Mr. SAVAGE. I think that is so, that you did that, and refused to bring certain ones in.

Mr. SCHAFER. Who were these witnesses; were they employees or patients?

Mr. SAVAGE. Patients, yes; and they were subsequently brought before the grand jury.

Mr. SCHAFER. They were patients?

Mr. SAVAGE. Yes.

Mr. SCHAFER. And were they in Howard Hall?

Mr. SAVAGE. Yes.

Mr. SCHAFER. And were supposed to have a deep-seated mental disability?

Mr. SAVAGE. No; I do not think so.

Mr. SCHAFER. Are not the patients in Howard Hall supposed to be patients who practically have no mind whatever?

Doctor WHITE. No; there are all sorts of people there, Mr. Schafer. Some of them are very seriously ill; some of them are not very seriously ill. There are all kinds of people there.

Mr. SAVAGE. They were all brought before the grand jury and testified. Robert McChesney

Doctor WHITE. Some of them are very dangerous, however. I do not remember the circumstances of the Green case, but it is perfectly absurd to say that the hospital would not respect the demands of the grand jury and the courts; it is a perfectly childish statement to make. Mr. SAVAGE. No. When this thing came before the grand jury the second time, I am going to read the second paragraph and touch on that.

Mr. SCHAFER. We do not want to leave that point there; we want to get some facts.

Mr. SAVAGE. This is on that point. The facts were laid before another grand jury by an outsider 15 months later and, over vigorous opposition of the hospital officials, the previously restrained witnesses were produced and thus the indictment procured. The foreman of the grand jury can relate the difficulties met at the hands of the hospital officials in obtaining the attendance of witnesses. Now I can only say what the foreman, Mr. Edwards, who lives down here in the next block, on B Street, told me. They had one man named Tisdale. They issued a subpoena for him. Whether the subpoena was served, or not, I do not know, or whether it was just placed in the hands of the marshal. But, at any rate, the foreman said they told him "Tisdale is too dangerous to bring down here; we can not bring him down here," and there were a number of others that were too dangerous to bring down.

Mr. SCHAFER. I know something about Tisdale and he was not só dangerous, but was employed in the dining room where there were knives and forks on the table, and butcher knives where he was passing by.

Mr. SAVAGE. Yes.

Mr. SCHAFER. What I would like to find out is whether the hospital did restrain Tisdale from testifying before the grand jury.

Mr. SAVAGE. Mr. Edwards, the foreman, told me that they refused to produce Tisdale and some others. I do not recall the names of the others just now.

Mr. GOODWIN. Right there: The grand jury, of course, issued a subpoena.

Mr. SAVAGE. They issued a subpœna.

Mr. GOODWIN. Or some authority acting under the instructions of the grand jury issued a subpœna.

Mr. SAVAGE. Yes.

Mr. GOODWIN. That subpoena undoubtedly is returned to the court issuing it, with a report as to the circumstances. Have you ever seen that subpoena?

Mr. SAVAGE. I have never seen the subpoena and I am not sure it was issued, for the reason that the marshal, sometimes, I assume, probably notifies the hospital he has a subpoena for such and such a patient, for convenience and, if they tell him I believe this is the way it is done that the patient is impracticable to bring before the court, or impossible, I believe they refrain from serving the subpœna. I believe that has been done. I know it has been done in that case and I know the foreman said they refused to bring him down because he was too dangerous.

Mr. SCHAFER. In order to keep the record straight, I ask unanimous consent that Doctor White incorporate, at this point, a statement indicating if a subpoena was issued upon him requiring Tisdale to appear before the grand jury and, if it was, what return was made; and, if he was not permitted to appear before the grand jury, the reasons why.1

Mr. GOODWIN. That will be inserted.

Doctor WHITE. I can not remember the whole thing.

Mr. SCHAFER. He can incorporate it later.

Doctor WHITE. Yes; I will have to find out what the facts are. Mr. SAVAGE. Why not make that include what the others were. Mr. SCHAFER. If you would name the witnesses I would include them.2

Mr. SAVAGE. So as to show all of the witnesses, because there are others besides Tisdale.

Mr. SCHAFER. Yes.

Mr. SAVAGE. When I speak about restraint, these men say they informed the doctors they witnessed this beating which caused the killing, and asked that they be allowed to go before the grand jury or some other authority and testify.

Doctor WOOLLEY. I think I can answer Mr. Savage's criticism without any hesitation whatever. The hospital has never refused to honor any subpoena which has been issued by any grand jury or court of the United States, and one investigation, if I am not mistaken, was a grand jury investigation, and demands were made for certain men in Howard Hall and, when the subpoenas arrived for them, we notified the authorities we had no facilities to take men to court, and they would have to be taken by the United States marshal and they were taken down by the United States marshal. We had not the facilities. to take these men down and back again, and the subpoenas were served and the United States marshal took them down to the grand jury.

Mr. SANGER. That case he speaks of came to trial and the men were acquitted; is not that true?

Mr. SAVAGE. That is true.

Mr. SANGER. It ought to be a matter of record that they investigated that and the jury acquitted him and said he was not responsible. Mr. SCHAFER. Yes; but in order to clear up the statement about restraining witnesses, I think the record should be completed in that

respect.

Mr. SAVAGE. Doctor White can submit his story from his sidewhat he has to say about it.

Doctor WHITE. I would have been in jail if I had restrained them, would I not?

Mr. SAVAGE. I do not know about that, Doctor; I do not believe anybody would put you in jail.

Doctor WHITE. Don't you think so?

Mr. SAVAGE. No.

Doctor WHITE. I hope so; I hope you are right.

Mr. SAVAGE. I do not believe even the Emperor of Japan would put you in jail. [Laughter]. Now, these men said they had told the doctors that they saw this thing and asked that they be permitted to go before the grand jury, and were not allowed to go. I base this statement on what Mr. Edwards told me and Doctor Woolley, I saw those men brought into court; I was down there, and they were accompanied by attendants.

Mr. SCHAFER. Your purpose in bringing out the matter which you have just discussed is to give the committee information so that they can ascertain whether there have been expenditures of the people's money to restrain patients from testifying before a grand jury when their presence and testimony had been requested?

Mr. SAVAGE. Well, I do not think that had anything to do with expenditures.

Mr. SCHAFER. Well this is an expenditures committee.

Mr. SAVAGE. I see.

Mr. SCHAFER. That is the only ground upon which we can consider that phase.

Mr. SAVAGE. I see. Well, I am commenting here upon the comptroller's report and these things are embodied in it and this may be said to be a criticism of the Comptroller General's report; that is what it is, and if I had been coming before this committee this was prepared for another committee-in fact, some of the stuff is not appropriate for this particular inquiry. But I think that everything which goes to show that the persons are wrongfully and needlessly restrained there is appropriate here.

Mr. SCHAFER. Of course, the best of them can make mistakes. So far as the Tisdale case goes, I believe he was unlawfully detained and that he was absolutely sane. In fact, I examined him myself and had two eminent N. P. doctors examine him and, after he went before a jury of his peers in the court action, they took about one minute, or less, to return a verdict of "sane," and he has continued along, outside of the institution, very nicely ever since.

Mr. SAVAGE. Now I have just a little bit more here that I will read. Neglect or other atrocities: The report of the district subcommittee was the basis for the resolution directing the comptroller's investigation of the hospital and available to the comptroller. On page 1352 of that report we find evidence of the killings of patients Frank Lewis. and Richard Streets and the rendition of death certificates in these

cases to the health department giving causes of death as paralysis of insane and general paresis. The comptroller makes no reference to these affairs and leaves Congress in the dark with reference thereto. The comptroller sums up his findings under "conclusions" page 126 et seq. He finds the laws inadequate and indefinite. He finds no fault with their administration. The housing facilities are not sufficient and the congestion makes inefficiency. The possibility of relieving the congestion by reducing the population is not suggested, hence we must conclude that added building appropriations must be the only remedy. Severe criticism of accounting methods or lack thereof is made, but as the comptroller says that the General Accounting Office is now solving the hospital's problems in this regard, Congress need not concern itself over that. It is observed that most if not all of the criticism is directed to the manner of keeping patients' accounts. Not much, if anything, is said about the expenditures of the appropriations.

Mr. SCHAFER. Just one question: You mention that the comptroller indicates that part of the trouble is due to the failure to have sufficient legislation. Does he make any specific recommendations as to what legislation should be enacted in order to cure the situation? Mr. SAVAGE. I do not know; I do not recall whether he does or not. But I think, as I have stated in here, that if new legislation is enacted, and it is not enforced or administered any better than the existing legislation, there would not be much improvement.

Mr. SCHAFER. Did I understand one of the witnesses from St. Elizabeths Hospital to indicate that they notified the foreman of the grand jury that patients who were desired as witnesses could not be be brought before the grand jury because of the lack of facilities for their conveyance?

Doctor WOOLLEY. We simply notified the marshal's office that these men had been subpoenaed before the grand jury and we did not have the facilities to handle those men. There were several of those men charged with murder, and we had no facilities and told them we would like to have the responsibility taken by the marshal's office.

Doctor WHITE. The marshal's office has a Black Maria for transporting them, and we would have to do it by sending an attendant to accompany them, and that makes it relatively easy for the men to escape.

Mr. SAVAGE. At any rate, Mr. Edwards said they were not produced; he said "we are going to produce their testimony if we have to go out there to get it.'

Doctor WHITE. Edwards did come out there to the hospital.

Mr. SAVAGE. Edwards took the jury out there. and held court out there in Howard Hall.

Mr. SCHAFER. Which was a good plan from the public standpoint, was it not?

Mr. SAVAGE. Yes, it was a good plan. Now I have a short statement here with reference to this boiler plant. It has been charged that the present boiler installation in St. Elizabeths Hospital is unreasonably large. As this matter is now the subject of consideration by a subcommittee of the District Committee of the House of Representatives it is deemed appropriate to offer the subcommittee some suggestive information bearing thereon. This was prepared for that commitee, but it has never acted; they have never had a meeting since then.

The installation in question is rated at 3,600 horsepower. The population in the hospital at the close of the last fiscal year (1927) was 4,340.

Mr. SCHAFER. That includes patients and employees?

Mr. SAVAGE. No employees; only patients. The ratio between horsepower installed and population served is at once startling to one informed in such matters. To others it might mean nothing. They might not know whether the installation was much or little for the population served. Some comparative data is herewith presented from which it is believed that it will be obvious to the layman that the capacity installed is much.

Mr. SCHAFER. Will the gentleman yield right there? I do not quite get your point. If you are taking figures based on the population served, why just confine your figures to the patients? If you are arriving at figures for comparative purpose, you must naturally include all the people served, it makes no difference whether they are patients or employees.

Mr. SAVAGE. I see. Well, I will say, as I said about the coal, that if I have been unreasonable in my criticism here, it is more than compensated in that we have a large factor of safety; that is, in the coal, I gave them double measure, and Mr. Sanger, in that year, put the number of employees in there at 1,074; yet I understand they work in three shifts and only one-third of them go on duty every eight hours.

Mr. SCHAFER. You mean, when you take patients only, that is a point favorable to the institution, in so far as the comparison.

Mr. SAVAGE. I have taken patients only and I have not considered employees. It might be said I was doing an injustice to the hospital in not including the employees. Mr. Sanger included the employees in his report they amounted to 1,074 employees at that time— and he put them in at the full number. I say, in reply to that, that that number should be divided by three, because they are on duty only one-third of the time; they do not live there all of the time; they live at home, off of the reservation, 16 hours a day, and only work 8 hours. So that instead of putting in the number at 1,074, he should have put it in at 350. So that would not make a difference of 10 per

cent.

Mr. GOODWIN. Does that really make any difference?

Mr. SAVAGE. It would, to be fair to them-the employees should be included, too.

Doctor WHITE. There are 150 that live at the hospital.

Mr. SAVAGE. I see.

Doctor WHITE. And at that time there were nearly 600.

Mr. SAVAGE. I took that into consideration and said it would be about 10 per cent on coal. It would be less than 10 per cent. Doctor WHITE. Which was not enough.

Mr. SAVAGE. Let us read this and then see if it makes any considerable difference. I say Some comparative data is herewith presented from which it is believed that it will be obvious to the layman that the capacity installed is too much. The boiler horsepower in use in 1916 was 3,300; the population was 3,193. Horsepower in use in 1919 was 3,600; the population, 3,586. So that in those years there was in use more than 1 horsepower per capita.