Mr. MOORE. I was an electrical engineer with the Interstate Commerce Commission on the valuation of railroads.

Senator CouZENS. What is your work now?

Mr. MOORE. I am a contracting electrical engineer.

Senator COUZENS. Located here in Washington?
Mr. MOORE. Yes, sir.

Senator COUZENS. On your own account?
Mr. MOORE. Yes.

Senator COUZENS. Not associated with anybody?
Mr. MOORE. Not associated with anybody.

Senator COUZENS. What was your occupation before you were in the Interstate Commerce Commission?

Mr. MOORE. I was superintendent of power and equipment for the Northwestern Pennsylvania Railway Co. of Pennsylvania. Senator COUZENS. Did you get into the bureau through a civilservice examination?

Mr. MOORE. Yes.

Senator COUZENS. Tell us what positions you occupied in the bureau while you were there?

Mr. MOORE. I passed both examinations, both the assistant appraisal and the appraisal engineer examinations and I was appointed assistant appraisal engineer in March, 1922, and promoted to appraisal engineer in February of 1923.

Senator COUZENS. Have you anything that you can tell the committee that would add more enlightenment on what Mr. Adams stated?

Mr. MOORE. I have not had a chance to collect much but I have a couple of cases that might interest you people. One was the Berwin-White Coal Mining Co.

Senator COUZENS. The Berwin?

Mr. MOORE. The Berwin-White Coal Mining Co., of Philadelphia, Pa. Two engineers were usually assigned to a case and Mr. Woolson was the senior engineer and I was the junior engineer on that case He was an older man than myself. They filed a claim of about half a million dollars for amortization. We investigated the claim and disallowed it in full on the basis that it was then in full use. This report was approved by the chief of engineers and the chief of the section.

Senator COUZENS. Can you name those?

Mr. MOORE. Mr. De La Mater was the chief of the section, and Mr. A. M. Flourney was the Chief of Engineers at that time. Some time later the case was reassigned to Engineer Whalen.

The CHAIRMAN. Can you give those dates?

Mr. MOORE. I could not say just when it was; it was in the last year sometime.

The CHAIRMAN. After being sent up, your report disallowed the claim?

Mr. MOORE. -Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. How long did he lay there before any other action was taken?

Mr. MOORE. Of course the taxpayer got the report, you see. Then he immediately filed a protest and claim for reexamination, and that evidently must have been granted, because it was reported upon

by Mr. Whalen, who had the case. I do not know just how long it was, but it was in the latter part of 1922, as I remember it.

The CHAIRMAN. What was the name of the man with you originally?

Mr. MOORE. Woolson. I happened to have a copy of that report with me.

The CHAIRMAN. It was given to another man, was it not, for reexamination?

Mr. MOORE. Yes; they usually are when the taxpayer makes a protest.

Senator COUZENS. Can you tell us the nature of the property on which the amortization was requested and denied?

Mr. MOORE. Yes; it was in connection with a new power plant they built at Windber, Pa., to take the place of a number of smaller power plants. They mine coal electrically there; they use electric locomotives and electric coal cutters; and this new power plant was to take the place of a number of smaller plants.

Senator COUZENS. Did you make a field examination?

Mr. MOORE. Yes.

Senator COUZENS. You found the plant in full use?
Mr. MOORE. In full use, practically.

Senator COUZENS. Although it was put up ostensibly for war purposes?

Mr. MOORE. Yes. Some time later the case was reassigned to Engineer Swaren. I could not say just how long. He stated that the chief of the section had instructed him to allow a certain amount, and he had to write up a report to fit the allowance, although he thought the allowance

The CHAIRMAN. How is that; say that over again; the Senator was talking to me and I want to make sure I heard you right.

Mr. MOORE. Some time later the case was reassigned for full investigation to Engineer Swaren-I forget his initials.

The CHAIRMAN. Is he still in the department?

Mr. MOORE. No; he is a consulting engineer somewhere I don't know; in New York, I guess. He stated that the chief of the section, that is, Mr. De La Mater, had instructed him to allow a certain

amount.

Senator COUZENS. The amount you do not know?

Mr. MOORE. No; I do not know; and he had to write up a report to fit the allowance, although the allowance was unjust. The amount allowed was settled in conference between the chief of the section, Mr. De Lamater, and the taxpayer without either of the engineers who made the report being present.

Senator JONES. How much was allowed, if you know?

Mr. MOORE. I do not know, roughly: I did know at the time but I have forgotten-I had so many of them. He either gave it on a percentage basis or a definite sum, I don't know which.

I have one other small case here which it seems that Mr. Adams mentioned, so I might as well-the Lea T. Smith Co., of Pittsburgh, Pa. They had filed a claim for amortization for approximately $19,000, if I remember. This was inspected and reported upon by engineers Woolson and Moore and the claim disallowed in full on the basis of being in full use at the time.

The CHAIRMAN. What was the business?

Mr. MOORE. They made general dental supplies and dental cements in particular. Mr. Smith at the time we inspected the plant was in California, and on his return he wrote a personal letter to Mr. Mellon to the effect that while he was in California "a couple of understudies of your office investigated my claim and disallowed my claim in full. I desire a redetermination made." The request was granted and reassigned to another engineer.

The CHAIRMAN. Was that letter of Secretary Mellon placed on file?

Mr. MOORE. Not that I know of, as I was simply called in Mr. De La Mater's office. Mr. De La Mater called Mr. Woolson and me into the office and said he had a letter form Secretary Mellon to that effect.

The CHAIRMAN. Secretary Mellon referred the matter to Mr. De La Mater?

Mr. MOORE. Yes. Mr. Smith wrote Mr. Mellon direct, as I understand it. Engineers Woolson and Moore disallowed the claim in full, as the plant was in full use, and said report was duly approved by Mr. De La Mater, the chief of the section, and Mr. Flournoy, the chief of engineers. Now, I happen to have a copy of both of those reports with me. We used to make an extra copy for ourselves.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not get the point there.

Senator JONES. What was done with that claim?

Mr. MOORE. Oh, it was reassigned for investigation to another party; and I would not say for sure but I think his name was Donnelly.

Senator COUZENS. What was the outcome of the investigation? Mr. MOORE. I could not say that.

Senator COUZENS. Do you know whether the claim was allowed in full, in part or at all?

Mr. MOORE. No, I do not. As I say, I did not volunteer this information; I just got mixed up in it.

Senator COUZENS. You have heard the testimony of Mr. Adams. I appreciate that the summons was rather hasty, but can you give the committee any more cases that you saw, or any information as to the weaknesses of the department that might lead to corrective legislation?

Mr. MOORE. Well, I could, but I do not know as I would want to take the time to go into that. It would take considerable time and study to get it all.

Senator COUZENS. Will you think it over and drop the committee a line as to what you think you might be able to do?

Mr. MOORE. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Moore, how did you happen to be a witness here to-day?

Mr. MOORE. Well, Mr. Adams and I are acquainted. We were in the same division together and used to talk about these different cases; we would sit so close together in the office that we engineers would talk about the different cases.

Senator ERNST. How did you come to testify here?

Mr. MOORE. Somebody subpoenaed me last night.
Senator ERNST. Where did you get his name?

Mr. MOORE. I got it from Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams and I sat next to one another in the office.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you and Adams leave the service at the same time?

Mr. MOORE. No: I left a little before Mr. Adams did.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you leave of your own accord?

Mr. MOORE. When I left it was said that it was on account of reduction of the force, and I took it up with the Civil Service Commission to have my name reinstated, and they said if I would send in a certain form letter my name would be reinstated.

Senator COUZENS. You heard Mr. Adams's testimony. generally subscribe to it or do you not subscribe to it? Mr. MOORE. Generally I do, but

The CHAIRMAN. It is a pretty sweeping question.

Mr. MOORE. There are certain parts, of course, I do not.

Do you

Senator ERNST. You have in mind those parts of the statement where he was guessing and imagining; they are the parts you are referring to, are they not?

Mr. MOORE. No; not necessarily that part, but about the arbitrary action taken by a lot of the officials down there; that was the common knowledge of all.

Senator ERNST. Do you not think you ought to designate the particular acts you are complaining of when you make any such sweeping allegations as that?

Mr. MOORE. As I say, I did not have any particular interest in coming here, because I was just subpoenaed and came here against my will, you might say.

The CHAIRMAN. That is all right.

Senator COUZENS. Do you agree with Mr. Adams that this question of amortization ought to be fixed upon a schedule basis rather than be left to the judgment of individual engineers?

Mr. MOORE. Well, it ought to be changed from the way it is. Of course, you could send two engineers out on the same job and one would allow more than the other. Of course, the difference comes from the man's view of the question.

Senator ERNST. There are a number of these cases where there could be a difference of opinion between two men and each be perfectly honest?

Mr. MOORE. Oh, yes; and there might be a big discrepancy between two engineers.

Doctor ADAMS. Does not the law contemplate changes in the amortization allowances after March 3, 1924; is not the amortization allowance unusual now?

Mr. MOORE. Yes.

Doctor ADAMS. The statute provided for a constant reduction until March, this month, specifically?

Senator JONES. I think the statute prevents a reopening of those cases after the 3d of March, as I understand it.

Mr. MOORE. No; as I understand, it is the taxpayer that can open it, or the Government can.

The CHAIRMAN. No; I think both could.

Doctor ADAMS. This was left that way for the specific purpose of reopening.

Mr. HARTSON. May I ask a question, Mr. Chairman?

The CHAIRMAN. Certainly.

Mr. HARTSON. I think the bureau would be interested in the reports that this witness says he has with regard to these two particular cases that he has referred to and I would like to question him for a moment about those reports and about the propriety of his having taken away copies of those reports.

Mr. MOORE. There was no reason, to my knowledge, why we could not have a copy of them.

Mr. HARTSON. Have you copies of all the reports that you made you were there?

while

Mr. MOORE. No; I have not.

Mr. HARTSON. Did you pick out certain reports?

Mr. MOORE. We generally instructed the stenographer to make an extra copy. Sometimes I did and sometimes I did not.

Mr. HARTSON. What determined you to pick out the reports that you have brought up here?

Mr. MOORE. Simply because Mr. Adams asked me or informed me that he had advised the committee regarding these cases, the BerwinWhite Coal Mining Co. and the Lea Smith Dental Co.

Mr. HARTSON. What reports have you in your possession other than the cases you brought down here to-day?

Mr. MOORE. Well, I do not know as I need to answer that.

Mr. HARTSON. I do not think you are obliged to do it; I am merely asking you. If you want to take advantage of your rights-and I think your rights should be called to your attention, under section 3167 of the Revised States, taking information with regard to a taxpayer's liability from the office of the case involves some charge at least of violation of the law. I want you to be advised in what you may be involved in by taking these reports.

Have you other reports besides these here?

Mr. MOORE. I do not care to answer that.

Mr. HARTSON. Then I do not wish you to answer. You have those two reports with you, though?

Mr. MOORE. No-I do not know that it is necessary to answer that.

The CHAIRMAN. Are these original reports, or copies?

Mr. MOORE. Copies.

Senator COUZENS. I think that is all.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will stand adjourned until Monday at 2 o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 4.45 o'clock p. m., the committee adjourned to 2 o'clock p. m., Monday, March 24, 1924.)

92919-24 PT 1-13