COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

Washington, D. C., March 13, 1920.

The committee met at 8 o'clock p. m., Hon. Simeon D. Fess (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. A quorum is present. When we adjourned at our last meeting we were in the midst of hearing Mr. Littledale.

Mr. BLANTON. Before we hear the testimony, I desire, in the nature of a personal privilege, to make a short statement.

The CHAIRMAN. On a question of privilege?

Mr. BLANTON. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the question?

Mr. BLANTON. I notice in the New York Evening Post the statement that this hearing was postponed at the instance of myself and also of the chairman of this committee to this particular time when there would be no members of the committee present and when the House Office Building would be vacant of people, and so forth, and insinuating that there would not be a full, complete, fair hearing of the matter. I protest against such an improper reflection upon this committee and also upon myself.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me say that if you are speaking in regard to privilege, or any attack upon yourself, it is in order.

Mr. BLANTON. I do confine it to the attack.

The CHAIRMAN. I am perfectly willing to waive anything of that kind, so far as it applies to me.

Mr. BLANTON. I do desire to say further that the representative of the Evening Post misconstrued whatever action I have taken in this hearing thus far, because I am in sympathy with the splendid work which the Evening Post has done up to this time in first bringing to light what is known as the "hard boiled" order which, at least, is in existence in the embryonic state. It was formulated by somebody, even if it were afterwards "blue penciled," and I am in sympathy with the interest in behalf of our disabled service men that the Evening Post is taking in this matter. There are imperfections in this service. The board itself admits it. I have been hoping to cooperate with the board and to have them cooperate with Members of Congress, and Members of Congress cooperating with the board, in weeding out these imperfections in the service. I want to commend the Evening Post very highly, indeed, for its interest and its action in bringing to light this matter. I think the person in this service who formulated that "hard boiled" order ought to be discharged from the service. I think the board owes it to itself to discharge that man from the service. I do not think he is a proper man in the service, whoever he is. I do not know who he is.

4661-20-VOL 1

15

Mr. BANKHEAD. Is it admitted that such an order was issued? Mr. BLANTON. It did not go into effect, but it was formulated and presented, but blue-penciled or suspended, as admitted by Mr. Lamkin.

Mr. BRAND. We have not all the facts on it.

Mr. BLANTON. As one member of this committee, I am here to help my colleagues in getting down to the bottom of the transaction and not shielding anybody, and if there is anybody needs censuring in the matter I am ready and willing to vote that proper censure is made, but we ought to go about it in an orderly way and in a proper way. I think the Evening Post has been a little premature in its criticism. I know exactly some of the problems that the board has had to contend with. I think that it has done unusually well with some of the problems but slow with others that have come from my district.

Mr. BRAND. I do not think we should pass upon the guilt or innocense of the board or anyone until we hear the facts.

The CHAIRMAN. Would not your observations come in the course of the proceedings?

Mr. BLANTON. I just want to call attention to one case from my State, No. 32 on the files of this board.

Mr. DALLINGER. A point of order.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not see how that would apply to the question of privilege that you are speaking on.

Mr. BLANTON. I could make that apply, but I will not take up

the time.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Littledale, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF MR. HAROLD A. LITTLEDALE, SPECIAL WRITER, NEW YORK EVENING POST-Resumed.

Mr. LITTLEDALE. Before I begin my formal statement, I wish to state that I have a carbon copy of the transcript of the official proceedings of yesterday, and there is an omission in it. I wish to ask the committee to permit an amendment, and the importance of that amendment will be seen, I am sure, from the following state

ment.

There was written to-day in the central office of the Federal Board for Vocational Education-the same central office that is guilty of the "hard-boiled" order-a three page publicity article. That article is in my possession. It is on the stationery of this board. It is headed, "British alien scores United States Government," and on Monday it will be spread broadcast throughout the country to thousands of newspapers. After giving within quotation marks a distorted statement of the utterance before this committee yesterday of Calvin F. McIntosh, the statement continues:

Question. What is your name? State who you are and what you represent. Where do your live?

Answer. My home is in South Orange, N. J.

Question. Are you a native American? Are you a citizen of the United States? Answer. I am a British subject.

Answer. Writer.

Question. Do you expect to remain here?

Answer. Some personal questions are involved.

Question. A man lives here some 14 years and does not take out citizenship papers? Do you expect to become a citizen of the United States?

Answer. I had expected to.

Question. I forgot to ask you; are you a married man?
Answer. No.

Question. I was just wondering whether or not you had your family here. You have been making a living in the United States of America for 14 years and yet you do not think enough of the flag of this country to take out your citizenship papers. Littledale did not make any reply to this.

Mr. LITTLEDALE (continuing). That concludes the publicity article. I state this because in the transcript of the official testimony, at the point where Representative Blanton asked me if I did not think enough of the flag to fight for it, no reply is given, yet the reply I made was: "I was in France when the United States went into the war."

In no other question was the American flag mentioned. This statement is an unscrupulous distortion of the proceedings of this committee, and if issued in that form will be met with action for libel. It is because of that fact that I wish the record here amended to show that I was fighting in France before the United States of America declared war. I need make no comment, of course, upon the fact that the interests of the disabled soldiers of this country are in the hands of men so utterly devoid of honor, justice, and fair play as to issue a statement so misleading in its title and so false in its

content.

Mr. BANKHEAD. I do not think that ought to go into the record. Mr. BLANTON. Yes; it ought to go in. Let the witness proceed, Mr. Chairman. These gentlemen are going to be given opportunity to answer in one way or another.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the witness proceeding?

Mr. BLANTON. The gentleman testified that he had two and a half years' service in France.

Mr. BRAND. He is casting reflections upon the board here without basing it upon facts.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you please state why you wanted to read the transcript?

Mr. LITTLEDALE. I say the record leaves out an answer to the question of Mr. Blanton: "You have been making a living in the Ünited States of America for 14 years and yet you do not think enough of the flag of this country to either fight for it or to take out your citizenship papers." No reply is given. That is an omission, I say, in the record.

Mr. REED. Do you mean an omission from the official minutes, or an omission from the circular proposed to be issued by the board? Mr. VESTAL. Do I understand you to say that the omission that you complain of is not in the transcript of the minutes of the meeting? Mr. LITTLEDALE. In the carbon copy that I have, sir. Mr. VESTAL. From whom did you get this copy?

Mr. LITTLEDALE. From Mr. Stokes, of our office.

Mr. VESTAL. I object to the statement of the gentleman upon that. Mr. BLANTON. I think the gentleman should proceed in his own way and make it clear. It is a pretty strong accusation against a man that he has remained in this country 14 years and making a

living in it, and not be willing to take out citizenship papers or fight. No one should assert that his answer to that charge is not in the record, when he answered it specifically.

The CHAIRMAN. If the committee will wait a moment, we can clear the question of doubt as to whether the omission has been made. If the omission has been made, the members of the committee remember that Mr. Littledale did answer the question. Mr. Littledale, will you please read the question that you claim was not answered? Mr. LITTLEDALE. Mr. Blanton asked:

You have been making a living in the United States of America for 14 years, and yet you have not thought enough of the flag to fight for it or to take out citizenship papers?

The CHAIRMAN. The reason that that was not answered is that the chairman at that time said that questions which qualify the witness or that may be necessary would be proper. Mr. Reed asked:

Are you writing for any English paper, or have you been during the 14 years? Mr. LITTLEDALE. No, sir.

You will note that the course of questioning was suspended at that point, when we raised the question of proper questions for qualifying the witness, and if there is no answer it is because you were not given the chance.

Mr. BLANTON. Then he should be permitted to answer now.

The CHAIRMAN. The question, however, was answered in substance, as follows:

Mr. DONOVAN. I understand you did fight for the cause with the Allies.

Mr. LITTLEDALE. Yes, sir.

Mr. BRAND. How long did you say you were in the service? How long did you drive that tank?

Mr. LITTLEDALE. I was in the Army two and a half years.

Mr. BRAND. You said you drove a tank?

Mr. LITTLEDALE. Fifth Tank Corps, British Army.

Mr. BRAND. You said that you drove a tank?

Mr. LITTLEDALE. In the Fifth Tank Corps, British Army. I was in France when the United States actually declared war.

Mr. BANKHEAD. I want to again call the attention of the committee to the language used by the witness, when he used this language:

I need make no comment, of course, upon the fact that the interests of the disabled soldiers of this country are in the hands of men so utterly devoid of honor, justice, and fair play as to issue a statement so misleading in its title and so false in its contents.

That is a matter for the determination of the committee and not for decision by the gentleman himself. If language of that sort is to be admitted without exception, of course, I have no personal objection to it, but it seems to me it is unparliamentary language and should be modified or stricken from the record. I make the point of order against it on those grounds.

Mr. BLANTON. I want to be heard on the point of order. The proper functioning of this board through its present personnel is a question in issue before this committee. This witness appeared before the committee the other day and was questioned. He answered the questions asked. He now contends that some of the personnel of this board which is under fire before the committee, in attempting to give to the public what transpired before this committee gave out a

statement which did not do him justice. In other words, it left him suspended in the air, to use a slang expression, on the question of remaining in this count y 14 years gaining a livelihood and neither fighting for the flag nor making any attempt to take out citizenship

papers.

That is a very grave charge. He says that the personnel of this board gave it out that on being asked such question he gave no answer and that this publicity statement now is ready for the press, and upon such asse tion he bases the further statement that the pers sonnel of the boa d that would do a thing of that kind is unscrupulous. Are we to limit the gentleman in his accusations upon this issue? I take it that the gentleman has a right to make that assertion and then, if it is true, that the board would mislead the public on these issues, it is a matter for us to dete mine affecting their means of proper functioning in the proper transaction of this Government business.

The CHAIRMAN. Does the witness believe that charge that the board is without honor?

Mr. BLANTON. It is alleged by him as a fact that they gave a publicity statement concerning matters the other day which, he says, is not true, and he says they attempted to leave him in a false light before the people of the country. If that is so this gentleman has a right to make this case before this committee, as we are to pass upon this board. I frankly state that I am fiendly to this board, it being a Government institution, as long as it deserves friendship. I consider every man on it my friend. I expect to defend them when the time comes if they have been unjustly accused. I expect to pin down sharply upon their imperfections, and they have impe fections, when the time comes, but I want to do justice to this gentleman who before the board.

appears

Mr. VESTAL. I think we lose sight of this proposition. The charge is made directly by Mr. Littledale against this board of distorting his evidence. The Federal board had nothing to do with the statement that the gentleman received. it was a copy of the stenographer's notes. The Federal board did not have anything to do with issuing the statement that you are charging was done.

Mr. BLANTON. The gentleman overlooks this point. He quotes in this alleged publicity statement of the board the question as to his remaining 14 years in this country and not fighting for the flag or taking out citizenship papers. He alleges that the board did not go on and give his later answer to it but left him swinging up in the air, with the question unanswered. The gentleman certainly ought to have a right to say that. He certainly ought to have the right to give his knowledge of the people if they are libelling him.

Mr. VESTAL. We do not know that the Federal board had anything to do with it.

Mr. BLANTON. This statement is taken from matter alleged to have been given out by the Federal board. Some employee evidently gave out this publicity statement. We want to find out who they employ there to give out such publicity statements. I think we ought to be fair to this witness and let him proceed in his own way. Mr. BANKHEAD. To satisfy the gentleman from Texas, I withdraw my motion.