(Mrs. Watkins read the resolution of the National Congress of Parents and Teachers, quoted before.)

Mr. HAMMER. The resolution, as finally adopted, was not the resolution as it was first introduced?

Mrs. WATKINS. Yes, sir.

Mr. HAMMER. With the children in it?

Mrs. WATKINS. You are referring to the other section. The resolution is exactly as it appears in the minutes.

Mr. HAMMER. But there was an effort made to make it broader and include children.

Mrs. WATKINS. This is the way it was when it was passed.

Mr. HAMMER. I am not talking about it when it was passed. I know it was passed that way. Was not an effort made to pass it in another way

Mrs. WATKINS. There was an effort made to pass it in another way, but after hearing Judge Gosline and Dr. Valeria Parker, of New York, the motion was passed as I have read it.

Mr. HAMMER. What was proposed before?

Mrs. WATKINS. It is exactly as it was proposed first. One woman raised an objection to it, but after Judge Gosline and Doctor Parker had explained it, it was passed as it was proposed.

Mr. HAMMER. Is it your idea that the juvenile court duties should be transferred, or a part of the duties of that court transferred, to this bureau when it is established by law?

Mrs. WATKINS. That I am not prepared to say. I have come here to-day simply to bring you two messages which I was asked to give you. Personally, I believe that this bill should pass, because of the experience that I have been having with my own 19-year-old daughter the experiences that she has on the streets and because I don't believe that the policemen are taking care of the women and girls as they ought to be taken care of. I am sorry that one of the witnesses who preceded me did not tell an experience which her mother had recently in Washington, where she reported something to a policeman, and he said he could not do anything, although she is a woman of mature years.

I have come to feel strongly on this, but that is only personal. I have come here to tell you what I have told you, in order to carry out the request which came from our national legislative chairman and from our board and our executive committee.

Mr. HAMMER. I hear people say that the activities of the welfare organizations and of the juvenile court are to be transferred to the women's bureau. I don't know anything about it; I was just asking you about it for my own information.

Mrs. WATKINS. I feel that there is so much welfare work to be done that we can not have too many people doing it. I think that much of this strong feeling and jealousy that we hear people talking about that somebody else is doing her work is wrong. All new lines of welfare work are big jobs and there can not be too much done. I do not feel that there can possibly be too much welfare work done.

Mr. HAMMER. Ought not we arrange for it so that there won't be overlapping of duties?

Mrs. WATKINS. Decidedly.

Mr. HAMMER. That is what I am trying to get information on. Do you think that we ought to transfer some of the duties of the juvenile court to the women's bureau?

Mrs. WATKINS. If there are things that the women's bureau can do better than they can possibly be done by the juvenile court, I would say that that principle would be all right.

Mr. HAMMER. Don't you think it would be a good idea to let the women's bureau confine-I am trying to find out; not that I want to do it-to have the policewomen confine their operations, like policemen do, along some lines; and won't they have enough to do in that way? Of course, every police officer ought to be a welfare officer to a certain extent; I mean, he ought to do welfare work. Don't you think that the strictly welfare work and the juvenile court work should still remain chiefly with the organizations in the city and with the juvenile court?

Mrs. WATKINS. I am not prepared to say. I think, though, that there would be certain bits of that work that could very well be done by the women police directly.

Mr. HAMMER. Everybody is doing welfare work, if he is any good; that is, if he has any red blood in him and any humanity, he is bound to. But some of the objections of these people are that our welfare bill that we passed the other day here and the juvenile court which we established that some of the duties of those organizations and that court ought to be transferred to this women's bureau. Is there any intention on the part of the framers and proponents of this legislation to invade those activities and take over them to this bureau?

Mrs. WATKINS. I am not prepared to say what the intention is. Mr. GIBSON. I assure this gentleman that there is no such intention.

Mr. HAMMER. You know what the objections are.

Mr. GIBSON. There is no such intention. There is no intention, either, of permitting the juvenile court to overlap its duties with those of the women's bureau.

Mr. BLANTON. May I say this? If there were any attempted interference with the juvenile court in this legislation, there would be some amendment offered to the bill. There is nothing in the bill that interferes with the juvenile court now. I have read over the bill carefully.

Your Parents and Teachers Organization has approved this bill; the Women's Christian Temperance Organization, of 750,000 members, has approved this bill; the 76 citizens' associations here, which represent by their advisory council the citizens of the District of Columbia, have approved this bill; and various other organizations here in Washington have approved this bill. As against that the press in Washington is against it. Are you in favor of passing it in spite of the press?

Mrs. WATKINS. I should think so. May I say this? Since our organization was the one that in the very earliest days sponsored the juvenile court and has pushed it for over 30 years, it would be the last one in the world to do anything to hamper the juvenile court. If it was the intention of this bill to interfere with the work of the juvenile court, we would not have indorsed it. We had Lieutenant Van Winkle before the executive committee to explain

the details of the questions that occurred to our executive committee; and after it had been discussed and after she had explained it, the executive committee went on record for the bill.

Mr. BLANTON. You ladies here in Washington know Mrs. Van Winkle to be a high-class woman, highly educated, and one whom you may indorse in every way possible?

Mrs. WATKINS. May I just say that, having had in my own office for the last five years a young woman as my stenographer who was with Lieutenant Van Winkle in the Food Administration, I have no doubts about the character and qualities of Lieutenant Van Winkle.

Mr. RATHBONE. It is getting a little late. Is there anyone else who would like to be heard?

STATEMENT OF MISS HELEN PIGEON, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF POLICEWOMEN

Mr. RATHBONE. In just a word, what is the National Association of Policewomen? What countries and States does it embrace?

Miss PIGEON. It is made up of the policewomen from all over this country and from some countries abroad. We have policewomen from the British Isles; we have members from other countries—one member from the League of Nations, one from Jerusalem, some from Norway and other foreign countries-women interested in the furtherance of the police service.

Mr. RATHBONE. Are the activities and functions of the bureaus, or whatever they are called in other countries and in other States, substantially the same, at least along the same general lines, as the proposed bureau of Mrs. Van Winkle?

Miss PIGEON. More or less so. The intention is to do preventive work-to prevent the necessity for court action and for reformatory

care.

We are not developed in some communities to the extent that it has been developed here in Washington; and it is for that reason that we feel that the passage of this bill will be of enormous advantage to the profession of policewomen throughout the country, because they look to Washington as a model and they look individually to Mrs. Van Winkle. She has been the inspiration for the bureau in Cleveland and for the bureau in Detroit. I know that in other large cities they are considering this very bill as a precedent for the establishment of their own bureaus.

Mr. RATHBONE. I want to get this thing perfectly clear. Is this not right, that in distant lands, as well as in the States of the Union, it has become apparent that there is a need for some such bureau or body or organization of this character to carry on in general this kind of work?

Miss PIGEON. Absolutely. That is now incorporated in the program of the League of Nations.

Mr. RATHBONE. Have you stated your general attitude toward this bill?

Miss PIGEON. The bill has been gone over very carefully. It has received the consideration of policewomen at our meeting last fall. We had present the head of the large Detroit bureau and social workers of wide experience, and we went very carefully over every

provision of this bill. We considered the provisions about the police work, and public-welfare work, about the handling of delinquents, and the relation of the work to that of private organizations, and the juvenile court; we went over all these things carefully to see that there were no provisions in there that might cause confusion in the community on that subject. We felt, when the bill was read for presentation, that there was no possibility for misunderstanding or that it gives any of the powers which such a bill should not give to the women's bureau.

We feel that the work of the women's bureau is a great feature of the work of every city. The police system is so universal and the social structure is so interwoven, one city with another, that with a fine bureau here in Washington, they know in Detroit, for instance, that the cases here will receive the proper treatment. The social system is so intricate, that where work like this is done in one city, it has its effects on other cities.

Mr. RATHBONE. Aside from the general merits of the bill and dealing with details: Have you sufficient familiarity with the work of the bureau here in the District of Columbia to say as to what would be an adequate and reasonable number of employees or policewomen in such a bureau?

Miss PIGEON. I don't think they are asking for any more than are really necessary for the carrying out of the work. I happen to know the work of the bureau very closely, because I live with Mrs. Van Winkle. I know that she had very many duties to perform and that often she works 12 hours a day and that on some days she works 18 hours out of the 24. They are overburdened beyond justice. They are not able to expand the work. There are many districts that they can not cover because women are taken off on emergencies elsewhere.

Mr. RATHBONE. What would be, in your judgment, a reasonable and adequate number?

Miss PIGEON. I don't think she is asking for an unreasonable number when she asks for 94 privates in the city of Washington, that is as important as it is, being the National Capital. It is a large convention city, to which many people are attracted, and it needs an additional number beyond the needs of other cities of the same size. Mr. BLANTON. Ninety-four women for three shifts would be an available 30 women for each shift?

Miss PIGEON. Exactly.

Mr. BLANTON. If there were two women to a squad, that would be an available 15 squads at any time?

Miss PIGEON. Yes.

Mr. BLANTON. There never would be available more than 15 squads for the entire city of Washington?

Miss PIGEON. No, sir.

May I say, in connection with the necessity of having two women work together, that one point not brought out is the necessity of having two witnesses in cases of sex offenses. I don't know how the law is written here, but in Massachusetts it is written in the law that in any sex offenses you can not convict unless there are two witnesses. The men on the vice squad all work in pairs. It is necessary in this particular type of offense.

Mr. RATHBONE. You are referring to confessions?

Miss PIGEON. No; I am referring to these cases of women soliciting on the streets. It is necessary to have two witnesses, because it might otherwise lead to defamation of character-one person might have a grudge against another. That is the law in Massachusetts--if you have one witness of such a thing, you might defame the character of some one, and you must have corroborative evidence. Mr. HAMMER. The age limit, I understand, is 45 for this bureau, except for six persons? Is there an age limit fixed now for the policewomen of the service?

Miss PIGEON. I think it is 25 to 35 here in Washington. That exception in the bill is so that there might be a few women of mature years--there are some cases when it seems that an older woman could deal better with a case than a young one.

Mr. HAMMER. Don't you think we ought to leave out that age limit of 35 years? Is there any reason why women 40 years old can not be just as good policewomen as others younger?

Miss PIGEON. Some of the police duties demand it-they talked that over. There was a policewoman outside Boston who was over 40 when she entered the service. She thought that on some duties you should have a younger person--that it is a physical tax on the older ones.

Mr. HAMMER. Don't you think it would injure the service by putting all members on as young as 35, when you can get good women that are 38 or 40?

Miss PIGEON. Of course it is necessary to set a limit.

Mr. HAMMER. I am just asking you about this. Don't you think we are going too far when we prohibit women over 35 from coming in? Supposing there is a really good woman of 38 or 40?

Mr. RATHBONE. Doesn't the question of pension enter into that consideration?

Miss PIGEON. Yes.

Mr. RATHBONE. In what way?

Miss PIGEON. When they take a woman perhaps at over 35, they might not be able to go on with their work more than 10 years and then they would be of the age when they would be entitled to pension. There are certain parts of that work that need young women.

Mr. HAMMER. I realize that you have high standards.

Miss PIGEON. It is considered the finest standard in the world to-day.

Mr. HAMMER. My objection to your standard, as I have been understanding it, is that from my experience, which I only refer to when I have to I have had some little experience in the courts-my experience is with policemen; I never had much experience with policewomen-down in my country they are not only not using policewomen but they don't have them on the jury-I feel that they ought to have policewomen in cities of this size or even less; in all large cities--but my experience with policemen and sheriffs and deputies-I am not like Clarence Darrow; I can see some good in them. He doesn't see much good in any sort of sheriff or policeman, if you take him literally in his statement that they are all inclined to be very prejudiced I don't want to misquote him-they are not reliable; in other words, that you have to make considerable allowances for