Secretary ICKES. I think that they do build officers' quarters and barracks and things like that.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. And, as to construction of that kind, would it be contemplated that that would fall under the provisions of this bill? Secretary ICKES. I would not think so. That is like a man repairing his own house. That is Army property.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. I agree with you that none of these functions should be transferred from that Department.

Now, then, in the Navy Department, Mr. Secretary, enormous sums are spent every year under the direction of that Department in works that are sometimes termed "public works."

Secretary ICKES. In building ships?

Mr. WHITTINGTON. In building ships that cost millions and millions of dollars, and I am wondering if this legislation contemplates the power to transfer those public-works activities to the Department of the Interior, or the Department of Conservation, as it would then be known?

Secretary ICKES. I do not think that that was even remotely considered.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. I did not think so.

Secretary ICKES. That is highly technical. The present Secretary of the Interior would not want to be charged with that responsibility.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. Mr. Secretary, you have given us, if you will pardon me for so saying, a most excellent statement with respect to the transfer of any independent establishment, board or bureau, and I will ask you to state whether or not, in your judgment, it would be wise to go further and provide for the elimination or abolition of any bureau or establishment that had proved to be useless, or that had proved to be more expensive than the results justified?

Secretary ICKES. Do you mean in any department?
Mr. WHITTINGTON. Yes; in any department.

Secretary ICKES. I suspect that a careful study would show that there is considerable overlapping-duplication.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. I am just wondering if the language of section 2 is broad enough to provide for the elimination and abolition of any duplication.

Secretary ICKES. I do not think that that is touched on at all. It merely provides for transfer.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. That was one of the reasons, among others, that we provided in the economy acts to which I have referred, of 1932 and 1933, for the reorganization of the executive departments; and as a member of the legislative authority, I know how difficult it is to provide for the abolition, by statute as well as by order, of any bureau once it is established, as you have indicated.

Secretary ICKES. Yes. That is where the departmental lobbyists come in.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. I understand that as yet this committee is without reports from the other executive departments on this bill, with one or two exceptions; but at the present time the highway Federal-aid construction is under the supervision of the Department of Agriculture.

Secretary ICKES. Yes.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. While the public parks, and construction in those parks, is under a bureau in your Department?

Secretary ICKES. Yes; that is right.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. The roads to which you have referred in your statement are roads which are confined to these public parks?

Secretary ICKES. No. The Bureau of Public Roads built our roads in the parks, too.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. And in the Indian Service?

Secretary ICKES. No; not in the Indian Service.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. What roads did you refer to?

Secretary ICKES. I mentioned the Bureau of Public Roads, which is a bureau in the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. Would it be your thought that all public road construction, insofar as the Federal Government is concerned, might be transferred from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of Conservation?

Secretary ICKES. It could be, unless it is too intimately an agricultural function for the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. What greater efficiency or economy have you in mind that might result from the transfer of road activity from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of the Interior?

Secretary ICKES. I do not think that, so far as the Bureau of Public Roads is concerned, any improvement could be made so far as the administration of that Bureau goes. I think it is very efficient and very economically run, but there is overlapping. I am looking at it merely abstractedly, from the point of view of efficient organization.

Now, why should any department have within itself a bureau which is so alien to its general purposes that it is in effect a different department? That is true not only with respect to the Bureau of Public Roads, but it is true with respect to other bureaus in the various departments, not Agriculture alone, or Interior. We have some bureaus that do not belong to Interior; I am frank to admit it. Why should there not be a reorganization along logical lines, in the interests of better administration?

Mr. WHITTINGTON. I am in accord with that view, but there would be no provision in this bill for the transfer of any bureau in your Department that should be in other departments.

Secretary ICKES. This gives the power to the President to transfer from my Department.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. This bill does?

Secretary ICKES. Yes, Congressman.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. Mr. Secretary, I recall what you said in your statement about petroleum oil. It has been suggested that there may be added to this bill-and I am referring now to the only report that has been made by any executive department to this committee that has been brought to my attention that nothing in this act should be construed as affecting any of the lands included in the naval petroleum reserves, naval oil-shale reserves, or other naval fuel

reserves.

Secretary ICKES. You would not touch them, anyhow.
Mr. WHITTINGTON. This bill would not touch them?

Secretary ICKES. No. Those are not departmental functions. As a matter of fact, most of the oil lands have been very gladly and willingly transferred to the Navy from Interior.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. And this legislation would not contemplate their retransfer?

Secretary ICKES. No; it would not affect the operation of our land office, under which we make these transfers.

I would like to see a whole lot more oil reserves in the Navy, to keep them away from wasteful exploitation.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. Yes; I would like them to stay there.

That is all.

Mr. WILSON. I have just come in, and it may be that Mr. Whittington has already asked this question; but as to this proposal to change the name from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Conservation and Works, you think that the latter name would better fit into the program in which your Department has and should have control or direction?

Secretary ICKES. I think so, Congressman.

Mr. WILSON. Now, as to matters of public works, you would not include, of course, anything that already goes to the War Department in the way of flood control or rivers and harbors improvement?

Secretary ICKES. No; and as I have already explained, I think there is logic for that, because you could not transfer that very well without transferring a considerable group of the Army. We have no militaristic aspirations.

Mr. WILSON. They have the organization complete for all of that work now.

Secretary ICKES. Yes; and they are intimately related to national defense.

Mr. WILSON. Yes; that is the basis upon which those works are undertaken.

Secretary ICKES. Yes; and the distinction is between matters affecting the national defense and those involving internal improvements and conservation.

Mr. WILSON. And that work would, of course, take in reforestation and other things that relate to the conserving of our natural resources. Secretary ICKES. That could all be brought in, but I want to point out again that I have not discussed with the President or with anyone else any possible transfer; and I have back in my mind the fact that for 2 years the President had precisely that same power that this bill would give him, when he limited them to my Department, and I have not any extravagant hopes as to what he might do or might not do. Anything that he might do would be a matter for his future determination.

Mr. WILSON. And you want by this act to establish a basis for this?

Secretary ICKES. That is it.

Mr. RICH. Mr. Secretary, I was interested in section 2 of this bill, whereby the President of the United States can authorize the transfer of any function that is now performed by any other department of the Government into the Department of the Interior if he so chooses. Secretary ICKES. Yes; subject to congressional disapproval.

Mr. RICH. How are you going to have that brought to the attention of Congress before it is actually transferred, if he desires to do it by Executive order?

Secretary ICKES. You understand, he has to make a report to Congress. It would be a matter of public record, and you may

have this in your mind-he could not do this in vacation time, while Congress was not in session.

Mr. RICH. If we had an Executive order by the President, and if the Congress gave approval, it would automatically be changed regardless of any objections that might be made from any other department? Secretary ICKES. Oh, yes; but the President's custom has been to hear objections from other departments.

Mr. RICH. At the present time you are in charge of the Department of the Interior, but at the same time you probably have 10 or 12 other alphabetical organizations which you are handling under the emergency acts as set up by Congress.

Secretary ICKES. I have two.

Mr. RICH. Only two?

Secretary ICKES. That is all.

Mr. RICH. That is, Public Works, and what is the other?

Secretary ICKES. Oil Administration, though there is not much left to the latter since the decision of the Supreme Court the other day. Mr. RICH. If the Department increases its functions, will the head of the Department of the Interior be able to give the proper time and attention to all of the functions that might be assigned to it?

Secretary ICKES. Well, we now have 5 bureaus in Interior, against 22, let us say, in the Department of Agriculture, and, without flattering myself unduly, I think that I can manage perhaps 2 or 3 more, if the Secretary of Agriculture can manage 22.

Mr. RICH. You have had Public Works up to this time, and Public Works in itself is more than one man's job, is it not?

Secretary ICKES. Well, it has not proved to be. I think that I have given a pretty good account of Public Works.

Mr. RICH. When one has the handling of billions of dollars, it seems to me that that is a real job.

Secretary ICKES. I have not any billions any more, Congressman. Mr. RICH. Have they diminished your power?

Secretary ICKES. Oh, no; Public Works is continued for 2 years more by Congress, but under the new works program, the Public Works end of the program will be relatively small compared with the whole proposition.

Mr. RICH. Have they definitely determined in their Public Works program the work that is to be done?

Secretary ICKES. Oh, no; we act on projects as they come along. We do not know precisely what the extent will be, but it will not compare with the original P. W. A. program, which I did manage, together with oil, to get by on.

Mr. RICH. Now, you have spoken of the work that is in the Department of Agriculture, that they have 22 separate and distinct organizations in that Department. Would the President likely transfer some of the departments from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of Conservation if this bill were to be approved?

Secretary ICKES. All that I can say to allay any apprehension along that line is that when the President did have that power, he did not transfer anything during those 2 years from Agriculture to Interior, but he transferred two bureaus from Interior to Agriculture.

Mr. RICH. The point that I want to get at is this, that I recall distinctly in the hearings before the Committee on Public Lands about a year ago, or a little more than that, when the Taylor Grazing Act

was brought up, that it was the thought of all of the members of our committee and I feel confident in making that statment-as well as of the Secretary of Agriculture and of the Secretary of the Interior that the handling of grazing and of all lands should be in one department; and, as we went on and developed that bill, and it passed, the statement was made that that would be the proper course of procedure, because of the fact that if we were handling grazing, it should be handled by one department so that the Committee on Public Lands, if they wanted information, would get it from one department or, if anyone else wanted to have information, it could be secured from that one department. You so stated, and the Secretary of Agriculture so stated, and the chairman of our committee so stated, that this would be thrown together and we would only have one control of the grazing lands in this country.

Secretary ICKES. That is right.

Mr. RICH. But recently you came in and asked us to give authority to your department to handle the grazing lands under the Taylor Act, and you set up a new bureau in your department, contrary to the statements you had made a year ago.

Secretary ICKES. Oh, no, Congressman; you are under a misapprehension there. I never made any such statement. As a matter of fact, my position all the time was that the control of grazing, since it had to do with the public domain, was properly a function of the Department of the Interior. It was stated that the best administration called for one administration of grazing.

Now, you talk about the setting up of a bureau. If one man is a bureau, then I suppose that I did set up a bureau; but, as a matter of fact, grazing is conducted under the Land Bureau of the Department of the Interior.

Mr. RICH. Mr. Secretary, I am not putting you in the wrong light, and I do not want to be put in the wrong light myself, and when you say that it should be administered by one department, on that we both agree.

Secretary ICKES. Exactly; but there is no power in any law nowalthough there would be under this bill-to combine it under one department.

Mr. RICH. But, under the recent bill that we enacted, you set up in your department, a new bureau for the handling of grazing on the public domain.

Secretary ICKES. Oh, no, Congressman, I did not.

Mr. RICH. You asked for 21 men to be here in Washington, and you are putting in 10 different areas, with 14 men in each area, out in the field. What would you call that, if it is not a bureau?

Secretary ICKES. I do not suppose that anybody thought that the Grazing Act could administer itself. Of course, we had to have men. Mr. RICH. That is what I say, that you are setting up a new organization in the Department of the Interior for handling grazing. Secretary ICKES. How else could I administer it?

Mr. RICH. But what I am trying to get at, and I hope that I can drive this point home, is the fact that we should have established one bureau. Now, if it could not be transferred from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of the Interior, then we should transfer it from your department to the Department of Agriculture. That would be the sensible thing to do.

3551-35-2