per diem allowance. We carefully regulate the amount of railroad accommodations, the kind of steamship accommodations, etc.

The CHAIRMAN. How do you reach this amount of $70,000 that you estimate you need?

Mr. CARR. We reach that in this way: That estimate was made up upon the basis of what had been spent, and the amount specified is that which at the rate of expenditure during the first half of the year is necessary to buy the estimated transportation and subsistence necessary to fill certain vacancies that still exist or that we know will be filled. This again is an approximate estimate as to all those things. We can not tell, for instance, whether an ambassador or minister will ask to transport the full amount of baggage or half the amount, and we can not tell exactly the amount of the cost of the steamer passage. We can only estimate that on the basis of the cost of transportation previously.

The CHAIRMAN. You can not tell the number of people you must provide for?

Mr. CARR. No, sir; we do know that unless we get this money the newly appointed and retiring diplomatic officers will have to travel at their own expense.

BRINGING HOME CRIMINALS.

The CHAIRMAN. You have an estimate of $3,000 for bringing home from foreign countries persons charged with crimes.

Mr. CARR. Section 5275 of the Revised Statutes and section 5546 of the Revised Statutes make it obligatory upon the Secretary of State to bring home criminals for trial or confinement. Section 5546 provides that all persons who have been, or who may hereafter be, convicted of crime by any court of the United States, including a consular court, in a country where at the time of conviction or during the term of imprisonment, there is no penitentiary suitable for the confinement of convicts or available therefor, shall be confined during the term for which they have been or may be sentenced, or during the residue of such term, in some suitable jail or penitentiary in a convenient State or Territory, to be designated by the Attorney General, and that they shall be transported by properly qualified agents and the transportation paid from the appropriation for bringing home criminals.

Section 5275 of the Revised Statutes provides

Whenever any person is delivered by any foreign Government to an agent of the United States for the purpose of being brought within the United States and tried for any crime of which he is duly accused, the President shall have power to take all necessary measures for the transportation and safekeeping of such accused person and for his security against lawless violence until the conclusion of his trial for the crimes or offenses specified in the warrant of extradition, and until his final discharge from custody or imprisonment for or on account of such crimes or offenses, and for a reasonable time thereafter, and may employ such portion of the land or naval forces of the United States or of the militia thereof as may be necessary for the safekeeping and protection of the accused.

The CHAIRMAN. What extraordinary condition has arisen that requires this appropriation of $3,000?

Mr. CARR. The extraordinary condition is this, that for years Congress has appropriated $5,000 for this purpose.

The CHAIRMAN. How much did you use?

Mr. CARR. For a good many years we used only a small part of it. Cases arose which made it necessary to disburse only a few hundred dollars. Last year Congress concluded to be economical and cut that appropriation from $5,000 to $2,000.

The CHAIRMAN. There is more need for economy now than there was then.

Mr. CARR. I realize that, but, on the other hand, we have had an unusual year. We had to bring home a mutinous crew from Trieste. We do not know what we will have for the rest of the year, but we know we shall have to bring back one man from Egypt.

The CHAIRMAN. How much unexpended balance is there in that fund?

Mr. CARR. Only about $800.

The CHAIRMAN. Did the mutinous crew come from one of our ships? Was it one of our ships on which they mutinied?

Mr. CARR. Yes, sir; it was a Government transport.

The CHAIRMAN. It would seem as though they should have brought the crew home on that ship.

Mr. CARR. The transport was bound to Hamburg for the purpose of bringing back a large number of our soldiers. Inasmuch as it was not coming direct to the United States, the commanding officer did not feel that he could manage the mutinying sailors and his own crew besides. As it was, the vessel had a hard time getting home.

The CHAIRMAN. You have had only those two cases?

Mr. CARR. Yes, sir; but we have a man sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment in Egypt who must be brought home as soon as we can get the money to do it. The balance in our appropriation will hardly cover the cost. How many other cases we may have this year we do not know.

The CHAIRMAN. You only want to get the $5,000?

Mr. CARR. We want to have enough to defray the expenses of any cases that may arise. Of course, it may be that no cases at all will

arise.

The CHAIRMAN. We do not want to appropriate the money unless we have some reason for doing so, because we have got to cut $250,000,000 out of these estimates in some way. That is the job we have before us.

Mr. CARR As you understand, we have no desire whatsoever to ask for something we do not need, and, in fact, we can not spend any of this money unless cases requiring expenditures arise. If we do not have money when criminals need to be brought home, then we are placed in an awkward situation, because it is a matter of very considerable importance to get mutinous crews out of foreign ports or to get criminals out of foreign countries. In the case of the mutinous crew in Trieste, the consul was directed by the local authorities to send the crew out of the country. If the incident were to occur to-day, our appropriation would not permit compliance with the demand of the local authorities and we should have an unfortunate diplomatic controversy on our hands and perhaps the foundation of an international claim.

The CHAIRMAN. How much of the appropriation has been expended?

Mr. CARR $1,200. We have $800 remaining, not enough to bring home the prisoner from Egypt.

PAYMENT TO THE GOVERNMENT OF COLOMBIA.

The CHAIRMAN. The next item is $5,000,000 to be paid to the Government of Colombia. Can you tell us why we are called upon to pay this $5,000,000-not merely because we have a treaty-but why should we be called upon to pay it?

Mr. CARR. Article 2 of the treaty

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). We know about the treaty, but what is the purpose of it and why should we pay it? Why do we have a treaty that requires us to pay it? I think we ought to know why we should pay this amount before we pay it. I think the people are entitled to know why they are called upon to pay this money, and I have never yet found anybody who seemed to know that, but we ought to know it.

Mr. CARR. As a matter of fact, I thought that had already been thoroughly thrashed out. A treaty was negotiated and was discussed in the Senate, and was finally ratified by the Senate.

The CHAIRMAN. That does not bind us to appropriate money without knowing why we are doing it. Personally, I feel that we should have information as to what led up to the treaty.

Mr. CARR. Precisely what information would you like to have? I can prepare and put in the hearing a history of the events leading up to the negotiation of the treaty.

The CHAIRMAN. For what particular reason did we agree to pay $25,000,000 to these people?

Mr. CARR. Mr. Root negotiated one treaty with Colombia, and Mr. Knox endeavored to negotiate another. Finally, during Mr. Wilson's administration, the treaty now under consideration was negotiated and submitted to the Senate, where it remained for a long time; it was amended there and was finally adopted by the Senate. If it would satisfy the purposes of the committee I will put in the hearings a statement from the department's records reciting the facts.

The CHAIRMAN. That is not it, at all. What we want to know is why we did it. We want to know the underlying motive for paying this $25,000,000.

Mr. CARR. The underlying motive was to restore friendly relations with Colombia, which were disturbed by the fact that we recognized the Panama Republic and constructed a canal across the Isthmus, and to obtain the recognition of Panama by Colombia.

The CHAIRMAN. When was this treaty ratified?

Mr. CARR. It was ratified on April 20, 1921, by our Senate. Colombia ratified it on December 22, 1921. Our ratifications were sent to Colombia to be exchanged in January, but they have not yet been exchanged.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, why do you want this appropriation carried in a deficiency bill?

Mr. CARR. The department feels that immediately on the exchange of ratifications we ought to be able to pay over the money.

The CHAIRMAN. The treaty provides that it shall not be paid for six months after ratification.

Mr. CARR. Actually, it requires that the payment shall be made within six months from the date of the exchange of ratifications, which period would run until—

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). Until after the 1st of July.

Mr. CARR (continuing). About a month after the 1st of July. The CHAIRMAN. Then, why should not this money be carried in the regular appropriation bill? It is not a deficiency.

Mr. CARR. It is not a deficiency in one sense; it is really an additional appropriation, I suppose.

The CHAIRMAN. Then it ought not to be in this bill if it is not a deficiency.

Mr. CARR. That point was fully discussed before making this estimate, whether or not it should be kept out of this bill and put in the regular bill and be made immediately available, or whether it should be put in the regular bill and charged against the next fiscal year. The CHAIRMAN. That is where it ought to be.

Mr. CARR. And the decision was made by the department that it ought to be in this bill, because we ought not to be put in the position of delaying a payment of this kind.

The CHAIRMAN. You would not be tardy if it is not due until after the 1st of July, and all of these bills will be passed before that time. Mr. CARR. The feeling of the department was that it ought to be put in this bill and ought to be available as soon as possible after the exchange of ratifications.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean to say that these people are so hard up that they should have the money long in advance of the time specified?

Mr. CARR. It is not that; but it is the advantage that the United States would gain by making prompt payment that influences the department to make this request. It would be unfortunate to have it appear that after the long controversy over the treaty there should be any delay about making the first payment under that treaty.

Mr. BYRNS. There is no possibility that it will be needed before July 1.

Mr. CARR. The entire period would not expire before July 1, it is

true.

Mr. BYRNS. You do not have to pay anything until the period has expired.

The CHAIRMAN. The language of the item provides that it is not due until six months after the ratification of the treaty.

Mr. CARR. The language of Article II of the treaty provides that the first payment shall be made within six months after ratification. The CHAIRMAN. And the language carried in this request provides that it is not due until six months after the ratifications have been exchanged, and all of the regular bills will be passed long before the 1st of July. They are being passed every day, and every bill will pass the House before the 1st of April. The bills are coming back from the Senate every day, so that there is no delay.

Mr. CARR. Well, of course, it is for the judgment of Congress, in which bill the item belongs. The department is only desirous of having the appropriation made and available as soon as possible after the ratifications of the treaty have been exchanged.

The CHAIRMAN. The schedule of this committee is that all bills carrying appropriations for 1923 shall be out of committee and in the

House on the 25th of March. Six of the bills have already passed, three of them have come back from the Senate, and four bills are practically ready for report to the House, and then we have two besides that.

Mr. BYRNS. It is a certainty that the whole State Department will have to shut down if the bill carrying its appropriations is not passed by the 1st of July.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not think it is a deficiency, but even if it is not a deficiency I want to know about it. I would not violate the confidence of the State Department, but as the responsible head of this committee I insist on knowing.

Mr. GALLIVAN. I suppose that means we shall all know.
The CHAIRMAN. I do not know about that.

Mr. GALLIVAN. I would not want to vote for an appropriation of $5,000,000 for anything of this sort without knowing what I am voting for. Not for the shadow of a moment do I put myself in the distinguished class of the chairman, but at the same time somebody might ask me why I voted $5,000,000 into this bill and I would like to be able to tell them.

The CHAIRMAN. You have the same rights as the chairman about it. Mr. GALLIVAN. I suppose Congress has a right to know.

The CHAIRMAN. Surely; and that is why we are asking for it, but there have been cases where confidential information has been given. to this committee and it has not been disclosed to the House.

Mr. GALLIVAN. That is all right and that is an altogether different proposition.

The CHAIRMAN. And the House has been willing to assume that the confidence should be kept. I do not think we ought to put it in this bill because it is not a deficiency. If there was any danger that the regular bill would not pass in time then, of course, there might be some reason why we should carry it in this deficiency bill, but there is no such danger.

Mr. CARR. There is really nothing to be said about this treaty and the reason for paying the $25,000,000 that was not said to the Senate at the time the treaty was under consideration there. It is well known that on January 22, 1903, the Secretary of State, Mr. Hay, and the Colombian minister, Mr. Herran, signed a treaty providing for the cession to the United States of territory on which to construct the Panama Canal. The treaty met with opposition in the Colombian Congress because the payment of $10,000,000 therein. provided for was not deemed sufficient.

When the Colombian Congress adjourned without ratifying the treaty Panama revolted, declared her independence, which was recognized by the United States, and shortly thereafter the Hay-BunauVarilla treaty of 1903 was entered into, under which the construction of the Panama Canal was begun.

The separation of Panama from Colombia was followed by complaints by Colombia against the United States and by proposals for arbitration as to the interpretation of the treaty of 1846 concerning the rights of the Uinted States upon the Isthmus of Panama. These proposals were rejected by the United States.

After the revolution in Panama and the beginning of the construction of the canal President Roosevelt undertook negotiations to secure the recognition by Colombia of the independence of Panama,