The CHAIRMAN. There is no new evidence; there was a discussion of the bill across the table, and such suggestions as were offered were considered, and the committee print is in the hands of the printers, and should be up this afternoon, and will be in the hands of the members immediately upon receipt.

Mr. SCHAFER. Has the bill been amended? I understand from the hearings on the bill that the bill was perfect, and it should be enacted into law without change, without the dotting of an “i” or the crossing of a “t."

The CHAIRMAN. The bill was amended in two respects. A copy of the bill will be in your hands this afternoon or the first thing in the morning.

Mr. SCHAFER. I am glad to hear, Mr. Chairman, that a subcommittee of five, composed of members who are all in favor of the consolidation, sustained the position of those of us who did not want to vote the bill out at last Saturday's session without dotting an “i” or crossing a “t."

The CHAIRMAN. I thank you for your words of approval.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Now, let us hear from the gentleman from Wisconsin. I think he should have time to fully express his views, because the gentleman from Wisconsin seems to be opposed to all kinds of consolidations; but that is no reason why this committee should squander its time in conducting hearings that lend nothing to the information of the committee that it has not already got. I think, if we are going to do anything with the consolidations

Mr. SCHAFER. The gentleman from Wisconsin is not opposed to all consolidations, as the record, when you were chairman, will indicate. If you will follow the hearings on the Army and Navy consolidation, you will see that the stand that I had taken, reflected and shown by my cross-examinations, indicates that I was leaning toward the consolidation of the Navy and Army. But when we had only one witness in favor of it, and all of the men who had to lead the Army and Navy in war against it, I changed my position. I resent any statement in the record indicating that the gentleman from Wisconsin is opposed to all the consolidation bills. If you go through the hearings upon these consolidation bills and the debates on the floor of the House, including the veterans consolidation, you will see that the gentleman from Wisconsin attended every hearing and helped to develop the testimony from all angles and supported consolidation. If you will go through my questions on the Army and Navy consolidation, you will see that the gentleman from Wisconsin did not show prejudice but propounded questions which could be propounded by those in favor of as well as those against consolidation.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. I want to say that if you did that and everybody appreciated it, but merely because you happen to be against the consolidation of the Army and Navy there is no reason why we should spend the entire spring in hearing witnesses.

Mr. SCHAFER. I am not against the consolidation of the Army and Navy. My mind is open. When we had the first hearings on these consolidations I was of the opinion that we should have the consolidation. I also want to state that the gentleman from Wisconsin has never had a general or an admiral, or a shave-tail lieutenant, or any officer, or any person whomsoever, contact him and try to lobby against the Army and Navy consolidation bill, either personally, by telephone, or by letter. The chairman of the Appropriations Committee, on the floor of the House, indicated that a great lobby has been working against the bill. No one has even asked me to oppose the bill.

Mr. COLTON. I just want to say this: It does occur to me, with all due respect—and I have not the slightest thought of delaying this measure—but we have a long list of witnesses who have testified and have presented some very strong convincing testimony against the consolidation; we ought to proceed with care. Now, we just have the testimony of one witness, a member of the committee, in favor of the consolidation; and I must express some little surprise and disappointment that now we are probably going to be casled upon Saturday to report this bill, with no further testimony and with no expert testimony at all, save only that which is incorporated in the statement of the gentleman from South Dakota. I am not in a position yet to say whether I think there ought to be a consolidation or not. Perhaps that is because I have not grasped it, but I have listened intently to every word that the gentleman from South Dakota said, and I was impressed with his statement; but, surely, there must be, somewhere along the line, if this great change is to be made—there must be some one somewhere who can give this committee some more specific evidence in favor of the great step that we are about to take. I regret very much that we are now to be called upon to vote this bill up or down Saturday.

Mr. MARTIN. Mr. Chairman, you announced on the floor the other day, after the castigation of the chairman of the Appropriations Committee of a plan here of lobbying, and stated this committee has been subjected to—

Mr. SCHAFER. The question was that there was a lobby

Mr. MARTIN. That was not the question. And made the statement that you thought you would report this bill out Saturday.

The CHAIRMAN. I did not, General, and the record will bear me out. I have never said I would report the bill out. I have never undertaken to speak for this committee at any time, and I never will. No one man will ever run this committee as long as I am a member of it.

Mr. MARTIN. If the committee is being rushed to vote the bill out, why take the time to come here Saturday? Why not vote now, if your subcommittee has made its report?

The CHAIRMAN. Does not the gentleman feel that we should wait and see the recommendations of the subcommittee !

Mr. MARTIN. Or, if it is railroaded through, there is no reason to wait. We have something else to do Saturday, and there is no use to come here Saturday on a finished report.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Now, the only thing the subcommittee can do is to report the bill back with such amendments as the subcommittee may suggest. It must then be read paragraph by paragraph in the full committee for amendments. The committee, I take it, is not in favor of reporting out any bill that it has not read section by section, for amendments.

Mr. SCHAFER. I understood, Mr. Williamson, that it was a perfect bill, and that we should report it out as such, without crossing a t or dotting an “i.”

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Nobody said that.

Mr. DAVENPORT. General Martin has referred to certain charges by Mr. Byrn, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, on the floor of the House day before yesterday. I was out of town and simply read it in the record afterwards. It was to the effect that a lobby had been operating upon this committee, and was attempting to smother it in the committee, and the lobby prevented reporting out his bill last Saturday.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I regard that as one of the most insulting things I have ever heard said on the floor of the House, with respect to a committee of the House; and if this committee now knows of any genuine lobby which has been operating upon it, unless it has been some political lobby within the Congress itself, I think they ought to speak out about it now.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Byrn made the statement, Mr. Davenport, that they had called on him personally, officer after officer

Mr. SCHAFER. Would they be calling on Mr. Byrn to stop it in: the committee, a man who is not voting in the committee?

The CHAIRMAN. The chairman attempted to defend the commit-tee and was congratulated by several members for his efforts.

Mr. DAVENPORT. You did it pretty well before you got through; but, Mr. Chairman, do you know of any lobby that is operating to smother the bill in this committee, any genuine lobby?

The CHAIRMAN. I think there is a great deal of talk going on. I do not know whether they are organized or not; but I will say, Mr. Davenport, there is a great deal of talk going on by the Army and Navy Officers in reference to the bill.

Mr. DAVENPORT. How can you prevent that, Mr. Chairman? Those men were asked to come here and present their ideas, and they have a perfect right to present them; but what I want to know is there a sinister thing such as the public understands to be a lobby operating on your committee ?

The CHAIRMAN. I will answer that by saying I have had a number of Army officers come to me tell me that we are on the right track, and I have had a number of others tell me we are on the wrong

track. Mr. DAVENPORT. But you do not call that a lobby, do you, Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. I am just telling you exactly what they said to Call it what


desire. Mr. DAVENPORT. But that is not a lobby.

The CHAIRMAN. Whenever a man told me we were on the right track, he said, “For God's sake, don't mention my name. I want to stay in the service."

Mr. MARTIN. What do you think of a man that is such a coward as that? You ought to expose him.

Mr. SCHAFER. You ought to ignore him, like you would ignore an anonymous letter.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. Getting back to the measure that we were supposed to have considered this morning, in view of Secretary Hur- ; ley's statement, Mr. Williamson, that neither of these bills embodied the idea of the President, or the administration, is there any objection to the chairman of this committee--I am offering it as a suggestion and not as a motion-making reply to this letter and saying


that, so far as the committee is concerned, they will be glad to have any detailed objection on the proposed draft?

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Not the slightest.
Mr. WHITTINGTON. Covering his idea. I would like to have that.
Mr. SCHAFER. That was what my motion was intended to do.

The CHAIRMAN. I think if we carry out Mr. Whittington's suggestion and get the Chief of Engineers here we will get the information from General Brown. I am sure the Secretary will keep his promise and send General Brown, but if he should not then the committee could, if it so desires, demand the appearance of General Brown.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. You stated that you desired

The CHAIRMAN. But I think the Secretary of War will send the Chief of Engineers.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. Is there any objection to making that request and telling him, the Secretary of War, that we will be very glad to consider his ideas, and ask him to point out what were his notions of the consolidation, different from the two bills under consideration?

Mr. WILLIAMSON. No; there is no objection to that.
Mr. WHITTINGTON. I would like to get that in the record.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. The President's message would indicate that what he would like is for this committee to pass a bill giving him general authority to reorganize after the Congress has indicated the nature or character of reorganization to be effected and, from the. way we are acting here, probably that is the only thing that can be done.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. I appreciate your theory, Mr. Williamson, but we suppose the Secretary has made a statement, and I would like to know what he thinks. I would like to know where the President's ideas differ from ours.

Mr. SCHAFER. Mr. Chairman, why not invite the President or request the President to transmit forthwith to this committee, immediately, a draft of a bill which he believes should be enacted, in order to comply with the consolidations, as outlined in his message?

Mr. MILLER. I introduced in the House a resolution, which was referred to this committee—that was a House joint resolution and yesterday I introduced a House resolution-to cover the same thing. I prepared the résolution asking the President to transmit to the House of Representatives specific information and specific recommendations as to the bureaus to be consolidated, as to the departments to be consolidated, and a statement showing the savings that might be expected in that consolidation. Now, that resolution, the House resolution, has not reached this committee yet, but it will reach it some time to-day. Is it here now? I had not intended to call it up at the present time. I did not introduce the resolution for the purpose of

Mr. MARTIN. I move that we have that for consideration in the Saturday session.

Mr. G'ASQUE. I am ready to act on the resolution.

Mr. MARTIN. I move that that resolution be considered the first thing Saturday morning, as it is an important resolution, which will take us some time.

The CHAIRMAN. Here is the resolution. It just came from the printer. It was introduced yesterday.

look on page

Mr. MILLER. Let me say, Mr. Chairman, that the only hesitancy, now, gentlemen, that I had in not calling up the resolution this morning, was this: If



will see that I say: Resolved, That the President of the United States be, and is hereby, respectfully requested to submit to the House of Representatives information as to the branches of the Government that may most economically be consolidated, without destroying their efficiency; that the said information further dis, close such detailed plans or proposals for the reorganization of the many different bureaus and independent agencies of the Government, together with a detailed statement of the amount of savings that may be made by such recommendations and in what particulars the economies may be accomplished.

The only hesitancy that I had in calling that resolution this morning was this: Whether or not it would conflict with the rule against asking the President to submit an opinion to the House. I understand that we do not have the right to call upon the President to submit an opinion, or whether it would come under the rule permitting or requesting the President, or any other department of the Government, to submit facts. Now, it is the facts that we want. It is the facts that this committee wants, and it is the facts that Congress wants. I think everybody is in accord with the consolidation idea, provided it can be done economically, and provided it can be done without destroying the governmental efficiency. Nobody wants to do that. • Now, I further hesitated, Mr. Chairman, because I did not want to do anything that might interfere with the consideration of this consolidation bill that has been prepared by the subcommittee.

Mr. SCHAFER. Will the gentleman yield? Can we not also request that he submit a draft of a bill which ccnforms to his message? This whole matter refers to the executive departments, and the executive departments ought to be able to furnish him a draft or outline of the bill, such as suggested in the message. That is why I made the motion to request the Secretary of War to come here; so that we could request him to submit a draft of a bill which conforms to the President's message.

Mr. MILLER. I appreciate what the gentleman from Wisconsin says.

Mr. SCHAFER. The gentleman from Wisconsin is not opposed to all consolidations, as the gentleman from South Dakota indicated, and the record will show that.

Mr. MILLER. I am not inferring that the gentleman from Wisconsin is opposed to it. I appreciate the suggestion that the gentleman has made.

Mr. SCHAFER. I made that statement because you are a new member of this committee, and you may, as a new member, reach the conclusion, from what Mr. Williamson said, that I am opposed to all consolidations, and the record does not show that.

The CHAIRMAN. The record will show that the gentleman from Wisconsin is in favor of consolidations. His actions in the past

prove that.

Mr. SCHAFER. I even voted for the prohibition consolidation bill.

Mr. MILLER. But I do not believe that the President, or any other department, ought to be called upon to submit any proposed bill, because that is the function of Congress.

« ForrigeFortsett »