eran's service. There were no financial restrictions as to income or dependency. This did not disturb the $30 rate to other widows.

The CHAIRMAN. In which case there would be no children because if she is the wife during the Civil War, well, certainly she does not have any dependent children 50 years later or 40 years later.

General HINES. I would not say with great certainty because the delimiting dates of the marriage were interjected into those laws. The CHAIRMAN. I understand what you read there was the widows who were the wives of the soldiers during the service. Well, they would hardly have any dependent children at that age unless they were crippled or demented or had some permanent disability that went back to childhood.

General HINES. That may be true.

The CHAIRMAN. How much was there provided for each child? General HINES. Six dollars. They continued amending the act and passing various acts up to the act of June 9, 1930, the last act passed for the Civil War dependents, that was 64 years after when they provided a rate of $40 for the widow. Of course, the other act was still the law, that is, $50 if she was the wife of the veteran when he served and $6 for the child. The widow must be 70 years of age in order to get the $40 rate. If under 70 years of age, the $30 rate is applicable.

Now, the Spanish-American War, the first legislation providing for a pension was the act of July 16, 1918, 16 years after the war, when they provided $12 for the widow and $2 for the child and it had a provision that there should be no means of support other than daily labor with an income of not over $250 per year.

The CHAIRMAN. What year was that passed?

General HINES. That was in July 1918.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. Was there any limitation on the marriage? General HINES. The limitation on marriage at that time was made the date of that act.

The CHAIRMAN. That was 20 years after the war.

General HINES. They amended the act numerous times. The last act was August 13, 1935, 33 years after the war when the rate for the widow was increased to $30 and $6 for the child by restoring the Service Pension Act of May 1, 1926, which was repealed March 20, 1933. And the period between the end of the war and the delimiting marriage date was 20 years. There was no financial restriction. Now, the committee, of course, is familiar with the bill, H. R. 7593, section 2, which would grant in effect a service pension to World War widows and children. If enacted, the benefit would be provided 22 years after the war and at a rate of $30 for the widow and $8 for the first child and $4 for each additional child. The delimiting date of marriage would be 22 years after the war, that is, the date of enactment of the proposed act. The present date is May 13, 1938.

The income and dependency restrictions provided in that bill are that the pension would not be payable if the income exceeded $1,000, or $2,500 if the widow had a minor child. If she herself has an income of $1,000 she would be barred. If she has a child the income limitation of $2,500 would be the bar.

That gives you some history of enacted and one item of proposed legislation. There are many acts in between and many changes in

the rates. I will be glad to insert that statement in the record if you wish it.

(The statement referred to is as follows:)

Historical development of service pensions for widows and children of Civil War and Spanish-American War veterans, including rates and certain elements of entitlement, compared with service pensions for widows and children of World War veterans as provided by H. R. 7593, 76th Cong.

1 Higher rate payable if widow of veteran during service, or if 70 years old.

2 Including Boxer Rebellion and Philippine Insurrection.

3 War dates are: Spanish-American War, Apr. 21, 1898-Aug. 13, 1898; Philippine Insurrection, Aug. 13, 1898-July 5, 1902; Boxer Rebellion June 30, 1900-May 13, 1901.

4 For first child.

Each additional child.

If there was service in Russia, the ending date is Apr. 2, 1920.

NOTE.-If there is no widow, the rate for a child or children of Civil or Spanish-American War veterans is that prescribed for widow and child or children, whereas under H. R. 7593 special (lower) rates are prescribed for a child or children, in the absence of a widow.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. General, do you have any idea how many widows were married to veterans during the World War, that is, they were wives of the veterans?

General HINES. Mr. Chairman, we could estimate on that by taking the proportion of widows that are on the rolls and applying it to the larger group. For the first time this year I feel that the estimate of this bill on the number of widows that will be affected by the legislation proposed is probably based on safe calculations. In other words, we have based it by taking those on the rolls, the serviceconnected age groups, and from that assuming, and, of course, you have to make an assumption, that the proportion of these marriages and the ages would be about the same throughout the balance that are not on the rolls. Outside of that one assumption I think it is very reliable.

The CHAIRMAN. How many Civil War widows are there now living who were married to the veteran during the Civil War-the War between the States?

General HINES. I have that right here, Mr. Chairman.

On June 30, 1939, the pensions were being paid to widows and children, brothers, and sisters of 57,915 deceased veterans of the Civil War as compared with 66,873 at the beginning of this fiscal period, a difference of 8,958. These pensions were being paid to 55,665 widows and 2,449 children. There were 7,462 cases in which $30 per month was being paid and 43,811 in which the beneficiary was in receipt of $40. as provided by law of the attained age of 70. And there were 762 in which $50 was being paid as authorized by law for widows who were the wives of soldiers during their service in that war.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. General, how many widows of World War veterans, if Congress were to approve a bill paying a pension, just how many widows would be entitled to that pension?

General HINES. It is our estimate, Congressman, that the provisions of H. R. 7593 would affect 144,500 deceased World War veterans. They probably would be classified as best we can tell in the ratios which I have been discussing. Widows without children, 54,300. Widows with children, 67,000. Children alone, 23,200. Based upon the amount in that bill the cost of paying this entire group, if they all applied, would be $60,309,000 for the first year. Based upon our experience we have found half, approximately half, of those eligible would apply the first year so our estimate of course on that bill is $30,000,000, and it would bring on the rolls, out of the 144,500, 72,000 new cases.

The CHAIRMAN. It would bring 72,000 cases onto the rolls now? General HINES. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. That is widows and orphans both?

General HINES. Widows and children, no dependent parents, just widows and children.

The CHAIRMAN. How much would that cost per year?

General HINES. Our estimate is, the first year, $30,000,000, and it would increase, of course, progressively.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the maximum payment to the widows in that bill?

General HINES. As I recall, it is $30 a month.

Mr. GATHINGS. That $30,000,000 would be in addition to what they now receive? That would be the added cost?

General HINES. That would be the additional cost to the present cost.

Mrs. ROGERS. Have you taken up the matter with the Budget? Of course the Budget is decided upon by the President.

General HINES. The report cleared the Budget and was furnished this committee February 13, 1940.

Mrs. ROGERS. Have you taken it up with the President?

General HINES. No; I have not had any opportunity to take these bills up with the President. Advice has been received from the Bureau of the Budget that the proposed legislation would not be in accordance with the program of the President.

The CHAIRMAN. Has the Budget ever approved anything? General HINES. Yes, Mr. Chairman, we sent you a bill today which the Budget approved.

The CHAIRMAN. What was that on, just changing this land over here?

General HINES. That is a bill which is before this committee which is on the liberalization of burial allowances, as I understand it. Mrs. ROGERS. What is the cost of that?

General HINES. What is the estimated cost, Mr. Birdsall?

Mr. BIRDSALL. The proposed extension of the period for filing claim from one to two years it is estimated would result in an additional annual cost of $65,000. It is not possible to estimate the additional cost for deaths after March 20, 1933.

General HINES. There would be an increase in the cost but it is rather difficult to ascertain.

The CHAIRMAN. You understand, General, I am not referring to the present Budget. I am acquainted with the Budget ever since it was created.

General HINES. I realize that.

The CHAIRMAN. I am probabiy one of the few members who wanted to leave those prerogatives in Congress where the Constitution placed them. Congress did not agree with me. My recollection is that it is easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than it is for veterans' legislation to get through the Budget and it always has been.

General HINES. In answer to Mrs. Rogers, I will say that on none of this legislation have I had an opportunity of talking to the President about it. As you know, it was introduced early in the session. I did not feel probably it would be desirable to take up with the President all of this legislation. There is a great deal of it and many of the bills are overlapping and when the committee indicates to me about the character of the legislation that they desire to bring out, I will then be glad to discuss it with the President. I think it would be much better to do that. If we added all these bills up that are proposed to this committee, it would make a staggering increase in the annual cost when actually the committee may have only in mind a very reasonable increase and I would prefer to go on that rather than on a larger increase.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course, General, if we passed all the bills introduced in Congress, there would not be enough money in the world

to pay the expenses. We realize all these bills are not going to pass. We are trying to settle down on some of it.

General HINES. The committee has always, I think, been very conservative in their endeavor to meet the situation existing at the time. No doubt when you get into executive session you will be able to indicate to me the character of legislation and at that time we will make a new estimate and I will take it up with the President. Mrs. ROGERS. Of course, we could pass the bill over the President's veto should the President veto a bill. We have passed bills before over Presidential vetoes.

General HINES. Yes; that is correct. I am frank to state to you I hope it will not be necessary for the President ever to have to veto a bill dealing with dependents and the children of World War

veterans.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. General, is it possible for you to develop just what percentage of widows and orphans will benefit by any legislation we may pass, that is a widow of a veteran of the World War, a widow or wife of the veteran when he served?

General HINES. We will endeavor to do that. I think probably we will have to resort to the same character of ratios as those on the rolls as we have in making up this estimate. I will be glad to try to do that. I do feel that that widow occupies a rather different status than the widow who marries the veteran, say, 20 years after the war. If the committee gives consideration to that, I have always felt that the precedent set up by the Civil War, even though it was late in the legislation, it was very good legislation because the wife of the man when he served certainly goes through certain experiences that the younger wife who married him years after does not experience.

The CHAIRMAN. General, do you think it would be logical then to bring the World War veteran's pension legislation or compensation in line with the precedent set in the passage of the Civil War and Spanish War?

General HINES. Without saying, Mr. Chairman, that I feel you should bring out pension legislation at this time, I would say we ought to do two things, certainly follow the good precedent set and avoid as far as we can creating any inequalities of the dependents of veterans.

The CHAIRMAN. I think that is a sound doctrine, if our predecessors were right in establishing their precedents.

General HINES. Well, probably they did not give the same consideration at the time that this committee has given to legislation dealing with the World War. In all periods of our history we have had different methods of doing things. I think more serious consideration has been given by this committee to legislation than the history shows was given to pension legislation generally.

The CHAIRMAN. The courts seem to have abandoned the doctrine of stare decisis. It is now left up to the legislative branch of the Government to observe that sacred doctrine. I am willing to follow along as best I can.

General HINES. Then, Mr. Chairman, may Mr. Brown proceed now and we will try to clear up these things?

Mr. BROWN. H. R. 7925, which is the Veterans of Foreign Wars legislative program, section 22, would amend paragraph 9 of Vet