that question is still open and we are going to have to take that through to the Supreme Court and, no doubt, we will have literally thousands of suits for refunds unless we are able to get an early determination by the Supreme Court that will prevent further suits. Of course, we have also the Kerr-Smith and Bankhead Acts, suits for refunds under those two acts, and, although the acts have been repealed still we will have to sustain their constitutionality in order to hold on to the tax that has already been collected under them. Of course, suits for refunds will raise the question of the unconstitutionality of those laws, and we will have to go ahead with that.

Mr. BACON. Do you expect those two acts will reach the Supreme Court as a result of the tax question?

Mr. WIDEMAN. I have no doubt that they will in suits for refund. Mr. CARY. That will have to be done in order to determine the question.

Mr. WIDEMAN. Yes.

Mr. CARY. And the Bankhead Act is another one of those acts that will have to be determined. The decision of the Supreme Court on that will be the basis of your handling these other cases.

Mr. WIDEMAN. No, sir, the decision of the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of those two acts will determine whether or not these people are entitled to refunds. The question is whether we will be able to hold the money that has already been collected and is in the Treasury.

Mr. BACON. The Kerr-Smith Act is already before the circuit court of appeals so that will come up pretty quickly, will it not?

Mr. WIDEMAN. What case is that?

Mr. BACON. Penn against Glenn.

Mr. WIDEMAN. That is an injunction suit and will be dismissed so that that might not be considered as a test case. In fact, we doubt if the question of constitutionality will get up there in this term of the Supreme Court. It will probably be in the fall.

Mr. BACON. The repeal of those acts, then, has not decreased your work?

Mr. WIDEMAN. No, it has not.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Do you feel, Mr. Wideman, in view of these acts that have been recently repealed that your work is going to be constantly increasing for some time to come?

Mr. WIDEMAN. Well, not so much on account of those acts. Of course, there will be hundreds of suits for refunds under the KerrSmith and Bankhead Acts, but there will be a great many more under the Agricultural Adjustment Act. There has been some billion dollars that has been paid in taxes under that act and a great many of the prople who paid those taxes will sue for refunds. Some 90-odd suits have already been started.

Mr. MCMILLAN. And, the bulk of that litigation will come along it appears to me, in the matter of the next year or two, will it not? Mr. WIDEMAN. Yes, sir; it will.

SUFFICIENCY OF ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL REQUESTED

Mr. MCMILLAN. In view of that, do you feel that these three additional attorneys and one stenographer will be sufficient to take care of your needs?

Mr. WIDEMAN. We can do it next year, Mr. Chairman, just as we handled these 2,000 injunction suits this year, by extra effort and long hours, because the peak of the work will not be reached until probably during the fiscal year 1938.

We asked the Budget for 8 additional attorneys, and 18 additional stenographers. I cannot truthfully say to you that it will be impossible for us to handle this work without more than the three attorneys in the fiscal year 1937. We can do it, I think.

Mr. MCMILLAN. All right, Mr. Wideman.

Are there any further questions on the part of the committee? If not, we are glad to have had you with us, Mr. Wideman.

CLAIMS DIVISION

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES W. MORRIS, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CLAIMS DIVISION

SALARIES

Mr. MCMILLAN. We will take up next the estimate for the Claims Division. Mr. Morris, within the item of $1,700,000 is included your division?

Mr. MORRIS. Yes, sir; our personnel is included in that.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Your personnel is included in that division?
Mr. MORRIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Now, will you, at this point, Mr. Morris, tell the committee what is your present personnel?

NUMBER OF PERSONNEL

Mr. MORRIS. Mr. Chairman, I will undertake to do it. I should like to have the privilege of submitting a statement because my information was that I was to undertake to justify only this item of special expense and I will be very glad to obtain and furnish you that information if desired. I will say, however, that we have paid from this appropriation the salaries of 28 attorneys and 24 clerks and stenographers, exclusive of 22 attorneys and 63 other employees in the Alien Property Bureau of the Division. The Alien Property Bureau is not paid out of any Government appropriation.

ADDITIONAL ATTORNEY AND STENOGRAPHER

Mr. MCMILLAN. Well, justify for us your additional employees needed here, one attorney at $4,600 and one stenographer $1,620.

Mr. MORRIS. The necessity for that additional personnel is on account of the increase in patent work. You understand, I am sure, that this patent litigation, which involves claims of over $290,000,000 against us requires most intricate work and after an infringement has been found and a judgment is entered against us, interest is added to it. It is, therefore, important in the interests of the Government that we handle it as fast as the Court can deal with it. That has heretofore been our limitation.

Now with the work of this additional Commissioner the situation has been helped and we are in a position, if you will authorize us to

do it, to push faster and further the patent matters and we think it is in the interests of the Government that that be done.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Will this attorney be stationed in Washington or in the field?

Mr. MORRIS. In Washington. I might say, in that connection, something that I think will be of interest to the committee. Formerly there was a minimum of personnel, regular personnel, in the patent work. In fact, at one time only one attorney with a very large number of specially employed attorneys paid out of the special assistant's roll. The policy, in the interests of economy and efficiency, too, I think, was to increase the permanent personnel and decrease these rather large fees that we have to pay on the outside for specialized assistants.

Mr. BACON. When was that change made?

Mr. MORRIS. Well, it has been over a period of years-I do not know whether I have the statement here or not, but I do know that there was a time, shortly after the war, when there was only one patent attorney in the Regular Establishment and some 37 specially employed on the outside.

Mr. BACON. Are there any specially employed on the outside at this moment?

Mr. MORRIS. At the present time there are.

Mr. BACON. How many?

Mr. MORRIS. We have, I think, eight that we use as and when necessary to use them. We pay them a per diem and, as I say, it is expensive, and my own hope is that we may further increase the regular personnel and decrease the expenditures made on the outside, but that is something of a real difficulty, because you cannot get the well-equipped, well-trained, efficient patent attorneys at the salaries that we are able to offer. I am up against that right now. I want to fill a vacancy if I could get the right man for it. We can get plenty of patent attorneys, you understand, but I mean attorneys that have had experience in patent litigation who can, with credit and success, meet the adversaries they are faced with. That is the direction in which we are pressing.

Mr. BACON. There are lots of patent attorneys, but very few good

ones.

Mr. MORRIS. I think the very large class that are known as patent attorneys are not what we mean when we use the term, because what we are referring to is patent litigation attorneys, which, however, seems to be a very limited field.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Did you say you had a statement prepared in support of this?

Mr. MORRIS. I understood we were called upon to justify, Mr. Chairman, the appropriation of $47,000, which is a special appropriation for defense of claims against the United States, of which my Division asks $39,000.

Mr. MCMILLAN. We will get at that a little later.

Mr. MORRIS. I do not have any statement on this, but I will supplement what I have said with a statement.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I think your statement is sufficient as you have given it.

Mr. MORRIS. Thank you.

PUBLIC LANDS DIVISION

STATEMENT OF HON. HARRY W. BLAIR, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, LANDS DIVISION

SALARIES, ADDITIONAL ATTORNEYS AND STENOGRAPHERS

Mr. MCMILLAN. We will now take up the Lands Division. Mr. Blair, the additional personnel asked for under your Division is two attorneys at $3,800 each and two stenographers at $1,440 each. That, as I understand it, comes in with the salaries of the Department of Justice and is a part of the appropriation submitted for 1937 of $1,700,000 and a total additional number of personnel to the extent of 49, and a total increase of $82,500.

Now, Mr. Blair, will you justify, please, the additional personnel asked for here, two attorneys at $3,800 and two stenographers at $1,440?

Mr. BLAIR. I will be glad to do so.

The Public Lands Division, if I may call your attention to the scope of its activities, includes, in addition to matters of Indian private claims and Indian tribal claims, water power and reclamation and irrigation and public-land work generally, the acquisition of lands now being made by the various new agencies.

The personnel of the Division when I came into it in December of 1933 consisted of 35 attorneys and 15 stenographers. We now have a total personnel in the Division of 404, the reason of that being the acquisition of lands by the various agencies, of which there are 37 acquiring and interested in the acquisition of lands.

Álso, there has been an increase in the general work of the Division, but we have been able to handle that with the personnel of 35 that we had in December of 1933.

ACTIVITIES OF DIVISION IN

CONNECTION WITH TITLES TO PUBLIC
BUILDINGS

The situation is now that, particularly with reference to public buildings, the work is much more than we can handle, although the men work at all hours, and at all times.

The Congress, last August, passed a bill providing for 356, I think it was, new public buildings throughout the country. We already had on our books over 200 buildings that were being acquired all over the country. We cannot handle that work efficiently and promptly, and promptness is important with reference to those buildings because there is so much of it, and our other work has our entire force busy, as I say, all the time.

Now, titles to public buildings, under the statutes, are required to be passed upon by the United States attorneys. The United States attorneys' offices throughout the country, without exception, are crowded with work. When they get one of these public-building matters they push it aside to attend to the more important pressing things that ar there before them, with the result that we wire and write and telephone and are unable to get action.

I have sent men out frequently in the last year to various places to straighten up the matter of a public-building acquisition because the United States attorney simply could not get to it.

On this present program now, of more than 400 buildings, the Treasury Department is pushing us, because they want to let their contracts for construction, and if we had two men that I could turn that work over to in the Department they could handle it promptly and efficiently and get them out in time for the Treasury's plans to go forward.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Do you mean it is the Procurement Division of the Treasury that has jurisdiction over these post-office building sites? Mr. BLAIR. That is right.

Mr. BACON. I would like to ask you a question. The present Treasury bill does not carry any additional appropriation for new post-office sites, and I understand that work is falling off.

Mr. BLAIR. In those acquisitions, the situation is this, very frequently: The Treasury Department sends us over a declaration of taking. We file the suit and the declaration of taking and get possession of the property. In a large percentage of the cases they can go ahead with their work, but we are left with that suit on our hands that we have to fight out, and frequently those suits take a year to a year and a half to determine. That is where our difficulty comes.

NUMBER OF FEDERAL AGENCIES ENGAGED IN ACQUISITION OF LANDS

Mr. CARY. I was interested in your statement, General, that 37 different Federal agencies are now engaged in the acquisition of lands on behalf of the United States Government. Would you mind inserting at this point in the record a list of those agencies?

Mr. BLAIR. I do not have it with me, but I will be glad to put it in the record.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Please do so.

(Here follows list of agencies:)

TITLE SECTION-Semiannual report Public Lands Division for July 1, 1935, to