BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY. AFTERNOON SESSION. TUESDAY, January 22, 1907. The committee reassembled at 3 o'clock p. m., Hon. Charles E. Littlefield (chairman) in the chair. STATEMENT OF DR. L. O. HOWARD, CHIEF OF THE BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. Doctor Howard was sworn by the Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. You are the head of the Bureau of Entomology? The CHAIRMAN. How long has that bureau been in existence? The CHAIRMAN. Two years? Doctor HOWARD. I think so. The CHAIRMAN. Was there any work of that character being carried on in the Department of Agriculture prior to the organization of the bureau? Doctor HOWARD. Yes; for a number of years it was carried on as a division, as an independent division. The CHAIRMAN. Who was at the head of that division? Doctor HOWARD. I was. I have been since 1894. Prior to my occupancy Professor Riley was at the head of it. The CHAIRMAN. Was divisional work going on prior to your being head of the division of that character? Doctor HOWARD. Yes; under Professor Riley. It was the first office of a Department to be called a division. The CHAIRMAN. And since 1894 you have been connected with it either as a division or a bureau? Doctor HOWARD. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. In 1904 it was organized as a bureau? Doctor HOWARD. I think that was the year. The CHAIRMAN. Was that because of legislation or by administrative action? Doctor HOWARD. It was by legislative authority. The CHAIRMAN. That is, the appropriation bill provided for the establishment of this bureau? Doctor HOWARD. Yes-that is to say, it simply changed the name. The CHAIRMAN. Was there any change in either the work of the bureau or the personnel when it went from a division to a bureau? Doctor HOWARD. No, sir. (Witnesses: Howard, Zappone.) The CHAIRMAN. There has been no increase in expense? Doctor HOWARD. The appropriations have been gradually increasing from year to year; but there was no marked increase at the time of the establishment of the bureau. The CHAIRMAN. Was there any change in the executive organization from the division to the bureau? Doctor HOWARD. None at all, except the change of the title of the chief from chief of a division to chief of a bureau. The CHAIRMAN. There was no change in the salaries? Doctor HOWARD. There was no change in salaries. Now, one moment. I am not sure, but there may have been a slight increase in my own salary. And if you will pardon me, I think it was in 1905 that it was made a bureau, instead of 1904. The CHAIRMAN. You say two years, predicating that from 1907? Doctor HOWARD. Yes. Mr. ZAPPONE. I find that it was 1905, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. There was, you say, a slight increase in your own salary? Doctor HOWARD. I think so. The CHAIRMAN. How much was that? Doctor HOWARD. From $2,500 to $2,750. Doctor HOWARD. It is now $3,250; yes, sir. Doctor HOWARD. Yes. I am not quite certain but what that increase was made prior to that time. Mr. ZAPPONE. I have the law before me. In 1904 the salary of the entomologist was $2,750. In 1905, the next year, in which the division was made a bureau, the salary of the chief was $2,750, the same Doctor HOWARD. With the proviso that there was $500 extra during the incumbency of the present occupant. Is not that there? Mr. ZAPPONE. Yes; and for additional compensation while the office is held by the present incumbent, $500." That made it $3,250. The CHAIRMAN. The regular salary is $2,750 now, with the addition of $500 for yourself? Doctor HOWARD. It was in 1905. In 1906 the salary was $3,000, with $250 additional. The CHAIRMAN. What was the occasion for that peculiar provision? Doctor HOWARD. I have no idea. Mr. ZAPPONE. They made the same kind of a provision in the case of the chief of the Bureau of Animal Industry. The predecessor of Doctor Melvin received $5,000. The regular salary was $4,500, with $500 additional while the office was held by Doctor Salmon. When Doctor Melvin succeeded to the office the $500 allowed to Doctor Salmon as additional compensation had to be turned back into the Treasury. The wording of the law is identical in these two cases, and it means that should someone succeed Doctor Howard the additional amount would have to be turned back into the Treasury. The CHAIRMAN. The regular salary is now $3,250? Doctor HOWARD. No; it is $3,000, with $250 additional. Mr. ZAPPONE. $250, instead of $500, is still appropriated in this way. (Witnesses: Howard, Zappone.) The CHAIRMAN. You do not know what the reason for that was? Doctor HOWARD. The Secretary of Agriculture asked for the increase for me, and the Agricultural Committee seemed to be inclined to put it in this way for me. Mr. ZAPPONE. They thought that the Chief of the Bureau of Entomology had deserved such an increase by good work done, but they did not know what the man who might succeed him would do, and they felt that he should first win his spurs. The CHAIRMAN. Have the duties been more onerous since that time? Doctor HOWARD. Not because it was made a bureau, but because we have had more money to expend and more duties to look after. The CHAIRMAN. More duties to discharge? Doctor HOWARD. More duties to discharge. That is on account of the increased appropriations. The CHAIRMAN. What does the increase involve, simply an increase of personnel in your bureau? Doctor HoWARD. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. That really is the principal expenditure in your bureau, the expenditure for personnel. Doctor HOWARD. Very true. The CHAIRMAN. And when you increase the personnel, that merely involves a wider scope on the part of your bureau on account of having more men to cover more ground? Doctor HOWARD. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. Were any other salaries increased, incident to the change from a division to a bureau? Doctor HOWARD. Not dependent on the change to a bureau, but salaries have increased almost every year. The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean the salaries of the individual employees have increased every year, or that positions are created with larger salaries attached to them? Doctor HOWARD. The salaries of individual employees. The CHAIRMAN. That simply means promotions? Doctor HOWARD. It simply means promotions, that is all. The CHAIRMAN. Did he receive the same sum when he was chief clerk in the division? Doctor HOWARD. I do not recollect the exact date of his increase. He was increased from $1,600 to $1,800 about that time, but I am not sure that it was coincident. The CHAIRMAN. What is the differentiation between a bureau and a division, and why is a bureau distinguished from a division? Doctor HOWARD. Nothing at all, except that it has a more dignified rank among the official institutions. The CHAIRMAN. It is a matter of sentiment rather than substance? Doctor HOWARD. It seems to be, and at the same time I imagine that there is a general feeling that Congress would give larger appropriations to a bureau than it would to a division. The CHAIRMAN. And perhaps, as incidental to that, an increase in compensation? Doctor HowARD. To the chief. (Witness: Howard.) The CHAIRMAN. For the handling of the larger appropriations and for the chief in the handling of the larger appropriations? Doctor HOWARD. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. So that it really comes down to the fact that the creation of a bureau tends to increase the cost to the Government without increasing efficiency-without necessarily getting any additional returns? Doctor HOWARD. I should hardly agree to that in its entirety. There is a compensating increase in efficiency, perhaps. The CHAIRMAN. Of course if you have larger appropriations under a bureau, it involves larger work. Doctor HOWARD. Exactly so. The CHAIRMAN. But assuming they did not increase your appropriations, if there was a tendency to increase the salaries under the bureau form-you get my proposition? Doctor HOWARD. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. Not applying it to this bureau; but we have found on examination that there were several instances where divisions have been changed into bureaus where that has been the case. Doctor HOWARD. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. What I have been trying to get at is whether the efficiency of the bureau is necessarily promoted by the change. Doctor HOWARD. I should say not necessarily. I think that the same amount of work could be accomplished with the same money under a divisional organization as can be accomplished under the bureau organization; that is, provided the divisional organization were an independent organization reporting to the Secretary, and not through a bureau. The CHAIRMAN. What bureau were you attached to when you were a division? Doctor HOWARD. We were an independent division. The CHAIRMAN. Then you reported right to the Secretary? Doctor HowARD. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. So that in the instance of yourself, so far as the executive efficiency is concerned, there was no occasion for the change from a division to a bureau? Doctor HOWARD. I think you are right in that. The CHAIRMAN. But is it a fact that while it may not be marked the tendency is to increase the salaries and expenses, without a corresponding increase in results, by the change of the division organization to the bureau organization? Doctor HOWARD. I think not markedly so, except so far as it increases general appropriations and widens the field of investigation, thus producing a general tendency to increased compensation. The CHAIRMAN. Upon what basis do you determine the compensation that men are entitled to receive in these various classes of clerks? Doctor HOWARD. We have very few clerks, Mr. Chairman; relatively few clerks. Most of the men employed are scientific men, and their promotions are based entirely on the efficiency of their work; not entirely on the efficiency of their work, but primarily so. The CHAIRMAN. You have three clerks at $1,000, one clerk at $1,200, and three clerks at $1,400. Doctor HOWARD. The salaries of those clerks are based on their rec |