Mr. BISHOP. I bring that to you attention because in Chicago and New York they move thousand and tens of thousands of people each morning, and of course they go back empty. That is true, but they come back and get them in the evening.

Mr. NOLEN. Chicago and New York have the advantage, for I imagine the figures would show that there is some return load, because a good many industries are located on the outskirts of the metropolitan area, in satellite communities surrounding the central city.

Mr. BISHOP. But so far as expenses are concerned, it would be cheaper for the Government to stand some of that expense of transportation than to build houses or to build facilities.

Mr. NOLEN. That might be, but it would require some special authorization to subsidize that transportation.

Mr. WILSON. Do you not think that if they operated in shifts, it would take care of the return load proposition? I passed some of the Government offices down here on my way home last night, and they were dark, nobody working at all.

It seems to me if they would operate those offices on three shifts they would require about one-third of the space, and then the commuter trains could commute back and forth and have loads both ways. Of course, I am not offering evidence in solution of the problem, except that I think we are just getting into deeper water all the time. În trying to solve the problem by bringing more people in we further complicate it, and I think the only solution is a wholesale decentralization of these agencies that do not necessarily need to be here. I think there are many of them that could be shifted, including the Department of Agriculture. I specially recommend that that Department be shifted out near the farm center anyway.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions?

Mr. NOLEN. I would like to submit for the information of the committee this chart which shows the growth of the Government establishments in Washington from 1905 to 1941, inclusive. The chart on the left shows the yearly and half-yearly changes from the beginning of 1905 to the middle of 1940. The one on the right shows the increase by months from the 1st of January 1940, to the 1st of November 1941. The dotted line shows the Bureau of the Budget estimate if no decentralization occurs.

(The chart referred to follows:)

Mr. WRIGHT. One of the previous witnesses said that they had brought 80,000 people here so far, and they probably would bring 50,000 more. Now, by the ratio that you applied awhile ago, we are going to have an increase of 500,000 people here.

Mr. MANASCO. Since we are not going to be able to get any golf balls now, have you given any thought to placing any of these projects on the Rock Creek Golf Course and the Anacostia Golf Course?

Mr. NOLEN. Well, the demands of these new employees on the recreation facilities in the District are beyond the ability of present facilities to meet.

Mr. MANASCO. They will not be able to get any golf balls, so they can not play golf, so why not put some of these new buildings on the golf courses?

Mr. NOLEN. Well, the topography is pretty rough. Also, a statement appeared the other day following a meeting of representatives of these new employees, in which they stated that one of the reasons why it was difficult to get employees to come to Washington was the lack of recreation facilities in the city.

Mr. MANASCo. I am in favor of having recreation centers. I think that is very important in keeping the physical well-being of the employees up.

Mr. NOLEN. Yes; already there have been taken from the recreation system of the District more than 100 facilities that are estimated to serve nearly 300,000 people during the course of the year, and that does not include spectators. Those are participants. The facilities are principally soft ball diamonds, tennis courts, and soccer fields.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Nolen. Do you have any further data you wish to present?

Mr. NOLEN. I have one thing more that Mr. Delano asked me to present to the committee.

We have been concerned in the defense housing projects that have already been undertaken, that we do not create problems of site lay-out that cannot be satisfactorily absorbed by the community later on.

To be a little more specific, many of these housing projects will doubtless be broken up and sold to private enterprise for management and operation after the war. We would like to see, so far as possible, the plans for those projects conform to the standards and practice that the District has had for many years as to subdivision and the furnishing of utilities and so on. The reason I mention that is because under the original Lanham Act, I believe, these Federal agencies were authorized to go into communities and establish these projects without relation to local laws and regulations. That was, of course, in order to expedite the carrying out of the program.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you familiar with the recent amendment of the act?

Mr. NOLEN. No; I am not.

The CHAIRMAN. The recent amendment to the act makes mandatory a consultation with local authorities and local housing authorities, public officials, and provides that insofar as possible the housing shall be done in conformity with city plans and city traditions, and we had some questions yesterday that were propounded to various witnesses, especially to the effect that those houses that are to be

68391-42-7

permanent should be established very definitely in accordance with that policy, in order that, as part of this city, if they are to endure they should be quite in keeping, especially in this National Capital area, with the buildings that we have.

So, insofar as we can do it legislatively, we now have that provision in the law.

Mr. NOLEN. That is fine. I am sure that will meet Mr. Delano's point.

The CHAIRMAN. That is an amendment of the act that was only very recently approved-as a matter of fact, it was approved this month.

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Nolen, is it your contention that in the development of these housing projects, that in every case, notwithstanding the stress of war conditions, they should be developed under ideal conditions?

Mr. NOLAN. No, sir.

Mr. HARRIS. I rather gathered the impression that you thought you ought to put in all of the recreational facilities and other frills that you put in in a modern residential development.

Mr. NOLEN. No, sir. As a matter of fact, we have contended that the plan that we already have for community recreation facilities should be adequate to serve these projects, and that within the projects themselves there is very little that need be done of that

nature.

Mr. HARRIS. I think, in view of the fact that we have a governmental policy now, through taxation and otherwise, where everybody is going to be required to sacrifice and reduce their outlay and do various other things to tend to keep down inflation, that these projects should be handled in conformity with that policy. Do you not think so?

Mr. NOLEN. Yes, I think so, if I understand your question.

Mr. GIBSON. Do you not think, Mr. Witness, that in fairness we ought to think more about realities and less about the recreational end of it?

Mr. NOLEN. The pressure for recreation facilities comes from the people themselves.

Mr. MANASCO. If a person does not take recreation, their efficiency is lowered and the Government loses in the long run anyway, does it not?

Mr. NOLEN. Yes, and we actually have a condition here where new employees refuse to come to or stay in Washington because of the lack of recreation facilities.

Mr. HARRIS. I think any Congressman could recruit more than you could hire, if you all get letters like I do.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Nolen. It is now a quarter of 12. We would not be able to stay here more than 10 minutes longer anyway, so we will adjourn at this time until 10 o'clock next Tuesday morning, at which time we will hear first from the other gentlemen of the Commission.

(Whereupon, at 11:45 a. m., the committee adjourned until 10 a. m., Tuesday, February 3, 1942.)

AMENDING THE ACT TO EXPEDITE THE PROVISIONS OF HOUSING IN CONNECTION WITH NATIONAL DEFENSE

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 1942.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS,

Washington, D. C.

The committee met at 10 a. m., Hon. Fritz G. Lanham (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be in order. The Honorable Winston B. Stephens, who appeared before us the other day, has written me a letter in which he says that some of the newspaper accounts of his testimony were somewhat misleading, in that they evidently were based on a misunderstanding of what he said, and without objection his letter will be included in the record.

(The letter referred to follows:)

Hon. FRITZ G. LANHAM,

UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION,
Washington, D. C., February 2, 1942.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. LANHAM: Newspaper accounts of my testimony before your committee last Friday morning lead me to believe that the figures I reported were understood to represent total recruitment figures for the District of Columbia for the periods reported. This is not the case, and I feel that it is important that your com aittee should have the full picture, as the 81,000 I mentioned referred only to probational appointees and the thousand a week only to stenographers and cert in other low salaried employees directly recruited for a number of the war agencies.

In addition to the probational appointments, totaling 81,001 for the period beginning July 1, 1940 and ending January 24, 1942, other appointments in the District, including those made from the replacement list, the reemployment list, Post Office appointments, temporary appointments made under the civil service rules and appointments made under Executive orders 8564, 8743 and 8044 totaled 50,793 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1941 and 39,240 from that date through December 31, 1941.

In other words, 171,034 persons were given civil service appointments in the District of Columbia by operating agencies served by the Civil Service Commission in a period of slightly more than 18 months. This number includes turn-over and the due proportion of persons from this general locality.

Even these figures do not fully measure the demands being made upon the Commission by the operating departments and agencies. The mounting demands have been in excess of the number of persons actually reporting for duty. The following figures indicating vacancies in Washington for which the Commission has been asked to furnish eligible applicants, indicate recent trends. The probability is that the weekly demands will continue to increase, rather than decrease.