Mr. BRUCE. This was a statement issued by the Insular Affairs Bureau. Senator HAWES. Of which $77,000,000 were bonds. Mr. BRUCE. That is an inaccurate statement, because I know, of my own knowledge, of a great deal more money in there now. I think this is approximately an accurate statement. I know the Bureau of Insular Affairs worked over it for a long time to work it out. The CHAIRMAN. This does not state what the authorities for it are, although it is quite detailed. Is this something that you prepared? Mr. BRUCE. No, sir. It was prepared and issued by the Bureau of Insular Affairs. The CHAIRMAN. Of the War Department? Mr. BRUCE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. The capital investments in the Philippine Islands, exclusive of investments by governmental agencies, in United States dollars, compiled from the best available sources, shows a total of $257,000,000 American dollars; $109,000,000 of Chinese capital; $26,000,000 of British capital; $56,000,000 of Spanish capital; and $3,000,000 of Japanese capital. I omit the hundreds of thousands. Senator HAWES. This pamphlet I have is from the United States Tariff Commission, United States-Philippine Tariff and Trade Relations Report No. 18, in 1926. The CHAIRMAN. This is down to January 2, 1932. Senator HAWES. This states: The largest American investor in the Philippines is, of course, the United States Government, and is not included in this tabulation. Omitting investments of the Government, the total value of American investments in the Philippine Islands is estimated to be $111,000,000. The CHAIRMAN. On this table which I have here, Senator, the total American bonds are shown as $113,985,000. Senator KING. I am sure that is inaccurate. The CHAIRMAN. What makes you think so, Senator? Senator KING. Because it is perhaps six months ago since I looked into the matter Mr. BRUCE. There are municipal as well as Government bonds. Senator HAWES. I will send over and get the Department of Commerce figures, and see what they are. The CHAIRMAN. This apparently came from the War Department. Mr. BRUCE. The War Department also issued another statement of what the Philippine Islands has cost the United States up to date, which I think amounts to $760,000,000. The CHAIRMAN. This shows investments in mercantile 'establishments: American capital $30,000,000; Chinese capital, $50,000,000— Senator HAWES. This is a very interesting thing, Mr. Chairman. Here we have reports made by the different departments, the Tariff Commission, the Department of Commerce, and the War Department, which comes in with a figure of its own. I asked one of these historians a while ago if it was true that the United States was the only colonizing nation in the world whose affairs were under the War Department, and the answer was that that was correct. So, we have our financial departments making one report, and the War Department making another report. As I understand it, the War Department distributes some $70,000,000 or more to the American banks, and the War Department is, apparently, the only opposition that we find to fixing a date for independence. The CHAIRMAN. I will ask General Parker, at the next hearing, which will be Saturday morning, to give us the breakdown of these figures. Senator KING. We have the figures from the United StatesPhilippine Tariff and Trade Relations Report No. 18, coming from the Tariff Commission in 1931. The figures which they give here are for 1928. Mr. BRUCE. May I ask the page, Senator? Senator KING. Page 62. Security holdings in Insular Government bonds, $64,103,000; provincial and municipal bonds, $10,213,000, making a total of $74,316,000. When the chairman asked me a few moments ago how I knew, I had remembered these figures, and I have seen some figures supplementing these. My information is—and I think Mr. Roxas will corroborate what I am about to state-that there have been no bonds of any importance issued since these figures were published. Mr. Roxas, do you know as to that? The CHAIRMAN. Of course, Senator, you will admit that the Bureau of Insular Affairs, that has been in charge of the Philippine Islands for a generation, is more likely to be accurate I am not saying that it is more accurate but it is more likely to be accurate, than the Tariff Commission, which has nothing to do with it, and went out of its way to issue this report. We will ask General Parker next Saturday to give us the breakdown, and then to check up and see where the mistakes occur. Senator KING. I do not want any invidious comparisons, but I would want some verification of some of the figures of the Bureau of Insular Affairs. The CHAIRMAN. But you are always willing to take the Tariff Commission figures. Senator KING. No, indeed, I am not. However, I have verified some of these figures. The CHAIRMAN. I remember sundry occasions when the Senator was not so anxious to take the figures of the Tariff Commission, particularly on pig iron. Senator KING. I do not recall any particular time when I thought their figures should govern the Senate. The CHAIRMAN. That is what I wanted to have you say, Senator. Senator KING. I reserve my judgment on reports of bureaus and Federal officials, because I am afraid of bureaucracy in any form, wherever you find it-the War Department, the Tariff Commission, or anywhere else. The CHAIRMAN. So am I. Senator KING. May I say that the total investments shown here aggregate $156,725,000. That is for principal investments of Amercans, Filipinos, and others, in the Philippine Islands. The CHAIRMAN. Including Filipinos? Senator KING. Let me see. I want to be entirely accurate here. I have given now, the total Government securities, $74,000,000 plus. Railroad and utility bonds and stocks: Manila Railroad Co., bonds, $27,000,000. I will not give the odd figures. Philippine Railway Co. bonds and stocks, $13,000,000; Manila Electric Co. bonds and stock, $7,000,000. Total railroad and utility bonds and stocks, $48,221,000. Mr. BRUCE. Senator, I would like to point out, if I may, that I know the investment of the Manila Electric Co. is $30,000,000, which they say is $7,000,000. I think perhaps they are putting in stock and bond issues, and not the actual money invested. Senator KING. That may be. I am just giving the figures as I find them here. The CHAIRMAN. Senator, would you mind postponing this until we can get General Parker here, because it is not fair to criticize his figures without giving him a chance to state where he got them. All I want to do is to get at the facts. Senator KING. I know that, Mr. Chairman. It is all any of us wants. Senator HAWES. While the Senator is testifying, however- Senator HAWES. Do you know of any colonizing nation in the world whose administration is in the hands of its War Departmenteither England, France, Holland, or any of them? Senator KING. Since the beginning of this session of Congress, we have been working 18 hours a day, on a thousand questions, and my memory is not quite as accurate as it might be, but I will answer that I do not now recall any nation of that character. The CHAIRMAN. The Senator does remember that I have been trying for a number of years Senator KING. To your credit. The CHAIRMAN (continuing). To get a bill through the Senate, without any success, that would take it out of the War Department and put it in some other department of the Government where it might more properly be. Senator KING. The Senator is entitled to commendation for his opposition to militarism. Senator HAWES. I say "amen" to that, too, Mr. Chairman. Senator PITTMAN. Have you finished with the analysis of the economic section? Mr. BRUCE. Yes, sir. Senator PITTMAN. There is a question or two I would like to get settled definitely with regard to cordage. Mr. BRUCE. I have already covered that. Senator PITTMAN. Are the figures already in on that? Mr. BRUCE. Yes, sir. Senator PITTMAN. Just one other question. What was the importation_to_the United States from the Philippines in 1929, of cordage? Mr. BRUCE. I gave that in the record, Senator. Senator PITTMAN. I just want to refresh my memory, if you have it? Mr. BRUCE. Yes, I have it. I have to explain, Senator, that I gave the figures of the existing plants in the islands for cordage. A large plant in the islands burned down last year, and I think it is perfectly fair to notify those people, if they want to rebuild it, that they have to rebuild it on the basis of a closed tariff to the United States, because it is part of our policy that any building from now on, of plants in the Philippine Islands, of that kind, shall be based on a world trade basis. Senator PITTMAN. Very well. Will you give me the figures for 1929? When did the plant burn down? Mr. BRUCE. I am sorry I am taking time. I have the figures right here: The Ynchausti mill, the mill that burned down, burned down in 1931. In 1930, the exports of cordage to the United States from the Philippine Islands consisted of 4,549,000 pounds exported by Ynchausti, and 2,506,000 pounds exported by all others. In 1929, Ynchausti, exported 4,309,000; all others exported 3,110,000. In 1928 Ynchausti exported 3,010,000 pounds; all others, 2,661,000. In 1927, Ynchausti exported 1,986,000 pounds; all others, 2,699,000. Senator PITTMAN. And the Ynchausti mill is the one that burned down? Mr. BRUCE. Yes. Senator PITTMAN. Has the rebuilding of that plant started? Senator PITTMAN. Was the plant insured, or not? Mr. BRUCE. I understand it was fully insured. Senator PITTMAN. What capacity would that leave now in the Philippine Islands? Mr. BRUCE. For a 3-year period, 1929-1931, the capacity is 2,591,000 pounds. Senator PITTMAN. Under the theory of the Hawes-Cutting bill, we are trying to maintain the status quo. That is, we do not desire to decrease the ability of the Philippines to export, as they are now, during the period of transition to independence; nor do we desire to encourage increasing it, or, in fact, permitting it to be increased. I am going to offer an amendment to make it in accordance with the facts. Mr. BRUCE. I would like, Senator, to point out one issue which I have made in this statement. These limitation provisions are based upon two theories: First, on the consent of the Filipinos to them, so that it is a contractual arrangement; and second, on the basis of these limitations. But I think it would be perfectly proper, subject to the approval of the Filipinos, to reduce that to 3,000,000 pounds. Senator PITTMAN. I do not know who would be able to answer that question now, but I intend to make that proposal, because it is only in harmony with the rest of the theory. Senator HAWES. While you are on that, Speaker Roxas is here. Mr. Speaker, do you know about the burning of that plant? Mr. ROXAS. Yes. That plant was burned. The Ynchausti mill was burned. Senator HAWES. Was that an American plant? Mr. ROXAS. It belonged to a Spanish concern. is an old Spanish firm. Senator HAWES. Did they get their money back? Ynchausti & Co. Mr. Roxas. I think so. The plant was at least partly insured. Senator HAWES. If that plant is out of the way, then the figures I have put in there, of 7,600,000 Mr. ROXAS. Seven million five hundred thousand. Senator HAWES. Those figures are out of line, then? Mr. ROXAS. We have made it very plain, in the presentation of our case before the House committee, that in this matter of trade relations, we would limit ourselves to the presentation of the facts, relying on the judgment of the Congress of the United States to determine what the limitation should be. I would say that Mr. Bruce has stated the true facts when he said that without the Ynchausti mill the present capacity of our cordage factories would be around 3,000,000 pounds. Senator HAWES. Around 3,000,000 pounds. Mr. Roxas. That is our present capacity, without that mill. Senator PITTMAN. Would it be objectionable to the Philippine delegation if I should offer an amendment to conform to the facts? Mr. Roxas. The Senator knows very well that we want to get as high a figure as we can, but I think that if you want to adopt a uniform policy with regard to these restrictions, 3,000,000 pounds would correspond to the restriction of the other items. Senator PITTMAN. I think we have to conform, if we have a uniform scale, on this proposition, or we would be subjected to criticism on the ground of favoritism. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions to be asked the witness? Senator HAWES. Mr. Chairman, in your absence several witnesses appeared and testified. One of them testified in regard to the importation of oil. The representatives of the farm organizations understood the hearing was closed so far as they were concerned, but if that question is raised, they ask permission to be heard on the subject. Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I was left in charge of the interests of the three farm organizations here this afternoon. The National Grange and the Farm Bureau representatives had to be in another place. I represent all three of them at this time. Statements have been made here by witnesses as to the effect of the importations from the Philippine Islands upon agriculture in this country, and those statements do not agree with our conclusions. We are unwilling to permit those statements to go unchallenged, and we would like to have an opportunity to be heard. The CHAIRMAN. It was our intention-I regret that I had to leave for a time-to limit the hearings entirely to comment on Senator Hawes's bill, and I thought that it was so understood. Senator PITTMAN. I think, Mr. Chairman, however, that that discussion would be very pertinent to clause 6 of the Hawes bill. The CHAIRMAN. The Senator will remember that we had a great deal of testimony from the farm organizations last year. I have no desire to shut anybody off, but, on the other hand, if we open the door, I do not know where we will stop. Does Mr. Simpson object or is he in favor of that part of section 6 which deals with the amount of coconut oil? As we Mr. SIMPSON. I do not wish to make any statement now. have those who have gone into that, I would not be the one who would appear before you. The CHAIRMAN. The hearings will be open again on Saturday morning at 10 o'clock. The Secretary of War has been invited to appear at that time, and at the conclusion of his testimony we should be very glad to hear you, or your organization, comment on that part of section 6. Mr. SIMPSON. We would want to refute the statements as to the effect on agriculture as they have been put in the record here this afternoon. We desire to present testimony to show that it is a great |