« PreviousContinue »
Mr. DaLLINGER. And when did you enter the service?
Mr. HAMMOND. I entered the service in April, 1917- April 20, 1917.
Mr. DALLINGER. And what had you been doing from the time of your graduation from high school inntil your entry into the service?
Mr. HAMMOND. I had been a salesman.
Mr. HAMMOND. No, sir: I was indoors at that time. I might say that it was my intention the following June to take up some collere work. I intended to try to go to Cornell-Sibley College, at Cornell ['niversity--to take mechanical engineering. ' I mentioned that when I went to see the adviser of the Federal board. That was my intention, of trying to scratch a little money together and if possible take that course.
Mr. DallingER. I understand you to say that the trouble you have makes it practically impossible for you to continue work indoors, does it?
Mr. HAMMOND. Yes, sir; I can not see that-that doesn't go against the grain of the Federal board here in this action-I don't mean to point that out to the committee, because they have agreed with me that I shall take outside work that is, the fact that I wanted to take mechanical engineering was gone over and settled upon. That would be all right, they said, but the question arises what kind of a mechanical engineering course could anybody take at night? And certainly I couldn't get along on $12 a month.
Mr. DaLLINGER. As I understand it, Mr. Hammond, your complaint is that you want No. 2 training and they say you can have only No. 3?
Mr. HAMMOND. My complaint is not-I make no complaint at all upon the action taken on my case; I am perfectly satisfied with section 3 training. I am not speaking of my case in that sense. I am a witness here simply to prove certain conditions that I have found at New York, not for myself. The fact that I am a witness in here is not for myself; I am perfectly satisfied with the results as they are now.
Mr. DaLLinger. Then may I ask you this: What treatment did you receive other than what you have testified to in regard to the examination by the doctor? What was the character of your treatment at the office, the New York office of the Federal board!
Mr. BRAND. I just want to make one suggestion, Mr. Dallinger. I want to suggest that he went over that in detail time and again in answer to questions of Mr. Fess.
Mr. DALLINGER. I did not understand that he had.
Mr. BRAND. No objection to your asking it again, but that is true, Mr. Witness, you went over that in detail?
Mr. HAMMOND. Just what was the question?
Mr. DaLLINGER. Independently and outside of what you testified in regard to your experience with the doctor, I am asking you whether you received any discourtesies from any other officials or employees of the Federal board.
Mr. HAMMOND. Well, as a man who has been in the Army you probably would not call it terrible discourtesy, but it certainly was not courtesy. That is the only way I can say it.
Mr. DALLINGER. Then while you don't make any complaints about the disposition of your case by the Federal board, you do find fault with the way in which other soldiers were treated by the board?
Mr. HAMMOND. Yes, sir; that is just my idea in testifying to-day.
Mr. DaLLINGER. And do you make any complaint in regard to inexcusable delay in your case?
Mr. HAMMOND. Yes, sir; on the initial day that I went there, I call that inexcusable delay. If the board is capable of hiring the number of clerks they have there, surely they could have enough doctors to take care of the disabled men for which that board is created, to see those men through in a day and not have them come there so often. That is my contention.
Mr. DÅLLINGER. Well, independent of the medical examination, do you feel that your case has been unduly delayed since the examination took place?
Mr. HAMMOND. I must qualify that. I can not say yes or no. With the assistance of my Congressman it has not been so.
Mr. DALLINGER. In other words, you are satisfied with the expedition which has taken place in your case as a result of the efforts of your Congressman.
Mr. HAMMOND). Yes, sir.
Mr. Braxd. You have stated the amount of the check, Mr. Witness, but
you did not state for what month that check was drawn in payment.
Mr. HAMMOND. The check that I received is $12 per month.
Mr. BRAND. Yés: you said that. I don't want to go over that. You stated $12 a month. What month was it in payment of?
Mr. HAMMOND. You mean the initial payment? I said initial payment.
Mr. BRAND. Did you say that was the initial payment?
Mr. HAMMOND. I have only received one check, but it was not for $12. I stated before that my check amounts to $12 per month. I don't believe I mentioned check, but if I did I meant that the amount of $12 is what I would receive per month.
Mr. Brand. Well, you have received it ever since December 31, haven't you?
Mr. HAMMOND. Yes, sir; and yesterday I received a check right here in Washington, paying me for January and February.
Mr. BRAND. That is what this letter here shows, that you are allowed $12 per month the 31st day of December, 1919.
Mr. HAMMOND. No, sir; the 1st day of January.
Mr. HAMMOND. Yes; that means that it begins—my compensation begins from that time.
Mr. BRAND. And you make no complaint against the payment of this money?
Mr. HAMMOND. No, sir; which shows the very date now when I received the letter granting me that.
Mr. BRAND. You didn't do anything from April until you made the application December 31 ?
Mr. HAMMOND. I didn't do any work? Mr. BRAND. Toward getting in touch with the board, or with the War Risk Bureau ?
Mr. HAMMOND. Well, to be frank, I didn't know there was such a thing
Mr. BRAND. You didn't do it, did you? It didn't make any difference whether you knew it or not, you didn't make any effort between those two dates to get in touch with either one of these boards?
Mr. HAMMOND. I will qualify that by saying that I made no effort to get in touch with the Bureau of War Risk, but as to making that statement as to the Federal board, I can not.
Mr. BRAND. When did you first try to get in touch with the Federal board ?
Mr. HAMMOND. I have testified to that.
Mr. BRAND. I know you have; but I asked you the distinct question if you made any effort between your discharge in April and December 31 to get in touch with either one of these institutions ?
Mr. HAMMOND. No, sir.
Mr. BRAND. That is what I thought. That is the way I understood your testimony.
Now, what were you doing during that time?
Mr. BRAND. How is it that an intelligent man like you could not find out between April and December 31 that Congress had created these two institutions for the purpose of helping the handicapped boys and that you hadn't got in touch with either one of them prior to December 31 ?
Mr. HAMMOND. In answer to that question I might state that I felt the same up to that time about the Bureau of War Risk Insurance as I did the day that I was discharged, which I have already stated to you. I testified to the fact that when I was discharged the condition of the Bureau of War Risk Insurance was not any too commendable, as far as the soldiers were concerned.
Mr. BRAND. You were disgusted with the delays?
Mr. HAMMOND. At that time; yes, sir. And at that time I did not hear, as I have also stated, about a Federal Board for Vocational Education, and certainly there were not great posters around during the time that I was—well, practically out of work, trying to work for a livelihood in between the time I was discharged.
Mr. BRAND. Now, what is the date on which that one-armed soldier first had this conversation with you about the Vocational Board?
Mr. HAMMOND. May I answer that other question?
Mr. Brand. Well, if you want to. You have answered to my satisfaction, but I don't want to cut you off.
Mr. HAMMOND. In between the time I was discharged and the time I met this one-armed man who gave me the information about
the Vocational Board and also stating that he thought that I could get compensation if I went for it
Mr. BRAND (interposing). You stated that repeatedly. What was the date of that conversation?
Mr. HAMMOND. The date?
Mr. HAMMOND. I have already stated that it was about the latter part of December, 1919.
Mr. BRAND. Well, I beg pardon. I did not understand you.
You were talking about failing to see Mr. Clark on one trip there when you saw that fat girl stenographer that you refer to in that way, who didn't give you much satisfaction. You asked for a Mr. Clark, didn't you?
Mr. HAMMOND. Yes, sir.
Mr. HAMMOND. I didn't testify as to talking to a stenographer. I said I asked a clerk.
Mr. BRAND. What did he tell you? Where did he tell you Mr. Clark was?
Mr. HAMMOND. I said the clerk at the first pen as you come in. I asked for Mr. Clark, that I would like to speak to Mr. Clark, and he said, “ On what business?"
Mr. BRAND. I didn't ask you that question. I asked you, whoever he was, whether it was a she or a he, or whether it was a clerk or a stenographer, where did this person say Mr. Clark was? Mr. HAMMOND. He didn't say.
Mr. BRAND. Well, you didn't see him, did you? You didn't see Mr. Clark, as I understand it.
Mr. HAMMOND. I did not.
you ask her or him, or the clerk where he was? Mr. HAMMOND. Why, I have stated that I thought that I saw Mr. Clark, but I didn't see Mr. Clark, I saw another man. I saw Mr. Clark here the other day and this gentleman that I saw at that time was not Mr. Clark. So, apparently, I was ushered into somebody that was not Mr. Clark, but I thought it was Mr. Clark.
Mr. BRAND. I wanted to know, Mr. Witness, whether it was your fault for want of knowledge or whether it was the fault of the clerk that
you didn't see Mr. Clark that day. Mr. HAMMOND. Well, I would state that it was the fault of the clerk, because I asked for Mr. Clark. I said, “I have personal business with Mr. Clark," and I was ushered into an office.
Mr. BRAND. All right, unless you want to continue. That answers the question.
Mr. HAMMOND. I was ushered into an office and I sat down and began talking to this man, thinking that I was talking to Mr. Clark and this same gentleman said that he would take immediate action on my case, and I should go over to be examined.
Mr. BRAND. Is Mr. Clark here now, in this room? I don't know him. Mr. HAMMOND. Mr. Clark was here yesterday afternoon, sir.
Mr. BRAND. And he is not here now? Mr. HAMMOND. No, sir. Mr. BRAND. Now, how many rooms were there in that building where the Vocational Board is doing business, that you know of?
Mr. HAMMOND. I only know of the large room; one large room where the clerical force is, and there is a section partitioned off where, presumably, the officials are, or subofficials.
Mr. BRAND. How many rooms did they occupy?
Mr. HAMMOND. To the best of my knowledge it was all one floor. I don't know how many rooms they did occupy altogether, but on that floor, I believe there were about—well, four rooms exclusive of partitions.
Mr. BRAND. Were you in all of them from time to time?
Mr. BRAND. Now upon what do you base your statement that they had 200 men there?
Mr. HAMMOND. Simply as I might say, if an officer spoke to me and said, “ About how far do you think it is from here to there?" I would say in the Army,“ Well, I think it is about 100 yards.'
Mr. BRAND. Well, you told Dr. Fess you assumed there were 200 men there.
Mr. HAMMOND. I assumed; yes, sir. I didn't say there were. I thought there were about 200, and it was simply by looking at the mass that I thought so.
Mr. BRAND. If there were 200 men at work it looks as though they ought not to have kept the boys waiting at all. That is a very important question.
Mr. HAMMOND. That I could not state accurately.
Mr. BRAND. Do you still stick to it that you assume that there were 200 men there?
Mr. HAMMOND. To me it looked like 200 men; yes, sir. I may be wrong, but that is only an assumption.
Mr. BRAND. Really don't know, Mr. Witness, how many they have there.
Mr. HAMMOND. That was only my assumption.
Mr. BURROUGHS. Mr. Hammond, let me ask you just two or three questions. I understood you to say there were about 200 employees in those offices in New York.
Mr. HAMMOND. Well, as I answered this gentleman here, I said that that is purely what I thought. I don't want that to be taken against me as saying there were 200 men there.
Mr. Brand. That would simply be your estimate?
Mr. HAMMOND. At the time, going to the place, I estimated that there were about 200 employees on that floor.
Mr. BRAND. You were there practically all day?
Mr. BRAND. That is, you got in there about what time in the morning?
Mr. HAMMOND. I got there at 10 o'clock in the morning. I remained until 12. I returned at 1 and I waited until 6, and was not examined then and was told to go out and return at 7. I returned at 7 and left there at about a quarter of 8, or 7.30 that night.
Mr. BRAND. So that practically you spent the whole working day there in the office?