Mr. BACHARACH. And, if you do not mind, I just want to read what you had to say and to get your comment on it.

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, Mr. Bacharach.

Mr. BACHARACH (reading):

The Legion, I will frankly state, had nothing to do with the initiation of the adjusted-service certificate, but when it came up in one of the later bills it impressed us as being an extra fine way of dealing with the problem because, first, it took care of some of the things we were deeply interested in; it took care of the beneficiaries of the ex-service men in case anything should happen to the service man; and, secondly, it became payable to him at just the time in his life that a great many men will need some aid from the Government. In a way it was a feature which would to some extent meet the constant reports of pensions being sought by ex-service men who served in the World War.

And so the adjusted-service certificate became a part of the bill, and the land-reclamation feature was eliminated.

We have no pride in any particular bill, we have no pride of authorship in our own bill. I want to say to the members of the committee that, so far as the American Legion is concerned, and so far as the veterans' organizations are concerned, I think-because all of them have unanimously indorsed this legislation at all of their conventions-the ex-service men and women of the country will be perfectly satisfied with the legislation which is reported by this committee, as the country is looking to a clean-up of this entire matter. I just want to read one more statement, and then I will finish. That brings me up to the point of what was done at the San Francisco convention on this legislation. At every convention of the American Legion this question has been brought before the entire body of the organization. On the floor of the convention it has each time been passed unanimously by the 1,000 delegates to the convention assembled nationally.

Mr. TAYLOR. That is correct; because at that time, you will find at some place else in the hearings there, we made a poll throughout the country, in the cities, of course, and there were 66 per cent of the men who favored the adjusted-compensation certificate. Of course, we did not initiate it. We presented to this committee that fourfold plan and this committee reported out a fivefold plan, including the adjusted-service certificate which, at that time, increased it by 40 per cent-not 25, and the rate of interest was 42 per cent, if you will recall. Then, of course, the history of the legislation from there on is well known.

Mr. BACHARACH. The President vetoed that bill?

Mr. TAYLOR. The President vetoed that bill. Then, in 1922, the cash option was abandoned altogether and there just remained the adjusted-service certificate with the cash to those entitled to less than

$50.

Then, if you will recall, Congressman Andrew came in and reminded the committee that nothing was being done on the legislation for the dependents. This committee then included in the bill payment to the dependents of the men killed in action, in the adjustedservice group, in 10 quarterly installments, and that was the final legislation, with the increase, instead of being 40 per cent, reduced to 25.

Mr. GARNER. I offered, urged, and voted for the optional cash settlement. The motion was made by the gentleman from New York [Doctor Crowther] that we give them adjusted certificates and give them an option of cash settlement and I, with every Democrat, voted for it and Doctor Crowther voted for it, and every Republican member of the committee voted against it.

Mr. BACHARACH. How about Mr. Frear; how did he vote?

Mr. GARNER. I do not know. That is what the record of the committee showed on the roll call.

Mr. COLLIER. I do not believe Mr. Frear was on the committee at that time.

Mr. GARNER. Is that right, Doctor?

Mr. CROWTHER. Yes.

Mr. GARNER. Doctor Crowther made the motion and I voted for it, so the record is clear on that.

Mr. TAYLOR. I could not say what took place in the committee. Mr. GARNER. Mr. Taylor, what is the total membership at the present time of the American Legion, if you know?

Mr. TAYLOR. At the close of last year, it was just a few short of 900,000 and this year it is 72,000 ahead.

Mr. GARNER. Do you think the action of last Sunday at Indianapolis fairly reflects the sentiment of the body of your organization? Mr. TAYLOR. The executive committee represents the national organization, sir.

Mr. GARNER. But that was not the question I asked you. I know it represents it; but I asked you if you believe the action of the executive committee at Indianapolis last Sunday fairly represents and interprets the wishes and desires of the 900,000 members that belong to your organization.

Mr. TAYLOR. Unquestionably.

Mr. GARNER. Then, General Hines may have been in error if he thought that a goodly portion, at least, if not a majority of the American veterans did not favor some kind of opportunity for a cash settlement.

Mr. TAYLOR. I do not want to comment on what General Hines said.

Mr. GARNER. Well, if you have 900,000 members and the only opportunity to express themselves being through their organizationif you have 900,000 and you are now asking Congress to adopt some method of optional cash settlement, it ought to reflect the sentiment of the three and a half million men interested, is that not correct?

Mr. TAYLOR. It ought to reflect the attitude of the organization. Mr. GARNER. Well, does your organization stand for what you believe to be the sentiment and judgment of the American veterans? Mr. TAYLOR. Our organization stands and expresses what it thinks it is for the best interests of the veterans. As to whether the large portion of the veterans who remain out of the American Legion differ with the Legion on its policies, of course, is a question purely of personal opinion, and I would not undertake to speak for them. The only body I can speak for is that vast group of legionaires, and their views have found definite expression in the manner in which their executive committee took action. Beyond this, I would not want to express an opinion.

Mr. GARNER. And you do not desire to express your own opinion as to any settlement?"

Mr. TAYLOR. No, sir.

Mr. GARNER. Do you admit the premise that this was a readjudication by the Congress, in connection with you and those representing the American Legion, who were the only organized body speaking

for the American veterans, as I understand, at the present time, that the passage of the act was an admission of a debt owed by the Government to the American soldiers?

Mr. TAYLOR. Our claim was then and it was perfectly sound that there was coming to the soldier an adjustment of his compensation— his war time compensation.

Mr. GARNER. And at that time were you reasonably satisfied with the action of Congress in determining the amount due the soldier? Mr. TAYLOR. We were.

Mr. GARNER. Then at the time Congress passed this, they admitted an indebtedness to the soldier of a dollar a day for home service and a dollar and a quarter a day for foreign service; that is correct, is it not?

Mr. TAYLOR. I think Congress admitted that would be a proper way to adjust the compensation of the soldier.

Mr. GARNER. And the soldier at that time, acting through you as his spokesman, and your organization, thought that was a just settlement?

Mr. TAYLOR. We certainly did.

Mr. GARNER. Now, if we owed that money, a dollar a day for home service and a dollar and a quarter a day for foreign service at the time you were discharged from the Army, and we paid it to you now, plus 6 per cent compound interest from the date you were discharged to the date you received the money, would not that be a just settlement by the Government of its obligation to the soldier?

Mr. TAYLOR. Oh, I refuse to answer that question, Congressman. This is an expression of the opinion of my organization; it is not mine.

Mr. GARNER. You admitted that was a just settlement and that the solution of that question was satisfactory and was just to the whole people, both the taxpayers and the soldiers.

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.

Mr. GARNER. Now, how much more interest would you want than 6 per cent if we were going to pay you?

Mr. TAYLOR. How much more interest?

Mr. GARNER. Yes. The Government owed you a dollar a day for your service in the United States and a dollar and a quarter a day for your service abroad, and you say that was a just settlement. Now you say we owed that to you the day you stepped out of the Army. We want to pay you now. How much would we owe you?

Mr. TAYLOR. I refuse to answer that question, Congressman, because the adjusted-service certificate plan, as it was passed by Congress, was a satisfactory method and accepted by the American Legion at that time and stated 4 per cent.

Mr. GARNER. Yes; but now, through your organization you are asking for a cash settlement.

Mr. TAYLOR. The retirement of the adjusted compensation certificates.

Mr. GARNER. You asked at the meeting of the executive committee at Indianapolis for a cash settlement, according to the resolution you read.

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes.

Mr. GARNER. Now I am trying to ascertain what is a just settle ment. We owed you a dollar a day for home service and a dollar and a quarter a day for foreign service when you got your discharge paper. We want to settle what we owe you: How much do we owe you now?

Mr. TAYLOR. That we will leave to this committee, Mr. Garner.
Mr. GARNER. All right.

Mr. TREADWAY. Mr. Taylor, you heard the inquiry I made, I think, of General Hines, in relation to the statement that he made that the Legion and other veterans' organizations were doing a great deal of relief work: Are there any statistics in the records of the Legion showing how much of that relief work has been done?

Mr. TAYLOR. Nationally, The American Legion this year is spending $184,000 for the maintenance of its organization to take care of disabled men-our rehabilitation work. We are spending $102,000 for the widows and orphans. That has nothing whatever to do with the actual money that is being spent by the 10,500 posts of the Legion and the 7,000 units of the auxiliary. It runs into millions of dollars, and there is no way for us to take any record of it, because it is a post activity and is strictly its own business.

Mr. TREADWAY. Locally?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.

Mr. TREADWAY. The national organization which you represent is expending $286,000 from its national treasury for the relief of the veterans themselves and their dependent families?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.

Mr. TREADWAY. Now is that of a nature

Mr. TAYLOR. Of direct relief?

Mr. TREADWAY. Well I did not mean direct relief, but of routine relief that would go on year after year, or is it more of the nature of emergency relief, based on economic conditions at the present time. Mr. TAYLOR. It is routine relief that started in 1919 and will continue to increase as the years go on.

Mr. TREADWAY. And has nothing to do with the effort to relieve the condition of unemployment at the present time?

Mr. TAYLOR. Nothing, whatever.

Mr. TREADWAY. Has the national organization given any consideration to that feature of relief at all?

Mr. TAYLOR. Only through the establishment of employment agencies in every post of the Legion throughout the country and the distribution of direct relief by the posts from funds that the posts themselves raise.

Mr. TREADWAY. Local contribution?

Mr. TAYLOR. Exactly, sir.

Mr. TREADWAY. Either from the veterans themselves to their local posts, or from subscriptions, perhaps, from citizens interested in the work of the post in their relief program?

Mr. TAYLOR. Exactly so. For instance, here in the District of Columbia we have a budget, I think, of $23,000, which is direct relief to the individuals who apply for it.

Mr. TREADWAY. That is increasing as the result of the present unemployment condition?

Mr. TAYLOR. That is increasing here in the District of Columbia.

Mr. TREADWAY. And you think what is applicable to the District would likewise be applicable to the posts throughout the country? Mr. TAYLOR. I think it would.

Mr. TREADWAY. Conditions are somewhat similar, probably?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir.

Mr. TREADWAY. So that there is under the supervision of the Legion, then, either directly through your national organization, or through the local posts, a very large amount of relief being given the veterans and their dependents?

Mr. TAYLOR. Oh, it is tremendous.

Mr. FREAR. At the time this was originally proposed Colonel Taylor, there was the question between a cash bonus and the adjusted compensation; that is, in the shape of a certificate, and due to that 25 per cent additional, was it not, was offered as an inducement for taking the insurance?

Mr. TAYLOR. When we proposed our bill for the fourfold plan, which was cash, farm-home aid, land settlement, and the vocational training, we increased the three of them-the land and home aid, vocational opportunity, and farm settlement-by 40 per cent, and I stated before this committee the reason we increased the request by 40 per cent, to use the language I used at that time, was that we sweetened them so that the men would take advantage of the other options instead of at that time taking advantage of a cash settlement. Your committee put in the adjusted-service certificate. We had nothing to do with that. But when that bill was reported as a fivefold plan we noted then they also increased it by 40 per cent, purely for the purpose at that time of inducing the veteran to take advantage of that plan.

Mr. FREAR. At that time we were confronted with the proposition there was going to be a veto of any bill that was presented? Mr. TAYLOR. That subsequently proved correct.

Mr. FREAR. And particularly of the cash proposition. Your organization eventually agreed to the postponement, and accepted the certificates?

sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. We agreed to an acceptance of the certificates; yes,

Mr. GARNER. We have a veto now staring us in the face.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman ought not to interrupt the witness and the questioner.

Mr. FREAR. At that time the distress was not so apparent as suggested by General Hines-200,000 or more in the third group of which he speaks who are without employment, and where the conditions are not in the shape they were at that time.

Mr. TAYLOR. Well, in 1920 and 1921, yes; because at that time the Legion put on its tremendous unemployment drive and actually secured employment for 700,000 veterans.

Mr. FREAR. Did we put this bill through in 1921?

Mr. TAYLOR. 1924.

Mr. FREAR. I am speaking of 1924. Now the conditions are worse now than they were then.

Mr. TAYLOR. Unquestionably.