committing magistrates, and who hold the preliminary hearings before the cases reach the district court.

Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana. Are the Commissioners used as much now as they were last year and the year before?

Mr. JACKSON. The fees of the United States Commissioners are running approximately the same each year. The fluctuation in expense has been on account of Conciliation Commissioners appointed under section 75 of the Eankruptcy Act.

Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana. How are those cases coming along in comparison with previous years?

Mr. JACKSON. They increased substantially in 1942. It is really a little too early to tell what our actual expenses under that allotment will be for 1943. But the amount of money paid out for fees of Conciliation Commissioners exceeded our allotment for 1942 by $15,000, and that was why we asked for a deficiency.

Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana. Is that shown here; that you had a deficiency?

Mr. JACKSON. No, sir. That deficiency was requested after these estimates were prepared.

Mr. WHITEHURST. It has not become a law yet.

Mr. JACKSON. No; it has not. It has only been approved by the House. The deficiency has not been approved by the Senate.

Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana. Do I understand correctly that the farmers cannot file under section 75 after March 4, 1944?

Mr. WHITEHURST. That is correct.

Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana. That law has been amended to that effect?

Mr. WHITEHURST. Yes.

Mr. JACKSON. That provision of the Bankruptcy Act was extended to that date.

FEES OF JURORS, UNITED STATES COURTS

Mr. O'NEAL. We will turn to page 74, the item for fees of jurors, United States courts. The amount you received in 1943 is $1,940,000, and you are asking for the same amount for 1944. There are no increases.

I would like to ask you what, if any, steps are being taken to effect economies in this item by reducing the number of juror days paid for but not utilized?

Mr. CHANDLER. Not only are steps being taken, but economies are being effected. The actual expenditures for jurors' fees dropped from $1.983,196 in 1940 to $1,826,187 in 1941, and to $1,777,603 in 1942. Mr. O'NEAL. What was the amount spent for the fiscal year 1943, the latest figure you have?

Mr. CHANDLER. I have a comparison here between the first half of the present fiscal year and the first half of the last fiscal year.

The amount expended in the first half of the present fiscal year was $688,482, as compared with $726,914 for the first half of the last fiscal year. Now, we cannot arrive at the expenditures for the full year by taking twice the expenditure for the first half of the year, because the first half of the year includes the summer, during which the courts are in recess. But I will say, Mr. Chairman, that the committee reduced this appropriation last year $100,000, at our suggestion, from

$2,040,000, which it had been before, and if you desire to make a further reduction this year of $100,000

Mr. O'NEAL. It looks to me, on the basis of those figures, that you would be safe in cutting it down to $1,400,000.

Mr. CHANDLER. But that is not a correct criterion for the full year, because we do not have half the jury service in the first half of the year.

Mr. O'NEAL. What has been your experience in past years as to what percentage of jury trials occur in the first half of the year and what percentage in the second half of the year?

Mr. WHITEHURST. It is considerably larger in the second half than it is in the first half.

Mr. O'NEAL. What would you say; 10 percent?

Mr. WHITEHURST. During the first half of the fiscal year 1942, up to December 31, 1941, there was spent $726,914, and the total expenditures for the year were $1,778,450; so if we subtract $726,914 from $1,778,450, it will give us the expenditures for the last half of the fiscal year.

Mr. ANDERSEN of Minnesota. That would make $1,052,000 for the second half.

Mr. O'NEAL. Yes. Now, let us have a reply to the question I asked you. I asked you what is being done by the courts to save some jurors' fees and traveling expenses.

Mr. CHANDLER. The judicial conference has a committee on the selection of jurors in the Federal courts. The assignment also includes arrangements for handling jurors. Judge Knox, the senior district judge for the southern district of New York, is chairman of the committee. I should be glad to bring over to the next session copies of the report of that committee.

Mr. O'NEAL. Has it had any effect?

Mr. CHANDLER. I think that you can see from this reduction that economies are being effected. Now, those economies come from two sources. In the first place, pretrial procedure, which is being developed more and more in the Federal courts, leads to a larger proportion of settlements. It is somewhat conducive to submission of cases in which there has been a demand for a jury for trial by the court without a jury. For these and other reasons the number of jury trials is going down somewhat.

In reference to the handling of jurors in those cases in which there is a jury trial, the committee recommends and our office has recommended to various courts that they try to make a rather close study in advance of the number of jurors who will be needed, so that they can reduce the number of jurors who are called and do not serve. A substantial economy was effected last year in Detroit in that way. The cost of petit juries in that district dropped from $47,644.80 in the fiscal year 1941 to $42,460.60 in 1942. That is a decrease of 11 percent. Mr. O'NEAL. Has that been called to the attention of the other judges throughout the country?

Mr. CHANDLER. Yes, sir. That is referred to in the report.

Mr. PLOESER. Mr. Chandler, if the same ratio follows out during this year, you will be getting along very well with $1,680,000, will you not?

Mr. CHANDLER. I think that is right, although that is setting it a little low.

Mr. PLOESER. It would probably make it unnecessary for you to ask for a deficiency appropiration, would it not? Apparently you are going to have a $260,000 surplus in that appropriation.

Mr. WHITEHURST. We will expend this year, as nearly as we can forecast it now, about $1,675,000.

Mr. PLOESER. That is what you think it will cost you?

Mr. WHITEHURST. What it will cost us this year.

Mr. PLOESER. But you will save at least $265,000 this year out of this appropriation?

Mr. WHITEHURST. Yes, sir. It looks that way now.

Mr. PLOESER. If you save $260,000 this year, then next year, you should have $100,000 or more too much.

Mr. CHANDLER. You see, this is a non-controllable expenditure by our office, and all I am concerned about is that, if possible, we may avoid the necessity for a deficiency. I would think that it is probable that $1,680,000 would be sufficient. If I were submitting a figure myself, I would allow a little more leeway, but that is a matter of judgment, and, of course, I can see that that would be a reasonable estimate.

TEXTUAL CORRECTION

Mr. O'NEAL. You have a deletion on page 174 of the bill. It is requested that the citation to section 193, title II of the act of June 6, 1900, be changed from "(28 U. S. C. 9, 557-570, 595, 596)” to “(31 Stat. 362)."

Mr. JACKSON. Mr. Chairman, those are statutory references-———— Mr. O'NEAL. It is simply to correct a typographical error in the text?

Mr. JACKSON. That is correct. That reference was in the appropriation text when we took it over from the Department of Justice. It is no longer relevant and we recommend that it be deleted.

MISCELLANEOUS SALARIES, UNITED STATES COURTS

Mr. O'NEAL. On page 175 of the bill we have the item for miscellaneous salaries. I understand that the amount received in 1943 was $893,100, and the present estimate is $1,224,880, of which the base is $871,100. On page 64 of the justifications which we will insert in the record you have listed the increases.

Regular appropriation, 1943 act-.

Supplemental appropriations for 1943.

Total appropriations, 1943.

$893, 100

893, 100

Deduct nonrecurring and other items not required in 1944: Estimated savings due to delays in filling new positions_.

22, 000

Base for 1944_.

871, 100

Increases requested for 1944:

National Park Commissioners...

$23,000

Additional cost of within-grade promotions made in fiscal year 1943_.

7,890

Reclassifications with resulting increases in salary_ 01 Additional personnel

100,000

219, 400

Changes in salary ranges of custodial employees.

Personnel transferred from the appropriation "Salaries, district court, Panama Canal Zone"

240

3,250

Total

353, 780

Total estimate or appropriation for 1944

$1, 224, 880

TRANSFER FROM INTERIOR DEPARTMENT

There is a transfer requested, which is $23,000, to be dropped from the Interior Department estimates and added to "Miscellaneous salaries, United States courts." Suppose you explain to us how that happened, and the necessity for it and the desirability of it. Do you want to discuss this $23,000 first? It is not in our justifications, but I thought we would emphasize that now and then take up the further increases.

Mr. CHANDLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. O'NEAL. Gentlemen, you understand this is not in our justifications. This came by way of a letter from Mr. Chandler.

NATIONAL PARK COMMISSIONERS

Mr. CHANDLER. Among the commissioners having the general powers of United States commissioners, but compensated by salaries and not by fees, are the National Park commissioners, of whom there are approximately 15. These are appointed by the district courts having geographical jurisdiction of the areas in which the parks are situated. They have been held to be officers of the courts, wholly judicial, to the same extent as any other United States commissioners. At the same time, because their services are rendered in the parks, the practice was instituted years ago of providing for their compensation in the appropriation for the National Park Service, which is in the Department of the Interior.

Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana. They are on a salary instead?
Mr. CHANDLER. They are receiving salaries.

Mr. O'NEAL. Have you had any supervision over them in the past. Mr. Chandler?

Mr. CHANDLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. JACKSON. The base salary of each of the positions is $2,000. The actual salaries of the men who will come over to us vary from $2,000 to $2,500.

Mr. O'NEAL. There is no increase in personnel in that amount? Mr. JACKSON. No, sir.

Mr. CHANDLER. There is no increase in personnel.

Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana. How many cases are they actually handling out there?

Mr. CHANDLER. The number of cases they handle is not very large, sir.

Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana. Why should they be different from the ordinary commissioners?

Mr. CHANDLER. I will answer that in this way: In addition to performing the usual duties of United States Commissioners, they are also authorized by law to try cases of violation of park regulations, such as exceeding the speed limit in driving, illegal fishing, illegal hunting, and any violation of the park regulations. It has been considered appropriate, I assume, by the Congress, that in every one of the National Parks which are frequented by large numbers of visitors in the season, there should be a minor judicial officer before whom persons committing violations can be brought. In the district of Mon

tana, for instance, where there is Glacier National Park which I visited this summer, the nearest United States judge is something like 200 miles away. All I can say is that there has been for years this system, which seems to me a reasonable one, under which there are inferior judicial magistrates in the various national parks.

Mr. O'NEAL. Does he act as prosecuting attorney and magistrate, both?

Mr. CHANDLER. No; he does not act as prosecuting attorney. As a rule, the superintendent of the park or some member of the park staff simply explains the complaint and presents the witnesses and evidence. The practice is much like that in any properly conducted police court.

Now, these officers are exclusively under the control of the courts. It is therefore anomalous that the appropriation should be carried in the budget of the Department of the Interior. Our office has conferred with the Department of the Interior. I first made the suggestion to Secretary Ickes some months ago. I asked him if he did not think it would be more appropriate, in view of the relation of the Commissioners to the courts, that their compensation should be included in the appropriation for the courts. He said he had not thought about it, but that it seemed reasonable to him. He subsequently had a study made by his assistants, and we are united in merely suggesting that that sum be transferred.

Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana. And it will be paid out of what fund? Mr. CHANDLER. The expense is now paid out of the appropriation for the National Park Service, in the budget of the Department of the Interior. It is proposed to provide for it in the appropriation for miscellaneous salaries of the courts.

Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana. Is that being taken out of their appropriation now?

Mr. CHANDLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. JOHNSON of Indiana. And this figure is the same figure that had been previously appropriated for the National Park Service? Mr. CHANDLER. That is right; $23,000.

WITHIN-GRADE PROMOTIONS

Mr. O'NEAL. The first increase requested is for the additional cost of within-grade promotions made in the fiscal year 1943, $7,890. Mr. CHANDLER. That is of the same nature, Mr. Chairman, as the like item for the salaries of clerks and probation officers.

RECLASSIFICATIONS

Now, if the committee please, I should be very glad if the committee would pass for the present the item of $100,000 for reclassifications, because that is an item in which a committee of the judicial conference is interested.

Mr. O'NEAL. Mr. Harvey tells me they will be before the committee Thursday afternoon.

Mr. CHANDLER. And the next item is the item for law clerks.
Mr. O'NEAL. That is the $219,400 item?

84140-43-4