AMBASSADORS AND MINISTERS CHANGE IN LANGUAGE The CHAIRMAN. The next item.

LIBERIA

Mr. CARR. I would like to call attention to this, Mr. Chairman, on page 5, line 24, after the words "Irish Free State," as to whether you would not wish me to suggest the inclusion there of "Liberia, and on page 6, line 5, to strike out "Minister resident and consul general to Liberia, $5,000."

The reason for that is that there has already been submitted an item to the Bureau of the Budget covering this, but the reason for the suggestion now is that you passed the act approved January 21, 1931, changing the title and increasing the salary of our representative at Liberia, raising the salary from $5,000 to $10,000, and changing the title from "Minister resident and consul general," to "Envoy extraordinary and minister plenopotentiary," so that there is a deficiency estimate coming up for the latter part of this year, and I take it that you will not want to include that for next year to carry out your act? Senator BINGHAM. There is to be no consul general there?

Mr. CARR. The President may make the consul general or he may make the secretary of the legation a consul general. That does not affect the salary.

Senator JONES. On page 6, line 5, you refer to the words, "Minister resident and consul general to Liberia, $5,000."

Mr. CARR. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And suggest striking that out?

Mr. CARR. Yes, sir.

Senator MOSES. Strike that out and put "Liberia" in line 24, after "Irish Free State," on page 5.

BELGIUM-LUXEMBURG

Senator MCKELLAR. Mr. Carr, will you return to lines 15 to 17, inclusive, on page 5, "For ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary to Belgium and envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Luxemburg, $17,500"? Why is our representative for Luxemburg put on a different basis from the other ambassadors?

Mr. CARR. Because we felt there it was desirable to have the representative at Luxemburg, and yet the Government did not want to send a separate representative there.

Senator MCKELLAR. I understand that.

Mr. CARR. So that he is accredited as an ambassador, and as a minister.

Senator BINGHAM. One man.

Senator MCKELLAR. I understand, but why do you have an ambassador at Belgium and a minister at Luxemburg?

Mr. CAR. It was thought that Luxemburg did not rate an ambassador. That is all I know.

Senator SWANSON. It is so small that you can walk over it for your morning exercise.

Senator McKELLAR. I understand.

CONTINGENT EXPENSES, FOREIGN MISSIONS

Mr. CARR. On page 6, line 22, I call attention to a typographical error. The comma after the word "record" should be removed. Senator McKELLAR. Should that not be "records" too?

Mr. CARR. No. That ought to follow the line above, "record and other books."

Senator McKELLAR. "Record and other books."

Mr. CARR. Yes, sir.

CONTINGENT EXPENSES, UNITED STATES CONSULATES

On page 10, line 17, we would ask for the Budget estimate there, which is $20,000 more than the House gave, the $20,000 having been intended for travel in connection with trade conference work of consular officers who are obtaining facts and placing them at the disposal of the Department of Commerce, and doing trade conference work for the purpose of giving trade information to Chambers of Commerce and business men, or certain business men about the country. We want to do more of that than we have been doing.

Senator MCKELLAR. Do you not have men in the Department of Commerce who are doing exactly the same work?

Mr. CARR. Yes; but the consuls there augment the work of the trade commissioners. We are working the two forces together in the trade conference work. The Commerce Department asks us for somebody to go to this place or that place or the other, and we place the man at their disposal and send him on orders from our department, and, of course, in that event have to pay his expenses.

There is no duplication of effort there whatsoever, but a complete coordination between the two departments in this trade conference work.

Senator GLENN. Has there not been a good deal of rivalry or competition between the two departments in that work?

Mr. CARR. There has been in the past, but there is not any at present.

Senator BINGHAM. I used to think that it was a bad scheme, but after investigation of the work done in Japan and China, I have found that there is complete cooperation between the commissioners for the Department of Commerce and the consuls for the State Department, and I have been impressed with the way that they have supplemented each other's work. It is admirable. There is no overlapping at all.

Senator MCKELLAR. Is it not a fact that there is a great deal of overlapping, and that it is costing a great deal more than it ought to? Mr. CARR. I think there is a minimum of overlapping at the present time.

Senator MCKELLAR. I found 11 different Federal activities in one city, Berlin, some years ago when I was over there.

The CHAIRMAN. Those things have been changed a great deal during the last few years, Senator.

Senator MCKELLAR. I hope they have.

Senator BINGHAM. Yes.

Senator MCKELLAR. I remember that they did have there all of these separate organizations, the Commerce Department's organization and the others.

As a matter of fact, the trade commissioners in the Department of Commerce have to get all of their information through the consular or ministerial officers of the government, because they are not allowed to go into other governmental matters, and make other inquiries of other governments. It has to be done through the State Department employees anyway. I think that you have a duplication of employment here and I would like for Mr. Carr to say if this is work which is not actually duplicated. I think we are doing a lot of duplication of work here.

The CHAIRMAN. That is the way that it used to be done. There is no question about it. But I think that Mr. Carr will bear me out in this statement, that during the last few years we have done away with a great deal of it, if not all.

Mr. CARR. I would say this, Mr. Chairman, that at no time, in my opinion, has there been a more complete understanding between the Department of Commerce and the State Department than there is to-day. That has been very largely due to the work that has been done within the past couple of years in trying to bring about a better condition, trying to cut out the duplication of this work, and cutting down expenses where it can be done and trying to promote the efficiency of the service.

There is a complete understanding between the two departments, and there is no duplication that we know about, that we can prevent. Senator MCKELLAR. Do you have the officers in the same building? Mr. CARR. Wherever we can. I should say that there are a number of places where they have officers in the same building.

At the points where we are erecting new Government-owned buildings abroad, the attempt is being made to bring into one building all officers of all agencies of the Government in that particular city.

Senator MCKELLAR. I think that it is a good thing, if it can be done.

Senator SWANSON. When this service was first started, there was considerable friction between the State Department and the Commerce Department.

Mr. CARR. Yes.

Senator SWANSON. The State Department thought that it was a reflection on the duties of the consuls, and so forth. They were opposed to it and tried to stop it. There was a very great conflict, and complaints about the work.

Mr. CARR. I do not think that there is any of that remaining at the present time.

Senator SWANSON. There was a great deal of trouble.

Senator ODDIE. Mr. Secretary, do you find that there is any competition between the work of our men in these various foreign agencies and those of foreign countries? That is, are our agencies in foreign countries handicapped by not having an ample expense account for entertainment's as the foreigners have, in achieving what they should?

Mr. CARR. That is particularly true of the State Department. I think that it is true to a greater extent with the agents of the State Department, than it is of the Department of Commerce, but I think that it can be stated truthfully that the agents of both departments are less well provided for in the way of facilities for doing their work,

and entertainment allowances, and that sort of thing, than the agents of the principal foreign governments.

I think there is no question about that.

I know that the British Government provides much more generously for its agents abroad than we do for ours.

Senator ODDIE. Repeating something that I said last year, before the committee, based upon my experience in Brazil last summer: I saw a British delegation come down to Brazil and Argentine and walk away with a large amount of contracts, and I wondered whether if our funds were a little more ample there our agents could not compete better and have secured some of that work for us.

Mr. CARR. Well, of course, I do not know how much they could have gotten, but I do know this, that they are very frequently at a disadvantage as compared with the agents of Great Britain, and the agents of Germany.

Senator SWANSON. We gave them last year a very good fund for entertainment.

Mr. CARR. Yes; you have been much more generous during the last 18 months than up to that time.

The CHAIRMAN. I think that we have got an increase in the entertainment fund in this act over last year.

Senator MCKELLAR. Is there any way that the department can find out, by an inspection, what these men are doing?

Mr. CARR. We know what they are doing.

Senator MCKELLAR. Oh, no, my dear sir, you do not. I have been over there, when they did not know that I was an office holder of any kind, and I know that you do not. I know that you do not know what they are doing, because some of them were very, very negligent of their jobs. There is not any doubt about it. I think it would be a very wise thing to have an inspector go over there and see what they are doing, at regular intervals.

Mr. CARR. We have a regular systematic inspection, Senator. going on all of the time and we have our consul generals.

Senator MCKELLAR. I think that some man ought to be sent from: here to go over and see for himself, and see whether they are doing what they should be doing, and how much attention they are paying to their jobs, attending to their jobs, I get a great many reports from constituents, people from Tennessee, who are traveling abroad, of things that should not be done, and I know from personal experience. They were very discourteous and even insulting to me.

Senator MOSES. That, when it is reported, all goes into their records, and each foreign office is judged upon the record it makes. I think that that would come up under a Foreign Service bill.

Senator HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I want to add to what Senator McKellar has said here, that I met one agent, who was so discourteous that I determined to report him and try to have him removed. The CHAIRMAN. Did you report him?

Senator HARRIS. I did not. I ought to have done it.

Senator BINGHAM. Well, of course, Senator, if some of them are discourteous, and they are not reported to the department, the department does not know anything about it.

Senator MCKELLAR. He ought not to be required to do that. Senator HARRIS. No.

Senator MCKELLAR. It ought not to be required of him.

Senator HARRIS. No.

Senator MOSES. I think that we ought to take that up in connection with the embassies and legations.

Senator MCKELLAR. I know that I walked into another building, and we were virtually invited out.

Senator HARRIS. I did not tell him what I was working on.

Senator SWANSON. One of the troubles is, if we are attempting to do anything, or a complaint was made and you attempted to discipline one of them in some way, you would have a lot of letters from every prominent man in his State saying that he was one of the best men that the Lord ever created.

Senator MCKELLAR. We know how anyone will sign a petition, but what you ought to do is to have somebody go over there and inspect them.

Senator SWANSON. They are inspected at every place once a year. Senator MCKELLAR. But, I mean, that we ought to have somebody go from here and inspect them.

Mr. CARR. They are supposed to be inspected once every two years.

Senator MOSES. Have you reported them and you have had complaints?

Senator MCKELLAR. We get many reports. I know I get many from my State. There are plenty of people in Tennessee who are traveling abroad, and they say that they are treated discourteously by some of our representatives.

Senator GLENN. I can tell a very interesting story along that line, too, if I had time.

MOTOR CARS

The CHAIRMAN. What about this item for "Hire of motor-propelled or horse-drawn passenger-carrying vehicles, and purchase, maintenance, operation, and hire of other passenger-carrying vehicles"? That is in lines 1 and 2, page 10. In all of our work in this country or, frequently, that is confined to public business. Is there any special reason why the use of motor-propelled vehicles should not be confined to public business in the Foreign Service?

Mr. CARR. As a matter of fact, they are understood to be confined to public business.

The CHAIRMAN. There is nothing in the language of the act that would require it though.

Mr. CARR. That is true.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course, that could be done by some provision. Senator MORRIS. Mr. Chairman, I think that we will get into a lot of trouble if we try to do anything about that.

Mr. CARR. You have that in the general act.

The CHAIRMAN. Why should we not have somethnig in the act similar to what we do have in reference to motor vehicles in this country? Could we say for official business, and have them used only for official business?

Mr. CARR. You have that in the general act, you know, covering property, the use of passenger-carrying vehicles; and that is specially permitted.

The CHAIRMAN. That is covered by the general statute?