Now, there is a great argument about that, which you have here, of course; but the reason why the framers of the Constitution gave the responsibility of government to the Congress was undoubtedly because they felt it would be unwise to have the Federal employees running the Federal city. So, they thought that Congress would run the city in the style to which the Capital of the great United States ought to be accustomed, though it is not.

Senator CAIN. Thank you, sir. We are deeply appreciative of your coming this morning, Senator. We are faced with a very practical problem of finding approximately $17,000,000 either by cutting, on the one hand, or adding, on the other, and we think that basically your formula, sir, is headed in the right direction, and it will be given very serious consideration by the joint subcommittee.

Senator O'MAHONEY. I would like to say that the Subcommittee on the District of Columbia Appropriations, over a period of 5 or 6 years, has had the same conviction, but it is very difficult to do the job. I think you are going to do it.

Senator CAIN. We are going to do all we can, sir.
Thank you very much.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Thank you, sir.

Senator CAIN. Commissioner Mason has requested permission to insert into the record this letter and memorandum from Government Services, Inc., in connection with the statement made by the Commissioner the other day. Permission is granted. (The letter and memorandum are as follows:)

Col. K. E. MADSEN,

GOVERNMENT SERVICES, INC., Washington 6, D. C., March 11, 1947.

Assistant Engineer Commissioner, Washington, D. C.

DEAR COLONEL MADSEN: There has been received from the office of the water registrar of the District of Columbia a bill in the amount of $1,573.87, which it is stated represents charges for water consumed at the Armory Cafeteria from May 1, 1943, to February 17, 1947.

When contact was made with Mr. J. Wilson Smith, assistant water registrar, District of Columbia, concerning this bill, he stated that the bill had been rendered as a result of a talk which I had had with you, during which Mr. Smith understood, I made the statement that G. S. I. would be willing to pay for all water consumed in its various operations. I do recall saying to you that there would be no objection on my part to G. S. I.'s paying bills for water consumed, provided a suitable plan was worked out. I had in mind that if the Water Department cared to press this point, it could be presented to the Public Buildings Administration for consideration by that agency.

It is my understanding that the Federal Government appropriates a sum each year to the District of Columbia for the use of water, and it has always been my assumption that water used in our cafeterias was one of the things for which we paid the United States one-half of our net profits from such operations. Whether I am right or wrong about this should be determined by a careful and thorough study of the entire problem. No matter what decision might be reached as the result of such a study, it could not be retroactive, as our accounts for past years have been closed and appropriate settlements made with the United States. With best wishes, I am,

Sincerely yours,

F. W. HOOVER, General Manager.

MEMORANDUM TO WATER REGISTRAR

THE ESTIMATED WATER CONSUMPTION OF SWIMMING POOLS OPERATED BY GOVERNMENT SERVICES, INC., IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Basis of estimate as made by Mr. Robb of the United States Engineer's Office is as follows: All pools are equipped with circulating pumps, which replace the original pool water capacity every 10 days. Toilets and showers estimated at 40,000 gallons per operating day, per pool.

Senator CAIN. I wonder now if Mr. Robert F. Cogswell, Administrator of the District Rent Control Office is available. If you are, Mr. Cogswell, please sit with us, and give the reporter your proper title, sir.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT F. COGSWELL, ADMINISTRATOR OF RENT CONTROL FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. COGSWELL. My name is Robert F. Cogswell, Administrator of Rent Control for the District of Columbia.

Senator CAIN. We should like to proceed as you see fit, Mr. Cogswell, explaining to us in as much detail as you care, the problems with which you are confronted, with particular emphasis on your financial structure, your needs.

Mr. COGSWELL. Well, Senator, our office staff is 26 in number, the same today as it was when we were first organized January 1, 1942, with the exception that in 1943, and in the appropriation there, we requested one investigator and two clerk-stenographers. From that time up until very recently, when I appeared before the deficiency committee, there has been no increase in the number of employees in the office, and there has been no increase in salaries other than those provided for by law.

Senator CAIN. You expect, therefore, in a few minutes to give us the number of personnel and the salary totals and maintenance and operation that you have been accustomed to in recent years.

Mr. CoGSWELL. The entire number of persons employed, Mr. Chairman, is 26. Our appropriation for 1947, the total estimate, was $103,500; and for 1948 the total estimate is $55,700, and that comes about by reason of the fact that under the terms of the District of Columbia Emergency Rent Act, it expires on December 31, 1947, and

while, at one time the Appropriations Committee did appropriate funds for the entire year, the budget committee said it could only cover the 6 months' period, so from that time

Senator CAIN. You are asking only for moneys sufficient to continue through December 31 of this year.

Mr. COGSWELL. Through December 31 of this year, yes, sir. Senator CAIN. Having obviously made no decision as yet as to the need for continuing your local rent affairs beyond that time.

Mr. COGSWELL. Well, Senator, that is a matter for Congress to determine after it has received recommendations from the Commissioners.

Senator CAIN. That is right. But your Commission has not yet made any recommendations.

Mr. COGSWELL. No, sir; we have not.

I might add, however, in that connection, that as far as appropriations are concerned, that, of course, our office, being the one which was very closely associated with the war effort, the employees in that office have had little or no leave; at no time did I ever grant anyone more than 2 weeks leave. So, there is quite a sizable sum. Senator CAIN. Accumulated leave.

Mr. COGSWELL. Due the employees up there. I just had a memorandum made this morning. For instance the appropriation requested for the fiscal year 1948, the half year is $55,700. The annual leave due employees amounts to $16,400 as of July 1, 1947.

Senator CAIN. But that is not reflected in your proposed budget allocation of $55,700.

Mr. COGSWELL. No, sir; not at the present time.

Senator CAIN. Well, let us assume that you actually go out of business at the end of this year. By what means do you intend to take care of this $16,000 item?

Mr. COGSWELL. I presume, Senator, that we will have to ask for a deficiency appropriation. May I ask Mr. Fowler, would that be the procedure, Mr. Fowler?

Mr. FOWLER. That would be the only one that we could pursue. Senator CAIN. It is not possible during the remainder of this year to take up some of those vacation requirements?

Mr. COGSWELL. To a certain extent, Senator, I guess some of the employees will have to. For instance, I have been told that Senator CAIN. Stagger your staff, and so forth.

Mr. COGSWELL. Well, I presume in a way that we will have to do that. For instance, I have been told by the young lady who keeps the accounts up there, I have 26 days of leave coming to me, which, if I do not take, I will lose in addition to the other leave that I may have. But one of our greatest difficulties is that our force is very small, and when one person is absent, it is felt right straight down the line; but I am faced with that dilemma, I guess, that they are entitled to the leave, and if they want it, they will either have to take it or if they do not they will lose it.

Senator CAIN. Proceed, sir.

Mr. COGSWELL. I have a statement here, if you wish to have it, that is a detail of our appropriations since 1942, and that is a break-down there of the entire set-up. I thought maybe you would rather have that to insert in the record than have me read it.

Senator CAIN. I think I would like to have it in the record because it nearly covers your operating expense, your operating figures for 1943 through some time in 1948, through your estimated 1948. (The document referred to is as follows:)

*The $5,850 listed for 1948 salary increase should properly be included in the 1947 deficiency.

This office began operations January 2, 1942 in the middle of a fiscal year. The annual appropriation was estimated to be $51,440. However, due to the act that the office was in operation only part of the period and that considerable delay was experienced in filling new positions the office operated on a budget of $27,970 for the period January 2, 1942, to June 30, 1942.

Mr. COGSWELL. If you care to have it, I might give you a brief summary of the operations of the office.

Senator CAIN. I wish you would, sir.

Mr. COGSWELL. As I said, the staff-maybe, Senator, I might give you the history of the act.

The District of Columbia Emergency Rent Act was approved December 2, 1941. Under its terms it was to have terminated on the 31st of December, 1945. It has since been extended twice so that it now terminates as of December 31, 1947. It provides for the rental control of all housing accommodations in the District of Columbia rented during the year 1940 or in January 1941, and that became effective as of January 1, 1942.

There is an administrator, a deputy administrator, a general counsel, four examiners, one of whom devotes considerable of his time as assistant general counsel due to the great amount of legal work required of the legal general counsel, not only in the office but in court as well.

The examiners are experienced trial lawyers, all members of the bar of the District of Columbia. In cases falling within section 4 of the act, and that is the one which relates to the adjustment of rent and minimum service standards either up or down, as the case may be, the act requires that the examiners make written findings together with their recommendation, their recommended order as to rental and service standards of the housing accommodations in question.

Under this section either party, dissatisfied with the ruling of the examiner, may file a petition with the administrator to review the action of the examiner. From the decision of the Administrator either party may appeal under section 9, to the Municipal Court of the District of Columbia which, under the act, is given exclusive jurisdiction of all cases arising under section 4.

Since the organization of this office, to and including March 14, 1937, 32,981 cases have been filed under section 4 of the act.

Between July 1, 1946, and December 31, 1946, 2,942 cases were filed.