cumstances, would authorize the designation of either the clerk of the court or the district attorney to act as commissioner and judge of the consular court. I believe it is undesirable to authorize the district attorney to act in these capacities. Apart from the fact that the district attorney at times is required to appear in the consular court in his official capacity, it would seem that a member of the executive branch of the Government ought not to be vested, even temporarily, with judicial power. Under the existing law the compensation of the commissioner cannot exceed $5 for each day of service actually rendered. The bill authorizes the Attorney General to fix the commissioner's compensation at not to exceed $10 a day. I see no objection to this. For your convenience, I enclose herewith a draft of a bill embodying the suggestions I have made. Sincerely yours, REMOVAL OF RESTRICTIONS ON RESIDENCE OF MEMBERS OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT MAY 14, 1935.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. ELLENBOGEN, from the Committee on the District of Columbia, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 3641] The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 3641) to amend section 559 of the Code of the District of Columbia as to restriction on residence of members of the fire department, having considered the same, report it back to the House with the following amendment: Page 2, line 14, strike out the period at the end thereof and add thereto the following: : Provided, That for the purposes of this Act, Washington, District of Columbia, metropolitan district, shall be held to include the District of Columbia and the territory adjacent thereto within a radius of twelve miles from the United States Capitol Building: And provided further, That any member of the fire department living outside the District of Columbia shall have and maintain a telephone at all times in his residence. This measure if enacted will permit members of the fire department to live outside the District of Columbia, but within the metropolitan district which is defined as including adjacent territory within a radius of 12 miles from the Capitol Building. Policemen and firemen are the only District employees who are subject to restriction as to residence and a bill has been favorably reported by this committee removing the restriction so far as it applies to policemen. It is believed the granting of this privilege to firemen will not affect the efficiency of the department and will enable them to obtain lower rental rates and probably acquire homes of their own. It is also believed that with telephone service and improved facilities for rapid transportation the law limiting their residence to the District of Columbia is antiquated and should be amended in the manner proposed. In reporting on this bill the Commissioners of the District of COMMISSIONERS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Hon. MARY T. NORTON, MADAM: The Commissioners of the District of Columbia are opposed to the principle involved in H. R. 3641 and H. R. 3642, respectively, relating to residence of firemen and policemen outside of the territory embraced in the District of Columbia. They believe that questions involving medical attention and communication facilities should be considered, as the fire and police board of surgeons cannot render service outside the local jurisdiction, and not all firemen and policemen can afford telephone service, particularly in rural communities. However, should it be deemed to be for the benefit of the men involved and for their best interests, they are entirely otherwise in accord with any such legislation. They desire, however, to suggest that a limit of 12 miles residence radius from the United States Capitol be substituted for the reference in these bills to "metropolitan district" as there is no legal or definable status for such a phrase that could be practically applied to the situation Respectfully, MELVIN C. HAZEN, O District of Columbia. T I OLD AGE PENSIONS MAY 14, 1935.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mrs. JENCKES of Indiana, from the Committee on the District of Columbia, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 6623] The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6623) to amend the Code of Laws for the District of Columbia in relation to providing assistance against old-age want, having considered the same, report favorably thereon and recommend that the bill do pass. The old-age pension plan has attracted more attention in recent years than any other form of social legislation. Since 1914, 33 of the 48 States have adopted this sane, modern method of caring for their aged, dependent citizens. Prior to that date the only refuge offered intelligent, respectable, mentally and physically competent elderly, dependent people was the poorhouse, where they were obliged to associate with the insane, feeble-minded, epileptic, and incurably sick, subject to the rigid restrictions and discipline required in such an institution. Men and women who had nobly contributed to the upbuilding of the State and whose only fault was that they had not accumulated a competence for old age had to become wards of the State and in exchange for food, clothing, and shelter relinquish their more priceless possessions of freedom, independence, and peace of mind. The wage earner, unselfish enough to marry and rear a family, takes upon himself heavy burdens. For many years his earning ability must be expended in the support of his family. During the best of his working years he cannot save, for income and outgo keep an even pace. By the time his children are self-supporting he finds himself superseded in his work by a younger man and is then dependent upon occasional and poorly paid employment. With the almost certain additional burden of illness or other misfortune, it is possible for the most worthy citizen-honest, industrious, and thrifty-to find himself facing dependency in his old age. It is this class of people whom the bill herewith presented is intended to aid. In every community there may be found people who would rather die of slow starvation than have the stigma of pauperism placed on them and spend their remaining years in the depressing atmosphere of a poorhouse. These are elderly men and women, in fairly good health, intelligent, self-respecting, able to handle money, purchase their own necessities, cook their own food, and care for themselves, but cannot do so because of sacrifices for their families, loss of their savings, or simply because the steady increase in the cost of living in recent years has exhausted their finances. The purpose of this bill is to provide such people with an income sufficient to meet their needs and give them the blessed privilege of keeping their self-respect and independence. Other people who would be greatly benefited by this legislation are those who have sons or daughters willing to support them but not able to do so because they are overburdened with the expense of rearing their own families. We naturally value our assets more than our liabilities. An aged, dependent relative in a family of too limited means is a liability; that same relative, receiving an old-age pension and paying for his room and board, becomes an asset. The following table epitomizes the old-age pension laws now in effect in 35 States and Territories of the Union. 1 May be age 70 until Jan. 1, 1940. Bill for the liberalized provisions now before Governor, otherwise age is 70, maximum $1 per day, citizenship for 15 years, State residence for 15 years, and only county funds. Bill before the Governor at present. Liberalized provisions do not go into effect until Federal funds are made available for aiding the State. |