« 이전계속 »
Mr. Stewart. It is being considered by the Budget Commission now. If the War Department can furnish it they will do so.
Mr. KELLEY. In that event you would not want this money?
Mr. Key. Only what we would have to pay. We would have to pay whatever they charged.
Mr. STEWART. It is a bookkeeping matter between the two departments.
Mr. Key. No, sir; we will use it for a shop building and build an entirely new building. The old power house will be one of the shops.
Mr. KELLEY. What is there about this whole situation that makes it an emergency?
Mr. Key. We had an explosion and the boilers are broken down. The engineers and prisoners are afraid to work there and there is no way to heat the institution this winter.
Mr. HOLLAND. Do you know how long the boilers have been in there?
The CHAIRMAN. Is there any inspection made of these boiler plants at different periods?
Mr. Key. They have been repaired from time to tine.
Mr. Key. No; other than that we have an expert engineer in the institution who takes care of them.
The CHAIRMAN. It is customary with people who have boilers and things of that sort to have a cold water pressure test made to see whether they are qualified to function.
Mr. Key. I understand that that is made regularly by the people at the penitentiary, but not by outsiders.
M'NEIL ISLAND (WASH.) PENITENTIARY-FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WATER Works
The CHAIRMAN. The next item is “McNeil Island, Washington Penitentiary: For construction of waterworks system $8,200." What is that for?
Mr. Key. That is for practically the same thing as at Atlanta, with this difference. At McNeil Island we have to depend, both for drinking and other purposes, on water obtained from springs. At present we pump it out of the springs and have a receiving tank. That receiving tank was erected 13 years ago, it is made of wood and is rotting. We have pieced it out with boards. The water is, of course, unfit to drink.
The CHAIRMAN. Why was not this called to the attention of the committee when the sundry civil bill was under consideration? It seems to me that the information should have been in the possession of the service long since?
Mr. Key. I can not tell you about that, sir.
NUMBER OF PRISONERS AT PENITENTIARIES.
The CHAIRMAN. It looks to me like a very important thing. How many prisoners have you at McNeil Island?
Mr. Key. 230 just now. We are erecting a new wing, which will take care of 200 or 220 more.
The CHAIRMAN. How many at Atlanta?
Mr. Key. Yes, sir. We have now to turn back into the Treasury from the appropriation about $160,000. The amount we are asking for is not in excess of what we will turn back.
The CHAIRMAN. That is 1921?
Mr. Key. Yes, sir. We are asking for the use of an appropriation made for one purpose for another purpose.
SUPREME COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA--MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES.
The CHAIRMAN. The next item is:
“District of Columbia, courts and prisons, miscellaneous expenses: For such miscellaneous expenses as may be authorized by the Attorney General for the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia and its officers, including the furnishing and collecting of evidence where the United States is or may be a party in interest, including also such expenses other than for personal service as may be authorized by the Attorney General for the court of appeals, District of Columbia, fiscal year 1921, $5,500.
"Sixty per centum of the foregoing sum for the District of Columbia shall be paid out of the revenues of the District of Columbia and 40 per centum out of the Treasury of the United States."
What is that for?
Mr. KENNARD. The appropriation proved insufficient. There was much additional expense incident to the Arnstein case, which was tried twice. We had to subsist prisoner witnesses who were brought here from New York, I think, for quite a considerable length of time. It cost us about $5,000.
The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean to say that you had to feed prisoners to the extent of $5,000?
Mr. KENNARD. Feed and house them.
Mr. KENNARD. These were prisoner witnesses. They were needed here as witnesses and we had to take care of them under guard. Then the Department of the Interior found it necessary to almost double the unit charge for heating our building, which made an additional expense for heating of about $3,000.
The CHAIRMAN. They increased the rate?
Mr. KENNARD. No, sir. The heating plant belongs to and is operated by the Department of the Interior. They furnish us with heat at so much per gallon of condensed water returned through the meter. They calculated the cost of the operation of the plant and they notified us that the price would be 75 or 80 per cent greater. We must pay what they tell us is right. They say that is what it is costing them.
The ('HAIRMAN. They found the price in 1921 to be higher than in 1919 and 1918? Mr. KENNARD. Certainly it was much higher than in 1920.
Mr. STEWART. I think their contention was that in the prior year they did not charge us all it cost.
The ('HAIRMAN. Did they increase it any time during the war, in 1917, 1918, or 1919?
Mr. KENNARD. There was then a different arrangement. Before that, the building was not in use. It was under reconstruction. We bought our coal.
The CHAIRMAN. How did the price of coal you bought compare with the cost of heating under the present plant?
Mr. KENNARD. I will have to investigate that.
Mr. KENNARD. It is, however, a different proposition, because we moved out of the building, occupied rented quarters, and bought coal and heated the rented building, while the Department of the Interior heats the new building.
Mr. STEWART. In prior years they did not charge us all that its cost. It cost more than they were charging us. They fixed the rate. Mr. Kelley. They have not any separate heating plant? Mr. KENNARD. The buildings are heated by the same plant.
The CHAIRMAN. Do you know what the Department of the Interior does with the money it gets; does it turn it into the Treasury?
Mr. KENNARD. They recoup their fund. They put it back into the fund for the purchase of their coal and supplies.
The ('HAIRMAN. They have authority to take the money and use it again?
Then there is the printing of briefs and court calendars, which is more expensive than usual. It cost about $2.000 more than in the previous year. That makes about $10,000, which is just about the increase in the expenditures this year over the previous year. Twenty-four thousand dollars has been heretofore provided by Congress, and we are asking for only $5.500 to make up the difference.
Mr. Kelley. Please put in the record a table showing how the $5,500 is apportioned. Mr. KENNARD. With pleasure.
(The statement referred to by Mr. Kelley follows:) Miscellaneous expenses, Supreme court, District of Columbia: Amount expended fiscal year 1920 in round numbers.....
$19.000 Expenses, including known liabilities, fiscal year 1921, approximately.. 29,500
The above increase arises substantially as follows: 1. Additional on account of housing and subsisting witnesses who were United
States prisoners, and other expenses, in the Arnstein case, which was tried
twice; approximately. 2. Additional on account of cost of printing briefs, court calendars, etc.;
approximately.. 3. Additional on account of cost of heat furnished by the Department of the
Interior to heat the courthouse building; approximately. 4. Additional on account of miscellaneous items, approximately.
INCREASE IN NUMBER OF CASES DUE TO PROHIBITION.
The CHAIRMAN. I wonder if you could, without much trouble, prepare a statement showing the increase in the number of cases pending in the courts due to prohibition?
Mr. Harris. We can not do that until all the reports are in. The CHAIRMAN. For six months or a year, as compared with a similar period. Mr. HARRIS.' The reports are prepared subsequent to June 30 and they are not in. Those cases are noted in the report of the Attorney General.
Mr. SLEMP. How much less is the Department of Justice undertaking to operate with this present year as compared to the last fiscal year?
Mr. KENNARD. It will cost us more to operate this year than it did last year.
Mr. SLEMP. Do you contend that you will need more money during 1922 than you expended during 1921?
Mr. KENNARD. Yes, sir.
Mr. HARRIS. That does not apply to the Department of Justice. Our business is increasing, because of new legislation, and cleaning up by litigation of the business of other departments. All the war contract cases, in the shape of lawsuits, have increased the business of the department, in addition to prohibition and other new cases, while the work of the other departments has decreased.
Mr. SLEMP. Have you found an appreciable increase in the number of cases in the last three or four months?
Mr. Harris. We do not go by months; we go by years. At the end of the year we found an increase, but the actual number of cases we have not reported.
Mr. SLEMP. What is the comparison between the number of cases on June 30, 1920, and on June 30, 1921 ?
Mr. KENNAR). There were about 25,000 more cases pending.
Mr. HARRIS. About the same as the prior year; very little difference in the percentage.
Mr. Slemp. You found this at the end of the year June 30, 1921, 33} to 40 per cent more cases on the docket than you had on June 30, 1920?
Mr. KENNARD. Yes, sir; at the same time we had disposed of more cases.
The CHAIRMAN. But the percentage is not any more because of the disposal of cases?
Mr. BUCHANAN. What would you think of the policy of establishing in the Department of Justice a bureau, separate, if necessary, with an increased, force, ii necessary to take care of all claims and all lawsuits of every character of every department of the Government, and taking away from them the employment of a whole lot of counsel? If you do not care to express an opinion, do not do it, because it touches other departments.
Mr. HOLLAND. I have a very definite idea regarding it, and was discussing that with Gen. Goff. Very frankly, I do not think the department desires just at this time to go on record in that matter.
Mr. STEWART. The department has that under serious consideration at this time.