administration, but in part for the public, where some one outside of the Library wishes to have a photostat copy of a map or a manuscript or pages of a book or what not. We do that for him, so far as our operators are at leisure, but we charge him for it. We make sure that the charge more than offsets the cost to the Government, but, of course, the materials that we use we have to buy out of this item. Last year they cost us-I gave that in my original estimate. The CHAIRMAN. How much of an unexpended balance have you out of the 1922 appropriation; what balance?

Mr. PUTNAM. We have not enough to carry us through the year and keep on buying these supplies. I will insert the balance. Mr. WOOD. What becomes of the money you receive?

Mr. PUTNAM. It is covered into the Treasury. We covered $1,700 into the Treasury last year.

The CHAIRMAN. You are asking for $1,000?

Mr. PUTNAM. Yes, sir; only to carry us through the year.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the meaning of the language, "including not exceeding $500 for expenses of attendance at meetings"?

Mr. PUTNAM. That is the original phrasing of the appropriation; it is nothing incidental to this.

The CHAIRMAN. No part of that is included in the $1,000?

Mr. PUTNAM. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. This is purely for photostat paper?

Mr. PUTNAM. Yes, sir.

Mr. BYRNES. You do not care for that provision?

Mr. PUTNAM. No, sir; I do not care for that. That is only in the general phrasing of the appropriation. I will send over for the exact statement of the balance. I apologize for not having it with me. The CHAIRMAN. $1,700 was covered into the Treasury last year? Mr. PUTNAM. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. What quantity of paper have you on hand now? Mr. PUTNAM. That does not appear in this statement. We have only a little on hand from week to week.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you buy it weekly?

Mr. PUTNAM. We buy it through the supply committee as

need it.

The CHAIRMAN. They have it on hand?

we

Mr. PUTNAM. They award the contract. We order direct from the photostat corporation.

SALARIES-LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE.

The CHAIRMAN. In House Document No. 171 there is the item:

Salaries, Library of Congress-leg'slative reference: To enable the Librarian of Congress to employ competent persons to gather, classify, and make available, in translations, indexes, digests, compilations, and bulletins, and otherwise, data for or bearing upon legislation, and to render such data serviceable fo Congress and Members thereof: Provided, That not to exceed one person shall be employed hereunder at a rate of compensation exceeding $3,000 per annum, $6,500.

The amount appropriated for the current fiscal year is $25.000. How much of that have you expended?··

Mr. PUTNAM. This statement shows exactly the situation. On February 1 we had a balance of $6,698.49:

Legislative reference division.

Estimated charges, Feb. 1-June 30

Balance of appropriation, Feb. 1.

Deficiency

The estimated charges are merely :

The actual present roll--aggregating $2 362 77 per month... Administrative assistant, at $3,000 per annum-for 3 months (position at the moment vacant, but indispensable).

1 assistant at $2.000-for 3 months (position at the moment vacant, but indispensable).

Total.

The above covers merely the staff as it was before two recent resignations.

N. B.--The actual balance February 1. being but $6 698.49. the above pay roll ($2,455.40 per month) would completely exhaust it by April 21 and require the entire staff to be dropped then.

FEBRUARY 15, 1922.

The CHAIRMAN. How much of the year is yet to come, February 1 to June 30?

Mr. PUTNAM. Yes, sir. Our present organization would require to June 30, $13.235.73, leaving an estimated deficiency of $6,537.24. The CHAIRMAN. Was the $25,000 appropriated for 1922 apportioned by months, as the law requires?

Mr. PUTNAM. No, sir. Our situation was this: We had last year $31.500, because in addition to the $25,000 we had a $6,500 deficiency appropriation last year. Now, with the deficiency we were enabled a year ago to keep up the force that we then had. We have not expanded it or taken on any new phase of work, but we have not reduced the force to the point of carrying through the year on the $25,000.

The CHAIRMAN. Why?

Mr. PUTNAM. Well, sir, I was confident that this being work for Congress it was best for us to keep up the staff while the demands. were pressing, even if, when the appropriation came to an end, we had to disperse it.

The CHAIRMAN. The deficiency act, you recollect, provides that the appropriations set out for any given thing shall be apportioned

1 See infra.

at the beginning of the year by months or quarters and that the allotment shall not be exceeded, and when Congress sets out an appropriation of $25,000 for a given activity it should be assumed that that was the extent to which Congress would like to have that activity go.

Mr. WOOD. And should be expended during the year.
The CHAIRMAN. That is what I say.

Mr. PUTNAM. I realize that the responsibility of an administrator is a pretty serious one in the face of that provision; and if it had been a work of buying supplies, of entering into new contracts, I should not have had an alternative; but here were these people already on the rolls and under the deficiency appropriation of last year had been engaged and maintained——

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). But, after all, if we are going to reduce the expenses of the Government, how are we going to be able to do it if the administrative officers pay no attention to the limit on the expenditures set by Congress?

Mr. PUTNAM. Well, that is very just, and I am trying to put myself absolutely in the place of the Appropriations Committee, but this is a little different.

The CHAIRMAN. No; I think not.

Mr. PUTNAM. We could absolutely cease this service April 21 if you insisted upon it.

The CHAIRMAN. That would not be the best way to do it, it seems to me. The best way to do would be to curtail within the limit set out in the appropriation.

Mr. PUTNAM. We gathered these people together and developed them until they became highly expert. We had an appropriation of $45,000 a year for this service. When two years ago the appropriation was cut from $45,000 to $25,000 we had to let go some of the best of them-I was holding on like grim death for them to remainand a year ago this subcommittee on deficiencies as supported by the general committee added $6,500, making our appropriation $31,500. There seemed to be at least that much encouragement from the committee to the maintenance of the force as it then stood.

The CHAIRMAN. After all, creating deficiencies in this way seems to me equivalent to making appropriations through the administrative side of the Government. Of course, not only the deficiency act prohibits that, but the Constitution itself prohibits it. We all take an oath to obey the law and the Constitution. I seems to me in carrying out that oath that we ought to live within the letter of the law, because an appropriation act is just as much a law as any other law, and even though it might embarrass the activity it has always seemed to me that the responsibility should be placed where it belongs. That is, if the Congress says $25,000 and you are not able to do the amount of work that should be done with $25,000 and it turns out that you are not able to get the information that Congress may require, that the responsibility for the failure to do that is up to Congress and ought not to be assumed by the administrative side of the Government.

Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Chairman, I believe that any administrative officer who disregards his responsibility ought to be rebuked. The CHAIRMAN. We are not going to rebuke anybody.

Mr. PUTNAM. And that it would be perfectly just. I think in this particular case, however, it would be only fair for you to recognize that I had this alternative, to retain the force needed to do all the work that could be done efficiently, carry it along as far as we could, and then drop it.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the character of the information?

Mr. PUTNAM. It may be the preparation of some statement like this indicating] that has been put into print by some committee, a digest of the Sales Tax Laws of Canada, France, Germany, Mexico, and the Philippines," which was prepared for the use of the Committee on Finance, or this one, a digest on "The War Tax on Incomes. Assessed Profits and Luxuries," prepared for the Committee on Ways and Means.

The CHAIRMAN. Those pamphlets are furnished in response to requests from Congress?

Mr. PUTNAM. In response to requests from the committees: yes, sir. Those [exhibiting] were prepared from time to time, and a great many were prepared at the requests of individual Members. Here is a list of typical inquiries during the past few months.

Mr. WOOD. What does this force do when Congress is not in session?

Mr. PUTNAM. There are always inquiries throughout the year. even in the recess, and there is always the organization of material and the indexing of it.

Mr. WOOD. What information is furnished to anybody else other than the committees or Members of Congress?

Mr. PUTNAM. None; except as in the case of a representative of the Department of Justice, whom I have just left, who came there to ask for information which we happened to have on hand. If we happen to have any file not confidential, if we have made a compilation, we let him see it, but we never do any original work for such an outsider.

Mr. WOOD. Suppose somebody not connected with any official fune tion would apply for some sort of information that I, as a Member of Congress, might apply for, would you furnish that information?

Mr. PUTNAM. No, sir. We are not allowed to do any work under the appropriation except for Congress. We are sympathetic to inquiries from any other government establishment. This man had asked the Naval Intelligence, the Commissioner of Navigation, and so on, and he got only partial information. He came to us and he is getting the rest. We do not do any original work for him, we do not compile anything, we do not digest anything, but if we have the information there we will let him see it. Indexes to the foreign statutes are very imperfect. The index of our Federal statutes kept up by this division is entirely complete.

The CHAIRMAN. How many employees have you in this division? Mr. PUTNAM. We had 23 on the 1st of February.

The CHAIRMAN. What compensation do they receive?

Mr. PUTNAM. Here is a list of the employees and their compensation. There is nobody on the roll at the moment getting more than $2.000 a year.

The CHAIRMAN. There is one administrative assistant at $3,000.

Mr. PUTNAM. There was, sir, but that place is at this moment vacant. These [exhibiting] are some of the questions we have been asked to deal with in the last few months.

The CHAIRMAN. These are requests made of you?

Mr. PUTNAM. By Senators, Members, and the committees.
The CHAIRMAN. How many requests are handled?

Mr. PUTNAM. They would run up to about 1,600 for a Congress.
Mr. BYRNS. What is the general nature of this work?

Mr. PUTNAM. There are some samples, digests involving diplomatic relations, public finance, military affairs, merchant marine, tariff, education, and transportation.

The CHAIRMAN. Can not this information be obtained from any other place than the Government?

Mr. PUTNAM. One of the conveniences is this, Mr. Chairman. There is a good deal of raw material existing in the executive estab lishments, the Treasury Department, the State Department, and so forth. The primary duty of this division is to ascertain, first, whether it does exist or is likely to exist, and if it does exist, to make use of it before endeavoring to make a compilation. The fact that our people are likely to know if it exists and where, is becoming more and more obvious to Senators and Representatives using the service. If, for instance, the Treasury Department has the material in convenient form we get in touch with them. However, the Treasury Department may have it in some form which does not meet his exact purpose

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). Is there any duplication of work? Mr. PUTNAM. We try to avoid that. It is primarily upon us to

avoid that.

The CHAIRMAN. How successful is it?

Mr. PUTNAM. I think it is pretty successful. I know that more and more duplication is saved by inquiries from Senators or Representatives or committees coming directly to us, because we have these lines right out to the departments, and in constant communication with them. If you were interested in a sales tax as operated in Italy you might think the Treasury Department would have the data. If it is merely figures they may; but very likely they haven't, or not in a form useful to you. The probability is that they would send to us to find them and the legislation from the original sources. The people they send can not equal the experts that we have had in such work. The CHAIRMAN. People who can put their hands on the books? Mr. PUTNAM. Experts in their use and also have who have the ability to present the data properly.

I

The CHAIRMAN. I was just wondering how this was used. I do not recall ever asking for information?

Mr. PUTNAM. No, sir. There are many Members of the House who do not use it, and there are many Members of the Senate who do not use it. But the men who do use it are the men who value it. That to me seems significant. If you were to ask Representative Burton-yet Mr. Burton is competent to dig out a thing for himself—if you ask him if this is a valuable service, you will get a pretty clear response.

Mr. BYRNS. I realize very well that the bureau can not discriminate as between the requests that come from Representatives and