(Witness: Zappone.) ficiency since it went into effect, and I do not think there is any danger of one. The CHAIRMAN. And before that time deficiencies were occurring all the while? Mr. ZAPPONE. We had deficiencies every year. Returning to our subject: At the end of the month the chief of each bureau and division renders to my office a statement of the liabilities incurred by him-that is, the obligations that he has incurred. I send to him the actual disbursements; he sends to me what he has contracted ahead. Thus we check each other, and I then make a report to the Secretary, showing him both the disbursements and the outstanding liabilities, so that he may see just how each bureau and division is operating. With the permission of the committee I shall insert in the record at this point a summary of the Department's expenditures for the fiscal year 1906, taken from the last page of the "Littlefield report;" it has a direct bearing on this whole testimony. The CHAIRMAN. Certainly. The summary is as follows: Recapitulation of the several appropriations for the entire Department of Agriculture as distributed among the following groups, and the total expenditures under cach. Statutory salaries.. Lump-fund salaries in Washington.. Lump-fund salaries outside of Washington.. Stationery..... Miscellaneous supplies and services, equipment, books, apparatus, machinery, and laboratory materials of all kinds... Furniture.. Fuel. Advances to temporary disbursing agents.. To amount appropriated for Museum, which was not used but turned back into Treasury... 16, 796. 62 8, 968.98 218, 390.31 18, 522.41 109, 316. 54 13, 102.04 446, 990.30 53, 691.71 92, 065.39 5, 814, 239. 77 6, 134, 757.95 5, 814, 239.77 320, 518. 18 $74, 916. 39 2,260.00 77, 176. 39 Repayments to appropriations through Treasury. Unexpended balance..... Of this amount, the balance under the permanent appropriation for "building, Department of Agriculture," on June 30, 1905, which is available until used, was.. Making the unexpended balance.... 243, 341.79 893.31 244, 235. 10 168, 297. 27 75, 937.83 (Witness: Zappone.) Mr. SAMUEL. How were the different grades in the statutory roll originally established? Mr. ZAPPONE. The grades in the statutory roll were fixed by section 167 of the Revised Statutes, which reads as follows: The annual salaries of clerks and employees in the Departments, whose compensation is not otherwise prescribed, shall be as follows: First. To clerks of the fourth class, eighteen hundred dollars. Fifth. To the women employed in duties of a clerical character, subordinate to those assigned to clerks of the first class, including copyists and counters, or temporarily employed to perform the duties of a clerk, nine hundred dollars. Sixth. To messengers, eight hundred and forty dollars. Seventh. To assistant messengers, seven hundred and twenty dollars. Eighth. To laborers, seven hundred and twenty dollars. Ninth. To watchmen, seven hundred and twenty dollars. Additions to these grades have been made by Congress from time to time, until to-day we find the statutory rolls as they appear in the Digests of Appropriations. The CHAIRMAN. The document that included the expenditures in the Department of Agriculture prior to the conference between this committee and yourself on the part of the Department of Agriculture, consisted of a volume of 584 printed pages, giving all of the details without any classification or summarized statement, did it not? Mr. ZAPPONE. It did, sir. It was an exact transcript from the cash books of the disbursing office. The CHAIRMAN. Under the instructions of our committee, you prepared for 1905, as well as 1906, a condensed, summarized, and classified list of expenditures, which we have been using in the examination? Mr. ZAPPONE. I did. The CHAIRMAN. And that consisted of only about 294 printed pages? Mr. ZAPPONE. It was just about one-half the size of the other volume and gave the matter in a more succinct form. In other words, gave the per annum cost instead of the separate-account cost. it The CHAIRMAN. And for the purposes of investigation and research or the ascertainment of conditions or expenditures in the Department, was worth vastly more than the original detailed statement? Mr. ZAPPONE. It was, sir; the value of the information has increased more than 100 per cent. The volume is twice as valuable as it was before and costs only half as much. The CHAIRMAN. By the adoption of that plan the cost to the Government has been reduced practically 50 per cent? Mr. ZAPPONE. Over 50 per cent from $5,306 to $2,153, approximately. The CHAIRMAN. How about the cost of preparation? Mr. ZAPPONE. The cost of preparation, I find, is about $5,000 at the present time, while under the old method the cost was about $3,000, making the additional cost about $2,000, which you will see is more than offset by the saving which has already been accomplished in the cost of printing. And if the committee will agree to have this report submitted in manuscript form it will further reduce the cost. The CHAIRMAN. By "manuscript form" you mean manifold typewritten copies? (Witness: Zappone.) Mr. ZAPPONE. Yes, sir; by means of a rotary mimeograph I can strike off at least 50 copies from one writing on the typewriter. The cost of such a machine will be about $50. In other words, instead of paying $2,153 for printing the report in the future, if your committee can get along with the manuscript copy and be satisfied with about 50 copies, half of which I would like to have for the use of the Department, I think it will answer every purpose and further reduce the cost. The CHAIRMAN. How much would it cost to give us the 50 typewritten duplicates? Mr. ZAPPONE. I have estimated that in the clerk cost for getting out the report. I have set aside $1,000 for typewriting at the end of the year. The CHAIRMAN. That same amount of typewriting would be involved in the case of printing? Mr. ZAPPONE. It will be involved in the case of printing just the same. The CHAIRMAN. So that, with the expenditure of that same $1,000, the only extra expense in getting up the report in manuscript shape would be the material used in duplicating and the duplicating machine? Mr. ZAPPONE. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Then all it would cost the Government, over and above the $1,000 for typewriting, would be not over two or three hundred dollars, if that?" Mr. ZAPPONE. Not as much as that. The CHAIRMAN. It would probably not be over $100? The CHAIRMAN. So that, instead of its costing the Government, say, $3,500, or whatever it is, to print this report, we could get in typewritten shape, using our printed reports that we now have as a basis for comparison, a report that would cost the Government only about $100, exclusive of clerk hire? Mr. ZAPPONE. That is right, sir. Mr. SAMUEL. And the machine could be used for future reports? Mr. ZAPPONE. It could be used each year. Mr. SAMUEL. And could it be used for other purposes in the Department? Mr. ZAPPONE. Yes, sir. There are a number of times when it is necessary to get out circular letters. One copy of the letter could be typewritten in the form of a wax stencil and additional copies struck off on the mimeograph machine. Mr. SAMUEL. So that the machine would not necessarily be used only for this purpose? Mr. ZAPPONE. It would not necessarily be confined exclusively to this purpose, but could be used for other purposes. The CHAIRMAN. Unless you hear from the committee to the contrary before the adjournment of this session it may be understood that we will get along with the manifold typewritten copies. That will reduce the expense to an almost negligible amount. Mr. ZAPPONE. Yes, sir. Mr. SAMUEL. You have the authority, under your law, to purchase that machine, have you? (Witness: Zappone.) Mr. ZAPPONE. Yes, sir; we could purchase that from the contingent fund. It would be for the general use of the Department, and would be a proper charge against that appropriation. The CHAIRMAN. Do you know whether the other Departments of the Government, as to which there are committees on expenditures, are preparing these lists of expenditures and having them printed, as the Department of Agriculture has been doing for the last few years? Mr. ZAPPONE. I understand that some of the Departments have been doing that, at least quite recently; but none of the other Departments, to my knowledge, classifies the expenditures in the way we have classified them. The CHAIRMAN. That is, the way that we have had it done for the last two years? Mr. ZAPPONE. Yes, sir. I mention this, because I know that some of the officials of the Treasury Department are interested in the matter. The Association of Accounting Officers have asked me to deliver an address on this very subject. That is a little out of my line, but it shows that they are interested in the work. I would like to show you the cards used in indexing the expenditures for final compilation. (The witness showed to the chairman the cards referred to.) The CHAIRMAN. This is a line of work suggested to your Department by this Committee on Expenditures? Mr. ZAPPONE. This reclassification was entirely at the suggestion of this Committee on Expenditures. They not only suggested it, but suggested the groups; and I wish to say that it has been found most useful to me in my work and also to the officials of the various bureaus and divisions. They can pick up one of these printed volumes and tell at a glance just what their expenditures have been for. the year for each of these specific groups. Mr. SAMUEL. The suggestion that the report be prepared by this duplicating machine was made by this committee, was it not; or was that suggested to the Department previous to the hearings of this committee? Mr. ZAPPONE. The suggestion really came to me in an informal way from the chairman of this con mittee. I looked into the matter, going to the Government Printing Office for that purpose. I found a duplicating machine there, but it was not only too expensive, but too hard to manipulate for our purposes. Then I discovered that the Edison rotary machine was more simple in its operation, much cheaper, and would answer our purpose just as well. That is how this change originated. The CHAIRMAN. To what extent, if any, have employees or representatives of the Department of Agriculture traveled upon passes heretofore? Have you examined into this question? If so, state fully what you have found in relation thereto. Mr. ZAPPONE. It is estimated that the money value of passes issued by the various railroads to employees of the Department of Agriculture during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1906, was approximately $90,000, $80,000 of which was for passes used by the meat inspectors of the Bureau of Animal Industry in making interstate inspection of cattle and sheep before shipment. This inspection is (Witness: Zappone.) almost entirely in the interests of the carriers. The remaining $10,000 of the amount named is divided among the other Bureaus of the Department. As the new rate law prohibits the use of passes after January 1, 1907, this privilege which the Government has enjoyed in past years has now been discontinued and has necessi tated additional appropriations by Congress to that extent. The CHAIRMAN. Much has been said before the committee as to the various lines of investigation that have been pursued and the projects that are from time to time started under the various bureaus. Is there any uniformity of practice or any rule in relation to that in the Department? If there is, state what it is. Mr. ZAPPONE. About a year and a half ago the Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, under instructions from the Secretary, directed each bureau to submit, on a printed form which had been prepared for the purpose, a brief statement of all projects then in operation, together with the probable date of their completion and their ultimate cost. The circular of instructions also provides that supplemental reports on these projects shall be made every six months. These projects are similar to those that are shown in the "Littlefield report," after the summary of expenses, except that there they deal principally with the expense necessary under each item, while in this statement, just referred to, there is given a general and more complete outline of the work being conducted. I submit a blank project form herewith, which I would like to have made an exhibit. The form referred to is as follows: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Washington, D. C. MEMORANDA OF PROJECTS OR LINES OF WORK IN THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. In general, the plan of memoranda of projects or problems contemplates a “project” as a line of work delegated to a given man, called a "leader," with one or more helpers; for example: "Study of Decay in Oranges During Shipment;" "Breeding Carriage Horses; ""Survey of Soils in Lyon County, Minn.;" "Stamping Out Foot-and-Mouth Disease in New England." It is designed that these memoranda shall be written on ordinary letter sheets, from 8 by 10 to 9 by 11 inches; that each project may be given a folder in a vertical filing case where the original and any supplementary or revised memoranda may be filed under its appropriate heading in a logical scheme with suitable reference card catalogues arranged by names of leaders, bureaus, etc. It is requested that too much technical detail be avoided, that this may be a key to information rather than a depository of detailed technical statements. Each project leader in the Department, in an experiment station, or elsewhere, where the Department has cooperative relations, who assembles the data for a project statement should have a copy of this memorandum, that all may follow the same general plan. NORMAL COURSE OF SUGGESTED PROJECTS. a. Preparation of project statement by leader. b. Reference to chiefs. Revision and suggestions for changes in scheme of work or in plan of organization and cooperation. c. Reference to Secretary's office. Revision, suggestion, and reference back for correction and approval by leader and chief. d. Approval by Secretary's office and placing copy on file in office of leader, of chiefs, and in Secretary's office. Supplemental records on each project are due to be filed on January 1 and July 1 of each year. |