Senator MCKELLAR. No; the legislation was reduced to $10,000, and the legislation now is that the building-as I remember it, is that where a village or a town has $10,000 receipts, they are eligible to have a building. But the question that I am trying to find out from you is what rule your Interdepartmental Committee has followed in making your recommendations as to where a building would be built. Mr. DRESSER. Well, these were not projects initiated by the Public Works. They were submitted by the Treasury, you understand.

Senator McKELLAR. Yes.

Mr. DRESSER. Recommendations are made by the Post Office Department. As I have just informed you, there is a list there listing

Senator MCKELLAR. Well, you select them just as you see fit, or do you have some rule by which they are selected? That is what I am driving at.

Mr. DRESSER. Oh, yes, sir.

Senator MCKELLAR. I notice in some of the recommendations, some of the States have very, very few, and other States have very, very many, and I was just wondering what rules you follow.

Mr. DRESSER. Senator, we made an analysis of each one of those projects submitted to the Public Works, by referring them to the Post Office Department, the Treasury Department, and the Justice Department, who are the principal departments that occupy the space in any Federal building. We even went further than that and took it up, took the matter up with the Internal Revenue, and any other Government Department which had in that particular building a considerable demand for space.

Now, so far as the program, as I understand, the conception of the program and the buildings involved in this program, that it was started in 1926, when this program was undertaken, the Post Office Department sent broadcast a questionnaire to all postmasters and postal inspectors in this country asking what their needs would be in 1936.

Now, they were considering normal conditions, and the postal receipts in 1926 were fairly normal, and of course economic conditions then were better than they are today. As a result of that questionnaire it was not unusual for a community postmaster to ask for five times the space or four times the space that he occupied in 1926, thinking that business was going to go up, and Senator Connally very aptly said that they did not see October 1929 when that questionnaire

was sent out.

Now, we have another situation. Prohibition is out of the picture and they had their offices in the post-office buildings. And in these offices today--in 55 Federal buildings today-they do not need the space or new buildings.

Now, in making this analysis with the return of the receipts, you must consider that postal receipts have dropped 20 percent since 1930, and in that regard the business aspects, post-office business, is rather interesting, so far as receipts are concerned.

Postal receipts doubled in this country every 10 years, beginning with 1866, continued until we had $480,000,000 in 1920. From 1920 to 1930 there was only an increase to $705,000,000.

Now, the annual increase was about 10 percent per year up to 1920, Senator MCKELLAR. About 8 percent, was it not?

Al Passow Up to 1920, Senator. From 1920 to 1926 they only kivivasid, poivont From 1928 to 1530 they only increased 13 perSo there has been a indizine falling off of postal receipts While esine bolo the decesiat, in 1826. Now, there has been a taling oil in 2000,01 sine (48) sumzuirling to over 20 percent. Pló spugë noods mãosaai, ir "126 are all out of proportion to the piceenit din pack s 11 s gone many instances their present quarTOSAN #kyamta si Hot Salt reason we find that in a great many jose alles tow building were overdone.

A

That does not answer my question at all, behose buildings where, in small towns where to 30 thousand dollars, we will say, and I just ue was followed. That was the purpose of ind out what rule you proceeded on in selecting

ices of de puilding of public buildings.

You mean for the making of allocations?

MASLAR. Yes. For instance, I have never been able

le that was followed by that Interdepartmental Com

Ms. We study the postal receipts. Have they gone up,

2 ore 20 gene down, or have they held in balance?

M... wissen. We study the population, determine whether that hes gede ap or whether that has gone down. We consult the Post Oflice Department and the Department of Justice, or any other eepartent which proposes to use space in that building. Do you won the same space as is provided in this building? In a good many cases they say "no." So we feel justified in cutting them down. Then we take into account what the building is to cost to put on the service charges, and the overhead, and how much that building is going to cost the Government to maintain as against present facilities. Sometimes it runs as high as 10 times in some cases.

Senator MCKELLAR. I just happen to have two towns in my own State in view,

Senator GLASS. I thought that we were going to get around to that. Senator MCKELLAR. One is the town of Irving in East Tennessee, and the second is a town of about the same size, the town of Milan in West Tennessee. Irving is getting a post-office building, though the receipts of Milan are very much larger, and there is more business at Milan. I just do not understand the method of selection, and what I wanted to get from Mr. Dresser was the method which was pursued.

Mr. DRESSER. It may be a question of rental.

Senator McKELLAR. Rental?

Mr. DRESSER. Yes.

Senator MCKELLAR. I just wanted to get what the cause was. Mr. DRESSER. If it is a question of rental. Since you are speaking of Milan

Senator MCKELLAR. Then you do not take into consideration the receipts, apparently?

Mr. DRESSER. Oh, yes; we do.

Secretary ICKES. Take everything into consideration.

Mr. DRESSER. We take everything into consideration. Then you have a mail-order house at Milan that has increased the postal ipts.

Senator MCKELLAR. The postal receipts have been increased very much, and so has the population of the town increased very much. Mr. DRESSER. That is right.

Senator MCKELLAR. Rentals, I suppose, are reasonable. I do not know what the present rental is. I did not look into it. I did not know that that was a necessary thing on which you based the selection. Mr. DRESSER. We think it is justifiable.

Senator GLASS. Senator McKellar, you are Chairman of the Post Office Committee.

Senator MCKELLAR. I am.

Senator GLASS. Why not include that in one of your bills?

Senator MCKELLAR. I wanted to get the fact. It is in this committee's bill. This is the committee that provides the money to build the buildings.

Senator GLASS. Not this subcommittee.

Senator MCKELLAR. No; the Interdepartmental Committee.
Senator GLASS. I just wanted to get along, that was all.
Senator MCKELLAR. All right, I am through.

Memorandum to the Administrator.

JUNE 7, 1934.

The following was taken from Mr. Buchanan's report to accompany H.R. 9830: "In recommending the appropriation of $65,000,000 the committee has required that the projects to be carried on under this amount shall be selected by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Postmaster General, acting jointly, from lists of buildings which will be found in statements nos. 2 and 3 appearing in the committee report on this bill. Statement no. 2 consists of projects in House Document 788, funds for which have not been allocated by the Public Works Administration, and statement no. 3 consists of projects not in House Document 788 but which have been submitted through the Treasury Department to the Public Works Administration for consideration and for which funds have not been allotted. The total number of projects in both lists is approximately 800, of which 604 are from Document 788. The total estimated limit of cost of the projects in both lists is $150,000,000. The provision in the bill also authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury and the Postmaster General to select for prosecution under this appropriation such other projects not included in these lists as, in their judgment, are economically sound and advantageous to the public service. The appropriation is made to the Treasury Department; and the selection of the projects, including the sites, is required to be made by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Postmaster General, acting jointly; and they, in making these selections, are required to distribute the projects equitably throughout the country so far as may be consistent with the needs of the public service and with a view to aid in relieving country-wide unemployment.'

The lists of projects in statements 2 and 3 were prepared and submitted to the Appropriations Committee by the Procurement Division, public-works branch. The 604 projects in statement no. 2 involving about $120,000,000, herein referred to, have been submitted to Public Works with a few exceptions and include, in general:

Forty-eight projects for Federal building improvements. A review of these projects was made by this office with Post Office Department and Department of Justice, both of which agreed that the improvements were not necessary and accordingly waived their requests.

Fifty-two projects which were deferred by the Treasury Department in original submission to Public Works.

Fifty-two miscellaneous Federal building projects for post offices and other governmental activities still under consideration. Study is being given these projects, and discussions are being held with department officials to determine justification of expenditures either as submitted or as may be established in accordance with present-day needs. In some places a committee has visited or intends to visit the cities to make a personal investigation. This grouping includes such larger projects as St. Louis, Philadelphia, Buffalo, Los Angeles, New Orleans, etc.

Four hundred projeme v house post offices now in leased quarters. A DUCT of the farte immagining to these slotuissions makes the projects economie ly unwound and not justified, por the post-office iuspertor & reports, which STEE tust present querere are ademase, good location, and good physical condition 1 wenywigia projecte recommended for approval of the interdepartmental count and passed by bon Board of Pole Works subject to funds aved

Twenty-four projecte reborstended to Special Board of Public Works by ja terdapartuumuta motte for approval but not yet passed.

Malment no. 3, referred to in this report, includes 189 projects not in Document No. 76% and amounting to $52,543,500, made up mostly of projects subwitted to Pubile Works within the last 30 days, and consisting of approximatelyOne wundred and thirty-five projects for building where post offices occupy brad quartaJE,

Seventeen garage buildings and sites to be located in the various cities where new poet office have recently been completed or are now under construction. Thirty-seven misellaneous projects for Federal building improvements. Of the 185 projects in the leased category, approximately 123 buildings are propond, avenging $70,000 per project for site and building, where the postal Texklube for 1982 are considérably under $20.000 per year, averaging $11,950, and only 12 projects where the annual receipts are over $20,000 or where the station is part of a larger city unit.

The proposed limit of cost in statements nos. 2 and 3 has been increased for moet projects over that now before Public Works, bringing the expenditure virtually back to the original proposal as submitted to the Public Works Administration in September 1988. Also, we maintain that the design and construction of the buildings as now being prepared by the Procurement Division are not along commercial lines, as agreed to last November, following which agreement the Treasury Department had materially increased each project cost.

F. J. C. DRESSER (For the Administrator).

Senator HALE. I would like to ask a question.
Senator ADAMS. All right.

ALLOTMENTS TO STATES

Senator HALE. Mr. Secretary, on page 205 of the House hearings, there appears a table showing allotments to the States, and the allotment to the State of Maine is $24,378,693; and there is another table on page 210 from which it appears that Maine has had, in all, $473,800. Secretary ICKES. That is non-Federal.

Senator HALE. That is non-Federal?

Secretary ICKER. Yes.

Senator HALE. Now, I would like to know where the balance of nearly $24,000,000 comes in.

Secretary ICKES. Most of that is for the railroads, I think, Senator. Senator HALE. No; railroads are only $184,000, according to the figures here.

Secretary ICKES. Navy appropriations, or allocations to the Navy Department.

Senator BYRNES. You are building warships up there?

Senator HALE. Is that charged against the State of Maine?

Senator BYRNES. You mean that at the navy yard at Portsmouth they are doing work?

Secretary ICKES. Yes; and that is charged against the State of Maine.

Senator BYRNES. I think that that is charged against the State. Senator HALE. Why should that be charged against the State? Senator BYRNES. That is, of course, Government property up there

Senator HALE. Yes; I know that.

Secretary ICKES. It is for the navy yard entirely.

Senator HALE. You mean that that is charged to the State of Maine just because construction is going on there?

Secretary ICKES. Yes.

Senator HALE. That is largely for work in the navy yard.
Secretary ICKES. Yes.

Senator BYRNES. I notice in my State that there is $17,000,000; and I know that it goes to the Navy because, while they manufacture all of the material up in your section, they ship it down to the South Carolina Navy Yards, put it in a ship, and all of that is charged to the State of South Carolina.

That is what it is charged to, but it is shipped down there from up here somewhere.

Secretary ICKES. It is difficult to do it exactly correct. It has to be more or less a rough rule of thumb.

Senator BYRNES. Yes.

Senator MCKELLAR. I would like to get some information along that line. On page 205 of the House hearings you show an allotment of $22,274,245, and only $5,744,833 has been allotted, according to the table on page 210.

Colonel WAITE. Our records do not show that in detail.

Senator MCKELLAR. I would like to have a break-down of it. Can you give that to us so we can follow it?

Secretary ICKES. Maine showed less interest in the non-Federal than any other State in the country. We closed our office there very early on account of lack of business. They did not want it, apparently. Senator BYRNES. They did not want to borrow money.

Secretary ICKES. They could get 70 percent, get a 30-percent grant, and they did not want to borrow the money.

Senator BYRNES. The people of Maine do not want to go in debt, apparently.

Senator GLASS. Now, if you gentlemen are through with that we will proceed.

Senator MCKELLAR. That is a part of the general proposition.

Senator HAYDEN, I would like to have a break-down of that, if you can give it to me.

Colonel WAITE. There is $17,000,000, Senator McKellar, in Ten

nessee.

Senator MCKELLAR. Seventeen million Federal or what?

Colonel WAITE. Federal, in Tennessee.

Senator BYRNES. Mr. Secretary, what this table means is, including the allocations, all funds for various purposes during the past year?

Secretary ICKES. Both Federal and non-Federal.

Senator BYRNES. That is the situation?

Secretary ICKES. Yes.

66572-34--