Mr. WHITTINGTON. Yes; if it was by statute, it still is. What about forestry? Secretary ICKES. Forestry I am not familiar with, but I suspect it just developed as a natural development of forestry administration. Mr. WHITTINGTON. Now, this final question: Under the existing law, has the President the power to transfer any of these boards, bureaus, or agencies from one executive department to another? Secretary ICKES. I believe not. Mr. WHITTINGTON. That is your opinion as a lawyer? Mr. HOUSTON. Mr. Secretary, could you give us a little light upon the background of Professor Chapman? Secretary ICKES. I think he used to be employed, like most of the members of his organization, and members of his organization, by the Forestry Service. He is one of those high-powered lobbyists for the interests he is concerned with. Mr. HAMLIN. Now, that interests me. Mr. HOUSTON. What is the present status of the oil situation? I know you are interested in that. Secretary ICKES. There is a bill pending, the Thomas bill is pending before the Senate now. I understand that subcommittee of the Committee on Interstate Commerce is considering the draft of a bill to offer in the House. Mr. HOUSTON. Is the Thomas bill more or less satisfactory? Secretary ICKES. The Thomas bill, from our point of view, is satisfactory, as it has been recently amended. Mr. GASQUE. We thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. Mr. GASQUE. We will now go into executive session. 3551-35-8 TO CHANGE THE NAME OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND WORKS WEDNESDAY, JULY 17, 1935 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS, Washington, D. C. The committee this day met at 10:15 a. m., Hon. Allard H. Gasque presiding, for further consideration of H. R. 7712. Mr. GASQUE. The committee will please be in order, and we will continue our hearings in connection with H. R. 7712, which is a bill to change the name of the Department of the Interior and to coordinate certain governmental functions. Mr. DUNN. I move that we conclude our hearings on this bill today. Mr. QUINN. I move that we limit today's hearing to 30 minutes. Mr. HAMLIN. I move that any further statements by witnesses be submitted to the committee in writing. Mr. DUNN. Let us close the hearings definitely. That would save money, time, and work. I would not like to accept that motion. Mr. GASQUE. There is pending a motion that today's hearing conclude our hearings on this bill, and there is, also, pending an amendment to that motion that we limit public hearing on this bill to 30 minutes today. All in favor of the motion and the amendment thereto make it known by saying aye. (The motion and the amendment thereto carried unanimously.) Mr. RICH. Before a final vote is taken will you hear all who want to be heard in connection with the bill? Mr. GASQUE. Insofar as we can today. We probably could not hear between now and Christmas all who wish to be heard. Mr. DUNN. My impression is that anything we hear will simply be a repetition. The ground has been thoroughly covered, I believe. Mr. CRAVENS. I move that, if we limit this final hearing to 30 minutes, we limit each speaker to 5 minutes. Mr. BRENCKMAN. I do not know the witnesses to be called, but I am here representing the National Grange, which organization is vitally interested in this question, and I should like to have enough time to present a concise argument in opposition to the proposed bill. I believe that the committee has heard all kinds of witnesses who are in favor of the bill, therefore I think you should give those who are opposed to it a chance. Mr. GASQUE. I believe we ought to allow those who cannot, by reason of lack of time, be heard to file a statement for the record. Mr. DUNN. I suggest we give the gentleman 10 minutes. The World War was won with 4-minute speeches. Mr. HULL. Those who favor the bill have been heard, and if we should place a limitation upon a large farm organization that would not be fair. Let us hear the gentleman. Mr. GASQUE. I am simply presiding. The committee can do as it sees fit. Mr. HULL. We have been hearing those from the departments, and now I think that the gentleman, who is a representative of a very large organization, spreading over the whole country, representing a cross-section of the farmers of the country, should be heard, whether it takes 1 day or 20 days. I am in favor of hearing the Grange representative fully. Mr. QUINN. I have not heard a new phase of this bill since the first hearing. It seems to me that both sides have presented all they have. I have not heard a new phase for or against the bill since your first hearing. Mr. HULL. We have listened to departmental people criticize each other here, and heard them tell of their various ambitions to obtain certain bureaus and agencies for their departments. We have before us now an outside man representing the people themselves; let us hear from the people. Mr. MCKEOUGH. Did the National Grange make an application to the committee to be heard? Mr. GASQUE. It did. Mr. MCKEOUGH. How long ago? Mr. BRENCKMAN. I can give you my statement in about 10 minutes, if I am not interrupted. Mr. MCKEOUGH. How long ago did you make application to be heard? Mr. BRENCKMAN. Several weeks ago. I was here at your last meeting, but could not be heard on account of a lack of time. Mr. MCKEOUGH. Was that the first hearing of this committee in connection with the bill under consideration that you attended? Mr. BRENCKMAN. Yes; of this committee. I did, however, appear before the Senate committee in connection with this subject. Mr. MCKEOUGH. I have no objection to hearing the gentleman, although we do have a lot of work before us. Mr. BRENCKMAN. I do appreciate that. This is, however, an important bill, and I think you should be willing, even anxious, to hear both sides. I think some of those in favor of this proposal have been heard several times, and therefore I think you should hear the Grange. once. Mr. HAMLIN. I move that we give the gentleman representing the National Grange 10 minutes. Mr. GASQUE. I believe, if we adopt the motion, that we should allow all who have asked to be heard, but who cannot be heard on account of lack of time, the right to file statements for the record. Mr. DUNN. I make that motion. (The motion was put by the acting chairman, and it carried unanimously.) STATEMENT OF H. H. CHAPMAN, PROFESSOR OF FORESTRY AT YALE UNIVERSITY AND PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS Mr. GASQUE. Let us first hear Mr. H. H. Chapman, professor of forestry at Yale University and president of the Society of American Foresters. Mr. CHAPMAN. I believe I am correct in stating that this is the first time a representative of the public has been heard by this committee. The Society of American Foresters is an organization of professional foresters numbering 2,500. It is the only professional organization of foresters. In view of the charge made before this committee in preceding hearings that I am a high-powered lobbyist, formerly employed by the United States Forest Service, it seems in order, first, to state what my position and responsibility is in appearing before your committee. For 29 years I have been employed by Yale University as a teacher of forestry and have never during that period severed my connection with the university. On two occasions the university has loaned me to the Government on leave. Once during the late war to take the place of a man needed elsewhere, I served for a little more than 2 years as Chief of the Division of Forest Management of region 3 of the Forest Service, constituting the States of Arizona and New Mexico, and I had charge of timber sales on 20,000,000 acres of Government land. Again, during the year 1927, I was loaned to the United States Forest Taxation Inquiry for a period of 15 months. I am in the same position, therefore, as that of countless other individuals and some colleagues at Yale, who have been or are giving their services to governmental departments under similar arrange ments. Forestry is a technical profession furnishing employment in public service with Federal and State Governments, with numerous private concerns, and with educational institutions training men in the profession. Many men now in State, private, and educational forestry have at one time or another been employed by the United States Forest Service. Nevertheless, the statement of the Secretary of the Interior that the board of directors of the Society of American Foresters is composed of men now or formerly employed by the United States Forest Service is inaccurate. Not only are 7 of the 11 men on this board entirely free from any Federal connection whatever, but 4 of these men have had no official connection with the United States Forest Service for more than a quarter of a century, and the remaining two for 18 and 6 years, respectively. Yet these men are still tainted with loyalty to the principles of public service represented by the organization which in their younger days was practically the only organization that stood for these principles. The Society of American Foresters represent the profession of forestry in America. Its 2,500 members are a cross section of the entire field of forestry and the fact that 7 of its 11 directors are in fields other than Federal is an indication of the composition of the society itself. This organization is not only independent of bureaucratic dictation for either the Forest Service or the Department o the Interior, but has not hesitated to criticize measures proposed o |