are ba .. ed upon a pre-meditated campaign to artificially make the spread b tween certain months-March and July, for in tance-by the sale of one month and the purcba e of another so great that particular interests on one side or the other put into their pocket.· millions of dollar when not one pound of actual cotton ever changed bands.

Mr. Pre ident, I submit that the Committee on Agriculture and For .. ·try, of which my friend, the 'enator from outh Carolina [Mr. MITH], i an out tanding member, ounht to et a time for the consideration of legi.:lation now p nding before that ommittee eeking to re ulate, not to d ·troy, not to wipe out

of xistence, but eekina to r gulate the cotton exchanap in order that they may be required to do actual bu ine .. , to do it upon the same standard that other concern. in the country do; vhen they have an article which they ell, they deliver it. I submit that the Senator from • outh arolina can render the cotton producer a great ervice if he will take up the 1 ai.la­ti n n w pending before that committee. I have a bill of that character pendin before his committee which I c nfid ntly be­lieve if nacted into law will not give the cotton producer any­thing out of th Treasury, will not create any fictitiou value for hi taple, but will imply provide that tho. e who seek to profit from him by fi.ctitiou campaign upon the e_'{changes shall not longer rob him of the fruits of hi toil.

Mr. Pre ident, in conclu.-ion I ubmit that if the nate want· to do anythin.,. real for agriculture it will stand fa t in the conf r nee committee in favor of the debenture plan, an<l it will then enact legi Jation to ee that the future.~ mnrkE:'t in farm commodities are .. o r gulated and re tricted n to make th ir transaction permi ible only in bona fide bu~ine · · deal~ and upon the arne ;tundard that every other busine~ · trnn ·­action in the country i ... uppo. ed to exit.

I hope the Senate in it anxiety to get mor tariff profit: out of the cowumers of the c untry, in it. anxi ty to get the tariff bill to provide for thi. and that and the oth r indu. try r :-:Wing in our own Stat and in other tate .. will not be .,o hlindeu a to for~et that we were called here by the Pre~id nt to 1 ,,.i~­late not imply upon the tariff but upon th , ul>je t of farm reli f. I submit to th enate that the tran action which hav takeu place since the formation of the Farm R lief Board have

2752 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 3·1 been such that no man can stand in this Chamber and contend· that the Senate has discharged its duty to agriculture, can con­tend that the Senate has done anything substantial for agri­culture through the formation of that board. I want the Senate to know that the obligation still rests upon it, and if we are not to have the present law broadened, if it is not to be made so plain that it does not require a lawyer· to fish around through its intricacies to see what the board may do and what it may not do if we are not to have its scope so broadened that every farmer of the land may receive some benefit from it instead of 4 or 5 per cent of the cooperatives, if we are not to have that, then I hope the Senate will stand fast for the debenture plan amendment and let the President of the United States know that the Senate at least expects to discharge its duty to agricul­ture by giving it real relief; that it is going to give the farmer something of substance instead of shadows regardless of the opposition of the Executive to the debenture plan or to any other plan that means more than fooling the farmer for four more years.

REVISION OF THE TARIFF

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the con· sideration of the bill (H. R. 2667) to provide revenue, to regu­late commerce with foreign countries, to encourage the indus­trifls of the United States, to protect American labor, and for other purposes.

Mr. HARRISON. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the ron; and the following Senators

answered to their names : Ashurst George La Follette Baird Gillett McKellar Barkley Glass McMaster Bingham Glenn McNary Black Goff Metcalf Blaine Goldsborough Moses Blease Greene Nor beck Borah Grundy Norris Bratton Hale Nye Brookhart Harris Oddie Broussard Harrison Overman Capper Hatfield Patterson Cat·away Hawes Phipps Connally Hebert Pine Copeland Heflin Ransdell Couzens Howell Robinsont-Jnd. Deneen Johnson Robsion, n.y. Dill Jones Schall Fess KEC>an Sheppard Fletcher Kendrick Shipstead Frazier Keyes Shortridge

Simmons Smith Smoot Steck ' Steiwer Sullivan Swanson Thomas, Idaho Thomas, Okla. Townsend Trammell Tydings Vandenberg Wagner Walcott Walsh, Mass. Walsh, Mont. Watson Wheeler

Mr. SHEPPARD. I desire to announce the necessary absence of the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. RoBINSON] and the Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. REED], who are delegates from the United States to the Naval Arms Conference meeting in London, England. Let this announcement stand for the day.

I also desire to announce that the Senator from Utah [Mr. KING] is necessarily detained from the Senate by illness. I will let this announcement stand for the day.

I also wish to announce that the senior Senator from Nevada [Mr. PITTMAN] and the junior Senator from Arizona [Mr. HAYDEN] are necessarily absent from the Senate attending a conference in the West relating to the diversion of the waters of the Colorado River. I wish this announcement to stand for the day.

Mr. HARRISON. I desire to state that the Senator from l\ii~sissippi [1\ir. STEPHENS] is absent because of illness.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Eighty-two Senators having an­swered to their names, a quorum is present. The question is on the amendment of the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. McMASTER], as modified, which the Secretary will state.

The LEGISLATIVE CLERIC On page 37, paragraph 205, it is proposed to strike out lines 6 and 7 down through the word "white," in line 8, and to insert the word "White," so as to read:

White nonstaining Portland cement, 8 cents per 100 pounds, includ­ing the weight of the container.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The question is on agreeing to the amendment as modified.

Mr. HARRISON. Mr. President, I merely wish to make this observation. I see many Senators now in their seats. The item involved in the pending amendment is one of the most important in the bill. Cement has been coming in free for a good long while. It is proposed to add 31 cents a barrel to the price of cement in this country. A most able, entertaining, and exhaustive speech against this increase was delivered this morning by the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. McMAsTER], but although the committee has recommended this increase, not a voice is now raised to explain it or d,efend it; yet we are asked to vote on the amendment. -

The VICE ·PRESIDENT. The question is on agreeing to the amendment as modified.

Mr. WALSH of Montana. I ask for the yeas and nays. Mr. COPELAND. Mr. President, there is no disposition on

my part to extend the debate, but I can not permit the state­ment of my genial friend from Mississippi [Mr. HARRISON] to pass unchallenged.

I listened attentively to the able speech of the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. McMASTER]. He presented his views in substantial and convincing form. If I felt his arguments really related to the cement industry in the eastern part of the United States, I should not say a word. If the arguments he presented with reference to the industry at large applied to the eastern part of the country, I should subside at once.

However, Mr. President, almost nothing of what the Senator from South Dakota has said can possibly apply to the cement industry in my section of the United States. He pointed out the great consumption and the great production of cement in the United States and contrasted that tremendous production with the small amount of Belgium cement which is imported into the United States.

Mr. President, I live within a very few miles of the cement works in my State; I live in the Hudson River Valley. I know what the situation is as to unemployment in that section of New York.

When I became a candidate for reelection to the Senate, in my speech of acceptance I said : "While I am a Democrat, and in general stand for lower tariff duties, there are certain in­dustries within the confines of our State which m11st have in­creased protection in order that American citizens may be employed." I felt free to state that among such industries was the one we have under consideration to-day. Taking pains to investigate the unemployment in the cement industry, it seemed to me perfectly evident that there must be an increased tariff rate upon cement; otherwise thousands of persons now em­ployed in my State would be out of work.

I feel that in taking a stand for an increase of rates on some articles I am in harmony with the views of the leaders of my party. This question was covered at length in the platform of the Democratic Party as promulgated at Houston. The stand­ard bearer of our party, Governor Smith, enlarged from time to time upon the subjects contained in that platform. I hold in my hand a volume containing the campaign addresses of Gov­ernor Smith. In his Louisville speech, made on the 13th of October, 1928, in his clear, conclse style, he presented what he called his "prescription" to meet the situation with regard to the tariff.

This is what Mr. Smith said-! shall merely quote the first two ingredients of his "prescription " :

First. I believe that the tariff should be taken out of politics. It should be treated as a business and economic problem. I am opposed to politics in tariff making.

Second. I believe in the Democratic platform, which recognizes that the high wages and constructive policies established by Woodrow Wil­son, and the business prosperity resulting from them in America, coupled with the economic ruin of the rest of the world, brought about a new condition that committed the Democratic Party to a definite stand in favor of such tariff schedules as will to the very limit pro­tect legitimate business enterprise as well as American labor from ruinous competition of foreign-made goods produced under conditions far below the American standards.

Mr. President, that is good common sense. I am happy to-day, as I have been for many years, to follow this distinguished statesman, and to emphasize if I may, to apply if I may, this doctrine to the matter now before us.

The distinguished Senator from South Dakota [Mr. l\Ic­MASTER] spoke about the importations of Belgian cement. I think he said-I have no desire to use a lot of figures in what I have to say ; merely enough to emphasize the point I have in mind-the distinguished Senator said, as I recall, that our im­portations of Belgian cement amounted to only 750,000 or a million barrels. Is that correct?

Mr. McMASTER. No; my statement was that the total im­portations of foreign cement amounted annually to 2,200,000 barrels. I did make the statement, however, that there were imported annually into the cities of Boston, New York, and Philadelphia 700,000 barrels of cement, and that 212.000 bar­rels of that amount went to the city of New York, the home city of the distinguished Senator from New York.

I might say, in addition to that, that I hope the Senator will comment upon this statement :

All of the mills in that section of the country, for which the Senator no doubt has a deep concern, manufacture annually 52,000,000 barrels of cement. In comparison with that 52,-000,000 barrels of cement, just 212,000 barrels from abroad

1930 C0.1.TGRE •ro :r L RECORD-SE.!:J_A .. TE 2753 dribbling amount to only from 1% to 114 per cent of the total production of cement in the United 'tat . _

Mr. KEAN. Mr. Pre ident, will the Senator yield there? , Mr. COPEL ~D. I prefer, and I a k in all serlousne , that

en a tors make no peeches in my time. I have a friend in ew York who i dying, and I want to go over th re and have five minutes with him before be depart thi life. I am determined, if I may, to fini b what I have to ~ay this afternoon.

The enator from South Dak ta thi morning mad a fine p ch, till d with much information and a whole lot of misin­

formation; but I sat silent in my seat while hi word were uttered. I a k now that I may have the courte y of a hearing without interruption.

I wi h to ay to my friend from Illinoi r Ir. GLENN] that when the t. Lawrence canal i built and the Mi i sippi waterway i complete, and wb n there is a broad canal running from Lal~e 1\Iichigan into the Mi ~ · ippi Uiver, and when there i a conn •ting link between Lake Erie and the Ohio niver, and

onnet:ticut when we hn\e a system of canal covering thi. country, what we mi"'ht say about foreign-made cement would relate to the

time whole country. But what i the u e of talking about unrealized dream , about po ibilitie till floating in the atmosphere?

I repeat, Mr. Pr ... ident, that the tariff upon cement i of no int re. t to outh Dnkot~. It is of no intere~t to any part of the country except 5;UCh part as can be reached by hip from for­eign land . I plead with you to permit thi bill as it came from th Hou 'P. to be enacted into law, becau e otherwise you will hamp r and de troy an indu try which is of tremendou im· portnnce to tho e who labor in my part of the country.

I aw thi · morning the tatement made by the Fed ration of Labor, calling upon the ongre s-nnd I dare say ,~ery • enator hn. received a copy of it-to give protection enou~h to furnl h employment for tho~e who would labor in America. I it n matter of no cone rn to certain enator , becau e of a feti h, tbn t there are in America to-day million upon million of un­employed men, four or five million out of work? No greater calnmity would come to any man, the head of a family, than to ba v no em11loyment and no means of meeting the nece ities of hi· wife and chiluren.

I plead for my neighbors. I kn w many of the familie along my valley who have no work. They have over them all the time the word of Damocles. They do not know at what mo­ment the thread may . nap and de truction may come.

If you ever had a note to meet at the bank in tho e day~ when you were poverty stricken and did not have money enough to pay the' intere t, and did not know where yon could g t it, you know how you felt. What would you think about the feel­ings of a father of a family who had not money enough in lli J10<'kets to huy the bread and the plain n ces ities for the . u te­nauce of hi · little group?

Tot a19ne ha. there been a marked decrea ·e in employment hut there are potentialities which are extremely significant. We must do what we can to fore.· tall di. a, ter.

Auytbing in the world can he proved by figure . I heard a lot rend tbi. morning. There will he more given tbL afternoon. Pcrhap · for a moment I may be indulged in . ubmittlng a very few figure., and in round numbers at that.

The enator from South Dakota [Mr. l\Ic1I.ASTER] know there i. no l\Iemb r of the Senate who re.~ard. him more highly or with de per affection than I do. But I wa. very sorry thi morning to hear him ,ay what he did regarding th Tariff om­mi .. ·ion. If we can not trust these !-:enan of the people, if we can not del)end upon them to give u trnthful figure .. --

1\Ir . .McMASTER. l\Ir. Pre idcnt, the enator ha referred to my .tatement in reference to the Tariff Commis.·ion. I think he mi con~trued the tatement. I diU attack the co t fignr(' which wt~re pre. ented by the Tariff 'ommi ."ion, bnt I explained that the Tariff Commi ··ion in pre~·enting tho-e figure· bad not examined the figures, and had not verified the r port made uy the cem nt manufacturers of the United • tate~ with regard to the co. t of production. The figur s I pre ented thi morning were the figure presented uy the manufacturer thcmselve , not

New ch<'ck d hv the Tariff 'ommis,ion. and I ~o stat d. Ir. COPEL N . Mr. Pre:-idcnt, the enator said that "the

figure~ are unfair" and that "never were wor:-:e fig-ure given n ·." I n;:;sume the Senator did not know that lvhen the 'l'ari.tr Commis.·ion a 'ked for the ,·e figures, those who wer to giye them were warned that they were going to be checked.

i\1r. l\IcllA .. TER. l\lr. Presi<lent, if the enator will yield, the manufacturer. were not warned that any figure were goiu<>­to be checked. The Tar iii Commi. :·ion simply ent out a que -tionnaire a. to the co t of production of tho.~e <'ompanie., and the comrmnies filled the que::,tionnair ._ out. They were not . worn to. and there wa never any tatement made to the manu· facturer that they were going to be checked.

2754 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 Mr. COPELAND. Let us see what the record shows. I hold

in my hand a copy of the letter from the Tariff Commission which was sent to these manufacturers, in which it was stated:

It is understood that the data presented in the individual schedule will be held confidential and will not be published in such form as to reveal the operations of individual firms. It is probable that the com­mission will desire to check some cost schedules back to the original cost records prior to the tabulation of the data.

I think I am no more human nor less so than other Senators, but let me know that when I make a statement in my income­tax return it is going to be checked-and I know it will be by an official of the United States Government-! am sure to make that statement accord with the truth. In the entire his­tory of our Government with income-tax returns, the percent­age of men who have been found to make false statements is a very, very small one.

Mr. McMASTER. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from New

York yield to the Senator from South Dakota? Mr. COPELAND. I yield, for the reason that I referred di­

l'ectly to what the Senator said, and I feel that he has the right to reply if he so desires. I made no comment while he was making a lot of statements this morning with which I did not agree, but I yield to the Senator.

Mr. McMASTER. The manufacturers made this statement to the Tariff Commission. The Tariff Commission did not check those figures. That is their statement, made to the chairman of the subcommittee of the Finance Committee which had this matter in charge, Senator Edge. They made the statement that the cost of delivering and selling cement in the city of New York was $2.23. However, the Department of Labor acquired figures for the whole year 1929, which showed that the average selling price-that is, the wholesale price of cement throughout the whole United States-was only $1.65. The Department of Labor received that statement, no doubt, from the manufacturers of cement. Did the manufacturers of cement tell the truth to the Tariff Commission, or did they tell the truth to the Department of Labor?

Mr. COPELAND. The Senator can answer his question as he pleases, but so far as I am concerned I think the figures given to both departments of the Government were truthful figures. One set related to cost and the other to price. However, I shall give a few figures to verify the faith I have in those which were given to the Government.

I hold in my hand a letter from . the vice president of the Alpha Portland Cement Co. In this he gives certain tables showing the return on capital, and labor and salary cost per barrel. These are based on the income-tax returns of the 16 Atlantic seaboard cement companies listed. I am not inter­ested, for the time, in any cement factory in any part of the United States except along the seacoast, and I am interested in them particularly because they are the ones which are suffer­ing most, although I have abundant ftgures here to show that there are plenty of other cement companies in this country which are in dire distress.

I hold in my hand a letter written by a very distinguished lady, Mrs. Alexander B. White, ex-president general of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, a fine, noble, upstanding character. She has been unfortunate enough to own cement stock. When I read here, as I do, how certain cement companies, in which this lady owns bonds and preferred stock, passed their dividends, and showed losses, too, in paper value, then I begin to think that the trouble in the cement industry is not localized on the seaboard, but extends also into the interior of the country.

To return to the figures. I mentioned, one would think from what was said to us this morning that these companies on the seaboard, and up the valley where I live, were prospering beyond all dreams of avarice. What is the fact?

Let me read: To avoid disclosure of operations of individual companies, transcripts

of income-tax returns were submitted direct by the companies to Dr. T. S. Adams, of the Yale University department of economics, and con­solidated in his office. These consolidated returns were submitted in the form suggested to your committee-

That is, to the Finance Committee-on September 21 by Mr. Ogden Mills, Undersecretary of the Treasury, in so far as items listed by Mr. Mills concerned manufacturing opera­tions.

What about these :figures? There was a solemn agreement entered upon by all concerned to tell the truth. The figures were compiled by an eminent and reputable gentleman, Doctor Adams, of Yale. They were gone over by the Assistant Secre­tary of the Treasury, Colonel Mills, and here they are:

In 1922 the net income of these companies, in round figures, amounted to $5,000,000. In 1923 and 1924 the net income of these 16 companies combined was $12,000,000. In 1925 and 1926 it was $14,000,000 in each year. I am going to speak in a mo.. rnent about the following years, but let me state why they were prosperous from 1923 to 1926.

Mr. McMASTER. Mr. President, will the Senator tell us the names of the companies?

Mr. COPELAND. Cei'tainly. They were the Alpha, Atlas, Coplay, Florida, Glens Falls, Giant, Hercules, Hermitage, Inter­national, Lawrence, Lehigh, North American, Pennsylvania­Dixie, Signal Mountain, Southern States, Vulcanite.

Those are the companies, and the earnings were as I have stated. In 1922, $5,000,000 ; in 1923, 1924, 1925, and 1926, from twelve to fourteen million.

Senators know what happened during the period of the war. The war started in 1914, and in 1914, 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921, and 1922r-nine years-there was almost no building in the United States. Nobody knows that better than I do, for it so happened that during the period of the war, com­mandeered, as I was by the mayor of New York City, to serve as health commissioner, one of the great problems I had to face was how to house the people, where to put the people. There were places . where human beings lived in outrageously insani­tary conditions. I said many times during that period that if it were not for the econo~ic stress and the inability to build houses I would have those places padlocked and their tenants excluded from residence in such ·unsuitable dwellings. The population was increasing, and immediately after the war immi­gration was tremendous, as many as a million a year coming in from abroad. There had to be houses. Those families had to be put somewhere.

Then came along the time when we had a return to no1'mal conditions and there was a demand for cement and all ot)ler building materials. I had in a way as much to do with the placing of building materials upon the free list as any man outside of the Congress. The Senate of the United States had appointed a committee presided over by my predecessor in the Senate, Mr. Calder. This committee visited different parts of the United States and studied the housing conditions of the. country. I was asked to testify regarding conditions in New York City and did so. Out of this grew a request from the committee that I might call together the health commissioners of the United States in a convention to consider the matter of housing and whether it was a pressing problem in all the cities of the country. We had such a convention in Detroit. It was the universal testimony-indeed, there was not a single dissent from . the general opinion-that there was a housing crisis which should be met at once. We reported to the· committee of the Senate that it was very important, in our judgment, that all building materials be placed upon the free list, in order that there might be an immediate resumption of building to provide homes for the people.

In 1922, in the passage of the tariff act, these items were placed upon the free list: Brick, cement, lumber, and everything else that had to do with building. But there was such a de­mand at that time for materials, such haste was involved in the matter, that all the cement companies of the country worked overtime. So we find that in 1923, 1924, 1925, and 1926 the income of those companies was very great. Then, with the immense demand for cement, our friends across the sea saw the possibility that they might get into the field, and so they commenced to make an attack upon the American market. So successful was their attack that in 1927 the consolidated re­turns of the 15 companies were $8,000,000 instead of $14;obO,OOO, and in 1928 it had dropped to $6,000,000. That is what happened.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from New

York yield to the Senator from Kentucky? Mr. COPELAND. Just a moment before I yield. I will

yield for a question and no more. Mr. BARKLEY. All right. Does the Senator realize that

the domestic production of cement--Mr. COPELAND. I must decline to yield for a dissertation.

The Senator in his own time can talk all he likes, but I want to get through with my speech and go home. If the Senator wishes to ask a question, I shall be glad to answer it.

Mr. BARKLEY. I wanted to ask the Senator whether he knew a certain thing. If he does not want ' to answer the question, all right.

Mr. COPELAND. The Senator will have abundant oppor­tunity in his own time to dissect my speech and put its bones upon the floor of the Senate.

19u0 CO JGRE SIO JAL llE 10RD-SE ATE 2755

It it~ contended by the Oov rnm nt tbnt the report ot prices on RP lflc job contracts in tr t lnfot·ms the members of the association or lH'ICCH to dealer , since the <lttrerentlul allowed to dealers is well known in the trade. How ver tbls mny be, the fact is that any change In quotution ot prlce to deul r promptly becomes well known in the t r·nd through report· of ani sm n, agent , and d alers of various manu­fnctur r .

W ctm not hide what goe on in any enterpri ~e. We can not hid what • enator. are going to MY if they make prepared RP ch 14. We know in ntlvan e even here largely what would h . the attitude or inclivldunl enator on some matter . So the ·onrt :-;nid:

Til fuel is that any change in quotation of price to dealers promptly becom R w 11 known in tho t.rnde through reports of sale men, agents, nod dt•o.l rs or varlou manufacturers. It appears to be undisputed thul tb t· were frequent changed in price, and uniformity bas re ulted

not from maintaining tbe price nt fixed levels but from the prompt meeting of cbnnge. in prices by competing sellers.

'Ve go down the tr et and ·ee orne "'OOd. in the show win­dow. If a dealer is going to ell a leather pocketbook to-day for '4.0 , the man in the next block know it in five minut~. and

vut ... his out at '4.93. We all know that to be the fact. 'Ve do not have to have a lightning rod up and have a communication fr m ubove to know about the e thing'. U~ing one's ordinary human intelligence, it is easy to know what one' · competitor. at·e "'Oing to do and the upreme Court took that view, which to rn eem sen, ible.

The court continued : It appears to be undi puted that ther were frequt>nt cbnnget~ in

price, und uniformity bas resulted, not from maintaining the price at fixed levels but ft·om the prompt meeting of chnnge in prices by competing sellers.

That explain· the uniformity of price . It i Ul'g d by the defendantl that such uniformity of price n exi ·ted

in the trade wn due to competition. They olrered much evidence tend­ing to show complete independence of judgment and of action of d fend­ants, by large expenditures in competitive sales elrort , nnd by varia­tions in the volume of their production and shipment. earnings, nod profits. A great volume of te limony was also given by uistingul bed t'conomi:ts in ~upport of the thesi thnt, in the case of n standardized product sold wholesale to fully informed profes ionnl buyet· , as were th dealers in cement, uniformity or price will inevitably result from active, free, and un trained competition.

I have ometime · thought that the tandard Oil Co. mu ·t have orne way of fixing price ·, but to explain what look. like collu ·ion, all we have to do is to read what the court found out about cement. It wa. a deci ion founded on the evidence of economi t , the te ·timony of tho e who appeared in the lower court, and the tatement in the briefs of tho e who appear d b fore the upreme Court. The upreme ourt found out, of cour e, e.·actly the truth in th matter.

When it i aid by anyone that the e men are in wicked d fiance of the law of the country I f el like re"'enting it. ·why? Beca u e I know many of the men. I have before me a one of my listeners tlle di ~tingui ·bed 'enator from J. •ebra ·ka [Mr. NoRRI J, better beloved, in my jud~ent-and I ~aY it without di:parugement of other here--than any 'nntor in tb Chamber. He lives in Nebra ·a; I live in New York; and while the nator from •ebrn. ka and I agree on many funda­mental thing., we often di~ agre widely as re"'Rrd · the mnchi­natio of men in indu try and in the many enterprises who- , activiti from time to time claim our con. ideration. I know, not all of th men who are engaged in the cement indu~try by any mean. , but I do know many of them, and I can not conceive it po ible that they would et a ide their private conviction.· for the ake of corporate advancement, or that they would enter into a wicked cou..;piracy again t the welfare of their country merely to make ju t a little bit more money on their product. But, anyway, I have quoted the view of the court a regards the que tion of combination and collusion and the fixing of price . Quoting aaain from the court:

A great volume of testimony wns nlso given by distinguished eeono­ml ts in upport of the thesis that in the ca e of a standardized product sold whole ·nle to fu'Uy informed profe sional buyers, as were the.,J]enlers in c ment, uniformity of price will inevitably result from nctive, free, anu um·e trained competition ; and the Government in its br·ief concedes that "undoubtedly the price of cement would approach uniformity in a normal market in the absence of all combinations betw en the manu­facturers."

The la'lt clau_e I have r ad from the opinion of Mr. Justi<'e tone wa a quotation from the brief of the Government in

oppo iti n to the cement manufacturers. Let me quote it again, o that enators who are 11 tening may know that thi part of

:Mr. Ju tice tone' deci ion wn a quotation from the brief of the Government, which wa eeking to puni h the cement manu­facturer . This is the language from . the brief of the Gov­rnment:

rndoubtedly the price of cement would approach uniformity in a no . mnl market in the ab ence of all combinations between the manu-

Mr. Pr ·~ident, there is one mor~ "laragraph which I want to quote in n moment, but enough bas been quoted from the deci­·ion to ~how that any effort on the part of the Government to e. tablish collu ion and conspiracy utterly failed, and the admi -sion on tbe part of the Government it elf was made that "the price of cement would approach uniformity • • • in the ab ence of all combinations between the manufacturers."

2756 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31' I quote further from the opinion of the Supreme Court : We realize also that uniformity of price may be the result of agree­

ment or understanding, and that an artificial price level not related to the supply. and demand of a given commodity . may be evidence from which such agreement or understanding, or some concerted action of sellers operating to restrain commerce, may be inferred. But here the Government does not rely upon agreement or understanding, and this record wholly fails to establish, either directly or by inference, any concerted action other than that involved in the gathering and dissem­ination of pertinent information with respect to the sale and distribu-

. tion of cement to which we have referred.

If standing here arguing for this rate and defending those engaged in the cement business I should employ such words, Senators might consider them mere persiflage. But these nre the solemn words of the Supreme Court of the United States. I repeat part of one sentence:

But here the Government does not rely upon agreement or under­standing, and this record wholly fails to establish, either directly or by inference, any concerted action other than that involved in the gath­ering and dissemination of pertinent information with respect to the sale and distribution of cement to which we have referred; and it fails to show any effect on price and production except such as would natu­rally flow from the dissemination of that information in the trade and its natural influence on individual action.

Mr. President, that is what the Supreme Court of the United States said about these men ; and so, as I said a moment ago, I regret to hear the Senator from South Dakota say-

There )s a strange coincidence of figures-

1.'hat was his language-A strange coincidence of figures. In spite of court decisions, it is

true that these prices are fixed.

Mr. President, I know the Senator from South Dakota bas just as high respect for the Supreme Court of the United States as have I, but he was unfortunate, if be w.ill permit me to say so, in his expression regarding the action of the court. It is natural that in heated debate men will go further than on due consideration they would be likely to go.

Mr. President, the court bas said that the cement manufac­turers did not violate any law of the United States, and, so far as I am concerned, with my knowledge of thE:m, I want to testify, if the testimony is worth anything, that these are honorable men.

Mr. NORRIS. Mr. President, may i interrupt the Senator at that point?

The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from New York yield to the Senator from Nebraska?

Mr. COPELAND. Yes. Mr. NORRIS. The Senator certainly does not want to convey

the idea that those of us who are opposed to a tariff on cement entertain the idea that those who are engaged in the manufac­ture of cement a,re dishonorable men. Certainly, I do not want to be put in that class.

Mr. COPELAND. No; I am sure the Senator does not, and .he is not in that class.

Mr. NORRIS. It does not follow, as I understand, that be­cause we are opposed to a tariff on cement we have anything in the world against or that we are claiming that there is any reason why anybody should have anything against any of those engaged in the manufacture of cement.

Mr. COPELAND. I thank the Senator, and I know that is the attitude of the Senator. I do not need to say it, but the Senator knows the respect I have for him as a man and as a Senator. I could not conceive, Mr. President, of GEORGE W. NoRRJS doing anything that he thought was dishonorable. I do not need to give my friend that testimony. His heart speaks it with the same effect. But I wish to make very certain, if I can, that the cement manufacturers are honorable men and that the Senate accept my view.

l\1r. President, up and down the Hudson River there are many cement factories. If Senators have taken the drive from New York up to West Point, they know how beautiful is the scenery; but from time to time as one leaves one beautiful part of the river to go quickly into another, he passes under an overhead trolley conveying rock or some other substance to a cement factory. I travel that route very often, and I know many of those who work in the cement factories--not the " big bugs " alone but some who labor with their bands. I do not want them to be out of work, and they are going to be if we permit Belgian cement to come in here.

Mr. President, I am sorry when I am forced to take a posi­tion which may hurt an industry somewhere else in the world. I wish to uy to you, Senators, that the economic pressure upon the peoples of Europe is beyond belief. They can never pay the

billions of dollars which they owe us. The whole world is staggering under a burden of debt wllich it can never pay. So, I do not like to be in the position of hurting any other country -when I try to do something for mine. At some other time I want to relate what I have seen during the last few months over there.

How can American workmen, \Vith our standards of living, compete with Belgians working at a dollar a day? We know they can not do so, and we do not want them to. Tllat is why the American Federation of Labor this morning sent to each of us a letter appealing for protection for industries which will by reason of that boon, give labor a chance to -work.

Mr. President, just as sure as we are here it will not be long before every man in public life will have to face the issue of starvation in America. I am departing from the economic views which I hold in general, to give support to some indus­tries, becau~e I want the American workingmen, and particu­larly those who live in my State, of course, to have employment. I want the men who work in the cement factories to have it. The owners of those factories have been striving for a long time to get more protection. They have looked forward to this session of Congress in order that relief might be granted them.

Yesterday I spoke in criticism of the President-~n respect­ful terms, I hope--for extending the legislative program beyond farm relief alone. But when he made the first promise to call the special session, and said that it was not only for farm relief but for those "special industries" that need protection, I have no doubt he had in mind an industry like this, as well as a few others. But because we have come here for general revision of the tariff-21,000 items-we now have split off into groups, into blocs, one group wanting this and one wanting that.

Ah, my friends, we must be discriminating in this matter. The matter which we hnve before us is of no interest to my friend from Nebraska [1\Ir. NoRRis] as a Nebraskan. It is of no interest to my friend from South Dakota [Mr. McMASTER] as a resident of that State. It is of no interest to any man from one· of the interior States; but it is of vital interest to the workingmen in the States along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.

Nothing that we can do lTere in the way of a tariff is going to affect the price of cement in Kansas or Nebraska. The limit of distance that cement can be carried and enter into competi­tion is, as the Senator from South Dakota said this morning, simply the area that a truck can profitably serYe ; that is all. The plant at lola, and the other plants in the West, are going to maintain by competition between themselves a rate -which approximates the present one. If we were to put on a duty here even of $2 a barrel, instead of 30 cents, it would not affect South Dakota and Nebraska. It is not a matter of con­cern to you, except as you are citizens of the United States, what the rate is upon cement. It is not going to cost the road builder of the interior of our country a single dollar per mile more for the cement required to build the fine roads of America. But, Mr. President, unless we are given this relief it does mean that in my section the Yessels coming from Belgium and other places abroad will bring in cargoes of cement that will be dumped on the dock::; of New York City to put our New York State plants out of business.

I understand-and I was gr:eved to hear this; I hope the Senator from Utah or somebody else can deny it-I was told this morning that the cement used in the construction of the new Commerce Building came from abroad, and was sold to the Government at a price a dollar a barrel less than any American competitor could furnish it to the Government for. Think what that means to the American industry.

The cement is brought in as ballast in these ships. When a tramp vessel, or a liner either for that matter, is coming to our shores without a full cargo, it can transport cement or brick as ballast and bring it in here for almost nothing so far as freight is concerned. Are you willing to have your brothers and sisters up and down the Atlantic seaboard and along the Pacific coast suffer because you believe, as a general proposition, that a tariff upon a necessity-which this is-must be reduced?

Ah, my friends, I am sure you will not do that. You may find fault with .me because on hats, or on rayon, or some other article used generally throughout the country, I vote for a tariff which you consider excessiYe. You may blame me for that because it increases the burden of living throughout our country, or you think it does. Of course, I think I have argu­ments to show otherwise. But here is a matter of no interest to the great bulk of the American people, and certainly to a great geographic area exceeding many times the area where it is a matter of vital interest.

I do not know that I can say any more. I have reams of material. I have simply presented to you, as best I can and in as few words as I could employ, bow I feel about this subject. If you are interested in the welfare of the people

1 0 c •RE~ \ IO .... :r L RECORD-SENATE 2757 who llv up nnn down th c n t · of Amer·ica where the e fac­tol'i nr . • ·tubli!4h <1; Jf y u fir inter ted in protecting them u~niust th IH'odu •t matl by hone t and fine people on the oth r Rid<', hut who, under the economic condition of the ld \\' rid, w rk for n dollar a <lay-if you ar inter ·ted becau e

I' .rour lov of humanity iu my ction of thi. great country, I b g or you to sn~tnln th bill a it ome to u from the IJou. , and not s k to lower the prot)O ed duty upon cement.

tatement to which I

ction, it i o order d.

Sl'l RbTARY Til:D~ ISSUE' Sl'ECIAT, TATl:MENT ON Mt:DlTEnlll. EAN FRUlT­FI,y AMPAION

" fnuy 1 tl rs received l1y the Depnrtment of Agriculture and by M mb t'tj or C ngt• . s and other with refel'ence to the M dlterranenn frull fly qunrnntlne make nec<·s~nry n gen ral statement of the fact ," Rnld ,' crt>taa·y ot Agriculture Arthur M. llytle tn a special statement I ·sul'!l to-doy.

"Th <lt>pnrtment hns be n gn-ntly ernbarrns d," said the ecretary, "by t·ep nt d attempts to stlr up dlscouleut in !!'lorida. It is not to 1J exp cl d that th fruit grow •r ot Florida would submit to the llt'CC Hary rt>gulntlons without some fl'iction. On the whole, the sup­port whlcb tb D pn1·tm nl of Agriculture bas bad in Florida ba been moHt grn ttfylng. 'l'he .1!1.orldn ltrus Growers' 1 arlng House Assocla­tlou, whkb r prt> ·cnlt'l 5 p r ct>nt of the Florida crop, bas been and is FHtpportlng thC' a lmlnlsh·aUon with all it power. The department bas In lt: 01 • commctHllltory reHolutlons recently pn ·sed by 119 different rgantzatlons In l!'IOI'Ida. Tht>se are organization of growers, coopera­

tive a; .oclnUons ot farmer::~, cornmerclnl club or many citie , Kiwanis tub, nod otll r::<. "An lnf(.' tntlon of tills pe ·t was di ·cover d near Orlando, Fla., in

Apl'll, 1020. Th fly itselt wn identified as tbe Mediterranean fruit fly by tb • eutomolog-1 ta of the Unlv r ity of Florida, by the specialists or the uitcd tntt>R pnrtmt'nt of Agriculture, and by qualified ento· mologiHt who subHt'quently were ent to Florida.

"'l'h •r • cno b uo doubt n to th gt•avlty of the infe~;tatlon. Teat macll• wltb cyanl<l gns netted as high 83 400 flies on one tree. The total numb r or lnf . t t1 propc1·t1e , as r v alt'd by subsequent coutlng, ran to n nl'ly 1,00 . Th · were spr ad through !!1 countie .

"Th" M dlt l'ranean fruit fly is the woftjt peat to which fruit and mnny v gt•tault'tj cun be ubj ct d. Its en-~ 1\l' deposited in the fruit. 'l'ht' · gg1-1 butch into maggot , which sp · dily de troy the fruit it elf. 'J'hc m nne ot the fly I not only to Florl<la, but to the entire South and , ont hWt'llt. 'l'h cllmnte ot tbe.-e Stat s is suitable tor their bree<ling and ~pr adlng. The capltnl value ot the orcharcls in these States is $1, 00,000,000 nnd the annunl crop is worth $!!40,000,000. If the fly b comt•s tabll~hcd in these • tntcs control mt'nsures will be an enor­mouH llurd 11 on the !nait growers. For tills rcnsou eradication is n1 cessnry.

"In ord r thnt tht're might be no po.: ible error as to the existence of th p t, or as to the qulll'aotine and eradication campaign which the <lepn1·tm nt Is conductin{!, we have upon two ~Hf'rent occa .ions ap­l)!JIDt( tuh•l 'Ol'Y ~1·oup of sci nti ·t~ to vlr;lt !-'lorida, urvey the situa­tion, nu<l r !)ut·t. The fir t group con olstcd of seven men of out tanding r!•putntlon nnd nbillly. 'l'h y were:

" Vet·non 1\:Pllo~~. pt>rmnnent a cretnry of the ~ationa.l Research Connell, ot Washington, D. . ; Thoma J. IIeadl e, director ot the New J<'TH<'Y Agri ullurnl 'oll g~>, ~cw Brunswick, N .• T.; V. R. Gardner, bend of hol·tlcullur drpartmcnt, Michigan Agricultural Experiment tatfon, I•:a:t L~tnsln~. fich. ; H. J. nnyle, entomologi t, itrus Experim<'nt Sta­tion, Hlv r~l!lC', \'nllf.; Thomas r. oop r, dean, College of A~riculture, Lr.xingt.on, Ky.; ' org A. Dean, bt>atl, d pnrtrnent of entomology, Kan-

sas Agricultural College, Manhattan, Kans. ; H. A. Morgan, pre ident, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tenn.

"They reported in part: " 'At the beginning ot the campaign tlies were numerous, easily

found, aud existed in grt'nt numbers at points of infestation. Measure­ment of progre,s is difficult. But the committee bas been impr Pd with the rapidity of the clean-up work, the eft'ectlvene s of the poi on­spray campaign, the progres o! in pcction, and it lncren.sina thorough­Des . Upon every side there is found evidence of incrt'asing efficiency and conviction upon the part of those in charge that they are making progres~.'

" Subsequently, acting in conjunction with Ron. WILL R. Wooo, chairman of the Hou e Committee on Appropriations, we appointed another special group. The members of this group were selected by the president ot the University of Indiana. This group con 1 ted of four biologi ·ts and one practical fruit gt·ower, as follow :

" W. 0. Thornpc:;on, pre ident emeritus of Ohio State Univcr ity; W. C. Reed, commercial fruit grower, of Vlncenne , Ind.; W. P. Flint, chief E'ntornologlst of the Illinois Natural History Survey; W. H .. Ald r­rnnn, hen(] of the department of horticulture, Uni>ersity ot Minnesota ; J. J. Davis, h£>ad ot the department of entomology, Pu1·due Univer lty.

" It reported that the campaign of eradication had b en very effi­ciently carried on and recommended that it be continued along the lines laid down. Part of the report follows :

" 'We concur with the report of your committee of seven regarding the economic importance of the in ect and the need for eradication. The Mediterranean frnlt fly should be recognized a a potential pest ot vet·y gr at importance to the fruit lndu try of the Southern States; also the rc ults to date clearly toreca t the po lbility of complete t'rndi­cation in Florida, and this goal shoul<l be vigorously ought. We corn­m nd tbe work of tbe re earch and control forces, the former tor the progrer-s made in the bort period since the discovery of the lnf ta tlon April 6, 1929, with attractant , poison sprays, llo. t plant tudle , and fruit sterilization; the latter for the apparent thoroughness and com­pletene s ot the quarantine and eradication work. We llltewise corn­mend the cooperation of the grower and the sacrifices wbich they have made in destroying hundreds of thou un<ls of boxes of fruit in ord<'r to aid in the eradication. A tudy of the activities of the research and control forces and the expenditures to date show an economical and fficient u. e of the funds available.'

"The Department of Agriculture in the conduct of a quarantine uni­ver ally work with and through the locnl authorities. Thi Is nee s­sary becau e local and 'tnte police power rest solely in the local nuthor­itie . In Florida the department ba worked throuah the Florida Plant Board. The eradication campaign is in direct charge of Dr. Wilrnon Newell, who i. the chief entornologi t of the plant board, and of tbe University of Florida.

"It i stated that a resolution was pencling in the Lt'gislature ot Florida to abolish the Florida Plant Board with which till> Department ot .Agriculture is cooperating. It Is alleged tbat immediately thereafter the fruit fly was discovered. Tbe implication is made that the appear­ance of the fly sa>t>d the political life of the Florida Plant Board, and that in orne my terious way the plant board wa re ponsible for its appearance. •

"The facts are that the Florida Plant Board ls composed of five out­tanding citizens of Florida, who are not only members of the plant

board but who also form the board of control of all the institutions of higher leaming, including the university, in the State. Two of them are grower of citru fruits. All of them have their homes and their busl­nes nffnll' in Florida. All of them serve without pay.

"Under all the circumstances, the veile.j accusation that these men were responsible tor the appearance of the fly in order to save their vol­untary unpaid jobs Is ridiculous. To charge the e men with vi itlng such a scourge upon the State in which they live and have all their posses­ions in order to preserve an empty honor is too great a tax to be irn­

po ed upon the imagination ot even tbe most credulous. " That the re olution pending in the legislature dealing with the

plant board was never taken erlously is amply demonstrated by the fact that the leg!. lature, with only one di senting vote. pn. d an appro­priation of 500,000 to support the quarantine.

"The statement is freely made tbnt tbe tly bas appear d in Florida at intermittent periods for the last 4.0 years. No entomologist or clentist has ever ma<le such a statement. None can be found wbo

will upport it. We have no doubt that there arc everal flies which re emble the fruit fiy and which have appeared at >arlous tim<.' . That those flies are not tbe Mediterranean fruit fly 1 amply dernonstrat('u by the fact that they bave not become the pe t or wrought the devasta­tion which bas followeu the Mediterl'anenn fruit tly.

"We have no doubt that there ha>e been in tances of abu e, inef­ficiency, and waste in connection with tbe emdicntion carnpaigu. The campaign was necesl'arlly hastily organized to meet nn ernt>rgency. Under such conditions, orne degree of waste and inefJ\clency is to be expected.

" Thi department bas ~Pent more than 4,000,000 nnd some 10 months in the etl'ort to eradicate the fly. We have been succe. ful beyond our hopes. The fruit tly population bas been so far r duced that it is irn-

,

2758 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 possible to find a fly in Florida at this time. In fact, no adult flies have been seen in Florida since August 7, 1929, and no infestation of any kind since November 16, 1929.

"We are highly gratified at the apparent reduction of the fly popula­tion. This, however, is no guarantee that the fly has actually been eradicated. Few, if any, house flies can be discovered in the District of Columbia at this season. This fact offers no proof that they are not here and will not reappear. In addition to this, our work has been so hamstrung by the delay in securing appropriations that we have not been able to cover the State adequately to determine whether or not the fly is actually in existence. In the view of our entomologists, the abandonment of the work now would be a calamity, would mean that the money already expended has been wasted, and that the fly, if and when it reappears, would spread without hindrance to the enormous damage of the whole South, Southwest, and West."

COLONIAL NATIONAL MONUMENT IN VIRGINIA Mr. SWANSON. Mr. President, I desire to have printed in

the RECORD a joint resolution of the General Assembly of Virginia.

A bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Mr. CRAMTON, a Member of Congress from Michigan, for the crea­tion of a colonial national monument to include the historic parts of Williamsburg, where many of the most stirring and impor­tant events of colonial times and down to the Revolution occurred; also Jamestown Island, the site of the first permanent English settlement in America, and the joint cradle alike of the glorious Commonwealth of Virginia and this mighty Republic; also the historic and important parts of Yorktown, where there was fought the battle which ended the Revolutionary War, and where there was effected the Revolution commenced in 1776, which Revolution has belted the world, and worked for the betterment of mankind the world over.

The General Assembly of Virginia has passed a joint resolu­tion urging the passage of this bill, and requesting its early consideration. I ask to have the joint resolution printed in the RECORD, and referred to the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is so ordered. The joint resolution is as follows: ·

Joint resolution with reference to colonial national monument in the State of Virginia

Whereas a bill "To provide for the creation of the colonial national monument in the State of Virginia, and for other purposes," was offered in the National House of Representatives on January 10, 1930 (H. R. 8424), by Hon. Louis C. CRAMTON, which bill provides under certain stated conditions for the inclusion in the proposed colonial national monument " Jamestown Island, parts of the city of Williamsburg, and the Yorktown battle field and suitable area to connect said island, city, and battle field"; and

Whereas the establishment of this proposed colonial national monu­ment, embracing a unique but l~g-neglected historic area within this State, would result in preserving in perpetuity these sacred shrines of national life and liberty, and would further result in presenting to the present and future generations the epoch-making events and glorious achievements which mark the birth of this Nation in 1607, and the beginning of representative government in America at Jamestown, Va., in 1619 ; together with the constructive and immortal co~1tributions

made in Williamsburg, Va., to the national independence, to the declara­tion of the rights and duties of man, and to the creation of the safe­guards of national liberty; and which, finally, would result in establish­ing a perpetual witness to the sacrifice and devotion by which national independence was secured by the culminating victory of the Revolution at Yorktown, Va.; and

Whereas Virginia, while cherishing these sacred memorials and glori­ous associations, is not herself able to reclaim, develop, enrich, beautify, preserve, and maintain for all time this historic area and thus make it a worthy memorial of the past and an inspiring witness to the future; a.nd because Virginia further feels that what is hers within this area is also a national inheritance, a national trust, and a national responsi­bility: Therefore be it

Resolved by the house of delegates (the senate concurring), That we do hereby most heartily indorse the " Cramton bill," which provides for the creation of the colonial national monument in Virginia, and requests the Virginia Members of the National House of Representatives and Senate to give their active support to the measure, and we hereby commend the Hon. Lours C. CRAMTON for his patriotic service to the Nation in preparing and offering this bill; be it further

Resolved, That the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Vir­ginia now in session in Richmond are in accord in their desire for the early passage of this great patriotic measure; be it further

Resolved, That the Governor of Virginia be, and is hereby requested, to transmit these resolutions in proper form to the Virginia Members

of the House and Senate in Washington and to the Ron. Lours C. CRAMTON, patron of the bill to create in Virginia a colonial national monument .

.Agreed to by house of delegates January 24, 1930. JNO. W. WILLIAMS,

Clerk of the House of D elegates. . Agreed to by the senate January 24, 1930.

0. V. HAUGEN, Clerk of tlle Senate.

REPORT OF UNITED STATES YORKTOWN SESQUICENTENNIAL COMMIS­SION ( S. DOC. NO. 7 5 )

Mr. SWANSON. Mr. President, I also desire to make a re­port as chairman of the United States Yorktown Sesquicenten­nial Commission.

We were directed to make a report to Congress by the 1st of February regarding the proper celebration to be made of the sesquicentennial of the surrender of Cornwallis at Yorktown. I have here the report, signed by all the members of the joint commission. I ask to have it printed in the RECORD, and also printed as a public document.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is so ordered. The report is as follows : REPORT OF THE UNITED STATES YORKTOWN SESQUICENTENNIAL

COMMISSIO~

To the Senate and House of Representatives ot the United States: The United States Yorktown Sesquicentennial Commission created

by the Congress to prepare and report a plan or plans and a program for the commemoration of the siege of Yorktown, Va., and the surrender of Cornwallis on October 19, 1781, with an estimate of the probable cost, and for other purposes, as specified in House Concurrent Resolution 43, Seventieth Congress, first session, and subsequent amendments, respect­ful1y reports as follows :

That pursuant to the said resolution the following members of said commission were appointed :

On the part of the Senate: Hon. CLAUDE A. SwANSON, of Virginia; Hon. DAVID A. REED, of Pennsylvania; Hon. Walter E. Edge, of New Jersey; Hon. HIRAM BINGHAM, of Connecticut; and Hon. RonEliT F. WAGNER, of New York.

On the part of the House: Hon. Louis A. Frothingham, of Massa­chusetts; Hon. ROBERT L. BACON, of New York ; Ron. ROY G. FITZ­GERALD, of Ohio ; Hon. JOSEPH W. BYRNS, of Tennessee ; and lion. CHARLES R. CRISP, of Georgia.

Hon. Louis A. Frothingham, of Massachusetts, having died, Hon. GEORGE R. STOBBS was duly appointed in his stead. Hon. Walter E. Edge having been appointed minister to France, Hon. JOHN G. TOWN­SEND, Jr., of Delaware, was appointed in his stead.

This commission met, and pursuant to the provisions of House Con­current Resolution 43 selected a chairman and vice chairman from among their members, as follows :

Hon. CLAUDE A. SWANSON was elected chairll?Jln; Hon. CHARLES R. CRISP was elected vice chairman ; and Hon. S. 0. BLAND was elected to serve as secretary for said commission.

The commission has considered all plans and suggestions which have been made to it, and recommends that the ceremonies in commemoration of the siege and surrender be held for four days, one of which shall be the 19th day of October, 1931, the anniversary of the surrender. On that day it is desired that the President of the United States shall be present and make an address. The President has signified his inten­tion to attend, and it is believed that he will make an address on that occasion.

The exercises contemplated are similar to those held in commemora­tion of the one hundredth anniversary of the surrender, at which time there. were present the President of the United States and his Cabinet, ex-Presidents of the United States, the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, ex-Vice Presidents of the United States, Members of the Senate and House of Representa­tives of the United States, the diplomatic corps, distinguished officers of the Army and Navy, governors of different States in the Union with their staffs, representatives of foreign powers, descendants of partici­pants in the siege and surrender, military and naval units from the United States and foreign powers, military units from the original thirteen States, mayors of principal cities in the United States, patriotic organizations, and many other distinguished guests.

The exercises consisted of speeches by the President, other dis­tinguished citizens, and representatives of foreign powers and of mili­tary and naval displays, reviews and parades, and exercises by patriotic organizations.

This commission recommends that the exercises be along the same general lines, consisting of educational and commemorative exercises, assemblages of patriotic societies, and military and naval reviews and parades.

In the absence of information as to the appropriations for the pro­posed celebrotion it is impossible for the commission to submit detailed

1930 CO GRESSIO.~.TAL RECORD-SE TE 2759 plans now or to The detnl11:1 or I h d PPnd npon tbe lcglHlullou.

<'lo more tbnn submit a broad ootllne ot it.<; plans. plnn nna pr1 "'ram mu~t b prepar d later and must

l<>nl to whicll they will b authorized by enablin"'

lllstot·icul ~It should b marked nnd mad nee .. sible to the public by np]n·oprlut drlvewny:-;, and pnrJ;;lng spaces, pnradc gt·ounds, and en­·umtlrn nt &;rountlN mnt'll be eecur d. Pucilltie for the comfort of the puhllc nnu n tc111porury nudltorlt1m for u e in the event of inclement Wl't\1 ht ·r muHt b provided. T( mpornt·y ro~td!'! must be constructed, an nll<·flllllt wnt •r supply obtnitwd, and othPr facilities provided.

'.I'll TJultt>d tntt~:~ owns considerable prop ri.y ncar Yorktown which should he utillz .d tlO tar as practicable to av(Jid ('X}) n .

.Mnch of the land which would be n<· ded for the purpose of the cell'llrn I ion hn b •en In litlAatlon for s •vt~ ral y1•ar pnst. It appears t hnt I his difficulty hns now b en r<'mov d, too late, however, for tbe cornmis ion to work out <1 tntl<'d plnnM.

'l'h (•omwl .I n r co1um nd that the .ongr . e enact ennbllng legis­lation uuthorlzlug au nppropt·!ution of ~200,0 0 for the purpo ·e~ of said <· lr!hrntlon. This comml · lon r •I that a c l•brntlon of the char. cter r<•l·omm •nded, worthy of tbi 'ntlon, and In keeping with th di1nl.ity of the •v nt to b eel brntcd would r quire tbnt sum. In fact, this comml!i~lon h 11 ' V< s thnt Jt will b ne cs~ary for State , municipnlitie!'!, aw1l c·ontmunltie to uppl,•mt•nt tbl sum.

'l'hlH comml. Rlon rprommen<l also tllnt the Po. tma ter en ral be nutlh>rlz d nnd dlr •ctM to l. u pcclnl .rll'. of postage tamps, in dlfT~'rl'ot dc•nnmlnntlons nn1l of HU h cli11Nent cl , ign a be may deter­mine, commemorntiv of the on hmult·Nl and fiftl<'th nnnlver ury or tht• Mil•gt' nncl surr ntll'r nt Yorl>towtl, rti.·plnying major events con­nr<•tl'll with th llh'g nntl HUrr nd~>r, and appropriate portraits of l'llllllt'nt tWr~on ronnectE'd with tbe nevolutlon. bill for that pur­po" hn b n Introduced at the r qu!' t or the commk ion by Hon. nor . Frrzonn r.o, a m!'mb r of the commi . ion, nnd a copy is hereto nttnt·h d.

ThiH comm!Rslon recommends that In commemoration of the one hundred and tHtl th nnntver nry of 1be cnd of the nevolutionnry War hy t h' Rurrrnd r of 'ornwnlll at Yorktown, Yn., there shall be coin('d hy the l>lrt' tor of t h Unt ISOO,O ·nv r (i -c nt pi('ce of standard size, wri~ht, nnd fln •neHH nnd or a P<><'ial approprlnt design to be flxrd by the Dlr ctor of th .lint, with the approval of the ecretary of the Tr n~nry, to b ll'l-r.ll h•ndrr in nll paym nt at face Talue, with ult.abl provlf;ions r lath1g to ntd coin n embodied ln a bill which has

br n tnt roduced at the r!'quc t of the I'Omml ·1don by lion. ROY G. FITz­m:rtAr.o, nnd n copy of that bill is hereto attach d. Thls chnract~r of 1 ~f:.;lo tion Is uot nr.w n ncl h. b l'n nne ted in the following in tanc s :

'l'o commemornt the R vcnty-flcth nnnlver.ary of the Gadsden Pur­chns : to comm mor te the founding of the city of Tr nton, N. J.; to comm momte 1 he L wi. and lark xpeditlon; to commemorate the founding or til Ma achusetts Bay olony; and in many otller ln­stnnc .

Inn much ns the 1 th dny or October, 1931, immediately preceding th nnnlvcr ary of the surrend _r, fallt1 on unday, thi commi sion suggi'!H the propr1 ty nt nn appropriate time of cnlllng by pre ldcn­tlnl proclamation th ntt utlon or the people of the United tate to tht• nnnlv l'tlnry, wJth the reque t that appropriate religion xerci ' es be h ld in the churcbc of the Unit d tnt in commemoration of tl1at Vt•nt and in thnnk~glviog for the ble . In~ that lun·e been bestowed

UllOn t ht' p oplt' of the Unit <1 Stnt !'!, ~'hi1:1 comml!' lon r!' ommcnd thut all of the tntes be reque ted, by

npproprlate prc. hi nt inl procl matlon, to participate in the e quj­c nl nnial c l<'brntlon, nnd that all unlv r Ill , college , and .chools ot all grad s be r quested on the 19th dny of ctob •r, 19:n, to com­m morat the aid urr nd r in an appropriate and patriotic manner.

ThlH corumb ·ion r commend that th Pr !;ident of the United tates h r tU ted to xtend to such gov<'rnruentll nnd individual ns the Prr.llldl'nt muy d tl'rmlne n eordlnl invitation to unite with the Govern­ru nt and Pt opl~ or th United tate. in a fit and appt·opriate ob erv­nuc of the surL' ndrr of Lord ornwnllis at Yorktown.

AH tlll:,; commi . Ion waH crt>ntcd by concurr nt r ' olutlon, tbi com­mill lon b II •v 'll that tlli. comml sion or such other as may be charged with the r spon ·ibllity of tbi eel bt·ation, 1:1hould be creat d by joint r R lutloo or uAnnl ennctm nt, and it r commends that the <'Dabllog 1 glslnllon provid for a comml Jon to be chnrg- d with all the powers, dutle., and 1· spou . lbllHics with which this commission is now wsted nnd which nl th time of the approval or aid legh;latlon shall not have b !'n ompl >ted.

'l_'ltis comml. l'lon tmbmlt!! hcrl'wlth sugge tlon for legislation in tb form or t~;ntntlve rl'solutiou and will .-upplem nt them by Inter report and tt•ntatlve bil or r <~olutlon as occn ion may demand.

'I'hiR commls. ion rc ommend that the commL ion b nuthorlz d and empower d to do uu thlnr.;s nee ·ary nnd proper to carry into eflect any nnd all plan. tbnt mny be adopted by ong-rt· ...

This comml sion ubmlts u n put·t of thi r port n most exhnu tive m morantlum or authorlU dealing wltb the lege of Yorktown and the Rurr ndl'r of ornwallls. This memot·andum hns been prepared by non. ltox G. FlTzol<lrtALO, n member ot this commis lon, and the com­mt slon bcllcvt' that 1t would be highly useful lf a painstaking and

thorough research could be made to develop for publication and distri­bution the most aecurnte and inter sting story of the siege and sur­render ut Yot·ktown. with the events leading up to tbe surrender.

This commission calls attention to the tact tllnt n few months follow­Ing th Yorktown eel bratlon there will commence a celebration com­memorating the two hundr dth anniver. ary of the birth of George Wa hington and that the Yorktown celebration may be recognized a. the l.Jcglnning of the commemoration of Washin"'ton's birth. The commis­sion should be authorized to cooperate witb the Unite<} Stnte commis­

ion for the celebrati(}n of the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of ,..ffirge Wa hin.gton for the purpose of appropriate coordination.

This commi . ion recommend to the Congre:;s for its con !deration the b111, n. R. 8424, introduced by RepresentatiYe CRAMTON~ of Mlchi­gnn, on January 10, 1930, which provide for the creation of a national monument to include Jamestown I land, parts of the city of Williams­burg, and the Yorktown Battle Field. The park to be e tablished would incln!le the Moore Hou e, wherein the t rm of surrt>nder were nego­tlat d. This commi ._·ion indor s the purpose nod principles of thi. bill, nnd recommends that legi lntion to accompli b these result be enacted at an early date, to the end that the monument mny be avail­able in time tor the . quicentennial c lebratlon, if po sible.

This commisF:lon strongly ur"'es that thl great event be celebrated in a manner which will be worthy of this Nation and which will pro• mote ~ood will and amity with nil the world. The celebration will st>ek to exalt the principles of political freedom for which the Revolutionary father fought and the ideals of liberty upon which our institutions are founded. It will in plre love of country nnd de"rtltion to its ideal. . It wm recall to younger generations the struggles of the pa ·t. It wlll p rpctnatc the principles upon which the Nation was built, and upon which its future most rest. Yorktown was the glorious culmination c-r n long truggle filled with tragic memories and heroic achievement . Yorktown is the place where the immortal truths declared in Philadel­phia were made permanently effective. It is the birthplace of tbe Nation, nnd the one hundred and fiftieth anniver ary of the surrender >~hould be ct>lebrated in a manner befitting the importance of the event nnd the greatness of this country.

This eommls!'!ion recomm nds early con lderation of the enabling legislation, which wlll be needed to prepare the celebration.

Resp('ctfully submitted.

H. R. 8922

CLAUDE A. SWANSON, 01tair11t01n.

JOHN G. TOWNSEND, Jr. lliRAli BI."GIIA {. ROBERT G. "WAGNER. CHARLES R. CRISP,

Vice OhatrnJ.<m. ROBERT L. BACON. ROY C. FITZOEIULO. ,JOSEPH W. BYnNS. GEORGE R. STOBDS.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESIINTATIYES, January ~1, 1930.

Mr. FITZGERALD introduced the following bill ; which was referred to the Committee on the Po t Office and Po t Road and order('(} to be • printed. A bill to authorize the i~ ue of postage tamp. in commemoration of the

sesquicentennial of the surrender of Cornwnllls at ~orktown

Be it enacted, etc., That in commemoration of the one hundred n.nd fiftieth anniversary of the end of tbe Revolutionary War by the sur­r nder of the British Army under Cornwnlll at Yorktown, 1het·e shall be i uf'd with appropriate de i&'Il a set of posta~e tamps, and the Po ·tmsu ter General, conferring with the United .. totes Yorktown e -quicentennial ommi . Ion of Congress, 1 authorized to have the designs ~E'1Pcted, including portraits of Washington, Lafayette, teuhen, Rocham­beau, and De Gras e and a de ign in two color depicting the surrender; plate,; prepar('d and the stamp placed on ~ale at the po t office of York­town and other cities on or before October 19, 1931.

H. R. 8923

IN TUE HOUSE OF RJilPRESE:->TaTIYES,

Jan11ary 21, 19!10.

Mr. FITZGERALD introduced the following bill ; which was referred to the 'ommittee on Cotnnge, Weights, and Meruures and ordered to be printed.

.A bill to nuthorize the coinage of :30-cent piece~ in commemorntion of the R4' quicentenninl of tlle surrendcr ot ornwallis at Yorktown

Be ·t enacted, etc., That in commcmot·ation of the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the end of the Revolutionary War by the sur­render of ornwallis at Yorktown, there ball be coined by the Director o! the Mint :>00,000 :30-cent pieces of standnrd size, weight, and silver fineness nnd of a special appropriate design to be fixed by the Director

·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE .JANUARY 31 of the Mint, with the approval of the Secretary o:t' the Treasury, to be legal tender in all payments at face value.

SEc. 2. That the coins herein authorized shall be i ssued at par and only upon the request of the chairman or secretary of the Yorktown Sesquicentennial Commission appointed by Congress.

SEc. 3. Such coins may be disposed of at par or at a premium by said commission and all proceeds shall be used in furtherance of the Yorktown sesquicentennial and memorial projects, including a monument commemorating the aid· from France and the French commanders, Admiral de Grasse and Count de Rochambeau.

SEc. 4. That all laws now in force relating to the subsidiary silver coins of the United States and the coining or striking of the same, regulating and guarding the process of coinage, providing for the pur­chase of material, and for the transportation, distribution, and redemp­tion of the coins, for the prevention of debasement or counterfeiting, :t'or security of the coin or for any .other purp_ose, whether said laws are penal or otherwise, shall, so far as applicable, apply to the coinage herein directed.

. Joint resolution authorizing and requesting the President to extend to foreign governments and individuals an invitation to join the Gov­ernment and people of the United States 1n the observance of the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the surrender of Lord Corn­wallis at Yorktown, Va. Resolved, eto., That when, in the opinion of the President of the

United States of America, it shall be appropriate for him to do so, the President be, and he is hereby, authorized and requested to extend to such governments and individuals, as the President may determine, an invitation to unite with the Government and people of the United States in a fit and appropriate observance of the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the surrender of Lord Cornwallis at Yorktown, and in order to carry out the purposes of this resolution the sum of ~25,000 is hereby authorized to be appropriated out of any money 1n the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the same or so much thereof as may be necessary to be expended under the direction of the Secre-

: tary of State.

1 Joint resolution providing for the participation of the United States 1n the celebration of the one hundred and fiftieth an'niversary of the siege of Yorktown, Va., and the surrender of Lord Cornwallis on October 19, 1781, and authorizing an appropriation to be used in con­nection with such celebrations, and for other purposes Resolved, eto., That the commission heretofore created pursuant to

House Concurrent Resolution 43, Seventieth Congress, first session, and

1 known as the United States Yorktown Sesquicentennial Commission be, and the same is hereby, continued by the same name and hereinafter referred to as the commission. Any vacancies arising in the personnel of the said commission shall be filled as follows : Any vacancies occur-

; ring among the Senators shall be filled by appointment by the Presi­i dent of the Senate, and any vacancies oceurring among the Members

of the House of Representatives shall be filled by appointment by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

SEC. 2. That there is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, not exceeding

' $200,000, to be expended in the discretion of the commission for the appropriate participation of the United States in the celebration and

I observance of the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the siege of Yorldown, Va., and the surrender of Cornwallis on October 19, 1781.

SEC. 3. That the said commission is authorized to formulate and secure the proper execution of appropriate plans for said celebration; to employ or assist in employing all necessary employees and assistants

· for the proper execution of its duties under this resolution ; to co­' operate with any and all other organizations, associations, and agen­

cies, Federal, State, or municipal, civic and patriotic, that may be in­terested in said celebration, to enter into such contracts, perform such work, and do all such other things as may be necessary or proper to carry into full effect the intents and purposes of this resolution.

SEC. 4. That the commission may 1n its discretion accept for the purposes of said celebration gifts of money or property, leases of land, and loans of property.

SEc. 5. That the said commission be, and the same is hereby, author­ized to call upon the Commission of Fine Arts in Washington for their assistance and advice 1n connection with the performance of the duties of said United States Yorktown Sesquicentennial Commission, and the said Commission of Fine Arts is directed to render such assistance and advice as its other duties may permit and as may be within its power.

Smc. 6. All expenditures of the commission shall be paid by the Treasurer of the United States upon the approval of the chairman and the secretary of the commission.

SEC. 7. That the members of the commission shall receive no com­pensation for their services, but shall be paid their actual and neces­sary traveling, hotel, and other expenses incurred in the discharge of their official duties outside of the District of Columbia to be paid out of the moneys authorized in section 2 of this resolution : Provided,

however, That the expenditures under this section of this resolution shall not exceed in the aggregate the sum of $5,000.

SEC. 8. That the commission hereby created shall expire one year after the expiration of the celebration.

BIBLIOGRAPHY OR ORIGINAL SOURCES OF INFORMATION ON THE SIEGE OF

YORKTOWN, VA.--THE SURRENDER OF THE BRITISH ARMY U NDER CORN~

WALLIS ON OCTOBER 19, 1781, TO THl!l ALLIED AMERICAN AND FRENC1I

ARMIES U~DER WASHINGTON AND ROCHAMBEAU, ENDING THE AMDRICAN

REVOLUTIONARY WAR, TOGETHER WITH TH:Bl MILITARY CAMPAIGN OF

WHICH IT WAS THE CULMINATIO!Il

(Prepared by Repre~ntative RoY G. FITZGERALD, of the United States Yorktown Sesquicentennial Commission)

. 1. Manuscript Journal of General Washington. 2. Diary of Lieut. Reuben Sanderson. 3. Account of Yorktown Surrender, by Lieut. Col. Harry Lee. 4. Description of Yorktown Surrender, by Colonel Fontaine. 5. Report of the Su:crender, by Lord Cornwallis. 6. The Siege of Yorktown, by Col. Richard Butler . 7. Lafayette's Expedition to Virginia, by Ed'ward M. Allen. 8. Narrative of the Campaign, by Sir Henry Clinton. 9. Journal of the Siege of Yorktown, by Chaplain Evans. 10. The Yorktown Campaign, by Henry J. Johnston. 11. A Journal of the Southern Expedition, 1780-1783, by Sergt. Maj.

William Seymour. 12. Journal of the Campaign, by Lieut. William Feltman. 13. Memoirs of Gen. Samuel Graham·. 14. The Campaign in Virginia in 1781, by Benjamin Franklin Stevens. 15. Journal of Operations, 1780-81, by Count Fersen. 16. Correspondence of Marquis de Lafayette. 17. The Revolutionary War, by Gen. Francis Vinton Greene. 18. Campaigns and Battles of the Revolution, by Edward Everett Hale. 19. Memoirs of the Due de Lauzun. 20. A History of the Battles of the Revolution, by Charles Carleton i

Coffin. 21. Letter of Gov. Thomas Nelson. · 22. Battles of the American Revolution, by Henry Beebe Carrington. I 23. The American Revolution, by John Fiske. 24. Memoirs of Lieut. Col. Tench Tilghman. 25. History of the Campaign of 1780-81, by Lieut. Col. Banastre

Carleton.

THE YORKTOWN CAMPAIGN AND SURRENDER OF CORNWALLIS

(Henry P. Johnston. Harper & Bros., New York, 1881)

LIST OF ORIGINAL AUTHORITIES ON THE YORKTOWN CAMPAIGN

Blanchard, Claude. Journal, 1780-1783. Translated from the French manuscript by William Duane and edited by Thomas Balch, Albany, 1876.

Butler, Col. Richard. Journal of the Siege of Yorktown. Historical Magazine (vol. 8, p. 102).

Cbastellux, Marquis de. Travels in North America in 1780-1782. London, 1787.

Clinton, Sir Henry. Narrative of the Campaign. London, 1783. Ob· servations on some Parts of the Answer of Earl Cornwallis, 1783. O!Jservations on Mr. Stedman's History of the American War, 1794. Clinton's Explanation, in Washington's Contemplated Attack on New York. Page 177 of New York City during the American Revolution. Mercantile Library Association, New York, 1860.

Cornwallis, Earl. Answer to Clinton's Na.rrative. London, 1783. Correspondence. Edited, with notes, by Charles Ross. London, 1859.

Denny, Lieutenant. Journal. Published by Pennsylvania Historical Society.

Deuxponts, Count William. My Campaigns in .America. Translated, with introduction and notes, by Samuel A. Green, M. D., librarian, Massachusetts Historical Society, Boston.

Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution. Sparks, Boston, 1829.

Evans, Chaplain. Journal of the Siege of York in Virginia. Collec­tion Massachusetts Historical Society (vol. 9, first series, p. 102). The chaplain's name is not given in connection with the Journal, but it appears, from a reference in Thacher's Military Journal, that the writer was Chaplain Evans, of Colonel Sammell's Corps.

Feltman, Lieut. William. Journal of the Campaign. Published by Pennsylvania Historical Society.

Fersen, Count. Letters and Journal of Operations, 1780- 1781. Maga­zine of American History, 1879. Also, in same magazine, May and June, 1880, Diary of a French Officer, with engineer's journal added.

Graham, Gen. Samuel. Memoirs. Edinburgh. Graves, Rear Admiral. Two Letters Respecting the Conduct of Rear

Admiral Graves on the Coast of the United States, July to November, 1781. By William Graves, esq., of the Inner Temple. Morrisania, N.Y., 1865. H. B. Dawson. Journal of the Siege of Yorktown, by an officer. Martin's Gazetteer of Virginia , title, Yorktown.

19 0 CO GRE IONAL RECORD-SE ATE 2761 Lntay tt , Mnrqul d . Memoirs, Corr pond nee, and Manuscripts of.

Am rl no dillon, N w York, 1837. S e also a rew letters tn Graham's Llr or G n. D nt I Mor an.

• 1: molr . Parts, 1 32. ol. Harry. femolrs of the War in the Southern De-

pnrtm nt of tll United tntes. Phlladelpbin, 1 12. Muhl nbcrg, Gen. I etcr, llfe of. By IIenry N. Muhlenberg. Phlla­

d lphl ' 1 ·U>. Nt•biOn. Gov. Thoma . Published by Virginia Iltstorical

och·t.r. N w rl s. No. 1, Op rations of tbe French Fleet Under D • rn; · . nradford Jub, NC\V York, 1 64. Orderly Book of th lr~ or ·orktown from ptcml>er 26, 17 1, to November 2, 1781. l'bHttrlt•lphla, 18 S. Parliamentary Register for 1781-17 3.

Pkl<t•rlng, ol. Timothy, llfe of. Boston. Itochamb •au, onnt. Memoir Relative to the War of the Indep nd­

cnc or the United Stat . Translation of M. W. E. Wright. Paris, 1 3 .

Itocllt>foucauld-Llnncourt, Due de. Travels Through .the United States in 17 5-1707. London, 1 00.

Sim o •, lJ ut. ol. J. G. Mllltary Journal of the Campaigns in Awt•ri nn R volutlon. w York, 1 44.

tcub •n, Huron, llfP or. By Friedrich Knpp. New York, 1 59. Tnrieton, Lieut. ol. Buna tr . IIi tory of ampaigns of 1780-1781

in the tlouthern Provine s of North America. London, 1787. Thncher, urg. Jam . MUit.ary Journal During tbe American

R volutlonnry War from 1775 to 17 3. llartford, 1 54. 'l'ilghman, Ll ut. ol. 'f nch, m moir of, with Revolutionary journals

and lt'l t ·rs. Alhany, 1 76. W • hill ton, n ral, writings of. By Jared park . New York,

1 11. I o p rkH' orr pondenc ot the Revolution. Wnyu •. 11. Anthony, llf and letters ot. By his on. Philadelphia.

A k('t, 1 ~. Weld, l~anc. Travel In the Northern States and Canada, 1795--1797.

Loncto11, 17 In autlltion to th Rpeclal journal and narratives, and tbe con-

t mpornry lll tori of ordon, tedman, Mar!'lhall, and others, the am­pi munul:l ·ript collection or the New York and Massachusetts Ilistori­cal Socl •ties, and thos nt Albany, Ilartford, and elsewhere. For other r f!'reucNI 011 lh<' cnmpnlgn the Httudbook ot the American Revolution, by Mr. Ju::-;Un Win or, llbral'lan of Ilarvnrd College, Is to be consulted.

MAPS A 0 PLANS OF THII II':Oa

1. 'l'he <'nrlil'l-lt plan or "draft" wn doubtless tbe one Washington tnte , Octob r 20, 17 1, that he transmitted to Congre wltb the

l' turns ()f JH'I ont.>r and the cupturcd standards. It is not known to be in ex:J~t• II(' •.

~. Mup of th lnv(', tment of York and Glouc • ter, in Virgtnln. Sur­v y <I ctol>r.r 22- 2 • 17 1, by Maj. ebastinn Bauman, Second Con­tin ntal ArtJJlery, Pbllnrt lphln, 1782. edlcnted to Washington.

opl 1:1 In llbrurl s or the New York and P nnsylvanla Historical So­c! t1' . l'ubli. b d on rl'duc d seal in ordon's Ill tory nnd in Mu.gn­zln • or IDt>rlcnu History, January, 18 1.

•. Plnn or the • 'lt>gc nnd djnc nt ountry. Drawn by J. F. Rennult "with a crowo nnd pr nled to th Marquis de Lafayette. Engraved by H. 'J.'nnnl'r, Philntlt>lphin, 1825 ( ?) • This nppenrs to be a copy or Baumnu'11, with th legl'nd utrter ntly xecuted and ornamented.

4. A l'ltlU oC York and Glou t r, bowing the Britl h and American Wurk~ in 17 1. By apt. Edwnrd F1lge, Royal Artillery. London, 17 2. mutwrnte.

11. Plnn or tb , nme from "an actual urvey in po. csslon of John Hlll~i, lnte 11 utPnnnt in tht> Tw<'nty-third Regiment nnd assistant engi­n r." Thl Is known n tbc Fad n mnp, London, 17 5, and wns prob­ably 1' mpilcd from the urvey by I+'n"'e.

11. Plan of tb • Hll.'ge of Yorktown, in Yfrglnln. London, March 1, 17 7.

7. Plnn of the Entrnnc . of bc!':apeake Bay, with James and York Rlv1•rs ; wh r •I n nr ::~hown th r tlCCtlvc po ltlons (in the beginning or

rtob!'r): l.'t, or the Brltl h rmy command!'d by Lord Cornwallis, at (llotH' :-;It r und York, In VIrginia; (2d) of the • merlcan and French rot·c t~ uu<l r Gl•twral Wn hlngton; (3d) of the Il'ren h Fleet under

ouut d rns e. By nn ollicc.-r. Publish d by WilHam Ii'nd~>n, Charlng ro !-1, November 2 , 17 1, London. Tbl and the preceding map, No.

o. nrc on ttl at lb office of the bief of Engine rs, United tates Army, WnHhlngtoo, D.

8. Plnn O'York en Vir lnle avec altaques et l<'S Campemens de 1'.\rml'e combin e de Frnnce et d'Amcrlque. This plan, by a French (•n •In ct·, nppe. r in the fourth volume of .::oule's Hlstolre Des Troubles de l'Amerlqu Anglnls •, Pari , 17 7; also In Magazine ot American nt tory, .Juu , 1 0. In • oulc' work, al o, is a cl r and accurate map showing the mnrd1 of 1hc French from Newport, R. I., to Yorktown, anu r turn. The camp b Cot· Yot·ktown is marked as t11eir "40th."

Bauman't~, Fu~l''s, Hill's, and the French map are the best nutborltieR, the tit· t nam d <'OV ring the entire fl ld, including the allled cnmps, with gr n t nccurncy.

9. Narrntlve nn<l Critical lllstory of America (vol. 6, ch. 6).

The War in the Southern Department, by Edward Channing. Houghton, Mlftlln & Co. The Riverside Press, Cambridge, Mass., 18 7.

Lo e at Yorktown : Kllled or ml sing, British, 541 ; French, 76; Am ricans, 180 .

Force at Yorktown, October, 1781: Allled army, 9,000 (3,500 m111-tin) American, 7,000 French; 16,000, of whom 1,400 were unfit tor duty. Briti,h surrendered 7,157, of which 3, 00 were fit for duty, October 19, 1781.

ONE-HUNDREDTH ANNIVEBSARY OF DEBATE BETWEEN WEBSTER AND HAYNE

Mr. W AL H of Massachusett . Mr. Pr ident, this w ek is the one-hundredth anniver ary of what is generally consider d the greate t debate that ever took place in the United States Senate--the debate between Senator Hayne, of South Carolina, and enator Daniel Webster, of Mas achusetts.

The Bo ton Post of this week published an editorial article from the New York un which pictured very graphically the circum tances surrounding this epoch-making debate. I a k that it be printed in the RECORD.

The VICE PRE IDENT. Without objection, it is so ordered. The matter referred to is as :follows:

[From the Bo ton Post, J"anuary 27, 1930] "UNION" SPEECH ON JANUARY 27, 1830-W~DBSTEB'S ORATION GREATEST

IN AMI:RICAN HISTORY FINISHED IN SENATJD JUST A CENTURY AGO (To-day is the anniversary of the greatest speech ever delivered in

Congr -tbe famous reply of Daniel Webster to Senator Ilayne. The following t'dltorial article from the New York Sun pictures very graphi­cally the circumstances urroundlng this epoch-making oration :)

DANIEL WllBSTD AT mGR TIDJI

Senator Hayne, of Soutb Caroll.rul, began on January 19, 1830, hls remark on Foote's re olutlon, a proposal relating to the snle of public lands and now remembered only becau~ of the d bate to which it led. It was by accident that Senator Webster, of Massacbus tts, much occu­pied with arguments before the Supreme Court, entered the Senate

bnmber that day and li tened to an assault on New England by th6 eloquent young spoke man or Cnlhoun. On the 20th Webster made his first reply, denying that New England, tbrough the taritl' of 1828, ought to burt the interests of tbe South and West. In his retort to

this Hayne presented the theory, already held by Calhoon, that it wns the right of any'" State to determine ot itself the constitutionality of a Federal law and, 1t lt found an net ot Congres unconstitutional, to prevent it execution within the State. For example, Sonth Carolina could refuse to permit the collecti~n of tbe customs at any of its ports. Hnync could quote not only tbe Kentucky and Virginia re olutions in upport of his "Carolina doctrine," bot the memorial drawn in Faneull

llnll in 1 09, which declared that tbe Mas achusetts General Court was " competent to devise relief against tbe unconstitutional acts of the General Government."

'l'he position of the North was the more delicate because, only 15 years before, New Englnnd bnd threatened to leave the Union. What could Web ter consistently say to Hayne? At the close of the proceed­Ings of Jnnua.ry 25, it was known that Web ter would reply on the mor­row. Ju. tice Story called on him tbat evening to otl'er ald. "Give your. elf no uneasiness, sir," said 'Yet ter, "I will grind him as fine as a pinch of snuff... He said to anotber t'riend: "All my life has been a preparation for this." The next morning be remarked to Senator Bell, of 'ew Ilampsbire, that his views might surprise some of their own p ople. Bell urged him not to be deterred by this, and added : " It is hi~h time that tbe people of tbls country should know what tbis Con­stitution is." Webster answered: "Then, by tbe blessing of Hooven, th<'Y shall know this day, before the sun goes down, wbll.t I nnderstand it to be."

'.rbe little Senate Chamber, where now the Supreme Court sits, over­flowed before noon of the 26th. "The very stairways," says Charles W. larch in ills remlnl cences, " were dark with men who bung onto one

another like bees in a swarm." The Hou e of Repre entntives was nlmo t de-erted. One Member, Lewis, of Alabama, b~came wedged in the crowd behind Vice President Calhoun's chair, unable to see Block Dan. With his pocketknife be removed a piece of stntned glass from one or the windows that finnked the chair. The floor was gay with tb bonnets and dres es of women who had charmed nntors out of their eats. The Indies may not have known wbat it was nll about, but Ir.

Webster was more magnetic tban any matinee idol. And be was no drab figure In his blue clawhammer with brass buttons, his figured wni t~ont, his bnff trousers, his high stock. Yet the Llon of the .._ 'ortll ne ded nothing !rom fa. Won. He was already at tbc full tide of his greatn~ ~. hi reputation made forever by his argument in the Dart­mouth College case, Ws Pilgrim and Bunker Hill oration., and hi eulogy upon Adams and Jelfer ·on. All the elements of his geniu were at the zenith--Intellect, manner, voice, memory, pr ence. To tb e in tlle reply to Hayne were joined the opportunity and the set­ting. Nullification had nt laSt raised its bend In the Senate. Then or never must nationalism answer. "The dull, black eyes., which Carlyle

2762 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 saw "under the precipice of brows, like dull anthracite furnaces needing only to be blown," were glowing now. The Yankees ln the gallery lifted their heaas, lowering them only to hide the tears that followed the immortal tribute to Massachusetts : " There she is. Behold her and judge for yourself. There is her history; the world knows it by heart. The past, at least, is secure. There is Boston and Concord and Lexing­ton and Bunker Hill; and there they will remain forever."

.After that came the fulfillment of the promise that the world should know what he, Webster, understood o.f the Constitution, the National Government, the rights of the States. "It is, sir, the people's Consti­tution, the people's Government, made for the people, made by the people, and .answerable to the people. • • • The States are un­questionably sovereign, so far· as their sovereignty is not affected by this supreme law." Webster put behind him the waverings of New England, the weaknesses of his own previous positions, and the fact that many of the framers of the Constitution believed what Hayne propounded. The Union Webster described was the one which he saw ought to be; not an easily broken compact between States, but a thing to be subverted only by the revolution of an oppressed people. None but the people could "control it, restrain it, modify or reform it." It was not u new vision of the Union; Washington and Hamilton and Mar­shall bad seen it, but never before had it been described to the people In language they could understand. As Lodge says, Webster "set forth the national conception of the Union. He expressed what many men were vaguely thinking and believing."

Let us quote for the benefit of schoolboys of another era who have mislaid their copies of Sanders's Fifth Reader the prophetic ending of the reply to Hayne : ·

" When my eyes shall have turned to behold for the last time the sun in heaven, may I not see him shining on the broken and dishonored fragments of a once-glorious Union; on States dissevered, discordant, belligerent; on a land rent witli civil feuds, or drenched, it may be, In fraternal blood. Let their last feeble and lingering glance rather behold the gorgeous ensign of the Republic, now known and honored throughout the earth, still full-high advanced ; its arms and trophies streaming in their original luster, not .a stripe erased or polluted, nor a single star obscured, bearing for its motto no such miserable motto as 'What is all this worth~' nor those other words of delusion and folly, • Liberty first and union afterwards'; but everywhere, spread all over in char­acters of living light, blazing on all its ample folds as they float over the sea and over the land and in every wind under the whole heaven, that other sentiment, dear to every true .American's lieart-liberty and union, now and forever, one and inseperable!"

"Mr. Webster," said a colleague, "I think you had better die now and rest your fame on that speech." The beaten but magnanimous Hayne interposed, ".A man who can make such speeches ought never to die." Only five Senators of that day lived to see the land "drenched In fraternal blood," and Webster was not one of them. But his words did not die. They went on, past the bee swarm on the stairways and out across the winter night. Lincoln, not yet 21, read them in the Louisville Journal just before be began his fateful journey to Illinois. The papers of the North spread the new gospel of the Constitution into every hamlet. The schoolbooks carried the message to millions of the young. The cold flame of the doctrines of Washington and Hamilton and Marshall had been fanned to a hot, red torch in the draft of Web­ster's eloquence. It was burning a generation later in the hearts of the men who climbed the heights of Chattanooga and turned back Pickett's Virg;l.nians at Cemetery Ridge.

Monday will be the hundredth anniversary of the reply, which was begun on January 26 and finished on the 27th. Critics say that 1t ranks with the finest orations of Demosthenes and Burke. But In the matter of etl'ect did it not surpass both the speech on the Crown and the Indictment of Hastings? Suppose that Daniel Webster had been a Sena­tor from South Carolina !

SENATOR FROM PENNSYLVANIA

Mr. SHORTRIDGE. Mr. President, the Committee on Privi­leges and Elections, to which was referred Senate Resolution 185, as amended, with instructions to submit to the Senate a report covering the right of Mr. GRUNDY to his seat in the Senate of the United States, has given the subject matter con­sideration, and, by its direction, I beg to submit the report of the committee (No. 147), pursuant to the resolution and in­structions.

I may state that hereafter, at a time to be agreed upon which will be convenient to the Senate, an appropriate motion will be made to adopt or approve this report. I state this because the Senator from North Dakota [Mr. NYE] desires to make some observations in regard to the report and the matter treated and perhaps other Senators also may desire to speak upon' the subject.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The report will be printed. MAINTENANCE OF RUR.Ar. POST ROADS

Mr. CARAWAY. Mr. President, I have a resolution adopted and numerously signed by people living in my State, suggesting

Government activity toward maintaining post roads, that will be very helpful, indeed, if it can be adopted. It is addressed to a .Congressman from my State, Mr. FULLER. I ask that it be printed in the RECORD.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is so ordered. The matter referred to is as follows:

FAYETTEVILLE, ARK . To the National Congress:

Whereas the Government bas wisely provided aid in the construction of post roads, and as such funds, together with State and local funds, have been concentrated upon the building of main highways, and by reason thereof the country or neighborhood roads have been neglected and left without sufficient funds to properly maintain them, and approxi­mately 93 per cent of the roads of the 43,840 rural mail routes in the country receive no benefit whatever from previous appropriations ; and

Whereas there now exists in the farm districts all over the country great financial depression and distress to the extent that it depresses the financial centers, and prosperity in the remote sections of the coun­try will enable the consumers of manufactured. goods to purchase from and prosper the highly protected industries and make possible the com­pletion of the financial cycle necessary for prosperity to abound among all the people ; and

Whereas the expenditure of Government money in the maintenance of rural post roads would relieve the financial strain in such communi­ties, would make possible more efficient service, and provide a passable· road for the farmers to market their unprotected products and establish the truth of the assertion that, among other things, governments are established and maintained "for the people " : Therefore

We, the undersigned, petition your honorable body to appropriate at least $50,000,000 annually tor the purpose of maintaining the rural post roads in the country with such safeguards and restrictions as deemed advisable for its proper expenditure.

Respectfully, LEE SEAMSTER,

Chancellor (ana 150 others).

UNEMPLOYMENT IN NEW YORK STATE

Mr. WAGNER. Mr. President, I ~sk unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD a letter sent to me by the industrial commissioner of New York, Frances Perkins, on the unemploy­ment situation which exists in the State of New York.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is so ordered. The letter is as follows :

Ron. ROBERT F. WAGNER,

STATE OF NEW YORK, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,

Albany, N. Y., January 29, 19SO.

United States Senate, Washington, D. 0. DlllAR SmNATOR WAGNER: With reference to employment conditions in

New York State, the returns from the list of New York State factories reporting monthly to this department as to the volume of employment indicates on the basis of returns thus far received a decline of 2.19 per cent in the number of employees. More than half of the report­ing factories and more than half of the employees on our regular list have sent in returns which have been tabulated in the figure just given you.

Of the 11 main industry groups, only 3 showed an increase in January as compared with December In this preliminary tabulation. The three industries reporting increases were pulp and paper, an in­crease of 1.08 per cent; clothing and millinery, an increase of 1.78 per cent; and water, llght, and power, an increase of 1.51 per cent. The remaining 8 of our 11 main industry groups reported decreases ranging from 11.79 In stone, clay, and glass, down to 0.62 in chemi­cals, oils, paints, etc.

Our index of manufacturing employment is now based upon the aver­age for the 36 months from January, 1925, to December, 1927, as 100. On this basis the employm.ent index In manufacturing for December, 1929, was 94.2. This was the lowest figure for any December since these records have been kept, beginning with June, 1914, except for the month of December, 1914. In that year the December employment index was 93.7. The December index for 1921 was 95.3 and for 1927 was 94.4.

The decline in our index number of factory employment for November to December was almost 4 per cent (3.9). This was the largest de­cline from November to December since the decline from November to December in 1920, and is the largest decline in any single month since the decline from .April to May in 1924. From April to May, 1924, there was a decline of 4.4 per cent.

This department collects each month returns as to the number of building plans filed iu 23 cities of New York State and also the esti­mated cost of such buildings. In November, 1929, the total number of plans filed in these 23 cities was 5,677, with an estimated valua­tion of $53,694,667. In these same 23 cities there were filed in December 4,241 plans, with an estimated valuation of $30,345,599. The November and December records for New York ~ City alone are as follows: Plans

1930 CO GRESSIO~:rAL RE ~oRD-SENATE 2763 filed ln November, 8,5().5, wlth vnluntion of $46,821,783. In December tbrr W(.>r :-J,03ri t>lnus 61 u, with vnluntlon of 22, 35,06-l.

'l'IU.' numb r ot worker r gl tered for C'ach 100 job open in the public mploym nt office operated by this tate wa 182 In November, 1 2!1, nnd 217 ln I> cemhC'r, Hl29. Tbis show , of course, the greater ecnrrlty of job open ln Dccembet· tbnn Novemb r ns compared with tbc numb r of workers de iring job . In New York ity nloue the numbt•r ot ' orkt'rl'l rcgi tcr ' d foL' each 100 job wn 214 foL' .. :ovember, 1{)20, nnct 2~!.. in Decrmb<'r, l 20.

I nm Iucio ln~t u <'OPY of our prt'. ummnry for New York State tnctory cmploym nt in the month of D ccmb r, HL9.

I nm not nuthorlz d to quote you nny stat m nt from the Welfare otwell of 'e\ York 'lty. Thl orgunlzntlon 1 the offi ·inl cl arinR

llou. tor ncurly 1, 00 privnt r('lief ngencl operating in the ·cw •orl Ity dl trict. I ft•c•l quilt' cet·tnln, how vt•r, tbnt tht>y r gnrd the

preH<'nt unemployment Pltuutlon In 'tw York 'ity us evere, with no slgu~o~ or ltnprov<>m nt up to tlnte.

Vt't'y t rnly yours, Fn . .\.~CF:S PJomKINS,

lllflllsll'ial Oommi ioner.

RE\'f ION OF THEl TARIFF

Th<' ln om mitt of th Whol , re. ·unted the con ld rntion of th hlll (II. R. 20()7) to provicle r •venue, to r ~ulnt c mnwl'<· ~ with foreign c untrl ., to nc urnge the J n(htHl ri<'.. f the nitcd tnt , to prot t Am t•ican lnbor, and for oth<>r purpo: :-:.

Mr. TIARRISO . 1\fr. Pt· ~id nt. I 8tH~" . t the nb ence of a

1• 1 •tchcr lt'ntzi r

corg 'lll!.'tt

Gin I nn off

GoldRhot·ou~b Or<' n Ornmly Hale Jinl'riR Illll'ri!olOU llu tfl!•ltl linw•s Ilt'lX'l't II Oln How 11 .Tohn ·on ,Jon

Kc n K<•ndrirk K Y<'S Ln Follette M K(•llur

fcl\1n tr.r l('t('lllt

MO, E'' Norb rk 'otT iS

~l13t

~hip . t nd 'hortrid~c 'lmm(Jn. 'mlth ,'moot ,'tt'Ck ..:I •iwcr ~ulllvnn ~wan on 1'horons. Okln. Tramm<'ll ~'ydln~ts ·nndenu rg

·wagner Wnlrott Wnl h, Mn.·~. Wnl·h. Mont. i\'nt. on

Wh eler

tor

and to

means that ~orne of our export trade has been captured by for ign competition.

We export in large Yolume to Cuba, Mexico, Canada, South and C ntral America.

PRlCE8

The price of cement has incren~ed 100 per cent since 1014:­even on the Atlantic ·e-aboard, where the manufacturer· clatm import are crippling their indu ·try.

ther pertinent fact are labor, co t , and o forth. Fk t. The manufacturers comJ)laiu nbout the cheap Belgian

labor while th fact· are that c ment is mo:tly produced by machinery, only about 15 per cent of the total co t being !abor. uule~ the manufacturer ha · not in 'tailed up-to-date machmery.

econd. ertain manufacturer· complain of having to clo.:- . down becau e of foreign competition when really they are simply clo · d to reequip their plant with more modern machinery.

DUMPING

The American manufacturers :filed a formal complaint with the Tren. urv Department in the yettr· 1924:. claiming that the im­porter ~were violating the dumping provi iou . of the present tariff n t.

The depnrtment or lered and carried. out ~ very ex.tcns;ive an~ far-r aching inve tigation of the que hons mvolved m th~ va~t­ou: xporting countries of Europe, and at a formal h anng m 'Va:hington on June 6, 1924. the American. manufacturer m~de pmctieally the arne claim· they are makmg to-day coucermug low wage.·, unfair competition, injury, and f';O forth.

After careful con ideration of aU the evidence prest'nt d on behalf of th partie. intere t d, the ecretary of th Trea:ury de ·idt.>d that a finding of dumping wa · not ju tificd and declined to i.·. ue ·uch a finding. Apprai ing officers concernetl hav been notified accordingly.

MONOI'OLY

If ment is removed from the free li t. countervailing duties will preclude further importation of thi · very n ce:,;:·ary com­modity and will automatically create a monopoly which can benefit only the American manufacturers, who now control and who alway have controlled ov r 0 % per c nt of the American market, and who. e profit are already sufficiently remunerative to :atisfy any rea onable group of ~tockhol(ler · or inve ·ton;.

Immediately competition i eliminated, it i r a onable to anticipate an ndvant:e in the . elling price of the American mills to at lea. t the nmount of the duty-30.4 cent per barrel­propos d in House bill 2667.

On the basi of la:-t :vear's hipment thi would m un ap­pr(lximately .~GO,OOO,OOO, • whieh would be borne principally. hy the ta.·payer:,; in the form of public improvement·, roud bmld­iug home .. public buildings, and o forth.

,'\?e are fit•mly convinced that the propo"ed tariff of 8 cent. per 100 pound·. including the weight o~ tJ:e co~talner, 30.4 cent per barrel. on Portland c ment at tln. t1me wrll do a two­fold injury; ftr:-;t, place all con umer and u..;er · of c ment at th mercy of the American manufacturer , member. of the Portlnnd · ement A·. ociation, and, second. needl : ly injure and unnece arily offend , orne of our be ·t int rnational purcha ers.

D ,·pit the ruling of the upreme Court that there wa~· no ca. e of price :fixing or attempt at a monopoly on the part of the American manufacturer , the fact r mains that they are very uniform in etting their prices in the variou cities, accord­ing to dL tances from principal plants.

Mr. Pre ident, the tatement which I have made ·. ummarizes the conclu~ ion which I have reached from tudJ·mg ull the fnct of thi · matter pro and con. I am convinced that there i · not a ca e made out for a protective duty. I have oppo · d

et protective duties on lumb r and other building mnterial .. I can not now comi tently turn to a cour ·e of upporting cJut1e

1 tl'on·rs 'l'h . import. m· <·hi •fly from B lgium. Th y r ached the

hil-!lU~t polnt in 1!l2G, with n total of ~· lightly ov r 3.000, 00 hnn ·1~. 'l'h v ry !4harp c.le line in 1!l27 may have b en due to th ~Pn rnl mnrk<>t c1 c·llne of all buildinl-! material". But. be­lieve it or not, maunfn •t nr r la im that they ut prices-­H lllng b low OHtH- in Hll attempt to hut out import . Imports clo uot g n rnlly ·c c 1 1 ~{! p r (' nt of the amount of the total JH'o<lu ·Uou of tlle c.l m ~tic produc rs.

EXI'OllTS

IlJxporl· hnv' dedim'<l in pile of au inct·ea:e in th dome tic produrtlon. ll i · L>ar •ly pos iblc thut th decline in imports

upon cement. . . I am furthermore convinced thnt if a duty 1 • levted on

cement the American public will immediately feel in increa. ed price 'the effect of the duty, nnd I am convinc.: d that in d~Ie our:e we will be confronted with a great cement monop Iy lD

thi country. It is a natural con..;equence of the impo ition of a protective duty.

One of the certain results of tariff duties i · that when an indu,;try is limited in the competitive field, as oon as ta1'iff duti are levied the tend ncy-the almo -t inevitable re ·ult­i for the e limited indu tries making the same product to come together in order to get the full ben :fit of the duty levied. o Ion" a harp competition exi ts in an industry, where there are"' numerou producers, it i · po~ ible to protect th pu~lic again t the exaction of the la~t dollar in ta1iff prot chon becnu:e of the domestic competition, but an indu try of this kind, concentrated, Qf a limit d number of comr anie., is o collJ tructed that the levying of a duty can make it very ca y

'2764 CONGR.ESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE J .A'NU.ARY 31 for them to combine, form a monopoly, and get the full benefit of the duty.

l\ir. SMITH. 1\Ir. President, I would like to ask the Senator to state the amount of exports from this country.

l\fr. WALSH of Massachusetts. In 1923 the exports amounted to 1,688,000 barrels, in 1928 they had decreased to 824,656 barrels, a decrease of 177,000 barrels. In 1928 the imports amounted to 2,283,351 barrels, the exports being about 40 per cent of the imports.

Mr. SMITH. So that we are exporting approximately about a million barrels now?

Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. Approximately. Mr. SMITH. The imports from abroau into this country are

less than 1 per cent of the domestic production and consump­tion, I believe the figures show.

Mr. W .ALSH of Massachusetts. Approximately 1'% per cent. Mr. SMITH. Therefore we are exporting about the same

amount that we are importing? Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. We are exporting about 40

per cent of the total number of barrels that we import. Mr. SMITH. Whatever we export comes in competition, of

course, wlth the very countries which import into this country. The point I am making is that not only do we furnish 9872 per cent of all the American consumption but we export in round numbers approximately 1,000,000 barrels in competition with the very people who are importing into this country.

Mr. W .ALSH of Massachusetts. The Senator is correct. Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President--The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Massachu­

setts yield to the Senator from Kentucky? Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. I yield. Mr. BARKLEY. If we deduct from our total annual imports

the amount of our total annual exports, the net result is about 1 per cent of our total domestic p'roduction.

Mr. W .ALSH of Massarhusetts. I think the Senator is correct. Mr. President, I repeat that considerable evidence has been

brought to me to the effect that on the seaboard the domestic makers of cement have bad to reduce their prices below what they think is legitimate because of the competition from abroad. Of course, cement being a heavy, bulky article, it is very ex­pensive to transport it and pay freight rates upon it, therefore it finds a ready market upon the seaboard. Much evidence bas been brought to my attention by agents and sellers along the seaboard to the effect that they are entitled to a duty. I have weighed these suggestions with ca'l'e, and I must frankly say that I am not satisfied that the slight injustice and loss which they may be sust..a'ining by reason of the impo1ts justifies me in taking the course of immediately increasing the price of cement to all of the .American consumers of cement and making it pos­sible to put the whole American public in the control of a mo­nopoly which I believe in this age of consolidation of industry is certain to come as a result of the legislation.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield again? M·r. WALSH of Massachusetts. I yield. Mr. BARKLEY. In that connection I desire to say that ac­

cording to the report of the Tariff Commission in 1928 the ce­ment mills along the seaboard, in the area where this competi­tion is effective from foreign countries, produced 96,000,000 bar­rels of cement. Those 96,000,000 banels of cement were pro­duced, I repeat, by mills operating along the seaboard and serv­ing the seaports. Compare those 96,000,000 barrels of cement with a total of 1,800,000 barrels of importations into the United States and Porto Rico. Out of the total imports into the United States there are about 355,000 barrels that go to Porto Rico. So when we deduct the 355,000 barrels from, we will say, 2,000,000 barrels imported into all the United States, we get' about 1,650,000 net barrels imported into continental United States.

I am unable to understand how the importation of 1,650,000 barrels into all the ports of the United States, including the Atlantic coast, the Gulf coast, and the Pacific coast, would force down the price of cement on the Atlantic coast, where they produce 96,000,000 barrels per year. I think that ought to be taken into consideration in determining whether the manu­facturers are justified in claiming that they have been forced to reduce their prices by importations of less than 1,500,000 barrels of cement on the Atlantic coast in competition with the 96,000,000 barrels which they produce in the same area.

Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. I agree with the Senator that the suggestion made by him should be taken into consideration.

There is another aspect of the question, and it is presented very ably in a letter which I hold in my hand, which I shall later ask to have printed in the RECORD, written to me by Mr. W. T. Miller, of Boston, Mass., an import merchant. He calls atten­tion to the situation along the seaboard that has followed as the result of the importation of cement. He cites the fact that

whatever little loss in wages there may be by reason of the fact that 11h per cent of our total consumption of cement is imported, it is more than offset by the wages paid longshoremen and the advantages to the seaport communities from the im.: portatlon of cement. He surprises me very much by this one statement, which I suppose is true of other ports:

During the past few years an average of about 20 ships per year have been drawn to Boston by imports of cement into this city.

That alone indicates considerable business to those ports in the shipping line. I know that the longshoremen who handle these shipments are paid exceedingly high wages, very much higher than the employees in the cement indnstry.

I ask to have the letter and another from the Longshoremen's .Association printed in the RECoRD, rather than to take the time of the Senate to read it. I think it a very excellent treatise of the subject from that standpoint.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. HowELL in the chair). Without objection, it is so ordered.

The letter is as follows : THE PORT OF BOSTON AND THE TARIFF ON PORTLAND CEMENT

JENNEY & Lux, Boston, Mass., Ju1~ 15, 1.91;9.

Hon. DAVID I. WALSH,

Senate Offwe Bdlding, Washington, D. 0. Sm: The placing of a duty on cement, at present being considered

by Congress, may considr.rnbly affect the foreign-trade development of the port of Boston-may take from the port a considerable portion of its ocean freight traffic.

During the past few years an average of about 20 ships per year have been drawn to Boston by imports of cement into this city.

American manufacturers of cement have united in asking Congress to place a high duty on this commodity which will prohibit further imports of cement and eliminate, not only from Boston, but other ports as well, a considerable amount of sea freight tra..ffic. In fact, the placing of any duty at aU may entirely eliminate this traffic.

Imports of cement have been beneficial to Boston and other port cities, without jeopardizing the domestic industry or interfering with their prosperity.

I will list a few of the public benefits derived from this importation: 1. Increased port activities due to additional steamers being at­

tracted here by sufficient paying westbound freight provided by cement cargoes.

a. IncreaS€d and regular employment to port longshoremen, which is necessary to maintain efficient and trained supply of dock labor for handling inbound and outbound cargoes. In proportion to its value, cement is of considerable bulk and weight and a large portion of its landed cost is pa.id in wages to local labor. Boston longshoremen alone will lose about $70,000 a year in wages with a prohibitive cement tariff.

b. Increased business to shipping companies-fuel and supply or­ganizations, and allied business related to shipping.

c. Attraction of other cargo to Boston on the ships thus drawn here. d. Availability of additional export cargo space for grain, etc., to

various world ports, provided by steamers bringing in cement. e. Additional business for Shipping Board and other regular lines

now serving the port in addition to chartered steamers arriving here. f. Increased business to terminal and pier organizations. 2. Money saved to the taxpayers of greater Boston and to the in­

vestors in building development by increased competition and reduction in prices on cement. Cement is a very considerable item in all modern construction ; and

a. Money has been saved in public works development and construc­tion-streets, schoolhouses, etc. ; and

b. Private and industrial building of all kinds-factories, office build­ing, apartments, and homes.

Considering the above benefits, I wish to point out reasons why the demand to prohibit these imports are unjustified:

1. During the last few years cement imports into the entire United States have not averaged more than 1~ per cent of the total domestic production-surely not sufficient to constitute a " menace." (Imports have decreased since 19·26.) This 1~ per cent bas been distributed in only a few port cities within ordinary trucking distance. Inland, where there is no foreign competition, prices are therefore high and profitable. The vast interior of the country is undisputed territory for the domestic industry.

2. Under the present tariff, imports have been and undoubtedly will be no more than 11h per cent.

Inland freight rates make it practically impossible to compete beyond trucking distance.

3. The domestic industry has generally been increasingly prosperous in spite of this small competition which they expect to sec eliminated­in spite of their own tremendously increased production. Generally speaking, where mills have been well operated, they have been exceed­ingly profitable. Example--two of the largest, Lehigh Cement Co., and International Portland Cement Co.

1930 co L RE ORD- E :r TE 2765 4. It Is the right lind duty or each port to encourage traffic that Is

b u •tlclal to H If, uul s tho ndver eiiects on the countl'Y at large are so gr nt o.s to x •e d the local benefits. As noted above, competltlon ts conr1t1 u to the port and tbe port receives t.he double benefits of the trnflle, and th lo all zed prlc comp tltion on nece . ary materials.

l'i. Whll Mn sacbu ·ett bas many industries requiring protection from for lgn trndo product11, comp tltion of which is not restricted only to p rt ar a , she hu no local c m nt factorlc to protect. Mo t of tbe ct•rm·nt consum d her comes from New York and Penn. ylvanin.

U. t•m nt i an unflulshed product. To be o! any use, it mu t be mL 1 d with several Urn s its own weight of local and and gravel by locnl lobor to produc concrete.

7. To ke p shipping at o. state or efficiency in order to provide sum­ci nt st nmcr for our tremendous xportnble surplusage in agriculture and ludustt·y, lllps must have import nrgo as well as export tonnage. A nwr1·hnnt marino with one-way cargoes will not pay. Many incoming cNncnt Hhlp bnv lo ded outbound with grain or cotton.

. With tt· m udous trade bnlunc alr ady against the countriPs that xport tbi small proportion or cement, we can not further decrea e

their 1-ltlle to u by prohibitory to.rltr rates and still expect to 1ncrea e onr 1ml . of growing surplu£<age to them.

9. 'onsumcr1:1 of ment are entitled to such competition as these small imports tn·ovld , or th y may bo compelled to pay exorbitant tncr<·nH in prlce wbl('h o.. monopoly would allow.

r tb 1% per c ut of cem nt imported, that which is o.dmitted free con!ltllut th lnrg st pn.rt. It ha been shown that even o.. very small duty on c m nt r ndcrs It nlmo t 1mpos ible of competition.

Imp rt rs of em •nt hnv m t with tr m ndou oppo ltion the past f w years provided by unlimited propaganda of all kind from the powcrrully organized dom Uc lndu try.

Th • importer of cem nt nrc only a mere handful, and Rince the bene-11 lnrl s ar only certain of the port cities, they have not had the u ual upp rt ot con umer throughout the country in oppo log unreo.sonably

high or prohibitory tarHr chang s. I f 1 sure that you favor any activities tending to increase and

mnlntutn the bu~:~tn a of the port of Boston. I believe the abO'Ve fact wlll be or int re t to you as con ld rably ntrectlng the port and you mny n r that Bo ton can not easily afford to entirely lo ·e this paying trnffic.

ThC' sltunllon r gnrdiug cement is cntir ly different, for example, from Hllo . Undoubtedly import d sbo s com.{)('te all over the country ns a many oth r article · ot for lgn origin. The small comp tition on c m nt is automnllcnlly confined to a Yery ·mnll area. In view of the t>eru•llts which the. importntlon have given to the port of Bo ton and oth r ports, I f 1 that thl mall competition hould be encouraged ro.th r thtln entirely llmlnnt d.

Thunk you for giving con:-ideraUon to tbit~ matt r, Respectfully youl's,

W. T. MILLER.

J. TFiR ' A'.rlONAL LONG HOnE~fF.N'S A SOCIATIO. ', Bo ton, JfaBB., Jtme ~0, 1929.

lion. AVID I. WALSH,

Unitr1Z • tat''' Sc11a.tc, Washittoton, D. 0. DIJAlt m: I buv b en instruct(•d by th no. ton Dl trlct Connell of

th Intrrnntl nn.l I...oug, bot· mrn's A;socialion to write you In connection wll h th pt'OPO!l t1 tarltr on ct'm<'nt n pa d by ongr . .

Whll th ot·gnnlzntlon Is In ·ympntlly with tb principle of protec­tlcm for the . .t\m('rlct.n workm n, t.bey feel that no good purpo e is being

l' t'VNl by th tnl'itt plncl'd upon cern nt by ongrt' , due to the fact that the importation of thl commodity htl given tb lon .. :sbore workers, in tltl' port or no. ton nucl vicinity, n larg amount of employment, al o 1t hnH h lp d •o11 ' idt•rably in developing the mnrltime intere. t ot the port.

W f •l that nn nnnlyt~t or the dntn prr:; nted by proponent nod oppunt•nt .. or th . tnrltr will bow that a ~rent r number or American workmrn will b<' hen tlt d by not hnvlng th tat·itr on thil:l commodity.

Hoping thu.t you will u ' your hC'st clrorts for the b netlt or our mem­ber ·hip ns w •11 ns the port or Bo: ton in connection with thi , matter, I remnln,

V ry truly yours, Jo EI'II It'. oNr;l!w, Secretary.

M:r. RAHrLE . Mr. I>rc~i<l nt, will th 'cnator yield fur­ther'}

Mr. 'YAIJ. II (,1' .fn . . achus tt.. I yield. Ir. BARKT..I•~Y. I dNiir to f'HY in th:\t arne c nn •ti n that

th importation of 2,0 ,000 barrels of c:cm nt, using that a. an illm~tration, nlthongh it was a little le~s in J02!l, i Jaraely car­ri •tl hy Am ricun mcr<·hant ~hips. ment from England and l>Pmnurl.:: and a lar~' part Of that from B •lgium is brought OYer in J m ricnn m r •lumt v£':scls b longing to the Am rican mer-hunt murine, whit'h w have b n in r •cent year· ·eeking in

evct·y way to •ncouragc. Ho far a. hthm· cm;t i cone rned. it L' true that those who

illlJ)(It't th intlnitesimnl quantity of c m nt compared to our dom<'stic pr ducllou puy higher wage · to th(' Am dean laboring

men who lumdle the cement than are paid in wages by American manufacturer to the laboring m n t!mployed in making the cement.

Mr. W .AL II of l\Ia .. ~nchn"£'tt . I am ..,o inform d. Mr. BARKLEY. The tariff of 8 cent per hundred pound~.

which i ab(•Ut 31 cent a barrel, is more than the entire labor co. t goina into the production of that quantity of cement. The averag£' labor co. t in the production of a barrel of cement i. somewllere in the neighborhood of 23 cents, Hllfl yet we are n ked to put on a tariff that repre ent~ 31 cent'. which i cent a barrel more than the entire labor c st involved in producing a barrel of cement in the nited States. That i largely true on account of the fact that cement i. es~entially a machine­made product. From the time the 1·ock i. quarri d in the hill ·iue or the mountainside to the time it comes out in the form of the ftni heu product, the operation is cariied on nlmo t entir ly by machinery,

Mr. W A.L H of :\in~ : chu ·etts. That L au important fact to be tak(;'n into consideration.

l\Ir. BARKLEY. That ha bad much ffect in r ducin~ the number of men employed in the cement indu. try in proportion to the quantity we produce.

Mr. W AL H of 1\Ia ·~achusett . I have been influenced in r aching my judgment, a undoubtedly the S nator from Ken­tucky ha been. by our attitude on lumb r. Certainly if cement i entitled to a duty, lumoer i likewi e.

l\Ir. BARKLEY. I am not ~·o certain but that lumber made out even a b tter en e than cement.

Mr. W AL H of :\fa. ·~achuRetts. Fully a good a ca, e anyway. I am trying to pur, ue a policy that ~eem to me to be fairly con Vtent. I am al ·o infhl(;'nced by the great increa .. e in co. t of public work and private building con"'truction that will fol­low, if a duty i levied.

~Ir. C PELA TD. ::\Ir. Pre~ident, I under tand that following tlw vote on cement. wh('never it is taken, ~yp~um will be taken up. It i: extremely difficult for me to be her to-mon· w. I am v ry much interested in the matter of gypsum. "aturday i u ually a hort day. I wood r if the enator from Utah [Mr.

MOOT] would not be willing to agree to put over the gyp nm item until Monday?

The VI E PRE IDE TT. The enator from Utah will please give hi.· attention.

l\Ir. ~IO T. What was the enator's que tion? l\Ir. PELA~D. I have just made an appeal a. king unani-

mou c n ent that in en· • the c ment it m ~ hould b .. ettleu to­night, the gyp ·urn· item be put over until Monday. I de ire to be h re when that item is taken up, and the clr um tances are such that I mu,_ t go to New York to-night. I would con ider it a matter of great con:-:ideration on the part of the enate if thi request might be granted.

l\Ir. ~I T. I do not know whether it will be nee . ary for me to call for a quorum in conformity with the promi ·e that wa made to the Senator from Wa hington [Mr. DILL] that we would call a quorum before any agreement i ~ mad a to a final vote or pa., ing over items that bad been a{,'T ed to at a preyious time.

:\Ir. ' PELAXD. I am ~ urc my good friend the Senator from '\Va:-bington will not interpo e any obj ction to my ~equest. I would appreciate it v ry greatly. I am anxiou · to take the 4.35 train to New York, and it is now 4.10. .

Mr. Il\IMON". Mr. Pre ·ident, I understand the enntor from ... T w York i ugg ting that the gyp urn item go ov r until fonday?

Mr. C PELA TD. Yes; until ~Ionday. l\Ir. 'Il\IMO.JS. I. :ugge t to the nutor from Utah that we

have a vote on cement now, and then we can con. ider the qu ~tion of wheth(;'r to put the gyp~um item over until Monday.

~Ir. .MOOT. I am perfectly willing to vote on cement now. l\fr. BLEA E. l\Ir. Pre ·ident--Mr. PELA. ro. What decision did the Senator from Utah

make with regard to m~· request for a po tponement of the gyp. urn item until Monday?

The VICE PRESIDE ... "T. While the ~enator from ... Tew York nnd the enator from Utah are conferring, the hair will r ~cognize the • enntor from • onth Carolina.

Mr. BLEASE. Mr. Pr ·ident, I de ire to offer an amcnument, of whirl1 I gave notice some time ago.

The VICE PRE 'IDE.~. ·T. It will be printed and lie on the table.

Mr. BLEA E. I want it to be pending so I can have it con­sidered. If the reque t of the enator from N w York i granted, I do not want my amendment to be shut out.

The VICE PRE IDE~'T. It will be printed nnu lie on the table, and the Senator can call it up at the proper time. There is a question now pending before the enate.

2766 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President, before the vote is taken on

the matter of cement I wish to call the attention of the Senate to an opinion from the chairman of the State highway com­mission of my State. Last summer when this matter first came up my former colleague, the late Senator Tyson, wrote to the chairman of that commission, and I read from his reply as follows:

I sincerely appreciate the opportunity you have given me, in your request of July 26 to express to you my views of the proposed in­creased tariff on cement produced by foreign manufacturers. If you will pardon a lengthy letter, I would like to go into the subject rather fully, since I believe that Tennessee is more interested in this matter than any other Southern State.

Fifteen years ago a substantial part of the cement consumed in the Southeast was shipped from northern plants, but the present-day pro­duction of the southeastern mills is substantially more than the con­sumption of the southeastern territory. Tennessee's production of cement is at the present time approximately 7,000,000 barrels annually. Tennessee's consumption during the last three years has been as follows:

Barrels 1926 _________________________________________________ 1,927,740 1927 _________________________________________________ 2,256,595

1928------------------------------------------------- 2,801,638 You will therefore note that lf Tennessee mills operate to capacity,

1t would be necessary for them to sell the greater portion of their out­put outside the State.

Alabama is a substantial producer of cement, with a production of approximately 8,000,000 barrels annually. Alabama's consumption is at the present time between 2,500,000 and 3,000,000 barrels annually. If the Alabama mills operate to capacity, they must sell the majority of their cement outside of the State of Alabama. The other producing States in the Southeast are Elorida, Georgia, and Louisiana, but their production is small compared to that of Tennessee and Alabama. It is essential that the production of the 'l'ennessee and Alabama mills be confined to the Southeastern States, as States out of this territory have mills which supply their markets.

The Southeast has more miles of seaboard per square miles of terri­tory than any other section of the United States. It is bounded on the east by the Atlantic Ocean, on. the south by the Gulf of Mexico, and on the west by the Mississippi River, which is navigable by ocean­going ships of sufficient size to transport substantial cargoes.

Substantial quantities of foreign cement have been imported to prac­tically every port in this territory. Some of the cement so imported is sold at such a price that it may be reloaded into railroad cars and shipped into the interior in competition with cement manufactured by near-by mills. Of course, the cost of manufacture of cement in Europe ts much cheaper than in the United States, and ships returning to this country without sufficient cargo will transport cement as ballast at very low prices. The seaboard of the Southeast not having the raw materials for the manufacture of cement, it is therefore left open to this ingress of foreign cement, since freight rates from the manufac­turing centers will exceed the cargo transportation cost from Europe.

Tennessee has no seaboard, but a large percentage of the cement manu­factured in Tennessee is dependent on seaboard consumption. At this season of the year, which is the heaviest shipping season, two of the largest producing mills in Tennessee are closed down completely for lack of business, and other mills are operating on less than their capacity basis. In addition to these two Tennessee mills there are three other mills in the South which are now shut down for lack of business. Even were the southeastern territory held exclusively by the southeastern miils, production would exceed consumption.

The present price of cement in Tennessee is very satisfactory, as we are getting it at approximately the cost of manufacture. The pro­ducers apparently do not anticipate within two or three years better average price conditions than are in effect at the present time, since we have bad mills to propose to us that they will be willing to enter into contract with this State for one, two, three, or possibly five years to furnish cement at present-day prices.

These mills in Tennessee form an important industry and employ many hundreds of citizens as workmen. The State highway depar~ ment is operating under a policy of encouragement to Tennessee indus­try by using all possible home manufactured products in highway con­struction. I feel that this is a wise policy, as it promotes industrial activities. I therefore feel that the tariff on cement should be suffi­cient to protect our manufacturers and to open to them all territory which might be opened without unduly penalizing the public.

Mr. President, this letter, written by the largest user of cement in my State, seems to make a fair and frank statement of the case, and therefore I propose to vote for a duty on cement.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, before the vote on this amendment, I want to call attention to one or two things which I think Senators ought to consider. We are asked to put this tariff on cement on th~_ g17ound that i!!!POrtJttions axe ~driv~

down the price of American cement, driving American laborers out of employment, and closing down American cement mills. Senators who have not taken the pains to look into it will be amazed, as I was amazed, when I discovered from the report of the Tariff Commission that we imported more cement into the United States in 1900 wben we produced only 8,000,000 barrels than we imported in 1929 when we produced 176,000,000 barrels. If anybody doubts tha,t statement, I will quote from the report of the Tariff Commission which was handed around yesterday, which is authentic, and which every Senator has had laid on his desk or has had mailed to him.

In 1900 the American production of cement was 8,482,000 barrels. That was 30 years ago. In the same year-1900-we imported 2,386,683 barrels. In other words, 30 years ago we were importing 28.14 per cent of all the cement we used. Our domestic production has been going up ever since ; there was . a tariff on cement until 1913.; and from 1900 to 1913 th~ domestic production of cement increased from 8,000,000 plus barrels to 92,000,000 plus barrels.

In 1913 cement went on the free list and has been on the free list for the last 16 years. During the time cement has been on the free list our domestic production has increased from 92,000,()00 barrels per year to 172,000,000 barrels per year ; and notwithstanding the fact that cement was on the free list dur­ing all that time and during the World War period and the years immediately thereafter, there was practically no cement imported into the country.

From 1923 to 1929 the importations have :fluctuated from 1,678,000 barrels to 2,010,000 barrels in 1924; 3,665,000 in 1925; 3,232,000 barrels in 1926 ; 2,049,000 barrels in 1927 ; 2,286,000 barrels in 1928; and 1,876,000 barrels in 1929. So, 30 years after 1900, at which time we were importing 28.14 per cent of all ce­ment we used, we are importing only 1.01 per cent of all the cement we use. If we subtract from that sum 355,000 barrels, which were imported into Porto Rico, which is included in our domestic imports, we have a still less proportion of imports com­pared with domestic production.

Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President--Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. Will the Senator repeat the

percentage in the earlier years? Mr. BARKLEY. I shall be glad to do so. The percentage of imports in 1900 was 28.14 per cent. That

percentage has gradually gone down through all the 30 years until last year it was 1.01 per cent.

Mr. WALSH of Massachusetts. The first figure was the per­centage of imports compared with the domestic consumption 30 years ago?

Mr. BARKLEY. Yes; and during 30 years our domestic pro­duction, as I said a moment ago, has increased from 8,000,000 barrels to 176,000,000 barrels.

Mr. SMOOT. I was going to call the Senator's attention to the increase in domestic production. I did not hear the Sena­tor give those figures.

Mr. BARKLEY. I did give them. Mr. SMOOT. In 1900 there were only 8,000,000 barrels pro­

duced in the United States, while in 1929 there were 176,000,000 barrels produced.

Mr. BARKLEY. In other words, while during the 30 years our imports of cement have decreased from 28 per cent of do­mestic production to 1 per cent, our domestic production has increased 2,000 per cent. Yet in the face of these facts we are asked to put a tariff of 31 cents a barrel on cement which is more than the entire labor cost involved in producing a bal'l'el of cement.

I can conceive, Mr. President, of no justifiable defense for such an attitude. If only the tariff itself is added to the price of cement, it means an increase to the American people of more than $50,000,000 a year. It means that every office building, every home that is constructed in part of cement-and more and more we are constructing our homes of cement-every highway built by any highway commission in the United States, every street .built .bY any city council in the United States or by any city administration must make its contribution to this increased price of cement.

The House of Representatives has just passed a bill increas­ing the annual appropriation for public roads from $75,000,000 to $125,000,000, which means an increase of $50,000,000 a year, which must be matched by the various States in order to receive the benefit of the appropriation. That means that next year there will be $100,000,000 more expended for public high­ways in the United States; and yet the people who pay that money into the ·Treasury Qf the United States and into the treasmies of the States will be burdened by an increased tax on cement, which will lessen their ability to build highways out of the money appropriated.

1930 CO :raRE SION L RECOI{D-SE:NATE 2767 Mr. Pr ·hl ut, if w could take n knife aml slice off the

AUnnti • sNtbmml hy it:elf and not on~·ider the country as a whole, th •r "oul<l ·1 ill h no ju ·tificntion for the incrca. e in th tariff on t<'UH'Ill. AI'{ 1 ·nid during the remarks of the • 'cnntor from Ma~~·adtu:-: tl.·, 1h c ment milt~ of thi: country huvl' not <lc<'l' •lf.:Nl in muub r; th<-Y have iucr a ed; t11er nre more <: m ut mill:o; ov rating to-day than ever b fore at any A"ivf'n tinw iu th hi.'tory r th rnitcd , tate.s. If w could t:tk th<• Atlnnti • :-l•ahom·<l alone n111l ·onsider the output of 11H mill.· s rving that :-e •linn of our country, we would find, ac­<!OI' IillA' to th Tnritr 'ommi ~ion. that th y are producing 6,000,000 hurr >L• of <·t'm<>ut, nud :v£>t he nu:-; of th importa­

tion or lc. ·s than 2,000, 0 bal'l' 1: of c m nt, compared to the 9(;,0 ,000 hnrr 1: vr()(1n<· d in th . am nren, we are a k d to irnpo '<' tlliH tnrifl' on <' meut for the h ncfit of the munufac­turc•rH nlon~ th' .\tlnutic . aboard.

I hotel iu my lHUHl, I will :uy to the 'enntor from New York­UJHl I hop lw i. 11r ~ nt nntl I ask f r hi: att ution-a copy of H t~)(•gram : 111. to th ::5l'natot· from • w ?ork on January • 0. 'J'h mnn who :cnt tll . t I gram t tlw • 'enntor mailed me a copy of it. It 1~:~ llluminntiu .~. Her i: whnl he f.:ay :

'Vlll the , nat r pJ a e read all of the

' · ; I am going to rend it all : In tlwir ability to . bip by wnt r, IIudRon Rt~er mill enjoy an almo t

riO per c nt udvttntngc over l,ennsylvania mUls-wlthout benefiting the consum l', howcv r.

In other worcl:, th llud:on Riv r di trict i • ~hipping cement h.v wnt 'r down to • w ork at an advantage of about 50 per ct>nt over PcmtHylynnia mill', and at th . arne time the citi­z ' tl.' of N w York ur paying th .,ame price for cement they JHlicl to th P nu~~ lvnnia mill., which had to .-hip it into New ·ork at hiA"her freight ratP. ; and yet w ar a ·k d to put this

tnritl' hnrtl n on tll p oplc of •ew York b cnu e of the impor-tution of ·<mu• 2GO,O hal'J' 1 f <'<'ment p r year.

'l'h ) t 1 grum go · on : Fot·<·l~n cnwnt SUJlPOl'llng American mercbnnt mnriue, a all hip­

men!:-~ f•·om Eo~lnnd untl n nmark, bnndllng nl>out 00,000 ncks an­nu ltlly, u:lng .\ml'l'l eun Icrcbnnt I~inc nnll American cnntic Line <' cluslv£•1y. llnndllng chnrg• xp nu •u for lnbor iu New York exceed lnLJor co t pt•r l>nrn·l or c mcnt nt mill~. When the sugnr chedule was clPhu tt·ll you Hpokt• <'loquenlly on l>ebnlf ot tbe consumer, and a couple of monthR ngo you ndvocnt u the d velopment of the Amcricnn mcr­dlunt mnrint'. Wlly not uppol't the c int r!'sts, together with the fnt•mf!r, by YOI In~ fot· duty frt•c c m nt?

• Cr. UOPI~LA!'\D. l\lr. Pr siclent, I have no ri"ht to ask that t Itt• :-1 u. tor ·ield to mc--

l\Ir. U HJ'Ll•1 r. I ;\'ielcl. Mr. U Pll][ ... L ·n. But I want tb 'cnalor to uot the reason

why I asked him to r ad all of th . tcle~r<lm. Thi telegram is from a .. •bipptn~ man, who d :ir · to have all the cement come In hy boat, tn r<l<•r thut the ~hiPilin~ inl re t · may profit. He tim·~ not ·ar a rnp ahout the priee of cement in T w York. He just wnnt, th ·hipH that l1 repr ~ents to be filled with foreign <·Pm nt.

1r. AHrLNY. J·~Y n , uppo:ing that the enator's int rpre­tntion of tlti.• N w Yorker's tel ~rnm i corrcct--

1\tJ'. OOPBLA 'D. '.rhnt i · ' ltat the t legrum ·ays. )ft·. BAH.rlJI!JY. It; involv an importation of only 250,000

barrt•ls, u compur d to Y,OOO,OOO barrels; and even ba ed on

the situation in New York, which is typical of all Atlantic ea­port., it eems to me that the importation of 250,000 barrel to compete with 15,000,000 barrel· doe not ju tify Ievyin"' a duty of 22 p r cent on cement, which i · the equivalent of the 8 c nts per hundredw ight provided for in the bill .

1\Ir. President, I do not d ~ire to say anything more; but I did want the enate to have these facts before it voted on tlli important and, as I consider, vital que. tion to the .American people.

1\Ir. "'ALSH of :\Ia~sachu~ett . I call for the yea and nay . Mr. HALE. 1\lr. President, the debate o far ha had to do

with the general question of a duty on cement. I hould like to . ny ju~t a few word about a great indu try in my tate which is coming into very direct competition with the Belgian cement that comes into thi · country.

Prior to 192 there wa no cement mill in my tate, and none in the re t of ... :ew Enalnnd. In 1928 the Lawr nee Portland

em nt 'o. complet d a cement mill at Thomaston, i\Ie. The capacity of the mill i about a million barrels of cemel.lt a year, and the inve. tment there wa about $3,000,000.

I have here n lett r from the president of the company whi ·h I .:hould like to rend to the Senate.

Bon. FREDERICK HALE,

LAWRJ:XCE PoRT.A1'D CE:\lENT Co.,

Neto York, N. Y., October fS, 1929.

Senate Otffce Building, lfa 1li11gton., D. 0. DEAn E.'ATOR : A· n further answer to your letter of October 22,

the present situation at our Thomaston plnnt is as follow : We have a capacity there of approximately a million barrels a yenr.

This mill started in operation about the middle of ::\lay, 192 . For the full year trom July 1, 192 , to June 30, 19:!9, we produceu 554,5;) barrel of cement. Iu other words, we opernted at about 55 per cent of capacity. Thi~ in spite or the fact that we are the only mill in 1:'ew En"'land.

We sold during that 12 months' period 451,19 barrels of cement, or a ·ales volume of about 45 per cent of our capacity.

We are employing nt the pre cnt tim~ fn the plant a monthly average of ubout 130 wag • earner . ur total annual pay roll approximates

2 . ,000 a year. In addition, we al o employ in supervi ory and cleri­cal help 16 people, who receive salaries of 37,500 n year. ur total force, therefore, i close to 150, and we pay wage nnll nlarie of approximately 245,000 a year. Briefly, our po ition is:

1. CapacitY-----------------------barrels per annum__ 1, 000, 000 2. Inve tmenL-------------------------------------- 3, 000, 000 3. Productlon ________________________________ barreffi__ ~44,~48

4. Ie·---------------------------------------do---- 451,1n 5. Wage earners------------------------------------- 1:~0 6. Wages ------------------------------------------- $208, 000 7. o.laried employees-------------------------------- lU

. alarles__________________________________________ $37,500 9. Total number emJJloycd---------------------------- 146

10. Total wage and ·alarie ·--------------------------- . 245, GOO In the buying of our principal materlam and applies and in the

fr ight charges on the e materials and on our fini:hed product we Lndircctly contribute materially to the employment of labor. Taking two of the principal items alone, namely, coa.l and railroads, on the basi' ot the production and sales hown above we made the following payments:

We bought 34,659 tons of coal, which co t 46,790 at the min , and to which was added the freight rate of 3.73 a ton to lay it clown at our mill. This one item yielded over 2 ,000 in wage to coal miners and paid the wages ot 25 men for on~ year.

Freight on coal amounted to 129,278 ; freight on our finished prod­uct totaled 225,599. The total freight charge on th se two items were $354, 77, of which ,.152,597 repre ented wages to rail worker and paid tbe wages of 93 men. In other word , on tbe ·e two Items alone the operations of the Thoma ton plant provided work for 11 men.

ltuated as we are, our contributions to the indo trial welfare of the country should have l>ecn larger. Under anything approaching normal condition we ·hould have operated at clo e to 80 per cent of capucity, fn which ca e om· employment of labor and our purcbns s ot materiaffi would have increa 'ed 50 per cent over the figure hown above .

The chief reason tor our failure to show a higher rate of operations Is to be found in the pre nt competitiv-e situation brou~ht al>out by the . t'rious invasion ot the New En~Iand market by forel~n c ment. 'rhree of our main logical markets are Portland, Boston, and Providence. It 1 inter ting to note what it co:,;t' us to lay down cement in tbo e three markets and what we get for it.

Costs f. o. b. Freight Delivered Price Profit<+>

Thomas- rate to- costs recei>ed or loss (-) ton

------------1--------------------Boston. __ ----------------------Portland ___ .---------------.--_ Providence __ .-------------- ___ _

$1.30 L30 1. 30

$0.63 .48 • 72

$1.93 1. 78 2.02

$1.68 1. 94 1. 90

-25 +16 -12

2768 ·co~GRESSION AL RECORD-SEN ATE 1\Ir. HARRISON. 1\Ir. President, will the Senator yield at

tbnt point, just for a question? Mr. HALE. Will the Senator allow me to finish the letter?

Then I should like to make an explanation about the costs. Our investment as shown above at Thomaston is $3,000,000. A. very

reasonable return on this of 6 per cent a year would amount to $180,000. At our present rate of production this would be approximately 30 cents a barrel, or, if we were running as we should run, namely, at 80 per cent, about 23 cents a barrel. You will note in two of our main markets, namely, Boston and Providence, we are actually out of pocket 25 cents per barrel and 12 cents per barrel, respectively, on each barrel sold, while in one-Portland-we make about two-thirds of a fair return per barrel sold.

The reason for these discouraging returns is the low cost at which Belgium cement can be laid down in these seaports. The Tariff Com­mission, from consular invoices, has made a study of the costs of laying down Belgium cement in Amel'ican seaports. Tbe following comparison gives a very adequate idea of what out· Thomaston mill is up against in competing with them:

Delivered Delivered costs, costs, Price re-

Belgian Th~o~as- ceived cement cement

Boston ____________ -------- ____________ ------ _______ _ Portland ____ -------------------------------------- __ Providence ___ --------_-- ____ --------- ____ -----------

$1.29 1.29 1.29

$1.93 1. 78 2.08

$1.68 1. 94 1.90

It can be seen that at the prevailing prices in these three seaports the Belgian producer can make a comfortable profit, whereas the do­mestic producer must take a substantial loss. We pay our h\J::or on an average of $5.50 a day. The Belgian producer pays $1 a day. It costs us 63 cents to ship a barrel of cement from Thomaston to Boston. The Belgian producer can ship from Antwerp to Boston, 3,000 miles, at a maximum of GO cents a barrel, and in many cases as low as 25 cents a barrel. In the Belgian delivered costs shown above the maximum ocean transportation charge bas been used.

There have been assertions that the imports of foreign · cement are a negligible part of tbe American market. This may be true as far as the total market is concerned. Cement, however, is a commodity which runs a relatively high freight rate per unit, and according to the testimony, both of domestic and foreign manufacturers, foreign cement can not be sold farther than trucking distance from the seaboard . All foreign competition therefore falls on the seaboard mills, and the extent of this competition in our m~U'ket can be judged from the follow_ ing figures covering 1928:

Foreign impo1·ts and! domestic shipntents of cement

Boston __ ---------------------------------------_ Portland ___ -------------------------------------Providence--------------------------------------

Domestic cement

shipments

1, 398,815 88, 131

462,84.1

Foreign imports into-

470,340 50,335 54,036

Percent­ageim­ports to domestic

ship­ments

34 60 12

In these principal seaport markets of New England sales of foreign cement amount to 30 per cent of domestic sales. It is impossible under these conditions to build up a prosperous cement industry to serve New England.

Very truly yours, FRANK H. SMITH, President.

Now let me say this--Mr. HARRISON. Mr. President, before the Senator gets

away from the letter, will he not answer one question? Mr. HALE. Will the Senator let me explain this? Mr. HARRISON. Very well. Mr. HALE. In computing the cost f. o. b. at Thomaston at

$1.30, nothing is allowed for interest. If on the cost of the plant interest were allowed at 6 per cent, that would amount to $180,000 a year; and on the production of a little over 500,000 barrels a year, that would amount to substantially 30 cents a barrel, which would have to be added to the $1.30, making $1.60 f. o. b. at the mill at Thomaston.

It is fair to state that this ·mill at Thomaston, Me., is probably one of the most modern mills in existence. At Thomaston the company gets the limestone and the clay that they use in making their product right on the premises. For their coal they pay a little over $5 a ton, which is very little more than is paid in other places. It is probable that they can produce ce!D,ent there

more cheaply than it can be produced at almost any other place in the United States. They are ope1·ating at the present time on a little over half production. Jf they were operating at 80 per cent production, they undoubtedly could make cement at a lower price.

Allowing for cutting off, say, 20 cents for 80 per cent produc­tion-and I do not know that they could cut off that much­that would make the cost f. o. b. at Thomaston $1.10, plus the 23 cents which would have to be added for interest on that land, or $1.33; I think that is cheaper than cement can be produced anywhere else in the United States, and at that low produc­tion price as the letter which I have rea,d shows, Belgian com-petition can not be met. ·

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield there ? The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. FEss in the chair). Does

the Senator from Maine ~·ield to the Senator from Kentucky? Mr. HALE. Yes. Mr. BARKLEY. Recently Mr. Farrell-who is the head of

the United States Steel Corporation, which owns the Universal Cement Co., with a capacity of 17,000,000 barrels, and which bas recently bought the Atlas Cement Co., with a capacity of about 20,000,000 barrels-made the statement that America could pro­duce cement and compete against the world, and proceeded to demonstrate his faith in that statement by purchasing one of the most successful cement companies in the United States for the Steel Corporation.

Mr. HALE. I thank the Senator. Mr. WATSON. Where was that located? 1\Ir. BARKLEY. The Atlas? 1\Ir. WATSON. No; the cement company they bought. Mr. BARKLEY. It is located all over the country. It bas

15 or 20 mills scattered all over this country. Mr. WATSON. Are any of them on the Atlantic seaboard? Mr. BARKLEY. I think so. They may not be on the coast,

but they are in eastern Pennsylvania; several of them in the eastern part of the country. There are 15 or 20 scattered all over the country.

Mr. WATSON. The question I want to ask is this: Are they not protected by freight rates rather than by a high tariff, and is not that, after all, the question, let me ask my friend? So far as that is concerned, they are protected by freight rates, and the sole question is whether or not the cement along the Atlantic coast shall be supplied by the foreign cement makers or by the domestic cement makers.

Mr. BARKLEY. As I said a while ago, and as undoubtedly is the fact, the imported cement does not ordinarily get out of the city limits of the city to which it is impo-rted, because of the expense of hauling. It is only carried so far as it can be trucked. My contention is, answering the Senator from In­diana, that, considering only the seaboard, when we produce on the seaboard 96,000,000 barrels and import all together, in­cluding the Atlantic, the Pacific, the Gulf, and Porto Rico, only 2,000,000 barrels, the competition is not serious.

Mr. HARRISON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. HALE. I yield. Mr. HARRISON. I merely wanted to ask the Senator with

reference to this organization in his State which has recently built a mill there. It was built by the Lawrence Portland Cement Co., was it not?

Mr. HALE. That is correct. Mr. HARRISON. I notice from the returns of this "baby"

of which the Senator speaks that their net earnings last year, as shown by the Treasury Department, were $711,000.

Mr. HALE. I do not think the Senator is referring to the Maine mill. I think he is referring to the parent company, which is in Pennsylvania.

Mr. IL.<\.RRISON. They have several mills, of course, but this is a new institution.

Mr. HALE. I am giving the Senate simply the information about the :Maine mill. I do not know the circumstances about the others.

Mr. HARRISON. They made a net profit of $711,000 in 1928. May I say to the Senator also that as to another of these organizations it is shown that if one had bought $5,000 worth of its stock in 1899, a hundred shares of the common stock of that company-! will not call its name-with the dividends which have been paid, according to the price quoted on the stock exchange recently, it would to-day be worth $646,000.

Mr. HALE. The Senator and I are talking about two entirely different matters. I am talklng exclusively about the production in Maine.

The State of Maine uses about 500,000 barrels of cement a year. Of that 500,000, in the last year this company furnished,

1930 CO :rGRESSIO :rAL RECORD-SE.r ATE 2769 I think, about 2r:o,ooo barrel .. The r t of their output they fnrni~h .d to n :t n und Provid nee, and ome to Nl~w Hamp­. hfr) llll<l {'rtuin Mn,· .arhu ett. towns, m . tly at a lo . . outside

tb Stut of Iainc. The opn lty of the mill is, as I said, a million barrels, and,

thr U"'ll mo<le>t'Jl impro ·cment~. they lmve in~ren l that a <: •rtnin umount, o that they will probably be able to produce nbout 1,3 , 0 burr I·.

If tb y ar • going to tnke care of the Maine n · alone-and, r com.,· •, th y will not have all of that bu:ine·~that ' ill m nu 1 s tl1an half of t11elr capacity, and there is no p ~-;sibility without a tnrlrr, a: r. nl.ith': 1 ttcr clearly show~,

f th<'ir omp ting with B !~inn e>ment out d of the Rtnte of Main .

Mr. 'IMMO . Mr. Pre idcnt, early in the con ·!deration of tb pending bill tb re was quite a drive on the part of the ce­ment p ople along the Atlantic eaboard in favor of a duty on c m nt. I thou"'ht, upon their pre entation, probably they were nlltl d to a small duty; but I determined to make a thorough inv tigution of the mntt r and r ncb a conclu ·ion for ru~ ·elf bns d up n the facts as I found them.

.A:-; a r . ult or my inv~tig~ttion I becume uti fie<l that there h; u. nntlon-' id combination or tru ·t to fix and maintain p1ices of this product, an<l that thi ·ombiuation ha succcede<l in molntniuin~ pric e ' tabli ·h <l by this combination or tru-t.

I do not know of n !-;iD"'l trn ·t in thi · country that hn been more l-iner s. ful in mnlutninin a fixed level of prices than has the cment lndu:try.

1 hnve befor me a list of 100 nrti 1 . . P~aclng their pre­wnr pl'l • at 100 the pr·o<lu ·t bad advanced in 1928 to a level of l4 . •m nt 1. one of tho: artJcle.\ and that indu try llas b •n able to ndvanc its price 1 v 1 24 points beyond the 140-polnt 1 v 1 of 192 . That i to •Y that the pre ent price~ of • •nwnt nrc 1: point above the 1913 1 v 1. Th Cement Trust

llHH b n able to advnnc their price · to thi high lev 1 in <1 tlunC' f tlle iuflu n · whi •h have held the pric of other products to a low r 1 vel.

N at·Jy 99 p r c nt of all th c ment consumed in the United Stut s i produ d in tb United tate .

Tearly 99 per cent of all the cement consumed in this country i · produ ed here, and the pric for that product i , I am advil:i d, uniform throughout the countrr .

In 192 only 1.16 per cent of the cement consumed 1n this country was imported. I stated in the opening speech I made up n thL bill tbnt a dome. tic nrtjcle tbnt wa~ confronterl with foreign competition of only 1 or 2 per cent of tho dome tic production certninl~· had no claim for a protective duty, nn<l I sugge ted that where imports were under 10 per cent of the dome. tic production thPrc would .. m to be little ground for the imposition of a tariff duty.

I do not know of any article of common-! miaht ~ay of practically univer nl-u. e in the Tnite<l tn.tes. wbi<'h ic:: heing u ·ed to accomplisll o much in conne<.:tion with the program of progre.! which we are making to-day, where as large a per­centage of the total consumption is produced here, n, in the case of cement, and I do not know of any other article in thi ~ country that ha. been as succe. ful in maintaining the pric s that have been fixed by t11e industry as the cement indul:ltl'Y of tbi country.

For the rea ons I ha\e ·tated, 1\Ir. Pre ident, I ..,hall vote to put tlti nrticle upon the free li.'t .

Mr. ·YE. Mr. Pre ident, I have no de ire to <lelay the vote beyond to-day, but I feel that the vote houlu not be re orded b fore ther bas been offer 1 for the REcon.o a bowing of the pro"'re:· of the 12 leading cement companies who e returns are incluclcd in the report made to the enate by the Trea::·mry in relation to income-tax return.. The reports of th e 12 com­pani for the ye-ar 1922 ·ho ~ a gross profit on ale· of 11 per cent; for 1923 they ·bow a gro ·s profit of 18 per cent; for 1924, of 17.75 p r cent; for 192!l, of 19.55; for 1926, of lt).75; for 1927, of 14; for 1928, of 1r.:.2.

Mt·. Pre ident, in this compilation I have referred to the companies only by indicating the page at wl1ich their records will be found in the report ubmitted by the Trea ury Depart­ment. I a .. k that this compilation be made a part of the RECORD.

The PllESIDE .. 'T pro tempore. Is there objection? There bejng no objection, the matter wa ordered to be printe 1

in the RECORD, as folJows :

1928 1927 1926 1925

Page

omp ny identity round

Gross sales Profit or Gross sales Profit or Gros sales Profit or Gross sales Profit or loss loss loss los

$4,178,386 $Zi, 972, (33 U,136,!l37 $30, 17,134 $5,284,522 $30, 153, (05 $6,26i, 25S 711,094 3, - '259 767,021 • • 111,358 305 3, 764,451 684,019

-2'9,090 2, 968,190 -4,«5 2, 805,111 1,147 •• 532,218 3.'i, 7i0 174,870 3,347, G91 182,119 3, 699,942 44.0, 734 3, 510,636 433,802 145,( 7M,013 171,673 846,84.0 300, 184. 876, (){K 2b9, 975 117,250 •• 539,193 -122,649 4, 719,707 ,277 I 4, 280, Of>6 I (26, b57

2, 685,534 1(.398,057 2, 252,113 13,732,626 2, 512,710 16,373,273 3, :.133, 63S 1, 392,883 12,<129,329 1, (15, 721 3, 360, (7( 759,539 ----------·- ---5;2ii;i~ 3, Z27,136 22, Zi3, 280 2, 974., 434 25, 445, 105 4,424, 552 27,803,631 1, 943,183 13,472,966 2,698,710 13,268,320 3, 811,952 10,926,536 2, 908,874 1, 7(5, 716 6, 202,063 1,155,010 6, 001,436 1, 668, 3M 6,160, 283 1,63 ,325

• 9, 986 2, 870, 96 530, i23 3, 076,215 700,721 2, 953,290 652, 1

'l'otal ___ ----------- - ----------------------.---------------- 109, 861, 721 16, 682,(3( 115, 246, 470 16,157,367 111,884,268 20,900.997 ~~~:~:~-! 21, i8.1, 500 Por cc.nt protlt __ ----------------------------------------------- ------------ 15.2 ------------ H.O ------------ 18.75 1{1.55

1 Denotes year ending Feb. 28. ' Organized Sept. 16, 1926.

Company identity round

1923 1922 P•r

1----..,..-----1-----:-----1------:-----1 Total gross Total profit <'ent

Gross sales Profit or loss Gross sales Profit or

loss Gross sales Profit or loss

sales or loss profit orlo

2/ill I,chlgh Portland $192, 490, 724

25,573,412 24, 2-i5,862 22, 4e3,(!)2

town, Pn---·· -- ·---------------------- - --- - -- ----- - $29, ~2. 428 L wronco Portland Cement 'o., ow York, N. Y - ----- 3, 414,490

urolin Portland ement o., Chnrl ton, S. 0-------- 3, 747,308 Ornnt. Portland C'em nt o., Philndelphi>l, Pa __ __ __ ____ 3,33!, 1 Sonthern States Portland Cement .o., Rockport, Ga_ __ 905,515 Edi~onPortland emeutCo., ewYork,N.Y _________ 1(,665,057 AI ph Portland Cement o., Et\Slon, P · - - --- -- ----- -- - 16,265,315 P nn!'lylvrmia Dixie eru nt Co., Scranton, Pn. (Nata-

$6,566,592 482,960

44., 6(H 257,~.i3 200,~G

I 258,780 a. 054,0¥9

$28. 87i, 660 3, 223,326 3,879, 518 3, 284,745 1, 005,343

I 4, 390,139 16,929,929

$6, 3i3, 689 537,866 37,321

166,623 409,966

1153,()t 3, 043,310

$21, 418, 031 2, 80i, 356 3, 498,949 2,460, 001

886,200 I 4, 017,303 11,598,514

$2,667,561 115,281 13, 42'9 24.~

272,84.0 I -214, 6

1, 609,953

r tb. P .) ' -- _ • _ --------------. _ _ ·- _ -- -- --- ---- - --- ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ -------· - ---Atl Portland went o.,NewYork,N.Y- - -- ------26.175,562 4,376,644 26,505,860 (,576,518 18,993,83\12, 7,WJ Int metionnl Cement orporatlon, New York, N. Y ____ 7, 189,901 2, 228,893 6, 328,633 1, 44.1, 428 4. 5, 037 !!03, 954 Medusa Portland mont ~o., 'leveland, Ohio____ _____ 6, 803,999 37 , 795 5, 038,257 1, (86, 215 3, 386.407 289, 8W S nt 'ruz Portland Cement Co., San Franci~co, CaliL 3,369,385 584,879 3,419,631 515,470 3,369,203 1 672,8i5

~f~1ciai::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~~:~:~~- IS. 5~7~~ ~~~~:~~- 18, H~s.·~ -~::~~~~~-~ 9, ooi't~: / 1 Denotes year ending Feb. 28. ' Organi:ted Sept. 16, 1028.

LXXII--175

5, • 79 30,901,591

103, 253, 6e4

27, 939, 632 3, 568, 143 167,997, i01 27,697, 71,283,605 15,836,994 39,366, 665· s. 363,275 21,671,4115 4, H7, 535

-~:~~~~~-1121, ~~~

2770 CONGRESS! OX AL RECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 31 The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing

to the amendment proposed by the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. McMASTER] as modified.

Mr. SMOOT. I ask for the yeas and nays. Mr. LA FOLLETTE. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll. The Chief Clerk called the roll, and the following Senators

answered to their names : Ashurst Fletcher Kendrick Baird Frazier Keyes Barl{ley George La Follette Bingham Glass McKellar Black Glenn McMaster Blaine Goff Metcalf Blease Goldsborough Moses Borah Greene Norbeck Bratton Grundy Norris Brookhart Hale Nye Broussard Harris Oddie Capper Harrison . Overman Camway Hatfield Patterson Connally Hawes Pine Copeland Hebert Ransdell Couzens Heflin Robinson, Ind. Dale Howell Robslon, Ky. Deneen Johnson Schall Dill Jones Sheppard Fess Kean Shipstead

Shortridge Simmons Smith Smoot Steck Steiwer Sullivan Swanson Thomas, Okla. Trammell Tydings Vandenberg Wagner Walcott Walsh, Mass. Walsh, Mont. Watson Wheeler

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Seventy-eight Senators have answered to their names. A quorum is present.

Mr. GOFJJ..,. Mr. President, in view of the memoranda of earnings and wages of the Atlantic seaboard cement mills intro­duced by the junior Senator from North Dakota [Mr. NYE], I wish in this connection to offer a memorandum, which has been duly prepared, of the earnings of those companies, which I ask to have printed in the RECORD.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The memorandum is as follows: MEMORANDUM ON EARNINGS AND WAGES OF ATLANTIC SEABOARD CEMENT

MILLS

Herewith are two tables showing return on capital and labor and salary costs per barrel based on the income-tax returns of 16 Atlantic seaboard cement companies listed below. These companies produce nearly 85 per cent of all cement consumed in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Penn­sylvania (eastern), New Jersey, Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Missis· sippi, and Louisiana :

Alpha, Atlas, Coplay, Florida, Giant, Glen Falls, Hercules, Hermitage, International, Lawrence, Lehigh, North American, Pennsylvania-Dixie, Signal Mountain, Southern States, Vulcanite.

'l'o avoid disclosure of operations of individual companies, transcripts of income-tax returns were submitted direct by the companies to Dr. T. S. Adams, of the Yale University, department of economics, and consolidated in his office. These consolidated returns were submitted in the form suggested to your committee on September 21 by Mr. Ogden Mills, Undersecretary of the Treasury, in so far as items listed by Mr. Mills concerned manufacturing operations.

Of the 16 companies which reported, 5, having mills both on the Atlantic seaboard and elsewhere, segregated their earnings for such seaboard mills on the basis of proportionate tonnage. In all other respects the figures are identical with those reported to the Bureau of Internal Revenue for the years in question.

Briefly, net earnings available to Atlantic seaboard cement companies for dividends from the production of cement in the past years were as follows:

Number Year ofcom-

panies

1922_-- --- -------------------------------------------- -·-- ---- 12 1923_----- ---------------------------------------------------- 12 1924_--- ----------------------------------- ------------------- 13 1925_--- ------------------------------------------------------ 14 1926 __ -- -------- ---------------------------------------------- 15 1927----- ----------------------------------------------------- 15 1928_---- ----------- ------------------------------------------ 16

Consoli­dated net income

$5,073,950 12,046,733 12, 037, 283 14,055,395 14, 442, 655 8, 084, 318 6. 427,076

It should be noted that net income has declined more than 55 per cent between 1926 and 1928 in spite of the fact that there was one more company reporting in 1928 than in the earlier year.

This is worked out in detail in Table B following. It is of the highest importance to remember that throughout all

this period cement prices on the Atlantic seaboard were falling. 'l'hrough constantly increasing efficiency, the cement industry partici­pated in the earlier years in the prosperity occasioned by a nation-wide construction boom. The construction boom lasted throughout all those rears, but the Atlantic seaboard cement industry by reason of the in· roads of destructive foreign competition has been brought to the point where holders of cement stocks are not realizing earnings equivalent to current interest rates on savings bank deposits.

In comparison with these meager returns in cement manufacture, an analysis of the earnings of 268 corporations in manufacturing other than cement show that in 1926 the return of owner's capital was 11.73 per cent; in 1927, 10.63 per cent ; and in 1928, 12 per cent; an average in three years over 11 per cent.

As pointed out by Mr. Mills to the Senate Finance Committee, income­tax returns do not segregate costs from labor costs and salaries exclu­sive of officers' salaries.

In the accompanying Table A, labor costs exclusive of all salaries were obtained from the United States Census of Manufactures, 1927.

Salaries, including officers' salaries, were obtained from the same source.

Officers' salaries were obtained from income-tax returns. All three of above items were checked against cost data obtained

from 101 American cement plants for operations covering 1927, which data bas been certified to the Tariff Commission. In all instances ex­cept those noted above, income-tax data was used.

Table A following shows exactly what happened to the income of Atlantic seaboard cement companies in 1927 and 1928.

TABLE A.-This is what happened to the income of Atlantic seaboard cement compa-nies in 1927 and 1928

Income and expendi- Income and expend-itures in cents per tures barrel produced.

1927 1928 1927 1928

----Reooived as gross income t ____________ $84, 892, 114 $81, 404, 858 2 153.40 2 154.62

Paid in wages 3 ________________________ 16,762,472 15,947,054 30.29 30.29 Paid in salaries (excluding officers'

compensation) '----- ---------------- 4, 045,350 3, 848,563 7.31 7.31 Paid in officers' salaries t ______________ 1, 106,799 1, 052,958 2.00 2.00

Total wages and salaries ___ ----- 21,914,621 20,848,575 39.60 39.60

After payment of wages and salaries there was left_ ______________________ 62,977,493 60,556,283 113.80 115.02

Raw materials, supplies, etc.' _________ 44,238,062 42,648,460 79.94 81.00 Net operating revenue~------·-------- 18,739,431 17,907, 823 33.86 34.02

From this there had to be paid: Depreciation (5.21 per cent)------- 6, 368,171 7, 125,141 11.51 13.53 Depletion ~------------------------ 176, 671 185,424 .32 . 35 Write-off for bad debts~----------- 149 34,503 (6) .07 Lor.al taxes t ___ ------------------- 987,976 1, 078,327 1. 78 2.05 Federal taxes~--------·------·---- 1, 400,768 1, 108, 141 2. 53 2.10

-----Totalt---------·---·-·---------- 8, 933,735 9, 531,536 16.14 18.10

Net operating income~-------·-------- 9, 805,696 8, 376,287 17.72 15.92 Fixed charges~------------------------ 1, 721,377 1, 950,211 3.11 3. 70

Leaving for stockholders t _______ 8, 084,319 6,426, 076 14.61 12.22

Owner's capital invested! _____________ 144, 103, 178 155, 041, 018 260.39 294.49 Return on owner's capital (per cent) __ 5.61 4.14 5. 61 4.14

1 Income-tax figures. J Per barrel shipped: 1927, 156.39; 1928, 153.65. Production figures used to avoid

inventory adjustments. a Income-tax figures, broken up by 1927 census returns. • Income-tax and census of 1927. 1 Bad debts included in depletion because of their small size.

TABLE B.-Conden-sed balance sheet and income account reporting Seaboard Portla-nd Cement Mills, 1922-1928

[Dollars; 000 omitted]

Balance sheet 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928

------------ASSETS

1. Current _______________ 19,661 24,285 28,050 29,996 35, 661 37,690 36, 194 2. Fixed _________________ 57,306 59,507 65,079 78,675 115,093 122, 845 138, 04') 3. Other _________________ 10,051 14,354 18, 628 17,856 20,950 21,724 25,841 ------------

Total assets ________ 87,024 98, 147 111,758 126,527 111. 703 1s2, 259 1 zoo. os1 ===

UABIUTIES 1. Current _______________ 8. 987 9, 558 9,890 12, 179 13,465 13, 2111 19,678 2. Funded debt__ ________ 8, 308 9,345 8, 665 3,107 22,809 24,405 24, 617 3. Preferred stock ________ 10,019 10,032 12,377 14,601 31,099 31, 142 48,983 4. Common stock ________ 47,356 52,992 58,457 67,372 70,575 77,703 81,884 5. Surplus and undlvid-ed profits ___________ 12,206 16, 102 22,062 29,008 33,283 35,257 24, 174 6. Other liabilities _______ 149 117 306 261 472 489 745

---------------------7. TotaL __________ 87,024 98, 147 111,758 126, 5'1:1 171,703 182,259 200,081

---------------------INCOME ACCOUNT

1. Gross sales ____________ 54,388 69,694 72,972 81,869 94,411 84,892 81,405 2. Cost of sales ___ _______ 43,371 50,616 52,157 58,800 68,058 66,153 63,497 3. Net operating revenue_ 11,017 19,078 20,815 23,069 26,352 18,739 17,903 4. Other deductions _____ 5, 247 6, '1:10 7,964 8,306 10,449 8, 934 9, 532 5. Net operating revenue_ 5, 770 12,808 12,851 14,763 15,903 9,806 8, 376 6. Depreciation, interest, etc __________________ 696 761 814 708 1, 460 I, 721 1, 950 7. Net operating income_ 5,074 12,047 12,037 14,055 14,443 8,084 6,426 8. Per cent earned own-

er's equity--------- 7.29 15.22 12.95 12.66 10.70 5. 61 4.14

1930 co J RE SIO TAL RECORD-SENATE -2771 1\[l'. II 'l'RID 1J1. Ir. Pr sid nt, I shall not d Jay tlle vote

' hieh I under:tand tb nate is now ready to take. I ask per-m!~~ion to incorpomtc in the RECono certain letter , telegrams, r ·olution~, nnd tntcment concerning tbe ubject matter of c m~ut, ·howing the n · ity for avp vtng the action of tlle Ji it1anc ommitt and giving protection to this American indu.­try. 1 • car<'t-ly n c<.l to ad<l that I hope the action of the Hom;e nnd of our l! innn ommitt e will be approved.

Th PRE 'IDE 'T pro tempore. ithout objection, it is so or1l 1' d.

Th matt r r f rr d to ar as follows : • 0 THWESTERN PORTLAND EMI!JNT Co.,

Los Angeles, Call/., Januarv 1, 1930. non. AdUF:L M. SnonTRIDGJI:,

TVaBllfugton, D. a. D~An ENATOR: Respecting pr vJou communication addre --ed to

you regnr<llng our rl.'qul.'. t thnt you do nll po~silJle to procure the impo i· tlon of tariff on tb Importation or foreign cement into this country, we lnclo e herewith a brlt>f tatemcnt of the cement lndu try of alifor­nln und Jt. contrllmtlon to Notional nnd tate proep rity.

Thl rrOectfl another a..son why a duty 1 nece . ary on tbe importa­tion or Portland cement.

Yout• <'Urne t con ldernUon 1 again sollclt<>d so that this legl latlon moy b hnd at th nrll • t po sible moment.

Your ery truly, M. A. KoFFMAN, 8ecretar1.J.

'l'n 1 'J:. rE:-;T I OUSl'RY IN CALtFOR!\IA .&..·o ITs o.·TniBUTION TO NAT!o.·AL

AND TA.Til Pno l'ElUTT

Followlnr• Is a brief annlysis ot' the Portland cement Industry within th • tnt or ullfornfu on the bnsis of 1028 operauon , with the last stx montbs timatC'd. (Th e figures arc ur·riv d at by the methods of computation u d In th tnte nnalylll for the year 192G. In Ulis case the tott\1. and maln ubdivlslons only arc curried out.)

• • • • • allfornln Is on of the lnrg4"st produeerq of ment ln the United

States. Employing capitol amountin~ to $52,•2-,000 the Callfornln Portland cement inclu try hns a produ tlve capacity of 17,474,000 barrels n Yt•ur. The cement inuustry 1n California op rat s 13 mill within the

tnt I', n follows: ntnv<>rns •m nt o., nn Andreas; 'nllfornla Port.Innd Cement Co.,

olton (2) ; ow 11 Portland Cement o., o 11 (Contra Costa Co.) ; fonolith Porllnu(l ment onoltth; Pa iflc I>ortlund Cement Co., cmrnt; Pacific Portland cment o., Redwood lty; Pncffic Portland mcnt Co., nn Ju n Bantt. tn: Riverside Portland Cement Co., Crest­

more; Rlv r· Ide Portlnn<l em nt Co., Oro Grande; anta Cruz Portland C m nt 'o., Dnv nport; outbwe tern Portland Cement Co., \"ictorville; and Yo mite Portlnnll em nt o., Mer •ed.

TUiil C LlFORNI.A. CEM !liT I 'DUSTRY' CONTRIBUTIO:S TO ECONOMIC WELFARE

Thf' dlt·cct contribution of the California cement Industry to the in­dustrl. 1 prosrrc of th State nnd Nation during 1028 may be approxi­mated ns follows:

1. Production--------------------------------barrels-- H, 175,000 2. nll• ---------------------------------------do____ 14, 000, 0 0 :t G 1'0 s op rntlng n•vcnues--------------------------- $26, 500, 000 4. Wng (urn rs cmploled----------------------------- 3, 5!54 ~- Dn~ or cmploymen given to c ment earners_________ 1, 066,200 0 .• 'alni'INl rupioy . --------------------------------- 70, 7. Pnyrnl'llts in wage -------------------------------- ~4, 961, 229

. l'nymenls In ~mlnrl ------------------------------- 1, 704, 470 9. Totnl pny r "------------------------------------- ~665,699

lndir ctl:r-thnt Is, by its d mnnd ln material nnd services from othl'r lndustrinl groups-Its exp ctcd 192 contribution would be sum­mnrlz <1 us follow11:

Materials nnd rvlces

4,01<1,9b3 bnrrot or olL----------·--·-----------77,9113 ton gYI um •• --------------------------4,74U, 773 l'ottou ncks. _ ---------·-------------­Mill !mppli sand rnnchin ry __ --·------------­};I<>ctrlc pow r- ·---- --------------------------­Hnilrond revonu -----------------------------

Labor's Payments sllnre in

wages

$4,454,9 2 233. 98 759,0:3

4, 96-i, 07 2, 2(17, 990 II, 351, 099

$1, 113, 74.6 1, 61

1664,991 49':1,481 4~.5!1

3, 003,282

Workers employed as result

742

1, 163 330 324

2, 476 ~------~--------+--------

Total .••• ------------------------------- 22,032,730 6, 773,959 5,100

Grand total~, direct and 4ndirect contrtbuHQn8

Vnlu c•m nt prolluc d------------------------------­\'alue mat rlnl and rvl cs outside cemenL-----------\Vn •c. ccm nt work •r ------------------------------­ltt•sulttng wng !I oth r work rtL-----------------------

umbrr ot • mC'nl work<'r and alarled mploy e ------­Worl 1•rs otbct· thnn cement---------------------------

EFFECT OJ' :J'OREION COllPETITION

26,r::oo,ooo 22,032,730 6,665,699

$6,773,95!) 4,262 5,103

Jrcctly· tllat Js, wllhtn Ita own manufacturing operations-the lo . es ot the Calltornia. PorUnnd cement industry due to the importa·

tlon of duty-free foreign cement for the years 1!>24-1928 (last Ix months e. timate<l), inclu ive, may be suO::marized as follows:

1. Sales -------------------------------------barrel'-- 2, 270, 093 2. Rcvenu ------------------------------------------- $4,190,605 3. Days' employment lo. t to w ge enrner --------------- 2:.!4, 847 4. Wn"'e nnd salaries lost to all employ e -------------- $1, 124, :234

Probable indirect lo~ es to other indu'tl'ie through reduction of alifornia Portland cement tndu try

Cost Wages lo t

1 ,633 tons coaL-------------------------------------------12,.S5 ton gypsum.. •. ------·-------------------------------739,830 cotton sacks ___ ---------------·-·----·--------------Mill suppli and machinery ___ ·----------------------·---Eiectric power ___ --------------------------------·---------Railroad revenues ___ -_---------- ___ --------_---------------

TotaL __________ ------------------ ·----- ------------

$496,583 4o,sn

118,273 852,260 363,215

1, 724, 179

3,595, 087

8umma111 of loBBCB direct and. indirect

$297,9.30 14,202 96, 193 85,226 72,643

741,397

1, 307, Gll

Value of cement dJ. plac <1----------------------------- . ~· !P~· 695 Value material and rvice apart from cem nL--------- :3, .J,Ii), 0 7 C ment wage' lo ·L---------------------------------- 1, 1~4. 234 Other wnges lost------------------------------------- 1, :307, ~11

AN BilltNARDINo, CALIF., December 9, 1929. Senator ..,Alf:l'EL Y. SHORTRIDGE,

Washington, D. 0. 1\fy DEAR E:'<IATOR SHORTRIDGE: I have ju:::t fini bed reading your

general letter of November 26 and your tat ment in regord to the stntus of the tnrif.t bill \\hen Congres adjourned on Frl<lay, November 22 last.

It ls very apparent tllnt everything pos ible to give adequate protec­tion to the intere ts of California, which I am inclined to think was done largely through your own efforts.

There i one matter, however, to which I would like to call your attention, regarding which I wrote to you ~;orne time a"'o. That 1.' the situation that exi ts here in our own county, and in sou them allfornia generally, in regnrd to competition betwe n our local mills manufac­turing cement and the foreign ~ment thnt ('()roes ln, particularly from Belgium.

It I am correctly advised, they are now brin~ing n ballast to Los Angeles clinkers that are ready for grinding. Tbe!>e clinker:; are tbt>n ground and sold as n finl.·hed product. Our own plants can not come anywhere near competing with tbls ltuat1on. They sell cement at a reasonable margin of profit, at "'1.05 f. o. b. thelr plants, whllc the foreign cement made from cllnke1 is offered for sale a' low a 07 c nts per barrel.

TbJs 1s a bad situation, and I nm sure ft will merit your clo e t inve tigatlon. There are at the present time, if my memory serves me correctly, at least 10 plants making cement in southern allfornia­using raw material and producing a finished product-and thl- is a big Industry. Four of these plants are located in an Bernardino County, and we are particularly aware of the ~;ituatlon that exi ·ts.

As we under tand the situation, the clinkers are produced in n lgium in a large number of milling plants which are almo. t family operntrd, being that small; and tben the clinkers are gathered togeth r and hipped here and ground into the finishe<l product.

I know you mu t be familiar with the situation, but I am nddht"' n word to tell you that the people of our own county, and I b<>lle> of the

tate generally, are glad to use our home product nnd would like to see a full measure of protection on this foreign cement.

With be.:t per onal regard~. I am, sincer ly your-, AN BERN.ARDI~O H.\:>IRER OF CO~DH;nCJC,

R. H. MACK, ecr ta1y.

OLTO:S, CALIF., • rot•tntber 1.!, 11"129. Hon. 'AU EL M. SHORTBIDGB,

United State c11ator, Washington, D. a. DEAR Sxn: The Colton Chambt>r of Commf'rce wi b to bring to your

attention the following matter: The principal industry iu the city of Colton ls the c ment manu­

facturing plant of the Cnlifornin Portland Cement Co. Tbis ompany employs nt its plant, under normal conditions, approximately 600 men, mo t of whom live in Colton. All of the materials u ed by the Call­fornta Portland Cement Co. in the mauufucture of its cement are ob­tain d in tbe vicinity of Colton.

Recently the Blue Diamond Co. con tructed a cement mnuufncturing plant in the city of Los Angele . The latter company imports from Bel ium c ment clinker which 1 merely ground in tt~ plnnt in Los An el s and then placed on the market iu competition with the c ·mcnt from the California rortlnnll Cement Co. an<l other companlc: loC"nted tn southern California.

The greater part of the cost of manufacturing c •ruent is in the manufacture of tbe clink r.

The Belgium cement 1 imported free of any tal'iti or other duty. The tre.tght rate by boat from Belgium to Los Angeles Harbor is the J18me as the freight rate bY. rail from Colton to Los Angeles Hnrbor.

2772· CONGRESS! ON AL RECORD-SEN ATE JANUARY 31 This foreign cement is being sold in the markets of southern Cali­

fornia at such a low price that apparently the California Portland Cement Co. has been unable to compete with it on a price basis. We do not know this to be an actual fact in so far as the actual: prices are concerned, but we do know that 'large quantities of this foreign cement is sold in the southern California markets and that the output of the California Portland Cement Co.'s plant has been steadily decreasing so that at the present time there are only approximately half of the men employed at the Colton plant instead of the usual 600, the number which are usually and ordinarily employed there.

The result is that Colton is suffering a very serious depression, and we have in our community a number of vacant storerooms and a large number of men who are now idle and have not been able to obtain employment.

We notice that there is a proposition before Congress to place a tariff upon the importation of cement, and we wish to urge you to do all you can to secure the enactment of a substantially high tariff on foreign cement.

It does not seem to us hardly just that men who have been employed many years at the Colton Cement plant and who own their homes here in Colton should be forced out of their employment because of the fact that cement may be manufactured and shipped to this country cheaper than it can be manufactured here. The workmen in nearly every other industry in the United States are protected by a tariff on the commodity which it produces, and we feel that we are likewise entitled to a tariff protection on cement.

Yours very sincerely, COLTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,

By J. N. ROBIN·~~. President, By JAS. A. GoRMAN, Secretary.

LIONS CLUB, Victorville, Calif. Resolution adopted at a regular meeting of the Victor Valley Lions

Club, June 11, 1929 Ron. SAMUEL M. SHORTRIDGE,

United States Senator, Wa.shington, D. 0.: Whereas thousands of workers are forced out of employment by the

closing down and partial closing down of cement mills throughout the country, which is caused by the impo1:ting of great quantities of foreign cement in various forms, which is being sold in competition to the domestic product at prices American cement companies can not profit­ably meet in consideration of the cost of labor here and abroad.

Whereas a bill designed to equalize the cost of domestic and foreign cement by placing a tariff on the imported product has been passed by the House of Representatives, which bill, in all fairness to American industry and prosperity, should be made a law : Therefore be it

Resolved, That this organization indorse this bill and pledge to it our hearty support, and that we appeal to our Senators and Representatives to do everything within their power to achieve the passing of this bill.

I hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of resolu­tion adopted June 11, 1929, at a regular meeting of the Victor Valley Lions Club.

WALKIIR JONES, Secretary.

Los ANGELES, CALIF., June i, 1929. Senator SAMUEL SHORTRIDGE,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Now that the tariff bill bas been submitted to the Senate

may I solicit your cooperation in the passage of the duty upon cement. The State of California alrected and directly concerned in the tariff

bill reported to the United States House of Representatives on May 7 in its provision for a duty of 8 cents per 100 on imported Portland cement. It is regretted that this duty was not placed high enough to permit home manufactures to compete equally with European shipments to our seaboard States, but any protection under existing conditions is better than none. You are, of course, entirely familiar with this sub­ject. and therefore I hope you will use all of your influence in favor of this bill.

Yours very truly, H. H. HELBUSH.

SAN BERNARDINO, CALIF., June fl, 1929. Sl'nator ~AMUETJ M. SHORTRIDGE,

Wu.shington, D. C.: Resolved by the boar·d of d·irectors of the San Bernardino Ohamber

of Commerce, That we do hereby indorse the proposed tariff of 8 cents per 100 pounds on Portland cement, and recommend the passage of the tarifl' bill containing the provision.

R. H. MACK, Sc01·ctar·y San Bernanlino Chamber of Commerce.

COL'l.'ON, CALIF., May 2S, 191UJ. SA111:UEL M. SHORTIHnGE,

Un-ited States Senato1·, Washington, D. 0.: Resolved by the cham.bor of comme1·ce of the city of Colton, That the

proposed tariff of 8 cents per 100 pounds on Portland cemenj will

be advantageous and to the benefit of the people of Colton and this vicinity, and that the chamber of commerce urges passage of the tariff bill providing for this tariff.

COLTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

SAN BERNARDINO, CALIF., May Z1, 1929. SAMUEL M. SHORTRIDGE,

Senator, Washington, D. C.: Resolved b1l the board of supervisors of the county of San Bernardino,

That it is for the best interests of the county of San Bernardino and the working~en of the county of San Bernardino that the proposed tariff of 8 cents per 100 pounds on Portland cement be adopted.

Resolved further, That we earnestly commend this item to the Cali­fornia Representatives at Washington for their assistance in securing its inclusion in the tariff act.

C. E. CRIER, Chairman.

SAN FRANCISCO, January 8, 1929. Ron. SAMUEL M. SHOilTRIDGE,

United States Senator, Washington, D. 0. DEAR MR. SHORTRIDGE : The cement and lime industry on the Pacific

coast is fast getting into a deplorable condition on account of the inroads of cement from Europe and lime from British Columbia. These two industries need protection by tariff.

The cement industry should have the old duty restored of 32 cents a barrel and the lime industry should have an increase on limestone and all lime products from the present protective tariff of $2 a ton. We feel that it should be $3 a ton.

As a Member of the Congress, we desire to call this situation very seriously and sincerely to your attention. Won't you kindly watch what is done in the Congress on the tariff question and see that these two industries are protected? They certainly need it badly.

Yours very sincerely, HENRY COWELL LIME & CEMENT Co.,

By W. H. GEORGE, Secretary and General Manager.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is upon agree­ing to the a,mendment proposed by the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. McMAsTER.] as modified. On this question a de­mand has been made for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. DILL. Mr. President, I would like to have the amend­

ment stated so we may know upon what we are about to vote.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment will be stated for the information of the Senate.

The CHIEF CLERIC The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. McMAsTER] offers the following amendment as modified by the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. BARKLEY]: On page 37, beginning in line 6, strike out the following words:

Roman, Portland, and other hydraulic cement or cement clinkers, 8 cents per 100 pounds, including the weight of the container; white.

And insert in lieu thereof the word " White," so as to make the subsection read :

(b) White nonstaining Portland cement, 8 cents per 100 pounds, in­cluding the weight of the container.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the amendment as stated, on which the yeas and nays have been ordered.

The Chief Clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. McKELLAR (when Mr. BRocK's name was called). The

junior Senator from Tennessee [Mr. BROCK] is unavoidably air sent. He is paired with the junior Senator from Kansas [Mr. .ALLEN]. If the junior Senator from Tennessee were present, he would vote "nay."

Mr. SHEPPARD {when Mr. HAYDEN's name was called). I desire to announce that the Senator from Arizona [Mr. HAY­DEN], who is necessarily absent on official business in connection with the conference relating to the waters of the Colorado River, has a special pair on this vote with the Senator from Delaware [Mr. HASTINGS]. If the Senator from Arizona [Mr. HAYDEN] were present, he would vote "yea," and if the Senator from Delaware [Mr. HASTINGS] were present he would vote "nay.''

Mr. ROBINSON of Indiana (when his name was called). I have a general pair with the Senator from Mississippi [Mr. STEPHENS]. I transfer that pair to the junior Senator fTom Idaho [Mr. THOMAs] and vote "nay."

Mr. SIMMONS (when his name was called). I transfer my pair with the junior Senator from Ohio [Mr. McCuLLOCH] to the senior Senator from Nevada [Mr. PITTMAN] and vote" yea."

The roll call was concluded. Mr. HALE. My colleague the junior Senator from Maine

[Mr. GouLD] is pai!"ed on this matter. If present and allowed

1930 CO GRE~ IO AL RECORD-SENATE 2773 to vote, 11 w uld vote "nay," and tbe Senator from New Mex­i o [Mr. "'UTTI a] with whom l1c i ' paired, I understand, would vot "r a."

Mr: H RAII. I d ;lr to announce tbat my colleague [Mr. Tno A 1 i detnin •d from the enate on account o! illn . Be l. pair <1 with the 'enutor from 1\fi i , ·ippi [1\fr. TEPHENS] by tt'tlllsf<>r of th pair of the nator from Indiana [Mr. RoB­IN o, l.

flo. IIARRI L T (t tt r having voted in the affirmative). Has th . •nlor nat or from r gon [Mr. M N.ABY] voted?

Th I RIC IDE T pro t mpore. That •nator has not voted. Mr. HARRI N. n thl vote I am pair d with the senior

• nator from Or g n [Mr. McN.\RY]. Therefore, I withhold my vot<'. If permitt d to vot , I , hould vot "yea!'

Mr. BLE E. I am paired witb th enntor from Delaware I Mr. TowNSEND]. I understand that if he were pre. nt he would vote" n y." H permitted to v te. I would vote" yea."

Mr. APPER. I wl~;-:h to anounce U1at my colleague [Mr. Ar.r.EN) i unavoidably ab · nt. If pr ent, be would vote" yea."

1\!1'. FE . I de.-11· to announce the fo1lowing general pair : 1~he nator from nnsylvania [Mr. REED] with the enator

from Arkan . n. [l\Ir. ROBINSON] ; and Th nnt r from olorado [Mr. WATEIUdAN] with the Sena-

tor fl'OIJl tall rMr. KING). Mr. GE R R Upon this vote I have a pair with the senior

SenHtor from 1 ra<lo [Mr. PHIPPS]. Therefore I withhold my YOt .

Ml'. IIEPPARD. I d . lr to announce the nece sary ab. ence or thl' R nator from At·kansn [Mr. RoaiNS<YN] and the Senator from P nn. ylvaula [1\Ir. REED], who are deleaat !rom the Unit d • 'tate to tb NaV'al Arm Confer nee in London, Eng­land. I will let thi · announcement tand for the day.

'l'h . ·ult wa announced- yea 40, nays 35, as follow

Burkll'y Blll<'k mnln Borah Brut ton HroHkhnrt ('npp<•r ('llrllWIIY (.' nnnlly

' UZl'D

A hurst Baird Bln~hnm UrouM llrd l'opclnnd Dnl nrn n !Jill J•' 1!8

YEA 40 lt'l<'t<'h r Prnzl l·r Glat1a m nn lfurrl lluw • It flln JIOWt'Jl K ndrlck Ln ~·on tte

Me.. fnst r Norlleek ~·orris Nyc

vr.rmnn Pine Schnll

beppard 'hlp. tend hnmons

NAY 35 Ootr Uolcl ·bor ugh Hr np Grundy Hal1• Jlat.ftl'ld IJ ll rt John on Jon s

Kenn

~~flnnr .fetcalt Mo. Oddle l'atter on Rnnsdell Rob1n.on, Ind.

NOT YOTI. G-21 A 111•n Mc~ary ntPnR Phipps HrO<'k Pittman 'nttlng Reed

f ;t>orgt• Robinson, Ark. tall t t t pbeus

Smith tf'Ck

Swan~on Thomas, Okla. Trnmm 11 Tyding Wagner \Val b, Mnas. Walsh, Mont. Wlleel~r

Rob lon. Ky. Shortrldg ~moot

teiwer ulllvnn

Vnnd nb rg Walcott Watson

Tbomn • Idnho Towns nd Wnt rman

~o Ir. :M IA ·'fER' am ndment a m ditled was agr d to. Mr .• 1 T. lr. Pr ~ident, in order that the que tion of

l'lll nt muy be ·om1•Iet d, on pn "'e 252, in the tree li. t, after lin 21, I move to in · rt :

l'An. -. m nt: Roman, Portlund, or otber hydraulic: Provided., 'l'hnt If any country, d pcnd('ncy, province., or other subdivision of gov rnmcnt tmpo H n duty on Rucb cern nt imported from the Unlted , tnt . , nn ~?qual duty bnll b lmpo · d upon such cement coming into tb nlted Stnt . from Ruch country, d p nd ncy, province, or other ulJdlvl ton of gov rnmeut.

'J'hni i tbe · i. Ung law. Mr. M MA TER. lr. Pr .Jdent, before that is acted on,

~;o:hould not Ut ·ond part; f my nmendm nt be acted on with r •f r nc to placin~ c •ment upon the !r liRt?

The l!HE .. IDE r1' pro t mpore. The purp e of the awend-m nt pr )PO ·ed by th nator from tnh moves to the nme end.

Mr. IoMA TI•JR. Very well. Mr. IMM N . I under taud the Senator from Utah pro­

pos • mer ly a count rvailing duty. Mr. M OT. That l all. All it <1 1 to place Roman,

Portland, nntl olll r hydraulic ceme11t on the free list with a conntt·rvnilin~ du ty nR provid <1 by e i ting law.

'l'h • PRE 1 IHJ ·T pro tempore. The que tion i on agreeing to th nm •ndnwnt prop · d by the nator from Utah.

'l'he amendm nt wn. a;.,rree<l to. Mr. B RAil ohtnin d th flo r. Mr. ' P~JLA ~n. ~fr. Pr ~ident--'l'lw PRijJHIDI<...NT pro t •mpor . Does the Senator !rom Idaho

,!.'it•l<l t tht' .'cnntor from."'"' York? Mr. B RAil. Yc.

Mr. COPELAND. Mr. Pre ident, for reasons which I have alr ady suggested to the Senate, it seems imperative for me to go to New York to-niooht. I am tremendously intere ted, as the Senator from Utah know.,, in the gypsum item, and a little while ago I a ked unanimou con. ent that tbe gyp~um para­graph might be put over until Monday. I realize the difficulty facing the Senator from Utah. lie tell me that nobody is ready to go on with anything el . I do not know how other Senators may be ituated, but, as I understand now, we are practically at the end of the first round of the bill. We will take up very shortly the chemical schedule. There are doubtl . matters of orne importance that might be consider d to-morrow, and I

tru t that my request-! have never made one like it before­may be acceded to, and that unanimou con~ent may be granted to po. tpone the gyp. um paragraph until Monday.

The PRE IDENT pro tempore. May the hair, in bi. ca­pacity a. a Senator, say tbat he bas some long-standing engnge­ment in his own State which he wi h to fill next week, and, not wi lling to interfere at all with the program of the enator from tab, he makes the proposition to the Senator from New York that be will pair with that enator on the que. tion to which he ha r ferred and let the matter be <l<>alt with to­morrow?

Mr. ~oPELA.c .. D. I thank the Chair, and I accept the pair, bnt my obligation i not quite concluded when I vote althon"'h that may end any furtb r work that will be done· 'but I a~n under peculiar obligation to the great gypsum mi~e in my • tate. 0! cou~e. I shall be forced to stay by rea. on of the peculiar obligation re. ting upon me, but what will happen is that we will comP here to-morrow morning; we hall hnve two or thr<:~e speeches-

Mr. WAT ON. Mr. Pre.;;ident, will the S nator yield to me !or a moment?

Mr. COPEL~ D. Yes. Mr. WATSON. What doe the Senator propose? 'J~e PRE.'IDE:r-.~ pro tempore. The Senator from New York

i~ a. kin.., unnnimou con. ent that the vote on an item in the free li t which it is proposed to transfer to the dutiable 1i t may be taken on Monday and not on to-morrow.

Mr. OPELAl'"D. No: but that the consideration and discu -.ion of the item r ferred to may be postponed until Monday.

Tbe PRE IDENT pro tempore. Very well; but may the Chair, again in hi capacity as a Senator, say that if the debate i going to run over several days beyond Monday the ena tor trow

E'W Ham~ hire will haYe to object, because he can not in ·dew of hi~ own commitment , tiek around here for three' or four day whi.le the • enator !rom New York again tran fers his all giance from hL' party's principles and attempt to transfer from the free list somethi11g to the dutiable list? [Laughter.]

Mr. 'OPELA1'1.'D. Mr. President, the ena.tor from New York hq Yery sincerely that about the middle o! next week he may abandon the bad company he has been in during the pr ~ent week.

The PRE IDENT pro tempore. The enator from .. · ew York will have to do it before that if he gets unanimous con ent from the nator from New Hampshire to-day.

Mr. IMMON •. Mr. Pre ident--Th PRE IDE!\"T pro tempore. Doe the Sen a tor from Idaho,

who has the floor, yield to the Senator from North Carolina? Mr. BORAH. I yield. Mr .• IMMONS. I wish to a k the Sca11tor from Utah if the

an1endmcnt as to gypsum is the only amendment of the com­mittee which ha been unacted upon?

Mr .• MOOT. That i the on1y question which ha._ not as yet been di po ed of, with the exc<'ption of American valuation, in paragraphs 27 and 2 of the chemical sclledule. We want to take up one or the other of them to-morrow; we do not want to wa. tea day.

Mr. SIMMO..:"', . I want to sugge t to the enator from 'tah that we ought to finish the committee amendment b >fore we begin the consideration o! individual amendment . As I uuder­tand, if the gyp um item is put over until Monday we will have

to begin with individual amendments to-morrow. Mr. MOOT. Ther are only two things to do a I ee it­

either take up the gypsum paragraph to-m rrow or the que Uon of American valuation. I should 1ike, with all my heart, to comply with the request of the Senator n·ow New York--

Mr. BORAH. Mr. President, I have the floor. If we can not agree upon the question before the Senate, I ~hould like to transact some business.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Idaho has been recognized and controls the floor. To wllom does he yield, if to anyone?

Mr. SlfOOT. Mr. President, I should like the Senator to yield to me just for a statement.

Mr. BORAH. Very well.

2774 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE J ANU.ARY 31 Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President, I desire to take up the gypsum · the President. So, Mr. President, if the Senator from Idaho

item to-monow. I hope the Senator from New York may will make a request to take up the joint resolution to-morrow forego his visit to New York; and if we have to recess early, morning at 11 o'clock when the Senate convenes, if the Senate well and good; the Senator can go to New York by a later shall recess until that time, I will have no objection to the train. consideration of the joint resolution at that time. I am per-

Mr. COPELAND. My leaving depends upon the visit of the fectly willing that a vote be taken upon the joint resolution death angel to a very ill friend. However, my obligation to after due consideration. I do not want to delay a vote; but I persons in my State is such that if the Senate insists on going do think there ought .to be an opportunity to discuss the joint on, of course, I shall stay here; but this is what will happen: resolution. If the Senator from Idaho will accede to that sug­To-morrow is Saturday; and in spite of the fact that the gestion, I will have no objection to his request. ground is covered with snow we will not have a quorum here Mr. CARAWAY. l\fr. President--after 12 o'clock. We will come here, and we will have a lot of The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from Idaho ·dil'cussion about this, that, or the other thing; but there will be yield to the Senator from Arkansas? no business done. · Mr. BORAH. I yield to the Senator from Arkansas.

Mr. WATSON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. CARAWAY. I was going to ask if it would not be well The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Idaho has for the Senator to propose an amendment to the Constitution

·the floor. abolishing the Executive and providing a commission form :Mr. WATSON. Will the Senator from Idaho yield to me? of government? Mr. BORAH. Yes. Mr. BORAH. I think we would not have time to dispose Mr. WATSON. We had a quorum all day last Saturday, and of that question this evening.

·there is every reason to believe there will be a quorum· all day Mr. CARAWAY. I hope the Senator will give it his serious ·to-morrow. While we all greatly admire our dear friend from consideration. New York and would like to accommodate him, 1 do not believe · Mr. BORAH. I shall. that he ougiht to ask the Senate to cease its work in order Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President--that he may fill some personal engagement. Six Senators on 1 The PRE.SIDENT pro tempore. The Chair wishes to under­this side have been to me to-day to ask to be excused for to- st~nd th~ situation . . ~e does not underst!lnd the Senator from morrow, but in every instance I have objected and insisted on Wisconsm to have obJected to the unammous-consent request their being here. So far as I have anything to do with it, . ~or the .consideration of House Joint Resolution 170, b~t, if .it I shall object to any postponement of the gypsum · paragraph IS not disposed o~ to-day and the Senate recesses that w1ll be m or anything else that would result in the Senate not being order the first thing to-morrow. . . . forced to have a meeting to-morrow. 1.\;[r. ~OUZENS. I obj.ect to tha~; I. Will obJect to anythmg

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair understands the which mterferes at all with the tanff bill. Senator from Idaho to have interposed objection to the unani- Mr. J~HNS_QN .. Mr. President, that is not what the Senator mons consent requested by the Senator from New York, upon from Wisco?sm sa}d at all. , . . the g:round that the Senator from Idaho wishes the Senate to The PRE~IDENT pro tempore. That IS what the Chmr transact some business; and the Senator from Idaho continues understood hrm to say. . .

· to hold the floor. ~1r. J~HNSON. The Cha1r misunderstood the Senator from Mr. BORAH. Mr. President, I am the on·e who suggested Wisconsm.

transacting some business, but it was not the Senator from The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Will the Senator from Wis-. Idaho who objected to the proposal of the Senator from New consin state exactly what he has iii mind. York. Mr. BLAINE. I have no objection to the consideration of the

'.rhe PRESIDENT pro tempore. It amounts to the same joint resolution--thing. · The PRESIDENT pro tempore. At the present time?

Mr. BORAH. The Senator from Utah objected to it. Mr. B~AINE. If it may. be take~ up to-!llorrow mornin~ when Mr. COPELAND. Mr. President, I am coming here to-morrow ther~ Will .be an o~portu!lity to d1s~~ss It. I would obJe~t to

morning, and will be here at 11 o'clock to present my cause the Immediate consideratiOn of the JOint resolution; that Is, to although I know full well that by 1 o'clock or half past i the consideration of the joint resolution this afternoon. there will not be a handful of Senators within reach. T.he PRES.IDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Ida~o is

Mr. SMOO'.r. Then, we can send for them. askmg unammous consent to proceed t<> the consideration of Mr. COPELAND. But I shall be here and I release the House Joint Resolution 170. If that request is granted and the

Chair from his very courteous gift of a pai~ Senate shall now recess until to-morrow morning at 11 o'clock. · the joint resolution will still be the question before the Senate.

INVESTIGATION OF H.A.ITIAN CONDITIONS Mr. BORAH. Mr. President, let me say that I am not in a Mr. BORAH. Mr. Preside-nt, I ask unanimous consent for position to ask that the joint resolution shall interfere with the .

the present consideration of House Joint Resolution 170, being tariff bill, and, as I understand the Senator from Wisconsin, · order of business No. 129 on the calendar. he does not desire to proceed with its consideration this evening.

Mr. McKELLAR. Mr .. Pr·esident, will the Senator yield? Mr. BLAINE. I think there is not sufficient time this evening The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the to consider it.

request of the Senator from Idaho? Mr. BORAH. Then, I shall have to withdraw the request. Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President, wlll the Senator yield? Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President--The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from Idaho The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Idaho

yield to the Senator from Tennessee? withdraws his request. Mr. BORAH. 1 yield to the Senator from Tennessee. Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President--Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President, I interposed objection the The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Utah is

other afternoon to the consideration of the joint resolution, be- recognized. To whom does he yield? cause I deemed that the joint resolution provides for a commis- Mr. McKELLAR. Just a moment before the Senator from sion. I am asking the Senator from Idaho will he accept an Idaho leaves the floor. · amendment on lines 13 and 14, as follows?- Mr. SMOOT. I yield to the Senator from Tennessee.

Strike out · the words "by commission or otherwise " and in- Mr. McKELLAR. In order to get rid of the commission--sert the words "by such means and by such agencies as he may Mr. CARAWAY. And get it under another name. determine," so that it will read: Mr. McKELLAR. Perhaps, get it under another name; I wish

That there is hereby authorized to be appropriated the sum of $50,000 to cover any expenses which may be incurred by the President in making an investigation by such means and by such agencies as he may deter­mine of conditions in and a study of the policies relating to Haiti.

Mr. BORAH. I have no objection to that amendment. The PRESIDENT pro tempore: Very well; but, first of all, it

is necessary that unanimous consent be granted for the con­sideration of Hous·e Joint Resolution 170. Is there objection?

Mr. BLAINE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I want to suggest that the joint resolution ought not to be passed upon hastily. I have no objection to the consideration of the joint resolution at such time as will afford an opportunity to discuss the purposes of the joint resolution and the objects of

to offer an amendment and let it be pending-namely, in line 16, to strike out the word "commission" and insert the word "agents."

As I understand, that is satisfactory to the Senator from Idaho.

Mr. BORAH. If we were considering the joint resolution I would have no objection to the amendment.

REVISION OF THE TARIFF The Senate, as in Cqmmittee on the Whole, resumed the con­

sideration of the bill (H. R. 2667) to provide revenue, to regu­late commerce with foreign countries, to encourage the indus­tries of the United States, to protect American labor, and for other purposes.

1!>30 C01.T RE SIONAL RECORD-SE JATE ~775 Mr. BLEA E. 1\Ir. Pr . ident--The PR~) IDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator !rom Utah

) '1 lu to the Senator from South Carolina? Mr. SM OT. I yield. Mr. BLEA E. I wh;h to offer an amendment to the cement

po.mgrapb of tlle p ndlng bill. Th PRE IDENT pro tempore. The amendment will be re­

c t" d, print <1, an<l lie upon the table. Mr. BLE "' E. Tb r • is no U!;e printing it; it has been

lll'lntcd. I off r it as an amendment. Th PRE 1 E 'T pro t mpor . Docs the enator wi h to

otr r it now? Mr. BLJiJA E. Ye .. The I.)llE I F.NT 11ro tcmpor . The nmendm nt will be

t tt u for the information of the Senate. The CtnEF U1RK. n page 37, at the end of Une 23, it is

propo ·ed to udd th following provi o to paragraph' 205: (f) Pro tdccl~ That this paragraph shall not apply to purcha es of

cement mad by the re p tive governments of States, counti s, parishes, 1ncorporat d citle , town , mun1cipnlltles, and polltieal subdl>isions th r of for public purpose .

1'be PRESIDE T pro t mpore. The question is on agreeing to the amendment pr po. ed by the nator fr m South Caro-linn.

Mr. BLE SE and Mr. SM OT addre ~ d the Chair. The PRE 'IDENT pro tempor . The enator from Utah ba

the 1loor but yleld <l to the .. •enntor from outh Carolina for th purpo:-; of pre enUng the amendment. Do the Senator from tuh yield further to the utor from South Carolina?

lr. BLEA E. Do s the enator from Utah desire that the .nate tak n r es now?

Ir. 10 T. It wa. my intention now to n k for a rece s. Mr. BLEA E. V ry well. I wi h to make some remark on

the nmC'ndment I bav ofiered. Th PHESIDENT pro tempore. The qne ~tton is on agreeing

to th am ndment propos d by the enator !rom South Caro­lina, and that que tion will be p nding when the Senate con­v n to-m rrow.

Mr. MOOT. I move that the Senate take a rece s until 11 o' •lock to-morrow.

Mr. W AT ON. I n k the S nator to withhold the motion, as it i <1 • ir u to have an executive se . ion.

Mr. MO T. I withhold th motion in order that an execu­th' es:::ion mny be h ld.

to the con-

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

The PRE IDE "T pro t mpore. The me ages from the Pr ident of tb Unit d Stut having alr ady been laid down and r f rrcd, r port. of cowmitt ar in order.

REP RT O:E NAVAL ~0 INATIO~'S

Mr. llAJ~E, !rom the Committe on Naval Affairs, reported the nomlnntions of undry offi rs in the Navy.

TOE CALENDAB

'l'h PRE lDFJNT pro tempore. The calendar is ln order. TRF..ATIES

lerk announc d Executi e , S Yenty-1lrst Con­ouu ~' . , ion, tr aty of arbitration with the Nether­

lands, ·h"ll <1 nt Wu...:hington, January 13, 1 30; and Executive A, v nty-fir 't u rr-e , ~ · n<l • ·ion, treaty of commerce nud navi ntlon with th Turkish Republic, signed October 1, J 29.

AROITR TJO. TRF.ATY WITH THE NETHERLA. DB

Mr. n RAn. Mr. President, there can be no objection to the <~onsideration thfs aft rnoon of Ex cutive C. It i the ordinary urhitrntlon treaty '\\hfch we llavc made with otlu•r nations; but I hnll have to aRk, at th rt'qu st of a colleague, U1at Executive A ~o ov r.

Mr. B RAII ubmltt d the following resolution, which was considered and agrC'ed to :

Rcsolv a (t1co-tllirtll of t1le Senator& pruont concurring therein.), Tbn.t th S nnte fHlvl e nnd conA nt to the rn.tl.ft.Ctltlon o.f Executive C, sev nt. ·fir t, s cond, nn nruitrntlon treaty with the Netherlands signed nt Wusbington on Jnnunry 13, 1930.

n motlon of Mr. Dou.\Ir, the Injunction of secrecy was re­m .'7 <1 from tll tr nty, whi<:h is as follows:

To the Senate: To the end that I may :receive the advice and consent of the

Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith a treaty of arbitra­tion b tween the United States of America and the Netherlanda. signed at ·washington on January 13, 1930.

HEB.BEBT HooVER. THE WHITE HOUSE,

January 21, 1930.

DEPARTMENT OF TATE, lra.8Mngton, Jamta1·y 16, 1930.

The PRE: ID~'T: The undersigned, the Acting ecretary of State, ha the honor

to lay before the President, with a view to iU; tran mi sion to the Senate to receive the advice and con·ent of that body to ratification, if his judgment approve thereof, a treaty of arbi­tration between the Unit d States of America and the Nether­land , signed at Wa bington on January 13, 1930.

Thi treaty is imilnr to arbitration trentie signed by thb United States with other countries within the pa t two years. It will upersede the arbitration convention concluded between the United 'tate and the Netherland. on May 2, 1908, wblcb will expire by limitation on :March 25, 1930, if not ooner . uper­sedro by rea.on of the e:xcbange of ratification of the pre ent treaty.

Re."pectful1y submitted. J. P. 0oTrON,

Acting Secretary ot State.

The President of the United States of .America and Her Maj ty the Queen of the Netherlands

D termined to prevent so far as in their power lies any interr11ption in the peaceful relations that have always exi, ted between the two nations;

D iron of reaffirming their &dberence to the policy of ubruitting to impartial decision all ju ticiable controvcr"ies

that may nri e between them ; and Eager by their example not only to demon trate their on­

demnation of war f\S an instrument of national policy in their mutual relation , but also to ha ten the time wh n the perfec­tion of international arrangements for the pacific settlemE>nt of international disputes ball have eliminated forever the poSl ibility of war among any of the Powers of the world;

Ha\"e decided to conclude a new treaty of arbitration enlarg­ing the scope and obligations of the arbitration convention signed at Wa.bington on May 2, 190 , which expires by limita­tion on March 25, 1930, and for that purpose they have appointed as their respectiYe Plenipotentiari s:

The President of the Tnited State of America: Jo eph P. Cotton, Acting ecretary of State of the United tate ; and

H r Maje ty the Queen of the Netherland : Dr. J. H. van Roijen, Her Envoy Extraordinary and Mini ·ter Plenipotentiary to the United States of America; who, having communicated to one another their full powers found in good and due form, have agreed upon the following article :

AllTICLJl I

All ditierence relating to international matter in which t11e High Contracting Parties are concerned by virtue of a claim of right made by one f\g&inst the other under treaty or other­wi ·e, which it has not been po sible to adju t by diplomacy, which ba"e not been adjusted a a re~ult of reference to the Permanent International ommi ion constituted pursuant to the treaty signed at Washington, December 18, 1913, and which ar ju tidable in their nature by rea on of bein..,. u ceptible of d ision by the application of the prin lples of law or equity, shall be ubmitted to the Permanent Court of Arbitration e ·tab­li bed at The Hague by the nvention of October 18, 1907, or to some other competent tribunal, a shall be decided in each ca ·e by . pedal agreement, which special a!!reement shall provide for the organization of sncb tribunal if necessary, define it powers, state the que. tion or que tions at issue, and settle the terms of reference.

The special agreement in each ca e shall be made on the part of the United States of America by the Pre. ident of the Unitrd States of America by and with the advice and con ent of the Senate thereof, and on the part of the Netherlands in accol·d­nnce with its constitutional laws.

ARTICLE II

The provisions of this treaty l'hall not be invoked in re ·p ct of any dispute. the subject matter of which

(a) is within the dome tic juri diction of either of the High Contracting Parties,

(b) involves the intere ts of third Parties,

2776 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 (c) depends upon or involves the maintenance of the tra­

-ditional attitude of the United States concerning American ques­tions, commonly described as the Monroe doctrine.

(d) depends upon or involves the observance of the obliga­tions of the Netherlands in accordance with the Covenant of the League of Nations.

ARTICLE III The present treaty shall be ratified by the President of the

United States of America by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof and by Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands.

The ratifications shall be exchanged at Washington as soon as possible, and the treaty shall take effect on the date of the exchange of the ratifications, from which date the arbitra­tion convention signed May 2, 1908, shall cease to have any force or effect. It shall thereafter remain in force continually unless and until terminated by one year's written notice given by either High Contracting Party to the other.

In faith whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed this treaty in duplicate in the English and Dutch languages, both text having equal force, and hereunto affixed their seals.

Done at ·washington the thirteenth day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty.

J. p. CO'ITON J. H. VAN ROIJEN

[SEAL] [SEAL]

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. By unanimous consent, Ex­ecutive A will go over.

NOMINATIONS IN DIPLOMATIC AND FOREIGN SERVICE

The Chief Clerk announced the nomination of Fred Morris Dearing to be ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary to Peru.

The PRESIDENT pro te-mpore. Without objection, the nomi­nation is confirmed, and the President will be notified.

The Chief Clerk announced the nomination of Alexander P. Moore to be ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary to Poland. · The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the nomi­

nation is confirmed, and the President will be notified. The Chief Clerk announced the nomination of Edward E.

Brodie to be envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Finland.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without obje-ction, the nomi­nation is confirmed, and the President will be notifi·ed.

The Chief Clerk announced the nominations of Donal F. McGonigal to be secretary, Diplomatic Service; vice consul of career; and Foreign Service officer, unclassified.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the nomi­nations will be confirmed, and the President will be notified.

CUS'l'OMS SERVICE NOMINATIONS

The Chief Clerk proceeded to announce sundry nominations in the Customs Service.

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, in ·the Customs Service there is one nomination that I desire to go over. That is the nomi­nation of Mr. Frank C. Tracey, No. 2191 upon the calendar.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, No. 2191 goes over. Without objection, the other nominations in the Customs Service are confirmed en bloc, and the President will be notified.

NOMINATIONS OF POSTMASTERS

The Chief Clerk proceeded to state sundry nominations of postmasters.

POSTMASTER AT MARSHALL, ARK.

Mr. CARA. \V A.Y. Mr. President, with reference to post­masters, I am not going to interpose an objection to confirma­tion; but in regard to one nomination that came in this after­noon-the postmaster at a town in my own State--! have some things here that I desire to put in the RECORD. It will take me only a moment to do so.

There were two candidates for postmaster at Marshall, Ark. One of them was named Fendley, and the other was named Leonard Mathews. Leonard Mathews is an ex-service man. I have his record here, or a little of it, which I desire to read:

ENLISTMENT RECORD Name: Leonard Mathews. Grade: Private, first class. Inducted September 3, 1917, at Marshall, Ark. Serving in first enlistment period at date of discharge. Prior service: None. Noncommissioned officer: Never. Marksmanship, gunner qualification or rating: No practice. Horsemanship: Not mounted. Battles, engagements, skirmishes, expeditions: Cbateau-Tbierry, July

23 to August 9, 1918 ; St. Mibiel, September 11 to 28, 1918 ; Argonne,

October 5 to November 11, 1!)18 ; at'lDJ of occupation, November 12 to April 27, 1918; American Expeditionary Forces, June 7, 1918, to April 26, 1D19.

Knowledge of any vocation: Liveryman. Wounds received in service: None. Physical condition when discharged : Good. Triple typhoid prophylaxis completed September 18, 1917. Paratyphoid prophylaxis completed October 5, 1917. Married or single : Single. Character : Excellent. Remarks: No absence without leave. No absence from duty under

General Order No. 45, War Department, 1914. Machine-gun company, Three hundred and forty-fifth Infantry, Camp Pike, Ark., September 4, 191?; Sixteenth Receiving Battalion, Camp Pike, May 10, 1919, to • date of discharge; due travel pay to Marshall, Ark.

The other applicant had no military service. He stayed at home and held a good job while this young man went to war.

The political machinery !Jy which postmasters are selected in Arkansas is by permitting the Republican county central com­mittee to name the candidate, and the Post Office Department follows that procedure universally. In the selection of the post­master at this place the committee met, and I have the affidavits of a majority of them wearing that they voted for Mr. Mathews. They destroyed the ballots ; they would not give him an opportunity to have the matter reinvestigated; and he offers here the affidavits of a majority of the committee, who swear that they voted for him in the committee meeting.

The Civil Service Commission tried to disqualify Mr. Mathews because they said be violated the law by reason of the fact that be had paid a taxi fare for one of the committee. It was so asinine that even the Civil Service Commission bad to abandon that contention. But what is happening in Ar­kansas, as far as I know. is that every ex-service man is being discriminated against. Notwithstanding the fact that the law provides that be shall have the advantage, they are actually penalizing in every instance the man who wore his country's uniform.

Here is a young man who served overseas, engaged in most of the major operations of our Army, stands at the top of the list as an applicant, and he is cheated in a committee convention, all of which facts are known to the authorities; and yet they recommend, over this record, that the other man shall be post­master!

I ask unanimous consent to include all of this matter in the RECORD.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered. .

The matter referred to is as follows :

Hon. T. N. CARAWAY, Washington, D. 0.

SEMlNOLE, OKLA., January e6, 1930.

DEAR Sm: Hereto attached you will please find a copy of the affidavits made by the committeemen and Mr. J. C. Evans, chairman of the committee.

I have bad a letter from the Civil ~rvice Commission since writing you last week, stating that I violated a certain act by paying a taxi $6 for bringing a committeeman, Elmer Drewry, to the meeting on March 30, 1929. If this charge is all there is between me and the post office, seems to me that a small charge like that could be over­come. Mr. CARAWAY, if you can get this position for me, I will always feel obligated to you, any time I can assist you, politically or person­ally, should I ever have a chance.

Very truly yours, LEONARD MATHEWS,

S'.rATlil OF ARKANSAS, Oounty oj Searcy, ss:

We, the undersigned members of the Republican central committee of Searcy County, Ark., hereby state upon oath that upon the last or fifth ballot taken in our meeting held at Marshall Ark., March. 30, 1929, to select a postmaster at Marshall that we voted for Leonard Mathews. ·

W. H. Sutterfield, A. C. Horn (by proxy), J. 1\:L Mason, E. D. Harrell, John Blackwell, Carl Nichols, Dan Garl'ison (proxy for Albert Arnold), C. B. Taylor, W. J. McDaniel (by proxy).

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 3rd day of April, 1929. [SEAL.] SAM BLAIR, Clerk.

STATE 01l' ARKANSAS, County of Searcy, ss:

By LEONARD MATHEWS,

Deputy CLerk.

J. C. Evans, after being sworn, states: My name is J. C. Evans, my post-office address is Snowball, At·k. I am chairman of the Republican

1930 CONGRESSIO AL RECORD-SENATE 2777 ecntrnl c mmftte<' and pr Rld<'d over tbe meeting held at Marshall, Mo.rch 30, 1020, wber the committee was call d to indor e applicants for the po tm t r at Marshall, and whf1c the count showed on the Oftb ballot l~ vot for W. G. F ndlt>y and 14 for Leonard Mathew , an ('rTOr wna mad , and I have before me afildavlts from members of the commltt<>e who votoo for Leonard Mathews, and as chairman I would ho.v vot d for r. o.th tn case of a tie vote, and that ts what hUPJWn d, had th y b en correctly counted. The vote by the com­mitt c was a tl , and I feel that the indorsement should go to Mr. Math w I r qu ted Mr. W. It~. Ell1 member of the •tat committee from Sf'arcy ounty, to fthhold action until tb memh<'rs could be cnnvn •d to determin bow the vot wa ca t. The ballots were d troyt>d aft r the committ &djourncd. The secretary of the county ornmfttcc as a ll'endley pnrtl an. I think that Mr. Mathews should

have tb 1ndors rnent of th county central committee, and withdraw th lndors mcut sla-ned by my8f'lf ns chairman and U. M. Sutterfield, 0.11 c tary, and ask a aquat·e deal.

J. . En .. ·s. Rub .rlbcd and sworn to before me tbi the 2d dny of April, 1929. (fl .AL.] SA BLAIR, Olerk.

By LEO. ARD .ATJIEWS,

Dep~tty Clerk. --TATJ!I 01' ARKANSAS, OouMJI of 8carcJJ~ 11:

We, th und rslgn d m mb rs ot the R•'PUbllcnn County Central Com­mitt e of a.rcy Count~, Ark., b reby Hlute upon oath that upon the Orth r last baUot tJlken 1n our m Ung 11 ld at Mar bnll, Aln., to select a po tm st r at Mnn;hnll, that we voted for LC' nard Mnth ws.

C. G. RAOLA ·o, C. R. RAG LA. ·o (by proxy). S. W. UTTE'lUI'IJ:T,D.

u. G. THE Cll.

R. R. Jon~ 'ON,

SAM GRIFFIN.

ub l'lb d and sworn to bcfort' me this 3d duy of April, 1929. [SMAL.) AAI BLAIR, Olerk.

By LEo.'!RD MATJIJilWS, DCJJiltV Oler1c.

lion. T. n. C.&ttAWAY, Washington~ D. 0.

SllMlNOLE, OKLA., Janua111 19, 19SO.

DEAR Sm: n January 20, 1!'120, thr e other men and I took an ex­ami notion for the po t offl<' at Mnr11hnll, Ark. Two of tho ·e fellows hun' h C'n llmlnut('(), leaving Mr. W. G. F ndlC'y and I in the contest.

u March 30, 10:.!0, the county central commltt e or carey County met, nnd on the last ballot, by tb count, Mr. F ndley r ceived 15 votes out or the 30. 1 r cciv d 14 vot . After the vote was taken and the count \vas mad , I talk d to the commilteem n und th('y told me tbey bad all vot tl, nnd 15 of th m made affidavits that they voted for me. U. M. utterfl ld, s crt'tnry or committee, kept the count and was for 1•' •mll y, and 1n 1 thno 10 mlnut s n.ft<'r the count be burned those bn II tR. II ('t o ttached you will p1 n. e find a copy of my di charge in •vltlC'nce of my <'rvic . I gave up n good bu io s }J('n I went to t11 Army and lost bl'avlly. n th examination Mr. F odley and I wcr only 2 p r c nt opart. He bad no los by s rving his country. I am brok , away from home working for wns:e . Mt·. Fendley is at home with bl fnmlly; bns n good job with the onoco on Co. and a good bnnk account In the First Stnte Bank nt Marshall, Ark. Be doc .. n't ne-ed It (t.h office•). I do, and want your a islance in my be­half. A copy of the affidavit mentioned above Is In the office of the 1r1rst AH~l tnnt PoHtma .. tt>r G n ral.

An lndorR ment or the county officlaiR and bu tness men of Marshall I in the offic(> or the tvil Service Commission ; also an affidavit that J did not buy or n. k anyone to buy a vot !or me. Anythtng you will do tor me ·will b appreclatt'd by me ~nd 0 per cent of tbe patrons of tlw office, nnd I wtll always feel under obligation to you.

Very truly your , lJF.ONARD MATHEWS.

flON R.ADLI: 0[ CIJAROE FROH TUB UNITil:D STATJ:S AJUlY

'l'o (lll 1cltom l.t mav concern: 'l'hi Is to c rtlfy that Le<>nard Mathews, 1G02 16, unassigned; last

aHHign d, ompany D, One bund d and fifty-first Maehine Gun Bat­tall n, th nltcd totes Army, ns a te. tlmonlal of honest and faithful HE'rvt r, 1a b reby honorably dl barged !rom the military service of tbe Untt d tntt> by r a n of demobllizntlon, conv ulence ot Government, ~r 1 •tt r A. . 0., Nov mber 30, 101 .

'nld Lconot'd lath ws wn born in Snowball, 1n the State of Arkan­n . Wllc-n enlisted be was 2 ii :years of ege and by occupation a

11 t,rymnn. II ball brown ey s, black hair, dark complexion, and was r, fl'PI 0 Inches in h lght.

tUv1 n u.o<ler my band al nmp Plke, Ark., tbl 15th day of May, 1919. !. L. CnJMU:INS,

MaJor, lln.Uecl State~ ln.fantrth Commancfing.

J:. •LJST fJ:NT ll!!COBD

Name: Leonard Mathews. Grade: Private, ft.rst class. Inducted: September 3, 1917, at Marshall, Ark.

erving in first enlistment period at date of discharge. Prior service: None. Noucommi loned officer: Never. Marksman hip, gunner qualification or rating: No practice. Hor emanship: Not mounted. Batt! , engagements, klrmi hes, expeditions: Chateau Thierry, J'uly

23 to Augu 9, 1918; St. Mihiel, ptember 11 to 2 , 1918; Argonne, October 5 to November 11, 1918; army of occupation, November 12 to April 27, 191 ; American Expeditionary I<'orces, J'une 7, 1918, to April 26, 1919.

Knowledge of any vocation : Liveryman. Wounds received 1n service: None. Physico.! condition when dlscbargetl: Good. Triple typhoid prophyluis completed September 1 , 1917. Paratyphoid prophylaxis completed October 5, 1917. Married or single: Single. Character : Excellent. Remarks: No A. W. 0. L. No ab nee from duty under G. 0. 45,

W. D., 1914. M. G. Co., 345 Int., Camp Pike, Ark., ept. 4, 1{)17. lOth Rec. Bn., Camp Pike, May 10, 1919, to date of discharge. Due travel puy to Marshall, Ark.

Si nature of soldier: Leonard Mathews. MAR\"1 N KOFER,

Capt., U. S. Int., Comm<m.dinD Oas. Dct. 16 Rec. Bn. 16l D. B.

The foregoing honorable discharge and enli ·tment record admitted to record In this office on the 12th day of .Aprll, 1921.

LEO. A.BD MATUEWS, Clerk.

TATE OV' ARK.t. ·SAs,

County of Searcy: I, Sam Blair, county and clrcnlt clerk and ex officio recorder within

and for the county aforesaid, do hereby ceL·tify that the above and fore­going 11 a true and correct copy of record of discha~ ' "~ ," page 27 th r of. Witness my band and seal this 16th day of January, 1 30.

[SBAL.) SAM BLAIB, Clerk.

Mr. CARAWAY. Mr. Pre ident, I dc·ire to serve notice now that while I am not trying to interfere with the control of the patronage in my Statc--I am not a king for anything; I am willing that the party in power hall llaYe it-I have re­solved that I am going to put the fact in the R~~:cono every time they di •rlminate again t an ex-service man. Thi is a po:>itiYe di crimination; tactics were used that werJ not honorable; all of which i known to the Civil Service Commis 'ion and to the appointing power.

Mr. BLACK. Mr. President, will the enator yield for ju t a minute?

Mr. ARAWAY. I yield. .:fr. BLACK. I do not understand that we have votetl on

tbut nomination to-day; ha•e we? Mr. ARAWAY. Oh, no! The PRE IDE T pro tempore. This is a nomination that

was receiyed to-day. Mr. ARA WAY. I simply want to have the record made. Mr. BLA K. It has not been report d from a committN>. Mr. CARAWAY. h, y ; it ha . It has b n report d from

the committee. Mr. BLACK. And ha been voted on? ~!r. ARA WAY. No; it has not yet been voted on. The PRE !DENT pro tempore. Let the Chair say to the nator from Arkan..,a that there are no nomination for the

State of Arkan as on the calendar. Mr. CARAWAY. I beg pardon, then. I thought the nomi­

nation was reported out I know it came in. Mr. SWA .. SON. Mr. President, I d sire to suggest to the

S nator from Arkan a that a fight was made by the senior nator from Montana [Mr. WALSH] in a ca e where a ~imi-

lnr ituation exl ·ted. It wa stated here at that time that it was simply a rule of the department that gav this eredit to ex- ervice men. I in i ted that there was a ·tnt11te to that effect. The Senator from Arkan. as looked it up and found the gtntute and read it to the enate; and when the di crimination wa shown, clearly and dl. tlnctly, the Senate b at the con­firmation of the man who:e name was ent in.

Mr. CARAW:AY. I am not en...,.aging in any war ov r confir­mation . I just wanted to call attention now to the fact, and have the REcoRD show it, that if we may believe the.;e peopl on oath the unsu~essful candidate had a majority of the votes in tlle committee; bnt the clerk, who wa the parti~an of ne of the candidates, reported the re ult the other way.

There are the affidavits, for whatever they are worth. The PRE IDE ·T pro tempore. The facts in the matter of

the appointment are, let the Cbnir state--M:r. OARAWAY. I know what they are.

2778 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 The PRESIDENT pro tempore. That to-day the nomination

of Mr. Fendley to be postmaster at Marshall, Ark., was received and has been referred to the committee.

Mr. CARAWAY. I realize that. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With the permission of t)le

Senator from Arkansas, the Chair will instruct that the papers filed by him be printed in the RECoRD and referred to the Com­mittee on Post Offices and Post Roads.

Mr. CARAWAY. Very well. Mr. CONNALLY. Mr. President, in. the post-office nomina­

tions I ask that No. 1998 go over. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, No. 1998,

being the nomination of George B. Black to be postmaster at Comanche, Tex., will go over.

Without objection, the remaining nominations of postmasters upon the calendar will be confirmed en bloc, and without objection, the President will be notified of the confirmations this day made.

The Senate resumed legislative session. PETITION OF PATIENTS AT UNITED STATES VEl'EB.ANS' HOSPITAL

NO. 93, LIOOION, TEX., AND OTHERS Mr. CONNALLY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent

to have printed in the RElOORD a memorial from certain patients at United States Veterans' Hospital No. 93, Legion, Tex., and members of the Louis Halphen Post, No. 379, of the American Legion.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered. •

The memorial is as follows: We, patients at the United States Veterans' Hospital No. 93, Legion,

Tex., or members of the Louis Halphen Post, No. 379, the American Legion, veterans of the Army, Navy, or Marine Corps who have served their country in time of need, urge our legislative representa­tives in Washington to use their influence to secure the enactment of any legislation indorsed by the national convention of the American Legion, but particularly desire that our representatives use every effort in behalf of the following proposals :

1. That dependents-whether wife, children, or parents-of noncom­pensated veterans of the World War who receive hospitalization under section 202, paragraph 10, of the World War veterans' act, as amended, be granted a dependency allowance so that these dependents may have some financial income, such allowance to continue during the period of hospitalization while the status of noncompensation continues;

2. That the World War veterans' act be amended to advance the date of presumption of service connection of tuberculosis and other diseases now covered under the act from January 1, 1925, to at least January 1, 1930;

3. T£at the adjusted compensation service certificate of any veteran who is rated 25 per cent permanently disabled, whether service con­nected or not, be held to have matured by reason of such permanent disability and the holder be held entitled to receive the full face value thereof in a lump sum or in installments, as he may choose ;

4. That service-connected hospitalized cases who have secured maxi­mum hospital benefit may be discharged to their homes with an added allowance for maintenance.

Hollis C. White, A. Schwart, Chester W. Henke, G. W. Alsbrooks, John S. Van Berg, W. G. Garrett, jr., L. D. Garrett, Scott Schreiner, Erie Denton, Harry A. Powell, Joe A. Harris, C. H. Johnston, Ben Surber, Wm. J. Franke, W. E. Hahn, B. C. Mathis, J. F. Stallings, Hal Peterson, E. M. Forman, Walter Slusher, Lee W. Montgomery, Claude Payne, John Gibson, Charles L. Mann, C. F. Luckemeyer, Wm. J. Tonjes, J. F. Schadd, W. F. Tamplin, W. A. Ruark, Ray E. Young, Ewd. Borth, Chas. Grace, J. E. Jorrell, Vernan Heipp, L. D. Lopp, F. J. Quirk, A. Brandt, W. J. Bartholomew, E. W. Luke, R. M. Palmer, Arthur F. 0. Evans, Malcolm D. Guill, D. E. SuttQin, J. G. Heffer­man, J. W. Converse, James A. Franks, I. A. Headd, Manley Wilbarn, E. H. Coleman, L. Rickels, A. T. Carrington, Doug Gilmvre, A. D. Flatt, Uriah Hallmark, A. D. Wallace, L. H. Schult, R. L. Horst­mann, Gustaf Ellison, F. S. Nickle, Bert Lipe, John F. Craig, H. G. Watson, Oscar F. Moore, R. T. Meader, Percy Taylof, M. R. McDonald, L. G. Simmons, John W. Smith, F. M. Tulloss, E. H. McBride, Benj. LaDuke, W. A. Simmons, J. L. Fox:, J. C. Crane, H. W. Stuart, J. P. Nisbett, Joseph Lee, •Charles W. Lindley, Adolph Gallegos, Vernon Owen, J. W. Parker, D. L. Watkins, lll. B. Henry, Alex Allen, M. K. Norris, Frank A. Collier Henry Logue, Marvin V. Maxwell, Theodore E. Clark, Stephen :a: 1\Iarkleski, A. T. Digby, G. K. Anderson, W. A. Gill, Joseph Marx, Clinton Smith, W. Y. Sheppard, jr., Caral E. Garrett, George D. McCain, Freeman Happy, Charles P. Bibb, Ewing A. Green, F. L. Byers, Roy Hanna, S. S. Pearson, Herman Forkalson, James H. Palmer, George E. Ard, Fred S. Burnett, H. W. Wilson, E. T. Holder, G. 0. Moore, Fred H. Caleman, E. D. Denton, Hoffman, W. B. Strange, C. W. Henderson, L. 0. Geister, Henry S. Moore, Dick Johnson, John Savage, W. S. Rag­laud, John W. McClure, James M. Stansbm·y, J. A. Day, T. J. Linnehan, J. E. Jackson, N. w. Sharp, Kirk C. Payne, George Ryan, Douglas

McAfee, C. F. Stehr, Richard E. Hosey, Elmer S. Killough, Walter Standridge, John A. Fairchild, J. G. Mansfield, J. D. Hight, William A. Sheffield, W. R. Sullivan, Park Ryan, J. L. Fitch, Raymond Brysch, William Key, Hiram Savoy, John G. Barham, Troy Watts, R. Watson, D. J. Nugent, Clarence Lormand, Archie L. Smith, G. C. Mitchell, Daniel Willey, Thomas H. Quyram, Jesse D. Gracy, W. T. Greer, T. A. Mayo, Joe Moss, G. Monenti, Hunt G. Smith, Robert L. Moses, Haley H. Corcoran, Gilbert Smith, H. C. Carroll, S. Goodman, D. L. Hart, S. E. Fox, H. B. Myers, R. D. Hill, T. J. Vaness, Ras Harris, E. C. Lipscomb, B. E. Stinnett, Henry L. Williams, Clarence Hansen, W. C. Ladd, Ed Brown, Curry Lavell, Raymond B. Woody, Samuel S. Burch, R. E. Patrick, Carl N. Woodyear, Jesse Carroll Hanes, G. F. Jones, Carl F. Niemeier, Forest G. Miller, Louis D. Wade, Wilbur R. Benefiel, J. M. Bennett, W. Cunniff, R. E. Busby, C. Atwood, Haskell Boyd, John Henderson, Ben Wilson, Edw. J. McMahon, Harry J. Parent, Hugh Brown, Sam H. Kaufman, C. E. Long, L. A. Hazel, R. M. Griffith, M. M. King, C. A. Watson, A. Robertson, C. A. Houlihan, H. E. Kilgore, W Ashcroft, David Hart, V. E. Lanfroncone, J. B. Inman, Charles H. Bayes, C. E. Dugdale, Wm. R. Bartlett, T. F. Mills, J. L. Farmer, L. J. Garmany, W. S. Ault, F. E. Craig, E. 0. Sayer, F. C. Scheideman, V. C. Jordan, Leslie C. Moore, William D. Lee, Lem Raitdutt, C. W. Lamar, W. E. Grif­fin, R. McFarland, John D. Woody, Jesse Croom, G. E. Lempe, P. H. Bal· lard, C. Devot, Thomas J. Smith, P. A. Betros, Raymand Fields, Anzelm Sprencel, John T. Smith, jr., E. B. Kesner, C. L. McClellan, Fred Graham, R. H. Thompson, R. 0. Chandler, H. G. Belser, J. N. Meadows, Romulus Genen, H. A. Stockton, J. H. Neilon, Joe C. Dearing, John D. Anthony, Jesse L. Jacks, H. H. Brady, Jennings Payne, James A. Eason, Oran C. Pritchard, Tho~as E. Robin, Elmo C. Hancock, A. D. Sample, F. T. Brett, John W. Bm·strom, Z. M. Sig, James Howard, R. L. McManus, Thomas H. Fox, Amado Casares, jr., Zack Langford, Joe Meyer, David S. Gillespie, Oscar Hackley, J. R. Honaker, J. 0. Waide, W. E. Emerson, S. H. Gilbert, John J. Smyth, Wil­liam Clark, Leonard A. Wilson, E. G. Cunningham, Chap. J. K. Ridgway, E. L. Williamson, Roy J. Sullivan, B. Phinlzy, John W. Freeman, John S. Goble, T. T. Hamblen, V. M. Etter, R. E. Rogers, Orvis Burchard, Fred H. Flaugher, Roy F. Hartman, Henry E. Moore, S. 0. Alexander, J. M. Wilson, W. E. Burke, Jim Huitt, J. E. Humphrey, Terrell B. Durrum, Jesse B. Griffin, Jerry L. Ellis, Perry A. Allen, G. L. Neyland, Anthony Tomassette, Ronald E. Mullins, Lon C. Macon, H. W. Chamberlain, L. V. Crocker, J. D. Childress, Fred A. Smith, James Rogers, James Wallace, G. P. Davis, Wm. Hendrix, James E. Tarpley, Martin L. Olson, W. E. Reiling, T. J. Wadsworth, George T. Dwyer, J. H. Hale, Louis Camden, Ernest Hill, James M. Brittain, Frank D. Sheffield, I. Margolis, L. R. Hicks, Asabel 0. Harrah, Paul F. Pierce, D. E. McLeod, C. A. Watters, L. G. Brewer, W. A. Bounds, Jesse R. Gray, John Smotek, Leonard U. Hardin, Blake 0. Bledsoe, Allie E. Sheets, J. A. Louaillies, Peter Gost, Walter W. Clark, E. A. Knetsch, George L. Taylor.

RECESS

Mr. WATSON. I move that the Senate take a reeess until 11 o'clock to-morrow morning.

The motion was agreed to; and (at 5 o'clock and 39 minutes p. m.) the Senate took a recess until to-morrow, Saturday, Feb­ruary 1, 1930, at 11 o'clock a. m.

NOMINATIONS

Executive nominatiom received bY the Se·nate January 31 (legislative day of Januwry 6), 1930

AssiSTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL Charles B. Rugg, of Massachusetts, to be Assistant Attorney

General, vice Herman J. Galloway, resigned. UNITE)) STATES A'ITORNEY

Fred C. Wetmore, of Michigan, to be United States attorney, western district of Michigan, to succeed Edward J. Bowman, whose term expires February 16, 1930.

APPOINTMENT, BY TRANSFER, REGULAR ABMY . TO ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT

First Lieut. George Dewey Rogers, Infantry (detailed in Ordnance Department), with rank· from February 12, 1924.

PROMOTION IN THE .AJl.MY To be captain

First Lieut. Aubrey Hornsby, Air Corps, from January 27, 1930.

To be fi'rst lieutena-nts Second Lieut. Martin Frank Hass, Infantry, from January 24,

1930. Second Lieut. Cornelius Walter Cousland, Air Corps, from

January 27, 1930. MEDICAL CORPS To be major

Capt. Brooke Dodson, Medical Corps, from January 25, 1930.

19.0 co TGRES IONAL RECORD-SENATE 2779 PosT AS'l"ERS

ALABAMA

Georg \V. rnv s to be po tma ter at Rus ellville, Ala., in pine ot' G. W. Grnv . . Incumb nt's commi ion expires Febru­ary 0, 1030.

H.obert Patter on to be po .. tmn ter at Selma, Ala., in place ot Robert Pa.tt r·on. Incumbent's commi ion expires Febru­nry 15, 1030.

.ABKANRAS

William G. Fendley to be po. tmaster at Marshall, Ark., in pla ~ of A. M. "'\ ood. Incumbent't~ commi. ion expired Decem­b I' 29, 1928. '

Jnm M. M rrick to be postmaster at Morrilton, Ark., in plnce o! J. Q. Skipper, r signed.

OA.LiroRNIA

hnrle · B. M !ville to b po tmast r at Fort Brag~, Calif., in pla of W. W. War . Incumbent' commission exp1red De-• mb t' 17, 192 .

• pen r Briggs to be po tma t r at Oleum, Calif., in place f r> nccr Brlggs. Incumbent's comml. sion expires February

0, 19' 0. . 1 F.ditl1 B. mith to b po. tmast r at Patton, Calif., in P ace

of 10. . 'mith. Incumbent' commi ion e~ired December 21, 1029. .

IC!mer G. Croft to be po tmaster at Penryn, Calif., in place f E. G. roft . Incumbent's commission expires February 6,

l9ao. . G orge C. Gtnnoln to be postma ter at Pe. ca.dero, Cahf., in

pin •' of G. C. Gianola. Incumb nt's commi · ion expires Febru­ary G, 1 30.

Jnn t D. Watson to be postmaster at Tahoe, Calif., in place of J. . Watson. Incumbent's commission expires February 0, 1930.

Loring N. Kirk to be postma t r at Upland, Calif., in place r IJ. N. Kirk. Incumbent's commi 'Sion expires February 27,

1 30. COLORADO

Elizabeth M:. Kroll to b postmaster at Ca tle Rock, Colo., in pine . of E. M. Kroll. Incumbent' commi ion expir s February 27, 1930.

Juan R. Valdez to be po tmu ter at San Luis, Colo., in place of .T. R. Valdez. Incumbent's commi . ion expired January 2 . 1930.

ltoy llodg to be po tma ter at Springfield, Colo., in place of Roy H d c . Incumbent's c mmi ion expires February 4, 1930.

CONNECTICUT

Ilarlan G. IIUJ to be po tmuster at Ea t Hampton, Conn., in pin e of H. G. Bills. Incumbent's commi ion expired Janu­ary 20, 1930.

DELAWARI!l

Napoleon B. Register to be postmaster at Lewes, Del., in pla of N. B. R gl ter. Incumbent's commis ion expires Febru­ary 4, 1930.

FLORIDA

Evn R. Vaughn to be postmaster at Century, Fla., in place ot E. R. Vaughn. Incumb nt's commission expired January 25, 1030.

Lnwr nc P. Abney to be po tmnster at City Point, Fla., in pla of L. P. Abney. Incumbent's commission expired Janu­ary , J028.

Nelli J. P. Browning to be potsmaster at East Palatka, Fla., in plnc of L. L. Batch, resigned.

John 11. Illldr th to be po tmaster at Live Oak, Fla., in place of J. II. Illldr th. Incumbent's commi. ion expired Decemb r 18, 1920.

Jamc L. IUrhbourg to be postmru ter at Laurelhill, Fla., 1n pla of J. L. Richbour". Incumbent's commi sion expired De­c moor 18, 1929.

Gerben M. D Vrl s to be postmaster at New Port Richey, Fla., in plnco ot G. M. DcVrles. Incumbent's commission expired January 8, 1930.

Flora E. Burk to be postmaster at Ocoee, Fla., 1n place ot ll'. E. urks. Incumbent's commission expired December 28, 1928.

Eloi e Marcy to be postmrurter at Penney Farms, Fla. Office be<•amc pr idential July 1, 1928.

lyd land to be po tmaster at P mpano, Fla., in place of lydc Bland. Incurub nt's commission expired January 20, 1930. Bonnie B. Wilson to be po tmnster nt Sneads, Fla., 1n place

f B. D. Wilson. Incumbent's commission expir s February 15, 1930.

Lonie M. Watkins to be postmaster at Webster, Fla., ln place of L. M. \Vatldn . Incumbent'& commission expired December 18, 192 •

Jerry M. Sullivan to be postmaster at Winter Garden, Fla., in place of J. M. Sullivan. Incumbent's commission expired Janu­ary 28, 1930.

Arthur B. Fuller to be postmaster at Altamonte Spring , Fla., in place of A. H. Fuller. Incumbent's commis ion expi~d March 1, 1928.

OEX>BGIA

Carlos C. Hartl~y to be postmaster at Alamo, Ga., in place of Mazie Brett, removed .

William T. Kitchen to be po tmaster at Mitchell, Ga., in place of V. A. Snider. Incumbent' commission expired January 8, 1929.

IDAHO

Lowell H. Merriam to be postmaster at Gra , Idaho, in place of L. B. Merriam. Incumbent's commission expires February 15, 1930.

Francis M. Winters to be postmaster at Montpelier, Idaho, in plare of F. M. Winters. Incumbent's commission e1.-pired Janu­ary • 1930.

Wells McEntire to be postmaster at Preston, Idaho, in place of Wells McEntire. Incumbent's commission expire February 15, 1030.

Percy E. Ellis to be postmaster at Stites, Idaho, in place of P. E. Ellis. Incumbent's commission expires February 27, 1930.

Jo ph 0. McComb to be postmaster at Troy, Idaho, 1n place of J. 0. McComb. Incumbent's commission expires February 15, 1930.

n.LINOIS

Howard B. Mayhew to be postma ter at Bradford, Ill., in place of B. B. Mayhew. Incumbent's commission expires Feb­ruary 6, 1930.

Fred Wilson to be postmaster at Broughton, Ill., in place of Fred Wilson. Incumbent's commission expired December 18, 1929.

Howard A. Hammer to be postmaster at Buda, Ill., in place of B. A. Hammer. Incumbent's commi sion expires February 6, 1930.

Otto W. J. Henrich to be postmaster at Des Plaine , Ill., in place of 0. W. J. Henrich. Incumbent's commission expires ~"'ebruary 15, 1930.

Peter Thomsen to be postmaster at Fulton, Ill., in place of P ter Thomsen. Incumbent's commi. sion expir s February 6, 1930.

Bruce C. Krugh to be po tmaster at Hom r, Ill., in place of B. C. Krugh. Incumbent's commi ion expires February 15, 1930.

Lora Johnston to be postmaster at Hudson, Ill., in place of Lora Johnston. Incumbent's commission expired December 18, 1929.

Guy R. Correll to be postmaster at Hutsonville, Ill., in place of G. R. Correll. Incumbents commi sion expires February 15, 1930.

Elza F. Gorrell to be po tma ter at Newton, Ill., in place of E. F. Gorrell. Incumbent's commi ion expires February 15, 1930.

Herbert L. Rawlins to be po tma ter at Thom. on, Ill., in place of B. L. Rawlins. Incumbent's commLsion expire Feb­ruary 6, 1930.

Robert Murphy to be postmaster at Tilden, Ill., in place of Robert Murphy. Incumbent's commission expires February 15, 1930.

John R. Marshall to be postmaster at Yorkville, Ill., in place of W. C. Ohse, resigned.

INDIANA

Avery C. Phipps to be po tmaster at Elwood, Ind., in place of W. A. Lewis, deceased.

IOWA

?tfiller C. Rhoads to be postmaster at Clark ville, Iowa, in place of M. C. Rhoads. Incumbent's commi sion expired Jan­uary 13, 1930.

Benjamin A. Brown to be postma ter at Colfax, Iowa, in place of B. A. Brown. Incumbent's commission expire$ Feb­ruary 6, 1930.

Harry E. Frantz to be postmaster at Winthrop, Iowa, in plnce ot H. E. FrniJtz. Incumbent's commi sion expires February 6, 1930.

KANSAS

Ezra D. Boling r to be postmaster at Bucklin, Kans., in place of E. D. Bolinger. Incumbent' commis.~ion expired December 14, 1929.

Maggie Dowell to be postma ter at Gaylord, Kan ., in place of Maggie Dowell. Incumbent's commi~~ion expires February 1 6, 1930.

2780 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JANUARY 31 Daniel 0. Edwards to be postmaster at Hazelton, Kans., in

place of D. 0. Edwards. Incumbent's commission expired Jan­uary 18, 1930.

Florence Murray to be postmaster at Isabel, Kans., in place of C. T. Murray, resigned.

Ernest Toomey to be postmaster at Neodesha, Kans., in place of Ernest Toomey. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

Joseph H. Andrews to be postmaster at Overbrook, Kans., in place of J. H. Andrews. Incumbent's commission expired January 21, 1930.

KENTUCKY

Effie S. Basham to be postmaster at Leitchfield, Ky., in place of E. S. Basham. Incumbent's commission expired December 15, 1929.

Samuel N. Sinkhorn to be postmaster at Stamping Ground. Ky., in place of S. P. Willis. Incumbent's commission expired January 30, 1929.

Halliday M. Ricketts to be postmaster at Covington, -Ky., in place of G. A. Seilor, deceased.

MAINE

Ellsworth D. Curtis to be postmaster at West Paris, Me., in place of E. D. Curtis. Incumbent's commission expires February 26, 1930.

MARYI.AND

],red R. Tucker to be postmaster at Forest Hill, Md., in place of F. R. Tucker. Incumbent's commission expired January 30, 1930.

Lillie M. Pierce to be postmaster at Glyndon, Md., in place of L. M. Pierce. Incumbent's commission expired January 6, 1930.

Frances R. Clayton to be postmaster at Overlea, Md., in place of Anna N ovy, resigned.

MASSACHUSETTS

Wilmur B. Brown to be postmaster at Harvard, Mass., in place of W. B. Brown. Incumbent's commission expires Febru­ary 1, 1930.

William F. Runnells to be postmaster at Newburyport, Mass., in place of W. F. Runnells. Incumbent's commission expires February 1, 1930.

Charlotte L. Parker to be postmaster at Osterville, MasR., in place of 0 . L. Parker. Incumbent's commission expires Febru­ary 1, 1930.

Lewis H. Bradford to be postmaster at Shirley, Mass., in place of L. H. Bradford. Incumbent's commission expired January 7, 1930.

William H. Pierce to be postmaster at ·winchendon, Mass., in place of W. H. Pierce. Incumbent's commission expired January 20, 1930.

MICHIGAN

Jesse R. Phillips to be postmaster at Auburn, Mich., in place of J. R. Phillips. Incumbent's commission expired January 6, 1930.

Ben H. lJavis to be postmaster at Edwardsburg, Mich., in place of B. H. Davis. Incumpent's commission expires Febru­ary 6, 1930.

MINNESOTA

John Oberg to be postmaster at Deerwood, Minn., in place of John Oberg. Incumbent's commission expired January 21, 1930.

Matilda Blodgett to be postmaster at Ghent, Minn., in place of Matilda Blodgett. Incumbent's commission expired Decem­ber 18, 1929.

Henry W. Koehler to be postmaster at Hector, Minn., in place of H. W. Koehler. Incumbent's commission expired December 18, 1929.

Olive 0. Dahl to be postmaster at Pine River, Minn., in place of 0. 0. Dahl. Incumbent's commission expired January 21, 1930.

Laurence A. Weston to be postmaster at Waubun, Minn., in place of L. A. Weston. Incumbent's commission expired De­cember 18, 1929.

Anton Levandosky to be postmaster at ·williams, Minn., in place of Anton Levamlosky. Incumbent's commission expired January 21, 1930.

MISSISSIPPI

Bonnie H. Curd to be postmaster at Pace, Miss., in place of R. C. Malone. Incumbent's commission expired March 3, 1929.

Elizabeth Collier to be postmaster at Shaw, Miss., in place of K. R. Latimer. Incumbent's commission expired March 2, 1929.

Emma D. Barkley to be postmaster at State Line, Miss., in place of H. M. Burch, removed.

Alexander Yates to be postmaster at Utica, Miss., in place of Alexander Yates. Incumbent's commission expired January 5, 1930.

. MISSOURI

Roy B. Woods to be postmaster at Bernie, Mo., in place of R. B. Woods. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

Ruby W. Benecke to be postmaster at Brunswick, Mo., in place of R. W. Benecke. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

Luther P. Dove to be postmaster at Cabool, Mo., in place of L. P. Dove. Incumbent's commission expires February 23, 1930.

Raymond E. Miller to be postmaster at Carl Junction, Mo., in place of R. E. Miller. Incumbent's commission expires Feb­ruary 6, 1930.

Ralph D. Stonner to be postmaster at Chamois, Mo., in place of R. D. Stonner. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

Edwin S. Brown to be postmaster at Edina, Mo., in place of E. S. Brown. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

William F. Haywood to be postmaster at Ellington, Mo., in place of W. F. Haywood. Incumbent's commission expires Feb­ruary 6, 1930.

Rose C. Geyer to be postmaster at Graham, Mo., in place of R. C. Geyer. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

William E. Fuson to be postmaster at Hartville, Mo., in place of W. E. Fuson. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

Paul P. Bradley to be postmaster at Leeton, Mo., in place of P. P. Bradley. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

William F. Crigler to be postmaster at Nevada, Mo., in place of W. ~ .... Crigler. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

Arthur B. Calame to be postmaster at Niangua, Mo., in place of A. B. Calame. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

John F. Hamby to be postmaster at Noel, Mo., in place of J. F. Hamby. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

Ruth E. McCormick to be postmaster at Reeds Spring, Mo., in place of R. E. McCormick. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

Evelyn S. Culp to be postmaster at Rocky Comfort, Mo., in place of E. S. Culp. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

Milton Wilhelm to be postmaster at Seligman, Mo., in place of Milton Wilhelm. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

Junius M. Bryant to be postmaster at Strafford, Mo., in place of J. l\1. Bryant. Incumbent's commission expires Febru­ary 6, 1930.

James Z. Spearman to be postmaster at Tuscumbia, Mo., in place of J. Z. Spearman. Incumbent's commission expires Feb­ruary 6, 1930.

Isaac M. Galbraith to be postmaster at Walker, Mo., in place of I. M. Galbraith Incumbent's commission expires ll""'ebruary 6, 1930.

John Black to be postmaster at Washburn, Mo., in place of John Black. Incumbe:>nt's commission expires February 6, 1930.

Edwin McKinley to be postm&ster at Wheaton, Mo., in place of Edwin McKinley. Incumbent's commission expires li'ebruary 6, 1930.

Ben J. Drymon to be postmaster at Willow Springs, Mo., in place of B. J. Drymon. Incumbent's commission expires Feb­ruary 23, 1930.

NEBRASKA

May T. Douglass to be postmaster at Callaway, Nebr., in place of M. T. Douglass. Incumbent's commission expired De­cember 16, 1929.

Elizabeth G. Mendenhall to be postmaster at Grant, Nebr., in place of J. S. Myers, deceased.

Elizabeth Mohr to be postmaster at Kilgore, Nebr., in place of Elizabeth Mohr. Incumbent's commission expired Decem­ber 16, 1929.

Ralph R. Brosius to be postmaster at Valentine, Nebr., in place of R. R. Brosius. Incumbent's .commission expires Feb­ruary 15, 1930.

NEVADA

Dora E. Kappler to be postmaster at Carlin, Nev., in place of D. E. Kappler. Incumbent's commission expired January 28, 1930.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Lloyd S. Emerson to be postmaster at Contoocook, N. H., in place of L: S. Emerson. Incumbent's commission expired January ~3, 1930.

1930 004 G E IO.L AL RECORD-SENATE 2781 NEW JER EY

B l'tllll A. hittick to be p tmast r at Old Bridge, N. J., in pin ' ( B. . Obittkl<. In ·umbent' commis ion expire lf'eb­tuury 1 , 1H' 0.

• NEW YORK

Hh()l<lon I . lark to b po tma ter at Bath, N. Y., in place of :::l. D. t 'lnl'k. lneumbl'nt' · commi~.ion xpire ]february 4, 1 au.

Uup l't :M. Gat to be po. tmn ter at Bolton Landing, N. Y., in pla<' of I. M. at . lncumb nt' •ommi i n expired Jan­unry 29, 19:J .

Hi hur<l Hullwiukl t b }lO'tma ter nt Central Valley, N.Y., Jn tlla of Rlclutr<l Bullwinkle. Incumbent' commi .. ion ex-ph·<:': F •bruary 6, lt 30.

Ght<ly. W. North to b po tmaHter at hazy, N. Y., in place of H. W. r'orth. lncumb nt.' commi ion expired December 21, 1 2 .

Eru:-;tuH 'orulug Dnvi~ to be p tma ter at Fonda, N. Y., in pla <' of E. avi . Iu •umbent's commi ion ex.pir Jnnunry 2!), 19;~0.

Fn d Il. Bn<·on to be postmn ·ter at Franklinville, N. Y., in plat• of 1!. H. Bucon. In um nt's commi :-:ion expired January 2fl, 1H30.

Fr(•d F. IInwl y to be po tmnRter nt Lnke George, N. Y., in pln('' f F. 1!~. llnwl .y. In umbent's commi .. ion e~ires F b­t•mny 4, 1930.

}i'l<'t ·h •r B. Brooks to b po. tmn ter nt Monroe, N.Y., in place of 1!~. B. Bro ks. In umb nt' commi.. ion expired January 25, 1H30.

Uo:-;w •ll I. Blnuv lt to b po. tma tcr at New City, N. Y .• in Jl}9C I or H. 1'. Blauv lt. Incumbent' commi. lon lo..'"Pired De­(' mh r 21. H):l9.

l<Jlmer J. onk1ln to be po tma. ter at Poughkeep~ie, N. Y .. in Jlla(' of R J. "onklin. Incumbent's commls ·i n e pired Decem­b 't' 21, Hl!!9.

Ji'rnuk Wright to be po tmaster at nl m, N. Y., in pln e of Fruuk Wright. lnC'umb •nt'. c<>mmi sion expire February 15, 1n:~o.

Ilt•J'h rt mlth to b ]')() tmaster nt Warren ·burg, N. Y., in plut' f Roh rt fnrrny. In umbcnt' commi sion expired De­c<•mbf'r 21, 1929.

NORTil OAROLIN A

Alb rt Z. Jurman to be postma ter nt Richland. , N. C., in plnee t A. Z. Jarman. In1•umbent's commi 'ion expires Febru­nr.v 6, 193 .

.John '1'. l~ ubow to b po tma ter at Win. ton-Salem, N. C., in pla of .J. rr. B nhow. Incumbent's commission expired Janu­ary 15, 193 .

NORTII DAKOTA

M~· r u '£. avi to be 'po tma ter at Lt bon, N. Dak., in place or M. T. Dnvi. . In umb nt's commi . ion expired January 6, 1930.

rpha B. 'Veil to b po tmn ter at Robinson, N. Dak., in fllnc f W. ll~. Legler, r . lgned.

OHIO

tu·I M. Molt to b postmn ter at Garrettsville, Ohio, in place of ' . Judd, d ·cased.

Ji~r n<:b row to 1J po tma ter at Marlon, Ohio, in place of Freu h row. In umbent's commission expires February 6, 19:l0.

liJurl Augul'tine to b po tmaster at Montpelier, Obio, in place of Ji)nrl Au ustine. Incumb nt's commb;;ion expires February 6, 100Q .

L . t r E: Whit b ad to b po tma. ter at Westervllle, Ohio, in plncc of M. }1. , r mov d.

J hn R. illlnm. to be P<> ·tma ter at Coli noe Corner, Ohio, in JllnC' f J. n.. William . Incumbent's commi ion expired De­. mb r 21, 1 29.

OKLAHOMA

R llawthorn nrpent.er to be postma ter at Cromwell, Okla., In t>ln of G. H. PuH~mor , r movoo.

}11!ta II .• Jn~ nc to b po tmaster at Edmond, Okla., in place of FJ. II. Ja:vn . Incumbent's commis ion e pired January 21, l :l .

William A. K ll<'Y to be po tma~:;t rat Mar ball, Okla., in place of W. A. K •11 •y. Incumbent' commi ion expired 1anuary 8, l!l:J .

OHm ON

Guy K Te • to b po. tma. t r at Central Point, Oreg., in place of G. El '1\!. ·. In ·uwl> nt'. c mml. sion expires February 6, 1930.

Allwrt 1. Port<•r to be po tmn ter at Gaston, Oreg., in place uf A. ~I. l,orter. ltH:umiJcni'a commi ·sion expires February 6, 1, ao.

Ruby 0. Roberts to be postmaster at lone, Oreg., in place of R. 0. Roberts. Incumbent's commission expired January 8, 1930.

·william G. Smith to be postmaster at Mill City, Ore;!., in plat'e of W. G. mith. Incumbent's commi sion expires. Febru­ary G, 1930.

John S. Sticha to be postmaster at Sclo, Oreg., in place ot J. K ticba. Incumbent' commission expires February 6, 1930.

Reber G. Allen to be po tmaster at ilverton, Oreg., in place of R. G. Allen. Incumbent's commLsion el..'J)ire February 6, 1930.

Tony D. Smith to be po tma:-ter at Union, Oreg., in place of T. D. mitb. Incumbent' commi ion expired January 8, 1930.

P&"'NBYLVANIA

Charle E. Pa to be po tmaster at Harri ·bur", Pa., in place of . El. Pa . Incumbent's commi ion expire February 1, 1930.

Earl W. Hopkins to be postma ter at Leet dale, Pa., jn place of E. W. Hopkin.. Incumbent' commi.. ion expired D · mber 21. 1929.

Fred J. Kintner to be postma. ter at Mehoopany. Pa., in place of F. J. Kintner. Incumbent' commi ion expire February 16, 1930.

harte H. Welch to be postma ter at Mount Union, Pa. in pla •e of C. H. Welch. Incumb nt's commi ion xpired January 16, 1930.

Lynnford K. John on to be po tma ter at Riegel ·ville, Pa., in place of C. F. DeLabar, removed.

Nell M. Hunt to be p twa ter at t. David , Pa., in place of P. \Y. Hunt, re igned.

Ira L. Humes to be postmaster at Tarentum. Pa., in place of I. L. Hume . Incumb nt's commL ion expir d January 30, 1930.

RHODE ISLA 'D

Alb rt J. Rene to be po. tma ter at West Warwick, R. 1., in place of A. J. Rene. Incumbent's commi. ·ion expired February 3, 19:..9.

SOUTH CAROLI. ~A

. T. Waldrop to be postmaster at Greer, S. C., in place of . T. Wal<lrop. Incumbent' commis ion expire<! January

1930. Davi<l . Pitman to be postmaster at Nichol , S. ., in place

of D. . Pitman. Incumbent's commi~ion expir d January 26, 1930.

SOUTH DAKOTA

William H. Ne bitt to be po tma ter at McLaughlin, S. Dak., in place of G. A. Del\.,.alt, re igned.

T!INNESSEE

Jame' E. Miller to be postmaster at Kingsport, Tenn., in plac of J. E. Miller. Incumbent's commis ion expired Decem­ber 16, 1929.

William J. Julian to be po tma ter at Silver Point, Tenn., in place of W. J. Julian. Incumbent's commi ion expires February 26, 1930.

Lawrence L. Linville to be postma ter at "\\ ... ayn boro, T 3nn., in place of R. C. Turman, re igned.

TEXAS

Mima Fessler to be po tmaster at Bigwell , Tex., in place uf S. L. Fessler, decea ed.

Mnrk A. Taylor to be po tma ter at Bonham, Tex., in place of M. A. Taylor. Incumbent's commi~ ion expired January 13, 1930.

VIRGINIA

Leslie M. Gary to be postma. ter at Victoria, Va., in place of L. M. Gary. Incumbent's commi ion expired January 13, 1930 .

Heney M. Stowe to be po tma ter at Bedford, Va., in place of T. W. Richardson, resigned.

WASIDNGTON

Hugh Eldridge to be postmaster at Bellingham, Wa h.. in place ot Hugh Eldridge. Incumbent's commi ion e~--pired January 16, 1930.

Frank A.. McGovern to be postmaster at Concrete, Wa ·b., in place of F. A. McGovern. Incumbent's commi ion expired January 8, 1930.

Alfred U. Thompson to be postmaster at Ever on, Wa.-b., in place of A.. U. Thompson. Incumbent's commission expired January 13, 1930.

Elijah H. Nash to be postmaster at Friday Harbor, Wa h., in p1ace of El. H. Nash. Incumbent's commission expired January 8, 1930.

2782 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE Adam L. Livingston to be postmaster at Mabton, Wash., in

place of A. L: Livingston. Inrumbent's commission expires Feb­ruary 6, 1930.

Be1-tha H. Welsh to be postmaster at Prescott, .Wash., in place of Lloyd Purdy, resigned.

Ira G. Allen to be postmaster at Pullman, Wash., in place of I. G. Allen. Incumbent's commission expires February 6, 1930.

William L. Oliver to be postmaster at Rockford, Wash., in place of W. L. Oliver. Incumbent's commission expired January 21, 1930.

Elton J. O'Larey to be postmaster at White Bluffs, Wash., in place of E. J. O'Larey. Incumbent's commission expired Janu­ary 29, 1930.

WEST VIRGINIA

Chancellor L. Jones to be postmaster at Fairview, W. Va., in place of H. C. Tennant, resigned . . Gilbert W. Smith to be postmaster .at Middlebourne, W.Va., in place of G. W. Smith. Incumbent's commission expired January 21, 1930.

Marshall C. Archer to be postmaster at Ripley, W. Va., in place of M. C. Archer. Incumbent's commission expired Decem­ber 17, 1929.

WISCONSIN

Clifford C. Bro to be postmaster at Aniwa, Wis., in place of C. C. Bro. Incumbent's commission expired January 13, 1930.

William H. Ware to be postmaster at Loganville, Wis., in place of W. H. Ware. Incumbent's commission expired Decem-ber 21, 1929. .

Rollyn Saunders to be postmaster at Oconte Falls, Wis., in place of Rollyn Saunders. Incumbent's commission expired January 8, 1930.

John L. Heffernan to be postmaster at Wilton, Wis., in place of J. L. Heffernan. Incumbent's commission expired January 18, 1930.

CONFIRMATIONS Ea:ecutive nominations confirmed by the Senate Janua;ry 31 (leg­

islative day of January 6), 1930 AMBASSADORS EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY

Fred Morris Dearing, to Peru. Alexander P. Moore, to Poland.

ENVOY EXTRAORDINARY AND MINISTER PLENIPOTENTIARY

Edward E. Brodie to Finland. SECRETARY IN THE DIPLOMATIC SERVICE

Donal F. McGonigal. VICE CONSUL OF CAREER

Donal F. McGonigal. FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICER, UNCLASSIFIED

Donal F. McGonigal. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

Thomas L. Walker, district No. 42, Lpuisville, Ky. COMPTROLLERS OF CusToMs

John J. Deane, district No. 28, San Francisco, Calif. Dwight Hall, district No. 4, Boston, Mass.

SuRVEYOR OF CusTOMS

Frank B. W. Welch, district No. 1, Portland, Me. POSTMASTERS

GEORGIA

Robert L. Lovvorn, Bowdon. ILLINOIS

Arthur H. Gross, Atwood. Roy J. Arseneau, Bourbonnais. William 0. Baker, Christopher. Oscar L. Anderson, Cobden. Howard L. Scott, Fox Lake. Paul W. Gibson, Louisville. Albert L. Weible, New Athens. Carlysle Pemberton, Oakland. Elmer C. Nethery, Palestine. Albert R. Cooper, Pesotum. J olm B. Dillon, Sadorus. Rudolph Mueller, Sherrard. Norredden Cowen, Sorento. Norman A . .Jay, Steeleville. Lel\oy Howell, Ziegler.

INDIANA

Chnrles W. Culbertson, Brazil. Woodson E. Greenlee, Coatesville. Elmer L. McKnight, l!"'owler. · Carl C. Davis, Ramsey.

IOWA

Orjen J. Perdue, Altoona. Jame~ H. Post, Carroll. Ralph H. Halloway, Churdan. Alfred Wright, Denison. Edwin J. Frisk, Des 1\foines. George L. Evans, Elma. Carrie H. Randall, Epworth. Fred A. Robinson, Estherville. Olger H. Raleigh, Graettinger. Emmet M. Henery, Grand Junction. Francis D. Winter, Hinton. Martin J. Severson, Jewell. Walter J. Overmyer, Lacona. Carl G. Austin, Lineville. Emily L. Gibson, Reinbeck. Paul H. Harlan, Richlancl. Arthur E. Norton, Rowley. Leona B. Christensen. Swea City. Clarence W. Rowe, Vinton. Roy H. Bedford, What Cheer.

KENTUCKY

John P. Balee, Guthrie. MAINE

Fred W. Preble, Bingham. Anatole L'Heureux, Chisholm. Malcolm B. Folsom, Greenville. Fremont A. Hunton, Readfield. Leo M. Cyr, Rockwood. Lemuel Rich, Sebago Lake. Eugene S. Thurston, South West Harbor. Joseph M. Gerrish, Winter Harbor.

MINNESOTA

Bernard McGrath, Barnesvil1e. Concetta Dal Vago Taraborelli, Buhl. Lambert J. Dols, Cologne. Chris N. Nesseth, Deer River. James C. Wilson, Grygla. Stanley A. Torgerson, Hawley. Axel P. Lofgren, Kadstad. Olof M. Groven, Mentor. Wilbert F. Ott, Nashwauk. William R. Gates, North St. Paul. John A. Fridgen, Parkers Prairie. Anna E. McDonald, Shevlin. John Jensen, Winger.

MONTANA

Elias 0. Sorvick, Antelope. James F. Blenkner, Broadus. Carroll E. Griffin, Glendive. Kirby G. Hoon, Helena. John R. Stewart, Ingomar. Charles A. Worthing, Lambert. George W. Fenton. Laurel. Ralph E. Rorabeck, Lavina. Alfred S. Opheim, Opheim. John A. Bywaters, _ Sandcoulee. Elbert L. Stackhouse, Thompson Falls.

NEW JERSEY

Helen Mylod, Glen Ridge. Alvin C. Stover, Pennington.

NORTH CAROLINA

Eva Smith, Columbus. NORTH DAKOTA

Florence F. Davenport, Napoleon. OHIO

Benson M. Harrison, Alexandria. William H. Campbell, Galena. Richard Hagel, Gypsum. Jacob E. Davis, Kingsville. Gailord A. Case, Loudonville. Lloyd R. Wallace, Mount Victory. Charles S. Kline, Port Washington. Ralph E. Saner, Powhatan Point. John P. Locke, Tiffin.

PENNSYLVANIA

Craig M. Fleming, Chambersburg. Paul A. Hepner, Herndon. Ralph E. Kelder, Matamoras. Pearl Clark, Roulette.

JANUARY 31 .

1930 CONGRE SI ... AL RECORD-HOt;SE 2783 BOUTll CAROLINA

l\Itll'k D. Bnt ·b 1<1 r, Frogmorc. IJnvld E. aul~, 'moal~:;.

UTAH

Ewell 0. Bowf'n, Hiawatha. II my C. 'Var<l, Mston. J ph F. MtwKuigbt, Price.

VIRGINIA

Wllliam T. IIoplin I 1CWport News.

Willlnm '. M · ormick, Rnphlne. J lm P. Iilldl ton, Tb Plain . Jam . R. 1'ompkins, T m. rePk. Alonzo L. Jon s, Yirgi11na.

FmnAY, Janua1y 91, 1930 Th llou~ • m t ut 12 o'clO<:k noon. 'l'bc 'hnplalu, Rev. Jnme · hera Montgomery, D. D., offered

tb fol1owing pray r :

W prni c 1'b , our ev rln. ting God, that 'l'by mercies still sul'\'lv , ndure, and cling until the end of life. 'l'by loving heart ncv r fail· to be beneficent and hen venly in its benedictions.

W(• tnt~t the power that make the mother and her child. Til y mark the boundary of all tuthly love and sacrifice. It i a won<l rful gunranty, and to our hearts it i like the honey in th cl ft of the r ck. pirit Divine, po ·~e u and work in u. tllat b ut UR chnng , nam ly, from love of wrong to love of right. When we fail let u n t be di. ·heartened, for being pntic nt and pet v l'ing what we do imperfectly here we shall d ll rf tly yond r. Tbr ugh Chri~t our blessed Saviour. .Am n.

Tb Journal of the pr cecding of ye terday was r ad and approv d.

M£: AGEl J"RRK THE 8ENA'IE

A me. sag fr m the • enate by Mr. OraYen, its principal clerk, announc· d that the nat u r to the r port of the committee of onfer n · on the disagre ing vote of the two Hou es on the aru •ntlment of Ute llou ·e to n joint resolution of the Senate of tb following titl :

. J. R !'!. 7. Joint r solution for t11e appointment of a joint c mrnltt of th • nat and llou .. e of Re1n· . ntatives to in­ve tigute th pay nnd nllo\ ·nnces of the commissioned and en-11 ·t (1 p 1 nn 1 of the Army, Navy, farin orp , Coa.:t Guard,

ooAt nnd G od ti urvey, and Public Ht>nlth rvke. Th • m ~. nge nl·o nnnounc l that the Pre,-ident pro tempore

hnd appointed Mr. Bon.An and Mr. WA- o~ m mbers of the joint )lect commltt eon the part of the enate a provided for tn the net of brulli'Y 16, l 9, as amend <l by the act of March 2, 1 5 entitled "An net t authorize and proYide for tbe di · po. iUo~ of uscl s papers in the ex cuti've departments," for the <llsposition of u cle ·s papers in the Department of State.

LEAVE TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE

Mr. B AND of G orgia. Mr. p aker, I wa allowed 10 min­ute. th other day to addre. the Hou~e. I did u e the word " 10 minnt s," but I changed it and made a lmilnr request for 20 rninut ..

'l1lc PEAr~JR. The gentleman from Georgia ask unani­mou con nt to adclr s the IIou e for 20 minutes on Saturday, following the g utleman from Georgia, Mr. CRISP. Is there ollj ction?

There was n objection. REPORT OF TliE COM UT'l"EE ON THE YORKTOWN SESQUICENTENNIAL

COMMI ' ION ( S. DOC. NO. 7 5)

Mr .• p aker, I submit herewith a report of the rkto"''Il Sesquicentennial Commission created

to pr pare a report n.nd plan or plans, and a J)l' ~rnm of th commemoration of tbe sie:re of York"town, Va., ond the urr ntl< r of ornwnlli , witll an estimate of the prol>­ubl ost, and for other purp . . The report is unanimous, with tb ' •xt•(•J)t ion of , •nat or UEED, who was unable to meet witll u::-~ us he i nt th Naval Disannnm nt Conference.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report. The Cl rk r ad a fol1ow : United States Yorktown S quicentennial Commission, c1·ented by

the Congre~ to prepare a report and plan or plans and a program for the commemoration ot the siege of Yorktown, Va., and the surrender or Cornwallis on October Hl, 1771, with an estimate of the probable cost, and for other purposes, as specified in tbe House Concurrent Ite o­lution 43, Seventieth Congress, first sc -ion, and ub cquent amendments, re ·pcctfully reports as follows :

The PEAKER. Referred to the Committee of the Whole H u.:e on tbe state of the Union and order d to be printed.

LEAVE TO ADDRESS TllE HOUSE

Mr. COLLIN . Mr. Speaker, I a ·k unanimous consent to speak for one hour immediately after the reading of the Jour­nal nnd the disposition o! matters on the Sp akers' table next Monday.

The SPEAKER. The Chair would sugge t to the gentleman that Monday is consent day, and th ,re is a very long calendar. The hair does not think he should recognize the gentleman tor that purpo e on Monday. but would on some other day.

Mr. COLLINS. I have consulted with the gentleman from New York [Mr. SNELL].

The SPEAKER. The Cbalr think it is his duty to protect the Consent Calendar a. far as possible. It is very long. The Chair will be glad to recognjze the gentleman to a k consent for some other day-of cour·e, excepting Calendar Wednesday.

OOLO.'IAL NATIONAL MONUYENT IN THE STATE OF VIRGINIA

Mr. WHITEHEAD. Mr. Speaker, I a k unanimou con ent to extend my remarks In the REOO&D by printing a copy of a joint re olution adopted by the General A. embly of Virginia, concerning Hou ·e bill 8424, to e tabli:.;h n col nial national monument at Jamestown and adjoining area in Virginia.

The SPEAKER. I there objection to the reque t of the gentleman from Virginia?

Mr. TAFFORD. Reserving the right to object, I want to a k the gentleman if the resolution is of such great importance that it should be incorporated in the RECORD? We all receive re ·olutions from the legi..,latures of our States, which we drop in tile ba ket.

It is not customary to encumber the REcon.D with resolutions of State legislatures. In fact, the State of \Vi consin passes so many resolutions that I pay little respect to them .

Mr. WHITEHEAD. This is not a long resolution-it Is the opinion of the General As embly of Virginia on the bill.

Mr. STAFFORD. I think it is a bad practice to inaugurate at tbi late day.

Mr. UNDERHILL rose. Mr. TAFFORD. I did not see the gentleman from Massa­

chusetts when I rose. Mr. UNDERHILL. I agree with the gentleman from Wis­

consin, but the House itself put it approval two year~~ ago on re. olutions receiYed from the Tarious State le!ti.,lature . They con idered that wn a part of the official record of the Hou. e as having received the e communications !rom the St.ate legis­latures. Although there is a proper place for them in the basket they always appear lat r in tile RECORD. It was thought in deference to Members who were Instructed by the legislatures to haTe them printed to let them go ln.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. 'peaker, when I roe I looked around t11e Chamber but did not see the gentleman from Mn •. achu. etts who o effic!ently afeguarus the columns of the RECORD. Ilad I seen him I would not have assumed the undesirable but neces­sary role to pas judgment in this propo al, and therefore I "'ith­draw the objection. But I wish to say, and empha ize o far ns resolutions are concerned, that I receive o many from tl1e Legislature of "\\-ri con ... in that I will not offend by asking to put them in the RECORD, and I do not even drop them in the basket. I leave that perfunctory task to other Members of the delegation.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Virginia?

There was no objection. Mr. WIDTEHEAD. 1\Ir. Speaker, under the leave to extend

my remarks in the RECORD I include the following joint resolu­tion adopted by the General Assembly of Virginia concerning House bill 8424, to e tablisb a colonial national monument at Jamestown and adjoining areas ~ Virginia: .101. 'T RESOLUTION WITH REI'JDRJDNCE TO COLONIAL 'ATIOXAL MONUME~ IN

THlD STATlil OF VIRGL'IA

Whereas a uill " to provide for tbe creation ot the colonial national monument in the State of Virginia, and for otb('r purpo es," wns offered in ~ National How;e of Representative on January 10, 1930, II. R. 8424, by Hon. Louis C. B..UITON, whi.cb bill provides, under certain

2784 CONGRESSIONAL RECOR.D-HOUSE JANUARY 31 stated conditions, for the Inclusion in the proposed colonial national monument " Jamestown Island, parts of the city of Williamsburg . and the Yorktown battle field, and suitable area to connect said island, ~ity, and battle field" ; and

Whereas the establishment of this proposed colonial national monu­ment, embracing a unique but long-neglected historic area within this State, would result in preserving in perpetuity these sacr~d shrines of national life and liberty, and would further result in presenting to the present and future generations the epoch-making events and glori­ous achievements which mark the birth of this Nation in 1607, and the

· beginning of representative government in America at Jamestown, Va., in 1619; together with the constructive and immortal contributio.ns made in Williamsburg, Va., to the national independence, to the declara­tion of the rights and duties of man, and to the creation of the safe-~

guards of national Jiberty; and which, finally, would result in estab­lishing a perpetual witness to the sacrifice and devotion by which national independence was secured by the culminating victory of the Revolution at Yorktown. Va.; and

Whereas Virginia, while cherishing these sacred memorials and glori­ous associations, is not herself able to reclaim, develop, enrich, beautify, preserve, and maintain for all time this historic area and thus make it a worthy memorial of the past and an inspiring witness to the future ; and because Virginia further feels that what is hers within this area is also a national inheritance, a national trust, and a national respon­sibility : Therefore be it

Resolved by the house of delegates (the senate concurring), That we do hereby most heartily indorse the Cramton bill, which provides for the creation of the colonial national monumf'nt in Virginia, and request the Virginia Members of the National House of Representa­tives and Senate to give their active support to the measure, and we hereby commend the lion. Louis C. CRAMTON for his patriotic service to the Nation in preparing and offering this bill : Be it further

Resolved, That the ~neral Assembly of the Commonwealth of Vir­ginia now in session in Richmond are in accord in their desire for the early passage of this great patriotic mt)asure. Be it further

ResoZt>ed, That the Governor of Virginia be, and is hereby, requested to transmit these resolutions in proper form to the Virginia Members of the House and Senate in Washington and to the Hon. LOUIS C. Cr:AlliTON, patron of the bill to create in Virginia a colonial national monument.

Agreed to by bouse of delegates January 24, 1930. JNO. W. WILLIAMS,

Clerk of the House of Delegates. Agreed to by the senate January 24, 1930.

0. V. HAUGE, Clerk of the Senate.

LEAVE TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago I made a request to address the House on Monday, but I will now make the request for Friday of next week.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Mississippi asks unani­mous consent that after the reading af the J om·nal and dis­\)Osition of matters on the Speaker's table he may address the Rouse for one hour on Friday of next week. Is there objection?

There was no objection. PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE

The SPEAKER. Under the order of the House the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. NELSON] for one hour.

Mr. NELSON of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I rise to present some views on the subjeCt, " The Golden Rule," the practical method for the solution of the Philippine problem. It is unneces-­sary for me to tell you who was the author of that famous pre­cept: "And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise." But you may be interested in knowing who has advocated most earnestly its application to the solution of our problems in the Far East, particularly in Asia and in the Philippine Islands-no less a person than the chairman of the Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs of the United

, States Senate, Mr. HIRAM BINGHAM, of Connecticut. Let me read to you a few very significant statements from an address by him, entitled " China and the Philippines," before the Rail­way Business Association on November 16, 1927. The Senator bad just returned from a trip to the Orient.

In the Philippines-­

Said he-we find revolt against the white man, even though that white man be an American. We find a desire to throw off his yoke, an intense and growing desire for independence and nationalism.

Under the subhead, "Our Remedy in China," the Senator commends the State Department for its prudent policy in the use of our marines and gunboats. He says:

But we can not go in a~d wipe out these people, as they seem to fear we will, or pacify them, as some people are asking . us- to do. That would be folly. We can only show them our friendship and try to persuade them of the truth of our good intentions.

Under the heading, "A New Philippine Policy," the Senator says:

In the Philippines we have got to change our policy. The new gen­eration is being taught to bate us.

He concludes with these eloquent words : It seems to me, my friends, that the time has come for us to do all

we can toward solving this problem in Asia by teaching and practicing the golden rule, by respecting these old, ancient civilizations over there, and treating their representatives, who are cultured, rellned, educated gentlemen, as we would like to be treated ourselves, and stretching out a helping hand to them with the gospel of the golden rule, which is, after all, the basis which has made America happy and great and prosperous.

I now have the pleasure to direct your attention to a similar statement by the Secretary of State, Mr. Henry L. Stimson, recently Governor General of the Philippine Islands. I read from his testimony befo-re the Senate Subcommittee on Com­merce on October 24, 1929 :

They (Filipinos) feel that they depend entirely on the good faith of this country in carrying out our promises which Mr. McKinley and Mr. Root aud Mr. Taft 30 years ago announced in their respective capacities as President, Secretary of War, and Governor General, as the purposes of the United States toward the islands when they prom­ised that the interests of the islands would be the governing policy of the United States • • •. While I thus believe tremendously in the importance of our connection with that group of islands, I want to make it equally clear that I am equally confident that this connection of ours with the islands can only be successfully maintained uot by force but by good will 'and by the development of the consciousness that it is mutually to the advantage of both sides. We have gotten beyond the cave-man age in regard to colonial development just as we have in regard to marriage-we do not and we can not now hold colonies by force. If we are trying to hold them permanently or advantageously or satisfactorily, it must be a union which depends upon the consent of both sides and upon the mutual advantage to both sides. It depends upon the public opinion of both sides, and while I frankly am a strong believer and hoper for the continued existence of tl!.e connection between the Philippines and the United States I ii.m equally convinced that this can only be done by the Filipinos giving their entire consent and their willing agreement.

Mr. Speaker, when I consider these statements by Americans occupying lofty towers of observation, who speak for the domi­nant power in our country which has hitherto, notably during the administration of Governor Geneeal Wood, stood for a strong-arm policy and for financial control in the Philippines, I realize that a "new policy "-..:.a new vision and a new spirit­has been inaugurated in our attitude toward the Filipino people, and I rejoice at this practical wisdom.

In this spirit, sincerely hoping that I may be enabled to contribute something toward better understanding, better feel~ ing, and better relations, more just and consequently more permanent, I have reintroduced my joint resolution setting up a simple and inexpensive yet practical and powerful legisla­tive medium for closer contact between the Philippine Legisla­ture and the Congress of the United States for the consideration and disposition of legislative measures affecting 1J"ilipino in­terests.

Pardon here a personal reference. Because of threatened ill health and for certain other reasons, I determined three years ago to lay aside political activities, factional or par­tisan, and to give my entire time, outside of the general duties of my office, to a special study of the larger prob­lems of my country. First on my progTam I placed the Phil­ippine problem. I wished to ascertain the facts, to interpret them, and then to apply the interpretation of those facts. I have made a very extensive survey of the literature bearing on this s.ubject, and as a result I have come to realize the pressing need of a more efficient medium of contact with the people of the Philippines. I have therefore presented my resolution and shall urge its passage until it is adopted or independence is granted.

But, Mr. Speaker, our relations with the Filipino people from the beginning have interested me deeply. Well I recall the declaration of war with Spain. At a meeting held immediately in the capitol of my State to give popular approval to the action of Congress, I had the honor of being one of the speakers. It was not the declaration of war that stirred me, but the nobility of the avowed purpose for which we went to war-the rescue of a weak, oppressed people from brutal tyranny.

coT 1 RE~ IO T L RE ORD-HOUSE 2785 Vividly do I r all the morning new:papcr r unting with

grapil.l<: h acllhH'H D w y' mutchle ·s victory at Manila Bay, nntl I nm ccrtuin tllnt I Wt\!4 not th only American citizen to whoru tbi vi ·tory symb liz d, · not mer ly Am rica's naval SUJlremncy ov r some Spanl h tub , n we know now, but the 1mm clint • 'mnnclpntlon of our heroic alli s who had b n fi~htln~ for thl~ir fr <lorn fr m pnni h domination. It will be 1' •m<>mhercd thut .Admiral Dew y had n laud for-· ' with which· t foil w up hi naval victory. II wa · entirely dependent upon th l•~ilipln for • ' to cnrry on land operations again t the Hpnninrd . In nn incredibly hort tin:e th y had sue e<led in dl'ivln • th • paninrds out of all th ·island· and were holding tb •ru c o d up in th cnpitnl city, wher they wer ating hor 11 ·~h and wer tha· nt n <l with n wat r famine. Our American Army did not arrive until June 30, 1 0 .

hPn w r nwmbcr thnt th Filipinos had, on Novemb r 1, 1 97, form d n provt ionnl gov rnment and adopted a c n titu­tlon whi h, by it pr nmbl , declar .d ind r1eu<l nc from Spain, it h <' w . : If- vident that the Filipino peovl~ llad won their i ncle11 nd('n · b •f r w m ri an nme in. How completely th y hnd po . <v ·ion i told u by Pre ldent McKinley and Admiral wey. The Pre. ·ldcnt ~aid:

By n c••mb L'. 180 , th revolutionary government wns in control of nlmol'lt the ntir nrchlpelngo. (McKinley, Island Pos e!'! ions of the Unit I >tnt H, p. 231.)

.Admiral Dewey aid: It 11.1 n tact tbnt they w r tn pos. ~lon, they had gotten pretty much

the whole thing, except Mnniln. <•. Doc. 331 (1902), pt. 3, p. 2041.)

With my f •How cit iz ns I could n t foil >w th ·ecr t negotia­tions nt Pnrl for PC'nt' ·with ~pnin, and I have never thought f:t vol'nbly of tb . purcbn e of the Filipino pt>ople for •. 20,000, 00. On tlli · poiut, listen to tllnt tute ·man, .'penker Thomn., B. u. d:

'l'o buy 10,000,0 0 p opl at $2 a head, unplck d, nnd then to hold thl'm at the gun's point n HO mnny chattels would be a depth of natJonnl sham(' to which not v<•n profit-hunting madne s could quite drag this country.

But it did! E ·<· dingly dlcl I r gret wbnt s med to me to be 'nn unneces­

~ury wnr with ur tn1 ting nlli ·, "A <·hapter in our history," RllYI:i th Am ricnn lli t rinn Lntnn~. "that i a mo~t humiliat­iu~ one''; t chupt r· relating t de 'ds done and practice· per­fouu d ·o nt vnriunc ~ith our id ul and profe~. ·ion · that when I r ud them ov r ngniu I nn feel no other emotions than those of lntense .t· gl'et and di~gu ·t.

R ar A lmiral Brndl y . Fi'-~ke wn navigator of the U. S. S. Pctr l and Monadnock <luring the war with the Filipinos. In his book, 'Vnr Um in Manila, b say , r gr tfully:

W tmu d Jn tbnt nlgbt wlth heavy benrt . • • • We knew thnt tbe wnr bud be n brought on by 1 nders who hnd mi.'lcd the Flllplnos with prorni~ • o~ lntlt'P ud nc and untrue statement about the inten­tlons of thl' nit d •tnt ; and we felt thnt th lr work ot mi l ndlng hnd b co mud n. y !Jy a ft>w untrained oldler who bnd alienated the frll'n•lly Filipino. by trenllng them as "nlggers."

F1·om tllll ng many deplorable practice of thi war let me JlOint out on . \V , wb d nounced Gen ral W yler and his urutnl h£>r<lin of th 'ubnn p ople into r cone ntmtion cnmp , cUrt th v ry sam thin~ with our one-tim _ allies who were !l •bting t the Lu t <.lltda, bedding tll ir life' blood for their fre dom; h rc:ling tb(.• Philippine p ople in the..,. me ort of d ath r.amp in th Phillppin s which Pr ·idcnt McKinley hn<l

igoroul-lly d •n uuc d pain for r~o·rtlng to In Cuba. Tlll-

11 .aid-If! not ch·lll?. a wn rrnr , bnt n new and inhuman phase bnpplly unprece­tJ. ntt•(] In th rnodt'rn hl tory of civilized hrlstlan p •opl . (Storey and Ll<'bnnco, The Conqu ·Mt of the Philippln by the United tate , p. 13!).)

'l'h •odor Roo · v •It, nr"'lng the Pr sldent to ngaln~:~t .·pniu, mnd the fearful ncctt'ation:

Th tep or th White House are ~;llpp ry wlth the blood of the r ·onccutrndcm. Ui•OrPy o.nc\ Llchanco, The onque t of the Philippine by fh Tnlt d tatP., p. 139.)

Ahout tll tin1 lhi. o-call d in urrectlon w·a ended I wns d t d to on·!T ~.'. '1 urly I recall the aecount of the ~"l'<'t ion of my collcn~ue :\lr. II~ RY ALLt:N 'ooPER, now the v<•uc·rnbiP dean of th • Ilou.· , ag chairman of the ommittee on In. ulnr ALTalt-. . Pr ~ld •nt M<.·Kinl y p r:onnlly ·u~ge t d to • 'ppnl<t•r !I( n<l •r:ou hi d :lr~ for Mr. OOPER' apvointm nt. 'l'h • Pre~icl nt wi::lb 1, a · be said privately, that n man be

L.-.'II-17u

'chairman who would not consent to any legislation exploiting tb Philippines.

My colleague'· valiant tight, as chairman of that great com­mjttee. to get the people of the Philippines eYen a leaislative a : mbly i hi ·toric. On thi · committee were the lender of the Hou ·e, o impol'tant was it regarded ; and the Cooper bill pa ~ed in committee over the oppo ition of such giant ns Mr. annon, of Illinoi ·, hy only 3 vote . Mr. CooPER's closing peech for the bill in th House wa pointed out to me a· one of the mo t elo­quent adclre e ever delivered in Conl!l'e ', With dramatic power Mr. COOPER read that mo t patriotic poem of the Filipino martyr, Rizal, My La t Thought. I shall quote the ovening lin s of the first tanza : Land I adore, farewell ! thou land of southern sun's choosing l Pearl of the Orient! our fot·r,~tted garden of Ed~n I Joyous, I yield up for thee my sad life, and were it far brighter, Young, ro e- trewn, for thee and thy happiness .,till would give it. Far afield, in the din and ru ·b of maddening battle, Others have laid down their live , nor wavered, nor paus d in the glvlng. What mntters way or pln<.:e-tbe cypre~ , the lily, the laurel-When 'tls the hearth and the country that call for the lite's immolation.

Hep ating the word of Ml'. Cunnon, who opposed the meaS­ure, Mr. CooPER exclaimed:

Pirate ! Barbarian ! Savages! Incapable of civilization! flow mnny of the civilized, Caucasian lnnderers of hi race could ever be capable of thoughts like these, which on that awful night, as be sat alone nmid~t Hence unbrok n, , ave by the rustling of the black plumes of the death angel at W Ide, poun•d from the oul of the IlUlrtyred dead, and where-on what soli, under what sky-did tyranny ever claim a nobler victim?

The next important legislation for the Philippines, 14 years after, was the Jon Act. While I voted for the act, I was gr atly di~appointed at the defeat of the Clarke amendm nt. It would have brought about the independence of the Philippine I land· in four rear . Tbi · independence amendment did pa ·s the enate by 1 vote, but failed in the Hou e. Perhaps post­ponement wa for the be't. Be that us it may, the Jone Act wa · for the time at lea t oil on troubled wat r . The preamble, with it pecitlc promi ·e, gaYe their hope a new form and habitation, ·which wa much needed, for "hope deferred maketh the heart ick." Though the powers of self-government were greatly circum ·cribed, it did n1ford the Filipino people n b tter opportunity for actual participation in their national a.trair and a chance to prove to the world their abundant ability to e tabli h table government. That they have been . ucce · ful in o doing a President of the United States has officially , affirm d in a me age to Con"'re~s.

A· a Member of the Hou e I baYe b<>en intere ted in the able leader · of the Philippine I lands. It ha been my pleasure to erve with Commissioner Quezon, afterward president of the

Philippine 'ennte; with Mr. Gabaldon, that fiery ('bampion of Philippine independence; with my per onal friend, Mr. Gt:E­YA.RA, n Filipino soldier, journali t, lawmaker, and patriot; and with the cholar and educator, the junior Commi . ioner, Mr. OsrAs. I ba\e had the privilege of learning to know per­sonally Senator 0. mena and the penker of the Philippine As­sembly, Mr. Rox;1. . During my more than 20 year of ervice in onn-re I have never met abler tate.·men. And after years of observation of the capable manner in which the Filipino puhlic men have dealt with the difficult problems of gov rnment that from time to time arose and challenged t11eir utmo t ·kill and alertne , I have lo t nll fear that the Pllilippine ! .. Janel will ever fall a prey to foreign capitnli tic exploitation. a have

uba and Hniti. With our present Secretary of tate, I heartily agree that-

A country that can develop such leader~hlp need not worry about its futut·e.

It seems to me-and I have given this mutter much con i<1era­t1on-tbut four avenues are open to us: (1) We may follow the puth of lea t re ·istan ·e and go on drifting much a· we have been doing, contiuuing the pre ·eut un .. atisfactory relation ; (2) ,ve may utterly <li:regard all of the Filipino c1aims to the ri~ht to govern them elves and with a strong hand force them to be our economic slave while we reap the profit of their native land; (3) we may uugrudgingly give the Filipin ~ the independ-ence they de ir ; or ( 4) we may determine that there i a high road which American citizen ~hould follow wh n dealing with fellow men-that of mutual dit:;cu · ion and friendly accord. Thi latter cour ·e I advocate as temporarily be ·t ndaptecl to bring about and maintain fiiendly relation: pending the , peedy determination of the political . tatus of the Philippine people .

l'tlr. peaker, let me dir ct your attention to pre ·<•nt condi­tion::;, after another period of 14 year:s. The tariff controver y j

2·786 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JANUARY 31 has emphasized the weU-known fact that existing American­Filipino relations ' are not satisfactory, either to Americans or Filipinos. For 30 years these people, whom both President Roosevelt and Governor General Taft called our "wards," have come to their " trustees " through memorials, petitions, and through missions, presenting their needs and their grievances, and an official Philippine mission is here now appealing for independence before the Senate Committee on Territories and Insular .Affairs. For 30 years they have been assured that they are the most fortunate P.eople in the world to have fallen into benign hands that are unselfishly leading them up the "stony path of self-government." After 30 years of these happy assur­ances but of little consideration and less legislation, these wards are beginning to question the outcome of their trustees' procras-tination. ·

An anti-independence writer in a vein of good humor tells us one thing this procrastination has done. He said that when he was in the Philippines he heard planters on a spree singing, " Mon­keys have no tails in Zamboanga." IUs curiosity about the monkeys in the rubber country was soon satisfied by the ex­p1anation that they " had· worn their tails off sitting on them waiting for the American Government to decide what it was going to do with the Philippines."

Mr. Speaker, resolutions passed by farm organizations such as the conservative National Grange, the American Farm Bu­reau, the American Federation of Labor, and the testimony of their authorized spokesmen before a Senate committee, together with powerful editorials of newspapers in the mid-West, such as the Minneapolis Tribune, are the immediate causes for the revival of hope for Philippine independence.

The organized farmers of America now standing shoulder to shoulder with federated labor are urging strongly that the Fili­pinos be given independence, for they would not deny them fair and equitable treatment and in the same breath demand protec­tion of their own rights. They are tired of the threat of actual and potential C!)mpetition, under free-trade tariffs, with the products of the Philippine Islands while certain self-seeking industrial interests are urging us to hold on to the islands with the secret hope and expectation that they may ultimately be able to exploit their resources, both land and labor. Let us not fail now in farsighted statesmanship, but clearly foresee that the more successfully American monopolistic interests succeed in exploiting the resources of land and labor of the Philippine I slands, particularly its farm products, the more will be the competition with the products of American farms; and if tariff barriers are raised, the greater will be the just outcry of the Filipinos against taxation without representation.

So, realizing that the tariff and other problems involving the mutual interest of Filipinos and the American farmers are complicated and that there is no present medium between the Congress and the Philippine Legislature through which a dis­cussion of such comprehensive questions may take place with the view of arriving at a fair and friendly understanding, I have offered my joint resolution.

Instead of costly missions from the Philippine Islands to this country and equally costly expeditions by Members of Congress to the Philippines, sometimes referred to as " Junket­ing trips," not to mention presidential commissions of one or more politicians of outstanding prominence, how much better it would be to take these problems, sit down around a con­ference table, face to face and feet to feet, 18 picked men, 9 from the Philippines and 9 from our United States, familiar with the problems, whose duty it becomes to work out the solu­tion that is most equitable, not for one side or the other but for the advantage of all concerned. This commission should re­main in session so long as necessity requires and upon conclu­sion of its work file its recommendations and reports with the United States Congress and the Philippine Legislature for proper legislative action.

That a pressing necessity exists for such a conciliatory me­dium is brougllt home to us now in the tariff controversy and the other sources of grievance enumerated in the preamble of my resolution. Let us consider tllem briefly.

First, let us take the tariff question: If it be true that Phil­ippine competition, actual and potential, endangers the pros­perity of the American farmers, as they charge, something should be done ; but, on the other hand, it we are ruthlessly discriminating against an island people under our flag and are killing their industries, then, again, something must be done. .Are we too much absorbed in the bigness of our world tariff problem to give proper consideration to that phase which, though incidental to us, strikes vitally at the very roots of the Philippine industrial structure? We are accused of " making them foreign f<iH' domestic purposes and domestic for foreign purposes." In deciding the question as to whether the Consti-

tution followed the flag, said the both wise and witty Mr. Dooley, " The Supreme Court followed the election returns."

Closely related to tariff is the q.uestion of trade. Trade, we know, is dependent upon friendly international relations. If the threat is carried out to extend our coastwise shipping laws to the Philippines, thus eliminating foreign competition by com­pelling all Philippine exports to be carried in American ships, which all agree will increase the cost of transportation, our friendly relations with the Philippines and other countries will be seriously affected.

Regarding the economic phase, our attitude is said to be that of a father about to slay his own child. We have always said their land is l'ich in resources ; develop them for their welfare ; yet it has even been proposed in Congress to divide their coun­try or to break down their land laws, the very bulwarks raised by us for their protection and which they have jealously guarded. Under the present conditions capital is afraid to enter the islands and the Filipinos are afraid to have it enter. Secretary Stimson returned from the Philippines a convert to the Filipino policy of preserving their land for small farms rather than great corporations of foreign investors. Again, a joint confer­ence may be the solution.

The political condition of the islands is so closely allied with the economic that the two are virtually intertwined. Our Con­gress has promised to give independence " as soon as stable government can be established." The Filipinos insist that they are now ready and call for independence. It is urgent that we give immediate attention to this demand for self-government .because it is being intensified by the world impulse for national­ism and growing race consciousness. Let us freely give heed to their rights rather than be driven to do so. The patriot Rizal warned Spain to " keep pace " with the wishes of the people rather than be forced to " give way " before them. The first, he said, "begets sympathy and love," while the latter "begets contempt and anger." Are we going to follow the example of Spain? We can not continue forever the present nondescript status of the islands. They are still in the disembodied state described by Chief Justice Fuller a number of years ago: ·

• the contention seems . to be-

Said he- · that if an organized and settled Province of another sovereignty is ac­quired by the United States, Congress bas the power to keep it like a disembodied shade, in an intermediate state of ambiguous existence for an indefinite period; and, more than that, after it has been called from that limbo, commerce with it is absolutely subject to the will of Congress, irrespective of constitutional provisions. (Reyes, America's Economic Policy toward the Philippines, p. 53.)

What about our problem of national defense? Do we need the Philippines as naval and military bases, or are they, as Roosevelt said, "a source of weakness" to us? Would they, if independent, have a better chance to provide for their own de­fense? At present they are wholly dependent upon us and con­sequently would be subject to attack by any nation with whom we should be at war. This fact was self-evident in the World War.

WHAT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS?

We should look seriously to the causes of world peace. It has been said that if we relinquish our hold on the Philippines the balance of nations will be disturbed. Would freedom for the Filipinos intensify the growing nationalism in Java, Korea, and India? Is it necessary for world peace that these remain subject nations? If, and when, independence is finally granted to our wards what international ari·angement, if any, should be entered into by treaty for their protection? Or is it best to let them carry on their own diplomatic negotiations?

These are but some of the major problems ; others such as labor, immigration, and citizenship, will arise and must be care­fully considered and settled.

It bas been my hope that by meeting and discussing our mutual problems the Filipinos will decide to continue connec­tions with us iu some way satisfactory to them. However, if they then insist upon an independent existence, we are pledged to yield. Whatever be the outcome, I believe that Americans desire to establish and maintain future friendly relations with our" wards" whom we have brought up, as it were, in our own family.

1\:lr. Speaker, let us consider now the cause of the Fili­pino people from a distinctly historical American viewpoint. They base their claim for just and equitable treatment on the fact that almost as soon as the sound of Dewey's guns died away in Manila Bay, in order to meet the world's suspicions and Spain's charge of mercenary motives, President McKinley declared:

19 0 CONGRE SIO.L:r L RECORD-HOlJSE 2787 Th T'hillppln nr our , not to exploit but to develop. •

'l' hiH l th path of duty whlcb we mu ·t follow or be recr ant to a mighty trmst committed to u .

' hi f .Tnl'tic Taft w11 n Governor of th Philippine I lnnd omHJ<'<l the ·1 gau, "'l'h Philippin for the Filipino·." This

(] ·lnralion of an ultruiHtic purpo · ha r • · nlly been reaffirmed by our pr ~ nt G v rnor General of the Phllippine , Mr. Davis, wh n h sald:

• 1! " economic dev lopment" meant "exploitation" ahould favor tl.ghtlng It to th tlnl 11. I hall n vcr favor the exploita­tion or th rc>Honrc '8 of the people or tbe Pblllpplne I lands, eltht>r by cnpltnl, Jnbur, or politics. foreign or . dome tic. (Message to tbe l'hlllpplne Lc •iHlnturc July, 1929.)

Orut 'Cul to us for Ill s aS!'urances th t we do not intend to rob them, but fulliug to receiv adequate consideration for th •h· clnim:; tuHl fft• tiv 1 gi.lation for their need , the Fili­pino justly and pt'Op rly • y, you are too di ·tant to be respon­:-;iv , to busy with your own affairs to regar<l our , too far away to know our n d , and too diff rent racially and tempera­m .ntnlly to . ympatbtze with u . You will not permit u to l.lt' ·om Am ricnu •itizcn ·, th r fore give u our full freedom and 1 t u. mnnng our own afrair to snit our ·elve . We may not .- t up a gov •ruwent to ult you American , but it will uit u~. whi ·h is, aft r all, th b t te t of a Philippine government.

N on hn b tt r Interpr t d th •ir right of elf-expression from th() AmN·lcan p int of view than Pre id nt Schurman, of th fir , t Philippine ommi ion:

Th ~e Am rlcans-

'aid be-pat•·touc but unv l'f~ed In history, who de, lre to re-create the FllJplno tn their own lmllltude, will nlwnye be able to demon trate that their orl ntal clay 1 etlll without hape· and se mllne s ln the American potter' !! hnnd nnd that for a p r!e t product, a v sscl of honor and ~lory, th American wheel ron t be k pt going for year , or, p rbnp , for g rwt·ntlons, or poHSlllly !or ccnturJes. Heaven uve the Filipino from 6iuch lUI Imp rtln nt and meddle ome earthly providence! The Fll1plnos o t to d •velop along 1 belr own racial lines, not along ours ; and it is colo "16.1 cone It and lmpud nee to discourage them becau e they are dttT r nt frorn ourselves. (Phlllpplne Atralrs, a Retrospect and Outlook.)

Mr. p ak r, it is tru that the nlted tates took the Philip­pin IRlan<.ls by fore of arm and by our superior power we may bold th m. A an Am rlcan citizen, I do not think of this ub­j ct rue in th Far Ea. t a a group of island but, much more. a f llow l>elng , an approximate ,000,000, which have grown to numlwr to-duy nearly 13,000,000 oul .

I prefer to think of them as not merely a people of dark Rkln. tnftu n ('d by a tropical environment, but as human beings fundam •ntally like u ._ Have th y not the snme instincts of . tr-pr ~ •rvution, of hung r, of fear, and of love? They are fr quently chnract rlz d by writers and others as "a en itive 1 OJ>l •," "a lovabl p opl ," "a cllarming people," "a proud Pt'OI>l ," " an it1 all tic p ople,'' " a hri tian people." They are rapidly be' mlng a highly edu a d pe ple. A mt sionary in th Philippin • , Doctor Laubach, ay that in a f w y ar they will h • on f tb b t- ducat d 1 pie in th world. Fh·e • ear ago n clu lrnum ot th Hou ommitt e on Insular Mairs, Mr. }'alrflt>ld, mud tll conce , ion that the Filipino were 50 per c nt llt r t . Filipino offi lul tali ·Uc pluce the percentage of lit racy ab v 0 p r nt.

F'rom fal propaganda Am rica. bas a mL taken idea of the l,hilippln . It 1 not unu ual for on country to have a bizarre opinion of the whole I> ople ot another c untry. The story is told that aft r a ~ine.·e 1 cturer hacl appeared before an Ameri­can au<ll nc nn Americun woman went up to the Chin e and n ld, 11 I it r ally true t bat they eat mice in hina? " The ·hine pollt ly r plied, "Madam, i · it really true that they eat

hot 0 g~ in m rlcn? " m of the mi r pr ntatlons about the ll'iliplno nr ju t as ab urd.

Dr. Dtlvid P. Burrows, who was Director of the In ~ular Bureau oe E<lu<'ation during the arly year of American occupation,

nicl that whil Am rlra might ju tly be proud of the work done tor ducntlon in the Philippine I land., yet this could not have h n H '('ODlpli ·b d bud it not been for "a worthy background

f ·ultur " tbut exi 'ted prior to American occupation. The JJ'illplno. w rl' n t avage when America "discovered" them, nor v n wh n the paniard discovered them. Secretary of •tnt tim. on . uld r c ntly that we are "perhnp a little oblivi-

ous" of J1ow mu h pain ha.d already accompli bed toward ~iving tll m gov t•nw ut and civilization. With ages of contact wlth the ullghl nment of eastern civUization in India and Chinn, with 3 y nrs of contact with pant 'h culture and civili­~mtiou, botb s culnr and r llglou and 30 yeurs of contact with Am r·!cnn conomic and political civilization the Filipino people,

90 per cent Chri tian , have reached the tage of development tbut d mand elf-expre ·ion and elf-governm nt. !

And from an Am rican ·tandpoint I again a. ·k, Why l::hould tb y not have it'! The Filipino· have a longing for freedom, both for the individual and for the group, jut a .· our fore­fathers had. They rebel again t bondacrc, ju t a· did our own brave colQlli.·ts. Collectively and individually they have their own racial traditions ancl their own innate yearning for na­tional , elf-expre ·ion. For the nke of convenience WP u e the t rm "Philippine ," but let u not forget tbat back of the name, center and oul of it, are living, breathing human beings, equal in God'.. ight to the best of earth's children, who, ju t a we our ·elve'. have de~ ires and a ·piration and inalienable rights.

Mr. peaker, have we lo t the concepts ot righteou nes and ju tice? Do we no longer r pond to what i fundamentally right? Heuven forbid! I believe that we American till have individual and national tandards of ethical behavior that nea..rly coincide. f cour e, here and there we ometimes have to strip oft a little • uperficial veneer, such a bu ine pride or a coating of elfi,.h intere t, in order to get down to the per onal tandard; but our internal cen or still points to equity and

fairn · in our dealings with our fellow men. This i our proud inheritance from the ocial compact entered into by the Pil­!ITim Fathers, and from the time of the igntng of that compact " equal rights to all men " became the very corner stone of inter­national peace and human progress.

The American In titute of International Law at it first se -·ion held in wa hington, January 6, 1916, adopted in it declara­tion of right and duties of nation the followin" resolutions:

F.very nation has the right to independ nee in the sense that lt has a right to the pursuit ot happiu and I free to develop it elf without Interference or control from other states, provided In so doing it does not int rfere with or violate tbe rights of other states.

Every nation entitled to a right by the lnw of nations Is entitled to have that rlgbt respected and protected by all other natlons, for right and duty are correlative, and tbe right of one is the duty of all to ob erve. ·

The e sence of tbi declaration was the pirit of our country from the earlie t days of our hi tory. Al xander Hamilton expr es it so far as the indi\"idual man is concerned:

Tbe fabric ot the American Empire ought to rest upon the solid basi o! the consent of the people. Tbe streams of national power ought to fiow Immediately from the pure, original fountuln of all legislative authority.

John Adams aid concerning our own chafing under foreign rule:

• • • there was something unnatural and odious tn 6 govern­ment a thousand leaguea dl tant, something sweet In a government of tbelr own choice. • • •

For the right of self-determination are these sound word of the state man, Daniel Web ter:

• • • no matter how easy may be the yoke ot a foreign power, no matter bow lightly 1t sits upon the boulder, If It le not lmpo ed by the voice of bis own nation and his own country, he will not, he can not, and he means not to be happy under its burden.

The underlying principle of freedom upon which all govern­ment r t i immortalized by our own Lincoln :

No man is good enougb to govern another without that other's con ent. When the white man governs him ·elf, that is self-govt'rn­ment; but when he governs him elf and al o govern. another man, that 18 more than el1-governmeut-that ls despotism. Our reliance is tn the laws ot liberty which God has planted in us. Our <lefenRe is in the spirit which pr~s liberty as the heritage of all men in all lands everywhere. Tho ·e who deny freedom to others de erve 1t not for themselves. and under a just God can not long retain it.

In the name of Abraham Lincoln, why are we to-day hold­ing in ubjection, against their will and choice, a people more than 6,000 miles di tant from our western shore? They are ln istently asking for self-determination, for ·elf-government, the God-given right to live their own life as a people. They base their claims on the education in national patriotism they have received from us from the time of the inception of Ameri­can Government in the i lands. The fir t le on plac •d in their schools for them to ab orb and emulate were tbe hi tolies of the heroic deeds of Gen. George Wn. hington, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jetl'er .. on, Benjamin Franklin, and Abraham Lincoln. Through the faithful work of American teacher , American ideals were early inculcated in the young Filipino mind. They learned their lessons well. They " made them~elvc in our likeness." To-day they are demanding the consumma­tion of these ideals-their liberty.

2788 CONGRESS! ON AL RECORD-HOUSE JANUARY 31 Upon us as citizens of the United States, and more especially

as Members of this Congress, lies a grave responsibility. Hand in hand with responsibility goes duty. May we safely trifle with the future welfare and happiness of some 13,000,000 human beings? History warns us that what we do or what we leave undone touches infinitely farther than ourselves, farther than the Filipinos ; it reaches out to the whole world and to future civilization. It is a matter upon which we should in all humility seek Divine guidance.

In our dealings with the Filipino people why are we drifting? It seems the easiest way; it is the selfish way. But the tide of world progress forbids that we drift indefinitely. Spain drifted. Hers was a policy of vacillation and drifting, and the outcome was a bloody, cruel, and bitter contest. The Filipinos at last rose in a united revolt against her treatment of them. From a docile, peaceful people they demonstrated in no uncer­tain way what they could do when thoroughly aroused. Outside of Manila they overthrew every vestige of Spanish power in the first organized rebellion.

Secretary of State Stimson, Senator BINGHAM, and many others who have seen the rising tide of resentment in the Orient against the dominating white man, have warned us that the eyes of the Orient are upon us and our dealings with their Filipino neighbors. Mr. Stimson pleads with us to remember that-

• • • in nothing will we be judged more sharply and critically than in tbe way in which we keep our promise with these Filipino people, who 30 years ago we announced to the world we should govern in their interests and not in ours.

Senator BINGHAM has declared that the children in China and in the Philippines are " being taught to hate us." Secretary Stimson and Senator BINGHAM are not alarmists. What is the significance of this growing resentment and bati·ed in India, China, Japan, and the Philippines? What dragon's teeth are being sown in the islands? The fire of discontent may be only smouldering to-day, but who can foresee when it may spring into flame? These docile Filipinos demonstrated to the mighty United States their inuomitable endurance when aroused to pro­test against being deprived of their priceless independence bought from Spain with the blood of.their beloved martyrs, when it required 150,000 American soldiers to put down the so-called insurrection, but which was, in fact, a bitter, bloody, and in­tensely popular war that dragged on and on for six weary years. There were only 8,000,000 souls then to protest with property and lives, but there are 13,000,000 now who are longing, the Senator says, to "throw off the yoke" of the white man, who have learned from their white masters the art of killing and have accepted their skillful weapons for that purpose.

It has been said, "We have paid $20,000,000 for a $200,000,000 insurrection." But the cost in money was as nothing in com­parison with the appalling cost in Filipino lives and American lives and in " the carload of maniac soldiers " sent home from the Philippines after service in the bloody guerrilla fighting in a tropical country. Philippine soil has been drenched with human blood, much of it American-far too much. Do you, our mighty masters of industry and trade, who stand in the way of a speedy fulfillment of America's pledges to the Filipino people, want a repetition of such inhuman history? Let me remind you that on the pages of the Book which Presidents touch with their lips it Is written, "The voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground." Again, " For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind." The history of nations, sacred and secular, most emphatically proves that the Almighty keeps his word.

Mr. Speaker, what we are doing in a drifting and desultory way, I repeat, is not satisfactory either to Americans or Fili­pinos. There is a better way-the way to secure the happiness of the Filipino people and fill their hearts with everlasting gratitude to the United States for having dealt with them not as a greedy tyrant but as the world's great champion of liberty.

Because from the bottom of my heart I feel this responsi­bility, I can no longer remain silent. I stand first of all for Philippine independence for my country's greatest good. But whether the Congress shall decide that the Filipino people shall be given their freedom now or whether it shall be withheld indefinitely, notwithstanding the impelling need of " a new policy," a clear vision, and a nobler spirit, I earnestly believe that the joint commission will meet the immediate need of smoothing out a wrinkled fabric of opposing views and in pro­ducing an understanding whose warp and woof is equity and human rights. Thus will the American Republic preserve her honor, and thus will she consistently uphold the eternal prin­ciples upon which she, in bondage, based her appeal to the world in 1776 to justify her own fight for freedom and inde­pendencR.

With heart and soul I accept as the only solution of the Philippine problem the Gospel of the Golden Rule.

l\lr. OSIAS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a question?

1\lr. NELSON of Wisconsin. Yes. Mr. OSIAS. I understand the gentleman to quote from a

certain declaration of a Senator to the effect that the new generation is being taught to bate Americans. Does that refer to the Filipinos?

Mr. NELSON of Wisconsin. Yes; the Filipinos. Mr. OSIAS. Will the gentleman yield for a statement? Mr. NELSON of Wisconsin. Yes. · Mr. OSIAS. I would like to enter an emphatic denial of

that. Such a statement is certainly not based on the facts. Mr. DYER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will permit, I

can say in corroboration of it, from my study and visit in the Philippine Islands many times, that I have never seen any evidence of any teaching by the Filipino people of hatred for · the American Government or the American people, but always the opposite.

Mr. NELSON of Wisconsin. I quoted what I referred to from page 13 of the printed speech of the Senator under the beading "A New Philippine Policy."

Mr. OSIAS. Mr. Speaker, permit me to say further that I make that denial as a man who has been actively connected with the government educational system for about 12 years, and as president of the National University for about 8 years, and, based on my educational experience of 20 years, I can say that it can not be true that a new generation in the Philippine Islands is being taught to hate the people of the United States. The contrary is the truth. f Applause.]

Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Speaker, wil1 the gentleman yield? Mr. NELSON of Wisconsin. Yes. Mr. BANKHEAD. I have been greatly interested, as has the

entire House, in hearing the statement of the gentleman from Wisconsin, who has given a profound study to this qt1estion. I hold in my hand a copy of the resolution introduced by the gentleman from Wisconsin, which has been referred to the Com­mittee on Rules of which I am a member. Has the gentleman made any effort to secure a hearing before that committee for the consideration of that resolution, with the hope of getting it out on the floor for consideration?

Mr. NELSON of Wisconsin. I have not. I introduced the resolution first some three years ago, but I have learned to know that there is a t~me to do things and that there is not a time to do them. I shall now ask for a hearing and I shall try to get a favorable report if I can. This is the time. The matter is in the air, and something must be done. I would like to do some­thing that is harmonious. I shall ask for a hearing before that committee later on.

Mr. BANKHEAD. I am glad to hear the gentleman make that statement.

Mr. NELSON of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Mem­bers of the House for their kind attention, and I yield back the remainder of my time. [Applause.]

House Concuuent Resolution 14 Whereas it is desirable that the problems of tariff and trade, eco­

nomic development, political development, national defense, inter­national relations, and such other problems as may arise, affecting the respective interests of tbe United States and the Philippine Islands, should be dealt with upon a basis of understanding and accord; and

Whereas there now exists no satisfactory medium through which a discussion of these problems may take place with a view of arriving at such an understanding : 'l'herefore be it

Resolved, etc., That a special joint committee of the Senate and of the House of Representatives be created, composed of three Members of the Senate and six Members of tbe House of Representatives, to be designated by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, to meet with a similar joint committee com­posed of the Resident Commissioners from the Philippines and seven members of tbe Philippine Legislature elected or appointed as said legis­lature may determine, for the purpose of discussing the problems set forth and of making such recommendations to the Congress of the United States and to the Philippine Legislature as they may deem advisable.

That as soon as practicable after the passage of this concurrent reso­lution the said joint commission on the Phil1ppines shall meet in the city of Washington, D. C., at such time and place as shall be de8ig­nated jointly by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, thereafter at the opening of the regular ses­sions of Congress, select from its membership a chairman and such other officers as may be deemed necessary, and file its reports containing its findings and recommendations with each House of Congress and each house of the Philippine Legislature. -

1930 CO :rGRE ~~IO.r .... \.L TIE 'ORD-HOL"SE 2789 PROIIIDITION j gntion had · its Woman's Chri. tian Temp<>rance Union or its

The PE KER pro tempor (~Ir. IIooo). Pur ·uant to the I~"ntlwr ~lath w Tolal .Abstine>nce Society. ord r of tb Iloul-le the hair rc ·oguizl' · the rentl man from 'l'hus organize!], the temperance advocate became militant New J r y [Mr. FORT] for one hour. and fir::;t r ached out for what wa called local option-the

Ml'. lf' RT. Mr. p ak 1', lutli •s a nd ~l·ntlemcn of the Hou e, right for each town to determine for it.:elf whether it would I huv pr pur <1 what I huv to •ty to-day with con iderabl permit the :ale of liquor within its boruer . Next, a the enti­cal· . \Vhile I do not want to :::;ay that I will not yield for illl mcnt grew, came county option, and then state-wide prohibition. iut rrupliou, I tru t that any c1ue tion which can be retained .All the ·p form · of law wel'e fought bitterly on many grounds­will b until I have fini hed my main tut menl, in order that on the same ground · we heur to-day-but still they pr ad. I mny dl ·cu · the matter in an orderly way. Finally, prior to national prohibition, the majority of the States

El vcu y nr ag th Am rican Nation, through tile proc uure hn<1 ·tate-wide prohibition, iu most case by popular vote, and pr db d for uch action, adopted th ight nth amendment all the rest, I think, had at lea t local option law~. to the 'on ·tUuUon of th Unit •d :tat :, thus enacting pro· The thing thnt had in most ca e led to the ·pread from local hlbitlon u a national policy. n year tber aft r the YoVtead to cotmty and county to State prohibition wa · the difficulty the A l wu pn d to carry out the provi ions of the amendment. no-lkense communities had in preventing alcohol from eeping ~'h fu•·th r in r tro pcct the nmendm ut and the law be- through their boruers from licen e territory. And the adoption om , the mor viol ntly do ontrover •y wage and the more of tat -wide laws left the same trouble if the next 'tate were

futil ami uv ' l'ti ·lui lhc dcbat . T -clay I doubt if one per ·on li n.·e. o, a the number of no-licen tat grew, the pre -in n thonsau<l in th Nation-in ludin~ many who peak or ure for national prohibition began not o much for the imposi­writc mo t fr qu •ntly on one ide or th oth r-havc anything tion f the will of th no-license tate upon the other!) as for but n very confus d idea of the r al content of the amendment the prote ·tion of their own border~ again ._ t a flo d of illicit r th law nn<l v n le ' u ~ to the purpo:-:: which cuu d their liquor. mwtmcnt. 41eanwilil the license States tried by many and variou. de-IIHil rto, n a M mber f ongre , I have remained ilent vices to control the use of alcohol so that it l'lhould not become

on tbi,· ntlr nbj ct. fe ling that om how and ·orne day the abu ·e. Dealing a all were with a traditional u e of alcohol ·torm f talk would blow uwuy and cu.lm consideration b come that tretched back farther than they could ·ee along the cor­llO~sihl .. I huv bl'gun to r aliz , how ver, that this is ridors of time, all the re ·ources of our civilization w re brou~ht high!. impt•ohabl , ~inc' parti~n of both ide~ become in- into play to curb what our new education ·bowed u · to hnve cr ttl-tingly •motional nn<1 le~,· tt:-mper d in the exprel*!ion of been its abuse--what our new industrial ~Y ·tern with it con­theit· vi •w . Thi L'i n t spok n in crltlcl m of anyone. Indeed ge ted population foru1d its chief problem. We tried proilibition th 'motional hel~ht to which many ri. · in their tatement of al to minor~ ; we tried Sunday clo iug and • hortened is •onvinciu~ proof of their in<: rity. But no que tion which week-day hom for our aloons; we tried limitation of number mov it tmrtl~uns to fanatical c•moti nnlbm will ever be of our drinking pla e and the requirement that drinks could be solv •d by t11 •ir ffort1::1. Therefore it eem.. to me that tho e ·old onlv with meal ; high licen e and low licen e, cr ens of uH who hnv n t f lt the urge of Anrgin~ emotion to talk down and creens up, and in Sooth Carolina, at least, Govern· upon this qu ·t ion must try to find l-lODl ·olvent in cold rea n ment dLpen arie.~. And none of them worked to the sati fac­whidt nn at len t lift th clebnte h •· and eb where to the tion of the temperance worker, and all were hailed a::~ infringe­dl~uit y which any dis u. Hion of the 'ow;titution and the laws m nts of per onal liberty by the nontemperance group. flll'rl'unll l' mud c1 mnnd:- mu t try to analyze the cau ·es Not only that but all proved unenforceable. If it were hiooh which led to th • ncl ptlon of prohibition; the ff ct of prohibi- lie n. e, ·peuk-ea ies sprang up-that i not a word which pro­lion n tho. cnn: . ·; wll r we are to-day and what lie ahead. hibition inv nte<1. If it \Yere low licen e, a ·ity like Chicago

I b p thut the Hou.'t• will acquit m of fnnatici.'m on this had one aloon to every 300 inhabitants-that i ~ rou(!llly 1 to or nny ther qu , tion. To me, a dend black or a pure white is every 75 adult male~. Almost nowhere were minor. unable to cxce clingly rar nn<l th r nP countle ' hades of gray be- buy. In J."'ew Jersey I at on a grand jury in 1902 which voted tw n. I)ersonull,y, my rE>Cor<l i. that I h gnu th u ·e of liquor overwhelminooly a~reinst any indictment for Sunday elling as u h vC'rag n n boy of 1 , feeling it: u ·e to be a . ocial neccs- becau._ they did not b lieYe in the law. The chi~f i._ ·ue of our slty, and quit nt 42, fe lin~ its di~continuan e to be a social tate election in 1907 wa the 1·epeal of the unclny closing law, duty. If I hncl b en n 1\1 mb r of tllis llou~e in 1917 I would in purt b cause it wa elnimecl to violate per onal liberty, and n t llnv vot d for the lgllteenth amnndment. nor did I then in part, because it wa hailed as tile cau e of graft and non· b llevc 1n prohibition; but the fir. t few year under the nmend- ob~ rvance of all law. Everywhere that liC'eD!';f' exi t d favorit­m nt ·bnng <l my opinion nn<l, a a candidate for el(>Ction to i m in the granting or refu .. al of license prevailed. and IJOlitic thiH lion ·e in 1924 in what was consider d a tron"' anti- nnd graft :hared equally in it exerci~e. And very di ord rly vrohlbition di 'lrict, my platform contained the following: hou e in or out of lie n e territory wa~ a peak-ea y. I venture

1 b llcvc In prohibition and ~llevc that tts hoo t E'nforcemcot to ay that no Memb r of thi Hou.;e will di pute these facts­would mean that mor men would earn more wa es nod gl\'e more unle~ hi youth_ denle him reco1lection. [Laughter.] food, mot·c clotblug, b tter bom s, and mot·e ha)lplnel<s to their All thi experimentation with the law in every tate--eon-fumilll's. tinued through so many years with growing viooor-mu t have

Th rc 111, how \'er, ju. t complnlnt over pres ot condition , since pt·ohlhltlon nforct'mcnt is so opl'rnted as to mnk the procuring of llquor merely n matt •r or price. The law tbu \)(>ar unequally upon th<.' old hnbHN or th rlch and tbt' poor.

I phd~ my bt'St ef'tort!l to ndc:n·or to finc.l n way to eliminate thl~ vl\ nnd to procur th g o rnl enforccm nt of Ute lnw.

I ri. · ' to-day t e.·plnlu what I under::;tand to b the purpose of pr hiiJltlon und to ju tify my b lief both in that purpo e and iu the law· nact a to carry it out.

To dl · oY r th purp of il ennctment, let u fir:t delve onwwhnt into hi ·tory. 'l'h u .. e of , me form of intoxicant

unt •~-; bncl< to the L>e inning f the re ·ord d t ry of our race. It iH found in our arlie:t and all int '1'111 diat liternture­tnc·luding ur dlcr <1 b ok~ . Not only th u but the ab.use ex­J. t cl in nll tim s an<l •lim s--and witil, o fnr a · literature tlL ·loR , slight. if uny protest.

::.!om time ln th ln. t • ntury, howe'\" r, with tbe simultaneou. Rpr nd f du ·ntinn and of an indu triul ·y.'tem tilat included large c•mvl Jment, organiz cl eff rt to produce temp ranee in the u of alcohol b gnu. l~'or many yenr. th t<>a hl'r .. of temper­an wl'r th bults of c ntinu d and unpl a ·ant ridicule. Fi­nally, how ver, the t aching. took root increa ingly and the cilur br• · th n th hi f if not only Ct>nt rs both of ~ocial con­ta<·t ond thkal study- rapidly pa ed from a tnge wh re drn11k n pr acher were quit common to on where every preach r thunder d condemnation of alcohol and every congre-

had powerful influence at work in its behalf. It i ea. ier to those now than it was in 1917. For major movement in

human life come in great waves, and when one is in their midst he can ee only the whitecap which dot the surface. 'ro me it i entir ly clear now that the agitati n did not reach its powerful sweep throu h it own internal tr nooth, diu not lift it. lf by it own bootstrap , but wa created by two irre •i, tible ground well in our national life for which It wa but the channel. [Applause.]

One of th e was the growing trend toward the mechaniza­tion of our whole life and the sy tematlzinoo of our industry. With hl"'h-. peed ma<'hinery and increa ·ed ·pedalization in it. u:e, ale>rtne of mind and body became e. !';ential for both the .. afety of the worker and the efficiency of his work. With fnc­torie orooanized .. o that pro e e were continuous and a break at any point in the handling chain . lowed all the wheel. nnd hnmperert all the work, each workman'. pre ence and corre t performan e mu t be as ur <1. )Iidday drinkin~ by on man might caur..;e some cog to lip and injure either hi fellow work· man or th . whole y~tem. o. too, the plant mn~ t be fully manned every day, ench pecializ d workman at hi. appointed ta •. k. To longer could our industries proceed with 5 per cent attendance Monday, 0 per cent Tuesday and 100 ner cent perhap by 'Yedne day noon. •

In the old days of one or two men hops. it had not b en so . erious. II nece. ary, the delinquent could work later whE'n sober and make up hi, lost time. But -hour day · and tll dependence of one man's work upon the other's made that

CONGRESSIONAL RECOR.D-HOUSE JANUARY 31 impossible. Nor could industry stand strikes. pace was too fast. Most strikes were caused poverty thrives on liquor.

The competitive sion of liquor, it provides that such possession is prima facie by poverty-and evidence that it is kept for sale in violation of law but that-

Then, too machines were fast replacing horses. Now, a horse would' get home with a drunken driver but a railroad train, a trolley car, or an automobile might not. So, somehow, we must try to keep our drivers cold sober. And, of course, the licensed drinking place, for its very livelihood, had to try to make them drink.

The swelling power of our new economic era, therefore, bad to match its sword against the saloon.

But this was not the only major trend of our past 50 years as a Nation. Side by side with education and industrializa­tion-creature and perhaps, creator of our new civilization­marched a new c~de of social ethics. So far as history dis­closes the emergence of wives and children from the complete contr~l of their lords and masters is very recent and nowhere else bas it attained the pace America bas set. Laws limiting the labor of women and children; requiring the husband and father to support his family; broadening divorce privileges and property rights ; establishing compulsory educati_?n ; insisting upon sanitation of homes and food; and throwmg countless other protections around those whose only law had been that of the bead of the bouse began to fill our statute books. And simultaneously, if proof weee needed that this was the volun­tary act of the men of the Nation, life insurance developed into a major feature of our economic structure. All this cul­minated almost exactly at the same time as the eighteenth amendment in the adoption of woman suffrage by the Nation as the free gift of men to women. [Applause.] .

Of course, this chivalric wave speeded the fight agamst the liquor traffic. There is not a man who does not know-even the moderate drinker-that his use of liquor never added anything to the happiness of his family or the comfort of his home. It may not have harmed-much-but it never helped-any. We American men hate to admit it, but the women know for a fact that as a friend said the other day, we are incorrigibly ideal­istic: We love to grumble about it now, but when we had to vote 10 years ago we gave our families prohibition and our women equality of political power. [Applause.]

Many men say the war brought prohibition. Undoubtedly it speeded its adoption. Our already fast industrial pace required a new acceleration-an added efficiency. What we had been lea1·ning subconsciously through the years while factories re­placed shops and machines furnished vast horsepower was that clear brains and steady hands were essential to our new methods--and alcohol produced neither. Just as 50 years before we had subconsciously felt that free and slave labor could not exist side by side and that the greater efficiency lay on the side of the free man, so in 1917 we realized that abstinence meant efficiency, and efficiency we must have. [Applause.]

The combined pressure of our economic needs and our ideal­ism-both fanned to unusual power by the excitements of war­was irresistible, and Congress submitted the eighteenth amend­ment ·to the States while efficiency was the Nation's greatest need and chivalry its compass.

As submitted to the States the amendment provided that it should be inoperative unless ratified within seven years, and many opponents of prohibition felt that this provision defi­nitely foreclosed the possibility of its ratification, believing it impossible that the approval of 36 States could be obtained in any such brief time. I think all of us were surprised-and many deeply grieved-when 45 States ratified within about a year. [Applause.] And three years later, two years after the Volstead Act had defined intoxicating liquor as any bever­age containing one-half of 1 per cent of alcohol, my State of New Jersey joined the other 45 after a state-wide campaign.

So now we had prohibition, and a law must be passed to define and enforce it. For substantially all the amendment said was that "the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes is hereby prohib­ited," and that Congress and the States should have concur­rent power to enforce this prohibition by approp1iate legis­lation.

Well, Congress tackled the job az;td produced the Volstead Act. What does that say? Most of 1ts language relates to the method and means of enforcement and I am not going to dis­cuss those provisions to-day. The real legislation in the act is all in four or five sections. First, it defines the word "liquor " and th~ phrase "intoxicating liquor" as meaning anything fit for use as a beverage which contains one-half per cent or more of alcohol. Then it prohibits anyone from " manufactming, selling, bartering, transpoding, importing, exporting, delivering, furnishing, or possessing" any intoxicating liquor except as authorized in the law. When it comes to the matter of posses-

it shall not be unlawful to possess liquors in one's private dwelling­provided such liquors are for use only for the personal consumption of the owner thereof and his family, and of his bona fide guests when entertained by him therein-

but puts upon the possessor the burden of proving lawful acquisition of the liquor. Finally, there is no definition ofwhat the word "manufacture " means but the penalty section says:

The penalties provided in this chapter against the manufacture of liquor without a permit shall not apply to a person for manufacturing nonintoxicating cider and fruit juices exclusively for use in his home.

I do not pretend to be much of a lawyer these days. I did think I was once but reformed and went into business, but it does seerri to me, from my recollections of the law, that this latter provision rather clearly lifts cjder and light wines, home made for home use, out of the ·one-half of 1 per cent definition and, as to them, to apply the test of intoxication in fact. And, of course, if they can be lawfully made, they can be la\-vfully possessed in the home of the maker and used by him, his family, and his guests. Whether this language can be stretched to cover home-brew, nonintoxicating in fact, is another question; but clearly the making, the possession, and the use of home­made nonintoxicating light wines and ciders is not prollibited by the act. I shall recur to tllis later, but mention it here as a part of the history of the adoption of prohibition to show the legislative form it took.

To recapitulate then, we find that apparently prohibition was the product of temperance agitation organized first through the churches but running side by side with and gaining its strength from th~ spread of education, the development of om· industrial system and the new conception of law . as a protection to the family and the home; and that it was finally enacted nationally because all lesser plans of regulation and control of the traffic had failed in their purpose and had been accompanied by wide­spread graft and violation of law.

So that is the history and legal status of prohibition. What have been its effects? Well let us look first at the bad sides and then at the good and see which way we have a surplus to dispose of.

No one can have read the newspapers or been a Member of this Honse without hearing plenty of complaint over our present status. I hope I will not miss any major complaint in this summary.

First, we have the loss of revenue from licenses, taxes, and customs duties and the cost of enforcement. These must be conceded as real, particularly the former, although, of course, State prohibition had the same effect where it applied.

Next we have the argument that prohibition is creating a . new cl~ss of lawbreakers out of what were formerly law-abicling citizens. This is serious to the extent that it is true and it is true more often in intent than in fact. By that I mean that the makers and drinkers of homemade and home-used liquors believe themselves, in many cases, to be breaking and braving the law. But they are wrong in thinking themselves criminal. As I have shown above, the law permits such manufacture, permits such possession, and permits such use by themselves and their guests.

And right he1·e may I say that, in my judgment, sincere friends of temperance have done the cause of prohibition its greatest injury by insisting that the use of alcohol since the eighteenth amendment has become immoral. The confusion comes from the fact, on which I have commented, that the organization of the temperance movement centered in the churches, but this was in their capacity as ethical and social centers, not as religious and moral ones. And were it otherwise, morals are not coded by the passage of laws; they are defined by tl1e conscience of the indi­vidual. We are here dealing with a social lmbit whose origin is buried in antiquity. To say to the man whose family for countless generations has been accustomed to this habit that they and he, if he follows their example, have violated a moral duty brings· a justified resentment. And from that resentment springs an entirely human impulse to assert the contrary-to challenge the authority which seeks to enforce its theories of right and wrong. I venture the assertion with supreme confi­dence that if the American people can be made to see that the law attempts no moral code-that the law nowhere denies the right to use liquor---<>ne-half the difficulties of law enforcement would vanish, one-half the users would stop. Take away the challenge to their morals and they will think in terms of ethics and of law, they will begin to talk law, and they will begin to observe the law. It can not be too often stated that the amendment and the Volstead Act made unlawful the traffic in liquor, not its use.

1930 CONGRESSION L RECORD-HOUSE 2791 And now we come to personal liberty-and in my note I

AP ll those word with capital . What ls the American's right of per onnl lib rty? Well, first, he may think as he plea es­nnd wh n he ba don that there 1 not nnotb r thing he can do a h plcaR s. Ile may ape. 1~ or write n. · lle pleases with such r a ounbl restriction ns 1. nece ary to safeauard the right of oth r . We can not · em to hav perfect liberty, even in ~p h or writing, can we? ot wbcu we injure others, at l<'tt:t. Wh n ' e comt> to actiom we ar· quite circumscribed. Th diff r nee 1., perbnp , that w are . o u · d to it in otb r thin rs that lb cir ums riptlon only burr.· when it i new. The lnw do not 1 t us park our ca1· wh r j w ·want to; we can not lawfully smuggl anything- not only liquor; we can not have our fl'i nds nnd r bttlves join us it they happen to be alien ; we can not 1 ave our prop rty away fr m our family, nor 1 av our family if we tire of th 'Ill; we can not own slaves; and now n on can lawfully .. 11 us 1iquor. Why? Becau e ur:-~ 1 nn orcl '1' d fr <lorn where our individual elf-centered

wi.·hc~ mu~· t not b .P<'rmlttcd to int rf4.'r with the intere ~ of oth 1'~, nor tho · of tb r · wlth our. . [Applnu..,e.]

'l'hen o far a the , 1 of liqn r 1 c nc rned, no one now allv has had p d ct fr dom ever in thi~ ouutry. All rerula­tory laws plnc d s me r ·trlction, eith r on hour or quantities

r qunllti or prlc . Th ~ bo rai e the per onal libetty qn • ti n n a principle, not a m r devic for the return of the old traffic, to be con ist nt mu t urge the r peal of all law.

And may I here rep nt that nll they have lost i the right to hav som one rater to th ir wnntl'. If they want the light win . for whi 11 they b , they may make and drink them to th ir b art' · c ntcnt. But I a s rt a the nb olute duty of the

m l'icnn Nation, for the pre:ervntion of that real liberty whl h m an qual opportunity to e:v ry citizen, to control or

Ul){lr r-: any t rn111c whi<:h harm. it · people or binders its prog­r : . [Applaus .]

Then we nr told ur youth ar b .ing ruined by prohibition. It t. · nn inter sting thing thnt thi tory 1, always told about som •body elH 's cbildr n. I womler h w many fatb r · can bon . tty lo k their on, in the eye and .·ay that there is more drinking among boys to-day than in our day. [Applaus .] But they ay there is more amon the girl . That I think is tru . But i. U1nt th only libertr the modern girl claim ·?

b ;moke · quite gen rally-her mother did not before the war. 'he g()('S to dnuc · at midnight with a boy-her mother w ut home th n, and with n chat eron ut that-and now hap rone nrc a e tinct as the <1 do. [Laughter.] I am not

worri d about our girl·. ter tbey have had a ftlng at their new-found freedom th y wlll settl down to become the mothe1·s of n better n xt g n ration, ju 't as the young ters of to-day are

tt r than we were at th lr age. [Applau ·e.] If you are w rrled about th d prnvlty of modern youth, just go oft in a qui t o1·n r and think about your own. [Laughter and applu.u e.] And y t mo t of u are fairly decent citizen now.

Finally, n · rlous en e 1 made of tb nonenforcem nt situa­tion- and it do . 1 ok bad with ~raft rampant, hooting fre­quent, politi r gnant, and the public apparently acquiescent. 'V ll, n I hnv ·hown, none r this i n w. Oue moving cause of gr at pot ncy for the ad ption of prohibition wa the fact that all th thing i ted under the old y~tem. The ftood of illicit llquor nlwny moved from llcen · to no lie n e territory. Bo tl gg rs lik p nk-cnsl aut dated the Vol tend Act and their m thocl were tbe same.

'l'he truth J that w m ricnn do not obey law wh n it •rvP. our purpoHC not to. 'V e hate to b told Wf' mu t do

nnythln . How many citiz n, mak fals incom or per onal prop rty tax tat Ill nt. - how many r turning traveler ~ mug­gle 'i - and smuggling i. ~en l'i ·ally the sam a bootlegging. Would you r p al the turitr law becau: it 1 violated bundreds ot time n day and graft oft n accompani the violation? Why nr tbe M rob r from N w York and Boston-who so fr~ qu ntly d mo.ud th~ r twnl of th eight nth o.m ndment and th . Vol tead ct be nul' they are unenforceable- ilent about th r 'P al of the fourt nth am ndment nnd the civil rights law'/ Are they o much more fully ob rved in letter and in spirit?

(>tltlem n of tb Hou , no lnw whi h run counter to tradi­tf u and llnbit- no lnw the violation of which offers a profit will C'ver h p •r.fcctly nfor d. But r 1 ntlc · pr . ure for a period of. yenr8 will have its • tendy effect.

Her . again, however, I mn ·t point out that what prohibition AtTu<·k nt wa. the traffic and not nt the indivl<lunl who drank. l n <'l)('fildng of nonenforc m nt, th I' for , oppon nts of the law nm: t lintlt th 'ir iustanc s to the truffi<'-not the consumption. Ami till. at l<>nst hns be<.'n made disreputable. I doubt, PE:'r­souully, tb,• long C'Ontlnuun in great volume in this Nation of uny dl ·reputable traffic.

Perhaps I eem to minimize the evils. If so, I am sorry. They are real-they are important-they must be checked. And they must be checked not only becau e they are real and important but beeau. the law under which they oceur is here to stay without ubstantial change. [Applau e.] I say that ·ob rly-not a~ nrgmn nt but a my sincere conviction. And

I will tell you why I feel this way. 'rhe agitation again ·t prohibition has equaled in intensity

any agitntion in our hi tory. ~ever have our great and power­ful new:,-papers thrown th~ whole weight of their influence practically unanimou ly on the ,:ame ide of a que tion b fore. Never have they begun to giv the l:lpace, let alone the di play, to any item of public controver.·y that they have given to pro­hibition, and, probably uncon ·ciou ·Jy, never have they allowed themselve to bow o strona a bias [laughter] in th handling of news a on thi ubject. I credit them with entire ·inc rity­both reporters and editors-but I believe that, like t11e lntene ·­tual who ordinarily are humanist. to the point of ·ocinli.:tic b lief, they are mi ·led by the nature of their calling. Individ­uali ·tic as their bu~ine i , the vital ucce :,:ity of the ·uppre -sion of the public ale of liquor to both workmen and owner of great indu trial e tabU bments doe not impres:-; them-and they see the evil and overlook the benefits of thl' law.

But, whatever the rea on for their 10 years ot effort, whnt are th re ult ? Well. thi House r ftect pretty clearly th views of it con tituenb·. Many a law pas~e~ with the vote of Member who per onally disapprove 1t but give their SU})­

port becau. e their district wi. ·he . When the ei"ht entb awend­m nt wn ubmitted to tb tat the House<' ntuiu d 4:l5 :;)Iem­berl'l, and 12 voted aaain ·t ubmi ion. When the Vol 'tend Act was pa ed, out of the same member ·hlp, only 100 were recorded in the neaative. And now, with 10 year p I' ·i:lent pre ure, with propaganda unequaled in our hi tory, out of 435 Members only 61 are willing to be enrolled n mc.>mber,· of the unofficial committee for the am ndment of the VoL-t ad Act!

Mr. CHAFER of Wi>::con in. Mr. Speaker, will the gentle­man yield?

1\Ir. FORT. Ye . . 1\Ir. CHAFER of Wi con in. If the gentleman would get

his dry friends to bring out some modification of the Volstead Act so that we could have a vote upon it, I think the record roll call would show that there are over 125.

Mr. FORT. Mr. Speaker, I hope the gentleman will put tho~ name in the RECORD, with the pecifi.c program of modifi­cation which they favor. [Laughter and applause.]

Mr. CHil..,ER of Wi con in rose. Mr. FORT. Oh, I have only five minutes left; I am . orry.

That i the result of the agitation. The mountain have all labored, but they have brought forth a smaller litter every time. [Laughter.]

I yield to no man in my r . pect for the power of the pr , and I believe implicitly in the psychology of modern adverti ing, which is that constant repetition will create a d maud. Inci­dentally, in this connection, I wonder what the great metropoli­tan newspapers would charge me if I were a d al<'r in patent medicines for the new -column pace they now give fr e to the dealers in liquor. [Applo.nse.] This power and thi psychology have been at work 10 year.,. Be ide , there are r al evil in prohibition, and its upporter · have made many and grievou · errors which have greatly irritated u all. And yet Ie~. than one- eventh of this Hou e favor a change-les than half tho e who voted again t the amendment. Why i thil:i ~·o '! The an wer can be only that the Ameriea.n people believe the bene­fit outweigh the evil .

Now, what are those benefit~? I have aid that prohibition wa the result of a combination

ot industrial evolution and the new view of the relation of the law to women and children. Unle it ba been effective in tbe~e directions it bas failed to achieve its purpo e ·. What, then, has our economic ex1>erlence been for 10 years?

"\\7 ell, along with all the nations of the world, we ran into

a erious deflation in 1920 and 1921. Unemployment wa. very serious in many sections. But we got through without oup bouse and recovered more rapidly than any other people, ~win~ing into a full tid of pro perity by the end of 19:.2. It was this performance--and the contra ting condition among the poorer people with th condition I bad ob rved in previou · period of unemployment, by the way-that made me a prohibi­tionist. [Applau e.] .li'r m 1922 until 1929, with only very moderate decline.., , our production continued large and our in­du. trial pro ·perity unpreced nted, and thi de!-;pite quite un ati:­factory condition among our farmer " and coal miner:- with con equent reduction of their buyin~ power. Our efficietl('Y in manufacture increased by leaps and bound th ·peed of our production and handling of good . As a re ult we jumped the

2792 CONGRESS! ON AL RECORD-HOUSE JANUARY 31 volume of our export trade enormously, proving able in many industries to undersell the world despite our vastly higher wage scale. Mass production, in its infancy in 1920, developed be­yond any dreams and workmen beca:me more and more special­ists, doing their detail of the work with sureness and alertness. .And thanks to the increase in productivity per man, wages mounted steadily.

The income of the Nation increased from an estimate of $63,000,000,000 in 1921 to $89,000,000,000 for 1928. Our motor cars trebled in number ; our life-insurance policyholders jumped from 13,000,000 to 27,000,000; our savings accounts from 18,-000,000 in 1919 to 53,000,000 in 1929, and the amount deposited from $13,000,000,000 to $28,500,000,000. For these statistics I must thank the fine article by Samuel Crowther in the Ladies' Home Journal for January entitled "Where Prohibition is a Success." Incidentally, I am informed that Mr. Crowther started the work upon his articles, highly skeptical of the eco­nomic value of prohibition, but finished with the statement that "prohibition is an economic success." [.Applause.]

I am not so unreasoning as to claim that all of these remark­able improvements in our economic status are solely attributable to prohibition, but I do say they are at least partially attrib­utable to it. And this for several reasons : First, high speed and mass production could not operate with midday drinking by the employee. The departure of the· saloon practically ende•l midday drinking. Second, our modern systematized industries could not operate with an unreliable attendance of their spe­ciaU.zed workmen. The departure of the saloon has been fol­lowed by regular attendance of the workmen. Third, our high­quantity production could not be maintained without high pur­chasing power among the people. The closing of saloons has diverted into other channels an enormous volume of money which formerly went for drink. Homemade drinks are ~eap, and the pay envelope is used for other purchases.

I do not know a manufacturer-and I have talked to some who hate prohibition-who does not agree with everything I have said about his workmen or who disputes the cause. I do not know a banker who does not feel prohibition to be the back­bone of his savings accounts. I understand that practically every foreign economic commission which has been here to study the causes of our p1·osperity places prohibition first. Last summer, while abroad, two foreign manufacturers in different countries, both drinking men, told me that they were convinced that if we kept prohibition, they would have to come to it if they hoped to compete in the world's markets. [Ap­plause.] I could go on with illustrations without end.

As a result of this prosperity another thing has happened-we have changed from a nation whose business was done on credit to one which buys for cash. There are whole communi­ties to-day where not a store sells on credit. Will any op­ponent of prohibition deny my assertion that this would have meant starvation or charity in the days of the saloon? But that is not why I mention it. It is to point out that our whole business basis has changed with the change in our industrial structure. The chief credit buying to-day is installment buy­ing of automobiles and luxuries. The return of the liquor traffic would ruin that. [Applause.] The whole economic structure of the Nation would have to be unscrambled if the public sale of liquor were to be resumed. ·

What about the families? Well, we have built homes to replace hovels without number; our children in high school and college have outstripped our ability to house them; we have installed millions of washing machines-and they do not go into homes where there are servants; and, to quote Mr. Crowther once more--

And it is daily becoming more difficult to engage the services of what was once a fixture--the bard-working wife who toiled to support a drunken husband.

Prohibition did not do all of this, Mr. Speaker, but neither did it hinder a,ny of it. No such miracles occurred here while the liquor traffic was legal-nor have occurred in any other Nation in these 10 years. And I have yet to hear an allegation of any economic loss--or of any offsetting degradation of the home. Whether they h~ve so phrased it to themselves or not, the American people sense and feel the change, and, grumble though they may, they like it. [Applause.]

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a question?

Mr. FORT. No; I regTet I can not yield. My friends who do not like the law-and there are many­

what alternative can you offer the American people which will save what we have gained? Is it Government selling you want? Well, there are two possible ways to run it. Either we can hold down consumption by high plices and make a vast profit for the Government or we Ca}l hold 9,own ~e profit by lQW PD.ce~

at the risk of increasing consumption. I wonder which is the more repugnant thought. I will venture that there are not 10 men in the House who like either alternative. What then of reinstating the traffic? Well, shall it be. for drinking on the premises? Of course not-that is the saloon again. But if that is not to be we will have to drink at home, even though home drinking is one of the evils we decry in the present sys­tem. Well, if we are going to drink at home, we can do that now-if we want it bad enough to make it. So why change the law at all, unless, of course, we want hard liquor-and none of the advocates of change want that, do they?

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from New Jersey bas expired.

Mr. FORT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I may proceed for five minutes more.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from New Jersey asks unani­mous consent to proceed for five minutes more. Is there ob­jection?

There was no objection. Mr. FORT. Unless they want hard liquor, unless they want

a return of the traffic in hard liquor, the law needs no change, unless, perhaps, they are too lazy to make it. [Laughter.]

So where do we finish? Just where we started-with the eighteenth amendment and the Volstead Act.

Perhaps the act needs clarification on the question of home­brew, although nobody has ever been convicted for making it for home use. But, otherwise, it seems to me pretty clearly to fulfill the purposes of its adoption and to satisfy the real wishes of the American people--for the preservation of their industrial system, their prosperity, and their homes. [Applause.]

To those who want abstinence to follow prohibition, may I suggest that they leave enforcement to the officers of the law and return to the kind of educational work so splendidly done for so many years by the Woman's Christian Temperance Union and the Father Mathew T. A. B. S. [Applause.] To those who want beer and light wines, I suggest that they forego the wish to buy and be content with what they make, but, above and beyond all, that they be good sports. They have made their fight and lost-lost to a combination of two mighty tendencies of the age--the economic and ethical reorganization of the American people. [Applause.]

Economic pressure is always relentless and it will not loose its hold upon the public sale of liquor. Usually it presses only to destroy that which has outlived its usefulness. To-day its pressure is not only down upon what it would destroy but surges mightily upward lifting to new levels the whole life and character of the American people. [Applause, the Members rising.]

MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT

A message in writing from the President of the United States was communicated to the House by Mr. Latta, one of his secre­taries, who also informed the House that on the following date the President approved and signed bills of the House of the following titles:

On January 24, 1930: H. R. 3392 . .An act granting the consent of Congress to the

Highway Department of the State of Tennessee to construct, maintain, and operate a bridge across the Tennessee River on the Dayton-Decatur Road between Rhea and Meigs Counties, Tenn.;

H. R. 3655. An act granting the consent of Congress to the Highway Department of the State of Tennessee to construct a bridge across the Clinch River near Kingston, in Roane County, Tenn.; and

H. R. 6125. An act authorizing and directing the Secretary of War to lend to the Governor of Mississippi 250 pyramidal tents, complete; fifteen 16 feet by 80 feet by 40 feet assembly tents; thirty 11 feet by 50 feet by 15 feet hospital-ward tents; 10,000 blankets, olive drab, No. 4; 5,000 pillow cases; 5,000 canvas cots ; 5,000 cotton pillows ; 5,000 bed sacks ; 10,000 bed sheets ; 20 field ranges, No. 1; 10 field bake ovens; 50 water bags (for ice water) ; to be used at the encampment of the United Con­federate Veterans to be held at Biloxi, Miss., in June, 1930.

PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE

Mr. LEHLBACH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that after the reading of the Journal and the disposition of business on the Speaker's table on next Monday I have leave to address the Honse for 20 minutes on the subject of prohibition.

The SPEAKER. The Ohair will state to the gentleman that earlier in the day he declined to recognize gentlemen to make requests for time on consent Monday. The Chair will be glad to recognize the gentleman for any other day.

Mr. LEHLBACH. Mr. Speaker, I modify my request to make i~ to-m~!.9w~

1930 c GR IO T L l{E RD-·HO E 2793 ~'h • PEAKER Tl1e ~ ntleman from New Jer. y n.-k · uuanl­

mou ·on~ ut lllut nt the conclusion of the nddr ._ of the g n­tlt>~nun f1·om G orgia [Mr. I~RAND] to-morrow ll may nddre,·s the II n~ for 20 minnl< ~. I· th re obj •tion?

Th r wn. uo obj •t ion. Mt·. " I:JA~'l•JR of Wi~con~in. 1\ft·. p('ak r, I a .. k unanimous

nni'L'lll to n<lclrt·~: the Ilou. for five minute~. 'l'hE> l'EAKII::R. Th gent 1 •man from 'Viscou. in a ks unani­

lliOll. · cons nt t ad<.lr :s the Ilou~e for five minutes. Is there hj ··lion?

Mr. ,'NELL. hH\''' import. ut hu:-;hw~. thi. afternoon which will take until lnle ht the nfterno n if w ompl te it. I tbiuk the ntleman fthould wuit until to-morr w, and I obj ct for the pre ent.

OL • lARG, RI. E

lr. PlTRNJt1!,IJ. It·. 'p nker. by Uir cti u of the Committ e ou Hul<>H. I <·all up IIou: • Resolution la3.

Tll I BAKIJ1H. 'l'he g •ntl man from Indlnnn calls up a r :-oolnt ion whi<'b tlte '1 rk will report.

'l'h • Clert· reu<l a follow·:

Ut•8oll'l'd, Thnt upon th ndt'lptlon of this re~olution it shall be In or<! t' to mov thnt tbr Iloo~(' re;olvc itsl'lf into the Committ<·c of the Whole HOUfl(' ou th tnte or the Union for th COD id •ration of H. R. 6. n hill to umt'ml th definition or ol mur~nrlne contninrd in the act <'ntltl£•11 "An tH't defining butt r, nlao lmpo log u tux upon and regulat­ing tht• mnnnfncturc, nle, Importation. and xportatlon of oleomnr­gnrlnr," nppt·ov d Augm~t 2, 1 6, n!l amended. That aft r general dt>hlll(, whl •b hull be contln tl t the blll nnd sbull continue not to <•X<•t•t•cl four hour~. to b • ('QUttlly divided and controlled J>y tbe chairman nncl runklng mhlot·lty nwmb r or the ommltt e on Agriculture, the bill Rhall !) t'(' d for m nc.hnent undt•r tb Ci ·mlnut rul . At the conclu-ion or the rtu<llng or tile blll for amendm nt tb committee , hall rl·e

nntl r port th l>lll to th House wltb uch nmendmeot a. may hnYe 11 'n HUII()t< d, nnrl th pr vloul'l qu ~uon Rh 11 be con~ld red a ord~>red on tilt' hlll nnd the> nml•ntlm •nt th rcto to llnnl passuge without inter­v uln • mutton t>Xr •pt ou motion to recommit.

Tlu SPEAKER. The g ntl man from Indiana is r cognized for om hour.

1\It·. I RNitJLL. lr. p ak r. lndi ' and gcntlem n of theo Iloll!'<l', th r<':-;olntl n whi h I brin~ h re by dir ction of th

ontmittt: on Hul s, Hou. <.' C':olution 133, if adopted, will mal· in ordN II. R. G, whieh is known to th m mh r~bip of th liou ·e · tb ole margnrin bill. The purpo f the bill, ht·oadly Htat 1, I~ to bring ·within the purvi ~w of the oleo­murgnrin law certain cooking compound which hnve b en mnnufn tur d and d v lopro within tb la..;t f w y ar and wblch nr uot now undet· the r gnlatiou · of the oleomargarine net.

Whil • tbi · lH a uhj t of considerabl inter t and con­trov 't', y, I r al iz it 1.· rath€'r bard to attract and hold the att ntton of th nwmlwr hip of the House after the ·plenclid .'J)( <'h we bav jn 't listen •u to by the di tingui hed M mber ft·om r w J cr::. y. T •v rth •le ·, I wnnt to take thi. oppor­tunity to • tnt . in a ~<'n rnl way. the pnrpo e which ar ought to b Hervcd by tlll bill.

Th ol uuu·gnrine net, whi h thi bill will nm nd, was p..'l ed in lH. H. Th purpo~ of the original ol oruargarlne a t was to }>l'ot ct tll public ngain 't adulterat c1 butter and a.,.ain. t the ~ul of ol omurgurine a butter. nder the pr vi ion of that lnw, wbi •h htHI IJ n nm nded, I think, once sin , and is now E-~ou~-:ht t b . am •ncl d by this bill, the manufacturer of oleo­mnr~urin w r nnd ar compelled to pay a tax of 600 per YNU'. Th whol snl r of ol omnrgnrine nre compelled to pay a tn.. of. 4 0 p r y nr, and the r taller of oleomargarine a tax (lf •• 4 J)Cr y •nr. In addition to that, th re is r quired a 1()-cent ~t.ump tu to b paid by tb m•mufacturers of oleomargarine upon color d ol mnr~arin , nnd a tnx of on quarter of a cent p •r pound u n uncolored olromargarlne. In addition to th e ta .. th uuumfnctur r of ole margarine are compelled to sub­mil tlwir plants noel tb ir pro<.lu t to the scrutiny of the Federal Grn•t•rnm .nt nnd nhiue by vnrlous re(!Ulatious in the interest of t h ' public h •ulth.

• 'ilw th pas.·ag of the oleomargarine act there hns come into ) ·1. t n · • ln the country a new butter ub titute branded ns a c•ooklng compound, but which to all intents and purpo es Js int('nd (l to be and is ld n butter. These new cooking com­pound. , whkh w t>k to bring within the purview of the ol om J'g:u·in . tuw nnd und r its provi ions, n.re made princi­rmlly of c 11tUt oil, perhaps 0 per cent coconut il, and the hnlanc·e ~n.unt oil. aU, and water. They are made in the id )nt i<'al mnnn r ns oleomut·garine with this exception: Oleo­margnritu' i~ emulsified in mllk or cream, whereas these cook­in, <·omvouml nrc emulsifi d in water. The ordinary cooking compnun<l::~ whi ·b ar known to the housewives of the country

g nerally, . uch a· lard, Cri~eo. and so forth, have ahout 1 per cent or lc~ of moi.'ture, while tb : e cooking coml)! und have from 10 to 15 per cent of moi ·ture.

I have on the table here some sample. of the. ·e new cooking compounds whieh I want the member ·hip of th IIomo:e to see. I regret exceedingly I hnve b en unabl to e ·ur one package, the like of '\vhich wa · exl1ibited before our Committee on Agri­culture and which i · in exactly thi.., form, being the form of regular creameory butter and which wa, divided, a butter fre­qu£'ntly i . into four quarter-pound packag · with the 1-pound packa~e, but which i labeled a a c oking compound.

A, I said n moment ago, co king compound', a w know them-lard, Crisco, and so forth-are unmi ·tnkably known in the markets by the hou e\vive ; but the contention of those who are eeking to bring the~e cooking compound under the pr -vi ions of the oleoma1·gnrlne law i that they are in fact not made to be ·old a · cooking compounds but a a 8Ub titute for butter.

I hope I will have ufficient time on the r olution, or later in general debate if the rule be adopted, to ~o further and at length into the activiti<' of the people who have be n making the · c oking compound . Let me remind the ladie~ and gen­tlemen of the House that the manufacturer of these cookin" compound · are under no restri ·tion what ver. 'l'hey pay no tax. '.I'he Government ha' no super>il'lion over the manufaeture of their product and impo: no obligation~ upon tht'm. They do not pay the 600, the 480, the $4 , nor the 10- ent tax. 'l.'bere i · no nutritive >alue in their product. It is even madE' with water. These o-calle<l cookin~ compound are made b~· the , arne id ntical rna ·binery a that used by the ol omargnrine peotJlc, and yet they e. cape the tax. while the general buying llllhlic i d~eived by their look an<.l mi led by the ad>ertising campaigns whlc·h have been contlucted in their behalf for mnny year~·.

'.fbi matter ha: been before our Committee on Agriculture for wme ·on iderahle time and has been giYen mo. t careful con ·ideration and study.

The Commi ~ioner of Internal Revenue ha 1 een making an hone t effort to tax these concern. . The Rev nue Department is convinced, and ha o held, that these products are in fact oleomar~arine, but ~hey have b en enjoined in ome court~ from coli ctin" taxe~. In a court in Rhode I ·land, I think. they were enc nraged b;v a finding that it wa not oleomargarine. o tb l~al ·tatu · of the~e compound · i ·, so to peak, up in the air. Hence, the nece ity of orne 80rt of legi lative clarifi •ation in ord r not only that the Bureau of Internal Revenue may know what to expect but particularly-nod thi, i the principal con­cern of the committee from which thi bill come ·-that the buying public may know whether it i buying butter or a ub­_,titutc for butter.

1\!r. LI1\"TTBI UA. Will the gentleman yield for a que. tion? l\Ir. PURNELL. Ye. Mr. I~I111"THI Tl\1. What method would you ugge .. t to let

the buying public know? Mr. PURNELL. Among other things, I wUl say I would

keep tbe buying public from having a yellow product of this kind [indicating] thru t in its face with the ugge tion that it i butter. I would keep the buying public from reading all of the e adverti. ements, which I hould like to read to the Hou 'e if I bad the time.

Mr. LINTBI UM. They are not put out by any manufac­turer , though, were they?

Mr. PURNELL. The gentleman means the adverti"'ements in the papers?

1\!r. Lir:rTmCUM. Yes. Mr. PUR~"ELL. Oh, they are too smart for that, of cour ·e.

They make the product, they announce privately, no <louht, to their cu tomers, the whole alers, and the jobbers that thc:v can ell this as butter, but, of course, the adverti ements are placed

in the papers by the local merchants. Mr. LINTHICUM. Would the gentleman thtnk that the

smell and the carton specifically stating in large type that it is a cooking compound, with every detail given on the package, would be sufficient notice?

Mr. PURNELL. No; it is not. I have a firkin of tbi prod­uct over in my office that I shall have over here before the debate is o-ver, not of butter but of a cooking compound, which i as yellow as this [indicating]. There is not a mark on it of any kind to indicate what it is. I have good rea on to believe that dealers in ome in tances bave taken thi c ok­ing compound and mixed it with butter and old the mixture as butter in bulk.

Mr. LI THICUM. Would the gentleman think well of a dairyman who put coloring in his butter? Doe the gentle­m~ think thnt be is fooling the public any?

2794 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JANUARY 31 Mr. PURNELL. Butter is made of cream and not of water,

coconut oil, peanut oil, and salt. If the gentleman will let me proceed, I want to yield some time to the other side. If this resolution is adopted, there will be four hours of general de­bate, within which time it is hoped that all those who desire to be heard for and against this bill will have an opportunity to present their views.

Mr. HASTINGS. I would like to ask the gentleman one question. I see there is no minority report from the Commit­tee on Agriculture. May I ask whether the report of the Com­mittee on Agriculture on this bill is unanimous?

Mr. PURNELL. It is not. A few members of the committee are here and will take opportunity to express their views in opposition.

It seems to me on this question of intent all these elements can be taken into consideration.

The ordinary cooking compounds-lard and Crisco-are white. They are sold for cooking purposes. They are not heralded as a spread for bread ; but those who manufacture this cooking compound not only put in a coloring matter but have developed, In some instances, a synthetic flavor, ~ few drops of which added to the compound will give it the flavor and the taste of butter.

of salt, emulsified in water, it is held out to the housewives of the country as a new substitute for butter. Attracted by the cheapness, they are led to believe that the product is better than butter. It says so.

The Agricultural Committee of the House is not objecting to these people making the product. That is not the point. We are not trying to drive the products off the market. There is no suggestion that it is actually harmful or deleterious. We do say, however, that since Congress saw fit, under the act of August 2, 1886, to prescribe certain regulations and impose a tax upon oleomargarine in the interest of the public and as a protection to the dairy interests of the country, there is no just . reason why we should not now compel those who make these cooking compounds to come under the same law and for the same identical reasons. I could read a number of these adver­tisements. Here is another one-

New nut butter, bas golden color, per pound, 35 cents.

Here is the advertisement of some local grocer who says that Nu-ine is an oleo product, colored.

Then here is this one-Sunflower shortening, 25 cents per pound. A high-grade butter substitute, already colored.

It is the contention of those who are sponsoring this legisla­tion that if these people are in good faith and are merely mak- , ing a cooking compound, they would not resort to the deception found in these advertisements which I hold in my hand. In many of them they proclaim these compounds to be a sub­stitute for butter; the best spread bread ever had ; and urge their use in place of butter.

In quarter pound prints, just like creamery butter.

I do not care what yoil.r package says, whether it says nut product in bold type or not, I undertake to say that if the news­papers and the billboards of this country and the grocery sales­men or anyone else announce that this is a ' substitute for butter, that it is better than butter, the housewives of the coun­try will not stop to look at the package and determine for themselves exactly what it contains. I can not take the time to read all of these advertisements,

but they have been running through the papers of the country for some time. I grant those who are opposing this bill that we have not seen many of them during the last year, and that it is rather hard to find any cooldng compounds in the market to-day.

That is true for ~ number of reasons; uncertainty as to this legislation, uncertainty as to what the courts will do, uncer­tainty as to what the Commissioner of Internal Revenue will do, if this is found to be oleomargarine, in collecting back taxes. .All those things serve to put a damper on the manufacturers of these cooking compounds. If adverse action is taken by the House or by Congress on the bill, we will see these plants spring up into activity over night all over the United States, because the machinery is there and only lying dormant waiting for legislative or judicial encouragement.

Some of these advertisements say that the cooking compound is as good as butter, and in some instances better. .

Mr. LINTHICUM. Will the gentleman read the advertise-ment of the cooking compound?

Mr. PURNELL. Well, that does not mean anything? Mr. LINTHICUM. May I read it? Mr. PURNELL. The gentleman will have plenty of timej

we hope to have four hours' general debate. Mr. LINTHICUM. The people will read the gentleman's

1 speech ; they may not read mine. ' Mr. PURNELL. .Anybody can read these advertisements. I think the one you have says " nuttine " or " neutine " ; I do not know what it is. But here is a newspaper which advertises

' "golden shortening," and underneath it says, ".A new and ; tasty spread." Who wants to spread shortening on bread?

Here is another one-" nu-ine." That is a product manufac­tured over in Baltimore in the district of my friend. It says

· "30 cents per pound-used in place of butter." I am sure the gentleman does not use it in place of butter ; he would not want his children to use it in place of butter, if he had any children.

Mr. LINTHICUM. I am sorry to say I have no children, but that advertisement was not placed there by the Baltimore people.

Mr. PURNELL. Oh, no; they are too smart for that. The · local grocer, no doubt prompted by the manufacturer, put the advertisement in the paper. Here is another: "Sunny Boy But­ter, 35 cents." There is not an ounce of butter in it, not a thing about it that tastes like butter, unless they use this synthetic flavoring which I have here.

Here is the New Gold Sunflower, and in parenthesis it says, "rich, nutty, butter substitute."

Here is a photograph of an electric sign which I should judge . is about 12 feet high and 24 feet long-! think it is in Omaha, but I am not certain about that. It says "rich, nutty, and delightful spread for butter."

Here is a Kansas City item which advertises : " Rich, delicious spread for bread."

Here is more "Sunny Boy," "Finest spread 30 cents a pound." "Nu-ine," better than butter.

Now here is an ambitious advE-rtisement of Nu-ine. With its i three-qua'rters coconut oil, one--quarter peanut oil, ~nd a pinch

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. PURNELL. Yes. Mr. LAGUARDIA. Does the gentleman believe it will be less

deception if we increase the price 10 cents a pound? Mr. PURNELL. I do not know about that, but there will be

, more protection if we pass this bill. · Mr. TUCKER. Is there any tax on these products now?

Mr. PURNELL. None whatever. There are no taxes, as I stated. The manufacturer pays no tax, the wholesaler pays no tax, and the retailer pays no tax. There is no tax of any kind placed on the package when it is made.

Mr. TUCKER. But there is a penalty for selling that as butter, is there not?

Mr. PURNELL. Oh, if you sell it for butter when it is not butter, and get caught, yon run up against the pure food and drugs act.

Mr. LINTHICUM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. PURNELL. I have already used more time than I

wanted to. There are others who want some time on this resolution. I merely wanted to present the subject in a general way, and I want now to express the hope that the committee will adopt this resolution and that we may have a full and free discussion of the matter in the four hours of general de­bate provided for in the resolution and under the 5-minute rule. I reserve the remainder of my time and yield 20 minutes to the gentleman from .Alabama [Mr. BANKHEAD].

Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Speaker, I yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. O'CoNNELL].

1 Mr. O'CONNELL of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, ladles and ! gentlemen of the House, the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. PURNELL] has very ably and artfully pictured this case from the viewpoint of the packer and the butter and dairy interests, but he has said nothing from the viewpoint of the consumer. The oleomargarine act was passed originally on .August 2, 1886, and while the oleomargarine industry was regulated by that act the primary purpose of the act, as it was later construed by the United States Supreme Cour~ was the purpose of raising revenue, and the Supreme Court of the United States, with

,some hesitation and by a divided court of 5 to 4, held it to be constitutional only upon the theory that it is a revenue-­producing measure, or intended as such when it was enacted by the Congress of the United States.

There was originally a 2-cent tax placed on all oleomargarine, and that act was not amended until May 9, 1902, and then we had the dffference in the tax, one quarter of a cent a pound on uncolored oleomargarine or naturally colored oleomargarine, and 10 cents a pound on oleomargarine that was artificially colored. The gentleman from Ind:ana [Mr. PuRNELL] wants you to believe that he wants to have the public protected against these products because they have the semblance and appearance and color of butter, but let me tell you some facts in relation to the amount of these products produced, and then I think you can intelligently form your own judgment. The1·e ~re only about ~ven aud a half million pounds of these prod-

1930 co:rGRE IONA.L RECORD-HOUSE 2795 nct.s which they s k to tax under H. R. 6 produced annually. Th r ure munufaclur ~ and s nt thr ugh the hunnels of in­t n;tut omw r · annually 15,000,000 poun<l of colored oleo­mar nrin , but th t' at· 240, , p und · of unc lored oleo­nuu·gtlrlu or uaturul1y <: lor d oleomarfrorine, and by nnturally color u I lllt'ttn that the color com not from human kill and labor, but from the u e of rlain ingr di nt which giv the nt·Ud i y llow color, un<l a matt r tand at the pre ·ent tim w h y ol margarine taxed at ne quarter of a cent a pound which is ju ·t u · y now n any butter, ju t a yellow as nny murgarlne thut i artlftciully ·olored and which pay 10

uts n pound. 'o, how ure you going to protect the public lmd •r tho e ir ·um tun~ 't Th dairy inter t.o,;;, the butter 1nt 'l' ·t, w may frnul·Iy udmit, want thi ·law, and the pack · do not oppo e the law. Th pa ker want it b ·uu they will n t be in •lu<l d und 1' it provi ·ions, o far a a large part of th it· product i ·on rued, and I may say, and I think fairly; to , that if Ul who ar auvocutlng this law in the int r . t ot th butt r and dairy inter ts had their wuy th y would in-lu l th pu kct·~, but th y admit op nly, some of th m, and <.>er­

tainly privo.t ly, tJ1 t th packers are too trong for them and thut th y an not g t thi1:1 l 'i lation thr ugh th Hou e if they tuelude th t>U k r .

o th<'Y are ~ ing t xcmpt the pucker from the operation C this bill, or ruth r the 1o- · nt tax, on a large portion of their

Ilrodn<:t~. Mr. 'NELL. Mr. p nk .r, will tb . gentleman yield? Mr. 0' N .NLL of Rhode Island. Yes. lr. ~ ELL. Wbnt d e the g utlemo.n mean by exem11ting

tb~ pa<•k r ? I do not unct rstand tbat. Mt·. ' ~ NNELL of Rhod I land. The packc are exempt

for U1L r n on. They hnvc •ontrol of the lnu ht rhou es-tbe allha tolr&-<>f th ountt·y und Uley ecure from the stoma ·h of old w , p lnlly Gu m y cattle, I think, n yellow fat ub-tnn · , and they put that in tlu'ir oleomnr mrin , and that give.

it a y )now color, and und r tb d l~ions of the court that i h ld not to b urtillclally c lot·cd, and so th y ar taxed only on -quart r of a c nt o. pound on their product, but no one el e, b · u th y do not slau ht r cattle in any quantity, has thi yellow oil or can •u.re it fr m th packers, anu so the packer hav a pra ti<'al monopoly.

Mr. NELL. Tbl bill do not ex mpt packers. Mr. • N ELL of h de I land. No expr

pa<•kcr.. . Mr. ~NELL. 'l'ht appli . to every man in the United

wb us . thi!i urtlcle. Mr. • ' NNFJI...L of Rhod r' land. Nothing ex mpt the pack­

r in XIlr s. term!!!. Mr. RNELL. 'l'hi upplle. to you and me and any man in . the

TJnit<•d tate· thnt makes the ·e produ<· thnt look alike. Mr. ' ~ N ELL of Rhode I land. If the product is arti­

tl •inlly <'olored it pny.' :tO c ntl' a pound, and if naturally col­or d It pay ouly on -qunt·tcr of a cent o. pound.

Mr. NEI .. L. I find tber are now r<l in this bill to indicate thut lt do not apply equally to all cln of people. .

Mr. '(' N lili .. L of Rhocl I land. Th re are n words which ~uy " packer· ," nnd no \\'Ol'dH that appear to di criminate; but th fn t i thnt the vid(•n · and th h nrings taken before th Committ on Agri ·ultur Rhow that the pa kers would be favorably atTectro by th op ration of thi bill, becau they ar tht.• only on s in thls country who po~ thi yellow oil, an tngr clierrt ~bleb may giv the oleomargarine a yellow color. ThiN product would pny on -fourth of o. cent per pound in ·tend of 10 c nt~ p t' pound.

Mr. ~ ELI... I have 1 packers in my di ·trict, and I am not int r t d in the pnck r ·. I th e anything in the bill that nubles Ur pa •ker to p, y thl lower tax?

Mr. 0' • ELT.J of Rhode I~o~lund. This bill tuxe a product tlln.t 1, not now con ic.l red to be oleomargarine. You are going to tu things that are not ol margarine. .,.ou are going to tax th m 10 ce11Ui a pound whil you are going to tax certain klu<l~ of r nl ol omnrgarlne one-quart r of a cent a pound.

IL·. J E of T xa . .Mr. peak r, will the gentleman yl~ltl'l

Mt·. ' ON IQLL of Rhocl I ·land. Y . Mr. J NE of Texa ·. Th r i a tax of 10 c nts a pound

on ol 10nrgnrin . 'l'he pack r have b en able to secure a Huhstnu whlcll 1· o. natural coloring muterial which enables tb(~il· pr duct to p y only on -quarter of a cent n pound. Your blll would uutomnticnlly mukP the. ·e tb r p ple pay 10 c •nts a Jl unu, · that r ally tb op€'ro.t1on of thi bill would be to the diHtinct ndvanta~ of the pa kers.

, lt·. ' • ·.DJLL of Rh d I lund. There is no question but that that will b • th eff~ t of thL-; legislation.

I ~n.y to you, g .utl me.n, that tbi. 1 gislation whkh we pr<r p · under II. R. 6 is not r gulation but clearly confiscation,

bect!u it puts a large lndu try out of business. There are only about 7,500, 00 pounds of this product produced annually. Th re are only 15,000,000 pounds of colored oleomargarine pro­duced and there are 240,000.000 pounds of uncolor <1 oleomar­garine, and some of the e producers and manufacturer of oleomargarine furnish with the oleomargarine a little cap ule.

The J1roduct they sell i oleomargarine, unquestionably, and i ta..""Ced as uch at one-quarter of a cent a pound; and inst ad of the mo.nufactur"r using thi capsule with the in ,.r dients that it contain and mL'ting it, the purcha r or buyer takes it borne, u the capsule himself, "'ets the color of butter, and till thnt product will have to pay only one-quarter of a cent, wberea products made out of peanut oil, coconut oil, and cottonseed oil mu. ·t pay 10 cents a pound.

We are talking about farm r ll~f. and they ay thi is a measure de igned to extend relief to the farmer. Well, you arc r HeYing one t of farmer at the expense of anoth€'r. You are taking from one set of farm r a great outlet for certain of hi products. but you are al o cl ing for the future the field, which is immea urable and incalculable, to people who are producing cotton eed oil and peanut oil all through the southern section of our country.

Tw nty-flve years ago th y did not have many u e for cotton­seed. The only animal that would eat the cotton!:->eed, then prac­tically considered a refu e, was the cow, becau.· the lint in the cottons ed could not be dig ted by any other .nnimal, not even the old mule. ince that day how many u ·es have b n found for cottonseed oil'! I may say the u of cotton ·eed have run up into the hundred , and ju t a· the l'adio industry is in its infancy, I ·ay to you that within 15 or 20 years there may b d' cover d many other u es for peanut oil and cottons d oil, and by this legi lation you are depriving the produ r of tho· arti<:l of a va~t market. Let me ·ay to you that you are also applyina the principle of a vrotective tariff in a way that ha · never b n applied before.

The PEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Rhode I land has expired.

Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman from Indiana yield me five additional minute'?

1\Ir. PURNELL. I yield to the gentleman from Alabama five minute .

Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. p aker, I yield thnt time to the gentleman from Rhode I land.

The PEAKER. The gentleman from Rhode I land i recog­nized for five minut more.

Mr. O'COI'I.TNELL of Rhode Island. Mr. peaker, I thank the gentleman.

Now, we are attempting to levy a tarifr, not on importations into this country, which i the accepted theory of a protective tariff, but now we are applying it internally again t one prod­uct, a product of one section of our country a again t o.n­oth r, and that is so so far as cottonseed oil an<l peanut oil are concerned.

At prE> ent we have no tariff again t the Philippine.. If we want to levy a tariff again t importation from the Philip­pin , I pre~ume we have the right to do ~o but w ought to do it directly nnd not indirectly, as is proposed in this bill.

Th re is al o some qu€' tion as to what may be included und r thi d finition in the added clause in the new bill. The C mmittee on Agriculture received a letter from tb A ·si.tant Seer to.ry of Agriculture, Mr. Dunlap, in which be • tated it would include, in the opinion of the chemi ts and the expert in his department. ice cream and many other product . Let m read to you what the As 1 tant ecretary of Agriculture aid:

The department believes that this definition can be held to cover commercial ice cream, which i animal fat, l. e., butt('r ernul ified nnd mixed with milk; proce ed cbe , which consists of animal fnt, butter emulsltl<'d with milk, water, or other liquids and usually con­taining other coloring; cod-liver oll mulsion, an animal oil, ernul ificd with irup and water. It seems that butter itself, although d('fined in another section of the act, is r ally an animal fat, churned, emul<~i­fied, or mixed in cream or milk; mayonnal ·e salad dre ing cl('at·ly seemij to fall within this definition.

Becau c the Seer ta.ry of A!rricnlture made that r port th committee bas ad led to ection 3 so a to eliminate mayonnai: alnd dr . :ing. but the purpo e of thi~ legi.'lation, my friend .

is to nullity and circumvent the effect of the d ·i. ions of our F deral court .

Here is the original nut product which wa manufactured, and it used the rune contain r, in this triangular form and wo.. marked exactly as this i:; marked to-day. It wa submitted to the Bu au of Internal Revenue, the trade-mark registered at t11e United State Patent Office. and then the Int •ruul ReY nuc Department said thi · product was not oleomarg-arine. It ha printed on the outside-and this bas o.lwuys been used on this

2796 CONGRESS! ON AL-RECORD-HOUSE JANUARY 3f package and never changed since its :first submlsisoh to •the Internal Revenue Bureau:

One pound net weight. Higgins Nut Product. Prepared for cooking and baking. Higgins Manufacturing Co., Providence, R. I. One-tenth of 1 per cent artificial color.

Nobody has ever claimed there was any deception in the marking on this package, or. that anything has ever been put in these containers, so far as they were put out by the manu­facturer, except exactly what is described on the outside, 80 per cent of coconut oil, 20 per cent of peanut butter per 100 pounds ; that would be the proportion, and to make 100 pounds then there is added 9 per cent of water and 3 per cent of salt.

This bill purports to amend the defintion of oleomargarine under the oleomargarine act of August 2, 1886, as amended by act of May 9, 1902.

Under that act as it now stands a food product manufactured and sold in interstate commerce by the Higgins Manufacturing Co. has been declared by the courts not to be oleomargarine and not taxable as such.

In 1922 a corporation known as the Nut Grove Butter Co., which is the predecessor in title of the Higgins Manufactur­ing Co. received an official ruling from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue that a certain nut product, made of vegetable oils and designed for cooking and baking, and which the Nut Grove Butter Co. proposed to manufacture, was not oleomar­garine and was not taxable as such.

The Nut Grove Butter Co. presented to the then Commis­sioner of Internal Revenue a sample of its product and re­quested a ruling as to whether or not such product was taxable as oleomargarine.

On January 20, 1922, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, D. H. Blair, advised the Nut Grove Butter Co. that the product which it had presented to the commissioner for analysis was not oleomarga1·lne and was not taxable as such.

This product is made entirely of vegetable oils. The ingredi­ents of the product are as follows: In making 100 pounds of "Higgins Nut Product" there are used 80 pounds of coconut oil, 20 pounds of peanut oil, 3 pounds of salt, and one-tenth of 1 per cent coloring matter.

The company invested new and additional capital in the busi­ness in plants located in Providence, R. 1., Syracuse, N. Y., and Detroit, Mich., and developed and built up a profitable business in the manufacture and sale of such product.

On or about December 1, 1922, the Nut Grove Butter Co. was notified that its product " Nut-Z-All" would be considered by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue as colored oleomargarine and taxable at the rate of 10 cents a pound.

The result of the revocation of the order was, owing to the wide publicity given to the regulations and rulings of the Com­missioner of Internal Revenue, which were sent to all collectors throughout the United States, that the business of the Nut Gro.-e Butter Co. was ruined and, as a matter of fact, owing to this revocation of the order and consequent loss of business, it became bankrupt and went out of business·.

A sh01·t time thereafter the Higgins Manufacturing Co. was formed, and before commencing business, and in order to test the legality of the ruling of the Commissioner of Internal Reve­nue, it manufactured and sold 165 pounds of the product made according to the same formula and packed in the same manner as it had theretofore been, and did not pay the tax thereon to the United States.

One hundred and sixty-five pounds of the product were seized by the Government and a tax at 10 cents per pound was assessed against it. This tax was paid under protest, and the plaintiff, Higgins Manufacturing Co., thereupon brought an action in the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island under the statutes of the United States to recover the amount of the tax thus paid.

The case, Higgins Manufacturing Co. v. Page, Collector, was thoroughly tried on behalf of the Government on the issues as to whether or not this product, so manufactured and sold, was oleomargarine; and among the issues tried was this, whether or not such product was sold in imitation or semblance of butter or was calculated or intended to be sold as butter or for butter.

The district court of the United States in an opinion handed down on April 15, 1924, held that the product was not oleomar­garine within the definition and meaning of the statute defining oleomargarine, and that it was not made in imitation of butter, nor was it calculated or intended to be sold as butter or for butter, and gave judgment for the plaintiff for recovery of the tax as one illegally assessed.

The case is reported in Two hundred and ninety-seventh Fed­eral Reporter, page 644.

The court further called attention to the manner in whicll this product was sold, saying:

'.:tq,~ trade dress is not only not an aid to deception but is designed to tell" the truth and avoid deceptions. The· triangular form of the package, the label of the same, " Nut-Z-All," and the words "nut prod­uct prepared for cooking and baking," prove that the plaintiff has in these respects done its best to avoid deception of a customer. There is no deception that is offered to the customer in the shape, and when the package is opened by a person who had read the label the yellow color of the product would probably not make him believe he had got butter.

No appeal was taken from this decision and judgment by the United States, and the same has stood since that time un­reversed.

It holds definitely and squarely that "Higgins Nut Product" is not oleomargarine; was not sold in imitation or semblance of butter, or calculated to be sold as such, and that there was no deception of the public, and owing to the manner in which the product was packed and stamped every attempt had been made by the manufacturer to prevent deception.

Immediately after the decision in Higgins Manufacturing Co. v. Page, the Higgins Manufacturing Co. commenced to manu­facture and market its product, making it precisely according w the formula set forth in the opinion and packed and sold in identically the same fashion.

The name " Higgins Nut Product " w:as substituted for "Nut­Z-All," owing to possible claim for infringement by another company.

On April 1, 1927, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue issued a new Treasury Decision (T. D. 4006), which attempted to nullify in effect the decisions of the court in the case of Hig­gins Manufacturing Co. v. Page, Collector, and which reversed T. D. 3590, and which by its phraseology made "Higgins Nut Product " and all vegetable-oil cooking compounds taxable as colored oleomargarine.

The portion of the Treasury decision which was intended to tax this product reads as follows :

All vegetable or a.nima.l oils or combinations thereof, churned, emulsi­fied, or however mixed, colored to look like butter, crystalUzed, salted (or unsalted), and worked will be deemed to possess a sufficient simi­larity to butter in flavor, texture, and appearance to bring the resultant product within the classification of oleomargarine.

The result of this new order was to/ practically destroy the business of the Higgins Manufacturing Co. Wholesale and re­tail dealers were naturally apprehensive of the tax liability and liability to penalties and seizures.

In June, 1927, the Higgins Manufacturing Co. brought a bill in equity in the District Court of the United States for the Dis­trict of Rhode Island to restrain t.he collector, Frank A. Page, from assessing, collecting, or enforcing any of the taxes or pen­alties provided in the oleomargarine act against the Higgins Manufacturing Co. or its product, "Higgins Nut Products."

This case was tried before Mr. Justice Lowell, of the district court of the United States, sitting in the district of Rhode Island, and a temporary injunction was issued against Collector Page.

The opinion of the court is found: in the case of Higgins Manufacturing Co. v. Page (20 Fed. (2d) Ser. p. 948).

The date of the decision of the temporary injunction was July 18, 1927, and the final decree was entered in the case, after a full hearing, on December 29, 1927.

Soon after the final decree was entered in this case, namely, December 29, 1927, this bill was introduced in the Senate (Feb­ruary 16, 1928).

The original oleomargarine a,ct barely escaped condemnation for the reason that the Supreme Court of the United States, by a 5 to 4 vote, felt bound to hold that it was a revenue measure. I am unable to conceive of any legitimate reason wily the oleomargarine statute, a revenue measure, should be amended so that it will serve but one purpose, and that purpose is to drive out of business the Higgins Manufacturing Co. and other ·companies manufacturing and selling simila,r products.

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Rhode Island has again expired. ·

Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Speaker, I yield two minutes to the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. ELLIS].

Mr. ELLIS. Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of the House, I am opposed to this bill. I am only opposed to the rule because I am opposed to the bill. I represent packers in a great packing center. I represent two of the industries challenged by this bill and which the measure proposes to put out of business. I represent the housewives of Kansas City who, in large num­bers, use this cooking compound. And J represent a great many

1930 CO.!. GRE • 10 ... '" ~\.L RECORD-HOUSE 2797

2798 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JANUARY 31 Let us see what the manufacturers of nut margarines actually

do. According to undisputed evidence they take the same ma­terials that go into cooking compounds such as Crisco and other similar products as a basis. The cost of this cooking compound at retail is approximately 20 cents per pound. Just at this point it is well to remember that only 1 per cent of water is permitted in cooking compounds or it is declared by the United States Government to be adulterated. By this new process of manu­facture which has developed rapldly during the last six or eight years, these same materials with a bit of coloring are emulsified in salt water and these so-called nut margarines are produced bearing various names but having practically the same formu­las. It should be remembered that the value as a cooking com­pound has not been inc1·eased by this process, but, in fact. it has been decreased by the addition of at least 9 per cent of water more than cooking compound is allowed to contain. As the proponents view this measure the consumers, for whom our distinguished and altogether likable colleague from Rhode Is­land pleads so eloquently, are asked 10 cents a pound more for a less valuable product than they would have to pay for the cooking compound in the first instance without any of these intermediate processes.

So from the standpoint of the pocketbook, may I say that the proponents of this bill believe we make out our case if we go not a single step further.

But, in the second place, friends, may I say that we not only are speaking for and on behalf of the pocketbooks of the con­sumers, but we are doing ~omething very much more important than that. We are speaking for their bodies.

Mr. JONES of Texas. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KETCHAM. I am sorry I can not yield. I would be

pleased to yield if I had the time, as my friend knows. These cooking compounds made to look and appear like butter

and sold for butter and as butter do lack very materially in the nourishing qualities that real butter possesses, and if any of you have any doubt about that, of course, all I need to do ~s to refer you to the testimony that is absolutely indisputable in the United States, namely, that of Dr. E. V. McCullum, the cele­brated food specialist of the School of Hygiene and Public Health of Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md.

I shall not take the time to refer to his extended testimony. With permission, I will include a paragraph of it in my remarks. The substance of it is that if we undertake to substitute a diet of vegetable oils for the real animal food substance that we :find in butter it will be materially prejudicial to the health of grown people, and particularly so to children.

Doctor McCullum exhibited to the committee pictures of rats upon which Ire had been conducting food experiments for a con­siderable period of time. One rat had every evidence of being well fed and the other was very much emaciated, undergrown, and had unmistakable evidence of disease about it. The first rat had a ration of butterfat in his diet, while the second had the same ration, excepting that vegetable oils were substituted for the butterfat. Speaking of the sharp contrast in the ap­pearance of the two rats, Doctor McCullum makes this com­ment:

Leave that butterfat out of the diet and put in a vegetable oil, such as cottonseed oil, and they go right back into this condition. I have put them into that condition and brought them back not less than four times on several occasions, using the vegetable fats in the same other­wise unmodified diet to "bring them into that condition and butterfat to bring them out.

As we are thinking of this question, discussing it upon an economic basis, let us not forget this other consideration, that to me is all-compelling, namely, that in the experi~nce of one of the very great food specialists of the world we have found nothing that can take the place of these :fine food elements that are found in butter, and that is exactly what is undertaken, consciously or unconsciously, by the men who are advocating the use of this butter substitute.

So far as the interests of all .who are interested in this matter are concerned, may I make a plea for a square deal as between all the producers? What are the facts so far as taxation is concerned? We are not aiming in this bill to do anything in the way of the taxing of these men who pro­duce nut margarines that we do not already do against the manufacturers of oleomargarine. We are not doing anything that we do not do against the manufacturers of butter, if in any way it is adulterated, because you are familiar with the fact that we impose a tax upon them when they so adulterate it. All we are aiming to do is to take the manufacturers of this product and put them into the present scheme of the law on exactly the same terms that we have already put oleomargarine. Now, friends, it seems to me this is perfectly fair and honest and square, and that there is nothing hidden or mysterious in all .the discussiop.~ or recommengation§! Qf th~ ~mt;!!i~ ~

there was no purpose to try to put over anything adverse to anyone, but simply to do what seemed to be altogether the best thing.

Some question has been raised as to the attitude of the oleo­margarine and other interests on the proposed bill. No better statement of the support being given it has come to my atten­tion than two paragraphs from a letter from Mr. J. S. Abbott, Washington, D. C., secretary Institute Margarine Manufac­turers:

This institute, comprising manufacturers of about 90 per cent of all the oleomargarine produced in this country, has appeared unanimously in support of this measure. The butter and creamery interests have appeared unanimously in favor of this measure. The Treasury Depart­ment and the Department of Agriculture, the two food agencies of the

, Government, have recommended its passage. The Association of Dairy, Food, and Drug Officials of the United States in convention assembled unanimously approved this measure. Only these nut-product manufac­turers oppose the measure because they are able without it to enjoy an unfair advantage over the manufacturers of the taxed and regulated product.

The argument for this product as a cooking or baking compound is wholly unfounded. It is salted, artificially colored, and has a moisture content of from 10 to 15 per cent. There are many legitimate cooking and baking compounds none of which are salted, colored, and watered.

May I just say a word, iu conclusion, to my good friends from the cotton States who are very vitally concerned, because an important percentage of this article they produce goes into the manufacture of these various nuttine products?

May I call attention to the fact that the Department of Agri­culture is authority for the statement that the total proceeds from the sale of cottonseed oil, the particular commodity in this article in which the Members of the cotton States are inter­ested, was $2,817,320? But the sale of cottonseed meal, of which the dairy interests are the great consumers, was $107,-870,000, or more than :fifty times as much as the total amount of cottonseed oil in dollars and cents. Looking at it from that standpoint you gentlemen ought to give support to this measure. [Applause.]

Mr. JONES of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from New York, Mr. LA"Gu.ARDIA..

:Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Chairman, the burden rests on the com­mittee sponsoring this bill to sustain it upon the ground of tax­ation and the necessity of additional revenue. If there is any purpose different than taxation the committee ought to be hon­est about it and say so.

Now there can be no immediate need of this additional and drastic legislation, because the housewife of to-day is not so gullible as to take oleomargarine for butter. There is hardly a State but what has sufficient drastic State laws to protect the consumers.

It would be a crime in the State of New York to sell any of the products contemplated in this bill or exhibited to-day by the proponents of the bill as a butter substitute. It would be a crime for any restaurant or hotel or public place to serve any of those products exhibited by the proponents of the bill in the State of New York as butter.

Mr. COLE. Are there any such crimes committed? Mr. LAGUARDIA. Yes; I will tell you about that. We

have an agricultural law in our State, and I read chapter 95, the laws of 1924, which make.~ it a crime to include any of the ingredients or chemicals or components of oleomargarine as a substitute for butter carried in this bill.

It is as follows : CHAPTER 95

An act to amend the farms and markets law in relation to the sale of an oleaginous substance designed to take the place of butter

SECTION 1. Section 62 of chapter 48 of the laws of 1922, entitled "An act in relation to farms and markets, constituting chapter 69 of the consolidated laws, as amended by chapter 368 of the laws of 1922, is hereby amended to read as follows :

" SEc. 62. Coloring matter, dairy terms, size of package, labeling, f.a.lse advertising.-No person, manufacturing with intent to sell any substance or article to be used as a substitute for butter or cheese, and which is not made exclusively from unadulterated milk or cr~am, or both, with or without salt or rennet, or both, but into which any animal, intestinal, or offal fats, or any oils or fats or oleaginous sub­stance o! any kind not produced from pure, unadulterated milk or cream, or into which melted butter, or butter in any condition or state or any moditl.cation of the same, or lard or tallow shall be introduced, shall add thereto or combine therewith with any annatto, or compounds of the same, or any other substance or substances whatever, fo1· the purpose or with the effect of imparting thereto a color resembling yellow, or any shade of yellow butter or cheese, nor introduce any such coloring matter or other substance into any of the articles of which the same ~compos~

19 0 CO GltE IONAL RECORD-HOD.SE 2799 "No pl'tRon manufacturing, . elllng, or otr<'rlng for ale any oleaginous

suh. tuncl' not mod from pur' mllk or cream from the same, designed to tnl< ~ th pine of butter, nnd the nle of which i not prohibited by any or th provl ionFI or thl article hall mak or ell the same und r any ht·nnd. d vi('('. or lub 1 b aring words indicative of cows or the pr(llluct o( the dulry or the name~ of breeds of cows or cattle, nor ll~l· tcrnl. lndlcntlv. or proc fl. in t.b dairy in making or pr ·paring bn t t r: no olenglnnnR ub.-tnuce not made fr m pur milk or cr am fl'olll thl• am •, dl•Hign d to take the place of butter, and tbe ale of whil'h 1~ not prohibited by nny of tbe provl ion of thi article ball lH't(•aCh•r ll<' Rnld , utr rNl or ·po. ('d for ·ale in this tnte except it be uld In tutrkngcH c(mtnlnlng not mor than G pound , such packag

to IJP Wi'I\JlpNl and plainly !lud · conspicuously labeled with the word 1 olc•onutr~nrln • tn gothic or <·qunlly con .·plcuous letters at least one· qunt'l(•t· of un Inch hl~b. No d •vice or brand hall be imprinted upon uny hrh'k r portion of th :ub. tnu it . elf unl ~ the word 1 ol('o­mar~nrln ' iF; ttl~o lml •nted tber •ou in lcttNs equal In size to those U!oil'tl In exprrR. lng nny brand or word u ~d by the manufacturer. 'Yl~> •n 110 diRpla:r 1 • made I' c pt til d vic . th nld word 1 oleo· mnrJ.: l'lne · hnll b o lud nted In letter· not les tbnn one-fourth of nn In h hll{h, and In u II cas th word 1 ol omnr •nrine ' hall be ttunlly dl·plnyNI with any brand or word us<'d by the mnnutncturer,

In C'lo l' proximity tht>r€'tn. nnll on the nme surfac of uch ub tnnce. 1'hl' uam and ad<lr '~!! of the mnnufnctut• r bnll be plainly printed on th cnrton o.- wrapper lnclo. ing the . aid good . ·o per ·on, firm, n ~odatlou, or corpurntiou sbnll u In any wny in connection or n11 Ol·inlion with th • al<' or xpo ·ure tot· nle or advert!· ment of any nh~:~tuuc• de~l~netl to be u t>d n a ubstitute for butter the word.

1 but ll'r,' 'Ct'etlnwry,• or 1 dlllry,' or th name or repre entation of nny br ·••tl or dnlry c ttl or any combination of ..;ncb word or words and rl'l>t'NH>ntn tlon or nny othl'r ,·ords or ymbol::~ or combinntlon .thereof cunutwuly us d in t h nle of butter. Nothing In thl ·ectlon shall b conHtrnf'd to pt'l'Vl•nt, In connection with the advertisement of any ub­stnnc <kHlgn d to b uHed ns n snb tltnt for butter, n tatement of the• c mpnsltlon of th • ub;,;tnnc ndvertisl'<l: Prot•ided. That all of the ln~t·Nll nt of lh' Rlllrl "ub~tanc and tho percentage of each be stated in typf' of tbt• Rumc Hlze.

" 81-.: •. 2. Tbi · uct • hull tuk etrect July 1, 1924.''

I al. or ad cction 38 of th agricultural law. 3 . .Muuutaclure und ale of Imitation butter probtbltcd: No p rson

by him lC, hi ug ntl:l, or mploye , ball produce or manufacture out of or trom nny unlmal fa or animal or vegetable oils not produced from uundultcrnted milk or cr nm from tbc arne, the article known n oh'omnt·gtll'lne ot· uny nrticl or product in imitation or semblance of nntul'lll !>utter produc d fr m pure, uondult<'rnted milk or cream of the sam •: or mix compound with or add to milk, cream, or butter any ncldH ot• olb r dt•l t rious nblltance or auy animal fnts or animal or v •g-t•tnhl oils not produc d from milk or cre-am. o as to produce any 1\t't icl or ub tnnc of any human food in imitation or in semblance ot nnturnl butter, nor ell, kc p for • le, or ol! r for ~ale any article, sulmtnncf', or compound mnde, mnnufuctur('d, or produced 1n violation of th provlsi n'il or thl . >ctlon, whetb~r ucb article, ub tance, or <·ompound, shull b made- or produced in tbl tnte ot• E-lsewhere. Any (ll't'HtHl mauurncturlng, elllng, ol!ering or E'.xpo~ing- for ale any com­ruodlly or ~:~ubstauc In lmltnUon or s mblnnce of bnttl'r, the product or tlw dairy, hnll he d em d guilty of a violaliou of thi chapter, wh lbl't' be s liH such ·ommodity or ubstancc a buttct·, olcomargaL"lne, ot· utHh•r any otb r name or d lgnation whnt~o ver and irre pectlve of any rept·c ntntlon he mny mnk relative to uch commodity or sub­atnnct•. Any deal 'r In nny article or product, the manufacture or sale or whi h 1 prohibit d by tbi "cctlon, who shall k -ep, tore, or dl play su •b nrt.lcl or product, with other merchnndl or tock in his place or bu. In a, bull b d ('m d to bnv~ the 8ame in hi pos slon tor ale.

'l'biH law waij tlr. t na t d in 1 3. The tate of New York bus kPpt aur a. t on tlli · kind of led lation. The farmers are fully prot ·t •d and the con.·um r nre protected in the tate of NC'w York-neitll r n d th 1 gislntion propo.ed in thi bill.

I bnv bad ~om expcri~:>nc with th .· luw.,·. Wb n I wa d puty attorney .., nertll of my tate the D pat"tment of Agricnl­tur ~ lJa<.l ag nt · working every day of the year, going to r i{taur nt , to gr- e<•ry ·t r . , to d teet violntion of the oleo­mnrgnrine law,': and in all th tim that I wa deputy attorney g n ral it wn. u t n · ~~al'y t go to trial once. There wa an imm dint plea of guilty, a paying of the penalty, and we had no mor trouble with thut r tail r or that I' tnurant.

It 1 Hugg t ~d tllat it is n · sHary t tax tb : n w pr duct. in orcl r to avoid d '<:t>tltion. I . ubmi t to the good s n e of every mnn and womnn n th _floor of thi lion· that th rabing t tlH' prk of tlu.~ commodity b: not going to prevent your di ·bone<ot l't>tnil r from c1N· hiu·~ th n. um rR.

Mt·. \ 'I I~. 'NN. \\~ill th <"f>ntleman yield? Mr. !JAG ARDIA. I will ylE'ld, if the am onrtesy will he

xt ndNl to me. 1\lt'. ANDH.Jii 'IiJN. Do the gNttleman think that the manu­

ftl ·turc>r of th : protluct;. do not use deception wh n he u ·es coloring to make It lo k like butter1

Mr. LAGUARDIA. There is not a hou ·ewife, I do not care how illiterate she may be, that does not know the difference between a nut product anll a cow product. [Laughter.] They certainly do know the diff renee, and with the s vere law that we ha\·e in New York-and it is a real agricultural law, I think the mot sati factory agricultural law to farmers than ther i in any other tate in the Union-there i no dan~ r of d eption. A I ~aid a moment aao, '\Ye have tate agent. on the job all of the time looking for violations of that law. Why, every tore or re tam·ant selling or u ·ing oleomargarine or imitation butter mu~ t have a larae ign di vluy d ·in it place of bu inc ·s announcing that fact; and the law i enfor ed.

I· ~ill tell you that it i ttot pos ible in the tate of .. Tew York t ~ ell any commodity for butter unle ::it i butter. What i: my inter ·t? Again I am peaking for the con~umers. The people now can not afford the luxury of butter. Butter ha'!! b om a luxury. You can not help it, uut butter i :o exp n:ive to the average famil~· that they can not u e butter for cooking. A areat many con~umers u e oleomargarine and orne of the uhstitute ·erve al:-;o a llortening.

o th ~e uu._titute · are in a way a aving in the constantly growing co. t of living. The. e ub titute are whol~ome. "o one will ay that they are not whole'ome. Perhaps they hav not the nutrition qualitie. that butter has, but certainly they will <lo for cookin". Why burden further the co ·t of living by addin.., 10 cent · a pound to these ubstitute · when th .y ure ·old for what they are in my State? They will b sold in the same wa~·. in my tate, and the only difference will be the addi­tional 10 cent a pound.

Mr. ADKL r • Ir. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. L.\GUARDIA. Ye .. )It·. ADKI ... ~ . "Why would a poor hou ·ewife buy a cooking

comvound at 25 cent" a pound when she can buy leaf lartl, which is a .:uperior article, for 12 and 13 cent a pound?

Mr. L GUARDIA. Because, if the rrentleman knew any­thina about cookina. he would know that there are a great many thing that you can cook in lard and a great many things that it is better to cook with substitute butter. Lard has too strong a flavor for a great many of foods that are fried, and certainly that i true for baking purpo e .

1\Ir. MI HE. TER. Why will not they buy thi nb titute in the colorle. s-in the white--it they want it for cooking, if they do not want to be deceived, if they are not inter ted in the color? Lard is white. and if they want to u e it for co k­ing why not buy this oth r in the white?

Mr. L G'CARDIA. Be<.~ause, if I may u e a very homely illustration and perhap a vulgar one, in feeding the family the eye i · a~ important a the belly.

Mr. l\II HE. ·ER. And when you are eating the cak in which thi~ shortening compound is used, can you see the color?

Mr. L GUARDIA. Of cour you can. Did not the gentle­mnn ev r eat pound cake or ponge cake?

lr .... n "HE ... ~ER. I <lid not know that butter made the col r. ~lr. LAG ARDIA. Well,_ it help . There i no ound ju tifi­

c:.,tion for thi act at thi time. I call the attention of the gentleman from Michigan [1\fr. KETcHAM] to this fact. He refer to bein~ concerned with the health of the J)€'ople. He say that he i concerned with the purity of food product , while in thi bill the committee did not have the courage to go through with it. You exempt from the provisions of the bill salad dre -ing , mayonnaise nnd mayonnai .. e product , that are sold a.· containing olive oil, when, a a matter of fact, there is not u drop of olive oil in them, and orne of lhem even haYe fLh oil a~ tated in thi bill. I will tell you right now that there arP more divorces in the jar of ..,alad dressings and mayonnai e sold to the American public, than there are in all of the choru ~ of the burle ques in the country. [Laurrbter.l

Mr. TIOPE. ~fr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. LAGUARDIA. Yes. 1\lr. HOPE. On the question of the tax. it ha b en tated

ber by the opponent of tbi bill that there are 15,000,000 pound of colored eleomargarine manufactured every year on whi h a tnx f 10 cents a pound i paid. Wbat ju. tification can the gentleman give for not putting this product which il-i identical except for the fact that it is churned in water in tead o.t' milk, under the ame regulation?

Mr. LAG ~ ARDIA. Becau!-;e that 10 cents a pound means o much to the f'lmilie of the people in the cities.

Mr. HOPE. That i an ar~ment again. t oleomargarine. Mr. LAGU.ARDIA. We need no protection in our 'tate under

our law. They can not ell oleomargarine for butter. All that you are doing is simply increa. ing the already too burdensome co. t of living on the average family.

Mr. JO .. TES of Texas. And there is le than ::> per cent of the oleomargarine old that pays a lQ-c nt tax. The other pays one-quarter of a cent a vo:n~d, so that if they would ;make

2800 CONGRESSIONAL RECORI>-HOUSE JANUARY 31 this whole thing 2 cents a pound they would collect three times as much money.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. True, and the 10 cents a pound means so much to the people in the city. I repeat, at the expense of becoming tiresome, that it means so much to them. We of the cities have gone along with you gentleman from the rural districts on every farm-relief bill that you have had, at least I have. We want to cooperate with you, but do not lose your heads entirely and make this burden so great that you will starve people in the cities.

Mr. KETCHAM. I can not for the life of me see where we are going to impose any greater burden on these things than they do on oleomargarine. The gentleman does not think that we are going to impose a tax of 10 cents a pound on these products unless the manufacturers do exactly what they do in respect to oleomargarine.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. We can buy these products now without the 10 cents a pound, and no one is being deceived.

Mr. KETCHAM. Why insist on making the housewives pay 30 cents a pound for it when you can buy the article for 20 cents?

Mr. LAGUARDIA. If you put on your 10 cents a pound, it will increase the price.

Mr. KETCHAM. We maintain that they ought to sell this compound cheaper; that they overcharge now for it. We main­tain this is a fraud on the housekeeper.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. It can not be in my State, because the law is so drastic and is so well enforced that there is no deception of the consumers in my State. My appeaJ is not to add an additional burden of 10 cents a pound. [Applause.]

Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gen­tleman from Minnesota [Mr. ANDRESEN]. ·

Mr. ANDRESEN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, the gentle­man from New York [Mr. LAGUARDIA] stated that this com­modity is not sold and used as butter. In looking through the hearings ·I find that a representative of the Internal Rev­enue Department report~d from an investigation that a sana­torium located in Georgia used 29,000 pounds of this colored product during the past 12 months, which \vas served aE; butter. He also said that the institution buys oleomargarine for cooking purposes. These inmates of the sanatorium have the product served to them, and they probably think it is butter. It tastes like butter and it cuts like butter and it spreads like butter.

As to the deception, why do the manufacturers of this article, which is made out of peanut oil and coconut oil, prepare the article in such a way that it looks like butter and smells like butter and tastes like butter? The cooking value of the com­modity would be just as great if they would leave out the 9 per cent of moisture and leave out the salt and coloring.

Mr. KETCHAM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ANDRESEN. Yes. Mr. KETCHAM. Is not the cooking value lessened by the

addition of the 9 per cent of mosture? Mr. ANDRESEN. Yes. The uncolored article contains less

than 1 per cent of moisture, and this compound contains from 10 to 12 per cent moisture, nearly as much moisture as you find in the best of June butter. The maximum amount in butter is 16 per cent.

Now, so far as the manufacturer is concerned, while he does not advertise his commodity as being butter or as a substitute for butter, he puts it up in a form so that when it comes into the hands of the retail merchant he can pass it out in cartons and packages put up to look just like the quarter-pound pack­ages of creamery butter.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ANDRESEN. Yes. Mr. LAGUARDIA. If he sells it in his store-! refer to the

retail merchant-he must have a sign stating that oleomargarine is sold here, and the same thing applies to it when sold in restaurants. ·

Mr. ANDRESEN. Most of the States have a law as to oleo­margarine; but as to this commodity, the gentleman's State has prohibited the sale of this commodity as butter. This com­modity has only been put upon the market within the last 10 years.

Mr. BRIGHAM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ANDRESEN. Yes. Mr. BRIGHAM. If the manufacturers of this com,Pound are

not required to label it as oleomargarine, the dealer does not have to put up such a sign as the gentleman from New York [Mr. LAGuABmA] referred to?

Mr. ANDRESEN. That is true. In 1924 the Internal Reve­nue Bureau decided that this product was within the purview of the oleomargarine act and subject to the tax. The proposi­tion was put before the bureau by a manufacturer in Baltimore. The manufacturer was naturally disgusted with the ruling of the department and refused to pay the tax and took the case into court. A Federal judge in Rhode Island decided the ~e,

and ·decided that the commodity put up in a package of this kind did not come under the definition of oleomargarine and there­fore was not subject to the tax.

The department's hands were tied and they could not collect the tax. Immediately a large number of factories appeared to manufacture this product, and I think last year they sold over 30,000,000 pounds as a cooking compound or substitute for butter.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield 1 Mr. ANDRESEN. Yes. Mr. ABERNETHY. This compound is not sold as butter? Mr. ANDRESEN. It is put up in a package like butter, and

it has moisture put into it, and it tastes like butter, and it is sold as butter in many places.

A MEMBER. But it is not labeled " butter "? Mr. ANDRESEN. No; it is not labeled as butter. Mr . .ABERNETHY. As I understand the purpose of this bill,

it is to impose a tax, if I read the language aright, of 10 cents a pound?

Mr. ANDRESEN. The proposition is to broaden the defini­tion of oleomargarine in the present law so that all articles of this kind will bear a tax of 10 cents a pound when artificially colored and one-fourth cent when uncolored.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Then will they not just add 10 cents a pound to the price, regardless of what it is sold for?

Mr. ANDRESEN. No; because if they add 10 cents a pound to the price it will cost as much as butter, and the housewife will buy butter instead.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Do you not think you should content yourself with prohibiting its sale as butter and leave the tax as it is at present?

Mr . . ANDRESEN. If this commodity were left uncolored­and it was within the purview of the provisions of the law­they would have to pay only one-qua·rter of a cent. The manu­facturers claim it to be a cooking compound and not a substitute for butter. If they have no intention of deceiving the public, they are required to pay only one-quarter of a cent a pound.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Does the coloring matter or the water prove injurious to health?

Mr. ANDRESEN. No. Mr. ABERNETHY. You propose to put a tax of 10 cents a

pound because it is colored and moistened? .Mr. ANDRESEN. Yes. Mr. BURTNESS. ~Ir. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ANDRESEN. Yes. Mr. BURTNES$. It is sold as a substitute for butter? Mr. ANDRESEN. Yes. It is sold and used as butter in

boarding houses nnd in camps, and so forth. Mr. BURTNESS. You stated that 30,000,000 pounds were

manufactured last year. Mr. ANDRESEN. Yes. Mr. BURTNESS. Can the gentleman tell us how much or

what proportion of this 30,000,000 pounds was made up of prod-ucts imported from abroad? '

Mr. ANDRESEN. Approximately 85 per cent of the raw prod­ucts used In the manufacture of this substitute consists of coco­nut oil.

Mr. BURTNESS. And is not all the coconut oil imported from the Tropics?

Mr. ANDRESEN. Yes. Mr. BURTNESS. So that only 15 per cent of the raw ma­

terial is produced in the United States? Mr. ANDRESEN. Yes. About 15 per cent of peanut oil is

used; approximately 50 per cent of this is imported and 50 per cent produced in this country.

During the past yeJ!r approximately 700,000,000 pounds of coconut oil and copra were imported into the United States from tropical countries, all of which comes into direct competition with the products of the American farm.

From all indications it now appearf'l that we will secure no relief through the tariff bill on importations of vegetable oils and fats from the Philippine Islands, and therefore it is highly essential that this bill become a law so that the dairy industry of this country may at least secure some small degree of pro­tection.

The stand taken by the majority of Congress in refusing: to place a duty upon imports of agricultural products from the Philippine Islands violates in every sense the pledge made by the majority party to give equality of protection to America11 agriculture.

The American farmer, be he grain or dairy farmer, is en­titled to his home market without having to continually face ruinous competition of cheaply produced impo.cted and com­petitive farm products.

Food is the one real necessity of life. Prosperity for the pro­ducers of food products in this country will bring prosperity to the entire Nation. The American consumers would be profitably J'~Wid by: ~dopting and practicing the following slogans:

1930 CONGRESSIONAL R.ECORD--HOUSE 2801 En t more but.tC\r, be<-nuse It ts nutritious. Drhl1\: more m111c, b cause it 1s good for you. J!Jat more br nd, bcenu. e it is ~ holesome. l!Jat mor m n · t giY you Rtrcngth nnd red blood. lf y u a t on th o logan yon will have performed a ser icf'l

for ·our colmtry and nt th nme time added to the general pros­P rlty nnll hnpplnc::- of tho e who need help and who 1n turn

lwJll b lp :ou through thctr IncreaR d purcha~lng power. Ir. J NlJ of 'l' xu.,. Mr. hairman, I yi 1<1 five minutes to

tbr g ntl man fr m l\1mvachu ott Ll\1r. UNDERHILL]. 1\lt•. tT , ERHILL. l\fr. hntrman, I can not qualify a an

t ., rt on th te<:bnicnl part of thi' dl. cu ... ·ton, but I an testify ns n con. umer. y own e. rl n , I think, t typical of that of th usands and thousands of p<'oplc who live in cong st d fir •u.. urlng the 'Vorld War the Government toolc particular pahlA to instrn t the Oille in conservation, and practically during tll wbol of thut tlme In my own hou. hold we would buy a pouml of butt •r und a pound of olcomnr"'urlne and then mi. th m up in orcl r that we might on. erve the supply of fat for nmmuultlon and for the oldi rs who wer flnhtlng aero ·s the water. What wa our c. perience? w·e could not go into a ,;tor in our tate and buy color d or y llow oleomargarine. Tll tore lcrk would I1llt n little cap ule in the package which t•ould h mL· d with th oleoruargal'in and color it. 'Vhen they wrnpp d up tb orl rlnal pad{ngc, labeled oleomargarine, into a pup •r thC\Y hn<l to tak a stamp about 6 or 7 lnche long and p rhuvs 3 or 4 inchc wlcle and tnmp " oleomargarine " on both Rid s f t11nt pnckn~ in lett('r s large that those who ran ml~ht nl·o r ud. t cour ·ewe had to xplain our rea ons, patri­otic, con rule, and ~a~tronomlc, for the u. e of this product. and thn b •nm n vocnl us w 11 ns a visible adverti. lug medium for 1hlH nb. titute for butter which the nited Stat . llealth De­pnrtm"nt th n r ommcnded and indor d, and which the Com­mitt on Agrt ultur now c1 lure an lmpo ltlon and an illu-lou. If it waA ~ood th n it 1 good now. You talk technicaU­

Huo~, hut th fn t 1 you lJnpl · tax one clas of people for tbe lH'rH'tlt of another elm;. , nnd you oul<l include quite n number of fa•·m r who p•·oduc p anut oil nnd other oil . It is unfair to _.·ume for n mom nt that the purcha. r of tbl commodity or<.> lth •r nitwit or moron . .

Th p ople who buy thi commodity are ju.'t as sensible a moHt of tho ·e wh oc ·upy ... at In 'ongre<:s, Their training 1 along a tUff r nt. llne, thnt i all. Th('y know what they are buyfn wh n th y bny it und th y know what they are buying 1t 1' r. I an uot th ju~tice of a bill like thi., and I can not

e why ongr . ha~ any ri~ht to force upon the people of the ountt·y an hnpo. ltiou whl h is mucll wor than the imp itlon

which it i ·Inim d the manufnctur rs of thi commodity prn •tic upon th p ople.

Ir. LD B R UGH. Wlll the gentleman yield? lr. U . EIUIILIJ. ~

Mr. G LD B R l Gil. an the gentleman tell u the rela-tJv nut l'itiv vnlu of that ub titut and butt r.

Ir. V 'Dl!JHIIILL. In th b('ginuing I di'"avowed any l{nowl­tlg a; to the h• ·hnl nl part of the que 'tion. What I am

OJ>Jl<> a to mor than nnythlng 1. e is that e ion after e. Ion siu<' • 1 hnv b u1 here bill ur r ported from committees whi 11 .·tnlllit-:h nnoth r uuil-lllnc for the p ople, and which accom­

JllJI'h notlliug xc •pt to rui. c the c t of living. I think we lutcl bctt .r top right here in h•ying to pa legi lation to bene­fit the ftll'm r at th ~ p n. of ther . Let the farmer, with his illg uuity, re. ourcefnln R~, nnd ; le~mnnship, adv rtk that 11 hm; n b tter p1· du t; advertl. e that he ha a product which l1n more nutritive valu than thi · commodity, and thus create

a market tor what he produces. That will cei·tainly bring tn a fair return for hi labor.

Mr. KETCHAM. W111 . the gentleman yield? Mr. UNDERHILL. Yes. Mr. KETCHAM. Does not the gentleman think it would be a

wi e piece of constructive legi 'lation in behalf of those folks to make it impo >;fble for them to be taxed 9 cent out of every <lollar-and that is what they at·e actually taxed-by ~Imply putting water into a product anu then selling It with some coloring matter in it at a price that would be 10 or 12 cents above what it would otherwi e be?

l\Ir. Ul\TDERHILL. I will reiterate what I said. I thlnlc Congre~s should stop interfering with legitimate buslne~s and leave the que tion of profit and lo. · to bu.'inef.: men, producer , and consumers. I think the public is perfectly able to protect Itself from fraud, at lea .... t, it is in my State.

Mr. BURTNE S. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. UNDERfiLL. Yes. l\Ir. BUHT.~. 1E S. Is the gentleman now making an argument

again t the bill before the House or is he making an argument again t the present olemargarine law?

Mr. UNDERHILL. w·en, if thi gentleman bad his way be would be very glad to support a bill, and hope that the good sen:--e of ongres would pas a bill, which would 1·emo\e all the laws we already have on this subject rather than to add to them.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from :llus:-oa­cbu tt bas expired.

Mr. llAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from lllinoi [Mr. AoKI~~s].

Mr. ADKINS. Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen of the committee, . o far a the proposed tax is concerned, it i, not going to make a penny's difference in the price the consumer ha!) to pay, whether we pass this bill or not. He wlll pay the same price for his butter or for his oleomargarine. I wi h my friend from New York, Mr. LAGuARDIA. were here.

:Ur. U. .. mERHILL. Perhap" I can take his place. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ADKI.a. . Ye . l\Ir. U.~. "'DERITILL. What is the purpose of yom· bill, then? :\It·. ADKI.~. ... S. That i ju t what I am going to explain. Fir,o;t of all, ff I did not think thi was a farm-relief mea ·nre

I would not be here for it, and if I did not think the oleo­margarine law was a good thing for tbe farmer, I would uot be for that, and in reply to the gentleman's que,.tion I am going to explain that feahtre to him ri~ht nov..

The gentleman talked about the capsule that went to color white oleomargarine. By presenting tbat in Its natural color they only have to pay the admini tration tax of one-fourth of a cent.

I am for tbat, and this law wlll m'ake them sell that as ol omargarine. It does prohibit them from fooling the public. "White oleomargarine is made out of a product produced on the American farm, and we make them sell it for ju~t what it i~. If a hou ewife want to color it and make it look like buttrr, they give her a cap. ule to do that work.

So far a. thi being n packer ' proposition i. concerned, the packer make. it, of course, but when you bit him, you hit the farmer in thi ca. e. ·

A~· to the price you pay, I nm going to in ert in the RE oRo ~ome figure I got from the Department of ommerce--wllich I always tal{e to be fairly accUl'ate-aild I am going to in ert \n the RECORD the amount we produ<:ed, the anwuut we con­, umed, and the price of oleomargarine and butter, quoting the

l1icago prices. ·

Butttr (Figures in thousands of pounds]

Production

Factory Farm Total Imports l Exports

l () . --- ·-·----·-------·----·- --------------------------------------------------1927--- ·------ --------.----------------------------------- ---··----------- ------1 !126_- ----------------------------------------------------- - -·---- --------------1\l:U-- -- -·--- -------------------------------------------------------------------111~1---- ----------.------------------------------- ---· --------------------------1 !)ZJ-- ------------- ·-------- ---·-- --------------- ----------··------------------­] o:r.z_- --------------------------------------------------------------------------111:.!1 _-- ------- ----------------------------- ·-·--- -------------------------------1 !120- -------------- ---------------- - -------------------------------- -· ----------101 o.---·------------·------------------------------------------------------ ----

1 Prior to 102·1 Ogur s lnclud butt r substitutes olso. J Ot aVl\IJable. {

1,479, 000 1,496, ()()() 1,4"2,000 ],362,000 1, 356,000 1,242,000 1,154,000 1,05&, 000

864,000 ,000

690,000 600,000 615,000 630,000 6-13,000 656,000 66 ,000

2,000 695,000 708,000

2, 069,000 4,659 2, 096,000 8,460 2, 007,000 ,029 1, 992,000 7,212 1,999, 000 19,4.05 I, 000 64,420 1, 823,000 46,573 1, 737,000 26,866 1, 559,000 15,991 1,576,000 11,332

Sour •: Production, ronsumptlon, and prl , Department of .Agriculture; Imports and exports, Department of Commerce. Jo'l ur, or for tile calcudnr ycnrs . . Flaur furnish d by Department of Commerce.

~. II-177

3,896 4,343 6,483 5,343 '2:i7

5,846 10,.

015 17,4 34,656

Apparent consump­

tion

(I) 2, 1671 2,~ 150 2,006,303 1, 976,905 1, 76,770 1, 796,053 1, 72.'i, 733 1,553,500 1, 622, 128

A;cmr,e Per monthly

capita Chicngo

Pound& (2) 17.40 17. 2 17.39 17. 17.00 16.5 16.1 14.7 14.8

prico

Cent8ptr pound

(2) 46 43 44 41 46 3 42 58 58

2802 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JANUARY 31 Oleomargarine

[Figures in thousands of pounds]

Fiscal year

1928.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------1927-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------1926_----- - --------- -------------------------------------------------------------------1925_-------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------1924_---------- --------------------------------------------- ~ --- -------.---------------1923_-- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------1922 __________________________________________________________________________________ _

192L _- _-.- _- ••• --.-------------------- ---------·-------- ---------------·--------------1920.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------1919_ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source: Department of Agriculture.

For the last 10 years you -vvi.ll find the market has run fairly constant. In the last three years it has run about the same, with a little increase since the war in the consumption of both oleomargarine and butter.

Mr. UNDERHILL. Will the gentleman yield there? Mr. ADKINS. Yes. Mr. UNDERHILL. Will the gentleman explain before he

gets through the inconsistency in his statement that it will not add a cent to the cost of this product and the statement of the gentleman from Minnesota who stated their purpose was to raise the price so it would cost as much as butter, and conse­quently we would use butter instead of this compound?

Mr. ADKINS. If I do not get the time to do that in the 10 minutes, I will do it when we debate the bill under the 5-minute rule.

We find we consumed in 1927, 2.17 pounds per capita of oleo­margarine. That sold in Chicago at a price of 22.5 cents a pound. In other words, in 10 years we had an average con­sumption of about 2.37 pounds per capita of oleomargarine. This is the way your consumer does in the cities. Whenever butter gets anywhere near 40 or 50 cents the average consumer can buy but when it gets above that, your consumer is going to buy :Oore oleomargarine, and that automatically brings the price of butter back. This is a fair balance. The dairy farmers can do very well within that range of 10 cents a pound, between 40 cents and 50 cents, but when it gets below 50 cents per pound the larger percentage of your consumers go back to but­ter again because they would rather have it, and I am going to insert these figures in the RECORD for the last 10 years, show­ing that your consumption has not varied a great deal.

Now, take your butter. We find that over a period of 10 years it has averaged about 16.56 pounds per capita at an average cost in Chicago of 46.39 cents per pound.

This is controlled by your consumer, and I do not c~re if you put 25 cents a pound tax in this proposed bill, it would not mean anything to your consumer. There would have to be competition with the price of oleomargarine that you buy where you put in the capsule, and he would have to compete with that price; and if the price was too high, your wife would buy the oleomargarine and color it herself, would she not?

Mr. CLARKE of New York. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. ADKINS. Yes. Mr. CLARKE of New York. Is not one of the vital points

in this bill the lack of fairness in the Government itself taxing one product and not taxing the other, and is it not the object of this bill to bring this compound under the same form of tax we are putting on oleomargarine?

Mr. ADKINS. Certainly. Fearing my time may expire before I put this in the REcoRD,

I want to read a statement from the hearings. The manufac­turer talks about a cooking compound and sheds crocodile tears over the consumer's wife for being deprived of a cheap cooking compound, but if you will read the hearings you will find the whole proposition is to make a butter substitute out of coconut oil, and the man who represented the largest manufacturer of this product before our committee said this about it. .

We do not want to misquote anybody, but when they are coming here and talking to the committee and pleading for a cheap cooking compound for the consumer their whole object is to displace the use of butter with a coconut-oil product. Here is the statement before our committee of Mr. Murdock, who was representing two of the largest manufacturers of this product :

Mr. ADKINs . .A moment ago I believe you said you would be in favor of repealing the whole oleomargarine law, and would be in favor of a tax, probably, of 2 cents on all of the products if that was not the

Production

Total Uncolored Colored

294,699 279,348 15,351 257, 157 242,655 14,502 248,047 234,866 13, 181 215,403 204,123 11,280 239,699 228, 151 11,548 209,182 200,922 8, 260 190,950 184,346 6, 604 281,082 269,481 11,601 391,283 375,659 15,624 359,217 345,368 13,849

Exports

732 942

1, 256 887

1,396 3, 764 2,143 6, 219

20,952 18,570

Consumption Average monthly price at

Total Percapita Chicago

294,079 255,858 246,569 214,403 238,343 205, 037 188,521 276,993 368,784 341,662

Cents Pounds per pound

----Ti7- --- -----22~3

2.12 22.8 1. 87 24.3 2.11 22. a 1. 85 20.9 1. n 1s. a 2. 58 20.8 3. 49 31.8 3. 28 34.3

case, and you gave the amount of imported oil used in these products. Would it not have the effect of increasing the production of these butter substitutes and increasing the importation of coconut oil into this country?

Mr. MURDOCK. Naturally. Mr. ADKINS. It naturally would. Mr. MURDOCK. It naturally would. Mt·. ADKINS. Now, do you think that it would be good business for

the country, good policy, to encourage the importation of food products from other lands which would evidently displace butter, to the detriment of the butter producers of this country? Do you think that would be good policy or. good business for the Government to adopt?

Mr. MURDOCK. That is a question of opinion; but I will say to you I do not see why in this land of oura we should favor the farmer in Illi­nois any more than we do the farmers in the Philippines ; the man who produces butter any more than we do the man who produces coconuts; they are both in the same country.

Now, when you go around here and put it on a cooking-com· pound basis you are just handing them a lot of bunk, because the representative of the largest producers of this commodity in the country admits differently, and it is good business for him, of course, to encourage the use and the manufacture of this product in this country, even though it puts the dairy farmers of the country out of business ; and you can take these figures to-morrow morning when you have a chance to study them and go back for 10 years and you can not for the life of you figure out where, if we put 20 cents a pound tax on this substitute, it would make a penny's difference in the price of the commodity that the consuming public would have to buy.

Of course, there is a big hurrah about the packers. Every­body knows there is a natural prejudice against the packers because. they were in bad odor for a good many years and they have improved very much in recent years, but that is just throwing dust in a fellow's eyes to fool him on this proposition.

The packer is selling the larger percentage of the oleomar4

garine used in the country without paying the tax, about 250,-000,000 pounds, I think it is. This 1~ all right, but we are compelling them to sell it in its natural color and we are com­pe-lling them to sell it for just what it is, and we do not want to prevent his manufacture of it because that is made from a product produced on the American farm, but we do not want that product to fool some other part of the public into the belief that they are buying butter when they are not.

Mr. BUSBY. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. ADKINS. I will be glad to. Mr. BUSBY. Is the oleomargarine that the packer sells of

white color, or is it colored by this substance? Mr. ADKINS. The most of it is of the white color. This is

the situation with regard to that--Mr. BUSBY. Let me follow that question--Mr. ADKINS. I do not want the gentleman to make a speech.

I thought the gentleman wanted to ask a question. Mr. BUSBY. I tried to ask the gentleman a question and

he interrupted me. Mr. ADKINS. I am trying to answer the gentleman's ques­

tion. A very large percentage of it is white in color. Most of it is white ; about 16,000,000 pounds is colored. A

Member near me says something about 5 per cent. Now, the reason they let that go by with one-quarter of a cent tax is, it is made of the natural farm product and not artificially col­q,red. The part that is colored, when made by some coloring liRe butter, we tax at 10 cents per pound.

Mr. BUSBY. A part of it. Mr. ADKINS. Very well; when we killed the old dairy cow

that gave much mllk rich in butterfat the tallow looked like

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HO SE 2803 The pn ·k<'r , on learned that the fat that came out

f tlt 1 \1 •ru. <•y !OW an<l th Jer y cow made natural-colored 1 omnrgariu 1 olllargurln without any coloring. We did

not Jllll th ta n it. · W m· n t obj , t ing to that, bec-ause if they had to pay a tn · ou that, thnl ~ ·oul<.l m out of the price of the dairy c w wh<•n Aold and would ' ·ork n di udvanta" to tbe farmer. o, in n wny, w at· prot ctlno- lbe dairy farmer, but we are not prote<·ting th pr duct ot the rllilippine. , tb coconut oleo­margarin .

Mt·. II< PE. Mr. A KIN .Mt·. II PE. Why i th 5 per cent ol omnrgarlne that the

gcntl man 'll ak of old by the pnckt . of the ·arne quality n tlw whit leomnrgal'ine not included in the ,·ame cla..:. ?

Ml'. ADri.. . B .('au. it i of a naturnl color. Mr. II PE. But it i of the ame color a the yellow oleo­

mnr~nriu<' mad . from <"onut oiL fr. A KI . The gentl man want. to know why it i unfair

t 1 t the nntuml color go by and tax th yellow made from t•o ouut oil?

Mr. II PE. ~ ; if it is made from coconut oil or cottonseed. 1\lr. A IU . 'l'o be frank, it i to prot ct the American

farm r ngnin. t t11e ·ub tltut made from coconut oil not grown 1n th ~ nit d , tat .. .

'l'he IIAlRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Illinois bu. n "Ui n pir •d .

.Mr. ADKI . wing to ur pr . ent relation:hlp with the Philtppiu , lt £' m we can not protect the American farmer throu~h th tnrifr nguln.'t coconut oi1, and this will do the job, s r r os prot ·ting tl1 dairy farmer, and not result in any advau in pric f oleomargarine t the con umer.

Mr. J "E • of Te.·a . lr. 'bairman, I yield 10 minutes to tlw gt•ntl won ft·om :\fi~ .· ouri (1\Ir. ELLI ].

1\Ir. ll;LLIH. Mr. hairman, to b ~in where my good friend from Illinoi~ left off. I want to . ay that from my inve tigation of this •usc upon th lt nrings--I have not bad acce to matter thnt ha lJet·n lug~cd Into th debate; none of u have had opportunity to inspect U1at-from the . bowin..,. made in the b nrln~~. tbis 1 a qunrr 1 b tw n the ole margarine people and 12 lndu. trl in this country that manufacture a commercially r <·o~mlz<'o t• ol·ing comp und.

rr. n PE. ill tb gcu tl mnn yield? Ir. JOI. .. I .. I.'. I Jl lu.

Mr. II PE. I · th g ntl man a wt'tre of the tatement in th h nrlng t th ffect tllat all but 3 of these 12 manufacturers ar al ·o m:mufactuting ol omargarine?

Mr. ELI.JJ. '. No; ut nll ri~bt; let it go at that. The oleo­margarin munufnctnr r ', principally th pa keJ:S, are on one Aitl • and tb H 12 industric ar on the other. The list of them apprar In th h nl'iu .. a at pag 109. But tbl bill comes out ot port nn<l sailR forth ond r the :flao- of the farmer. Then my g !l fl'it'nd from M:i<'hlgan [Mr. KE'TcHA l] add a pennant f r tb ow and anoth r for the ow. o if th re is any other raft on th • l<.ogl lativ a it must arry the bla flag of the

plrat . ti-augbt r.] Now, g('ntl m n, there is not anything in the bill for the

fnrtnf'r unl , you an make good picnic lemonade by tht·owing nn uncut 1 mou into a barrel ot rain wa r. [Laughter.] Ther is a . ol utely nothing In it for the farmer. That i made manif ~ t in tb h al'ing ..

ur hi..,.hly te m d friend, the chairman of this committee, put U1 right foot forward in conducting the hearings. He put on th tand at the tart :Mr. Loomi , s cretary of the National

airy Uni n. Mr. Lo mis i the czar of all of the dairi in thl country.

II wa :xbau tlvcly examined, but he did not make the slight­<' t pret n. e that tb farmer or farm int r t were going to g t any ben fit fr m thi measure. That sugg tion come from my fri nd from Mi higan [Mr. KETonAM], from my friend from Minn ·ota [Mr. ANDRE Jo;N J, and my friend fr m illinois (Mr. AnKI l. Til .y have discover d somehow that the farmer is go1ug to be n tltc<l, and they want to make that the issue h<'r b for u, to-dny.

Mr. A KI S. Mr. Chairman, will the g ntleman yield? Mr. ELLI . Ye . Mr. ADKI . If this <loc not rtaln to the farm in any

way, it would not lik ly come before our committee. Mr. ELLI . Oh, I do not think this bill belongs in the gen­

U man's commitl e at all. The g ntleman from New York [Mt·. LA u n.mAJ is right about it. 'l'be controverted que tion h r is nt 1h bu e one of revenue. When did the Agricultural

ommitt tak juri ·diction of exc1 and tarifls? The con-trov rsy tlu~ oleomar·~arin ople are having with these indus­tri · iii vcr tile tax. The ·e manufacturer of oleonuu:garine

want to drive out of business the makers of this compound by having a tax imposed upon the product.

Mr. BURT "E S. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ELLI . Yes. I will yield to my friend from North

Dakota. Mr. BURTNES . Do the gentleman think it 1 fair for

the ono-re s of the niteo tate to tax the manufacturers of artificially c lored oleomargarine, the product of the American farm, 10 cent a pound and permit the manufacturers of what you call these cooking compounds, sold direct1y in competition with oleomargarine for the same purpose, to be entirely tax free?

:Mr. ELLIS. Tbe an wer to that que tion i that oleomarga­rine is not a product of the American farm; and the packing hou: . , where it lli produced, d not pay 10 cents a pound; they have contrived to avoid such payment.

Mr. Bt'R 1 TE. . That i exactly the situation to-day under the Ia w a. it exi. ts.

Mr. ELLIS. Well, oleomargarine i made in my di trict and in other district in this country, and nowhere do they pay 10 cents a pound on mu ·h of it. Th y pay one-quarter of a cent a pound, which amounts to nothing.

Mr. B RT1TE . That i on the product that i not colored. Mr. ELLI . Ye . And a has been ·bown, they are thrifty

enouo-h to out ju. t color enough to make it sell and . till not enou"'h. or of the sort to reQuire payment of the tnx. My fri nd'. · . ympnthy for the packers is a dead wa. te--a total lo"s.

Mr. JONE of Tt>xas. :Mr. hairman, I have the fio-ur . on ol margarine from th n.us Department. Th re were 315,-000,0 poun<l of oleomargarine made and old la t year, and only 16, 00.0 of that paid the 10-c nt tax, and 299, 00,000 pound paid one-quarter of a cent a pound.

Mr. ELLI . I thank my friend from Texa .. Mr. BURT.~..-ESS. And that large amount wa not artificially

color d, while tb e people c lor their stutr. Mr. ELL! . Mr. bairman, in my rema1·k. on the rule I

comp1nined about the . tat ment of thi ca_,e as to a jury, by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. PUR~]. He undertook to say that frnud was b ing p rpetrated upon the American pe ple by the maker of the;~e king. compound . The hearings di pute that-c ntrov-ert it ab olutely. It wa denie<.l by every wibless that wn . competent t t . tify.

Mr. KETCHAM. While the gentleman i looking for that in tb bearing will he yield to me for a moment?

Ir. ELLI . Let me r ad tbi . If I am not car ful, I will not have anything that I say myself in my speech at all. I read from the testimony of Mr. Loomis, and no better equippe1 witne wa called fore the committee. He aid of this compound we are talkin"' about:

It is mnrketed in n package which 1 label d by nothing exe<>pt tbis trade name, " P nobscot 'ut Product; Danish Packing o., Providf'nce, R. I." evernl imllar product in texture and taste on the market are labeled a " Nut product " prepared exclusively for baking, cooking, and shortening.

Mt·. A wELL here interpo 'ed a que tion : Is there any fraud in that? I do not see any fraud In that it what

you r nd d scribes what is in it • • • what harm does that do? In ca e people want to use it for butter, what harm does it do?

Mr. Loomis ans~red: I know of no harm that It does if they know what they are buying.

Mr. AsWELL: It tells In there what It Is compos d of • • •. Do they not show

what it 1 made of?

Mr. Loomi answer d: They do ; they tell the truth about it.

The gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. AswELL] bas a rather inqui. itive turn of mind.

On thi charo-e of fraud again t thes people who make this product I want to ref r again to these bearing . They put a r venue o:ffi er on the stand, and be proceeded to tell the efforts that had b n made by u~e of revenue ag nts ov r the country to detect the wrongful u. e of the e cooking ompounds. This official told the committee they had found two re taurants down in Kentucky somewhere that were using this compound on the tabl instead of butter. Then he reported efforts of these agents in my city and . aid that there he found five dealer · who were s lling this commod.i.ty.

You will find thi in the report upon this bill: There is no showing that any of the e dealers in Kan as City b ld out this product to be anything other than what it really i . The agents asked for colored oleomargarine. They were hnndcd by

2804 ~ CON.GRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE J .A.NU ARY 31 the salesman this product manufactured in New Jersey. I can visualize that transaction. The salesman u.ndoubtedly said, " 'Ve do not handle oleomargarine, but here is an article just as good for the purpose you likely have in mind." That is the common practice of salesmen in retail stores, and it is con­sidered good salesmanship. The report of these agents was complimentary to Kansas City salesmen and saleswomen. They presented a commodity. They told the truth, if they said it was sweet and wholesome and nutritious and answers in many purposes for butter. They may have told these agents that housewives of Kansas City, among them the housewife I return to when I go home, come into those stores and ask for this baking compound; that when they are paJing 60 cents a pound for butter and they want something for use in cooking and baking that will serve the purposes of butter, they prefer to buy this article at 40 cents a pound. These women are not being de­ceived. They know they are practicing economy.

If you pass this bill, you are going to deny to housewives tP,e practice of this economy. You are going to impose a burden on the housewife and on the families in this country by adding a tax that the oleomargarine people hope will drive these industries from competition with them. As the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. UNDERHILL] has well said, you better take off the burdens on the consumer rather than put them on.

There are in my district some of these manufacturers of oleomargarine. Here are also these perfectly reliable and honest manufacturers of this compound ; and there is the general public. I have gone carefully through these hearings in the last few days, and I have not the slightest trouble in making up my mind to vote against this bill.

Mr. ANDRESEN. Mr. Chairman, does not the gentleman think that the cooking compound that is sold to the housewives would be just as good if they left out the coloring matter?

Mr. ELLIS. Oh, perhaps. But if putting in of coloring matter helps to sell it, I should worry. [Laughter.] The price to the people of a good, wholesome article of food is what in­terests me.

Mr. ANDRESEN. It costs 9%, cents a pound less. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Missouri

has expired. Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield five minutes to the

gentleman from Vermont [Mr. BRIGHAM]. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Vermont is recog­

nized for five minutes. Mr. BRIGHAM. Mr. Chairman, the bill under consideration

establishes no new policy with respect to the control of butter substitutes. It does nothing which it was not intended our present law would do. This proposed amendment is simply a clarification of that law to settle a dispute which has arisen concerning it, so that without question the manufacture and sale of all butter substitutes will be brought under the regulations which it provides.

Charges have been made that this bill is in behalf of the Butter Trust, whatever that may mean. It is sufficient refuta­tion of this charge to cite the fact that every civilized nation in the world has passed laws to regulate the manufacture and sale of substitutes for butter, which look like butter and are for the same uses as butter. Surely no butter trust can be suffi­ciently powerful to control the parliamentary bodies of the world.

The reason for such a universal legislative policy is not diffi­cult to determine. More than 50 years ago a French chemist, Mege-Mouries, made public a formula for artificial butter, com­posed of animal fats, churned or emulsified in milk or cream, and colored so that the texture, flavor, and appearance resembled butter made from cow's milk. This artificial butter cost much less to produce than it cost to produce the genuine article from cow's milk. If the imitation could be freely sold as and for butter then there could be but one outcome. You know that it has long been recognized as a fundamental monetary principle, known as Gresham's law, that when two metals of unequal bullion value are made to circulate freely as a medium of exchange, the cheaper money will drive the dearer out of circulation. By the same reasoning, if we have an artificial butter made from animal or vegetable fats, which is freely permitted to imitate the color, the texture, and the flavor of butter and to be fraudulently sold as butter, while it costs much less to produce than does the genuine butter from cow's milk, then there can be but one outcome-the dairy industry which produces genuine butter must go out of business. The issue at that time was clearly defined. Regulate and control the manufacture and sale of butter substitutes and maintain the dairy industry Oi' give these substitutes a free field and let the dairy industry go.

A controversy raged over this subject for many years in the world's great legislative assemblies. Able scientists maintained

that the substitute butters, differing somewhat in the materials. entering into their composition, but grouped under the term, oleomargarine, had the same chemical composition as butter, the same nutritive value, and should be allowed to be sold as butter. Other scientists held the view that . the cow placed in the milk to nourish her young some.thing which she did not place in the body fat which she stored in her body to nourish herself, and that butter substitutes, made from body fat and vegetable oils could not perform the function in the human dietary that is performed by butter made from milk fat. The discovery in recent years of certain growth substances called vitamins which are necessary for normal growth of the young and which are found abundantly in cow's milk butter now con­firm the opinion of those who defended the superior food value of butter.

Practically every great nation of the world adopted the view that the well-being of its people demanded that the dairy in­dustry be maintained and enacted stringent laws to protect dairy butter from the counterfeit called oleomargarine. Presi­dent Hoover in the following language has stated the view held to-day by practically every nation.

We need insistent recognition ·of the fact of the interdependence of the human animal upon his cattle. The white race can n9t survive without its dairy products and no child can be developed on short or bad milk supplies.

I have had the laws of several nations compiled by the Library of Congress and it is interesting to study the methods that have been adopted to protect butter in its legitimate market. Our neighbor on the north, Canada, goes the farthest and absolutely prohibits the importation, manufacture, or sale of butter sub­stitutes. France, the original home of oleomargarine, prohibits the coloring of oleomargarine, which means that it can not take the color of butter, and provides that it shall be sold under the strictest supervision and that it must not be sold in the same retail store from which butter is sold. In Germany the sale of butter and oleomargarine from the same store is also prohibited in towns or cities of over 5,000 inhabitants and the mixing of butter and to a certain extent milk and cream in the making of oleomargarine is prohibited, thereby depriving oleomargarine of the use of the distinctive flavor of butter.

In our country the Congress, in 1886, established the policy of safegu~rding the dairy industry and protecting its product from fraudulent imitations. The method set up in 1886 was the same as, with some amendments, prevails to-day. Pres­ident Cleveland, in approving this original act, sent a message containing the following comment:

Not the least important incident related to this legislation is the defense accorded the consumer against the fraudulent substitution and sale of an imitation of the genuinf' article of food of very general use. I venture to say that hardly a pound (referring to oleomargarine) ever entered a poor man's home under its real name and in its real char.~cter.

Our law provides for the Federal control by license of the manufacturers and distributors of butter substitutes, and it provides for the levying of a tax upon butter substitutes. This tax varies in amount. If the substitute is sold under its own color, which is white, the tax is nominal, only one-fourth cent per pound, or only sufficient to reimburse the Government f the cost of regulation. If artificial coloring matter is used to color the oleomargarine in imitation of butter, then the tax is 10 cents per pound. This is on the theory that yellow is the natural color of butter-its trade-mark, in fact- and if the substitute borrows that color it should pay for the privilege. But so universally popular is butter and so profitable is the manufacture of its substitutes that clever chemjsts have been employed to attempt to make a counterfeit, yellow in color and having all the appearance of butter, with which to fool the consumer and at the same time not be subject to the existing oleomargarine laws. .Finally success has rewarded the efforts of these I)eople and they have at last put upon the market a number of products called cooking compounds, which are col­ored like butter, have the same texture as butter, and are put up in packages similar to those in which butter is sold, and these compounds under the ruling of the courts may be manu­factured and sold without the payment of a tax and without the supervision of the Bureau of Internal Revenue.

The practical question is, Are these compounds being sold for and used for butter? In the first place, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue held that these compounds do come within the scope of our laws relating to oleomargarine and should be regulated and taxed as such. The following is the regulation of the Bureau of Internal Revenue defining when in its opinion cooking compounds are to be classed as oleomargarine :

Cooking compounds or substitutes for lard ; when taxable : All animal fats or oils, vegetable oils, and all compounds and mixtures of such

1930 COXGRE~ IO :r 1\.L RECORD-HOUSE 2805 anlmnl f&ts or ollfl nnd vc ~tnble on , with or wltbout the nd<lltlon of c loring m."\ ttcr, whlcb l1ave b en chut·n a in cream, milk, or water, or bnth<'<l tn n Rolutlon of brln , tb<! reby imparting to the r ultant product th flavor, t<> lur , and n111l arance of butter, ar prop rly tn able under tltr lllw n ol mnr~nrln . ook!ng compound or ub. tltute tor lD.I'd whit'h nr placed on tho mark t Jn g od faith a. such and wblch do not r semble butter in general cbnrnctcrlstlc ar ex mpt from tax as ol omnrgnrlnc. •

Nut·Z- 11, the new butt r put up in pound packag &--It's colored, enlt •d, and r ndy to us - tt' like butt<'r- 85 cents a pound.

'l'he following 1 an adYerU ment appearing in the Kan as City tnt·:

Nu ·lne (u In place of butter) ; pound, 30 cent . Thl. 1 but typi•al of runny adverti m nt appearing in news­

paper fn differ ut part of the couutry which are quoted tn the R ·RD.

Mr. I'"ET DAM. Mr. Chairman, wJll the gentleman yield? Mr. BRIGHAM. Y . Mr. KF./1' HAM. the g ntlemnn recall from the hear-

Ing nnd t sthnony had b fore our committee whether or not the1· wa. any evldenc orr re<l to show that the manufacturers rntller en on rag d th dealers to ndverti e in that direction?

Mr. BRIGU I. I think the manufa turer claimed that they dl(l n t an •Uon ucb adv rtlslng, but adv rtl ments lmllar In barnet r em d to appear in papet·s in widely separated

1 allU . . Tb 'IIAIRMAN. The t.im of the gentleman from Vermont

hn . ·pir d. Mr. BRI HAM. May I have five minute more? l\Ir. HAUGE . I yi 1<1 to tb g ntleman three minute. more. 'l,h HAIHM .. . Th gent! man is recognized for three

minut mor . Mr. BlU UAM. Furth

om· populati n now of n ·ity mu t nt one or more meals nch dny in public eating pia · . Marking the pa ·kage iu which

food 1 · pur ha .. d by th propri tor i not protection to the Ilalron to whom a mall portion 1 . r~ed. In mo t tates:, if ol mar •nrln 1. • erv d in a public atmg place notice of this fa ·t must be .dl plny <l '·her th patron an ·ee it. In Mr. Yeatman' t timony you wlll find that n d puty collector of the Bur au f Int rnnl Rev nn w nt into a re ·tnm·ant here in Wn. hin~t n aud when he a. ked for butter he was .·erved a little vnttt of Nu-ine, ne of th . om1 ound which we are trying to bring within th . cope of the leomnrgarlne laws. Another inl-' ·tor, wh n taking a m al in a hotel Jn K utucky, a ked for butt r and wa. ened wJth one of th .:e (•ompound . I am in­f x·m 1 tllll it I ommon pracllc in many re tam·ants to u e on of th s mpounds in the place of butter, not only on the tnl>l , but in making ·andwlch , buttering ton t, and o forth.

o 1 ng os the 1 w permit. th m to be cla ed a. ometbing else than ol omnrgarin , re. tnUt·ant proprietors are relieved of giv­ing puhllr not it' of tll ir use.

Mr. LI Till "UM. Mr. hail·man, will the gentleman yield th 1' ?

lr. BRI ll.A f. I regret I can not yl ld. Now, if th 'S compounds are u.,ed ns and for butter, what Is

tb degr of competition to which the dairy indu try is sub· j ct a by , uch u ·e? I would r fer you to page 66 of the bear­ing on thl bill. Th re you will find a brief filed by Mr. Hig­~inR, of til Higgins Manufacturing o., a manufacturer of one of the product we are aiming to control. He • aid :

Tb lngredl nts o! the product are a follow : In making 100 pounds ot Iltggln. nut product there nrc u 'Cd 0 pounds ot coconut oil, 20 pouuds of p nnut on, 3 pounds ot s It, one-tenth of 1 per cent of color­Ing mnttet·.

1'hc IIAIRMAN. Th time of the g ntleman from Vermont lUIH ugnin <> ." Ji il' d .

• Ir. Il t:Gl•)~. 1\Ir. hairmun, I yi 1<1 to the gentlE>man one ml11ut mor.

Mr. BRIGHA~I. The brief statement do not say, howC'ver, that the material i. · churned and emul. itled in water. I "ll -mitted the que tion to an expert and was inform d that the material above mention d, weighing 103 pound~, would, wl1en churned in water, ab80rb . u:fficieut moi .. tur to produt 113 pound of nut product. On the ba . .i . of price · of Dec ml>er 26, 1920, tho following would be the cot of material· for producing Higgin ·~ nut product:

80 pounds coconut otl, at 9 cents--------------------------- $7. 20 20 pounds p anut oil, at 13 cents--------------------------- 2. 60

3 pound salt, nt 1 cent---------------------------------- . 03 10 pound water.

113 pounds, or 8.69 cents per pound. 9. 83

Now, let u con. ider the co. t of producing dairy butter. Prof. 0. E. Reed, the very able and efficient Chief of the Bureau of Dairy Industry, has furni~hed me ome figures a to the co~t of producing butter, which were obtained as the re.~ult of ln­ve tigation in s veral thou~and herd. throughout tbe coun­try. Tbe co t varied with the production, but in the group of herd producing 200 pound of butter fat annually, which is better than the average for the whole country, the co t of pro­ducing the cr nm at th farm, the raw material b fore manu­facture, which i on the . ame ba. i a I have used for the sub­stitute, averaged 89 cents per pound of butter.

Th n we have thi ituation: We bave a product made from vegetable oils and manufactured in such a way as to imitate butter in very way, in texture, in color, and in flavor, and co t­ing but .7 cents per pound for the material to manufacture it, being s ld in competition with butter whlch is co ting the dairy farmer 39 cents per pound for the material to manufacture it. I a k you if the dairy can endure under this competition?

Furthermore, in d1 cu ing competitive conditions, I want to point out that dairy farmer are not the only ones concerned in tbi bill. Refer back, 1f you plea e, to the formula for one of the e compounds which I have quoted from the hearing . You will note that it contain no cottonseed oil and no animal fat You will note also that of the materiaL, except water and salt, which enter into it composition, eight-tenths is coco­nut oil which 1 not produced at all on the farms of tbi coun­try. This compound does contain a small amount of peanut oil, which can be produced en the farms of the South. But when a pound of this compound i sold it provide a market to our peanut grower for about 2.3 cent worth of peauut oil.

On the other band, we have in the South a a by-product of our greut cotton industry quantities of cottonseed meal. This meal is one of the best source. of protein feed for the dairy farmer. The Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture esti­mate that a much as 2,000,000 ton of cotton eed meal and cake are u. ed as feed annually. It is the u ual practice for a dairy farm r to feed a cow producing a pound of butter a day , 2 pound of cotton eed meal in her ration. This ts worth at lea. t 2 cent p r pound. Therefore, when a pound of butter is sold it provide a market for 4 cent worth of cottonseed meal together with additional quantitie of bay, corn, and grain by­product , all the products of our oil, while a pound of cooking compound old to replace a pound of butter provide. a market for only 2.3 cents worth of peanut oil.

In view of the ituation which is di closed by the evidence pre nted in the bearing in this bill, the que tion 1 again quarely before the Congre a _ it was In 1 6. I it e ~cutial

to the good health and general ·well-being of the people of the United tates that the dairy 1ndu try be pre. erved? If we an wer that que tion in the affirmative we mu.·t protect the produ ·t of this indu try from the competition of low-co t, in­felior, counterfeit product by the pa.- age of tWs bill. [Ap­plau e.]

Mr. JO ;ES of Texas. Mr. hairmnu, I yield fir-e minutes to the gentleman from Yitginia [Mr. LA. KFORD].

The HAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for five minutes.

.Mr. L :rKFORD f Vir"'inia. Mr. Chairman and gentl(lmen, I he itate to take the floor, being a new Member, but I c1 want to call rour attention to one or two thing in thi. bill. Thi · is on of the mo ·t tech'nlcal bills which ha.· come b(>fore the Hou~e . lnce I har-e been li re. Ordinarily I take t11e adYlce of the ommittee, and I have Tery great r pect for thi .Agri­cultural ommittee, but thut 1. a dan<rer I am afraid we are all in. This is a very important thing, and I want to a..:k you 1o mnke a tudy of it and before y u vote on the blll let U " know what we are YOting on.

I was very much impr ed by the gentleman from Xew York [Mr. LAGUARDIA] and the gentleman from Ma~ achusett. [Mr. UNDERHILL]. I a~ree with th m that we do n t want to put an additional burden n the hou.· wive!; of thi countt·~·. If they do not want the. e u titute..,, they do not need to buy

2806 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JANUARY 31 them, but if they do want them we should not add to their burden by putting on an additional 10-cent tax.

The thing I am very much interested in is the question of peanut oil. I come from the peanut belt, the very heart of the peanut belt. We there raise the bulk of the peanut crop. One of the objections made to the use of the-se substitutes is that in making them they use cottonseed oil and peanut oil. Earl~' in the tariff session you gentlemen were kind enough to give me an additional penny on peanuts. We have been suffering for years because of the Chinese competition and we were very much in need of additional tariff. However, having gotten the additional tariff, it has not helped very much, because the price of peanuts is down because the consumption has fallen off.

Mr. STRONG of Kansas. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. LANKFORD of Virginia. Yes. Mr. STRONG of Kansas. Does the gentleman feel that

peanuts should have protection? Mr. LANKFORD of Virginia. I certainly do. 1\!r. STRONG of Kansas. Does not the gentleman believe that

the producers of butter are entitled to the same protection? Mr. LANKFORD of Virginia. Certainly; and they do get a

much higher protection than peanuts. Mr. STRONG of Kansas. But the gentleman was talking

against it. Mr. LANKFORD of Virginia. No. I am willing to help

dairy products. Mr. STRONG of Kansas. Then vote for the bill. Mr. LANKFORD of Virginia. But I do not want peanut oil

discriminated against, and that is what we are doing in this bill. I object to sacrificing the peanut on the altar of the cow. Here are two products produced in this country, peanut oil and cottonseed oil. They are products which this bill proposes to tax for the benefit of the butter industry, and I do not think that is fair. It has been stated that you want to get rid of coconut oil. If that is so, why not confine this to coconut oil and let American products, raised on American soil, do as they have done in the past? That will come up later, and I ask your careful consideration of it. If you want to get rid of coconut oil, then confine it to coconut oil, but do not penalize peanut oil and products of that sort for the benefit of dairy products.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. LANKFORD of Virginia. Yes. Mr. ABERNETHY. Does not this bill tax the· housewives 10

cents a pound on something that is not claimed to be butter'? Mr. LANKFORD of Virginia. As I understand, this bill will

result in taxing the housewives of the country and also result in laying a burden on the American peanut farmers as well?

Mr. ABERNETHY. These' products are not sold as butter, are they?

Mr. LANKFORD of Virginia. I do not suppose so ; at least, I believe the people know what they are buying; if they do not want to buy them they do not have to do so, and certainly this bill will increase the price 10 cents a pound if it is passed, and I do not believe this bill should pass. [Applause.]

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. LINTHICUM. Mr. Chairman, I make the point of order

of no quorum. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Maryland makes the

point of order of no quorum. The Chair will count. During the counting-Mr. LINTHICUM. Mr. Chairmqn, I withdraw the point of

no quorum for the present. Mr. JONES of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield five minutes to

the gentleman from Colorado [1\Ir. EATON]. Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of

the committee, I would like to have your attention for a moment, for I want to direct your attention to something which appears to me to have been overlooked in your bill. You may not know that Colorado was one of the first States to pass a bill of this character, but in passing it there were four words in the Colo­rado bill which seems to have been stricken from this one. They are the last four words of the bill and are:

Nor to pharmaceutical preparations.

As your bill is written, and as it was presented to us in Colo­rado for passage, those words were contained in the bill. This is merely an amendment of the present existing law to take care of a situation that has arisen in connection with things to eat, something that grocers handle, that packers and others make, and in which dairymen are interested. The bill provides:

That for the purposes of this act certain manufactured substances, certain extracts, and certain mixtures and compounds, including such mixtures and compounds with butter, shall be known and designated as "oleomargarine," namely: All substances heretofore known as oleo­margarine.

• • • all mixtures and compounds of oleomargarine, oleo, oleo· margarine oil, butterine, lardine, suine, and neutral ; all lard extracts and tallow extracts ; and all mixtures and compounds of tallow, beet fat, suet, lard, lard oil, fish oil or fish fat, vegetable oil, annatto, and other coloring matter, intestinal fat, and oll'al fat; • • •.

Here follow two exceptions which were in the old law, and now this is what is added :

If churned, emulsified, or mixed in cream, milk, water, or other liquid, and containing moisture in excess of 1 per cent or common salt.

Then come the two exceptions : This section shall not apply to pufr-pastt·y shortening not churned

or emulsified in milk or ct·enm, and having a melting point of 118" F. or more, nor to any of the following containing condiments and spices : Salad dressings, mayonnaise dressings, or mayonnaise products.

In the bill passed in our State, and as I understand in the other States, there is also a third classification and exception:

Nor to pharmaceutical preparations.

Immediately this bill was passed, litigation was started by a Kansas City firm interested in oleomargarine, butterine, and so forth. I do not know the names of all the products. The deci­sion was against the butterine people and the litigation is now being held until the passage of some kind of a law by· the United States Congress.

I direct the attention of the committee to this matter. It seems to me there has been overlooked by some one the fact that every kind of an emulsion, no matter how it is made by the addition to liquids of oils of the different classes, is affected by this bill, so that druggists, whether they are retail druggists or wholesale druggists, will have to pay the tax which this law provides. The oleomargarine law is- not against druggists or against packers or against farmers as such, but against all those people who mix the different kinds of o~ls with something that wiU make more than a 1 per cent moisture content. I submit that for your consideration, and to-morrow I will sub· mit an amendment at the proper place and I trust that those who look into it will find it is a proper amendment to the bill.

Mr. Qhairman, I yield back the remainder of my tlme. Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from

Minnesota [Mr. SELviG]. Mr. SELVIG. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee,

there is no new principle or procedure in the bill. It merely extends the definition of oleomargarine. It simply brings in under the scope of the oleomargarine act passed 43 years ago products colored in the semblance of butter. It merely includes such new products as scientific knowledge has invented which have been introduced into the markets of the country since the original oleomargarine law was passed.

The reason for urging the enactment of this bill is because the courts have ruled that the so-called cooking compounds do not come under the present provisions of that la\v. This bill simply adds to the regular oleomargarine law, broadens the present law, to protect the consumers and producers of butter against another substitute.

This bill seeks to put an end to the intolerable situation which confronts both the dairy interests of the country and the con­sumers as well. It is a timely measure. The inroads made by oleo and nut margarine manufactured and sold in imitation of butter have created a price crisis among the country's dairy farmers.

I shall not take time to quote statistics. It is well known to all that the dairy industry is facing demoralization on ac­count of this unfair competition centered against it by mar· garine products that are being placed on the market. I favored the rule to bring this bill before tlie House, and wanted it done last spring after the Agricultural Committee reported the bill. I am in favor of passing the bill at the earliest possible moment.

It is generally admitted that these nut margarines, these so­called cooking compounds, are made in imitation of butter or in semblance of butter. Even the opponents of this bill do not contend that these nut margarines are as good as butter. It is admitted that they are made largely from coconut oil, for the most part imported from the Philippine Islands duty free.

Nobody contends that they contain the health-giving vitamins that set butter apart as a food in a class by itself. If · this is true, why should not these products be classed as oleomar­garine?

The deceptiveness of the product is obYious to all. This deceptiveness is such that even an expert can not determine from appearance, taste, or odor the difference between butter, oleomargarine, and the nut-margarine product under discussion this afternoon.

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 2807 WhY do they try to fmttnte butter? Tbi i one que tion that

ba not been aUsfnctorily answered by the opponents of this legi ·lation.

If it 1 t11 hone. t lntere t of tbe manufacturer to have the e nut mnrgurin uH <1 a. a sl10rtenlng product, why do they in ev ry way try to have th m imitate butter?

Lard and shortening produ ts . 11 at 11 or 12 cents per p und. They contain only about 1 per ent of mol hrre. The ubf'titut s, whl ·h the bill r omm nded by the Agricultural omntitt • • would elm; ·ify n · oleomargarine-, are not sold as

short ning, which . 11 at 11 or 12 cents per pound, but are mad to look nnd t st lik butt r in ord r to command a better pri .

1\:[nny, it not nll, of the M mb rs of this House ar inc rely and vitnlly concerned with the welfare of our farmer . I am uot g lng to make a spe ch on the g neral subject of farm r 11 f n w, but I want to point out that t11e distingui hed mem-

r of th ~n·eat A rlcultural Committ of t11i Hou e, after giving thi. bill full ·onsid ration, recommend it to pa . The m mh 'r · o:t that committee can well be called the guardians of th agricultural fnt rests of our country.

No 011e who 1 interested in the mo t important problem con­!rontln~ tb nited tate , which, a I have frequently reiter­at d for Uti body, i: the agricultural problem, needs to apologlz :tor trying to saf guard this vital interest. He should be proud to glv hi support to every legitimate measure for th b n flt f that gr .at indu try.

'l'o uf uard th dairy industry and to aid agriculture de­mand · that tb . e nut margarines should be cla ed under the law a ol omnr nrin . Th 'Y are manufactured by the ame 1<1 nll ·al proce:,;~ a. butt r. They are old as a substitute for butt r. Wbat ju li1lcation i tbere for permitting them to r •mnin uLide that law?

N'by hould the farm rs o:t th United tat submit to hav­ing th 1 gitinmt products of a:tticulture come into unfair compNlUon with the produ t of v getable oil ?

Th • dnirylng indu~try of the United State mu t be safe­guard d. It ls one :t the mo t important sources of the Nation's agricultural Inc me. In many r gions it is the only branch of farming that yields anything Uke a favorable return upon tim , capital, and lab r invested.

The mption of nut margarines from the provisions of the ol omar arine a t trlk a body bl w at dairying. The future wel!nr . of our Nation depend upon giving every encourage­ment to tb drury indu try. Dairying, unlike many other brandt of farming, con rve oll ferUlity. Wise statesman· hlp will incr •n ingly str s thi point. ·w must not lo e lgbt ot the fact that butter and milk nre

up rl l' food , indi pensable for children. The vitamins in th foods are nee ·itl . . We are not thinking simply of d Uar and cents In urging tbat favorable consideration be given thi mea ·ur . To my mind, we touch upon a vital problem of our c untry' welfare.

R 1 r ntativ of all the principal national farm organiza­tion tc ·titled in favor of giving our drury farm rs this protec­t! n. Evi<l n e was pre · nted which showed not only the wide­apr ad di tributlon of the e o-called cooking compound sold 1n mblnnce of butt r, but that there has been a tremendous 1ncr a, fn their production.

We arc facing a condition, not a theory. Imports o:t vegetable oils amounting In vnlue to at least $150,000,000 this year come tn dlr ~t comp tition with our liv to k producers.

Th : are c n ervativ figures. conut-oil production in the Philippin now run around 1,000,000,000 pounds every year. More than half---030,000,000 pounds-in 1923 was shipped into the United Stat r placing American farm-produced oils and tat.

The signi1kunt fact in connection with the bill under con­aid rnUon Is that the o-call d cooking compounds are manu­fnctur d principally !rom vegetable oils imported free of duty. Under 1 av gt•nnted me to extend my r marks, I will go more fully into the matter of duty-free imports of coconut oil from the Philippine I lands.

COCO UT OIL J'JlOM THE lULIPPIN.I!lS

The ncquisl tion of the Philippine Islands 30 years ago, a close tud nt of our a "rltulturnl lndu try recently said, is costing the

.Am ricnu farmers at least $150,000,000 this year. These figures ar con ervntlve. Others say that the real cost is several times thnt much.

C onut-oil produclion in the Philippines now runs around 1, , 0, pound per Y.ear! and half of this is shipped into th lJuil d tnt . In thi country coconut oil replaces Ameri­can fal'm·produce<l oil and fats, pound :tor pound, and forces th biglH t·-pric<.•<l Ameri an products out of the United States Jnto 111, lteapcr foreign trade. This coconut oll goes prin-

cipally to the soap and oleomargarine manufacturers and thus competes with the producers of lard, butter, cotton eed, soy­bean , peanuts, flax, and even, to some extent, with corn.

Of the 575,000,000 pounds imported in 1927, 88 per cent came from the Philippines.

How does this vast importation afrect the American farmers? One had but to listen to the testimony presented before the Ways and Mean ommittee to learn of this. All the witne<l es were agreed that bringing 575,000.000 pounds o:t vegetable oils into the country simply displace in our own market 575,000,000 pounds of the oi1 and fats produc d on American farm. , or almo t 10 per cent of all the farm oils and fats in the United Stntes.

The native who ban·e ts coconuts in the jungles of Luzon is thus a considerable factor in holding down prices of hogs in the Middle 'Vest, of soybeans in Illinois and r .. orth Caro­lina, o:t cotton nod peanuts in the South, o:t flax in the North­west, and of dairy products all over the United State . At least 75 p r cent o:t all the farmers in the Nation are adver·ely afrected in a ub tnntial way by thf form of competition.

What \Yill happen in 5, 10, or 15 years hence? The farmer of the country have a right to a k this question. Tbi we know: The Philippine coconut industry is expanding at a tremendous rate. It is estimated that within 5 years the Philippine coconut-oil production will be above 1,600,000,000 pounds per year and above 2,000,000,000 pounds annually, in 1939. omething mu t be done to stop thi flo d of oil.

The taritf on vegetable oil will be of no avail unless it is applied to oil coming from the Philippines, as well as to oil produced in foreign countrie . Thi was emphasized in the tar11l speech which I gave on May 6, 1928. It is one of the most important items in the entire farm-tariff situation.

It is important that the American people g t to know the situation with respect to the total production of fats and oils in the United tates, and the effects of importations thereof. In 1927 American farmers produced 7,643,000,000 pounds of all fats and oils.

Th importation into the United States of vegetable oils In 1927 included 575,000,000 pounds o:t coconut oil and 487,000,000 pounds of other vegetable oil . They came in because they are produced by cheap labor, principally from the Tropics. Our exports of lard during the same year amounted to 702,000,000 potmds. This wa old in a market that tends to be lower than our domestic market.

About one-third of the vegetable-oil importations is animal and 1l h oils and :tats, including lard, tallow, fi h oil, and whale oiL The total dome tic production of 1l h and animal fat and oil . except butter, comes to 2,781,000,000 pounds, about 2,000.-000,000 of which is lard.

The second group is vegetable oil, with dom tic production totaling 2, 766,000,000 pound . Cottonseed oil makes up about two-thirds of this, and the balance is soybean oil, linseed oil, peanut oil, corn oil, and a few minor kinds, like unflower-seed oil.

The net result of all this commerce in the various oils is that 1,053,000,000 pounds of foreign and Philipine vegetable oils are brought into the United Stat . They are produced with the cheap native labor in Asia and Africa, with living conditions lower than have ever been tolerated in North America.

At the .,ame time Americans have been obliged to export 979,000,000 pounds of fats and oils 702,000,000 pound of which is lard, mo tly to Europe, where it sells In a market which tends to be lower than the American market. It is conceded by all that the export surplus determines the price for the whole American output, and so the prices of American farm products which are used for fats and oils are determined by cheap oriental labor at one end o:t the line and by a cheap European market at the other.

The farm organizations and spokesmen :for agriculture demand that fat and oils be dealt with as a unit in the forthcoming tarifr legislation. This is necessary on account of the ease in sub tituting one oil for another in the various indu tries.

In 1927 the import figures reported by the Department of Commerce tell u that the United tates imported more than $147.000,000 worth of vegetable oil and that the average import duty JJaid wa only 4 per cent. The free admi ion of coconut oil from the Philippine Islands reduced the average ad valorem equivalent of the duty to that low rate, which all know amounts practically to no protection at all.

The agricultural interests of the United States are vitally interested in H. R. 6. They are also tremendou ly concerned .in what Congress will do with regard to the tariff on veg "table oil ..

Congre s must as a national policy and a duty to our food producers accord to the great indu try of agriculture every consideration and aid. Many practical difficultie · mu::;t be met

2808 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JANUARY 31 and oYercome. The problems can be solved, for where there is a will to give real and substantial help to agriculture a way can be found to do it.

Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I move that the committee ao now rise.

The motion was agreed to. Accordingly the committee rose ; and the Speaker pro tempore

(Mr. SNELL) having resumed the chair, Mr. HAWLEY, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that committee, having had under con­s:deration the bill H. R. 6, had come to no resolution thereon.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to Mr.

VINSON of Georgia, for five days, on account of important busi­ness.

CLAIM OF H. W. BENNETT, A BRITISH SUBJECT (S. DOC. NO. 76)

The SPEAKER. The Ohair lays before the House the fol­lowing message from the President : To the Oonure8s o.f the United States:

I inclose a report received from the Secretary of State re­questing the submission anew to the present Congress of the · claim presented by the Government of Great Britain on behalf of Mr. H. w. Bennett, a British subject, against the United States for reimbursement on account of losses sustained in connection with the rescue of survivors of the U. S. S. Cherokee in February, 1919.

I concur in the recommendation made by the Secretary of : State, and recommend that as an act of grace and without I reference to the question of the legal liability of the United

States in the matter, the Congress authorize an appropriation · in the sum of $253.50 in order to effect a settlement of this

claim. HERBERT HOOVER.

THE WHITE HousE, January 31, 1930.

The SPEAKER. Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

ENROLLED JOINT RESOLUTION SIGNED Mr. CAMPBELL of Pennsylvania, from the Committee on

Enrolled Bills, reported that that committee had examined and _ found trulv enrolled a joint resolution of the House of the following title, which was thereupon signed by the Speaker:

H. J. Res. 217. Joint resolution making an additional appro­priation for the support of the Federal Radio Commission during the fiscal year 1930 in accordance with the act approved December 18, 1929.

JOINT RESOL UT!ON PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT Mr. "CAMPBELL of Pennsylvania, from the Committee on

Enrolled Bills, reported that that committee did on this day present to the President, for his approval, a joint resQlution of the House of the following title :

H. J. Res. 217. Joint resolution making an additional appro­priation ·for the support of the Federal Radio Commission dur­ing the fiscal year 1930 in accordance with the act approved De­cember 18, 1929.

ADJOURNMENT Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do

now adjourn. The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 4 o'clock and 44

minutes p. m.) the House adjourned until to-morrow, Saturday, February 1, 1930, at 12 o'clock noon.

COMMITTEE HEARINGS Mr. TILSON submitted the following tentative list of com­

mittee hearings scheduled for Saturday, February 1, 1930, as reported to the floor leader by clerks of the several committees:

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS (10.30 a.m. and 2 p.m.)

Navy Department appropriation bill. Deficiency appropriation bill. District of Columbia appropriation bill.

COMMITTEE, ON THE JUDICIARY-SUBCOMMITTEE NO. 1

(10 a.m.) To make the Star-Spangled Banner the national anthem

(H. R. 14).

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC. Under clause 2 of Rule XXIV, executive communications were

taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows: 297. A letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmit­

ting recommendation that existing legislation be amended so as to av.tl;lorize th~ Secretary of the Treasury to accept i;ltle to

the larger tract of land subject to a reservation of mineral rights in favor of the Blackfeet Tribe of Indians; to the Com· mittee on Public Buildings and Grounds.

298. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting supplemental estimate of appropriation amounting to $587,500 for the{:epartment of Agriculture for the fiscal year 1930, for an ad itional amount for the control and prevention of spread of t e pink bollworm (H. Doc. No. 273) ; to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed.

299. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting two supplemental estimates of appropria­tions for the War Department for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1930, amounting to $125,000 (H. Doc. No. 274) ; to the Com­mittee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed.

300. A letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmit­ting draft of a proposed bill to amend the Federal farm loan act, and for other purposes ; to the Committee on Banking and Currency. -

301. A letter from the president of the Capital Traction Co. transmitting report of the Capital Traction Co. for the year ending December 31, 1929 ; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND - RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of Rule XIII, Mr. CRISP: Yorktown Sesquicentennial Commission. A re­

port on the celebration to commemorate the siege of Yorktown and the surrender of Cornwallis on October 19, 1781, with recommendation of legislatiGn to carry out the purpose of the celebration ( Rept. No. 569). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Mrs. KAHN: Committee on Military Affairs. H. R. 4138. A bill to amend the act of March 2, 1929, entitled "An act to enable the mothers and widows of the deceased soldiers, sailors, and marines of the American forces now interred in the ceme· teries of Europe to make a pilgrimage to these cemeteries " ; with amendment (Rept. No. 571). Referred to the Committee .of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Mr. FISH: Committee on Foreign Affairs. H. J. Res. 210. A joint resolution to authorize an appropriation for the expenses of official delegates to the Fourth World's Poultry Congress, to be held in England in 1930; without amendment (Rept. No. 572). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Mr. HAUGEN: Committee on Agriculture. H. J. Res. 232. A joint resolution to amend the joint resolution entitled "Joint resolution to provide for eradication of pink bollworm and authorizing an appropriation therefor," approved May 21, 1928; without amendment (Rept. No. 573). Referred to the Commit· tee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PRIV ATE'l BILIJS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of Rule XIII, Mr. PEAVEY: Committee on War Claims. H. R. 2433. A

bill to pay certain claims, heretofore reported to Congress by the Secretary of War, arising from the explosions and fire at the p.lant of the T. A. Gillespie Loading Co. at Morgan, N. J., October 4 and 5, 1918; with amendment (Rept. No. 570). Re­ferred to the Committee of the Whole House.

CHANGE OF REFERENCE Under clause 2 of Rule XXII, the Committee on Pensions was

discharged from the consideration of the bill (H. R. 8954>: granting a pension to Annls M. Lagel, and the same was re­ferred to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

PUBL1C BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 3 of Rule XXII, public bills and resolutions

were introduced and seveJally referred as ~ollows: By Mr. BRITTEN: A bill (H. R. 9370) to provide for the

modernization of the United States Naval Observatory at Washington, D. C., and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. FITZPATRICK: A bill (H. R. 9371) for the trial of Federal or State officers, agents, or employees in the Federal courts for violation of the provisions of the fourth amendment to the Constitution of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, a bill (H. R. 9372) transferring trials of Federal officers, agents, or employees of the United States Government from Federal to State jurisdiction; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

1930 .. CO ..,.GRE SIO :r L RECORD-HOUSE1 2809 Dy l\fr~. • RTON: A b111 {TI. R. 9373) to authorize a suit­

ahl~ ·tutuc or Mn1· ·hal E crdlnan<l }'ocb, geuerali ' imo of the alii d for· ~, in the Dl ·tri t of ~oluwbia, ns a national monu­Dl nt; to the ouunitt on tbe Library.

By ... Ir. SPRO L of Illinoi ·: A b111 (ll. R. 374) to authorize th Po:-;tmn. t121' G< nernl to pur ·bnse motor-trn I· part from the trm:l· mmwfn •t urer; to the owmittee on the l o t Office and 1' .· !toad ..

B~· lr. ·1E RL ·aiL\ : A bill (H. R. 9373) to' promote mul u ld ju nbor ·bing toll bridg on ~ d rnl highways, and for oth •r Jmrpos ; to the ommttt e n Rule~.

lly 1\Ir. SEAR. : A bill (11. n. 9376) to take possession of the run-ocr or flood wat r of the valley b •tween the . llegh ny and the l ocky l\Iountaln y tcms, including all of the watersheds of ~nld ~~·st m · whose wat rs druln into said valley by mean of re. t·voirs, dnm., and oU st rage; for the purpo"e of con­tro1llng th 1mpplylng of water to the mwi"nb!e riY r' thereof, nt low-wa.tcr sea ·ous; for r for ting lauds ndjacent to the ~:;tr nm · und I'lvcrs of snid dl trict; for the promotion of fish cult ur and that of wild nnimal nnd bird life; for the aidinn of ugricultnr a.ud Ute tempering of bot wind~ thnt pus OYer the t; •\· rnl tul · of sni<l district anu t11e fnrui. bing of added wal r fol' munl ·lpt'll u. e , and the promotion or navi""ation; uud for the l'( ntlon o:f a F uerul board of public works, to tal charge or HU ·h coutemt)lnted internal improvement , and tlwlr con!o~lrtH'tion; to the otmnittee on Flood ontrol. B~· ~It·. LA 'KF RD f G orgin: A bill (11. R. 9377) to pro­

vilh~ for inHl •lion nod grading of tobacco by e. pert of the I pnrlment of Agriculture, auu for other purpo~ s j to the Com­

mitt<•' on Agricultur . Hy :i\It·. ~ c TIAI!l•}R or "Pi: .on,.iu: J int re olution (ll. J. Re ..

23·1) ulrcctfn tll Fed rnl J>ower omml ·ton to withhold ~nt­lng ot: 1i · •n .· to u velop pow r .it s on the Wolf River w1thin th I nomln Indian n : rvation, in Wiscon in, and to for­\Var<l any r ·omm mint ions for th 1 ., uance of stl h licen e to th Cougr s. of the Unit u tat ; to the ommittee on Inter­stat anu For lgn .,onnn r c-.

By 1\lr. l~ORELL: Jolnl r ·olution (H. J. R .. 235) authoriz­ing an auuual nppt·opriatlon for the xpense of e tabllsbfng and runlntnfning n nit d tat paSSPort bureau at Portland,

r g. ; to tbe ommitt on F r 1gn Affair ·.

l)RIVATI!J BILL A .. D RE OLUTIO ... S olution~

By Mr. PARKER: A bill (ll. R 9394) granting a p n8iOn 'to Ruth 0. Corbett ; to the Committ e on Im·alid Pcn-;ions.

Dy Mr. IIAR 0 RT J. PRATT: A bill (H. R. 9395) for the reli f of Alton B. Platner : to the Committee on 'lairu :

By Mr. REED of. ~ew York: A bill (H. R. 939G) for the relie:t of Henry ]~rahm; to the Committee on Claim~.

By Mr. RUTHERFORD: A bill (H. R. 9397) for the relief of the Macon, Dublin · !::avannah Railroad Co. ; to the Com­witt e on 'Var Claims.

By Mr. I~I:\1 : A bill (H. R. 9398) for the relief of. Dr. J. T. "~o d; to the Con~ruittee on Claim ..

By 1\Ir. THOMP ·o .. T: A bill (H. R. 9399) granting an increa e of pension to Alice G. Pbelp ; to the Cornmitt e on Invalid Pen ions.

By l\Ir. ·wooD: A bill (H. R. 9400) granting an lncrea e o:f p nsion to Fannie B. "mith ; to the Committee on Im·alid r n ions.

Al. , a bill (H. R. 9401) granting an increa e of pension to Jennie Hutton ; to the mmitt e on ln'Valid Pension ..

AI ·o, a bill (ll. R. 9402) granting an increa. e of pen~lon to Elizabeth . Sim ; to the Committee on Invaliu Pen. ions.

Al.·o, a bill (li. R. 9403) granting an lncrea ·e of pension to arab F. Dilden; to the Committee on Pen ion.'. Al .. o, a bill (H. R. 9404) gr nting a pension to Laura E.

levin er ; to th Committee on Invalid Pensions. By Mr. KORELL: Joint r lution (H. J. R ·-· 233) granting

compen ation to George Chari 'Yalthers; to the Committee on Claim .

PETITIONS, ETC. Under clau e 1 of Rule XXII, petitions anu pa s were laid

on the Clerk's desk and refeiTed a follows: 3 65. By Mr. A~ DRE'V: P tition of City Council of Salem,

Ma ., m morialfzing Congre to enact Hou, e Joint Re olution 167, directing the Pr !dent of the United Stat to proclaim Oct b r 11 of each year a General Pulu ki's memorial day; to the ommittee on the Judiciary.

6. By Mr. BACOr : Petition of sundry citizen of Long I land, urging increased pen ton for Spani h-American War vet rnns and widows of veterans; to the Committe on Pen ions.

3867. Al o, petition of sundry citizens of Long I ·lund, urging lncr pen, i ns for Civil War veterans and widow ' of vet-rans; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. S G • By Mr. BLACKBURN: Petiti n of sundry citiz ns of

Lexington, Ky., prayin" for the p age of legi.lation providing in ·rea d pen ion to Spanish War veteran , etc.; to the Com­mittee on Pet ions.

3 69. By Mr. BLOOM : Petition of the Rodeph holom Si ter­hood, ppo ·ing any change in the calendar ~bich in any manner endnn r the fixity of the abbath, and that in harmony with the U>ngue for Safegunrding the Fixity of the abbath, with wbich they are in hearty cooperation, the Roueph holom ic:ter­hood oppo · any r lutlon or bill which m. y provide for the calling of or the n<llng of del "at , from the United • tates to nn international c nference for the implifi.cation of the cal­endar, unle such tesolution or bill contain a provis that the del gate- of the United tat to uch a conference be in.,tructed to oppo any plan for the .. implifi.cation of the calendar which would include a blank day or any other d vice by which the e.xi tiug and immemorially fixed periodicity of the Sabbath would be de troycd; to the C mmittee on For lgn Affair .

S 70. By :lr. BUCKBEE: Petition of A. H. Korte and 60 ther citize of 0 we o. Ill., a. kin" for early pa"'.:-age of Hou. e

bill 2562, providing for increa e in pen ion to pani ·h War v •t ran · ; to the ommi ttee on Pen ion .

71. By Mr. CHALMER : Petition igned by con tituent · of '1' led , llto, urging the pa . age of legi latiou to increa~e the pen ion f pani b War veteran · ; to the Cvmmi ttee on Pen­ion ..

3 72. By Mr. 0. Tr'ERY: Petition of citizen of Lynn, lfa .. , asking for in rease in pen ion for Spanish War veterans; to the

onunittee n Pensions. 3873. By Mr. COYLE: Petition of 69 citizen. of Barrett

Town. hip, Monroe Count . Pa., fmToring enat bill 476 and of Horu:e bill 2562. pro'Vidina for increa ed rnte of pen. ion to the

m n who . ened in the armed force. of the Unit d .~late-. dur-ing the 't ani.'h War period; to the mmitt on I en.ion._.

3 74. By :Ur. RI P: P titi n of Jack nardy and a larg numb r of 'citizen. of tewnrt ounty, Gn., favoring the H u~e uill grantim~ increa ed pension. to ~pauish-American War v t­ernn. · ; to the Committee on Pen ion .

3 75. AI o. petition of Dr. T. J. McArthur and a lnrge number of citizens of Cri p County, Ga., fa,·oring the passage of Hou:o::e bill 2562, granting increa. ed p nsions to Spani~h-American War veterans; to the Committee on Pension~.

2810 OONGRESSION AL RECORD-HOUSE JANUARY 31 .

8876. By Mr. DALLINGER: Petition of certafri citizens of Middlesex County, Mass., praying for an increase in Spanish War veterans' pensions; to the Comll!ittee on Pensions. ·

8877. By Mr. ESLICK: Petition of citizens of Williamson County, Tenn., in behalf of soldiers of the Civil War; to the Committee on Pensions.

3878. By Mr. FITZPATRICK: Petition of the Musicians' Pro­tective Union, Local No . . 402, American Federation of Musicians, Yonkers, N. Y., urging prompt and favorable action on House bill 2756, known as the Army band act; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

3879. By Mr. FULLER: Petition of Chancellor Lee Seamster and 200 others, of Washington County, Ark., praying Congress to support the movement of. Congressman FULLER to appropriate $50,000,000 annually for maintenance of rural post roads not now in the Federal road system ; to the Committee on Roads.

3880. By Mr. GREENWOOD: Petition of Thomas Mullins and 71 other citizens of Jasonville, Ind., and that community, urg­ing the passage of Senate bill 476 and House bill 2562, pro­

, viding for increase in pensions for the veterans of the Spanish­American War period ; to the Committee on Pensions.

3881. By Mr. HADLEY : Petition of residents of Snohomish County, Wash., indorsing the bill for increased! pensions for Spanish War veterans; to the Committee on Pensions.

3882. By Mr. HARDY: Petition signed by Jesse Ivey ~nd a number of citizens of Pueblo, Colo., urging the passage of legis­lation increasing the pensions of Spanish War veterans; to the Committee on Pensions.

3883. By Mr. HUDSON: Petition of citizens of the sixth con­gressional district of Michigan, urging favorable action on House bill 2562, carrying benefits to veterans of the Spanish-American War period; to the Committee on Pensions.

3884. By Mr. JENKINS: Petition signed by voters of the tenth congressional district of Ohio, urging Congress to use

I every endeavor to secure speedy consideration and passage of House bill 2562 and Senate bill 476; to the Committee on Pensions.

3885. Also, petition signed by citizens of Hamden, Vinton County, Ohio, urging Congress to use every endeavor to secure speedy consideration and passage of House bill 2562 and Senate bill 476; to the Committee on Pensions.

3886. Also, petition signed by citizens of Canton, Ohio, urging Members of Congress to use every endeavor to secure speedy consideration and passage of House bill 2562 and Senate bill 476; to the Committee on Pensions.

I 3887. Bf Mr. JOHNSON of Washington: Petition of sundry citizens o Tacoma, Wash., advocating pending legislf!tion relat­ing to Spanish-American War veterans and their dependents; to the Committee on Pensions.

3888. By Mr. KIESS : Petition from citizens of Tioga County, Pa., favoring the passage of Senate bill 476 and House bill 2562, granting increased pensions to Spanish-American War soldiers; to the Committee on Pensions.

3889. Also, petition from the county commissioners of Tioga County, Pa., favoring Senate bill 476 and House bill 2562, grant­ing increased pensions to Spanish-American War service men; to the Committee on Pensions.

3890. By Mr. LUDLOW: Petition of r~sidents of Castle Point, N. Y., urging the passage of House bill 3397; to the Committee on World War Veterans' Legislation.

3891. By Mr. McCORMACK of Massachusetts: Petition of Mary E. Elliott, department secretary Woman's Relief Corps, 521 Boylston Building, 18 Boylston Street, Boston, Mass., and 2,332 others, urging early and favorable consideration of pen­sion legislation for Civil War veterans and widows of veterans; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

3892. By Mr. McKEOWN: Petition of S. M. Cunningham, of 325 Clayton Building, Sapulpa, Okla., and other citizens of Sa­pulpa, Okla., urging speedy consideration of House bill 2562, a bill providin"l' increased rates of pension for the veterans of the Spanish War ; to the Committee on Pensions,

3893. By Mr. McREYNOLDS: Petition signed by 73 voters of McMinn County, Tenn., asking for immediate consideration of Senate bill 476 and House bill 2562, providing for increased rates of pension to the men who served in the armed forces of the United States during the Spanish-American War; to the Com­mittee on Pensions.

3894. By Mr. MAGRADY: Petition of George H. Edwards and 109 other citizens of Locust Gap, Northumberland County, Pa., favoring Senate bill 476 and House bill 2562, providing increased rates of pension for Spanish War veterans, and urging speedy consideration and passage of such legislation; to the Committee on Pensions.

8895. By Mr. NEWHALL : Petition of sundry citizens of Ken­ton and Campbell Counties, Ky., urging the speedy consideration

a:r;~.d passage of House bill 2562 and Senate bill 476, p'roviding increased rates of pension to the men who served in the armed forces of the United States during the Spanish War period; to the Committee on Pensions.

3896. By Mr. O'CONNELL of New York: Petition of Clarence W. Lyon, of Brooklyn, N. Y., and 63 other citizens of Brooklyn N. Y., favoring the passage of House bill 2562, for increase of pensions for Spanish War veterans; to the Committee on Pen· sions.

3897. By Mrs. OLDFIELD: PetiJion of James E. McAlex­ander and others, of White County, Ark., urging the enactment of additional pension legislation for Spanish War veterans; to the Committee on Pensions. -

3898. By Mr. RAMSEYER: Petition of Lodge No. 9, I. 0. 0. F., of Ottumwa, Iowa, urging the speedy consideration and passage of the bill to increase the rates of pension to the men who served in the armed forces of the United States during the Spanish War; to the Committee on Pensions.

3899. By Mr. REED of New York: Petition of residents of Dunkirk and Olean, N. Y., in behalf of House bill 2562; to the Committee on Pensions.

3900. By Mr. ROBINSON: Petition signed by John Metzler and about 60 other citizens of Earlville, Iowa, urging the pas­sage of legislation increasing the rates of the pensions of Span­ish-American War veterans ; to the Committee on Pensions.

3901. By Mr. SELVIG: Petition of Central Cooperative Asso­ciation of Minnesota, urging speedy enactment of House bill 6, classifying certain commercial cooking compounds as oleomar­g.arine ; to the Committee on .Agliculture.

3902 . .Also, petition of Becker County Producers, composed of dairy farmers, Christian Hanson, president, and G. H. Bakken, secretary, urging enactment of adequate tariff protection on competitive agricultural products; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3903. Also, petition of· George J. Haustein, G. E. Wagner, G. T. Tostensen, and 38 other citizens, residents of Fergus Falls, Minn., urging enactment of increased pension rates to veterans of Spanish-American War; to the Committee on Pen­sions.

3904. By Mr. SIMMS : Petition of citizens of Tularosa, N. Mex., urging early passage of House bill 2562, providing for increased rates of pension to veterans of the Spanish War; to the Committee on Pensions.

3905. Also, petition of citizens of Santa Rita, N. Mex., urging prompt action on House bill 2562, providing for increased rates of pension to veterans of the Spanish War; to the Committee on Pensions.

3906. By Mr. SPROUL of Illinois: Petition of Michael J. Crowley and 66 other citizens of Chicago, Ill., praying for the enactment of House bill 2562, to the Committee on Pensions.

3007. By Mr. TARVER: Petition of P.R. Daley and 18 other citizens of Georgia, for increased rates of pension ·for Spanish- 1 American War veterans; to the Committee on Pensions.

3908. By Mr. WATSON: Petition signed by citizens of Mont­gomery County, Pa., urging increase of pensions to Spanish­American War veterans; to the Committee on Pensions.

3909. By Mr. WHITLEY: Petition of citizens of Rochester, N. Y., urging the passage of legislation to increase pensions of veterans of the Spanish-American War; to the Committee on Pensions.

3910. Also, petition of citizens of Rochester, N. Y., urging pas­sage of legislation providing increased pensions for veterans of the Spanish-American War; to the Committee on Pensions.

3911. By Mr. WOLVERTON of New Jersey: Petition of citi­zens of Westmont, N. J., urging increased pensions for Spanish­American War veterans 1 to the Committee on Pensions.

3912. Also, petition of citizens of Clementon, N. J., and vicin­ity, urging increased pensions for Spanish-American War vet­erans ; to the Committee on Pensions,

3913. By Mr. WYANT: Petition of citizens of Westmoreland County, Pa., indorsing Senate bill 476 and House bill 2562, providing increased pensions for Spanish-American War veter­ans ; to the Committee on Pensions.

3914. Also, petition of citizens of Westmoreland County, Pa., indorsing Senate bill 476 and House bill 2562, providing in­creased pensions for Spanish-American War veterans; to the Committee on Pensions.

3915. Also, petition of citizens of Darragh, Westmoreland County, Pa., indorsing Senate bill 476 and House bill 2562~ providing for increased rates of pension for Spanish-American War veterans; to the Committee on Pensions.

3916. Also, petition of Monessen (Pa.) Lodge, Knights of Pythias

1 advocating the passage of the retirement bill (H. R.

1815) ; to the Committee on the Civil Service.

1930 CO :rGRESSIO ""AL RECORD-SE~J"ATE 2811 3917. Also, p tltfon of 1o o.l union No. 95, of the I. W. of 0. E.,

advocating pn Hnge of the r Ur ment bill (II. R. 1815) ; to the ommitt • on the ivil et'Vice. :391 . By 1'r. Y : P UUon of llobert p.. Carpenter, A. A. Inn, ,V .. T. Rnwle , J. R. Hunter, A. L. Boykin, T. H. Hudgins,

and oth r , of n ads, Jack 011 County, rlu., urging ongre fo1· urly pa. 'lage of Ilou ·e bill 2562; to tbe Committee on P n-1 us.

SE ATE SATURDAY, Febnwry 1, 1930

(Legislative day of Monday, Jauum·v 6, 19SO)

The nate met at 11 o'clo k u. m., on the expiration of the r s.

'l'be VICE PRESIDENT. The S nate resumes the considera-tion of the unfini h d bu in ·

REVI ION Oi' TH:I!l TARIFF

The Senat , as in C mmltte of the Wbole, reJ tuned the C<Jll­std ration of t11e bi11 {II. R. 2667) to provide rev nue, to regu­late commer e with for lgn countries, to encourage the indus­tries of the United tnte., to protect American labor, and for olh r purp e .

Mr. PELAND. :Mr. Pre ldent, 1:t the Senator from South OnroHnu [M1·. BLEASE] will oblige me, his amendment seems to apply to th snme aragraph to which I have offered an amend­:m nt relnllng to gyp um. 'Vilh his kind perml · ion, becau e of my un lety, ubout which I have told him, to get nwny ns early a po. lble to-day, I should like to proceed with my amendment now.

Ir. BI~EASE. Mr. Presid nt, if tbe Senator will yield-­'Ihe VI E PRE IDE T. Doe.' the nator from New York

;yl ld to the nut or from outh arollnn? Mr. PELAND. crtninly. :Mr. BLEA E. I have called t11e attention of the Senator

from cw York to the fact that he had better be careful about tb wording of his nmendm nt. As I under:stand it, possibly this nm ndm nt of mine is cov red by another amendment. I cnllecl his attention to it tbl morning to see if that 1 tbe en e, and If it is I hall withd1·nw my amendment. It will take only n moment for me to do that, and it the Senator will permit I , hall be glad then to give wny to him.

Mr. OPELAND. I would appreciate 1t 1f the Senator would do that.

Mr. lOOT. Mr. rre !dent--The VICE PRE IDE T. Does the Senator from New York

yl ld to the Senator from Utah? Mr. PELAND. I yield. Mr. ~MOOT. I understood the Senator :trom South Carolina

to Inquire in relation to his amendment to paragraph 205, the cern nl paragraph.

1\Ir. llLliJA E. I offered this amendment on the 14th of Sep­t mb •r 1!>2 .

Mr .• M OT. Cement ' has been taken from the dutiable list and put on th fr 11 ·t.

1\Ir. BLEA E. I made a speech on the subject October 4, 1920. An am ndment was adopted yesterday, as I under, tnnd it, nod the rca on given for it adoption would indicate that it Is the ame amendment I otrered and that the argument used h re y terdny ln upport of the amendment which was agreed to wa nctly the same argument that I used in October.

Mr. MOOT. I understood that to be the en e. Mr. BLE E. The only thing I want to do is to keep the

r ord • trnlght. I have no objection to somebody ell'e getting cr dlt !or the amendment, hut I think the r cord hould be kept straight. amendment otr red by myself S ptember 9 (cal­endar day pt mber 14), 1029; nl , remarks by me, page 4212,

0 ORESSIO AL RI<:JCORD, October 4, 1929. Mr. )1'ESR l\1r. Pr . ·tdent, wlll the Senator from New York

yl ld to nabl me to ugge t the absence of n quorum? The VICE PRE IDE T. Doe the Senator from New York

yi 1<1 to the S nntor from Ohio for that purpose? Mr. OPEL ND. C rtainly. Mr. FE . I ugg t th ab ··ence of a quorum. Th VI E PRE IDENT. The clerk will call the roll. The leglslntive clerk call i the roll, and the following Senators

nnsw r~d to their nam All<'n nrntton Ashur t Brookhart Hnh·d Broussard lint•kl y ' pper ntnl{hllln nmwny Dhu•k onnnlly Blaine Copeland Bl<'ltHe Couzens Rornb Dnlc

Deneen Dill Fes Fletcher Frnzl~>r George G1llett Glass Glenn

Ootr Gould Greene Grundy llnle Hax·rl Ho.rrlson natfield Hawes

llebert Metcalf Schall Ilefiln Moses 'beppnrd II ow ell .. ' orbeck Shlp ·tead Johnson Norrl Shortridge Jon · Nye tmmons Kean ddle mitb Kendrick Ovet·man Smoot Key s rn tter ·on teck La I~'ollette Pine Steiwer McKellar Ran d<'ll Sullivan Me. In tcr Robin on Ind. Swan on McNary Rob,-Jon, Ky. Thomas, Idaho

Thomas, Okla. Town E>nd Trammell Tydings Vnndenberg 'Yagner Walcott Walsh, Mn . Walsh, Mont. Watson Wheeler

Mr. TOWN END. I de ire to announce that the senior Sena­tor from Delaware [:Mr. HAsTINGS] i detained from tbe enate becau e of illness in hi family. I ask that this announcement may stand for the day.

Mr. McKELLAR. My colleague the junior Senator from Tcn­ne . ee [Mr. BROC'K] is unavoidably detained from the Senate. I will let this announcement stand for the day.

Mr. HARRI ON. I wi h to announce that my collengue (Mr. STEPHE...~s] i~ detained from the Senate by illnes . I a k that tbis announcement may stand for the day.

Mr. HEPPARD. I desire to announce that the enntor from Utah [Mr. KI ... ~G] i neces~arily detained from the Senate by illness. This announcement may stand for the day.

I de ire to announce, al.,o, the nece sary ab ence of the Sena­tor from Arknn as [ lr. RoBINSON] and the enator fr m Penn­sylvania [Mr. REED], who are delegates from the United States to the Naval Arms Conference meeting in London, England. I will let this announcement stand for the day.

I also wish to announce that the senior euator from Nevada [Mr. PITTMAN] and the junior Senator from Arizona [l\lr. HAY­DE8] are necessarily absent from the Senate attending a con­ference In the West relating to the diversion of the wat r or the Colorado River. I wish this announcement to stand for the day.

The VICE PRESIDE ... :rT. Eighty-three Senators bave an­swered to their names. A quorum is present.

REPORT OF THE CAPITAL TRACTION CO.

The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a communica­tion from the president of tbe Capital Traction Co., tran mit­tlng, pursuant to _law, the report of that company for the year ended December 31, 1929, together with a list of the shareholder , which wa referred to the Committee on tbe District of Co­lumbia.

REPORT OF WASHINGTON GAS LIGHT CO.

The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a communi­cation from the president of the Washington Ga Light Co., tran. mlttlng, pur uant to law, a detailed tntement of tbe busi­ness of the company, witb a li t of the stockholders, for the year ended December 31, 1929, which was referred to the Com­mittee on the District of Columbia.

REPORT OF GEORGETOWN GAS LIGHT CO.

The VICE PRESIPENT laid before the Senate n COllllllunica­tion from the president of the Georgetown Gas Light Co., trans­mitting, pm·suant to law, a detailed statement of the bu ine s of th company, together with a 1i t of the tockholders for the year ended December 31, 1929, which was referred to the Com­mittee on the Di trict of Columbia.

PETITIONS A ... ~o UEMORIALS Mr. BROOKHART presented a petition of veterans and mem­

bers of the sanitarium and soldiers' borne nt Hot Spring , S. Dak., praying for the passage of the o-called Brook11art bill, being the bill {S. 1775} to amend the World War veterans' net, 1024, as amended, which was referred to the Committee on Pension ..

He al o pre ented petitions of sundry citizen of Eagle Grove, Gillett Grove, LeGrand, Des Moines, Davenport, and Glimwood, all in the State of Iowa, praying for the pa age of legi.'latlon granting increased pensions to Spanish War veterans, which were ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. BLAI~TFJ pre ented a re, olution adopted by the coun~y board of Price County, Wis., favoring the pa. age of the so-called Knut on bill, being the bill {B. R. 5410) to authorize the See­r tary of Agriculture to enlarge the tree-planting operations on the national fore ts of the Rocky Mountain , and for other pur­poses, whlcll was referred to the Committee on Agriculture nnd Fore try.

Ir. VANDENBERG presented n resolution a ]opted by Twin Port Lodge, -o. 12, Shipmaster 'A ociation, of Duluth, Minn., prot tlng n"'ninst the pa. ~a"e of legi latlon to provide for tb e tnblishment of shipping commi . loner~ at ports on the Gr at Lak , which was referred to the Committee on Commerce.

Mr. JONES pre en ted petition numerou. ly signed by , ·tmdry citizens of the State of Wn~hlnatou, praying for the pas. age of Iegl lation granting increased pen ion to Spanish War vet­eran , wbich were ordered to lie on the table.