Mr. LYON. We were asked to retire from the room. That is true. Dr. KANSTOROOM. Are you not attempting to say that what Mr. Kaufmann said outside of your hearing is correct?

Mr. LYON. When we returned to the meeting everything that had been said in that meeting was told to us, as I was informed. That is my belief that everything that transpired behind closed doors was told to us, at least in substance. We were told what discussions had taken place and upon what terms they were going to assist my client in the pending litigation.

Dr. KANSTOROOM. You are willing to say here that everything that Mr. Kaufmann has said here about what transpired at that meeting is correct, yet you were not present at all times during that meeting. You are willing to state with mathematical certainty all that occurred there yet you were not present all the time.

Mr. LYON. I think that is ridiculous.

Dr. KANSTOROOM. No; it is not ridiculous.

Mr. LYON. I will put it this way: To my own personal knowledge, nothing that Mr. Kaufmann has said here is untrue. On the contrary, substantially everything he has said here, which took place while I was present at that meeting, is true. In other words, Mr. Kaufmann has not in any way misrepresented anything insofar as I know. Is that an answer?

Dr. KANSTOROOM. Yes.

Mr. LYON. I do not know what was said when I was out of the room. I can verify only that which I heard him say.

Mr. KANSTOROOM. You feel that it is asinine or clandestine for a man to be here and to appeal for an equitable solution of a difficulty, as I understand. You seem to resent the fact that those who attended the meeting might discuss that meeting elsewhere. Are you aware of the fact that two other businessmen who were invited to your meeting went elsewhere to discuss that meeting? I discussed that matter with them, and they expressed themselves to others that they were not interested in the bill that Mr. Nichols had introduced. Mr. KAUFMANN. That has no place here. It is entirely irrelevant and immaterial.

Dr. KANSTOROOM. You keep questioning my right to be here and speaking about attending your meeting and what took place there. Mr. KAUFMANN. You can do anything you please.

Dr. KANSTOROOM. You question my interpretation of that contribution that was arranged for at that meeting. I would like to ask why $800 was held in escrow in the name of Miss Hutton, who is employed in your office, for a period of more than a year. Was that a lawyers' fund?

Mr. KAUFMANN. It was the same fund we were talking about.

Dr. KANSTOROOM. You acknowledge that several subscriptions were entered on a card in the name of Miss Hutton, an employee of your office. You acknowledged that $800 was held in escrow. It was not

for attorneys' fees, but

Mr. KAUFMANN. I object to that. If I am going to be subjected to cross-examination, would it not be better if the examiner asked direct questions, specific questions, and proceed in an orderly manner? The questioner is confusing me by a long rigamarole that is not clear and

in many instances not relevant. I have nothing to hide; but am perfectly willing to discuss anything and everything that the questioner may wish to bring to light.

Dr. TENEROWICZ. You should ask the gentleman a direct question, and then give him an ample opportunity to make answer. If you do that we will get along better. Put a direct question, and do not indulge in argument.

Mr. KAUFMANN. I probably have many accounts in the names of other persons, because I am known to be a personal spendthrift with my own funds, and I do not want to be found owing this group $800 or $900.

Dr. KANSTOROOM. You asked me to send you a check; and you had Miss Hutton write her name on a paper. It was in her own handwriting. You asked me to send that check to her and not to you; although I was dealing with you and not with her in that meeting.

Dr. TENEROWICZ. I suggest that you, Dr. Kanstoroom, confine your questions to things that are relevant and material to the matter now being discussed.

Dr. KANSTOROOM. I have no further questions.

Dr. TENEROWICZ. If there is nothing further this morning, the subcommittee will now adjourn, to meet tomorrow morning at 10:30 o'clock.

(Thereupon at 12:10 p. m., Thursday, May 18, 1939, the subcommittee adjourned, to meet at 10:30 a. m., Friday, May 19, 1939.)

TO REGULATE THE PRACTICE OF OPTOMETRY IN THE

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

FRIDAY, MAY 19, 1939

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC HEALTH, HOSPITALS, AND CHARITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

Washington, D. C.

The subcommittee on public health, hospitals, and charities of the Committee on the District of Columbia met in the committee room, Old House Office Building, at 10:30 a. m., Hon. Rudolph G. Tenerowicz, acting chairman of the subcommitee, presiding.

Dr. TENEROWICZ. The committee will please come to order.

The hearing will be resumed this morning on H. R. 278, the bill introduced by Mr. Smith, of Virginia, "To regulate the practice of optometry in the District of Columbia"; and,

A bill introduced by Mr. Nichols, of Oklahoma, H. R. 5238, also "To regulate the practice of optometry in the District of Columbia.” I will ask Mr. Kaufmann, who previously has testified, to take the stand.

ADDITIONAL STATEMENT OF CECIL D. KAUFMANN

Mr. KAUFMANN. Mr. Chairman, yesterday many things were said, and as a result of the things said, you made a specific request relative to the substantiation of the information which I gave you.

I have all that information, and I have a complete substantiation of everything I stated here yesterday. There is only one request here that I am going to make, and that is in effect as to the procedure thus far, and, of course, it rests entirely in your own hands.

I recall that other witnesses here have made statements and have quoted a lot of people. Then, when they were specifically asked who made those statements, they answered you by saying that they preferred not to disclose those names, because it might prove embarrassing. Do you recall that part of the testimony?

Dr. TENEROWICZ. I recall that testimony.

Mr. KAUFMANN. I have everything you asked for, and if I may, sir, I would rather present the facts in bulk without naming the individuals involved on the same ground that it might prove embarrassing to them because, after all, I have more or less carried the brunt of this thing, you see, and you know who I am and my name is a matter of record. So, if I may, I would like to give you the information minus the names. Would that be fair?

162220-39

79

Dr. TENEROWICZ. Is the committee to understand that you are willing to give this information for the information of the committee.

Mr. KAUFMANN. I will give you any information you ask for.

Dr. TENEROWICZ. In other words, what I want to say is this: Do you want to make a statement for the committee?

Mr. KAUFMANN. Yes; sure.

Dr. TENEROWICZ. A written statement to be a part of the record? Mr. KAUFFMAN. Yes; the only thing that you asked me for, you asked me for the contribution; do you remember that?

Dr. TENEROWICZ. Yes, Mr. Kauffman, but you also recall that was quite a serious charge.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. I have that information, Judge. Let me impart it to you, and then I will ask you again at the close.

It was approximately April 5, 1938, as close as I can remember that our group first met. At that meeting after much collaborating and discussion and in view of the past history of the optical situation, we felt naturally that it would require money.

In the past 10 or 12 years whenever litigation had arisen throughout the country somebody had to pay for attorneys and pay for the men's time that fought the situation or created it. I think that was brought out here yesterday in the testimony that the optometrists themselves had attorneys' fees to pay and need money to support litigation in having their various cases adjudicated and likewise we found ourselves in the same boat.

Here is an exact record of that fund [indicating] taken from my own ledger-not my ledger but one of our office ledgers.

I also have here the cancelled checks of the amounts and the only amounts that were paid out of this fund. The gentleman wanted to know yesterday why this money was in Mrs. Hutton's hands. You will remember Mrs. Hutton. She happens to be here this morning and I did not want to have anything left undone, and I prefer to have her speak and I will call her now, with your permission.

STATEMENT OF MRS. EMMA HUTTON

Mr. KAUFFMAN. This is your ledger sheet? [Indicating.]
Mrs. HUTTON. Yes.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. Mrs. Hutton has been with us 15 years or more. I want you to tell these gentlemen if there was anything unusual in your having received this money and put it in your own money? Mrs. HUTTON. No, sir. This account I have had for years. I have looked after the records and books of Mr. Kauffman and practically the whole family in my time, and I kept the account open over a period of years for different funds they collected. That is what they call the springtime frolic. It is a party given for the creation of good fellowship and they do not put it in their bank account. I collect all the funds for that and pay all the bills and I have done it since 1925, and if some men went out of town there would be bills; they turned money over to me and I would pay out bills and there was a special account that I used.

Dr. TENEROWICZ. Mrs. Hutton, during the testimony it was testified that this money was left in your name; was that correct?

Mrs. HUTTON. Yes, sir; it was kept in that special account.

Dr. TENEROWICZ. How many of these funds or what different departments is it that are kept in your name? Is it just the one or more than one?

Mr. KAUFFMAN. May I explain? We have corporate money, of course; we have probably 5 or 10 accounts.

Mrs. HUTTON. At least 10 or more.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. Mrs. Hutton is the custodian of those funds and as she has pointed out to you, there are many interests thrown in here where we do have money such as the springtime frolic, which is a social thing that nobody wants the fund confused with their own. funds, and since Mrs. Hutton has been with us so long and we trust her implicity, it is not unusual for us to pay her for this purpose or that purpose, to take care of that bill, because we are very often out of town when something comes up.

She takes care of printing and purchasing and nobody wants to be bothered with signing a lot of checks.

This money, sir, that we are talking about now was treated in the same manner and it was put in the same account. The springtime frolic account for no other reason-of course, it was held very queer that it was done that way, but for no other reason than that it simplifies matters.

Mrs. Hutton, do you remember what I said to you when I came out of that meeting that day about these funds that would come in? Mrs. HUTTON. You said you would get in checks from different concerns for legal fees for the optical department, "just hold it until I call for it."

Mr. KAUFFMAN. What did you do with the moneys that came in? Mrs. HUTTON. I deposited them in the special account that I had, "Emma Hutton, Special."

Mr. KAUFFMAN. What have you drawn?

Mrs. HUTTON. I have only drawn two checks which came back, and I have the canceled checks and brought them to you.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. Do you remember what those checks are for?

Not who they were to, but what they were for?

Mrs. HUTTON. They were both for attorneys' fees.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. Do you want to ask any questions?

Mr. TENEROWICZ. No.

Do any members of the committee wish to ask any questions?

Mr. BATES. Did I understand you to say, Mr. Kauffman, she keeps various accounts in her own name?

Mrs. HUTTON. I keep one account.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. She keeps the books; we have a number of accounts in which money is credited for many expenses in the conduct of our business, and Mrs. Hutton keeps those books and is charged with those books, those 10 accounts may be in various names, maybe 12 Kay Store accounts, 1 plant, another advertising and so on so that the accounts are kept straight and orderly; those accounts are in the company's name which Mrs. Hutton has charge of.

This account which she is speaking of is a sort of sundry account where is set up a fund known as the springtime frolic fund, or money which we do not want mixed up with our business.

Mr. BATES. The point I was trying to get at is this Spring Time frolic fund; this particular account is the same account?