ments that there does not seem to be any room for argument as to what they are trying to do, what they are striving to accomplish. It seems to me the only question is whether the general law is to be modified so as to meet any particular situation; that is the thing I am concerned about.

Mr. COLTON. That is, modified by departmental action?

Mr. McCARL. No; by the Congress.

Mr. COLTON. Oh, I see. Well, as a matter of fact, your position is, in effect, that it has been modified in this particular case by administrative officers.

Mr. McCARL. No. My position is that the administrative officers are not functioning under the existing law to give me the determined value of these allowances and quarters; that the law is not being complied with.

Mr. LANHAM. And your decision is being held in abeyance pending that?

Mr. MCCARL. Not my decision; my action-to see what this Congress is going to do, if anything. If it is not going to do anything then it is up to me to act.

The CHAIRMAN. Now section 3 of the act of March 3, 1928, provides this: That the head of an executive department or independent establishment where in his judgment the conditions of employment require it may continue to employ and to furnish civilians employed in the field service with quarters, heat, household equipment, and so forth. Then it goes on to provide, where these are allowed, that the reasonable value of such allowances shall be determined and considered in fixing the salary rate of such civilian.

Mr. McCARL. That was to cure the situation where there was no law authorizing the furnishing of anything.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand; but it would apply to St. Elizabeths Hospital only in case that is considered as being in the field service?

Mr. MCCARL. But it was not necessary to include the departmental service, because they have been included in the classification act. Is there a different rule for the field than for the District of Columbia?

The CHAIRMAN. I am not so sure there is. That is what I am inquiring about.

Mr. McCARL. I think that was pretty carefully considered by me, and, so far as the accounting office is concerned, there is no difference.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. I recall last summer I received an appeal from a graduate nurse employed at the Veterans' Bureau hospital. Her family lived about 3 miles from the hospital, outside of the reservation. Her family constituted, as I recall it, a sister and a dependent father and mother. She received a small salary, together with quarters and subsistence, and her request was that the Government pay her an amount equal to that of the quarters and subsistence she was receiving so that she could live with her parents right outside of the reservation. She figured that the four of them practically could live as cheap as three and the money was needed for the upkeep of the house. The medical director advised me that under the law he had no power to comply with my request. Was he acting under some law affecting the Veterans' Bureau, do you know, or under this general law?

Mr. McCARL. I would not want to "curbstone" about it; but my guess is, if you will investigate it, it is a bureau regulation. Most of these institutions are run on this basis, if I understand correctly, that where they maintain a kitchen and furnish subsistence they prefer to furnish it rather than to give employees the money to go out and buy it some place else; because they go to the expense of providing the table most institutions would prefer, and some insist by regulation, that where under the contract subsistence is to be furnished it is furnished in kind unless they can not furnish it in kind, and then they make other arrangements and pay the monetary value. I do not know whether that is the fact in your case, but I think you will find, if you will ask the Veterans' Bureau, that to be the situation.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. They do have quarters.

Mr. McCARL. If they have quarters, they doubtless prefer to furnish quarters rather than the money value, and perhaps the regulations require them to be used. I thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, gentlemen, I have a number of documents here which may be furnished by Doctor White, but if they are not I think they should be in the record. Among these is a letter from H. M. Lord, Director of the Budget, to Mr. Finney, under date of November 10, 1928. I think that should be in the record.

Also a letter from E. C. Finney to Hon. H. M. Lord, dated October 31, 1928, dealing with this matter.

I also have a letter here from Mr. M. Sanger, assistant superintendent of St. Elizabeths Hospital, directed to the Secretary of the Interior, under date of October 26, 1928, which should be in the record.

Also a statement, which I assume has been made up at St. Elizabeths Hospital, showing the various employees from Doctor White, the superintendent, on down, who receive subsistence, laundry, or other services from that institution, and with your permission we will also put that in the record.

(The letters and statement above referred to are as follows:)

Hon. H. M. LORD,

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
Washington, October 31, 1928.

Director of the Bureau of the Budget, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR GENERAL LORD: I inclose herewith copies of my letter of September 22, 1928, to the Comptroller General, his reply of October 11, 1928, and a letter from the assistant to the superintendent of St. Elizabeths Hospital, bearing date of October 26, 1928.

Is there any objection on the part of the Bureau of the Budget to the presentation of the matter for the furnishing of quarters, subsistence, and other allowances in kind to the officers and employees of St. Elizabeths Hospital to Congress through the proper appropriation committees in connection with hearings to be held on proposed appropriations for the hospital for the year 1929-30?

Very truly yours,

E. C. FINNEY,

First Assistant Secretary and Budget Officer.

Hon. E. B. FINNEY,

BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, November 10, 1928.

First Assistant Secretary and Budget Officer, Department of the Interior. MY DEAR MR. FINNEY: On October 31, 1928, you wrote me with regard to the furnishing of quarters, subsistence, and other allowances in kind to the officers and employees of St. Elizabeths Hospital. As the Comptroller General has questioned the payments made to this personnel on the ground that no deduction was made for the allowances in kind mentioned by you in contemplation of section 3 of the act of May 5, 1928 (45 Stat. 193), I certainly believe that the Committee on Appropriations should be fully advised by you in the matter.

The omission in the expenditure schedule, which follows the Budget estimate for St. Elizabeths Hospital, of any notation of deduction from the total of the estimate on account of these allowances, was due solely to the fact that no information was available as to the reasonable value of the allowances. I mention it so that you may know that had the information been available it would have been reflected in the Budget presentation of the St. Elizabeths Hospital item.

Sincerely yours,

The SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR,

H. M. LORD, Director.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

ST. ELIZABETHS HOSPITAL, Washington, D. C., October 26, 1928.

Department of the Interior, Washington, D. C.

SIR: In reply to the letter of the Comptroller General of the United States of October 11, 1928, in reconsideration of appeal 23927:

It is noted that the comptroller says: "This office can not accept the view you advance that the Congress has heretofore expressly or impliedly sanctioned or approved the furnishing of the various allowances, referred to in my decision of August 15, 1928, to the extent there set forth and free of charge or without being considered as a part of the compensation of the officers or employees under St. Elizabeths Hospital."

We do not know on what the comptroller bases his conclusions, but give herewith the laws, customs, and evidence as presented to Congress pertaining to pay and allowances of St. Elizabeths Hospital employees. In the organic act of the hospital (R. S. 4839, U. S. C. 679, sec. 165) it states: "The chief executive officer of St. Elizabeths Hospital shall be a superintendent who has been appointed by the Secretary of the Interior, and shall give bond for the faithful performance of his duties in such sum and in such security as may be required by the Secretary of the Interior. The superintendent shall be a well educated physician, possessing competent experience in the care and treatment of the insane; he shall reside on the premises," etc. You will note this act provides that the superintendent shall reside on the premises.

At the time the St. Elizabeths Hospital, then known as the Government Hospital for the Insane, was opened it was necessary that all employees reside at the hospital. The hospital was isolated; there were no means of traveling from the city to the hospital except on horseback or in horse vehicles or on foot. The roads were poor; travel was difficult; it took a good deal of time, and the employees were compelled to live on the hospital reservation. Quarters and maintenance with necessary service, such as laundry and travel, was considered part of their allowance. This was not only peculiar to conditions at St. Elizabeths Hospital, but was and still is the custom in effect in all similar institutions in the United States and abroad. Communications received from institutions in practically every State inevitably show that quarters and maintenance are furnished to the superintendent and other employees, and in addition to their quarters they are furnished automobile service, laundry service, and maid service, as required.

In the schedule of salaries and allowances for maintenance when the pay roll of St. Elizabeths Hospital was adjusted August 1, 1919, opposite each position there was given a list of allowances-as, for instance, superintendent was given a salary of $7,000 with board, lodging, laundry, and medical atten tion for self and family. This was fully explained in our letter of September

14, 1928, wherein we cited the hearings before the subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations on the second deficiency appropriation bill for the year 1920, and set forth on pages 384 to 391 the whole matter of furnishing quarters and maintenance to the employees. We called attention to the fact that the president of the board of visitors appeared before this committee in reference to the increase of the superintendent's salary. With this information before them the Appropriation Committee directed that the General Accounting Office credit the accounts of the special disbursing agent of St. Elizabeths Hospital such amounts that he might pay in carrying out the provisions of the law, directing the payment of $7,000 per annum to the superintendent of St. Elizabeths Hospital in addition to such allowances as are enumerated.

The report of the Comptroller General, as a result of the investigation of St. Elizabeths Hospital, House of Representatives Document No. 605, on pages 89 to 92, inclusive, calls attention to the hospital's practice in the following language:

"(5) Quarters, subsistence, and other allowances: There were approximately 133 employees of the hospital living on the reservation June 30, 1926. These employees were living in family houses, male and female nurses' homes, the farmhouse at Godding Croft, and the various buildings of the ward service and the industrial service.

"Prior to August 1, 1919, all employees of the hospital lived on the grounds and received board, lodging, laundry, and medical attention. About that time increases in personnel made it necessary to provide quarters outside the grounds. The act approved March 6, 1920 (41 Stat. 513), made it possible to pay an allowance in lieu of quarters and subsistence to those employees who were to live outside, and also provided for the readjustment of salaries of all employees of the hospital. With the passage of the reclassification act of 1923 (42 Stat. 1489), effective July 1, 1924, the positions at St. Elizabeths Hospital and Freedmen's Hospital were reclassified, although both appear to be field offices and not included in the provisions of that act. The positions at these hospitals appear to be in a status similar to those in the Washington regional office of the Veterans' Bureau, the Hygienic Laboratory of the Public Health Service, Walter Reed Hospital, and the medical division of the navy yard, all located in Washington and not classified.

"In the assignment of positions in St. Elizabeths Hospital the Personnel Classification Board followed the provision of section 3 of the reclassification act, which provides in part as follows: 'The board shall make necessary adjustments in compensation for positions carrying maintenance.' At that time these employees were receiving the $240 bonus, so that the new salary included the former basic salary, bonus, and the sum allowed in lieu of subsistence or maintenance.

66

Since July 1, 1924, the hospital, in addition to paying the salaries fixed as above, has been furnishing quarters, subsistence, and other allowances, as specified in statement attached."

On pages 91 and 92 is a schedule showing names of some of the employees and description of quarters and allowances.

With this information before him we can not see how the Comptroller General arrives at his statement that Congress has not heretofore expressly or impliedly sanctioned or approved the furnishing of the various allowances, referred to in his decision of August 15, 1928, to the extent there set forth and free of charge or without being considered as part of the compensation of the officers and employees under St. Elizabeths Hospital.

At the time the deficiency act named was approved the superintendent was getting $7,000 and full maintenance, including the various things enumerated; the other members of the staff in proportion. The population of the hospital has increased since that time; the buying power of the dollar is less. Nevertheless, according to the comptroller's decision the superintendent must reimburse the Government, as he states, in the amount of several thousand dollars for such personal allowances as are rendered to officials in similar institutions, not only throughout the various States of the United States but, as we understand, throughout other countries of the world, without deduction from their salary. We do not believe it was ever the intent of Congress to take away from employees of this hospital allowances which had been granted by custom for many years; such a length of time, in fact, that it has been practically adopted in institutional life in States and other countries as having the weight of law. This custom has been in existence to such an extent that it is accepted

as part of the emoluments that go with the offices, such a long period of time that to change these we believe it would be necessary to have specific legislation rather than by indirection.

The Comptroller General in his letter states: "It is suggested for your consideration whether there are not now being furnished to certain of the personnel allowances which should be immediately discontinued, such as servants, automobiles, laundry service, personal telephone service, etc."

We tried to explain in our letter of September 14 that payment for telephone service in the superintendent's, physicians', and employees' quarters at the hospital was specifically authorized to be paid from the hospital appropriation in 40 Statutes 19, approved April 17, 1917. This is a direct authorization of Congress for the official use of phones; private phones have been rented by many of the physicians and pay booths have been installed for private use.

We tried to call attention to conditions existing in an institution of this sort where the superintendent must be considered from two standpoints, namely, that in his official position, as superintendent, as host for the Government, and that in his personal position as superintendent. We called attention to the fact that the quarters he occupies were built many years ago, that they are laid out in such a manner that they can not be divided, that they cover a much larger space than he would need for his own use, and that if the quarters were vacated it would require the service of a housekeeper to maintain the place in repair and prevent it from deteriorating.

We called attention to the annual appropriation act that for the fiscal year 1929, as approved March 7, 1928, pages 46 and 47 of H. R. 9136, containing the following language:

"St. Elizabeths Hospital for support, clothing, and treatment in St. Elizabeths Hospital, and so forth, for the purchase, exchange, maintenance, repair, and operation of motor-propelled passenger-carrying vehicles for the use of the superintendent, purchasing agent, and general hospital business," etc.

Similar language to this has been carried in appropriation acts for many years past. In the beginning it called for providing of horses and carriages. In later years this was changed to motor-propelled passenger-carrying vehicles, as expressly authorized by Congress.

Laundry is a necessary incident to the service. It is of small matter in itself but an advantage to the hospital that the employees who are living on the reservation should not have outside laundresses doing their work.

After reviewing the various points raised by the comptroller and given consideration as outlined in this letter, we believe that inasmuch as the comptroller states that he would be disposed to permit a postponement of final adjustment of the salaries of the officers and employees involved until Congress has had opportunity to give consideration to the matter for such allowances as may be generally classed as bed and board-that is, room and meals-that there should be included the other items be enumerates so Congress can have the whole question before them when they act on this problem.

Very respectfully,

M. SANGER, Assistant to the Superintendent.