one of the most efficient officers in the Department of Justice, and I said unless we could pay him more money we would lose him. But we could not set up a position as First Assistant in the division, because the Civil Service would not allow it. We had to keep him on as special assistant and pay him $7,500. I have now to report that he is getting double that amount in a position in New York City.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I quite agree with you in your remarks concerning Mr. Parish's ability and his efficiency and I regret to learn that he has recently left the Department.

Mr. KEENAN. With great reluctance we let him go. He stayed as long as he could without making too much of a personal sacrifice. Mr. MCMILLAN. And his leaving the service, in your judgment, is due to the fact that you are not in a position to give him additional compensation, additional raises?

Mr. KEENAN. Not alone additional raises, but we have been subject. to criticism and I think justly so, perhaps that here was a man who was working in the Department permanently, acting as the head of a division-and I do not see how there could be a more important one in the Department of Justice than the head of the Criminal Division; and yet we could not pay him even the sum that was paid as special assistant, and which proved to be grossly inadequate, without putting him on the special assistants' roll.

I have not been able to find a solution of that, Mr. Chairman. are trying to do the best we can with some of these rules that have been crystalized and that are so difficult to break through in the Government.

I would be glad to submit a table of those who are permanently employed, for your consideration, but who are not on the regular roll. Mr. MCMILLAN. I wish you would do that.

Mr. KEENAN. I can give you our word, however, that those who are presently assigned to this division are faithfully working a full day, and a great deal more, and that applies not only to the stenographic help and the secretaries, but to the lawyers.

DUTIES AND SALARIES OF SPECIAL ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS

Mr. MCMILLAN. Judge Keenan, having as you do general charge of the administration of the department, I would like you to tell us something about your special assistants whose services are used for purposes other than the conduct of your own office; and the demand that exists, if any, for additional funds for the special assistants that are needed throughout the service.

Mr. KEENAN. We have among the special assistants-I have with me a list including every special assistant, the compensation that he gets and the duties that he is performing, including specific cases, in many instances, on which they are working, so that we may enlighten the committee in every detail that we can think of

Mr. BACON. I think that list ought to go in the record.
Mr. MCMILLAN. It may go in the record.

Mr. KEENAN. This is the list, Mr. McMillan, that has already been submitted to Congress. We are willing to have it go in the record. here, if you wish.

Mr. MCMILLAN. May I suggest that we have that incorporated when we come to the item in the bill providing for the appropriation for this purpose?

Mr. BACON. Of course, let it go in at the proper point in the record. (Statement inserted under special assistants, United States courts.) Mr. KEENAN. We have, for example, on this list, many men who are on the Antitrust Division. There is Mr. Abt, who is getting compensation at $7,500 a year, who is Chief of the Antitrust Trial Section. With the important duties that devolve upon that, which undoubtedly the Assistant Attorney General, Mr. Jackson, has related to the committee, a man who holds the position of Chief of the Antitrust Trial Section rates compensation of $7,500 a year. But you cannot give him that position through the civil service. He ought not to be on as a special assistant, but we do not know of any other way to handle it. I have just been informed that the committee put the antitrust allotment under the special assistants' roll this year for the first time.

Mr. ANDRETTA. Under the pay of special assistants.

Mr. KEENAN. Under the pay of special assistants, although their duties are well known.

Here is John Will Aiken, who is getting $7,500 a year, who is the chief trial attorney on the matter of collusive bidding. That is one of the most troublesome matters coming before the division, and requires dealing with the largest concerns in the United States, the largest industries, a matter that must be handled with understanding, and requiring a man who has background and training, and who is a very high-grade lawyer.

Here is Mac Asbill, who is Administrative Assistant to the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Land Division. He is drawing compensation of $8,000 a year. The far-flung activities of the Government, in the Lands Division require work done that I think a few years ago would have equaled a good part of the work done by the entire Department of Justice. And it must be ably done. There is a great deal of room for waste and leakage, unless you have competent men of Mr. Asbill's type at the head of it.

William Webster Barron is paid $7,500 a year. He is Chief of the Appellate Section of the Criminal Division. He supervises all appeal, legislative and prison matters, including the preparation of briefs in the Supreme Court and general legal memoranda.

Mr. Barron came into the Department while I was head of the Criminal Division, I think at something like $5,000 a year. Today he has available to him many offers to go into private practice at compensation far exceeding the sum we are paying him, and he is staying in the Department as a matter of loyalty to us.

I am mentioning those only in the higher brackets, Mr. Chairman. Here is Wendell Berge, who is Assistant to the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division. He supervises the work of the entire division. In addition to that he is handling the A. A. A. milk cases, and there are 30 of them in the Boston area. Those matters are of such transcendant importance to the department that they are handled by the man who supervises the work of the entire Antitrust Division. His compensation is fixed at $8,000 a year.

Now, Mr. Chairman, these salaries seem large. They are substantial. But when there is considered the type of work that is done, I am sure this committee, that has lawyers on it, and others, will readily perceive the justice of the compensation paid.

We have, for example, one attorney who has been in charge of the prosecution of mortgage cases in New York for 21⁄2 years, in the Criminal Division. There is a tremendous amount of detail work. He has only a small staff working under him. These prosecutions it is felt are of the utmost importance. This man gets $7,500 a year.

The First Assistant to the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Claims Division is Paul Campbell, he gets $7,500.

I think you will find generally that the second men in the divisions are on the special assistants' roll. Sometimes the next man to them, also, for the simple reason that we cannot get these positions allocated. They are not permitted to make payment of such sums of money.

I reiterate, I do not know the solution. It is almost like a spell that has been cast upon the Government in that regard. We do the best we can, which is to go to this roll.

Now, Mr. Chairman, if I may make a final statement about this, we have this list. I do not need to say to this committee that there is no desire to conceal either the name or the amount of compensation or the activities of any individual on it.

We certainly have been placed upon notice that this committee and others have had their attention engaged and have had their minds directed toward the justification of putting men on the pay roll who were not working in the division, or whose employment was not justified, at higher salaries than they deserved. But we must earnestly invite the most minute inspection of the committee to this matter and offer our full services in giving any further explanation of it that we

can.

Mr. BACON. I think in view of the interest that several Members of the House have expressed in this list, that the whole list ought to go into the record.

Mr. MCMILLAN. We will insert the list in the record when the item is taken up in the bill.

DIFFICULTY IN SECURING PROPER CLASSIFICATION OF SPECIAL ASSISTANTS

Mr. MCMILLAN. You referred to the fact a moment ago, Judge, of the difficulty you met in the classification of your special assistants who are now employed with you, through the Civil Service Commission. Have you any suggestions to offer as to how that condition could be remedied? Is legislation necessary?

Mr. KEENAN. I am informed that the State Department, for example, has a certain amount allocated to it that may be expended without regard to the Classification Act. I think that that would be one way. I would hesitate to suggest or advise any measure that would cause unwarranted or unintelligent criticism of us or of the committee or of the Congress. We know the feeling that people. have toward the so-called merit system in the Government.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I recognize the problem that you have there, in view of the limitations under which you are now operating.

Mr. KEENAN. It would be satisfactory to us if we could have permanent positions, and then have the committee decide whether we should try to pay less than we are paying these men. It will amount to the same thing.

SALARIES OF DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEYS IN THE

FIELD

Mr. MCMILLAN. Judge Keenan, I wanted to ask you something about the district attorneys and assistant district attorneys in the field. Will you make a statement on those positions, as part of your general statement?

Mr. KEENAN. Yes. I have repeatedly stated that our men in the field, we feel, are underpaid. We believe there is a reason for it. The law permits both the United States attorney and his assistants to practice law outside the Department. There was contemplated, in the earlier days, much less activity in those offices than exists today. In some of the smaller communities-there are not many today-some time does exist for that kind of outside work. But today we judge the assistants' jobs particularly on a basis of full-time work from everybody, and when you get anybody's full time as an assistant United States attorney, with the relative purchasing power of the dollar as it is today, at $3,200, after a man has gone through school and has left his high school and college and law school, and deserves the appointment, it seems to me that that is a minimum figure.

We asked for that and last year this committee was considerate enough and thoughtful enough to suggest that we get up a more detailed statement on this subject. We ran against the obstacle of the budget. They turned us down on it. We have it available here and will submit it or not, as the committee sees fit.

Mr. MCMILLAN. At a later time during the hearings we will take up in detail the question of these Assistant District Attorneys.

Mr. KEENAN. It seems to me it is almost as plain as when you name the letters of the alphabet, that $3,200 a year is the minimum that ought to be offered to attorneys, lawyers, and I further say that this committee of Congress is experienced enough and thoughtful enough to know that you get what you pay for in the long run. you will not get much more than that.

In the New York district, for example, we have 52 men. to lose a great number of those men as time goes on.

And

We expect

We have another basis of comparison. It is very unsatisfactory to ask your United States attorney to accept less compensation than that which is paid to the county prosecutor or the State's attorney, or the district attorney of the State or its subdivision, as it is known. And he has his assistants.

Throughout the United States-you may take any city you wish as an example-the man in the United States attorney's office and his assistants are grossly underpaid in comparison with men doing similar or even less important work for the cities. We are getting our United States attorneys and their first assistants for money that is substantially less than is paid assistants in the police courts.

Not only in the biggest cities, such as Greater New York, but in medium-size cities, they are being paid substantially less and it has just gotten to a point where nobody seems to be able to do anything about it. And it goes on because we do not get out into the field ourselves and see it, as it is, all over the United States.

But when you do have that opportunity and travel around-and I think I do more of it than a lot of men have done in this position-we can see that there really is not any answer that we can make when we are asked by these men, "Why can't we get more than $2,100 or

$2,200? I have a wife and family and I would like to keep on this work, but I cannot do it." I do think we have a right not to take for granted that these payments of local authorities are all out of line. I think we have the right to take the view that there is something wrong with our own schedule of payments.

So I suggest most respectfully but earnestly to this committee that it is false economy with your lawyer as well as with your doctor. We would like to put up a showing. There are many things that we could do.

Mr. BACON. Of course, it is not the fault of this committee; it is the civil-service classification, is it not?

Mr. KEENAN. No. This is the field, which is outside of the civilservice work. All of the United States attorneys and their assistants are outside of the civil-service. This is the fault of those who act upon the appropriations, all of them.

Mr. MCMILLAN. And that applies as well to the Budget, does it not, Judge?

Mr. KEENAN. Every time I say that, they tell me I am talking about someone else, or the head of the Budget. I did not know it. I do not care to go any farther than that. I do not know how to solve the problem. They are underpaid and I have not heard anybody urge that they are overpaid. It is pretty hard to say that a man who has been an assistant for 3 years and who is trying cases in New York City in a commendable fashion at $1,800 a year is not underpaid.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I am quite willing, Judge, to assume my share of the responsibility in this matter. But I would like to say this. We are constantly urged to uphold the estimates of the Budget and to comply with the terms of the Budget estimates. I would like to see some of that responsibility fastened on them in this matter.

Mr. KEENAN. All we can do, Mr. Chairman, is lay our facts before you as earnestly and accurately as we can and as definitely and emphatically as we can. We can lay these facts before the branch of the Government that has to do them. That we have done with the Budget, and that we have done, with great respect, with this committee.

AMOUNT OF ESTIMATE FOR DISTRICT ATTORNEYS SUBMITTED TO THE BUDGET BY THE DEPARTMENT

Mr. TARVER. When you submitted your estimates to the Budget, did you ask for more money for these attorneys than is contained in the Budget estimate?

Mr. KEENAN. Oh, yes.

Mr. TARVER. How much did you ask?

Mr. KEENAN. We asked for an increase of $140,000, and they gave us an increase of $15,000.

Mr. TARVER. What would that amount of money have enabled you to do so far as the compensation of these individual attorneys is concerned?

Mr. ANDRETTA. That would have enabled us to make a reallocation. of several of the United States Attorneys' positions in the key places throughout the country that were badly out of line, and also a reallocation of first assistants in some of our offices that would be commensurate with their work and responsibilities; and in addition would have brought 108 assistants up to a minimum of $3,200.