Page images

Senator Cain. The dollars requested are the same, then, for 1947, outside of these two?


Mr. Bates. Have you given any consideration to a farm that the prisoners can be used on to produce food?

Mr. CLEMMER. We have a farm, Congressman, of some 900 acres and the average produce for the last 10 years is about $79,000.

Mr. Bates. That is all cultivated land, you mean?
Mr. CLEMMER. Yes; that is cultivated land.
Mr. Bates. That is in connection with what institution?

Mr. CLEMMER. That is in connection with the workhouse. The situation is that a good many of our drunks are fairly old and cannot do very heavy farm work.

Mr. BATEs. They can do some weeding. It would probably do them a lot of good.

Mr. CLEMMER. We work them all we can.

Mr. BATEs. We read a good deal in the papers and I am not saying this in any critical sense of Alcoholics Anonymous. It seems to be growing throughout the country. Have you given any thought as to the benefits that can develop from an organization of that kind?

Mr. CLEMMER. Yes; not only that, but our members of that group come down to the workhouse, 30 miles away, every Saturday afternoon. We invite the drunks to come in. One of our officers sits in the back of the room and these four or five Alcoholic Anonymous members come up and preach their story to the men. We think it is helping some.

Mr. BATES. I think it is quite a proven fact that no matter how many times you commit a habitual drunk, no matter how well meaning he may be—at least that has been my experience in life with these menthat you just do not make any impression on them. Some of them, of course, recover, but I am thoroughly in accord with the sentiments expressed that we have to treat that more on the basis of a disease than perhaps any violation of the criminal code.

Mr. CLEMMER. Yes; I am, too. Of course, a few of our inmates are rather bright ones. They say, "If I am an alcoholic, I am therefore diseased, and if I am diseased, I need treatment and I do not have

to work."

Mr. BATES. I know there is that psychological factor. Mr. CLEMMER. Part of our treatment is work. Mr. BATES. I am thoroughly in accord with that, too. Senator Cain. I would say that is a rather happy thought with which to conclude our morning's session. With your permission, Mr. Bates, and that of the other gentlemen of the committee, I would suggest that we recess our hearings until Tuesday morning at 10 o'clock.

If it is agreeable to continue our hearings at 10 o'clock Tuesday, I would suggest that the committee would like to hear as their first witness the official from the schools of the District.

Mr. BATES. I had hoped that I would be here to hear the testimony on schools, because I think it is by far the department of the city which accomts for a significant portion of total expenditures.

Senator Cain. I would suggest that with the approval of the Commissioners we could very easily hear on Tuesday morning from the official of the library and begin with the engineering division.

Mr. Mason. We can have the library, rent control, and purchasing office.

Senator Caix. I should think those three would just about take up Tuesday morning.

Mr. Mason. And put the schools over?
Senator Caix. I would appreciate that, and Mr. Bates would.

Mr. Bates. What we would like to do, Mr. Chairman, is to finish up these hearings so far as an examination of the financial structure of the District is concerned, as quickly as we can, and then get down to the witnesses. There may be some representatives of civic organizations that have some thoughts relative to the expenditures which they would like to bring before us.

Senator Cain. We will adjourn until 10 o'clock Tuesday morning. (Thereupon, at 11:45 a. m., an adjournment was taken to Tuesday, March 25, 1947, at 10 a. m.)

(Statement later received for the record from the Department of Corrections.)

Department of Corrections

[blocks in formation]

1938: Nine new employees allowed-1 parole officer, 2 clerks, 1 storekeeper, 1 electrician, 1 farm supervisor, 2 guards, and 1 (ook for an expanded program and for population increase. An increase for supplies for increased population.

1939: Twenty-two new employees allowed-21 guards and 1 clerk, allowed for greater security. An amount allowed ($61,000) for support of District prisoners confined in Federal institutions.

1940: Thirty-five new employees allowed-32 guards, 1 engineer, 1 supervisor of the Sewage Division, 1 stenographer, and 1 parole officer. The additional employees to permit an expanded program and to give greater security. There was an increase in the amount for support of District prisoners in Federal institutions.

1941: Twenty-nine additional employees allowed-25 guards, 1 assistant chief guard, 1 superintendent, Women's Division, 1 chief steward, and 1 farm supervisor. A further increase in support of District prisoners in Federal institutions. Additional employees to give greater security.

1942: Six additional employees allowed-3 guards, 1 operating engineer. 1 mail clerk, and 1 nurse, for an expanded program. Additional funds allowed to cover increased cost resulting from Public Law 200, authorizing within-grade promotions.

1943 : Fifteen additional employees allowed-9 guards, 2 clerks, 1 classification officer, 1 electrician, 1 principal operating engineer, 1 assistant clerk. Additional increase for supplies and materials for rise in costs.

1944 : Twenty-two additional employees allowed-5 guards, 1 cook, 3 clerks, 1 captain of the watch, 1 baker, 1 assistant stewart, 8 senior officers, 1 nurse, i director of education. These additional employees permitted a reduction in work-hours at the jail, and for expanded operation.

Additional costs incurred by reason of 40-hour workweek.
1945: Reduction of 50 employees by reason of inability to fill vacancies.

1946: Further reduction of 7 employees. Additional costs occasioned by 40-hour workweek and increase in cost of provisions.

[blocks in formation]






Washington, D. C. The joint subcommittee met at 10:05 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, in the Senate District Committee room, Capitol, Washington, D. C., Senator Harry P. Cain (chairman of the joint subcommittee) presiding Present: Senator Cain. Present also: Parker L. Jackson, special adviser to the House Committee on the District of Columbia. Senator Cain. May I call this morning's session to order, please. We shall recess at approximately a quarter of 12, reconvening tomorrow morning at this time. As some of you know, Congressman Bates is out of the city and will not be here this morning, but is expected to be here tomorrow. I think our first witness tomorrow will be the one concerned with the educational system of the District.

Helping us out this morning, at the outset of this morning's session, is Senator O'Mahoney, whom we have asked to come here to discuss, as he sees fit, the substance of his formula bill which was recently introduced in the Senate.

I know that every citizen in this room will have a deep regard and interest in what the Senator has to say about this proposed piece of legislation. I would only say to the Senator in connection with our interest, that the joint committee, sir, feels that we cannot very well be successful with proposed pieces of tax-raising legislation until we have solidly made up our minds as to what the reasonable contribution of the Federal Government to the District ought to be on a continuing basis, so we are tremendously grateful for your appearance, and would like you to proceed in your own way, sir. STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH C. O'MAHONEY, MEMBER OF THE


At the outset I think I should say that I think the citizens of Washington and the people of the United States are fortunate that a joint committee has been established this year to study this problem. I note by the reports in the public press that you are going about the task in a very workmanlike manner, and I have no doubt that the result of

your labors will be highly beneficial to all concerned.

My own feeling is that this problem of governing the District of Columbia or the city of Washington is something far beyond the concern of the people of the District itself because Washington is the Federal city; it was established by the Constitution, I need not remind the committee, as a Federal city, the city for all of the people of the United States as the seat of the Federal Government.

George Washington, whose name was given to the city, I think, had a vision of what it might become when, at the very outset, he arranged for the planning of the city itself.

I think that Washington is the greatest capital in the whole world now, but I doubt very much whether it is maintained as such. It would not be an exaggeration if we were to call it an orphan city, governed by lot and by neglect. Members of Congress to whom are delegated in the organization of Congress the responsibility of taking care of the government of the city, shed the responsibility just as soon as they can, and it is only natural that that should be the case, because as the government of the United States grows, as there is greater and greater concentration, Members of Congress are busy about national problems and they slough off very readily and easily the drudgery of municipal government which, of course, it is, a drudgery.

I speak as one who has had personal experience in that matter. I know from my own experience how difficult it is to lay aside other matters of great national importance and come here, sit down with the citizens of the District and with the officeholders and employees of the District government, and discuss municipal affairs.

Now, because Washington is the Federal city, it is different from any other city in the whole United States; and, yet, there is a great temptation to regard it as like any other city. It is not.

In the first place, Washington has no possibility of expansion because the creation of the District of Columbia put a strait-jacket around this District, around the Federal city, so that it cannot expand, and yet, as the Government grows, the benefits which naturally arise from the gathering of a large group of people in one center accrue to all the surrounding territory.

Real estate is the primary, and has been for many, many years, the primary source of wealth, and the primary source of taxation. Of course, 'in our time it is becoming less so because the production of wealth nowadays comes more from industrial organization than it does from the utilization of land, and that is the reason why I think every city in the country is face to face with a tremendous problem of raising sufficient revenue to carry on the very necessary services which the city must carry. I do not think there is any municipality of any size from coast to coast that is not struggling with the problem of how to get the revenue to carry on absolutely necessary services.

By reason of the fact that there is this strait-jacket around the real property of the District of Columbia, the amount of land which is subject to taxation has been constantly and steadily decreasing. When you take into consideration the amount of land owned by the United States, and used for strictly Federal purposes, and the land used for parks, why it becomes evident that at this moment scarcely 50 percent of the land area of the District of Columbia is subject to taxation.

« PreviousContinue »