74TH CONGRESS 1st Session

}

SENATE

{

REPORT No. 251

EXTENDING PERIOD OF SUSPENSION OF LIMITATION GOVERNING FILING OF SUIT UNDER SECTION 19, WORLD WAR VETERANS' ACT, 1924, AS AMENDED

MARCH 4 (calendar date, MARCH 5), 1935.-Ordered to be to printed

Mr. BLACK, from the Committee on Finance, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany S. J. Res. 65]

The Committee on Finance, to whom was referred the joint resolution (S. J. Res. 65) to extend the period of suspension of the limitation governing the filing of suit under section 19, World War Veterans' Act, 1924, as amended, having considered the same, report it back to the Senate with an amendment, and as amended, recommend that the resolution do pass.

The amendment is as follows:

On page 2, line 7, strike out the words "three months" and insert in lieu thereof the words "ninety days".

This resolution will permit suit to be filed in claims where after the denial of the claim there remained but a few days in which to file suit, and will have the effect of enlarging the period of suspension of the statute and give the claimants an additional 90 days in which to file suit.

As to cases in which suit was dismissed because not filed within the few days remaining after receipt of notice of denial, this resolution will permit reinstatement of the suit within 90 days from the date of enactment of this resolution.

O

74TH CONGRESS 1st Session

}

SENATE

{

REPORT No. 255

MEMBERS OF CONGRESS ACTING AS ATTORNEYS IN MATTERS WHERE THE UNITED STATES HAS AN INTEREST

MARCH 4 (calendar day, MARCH 6), 1935.—Ordered to be printed

Mr. BORAH, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following

A BILL Relative to Members of Congress acting as attorneys in matters where the United States has an interest

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That no Senator, Representative, or Delegate, in Congress, after his election and during his continuance in office, shall receive or agree to receive any compensation whatever, directly or indirectly, for any services rendered or to be rendered to any person, corporation, or association, either by himself or another, in relation to any proceeding, contract, claim, controversy, charge, accusation, or arrest, or other matter or thing in which the United States as a party is interested, before any commission, department, or court whatever. SEC. 2. That no person holding an appointive office under the Federal Government shall receive, or agree to receive, any compensation whatever, directly or indirectly, for any services rendered, or to be rendered, to any person, corporation, or association, either by himself or another, in relation to any proceeding, contract, claim, controversy, charge, accusation, or arrest or other matter or thing in which the United States is interested, before any commission, department, or court whatever.

SEC. 3. That no Senator, Representative, or Delegate, in Congress, after his election and during his continuance in office, shall act as attorney or counsel for any person, corporation, or association engaged in interstate commerce.

SEC. 4. That every person offending against this Act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be imprisoned not more than two years or fined not more than $10,000.

Section 1 covers all cases or matters in which the United States is a party interested. It prohibits Senators, Representatives, and Delegates in Congress acting before commissions, departments, or courts for compensation in any matter in which the United States is a party or has an interest. This section is designed to prohibit Members of Congress from receiving compensation for services rendered against the United States. It is regarded as highly unethical and improper

for those who have been selected to represent the Government to use their position and influence against the Government wherever the Government is concerned.

Section 2 applies the same principle to all appointive officers in the Federal Government. They are not permitted to receive, or agree to receive, compensation for any services rendered against the Government wherein the Government is a party or is interested. The design and purpose of these two provisions are apparent and little controversy is expected in regard to them.

Section 3 is the section about which much controversy has arisen. This section provides that no Member of Congress, Senator, Representative, or Delegate shall, during his term of office, act as attorney or counsel for any person, corporation, or association engaged in interstate commerce. The purpose of this section is to disassociate all Members of Congress from corporate influence or corporate obligation. It is not thought proper for those who must be engaged in legislation touching corporations engaged in interstate commerce. to be receiving compensation or pay from those whose interests may be affected by such legislation.

To give an illustration, let us suppose that Congress is engaged in framing a measure or enacting laws which will affect corporations. either in control or limitation of their power, or in any other way. Would it be ethical and would it be in the public interest for any of those so engaged in framing such laws to be receiving at the same time large compensation from corporations which would be affected by such legislation? No one would contend for a moment that a man who had been selected as a judge should continue under any circumstances to receive compensation from corporations or persons whose interests might come before the court for consideration. Indeed, no one would consent that a judge should receive compensation from anyone under ary circumstances other than his salary.

It is believed that the position of those engaged in framing laws is, in fact, no different so far as the public interest is involved than those who are engaged in the interpreting of laws. It might be well argued that those who frame the laws stand in a more representative position than those who interpret the law and, therefore, should be even more completely divorced from all obligation and from all selfish interest which might consciously, or unconsciously, affect their views as to what the law should be.

The Congress of the United States is constantly engaged, and in the future must necessarily be constantly engaged, in legislation touching the rights, duties, and obligations of all persons, corporations, or associations engaged in interstate commerce. Those who legislate on these vital matters should not stand under any obligation whatever to anyone except the public. Private interest and personal interest should be eliminated.

In conclusion, the purpose of this bill is to eliminate the question of personal or private interest in matters of legislation insofar as it can practically be done. A man who is enjoying a retainer from a railroad corporation, say from $15,000 to $25,000, or from any corporation, is utterly unfit to help frame laws which may affect that corporation.

O

TO AUTHORIZE NAVAL AND MARINE CORPS SERVICE OF ARMY OFFICERS TO BE INCLUDED IN COMPUTING DATES OF RETIREMENT

MARCH 4 (calendar day, MARCH 8), 1935.—Ordered to be printed

Mr. CAREY, from the Committee on Military Affairs, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany S. 2029]

The Committee on Military Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (S. 2029) to authorize naval and Marine Corps service of Army officers to be included in computing dates of retirement, having considered the same, report favorably thereon, with a recommendation that it do pass.

The purpose of S. 2029 is to authorize that in computing service for the purpose of retirement of an officer of the Army, there shall be included, in addition to service now authorized by law to be included, all service in the Navy or Marine Corps which is authorized by law to be included for the purpose of retirement of an officer of the Navy or Marine Corps.

In rendering a favorable report on this bill, the War Department submitted in part:

As officers of the Army, under existing law, do not receive retirement credit for service in the Navy or Marine Corps, it is seen that they are discriminated against in this respect. The proposed legislation would correct this inequality.

Officers of the Navy or Marine Corps receive retirement credit for service in the Regular or volunteer Army or Navy (22 Stat. 473; Public, 263, 73d Čong.). Thus, S. 2029 merely extends the same right to receive retirement to Army officers for naval service as naval officers now receive for Army service.

In the Army at this time, there are some 87 officers who have had service in the Navy or Marine Corps. Of these, a number have completed 30 years' service and will receive no benefit from the enactment of this bill. The War Department points out that inasmuch as only some 12 percent of officers who retire do so under the