Mr. CARR. That is an item which is peculiar to Constantinople. The embassy proper is located in the city of Constantinople. Every oreign mission has its summer residence on the Bosporus, some listance away. Also, there is occasion to visit the opposite side f the channel from time to time, and to do other things which ave to be done in some kind of a launch. So it is simply a choice of having one ready constantly for use or endeavoring to pick up ne when it is possible to do so, which is not a satisfactory arrangenent. So for years the embassy has had at its disposal this $1,800. Mr. DICKINSON. Is not an item for an automobile carried as an ncidental expense at some of the other capitals, and could that not De done in this case?

Mr. CARR. As a matter of fact, I suppose it could be done in that way, though I may say for your information that we do not mainain automobiles for the embassies.

Mr. CONNALLY. If you are going to carry it at all, would it not be preferable to carry it in this way, because the money might be spent for some other purpose if it were not carried in this way?

Mr. CARR. I presume that is the precise reason why it is carried in this form, and it was not deemed desirable to have it paid out of i lump sum.

Mr. ROGERS. As a matter of fact, I suppose we have not been expending anything under this item for some years, and we may not for some time to come.

Mr. TEMPLE. We did in 1915.

Mr. CARR. We still have on hand the amount appropriated last

year.

Mr. ROGERS. Are there any other questions in relation to any of the items down to the bottom of page 11? If not, suppose you say a word or two in reference to the item relating to the International Boundary Commission between the United States and Mexico, with special reference to the reappropriation of unexpended balances which are asked for.

INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY COMMISSION, UNITED STATES AND MEXICO.

Mr. CARR. That recommendation has been submitted to Congress on the suggestion of the American representative on the Boundary Commission, who appeared before the committee last year and explained his needs himself.

Mr. ROGERS. That is Judge Hill?

Mr. CARR. That is Judge Hill, yes. I presume you understand that the reason he wants that unexpended balance appropriated is because he expects that there will be this year some expenditures, or a smaller expenditure, whereas next year there may be a larger expenditure, and he did not want to ask for a new appropriation to the extent of the amount he wants to expend. If you will notice, he decreases his demand for a new appropriation by $5,000 plus the unexpended balance. Last year, that is, the year ended June 30, 1919, there was an unexpended balance of $5,135, which, of course, went back into the Treasury.

Mr. ROGERS. Is Judge Hill in Washington?

Mr. CARR. Not so far as I know. But I assume the committee would desire to have him before it to explain this item.

Mr. ROGERS. I think so. I think the committee will have a great deal of curiosity to know why it is going to be necessary to use $40,000 in connection with the boundary between the United States and Mexico, in view of the unsettled conditions between the two countries.

Mr. CARR. Let me call your attention to the hearing before the committee last year, when Judge Hill appeared before the committee in reference to this item. The appropriation given him for the present year was for the purpose, not exactly of plotting boundaries, but for making some investigations into the means of controlling the waters tributary to the Rio Grande in such a way as to prevent the floods of the Rio Grande and the constant shifting of the bed of the stream, and with it the boundary between the United States and Mexico.

Mr. DICKINSON. Would this item come within the rule of being not only necessary, but being imperative under existing conditions down there?

Mr. CARR. That is a question. A certain part of this is an international obligation, and that, of course, is because it is done by virtue of treaties between the United States and Mexico; that is, the ascertaining of the boundary.

Mr. DICKINSON. What part of it?

Mr. CARR. The part of it that relates to the investigation into means of controlling the waters tributary to the Rio Grande is not, I believe, a part of the treaty, but was considered by the commissioner and by Congress to be a very desirable work to undertake to the end that possibly the work of this boundary commission might be shortened and made eventually unnecessary.

Mr. DICKINSON. Can you give the committee an estimate as to what part of this item comes under the treaty obligation?

Mr. CARR. I can not give you an estimate of the proportion that comes under the treaty obligation. I would have to refer you to Judge Hill for that. It seems from the data I have here, according to estimates made before this committee last year, that it was understood this work would continue for about two years, in the making of surveys and investigations into the possibilities of controlling the tributary waters.

Mr. ROGERS. Have you any information as to what work Mexico is doing, corresponding with this item?

Mr. CARR. I have not, except that I understand that the Mexican commissioner is working with this commission.

Mr. ROGERS. Have you any estimate as to how the expenditures for the last fiscal year were apportioned?

Mr. CARR. I have not here, but it will be easy to get that data.

Mr. ROGERS. My impression is, without having discussed the matter with the committee, that the feeling will be quite general that this will be a good place for some saving.

Mr. HOUGHTON. Is not the same thing true in connection with the boundary line between Alaska and Canada, and between the United States and Canada?

Mr. ROGERS. That is on a different basis. For the last half-dozen years the political situation between Mexico and the United States has been such that no effective work could be done. On the other hand, between the United States and Canada, and between Alaska

and Canada, the political situation is absolutely settled and stable. In addition to that, we have had on the boundary an extremely efficient commissioner who has been running the affairs of that commission on behalf of the United States. There has been some doubt, especially under the administration of Mr. John Wesley Gaines, the commissioner to the South, whether the work there was being done wisely and whether it was useful work.

BOUNDARY COMMISSION, UNITED STATES AND CANADA.

Mr. HOUGHTON. What is the imperative element in connection with the Alaska-Canada boundary?

Mr. CARR. I would say in a word or so that this work of agreeing on the boundary line between the United States and Canada is a treaty obligation undertaken by virtue of a treaty between the United States and Great Britain. It has been going on for a long period of years. It is now virtually nearing completion. The appropriations have been gradually decreased until the estimate for 1921 is only $55,000 as against $250,000 and $300,000 in past years. It would really be a pity to stop that work now when it is so near completion, and it will take only a short time longer, I think. I do not think it will occupy more than a year or so to have the whole work completed.

There is an increase here of $15,000, which is for the express purpose of re-marking in a little more detailed manner the boundary out in Western Canada so as to fix the ownership of certain mining properties which have been opened up out there, and the work, I think, has extended there so as to bring the question of the boundary into dispute, as to whether the properties are in British or American territory. So that, I think, to carry this particular work on would be not only in the interest of the Government but in the interest of our own people out there.

Mr. MASON. Twenty years ago, when we made that treaty, I remember seeing them at work on that boundary. That was 20 years ago. This is under the same treaty, is it not, and the work has not yet been completed?

Mr. TEMPLE. The treaty was made in 1908.

Mr. MASON. There was a treaty made in 1898 in regard to Alaska? Mr. CARR. They have come from the Arctic Circle all the way down the west side and then across from the Pacific to the eastern end of Maine and along the St. Lawrence River, and they have practically marked the entire boundary now. The only part remaining to be completed is that in the eastern part of the United States, a short stretch there, and this part in British Columbia, which needs to be marked in more detail for the benefit of American mining interests, and a short distance in Minnesota.

Mr. TEMPLE. There is a part in Maine, and some in New York, and a part in Minnesota that has not yet been marked.

Mr. ROGERS. On pages 4 and 5 of the letter of the Secretary of State in explanation of the items of the bill, you will find a fairly detailed statement of the purposes and basis of the expenditures under this item.

Are there any other questions on any of the items down to the bottom of page 13? If not, the next new item is on page 14, provid

ing for the International Prison Commission. Is that a treaty obligation, Mr. Carr?

INTERNATIONAL PRISON COMMISSION.

Mr. CARR. That is not a treaty obligation, but it is an obligation that was undertaken by virtue of a provision in a law enacted by Congress. For example, the diplomatic and consular appropriation bill for the year ending June 30, 1913, contained the language

That the United States shall continue as an adhering member of the International Prison Commission and participate in the work of the said commission, and the Secretary of the Treasury be, and is hereby, authorized to pay the pro rata share of the United States in the administrative expenses of the International Prison Commission and the necessary expenses of a commissioner to represent the United States on the said commission at its annual meetings, together with necessary clerical and other expenses, out of any money which shall be appropriated for such purpose from time to time by Congress.

So the appropriations for the years from 1916 to 1919, inclusive, were made for that purpose, but so far Congress has not made an appropriation for the current fiscal year.

Mr. BEGG. Is the commission still functioning?

Mr. CARR. It is functioning so far as it can, without any money. Mr. BEGG. What is the purpose of the commission-investigation, or something else?

Mr. CARR. Investigation, and considering ways and means to improve prison legislation in the different countries in reference to the treatment of prisoners, the general improvement of prisons, and so forth. I think they have really done a very useful work in very many ways.

We have found it advisable in view of the moral obligation of the United States as a member of this commission to pay this pro rata share of the expenses of the commission, or its quota, to ask Congress to appropriate as a deficiency the amount which it failed to appropriate for the current year, and that is now before the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. BEGG. Will $2,550 be sufficient to pay our share of the expenses and the commissioner's salary?

Mr. CARR. I think the commissioner gets no salary. That amount is practically all for expenses. That is about all that is paid under that item.

Mr. HOUGHTON. In the act you referred to you say that the Secretary of the Treasury was directed to pay these expenses?

Mr. CARR. Yes.

Mr. ROGERS. The letter of the Secretary of State, in explaining this item, on page 6, says that " Appropriations for the years 1916-1919, inclusive, were $2,250." The amount asked for here is $2,550. Which is the correct amount?

Mr. CARR. The $2,550 is the correct amount.

Mr. ACKERMAN. Is the amount of our share based on a percentage of the total cost of the prison commission, or is it simply an arbitrary sum?

Mr. CARR. The quota is based upon population, as in the case of many of those commissions.

Mr. TEMPLE. It ranges between 25 and 50 francs per million of population.

Mr. ACKERMAN. What is the total amount of the expenses of the commission a year?

Mr. CARR. Last year the accounts audited up to June 30, 1919, amounted to $1,513, but that did not include all the expenses.

Mr. ACKERMAN. That was the share of this Government. What was the entire cost of maintaining the International Prison Commission?

Mr. CARR. That I can not tell you.

Mr. BEGG. Can you tell me readily what countries are participating in the work of this commission?

Mr. CARR. There were 38 countries represented in the congress of 1910, and 20 countries are adhering members of the commission. I do not have the names of the countries here, but they would include practically all the important countries. This prison commission, by the way, exists by virtue of the initiative of the United States itself, which under the authority of a joint resolution of Congress in 1871, sent a commissioner to Europe for the purpose of getting other nations interested in this subject, and the United States has been represented at the various conferences held in Stockholm, in Rome, St. Petersburg, Paris, Brussels, Washington, London, and so forth.

Mr. BEGG. May I ask you another question?

Mr. CARR. Yes.

Mr. BEGG. As I understand it, the commission has been in existence since 1916, and we made appropriations from 1916 to 1919. Have we been paying any since then?

Mr. CARR. We had been paying for some years before this time. Mr. ROGERS. Since 1896?

Mr. CARR. Yes.

Mr. BEGG. I would like to ask another question. Have they done anything more than to investigate?

Mr. CARR. Yes; I think they have done a great deal. For instance, they make a report annually.

Mr. BEGG. To whom?

Mr. CARR. To the various Governments. The report is usually printed by Congress.

Mr. BEGG. It stops there, does it not?

Mr. CARR. I think they have had considerable effect on general prison administration throughout the world.

Mr. TEMPLE. That is all they can do. It is then up to the various Governments. As I understand it, the indeterminate sentence and parole are the results of their investigations and reports.

Mr. BEGG. I want to know whether we have profited in any way by their investigation. In 24 years we ought to be able to get some tangible records.

Mr. TEMPLE. It is said that the indeterminate sentence and the parole of prisoners and other prison reforms have come very largely out of their investigations and reports.

Mr. CARR. If I might suggest, if we did not get anything more out of it than a mere participation in it and the exchange of ideas with the representatives of the other Governments, it would be worth many times the small amount which Congress appropriates for the purpose. It is one of those things and there are a number of them in this bill-concerning which the value is not to be estimated at all by the