The Lands Division states that as of January 1, 1944, 18,424,718 acres of land were involved in condemnation proceedings of the United States Government which were pending in the courts. I divided that by 640 to get the number of square miles and found that the aggregate area is around 28,788 square miles, which is considerably larger than West Virginia with 24,022 square miles, and only slightly smaller than either the State of Maine with 29,895 square miles or the State of South Carolina with 30,495 square miles. I give you those examples in order that you may have some general conception of the immense areas that are involved.

I ought to say that not only do these cases call for considerable attention, in many instances, on the part of the courts, but the amount of work of the clerks of the court in making the records, furnishing copies of the orders, handling the formalities requisite to the disbursement of the awards, is very great.

BALANCES IN REGISTRY FUNDS

I have in my hand a table prepared by Mr. Jackson of what is called the balances in the registry funds of the clerks of the United States courts for the first quarter and for the second quarter of the current fiscal year. The registry funds of the clerks are those funds which are temporarily in their custody for application or distribution in accordance with orders of the courts.

As of the end of the first quarter of this fiscal year, the clerks of the United States courts had in their custody something over $91,000,000. At the end of the second quarter disbursements had been made so that the amount then in their hands was something over $81,000,000.

Mr. O'NEAL. That money is for what purpose, largely?

Mr. CHANDLER. I cannot tell you precisely what part of that represents awards in condemnation cases, but much the greater part of it does. That part is composed of sums representing the compensation for lands taken, payable in due course after the requisite steps have been taken and rights to payment determined to the owners.

May I refer in passing to one rather sad item in the duties of the clerks occasioned by the war; that is the duty of distributing under the direction of the courts the effects and moneys of deceased seamen, seamen who are lost in vessels that are sunk for any cause, but usually in attacks by submarines. The clerks of the United States District Court for the District of New York received during the fiscal year 1943, for distribution to persons entitled to such moneys, usually the next of kin of the deceased seamen, $1,609,000.29. Of that amount he disbursed $1,491,000.20, and had, as of June 30 last, on hand a balance of $815,405.42. That money is, of course, a small part of the registry funds of the clerks.

Mr. O'NEAL. How does it happen that he is charged with that responsibility, Mr. Chandler?

Mr. CHANDLER. I never examined the statute. Judge Knox, is there a statute?

Judge KNOX. There is a statute whereby the effects have to be paid in by the Shipping Commissioner; the amount due the seaman for wages and bonuses being paid in to the Shipping Commissioner, and he paying it in to the court. We have to make the distribution.

CERTAIN ACTIVITIES OF LAWYERS IN CONDEMNATION CASES

Mr. KIRWAN. You have been speaking of condemnation cases. There are two dams being constructed in my district. I think I know a little about the troubles the Government has to go through in condemnation cases, sending agents out to the particular area, and so forth; usually very good men, well trained and qualified.

Now, when there is a case against a railroad company and some lawyer goes out chasing an ambulance, members of the bar usually take note of that and there may be proceedings to disbar that attorney. But when it comes to a case involving the United States Government, there is a different attitude. These dams that are being constructed are fine. They send an agent out to get options on these pieces of property, and he does a good job. Then, in the cases I have in mind, two lawyers come along and say to these people, "Don't sign up with the Government, I will get you twice as much as they are offering." They organize a group, and meet in the local schoolhouse, and all agree to take a stand against the Government. In such a case the court does nothing about it. It does not step into the situation.

On the other hand, I have seen it happen many times in my town, that when a lawyer chases an ambulance, in a case involving a railroad company, immediately that is considered unethical, by members of the bar. But when it comes to a case involving the Government, and a lawyer goes out, goes from house to house and says to them, "Don't sign up, we will get you twice as much as they are offering you," the court does nothing about it.

Do you not think it would be a little better if the Court occasionally paid some attention to that sort of activity?

Mr. CHANDLER. Of course, the court should stand impartially between the Government and the owners, and see that both are accorded their rights in the condemnation proceedings.

Mr. KIRWAN. Something should be done by the Court, instead of just sitting by and doing nothing but drawing their salary. If it is against the lawyer, that kind of activity leads to disbarment proceedings, but not when that activity has to do with a matter in which the United States Government is involved.

Mr. CHANDLER. I do not know about the particular situation to which you refer.

Mr. KIRWAN. In the case of these two dams that they are building in my town, they had to hire a special assistant prosecutor, in the office of the district attorney in Cleveland, and get the assistance of four clerks, just to take care of the business generated by these two lawyers. They created all of that trouble, but the courts did not step in and say, "This thing must stop." But when similar action is seen in cases involving some private corporation or a railroad company, it is usually brought to the attention of the bar association.

Mr. CHANDLER. That sort of conduct is regarded as unethical. Mr. KIRWAN. But when it is against the Government it is all right. Mr. CHANDLER. I should think that in such a situation the property owners would get together, as you indicate they do, and then engage a lawyer to represent them jointly.

Mr. KIRWAN. That would be fine. But here the agent of the Government came in and offered them a good settlement, made them satis

factory offers for their property, and when they were about ready to accept, along came these two lawyers and said, "Don't take that, we will get you twice as much." So they go into the courts, and after the thing is all over and they have to pay the lawyers, then they do not have as much left as they would have had if they had taken the original offer of the Government.

Judge KNOX. I do not know what the procedure is in Ohio, but in New York the United States attorney presents to the court a petition setting forth all the facts, as to how these retainers came about, and then they would have a hearing before the court and pass upon the propriety of it.

Mr. KIRWAN. And they do in my country, too. Eventually the matter gets into the court, where it belongs. But the lawyers have collected their fee and nothing is done about it, and the poor devils who have hired them are out all of that money.

When they go into court, the court is not going to give these parties more money than the Government says is the proper amount, in the first place.

Mr. GORE. I have frequently known of contested litigation that has brought about increased remuneration for condemnations. I have likewise had some dams constructed in my district, but I know of no cases of unethical conduct on the part of the lawyers. I do know of cases where increased compensation was obtained by reason of going into court. I believe our courts in Tennessee would be equally diligent in looking at unethical practices and condemning unethical practices in cases involving the Government, or the railroads, or what not. Mr. HENDRICKS. I do not think Mr. Kirwan's objection was to any action that the court might take. I think I know what Mr. Kirwan is talking about. Lawyers go out and make cases for themselves by soliciting business of these people and telling them "Don't accept this, we will get you more."

Mr. KIRWAN. That is the point; yes.

Judge MARIS. If that were brought to the attention of any court. of the United States, those lawyers would unquestionably be disbarred. But the court does not know anything about that unless it is brought to the court's attention.

Mr. KIRWAN. That is the peculiar part of it. Everybody in the district knows about it except the court. And there are enough people connected with the court to be able to tell them what is going on. Everybody in the village will know about it except the court.

CASES IN THE UNITED STATES COURTS

Mr. CHANDLER. Another class of cases that is accounting for a considerable share of the civil cases is proceedings under the Emergency Price Control Act. In 1943 such cases were 2,230 in number, or 6.1 percent of all civil cases commenced.

In criminal cases there was a decline in 1943 in prosecutions for the usual types of offenses-violations of the liquor laws, thefts of automobiles, and the like-prosecutions for violations of the liquor laws going down 57 percent in 1943 as compared with 1942. Such cases were only 15 percent of the total number of criminal cases as compared with 33 percent the year before. Prosecutions for violation of the narcotic laws declined 22 percent, and for automobile thefts 35 per

cent, in 1943. You can yourselves supply the causes. We like to think one important factor in the decrease of the ordinary types of crime in the Federal courts is the economic opportunity, which has improved, the opportunity for legitimate employment.

In criminal cases there was a sharp rise in prosecutions relating to the war. Prosecutions for violation of the Selective Service Act went up from 3,384 in 1942 to 7,934 in 1943, an increase of pretty close to two and a half times. That increase in selective service cases more than accounts for the increase in the total number of criminal prosecutions for 1943 over 1942. Prosecutions for espionage, sabotage, sedition, and treason went up about 110 percent; prosecutions for the illegal use of the military uniform about 183 percent. Those nearly trebled. In 1943 prosecutions for violations of the price-control and rationing regulations, 2,311 in number, constituted 6 percent of the total number of criminal cases.

That gives you a rough idea of the trend of the judicial business, normal types of cases declining in number, and cases relating to the war going up.

Mr. O'NEAL. The sum total is greater than in the fiscal year 1943? Mr. CHANDLER. If you are taking into account the increase in criminal cases, the total number of cases is slightly greater.

Mr. O'NEAL. That is, the total business of all the courts, you feel, increased in the fiscal year 1944 over 1943, and you are looking forward to increased business for 1945?

Mr. CHANDLER. I will ask Mr. Shafroth, who is the Chief of our Division of Procedures and Statistics, whether his estimate would be that the total for 1944 will be far different than the total for 1943. I am inclined to think that it will not.

Mr. SHAFROTH. From the figures we have for the first half, that is the indication; it is going along about on a level.

Mr. CHANDLER. We are virtually on a level so far as the volume is concerned. But there has been the change in the types of cases making up the total volume which I have mentioned.

STATUS OF COURT CALENDARS

The calendars of the courts are, speaking generally, in a current condition at the present time. There are some exceptions, but generally a litigant who has a cause in the Federal court can secure rather prompt action on it.

You might be interested, for instance, in the difference that has been brought about in the southern district of New York where Judge Knox presides. In that district, during the year 1943, the number of cases on the civil calendars was reduced from 1,384 at the beginning to 762 at the end of the year. In other words, there was a reduction of almost half in the number of civil cases on the calendar of that court. It came about by the disposition of such cases during the year.

In the District of Columbia, where there has been very great congestion-I will have to say it with all due deference to Justice Miller, who is in the court of appeals, not in the District court, but he accepts some responsibility for general conditions in the District-in the District of Columbia the interval between the time when civil cases,

both jury and nonjury cases, are placed on the trial calendar and the time when they are disposed of that is, the time that a case has to wait for trial after being placed on the trial calendar-has been reduced from 11 months at the end of the fiscal year 1941 to 5 months at the end of the fiscal year 1943.

Judge MILLER. I am happy to accept the responsibility for that change.

Mr. CHANDLER. We have a rough ideal, I think, in the Federal judicial system, concerning the disposition of cases in the trial courts, that under normal circumstances they should be terminated within a period of 6 months from the time that they are begun. Now in a general way we are getting nearer to that.

EFFECT OF THE WAR ON PERSONNEL

The next matter to which I would refer is the effect of the war upon the personnel of the Federal courts. Your committee was interested in that subject last year. The loss of personnel to the armed services necessarily has placed some considerable strain upon the courts, greater in some offices than in others.

REQUESTS FOR DEFERMENT OF EMPLOYEES

At the present time the Committee on Requests for Occupational Deferment of Employees of the Courts, which has been appointed by the Chief Justice, pursuant to an act which was approved April 8 last, has made 29 requests for deferment of court employees on occupational grounds. Bear in mind, that relates to requests for employees of courts throughout the country. Those 29 requests involved 24 persons, because in a very few instances second requests have been made. As far as our records enable us to state, there are only 12 deferments of officers and employees of the courts in force at this time and action on 3 requests which the Committee has made is pending before 3 selective-service boards.

When you consider that the number of the deferments of employees of the courts at the present time, if we include those 3, is 15 out of a total personnel in the classes represented of 2,083, I think you can see that the Committee, which consists of Chief Justice Groner, of the United States Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia; as chairman, Circuit Judge Herbert F. Goodrich, of the third circuit; and District Judge William C. Coleman, of Maryland; has been very conservative in making requests.

PROCEDURE IN REQUESTING DEFERMENTS

Mr. O'NEAL. All requests for deferments from district courts must. come through this Committee?

Mr. CHANDLER. Through that Committee; yes.

Mr. O'NEAL. And a request for deferment must be acted upon by these three judges?

Mr. CHANDLER. That is right.

Mr. O'NEAL. Before it is made?

Mr. CHANDLER. That is right. That is the only Committee authorized to make requests. As you would surmise, the Committee