amount of money which goes into them. They are worth infinitely more than we can possibly imagine, from the amount of money contributed.

Mr. BEGG. Another thing I can not understand is where you have been able to get men to serve on this commission for no salary for 24 years.

Mr. CARR. There are many men, especially scientists and students who would be very glad to serve their Government by representing it at these conferences, merely if their expenses were paid. They are not usually men of considerable fortunes, and they can not afford to do these things at their own expense. But they will be very glad to give their services to the Government if the Govern ment will pay their traveling expenses.

Mr. SMITH of Illinois. Simply from the humanitarian standpoint?

Mr. CARR. Yes. A member of this particular commission, I happen to know, received the Indian member of this commission not long ago. There was no appropriation for that kind of expense on the part of our representative on this commission, so rather than see the Indian member turned away or thrown entirely on his own resources, in his desire to look into the prisons of the United States and find out what we were doing in that regard, the commissioner representing the United States spent his own money in taking care of the Indian commissioner. I tell you that merely to indicate to you the attitude of the men who are members of some of these commissions toward questions of that sort. That is not a question of money it is a question of science, a question of securing better treatment of prisoners and promoting more enlightened work in that direction.

Mr. NEWTON. We have a prison reform association in the United States. I know in my own city there are men who spend their own money purely from a humanitarian standpoint to further the aims of that association.

Mr. CARR. That is generally true of certain types of men in all countries.

Mr. CONNALLY. Is it not true with reference to this particular commission, as it is with all these various international commissions, that it is not so much for the benefit of the State Department in getting a knowledge of these different countries as it is to assist the State Department in connection with our international intercourse? Mr. CARR. It benefits the State Department in its general intercourse as between the United States and other nations. And, still more, it does what Dr. Rowe so well explained the other day: It starts groups of men in this country cooperating with groups of men in other countries. When we get that going on in several different lines of work-in several different professions, if you please-in the course of 10, 15, or 20 years a marvelous work has been done which means a great deal toward a better understanding, and that better understanding means a great deal toward decreasing the difficulties which, let us say, our merchants have in their relations with other countries in carrying on commerce with other countries.

It means a great deal of difficulty removed which our Secretar of State has to encounter in bringing about better relations and i bringing about the settlement of questions with other countries. Al these things have a very direct bearing upon our foreign relations

Mr.

Mr.R

our political relations, and a distinctly important effect upon our commercial relations with other countries. Judging the matter from the extent to which I have had to look into it, I have thought that we ought to do more of it, that we ought to give more energetic support to international commissions. I think they accomplish a commendable and an important work.

Mr. ACKERMAN. I understood you to say our representative on this commission had served for 24 years.

Mr. CARR. No; the present representative on the commission was appointed at a very recent date.

Mr. ACKERMAN. Is he appointed for a special term?

Mr. CARR. No.

Mr. ACKERMAN. For as long as he may serve?

Mr. CARR. For as long as the administration wishes him to serve.

BUREAU OF INTERPARLIAMENTARY UNION FOR PROMOTION OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION.

Mr. ROGERS. There is a somewhat similar item on the next page, "Bureau of Interparliamentary Union for Promotion of International Arbitration." That was carried in the bill for some years, but was dropped last year?

Mr. CARR. Yes.

Mr. MASON. From what I have been informed, that is a very useful organization.

Mr. CARR. That was a matter in which this committee was particularly interested, and in which it has been particularly interested for a good many years. Mr. Bartholdt used to be especially interested in it.

Mr. NEWTON. Did not Mr. Moores attend an interparliamentary congress in Switzerland not long ago?

Mr. CARR. Yes; I think so. I think this bureau had its origin in the relationships which sprang up between various legislative bodies in different countries. There have been conferences held in various countries by the representatives of the principal countries of the world, and other countries have been members of those conferences.

PAN AMERICAN UNION.

Mr. NEWTON. I want to ask you a question in reference to the item on page 14 for the Pan American Union. It is provided there that there shall be credited to the appropriation of $100,000 any moneys received from the other American Republics for the support of the union. Just how much support have these Central and South American countries contributed to that fund?

Mr. CARR. They contribute an amount based upon populationtheir proportion according to their population. I can not tell you offhand just what that amount is.

Mr. NEWTON. Do they pay it?

Mr. CARR. Yes; of course.

Mr. ROGERS. My recollection is that we pay about 80 per cent, based on population, and the other 20 Republics pay the other 20 per cent. Mr. CARR. I think that is correct.

Mr. NEWTON. I presume that is the reason it is made up in this form.

Mr. CARR. Yes.

Mr. ROGERS. Up to last year our quota was $85,000, and it ran last year to $100,000, did it not?

Mr. CARR. It ran last year to $100,000, upon the suggestion of the representatives of the member Governments to make that recommendation to all Governments, and the recommendation was made to this Government, and this Government provided its quota of $100,000.

Mr. ROGERS. I suppose nothing has happened to make it appropriate to reduce that amount to the original figure?

Mr. CARR. I think not, because one of the reasons why that was made was because of the increased expenses in running that organization.

INTERPARLIAMENTARY UNION.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Carr, you have not really contributed very much information in regard to this Interparliamentary Union. Is there anything more you can say on that item? What is the history of the appropriation?

Mr. CARR. The history of it is that an American group in the Interparliamentary Union, made up of members of the American Congress, was organized in the spring of 1904, on the initiative of Hon. Richard Bartholdt, a Member of Congress from Missouri, and ever since that time an American group has participated in the different conferences of the union. They had been having biennial conferences up until the war began. They held conferences at Paris, London, Rome, Berne, The Hague, Brussels, Budapest, Christiania, Vienna, and Geneva, and in 1904 Congress appropriated $50,000 for the expenses of a conference which took place in St. Louis, Mo.

The bureau is located in Brussels. There are 20 different countries which make annual contributions, according to the size and population of the different countries, for the maintenance of the bureau, including Great Britain, Germany, Russia, France, Austria, Italy. Spain, Japan, Turkey, Belgium, The Netherlands, Portugal, Hungary, Greece, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, Roumania, and Serbia. It is composed of members of the various parliaments of the world. The bureau at Brussels keeps a list of the various members and directs their formation, attends to the execution of the decisions of the council, and keeps documents concerning international arbitration as well as other documents of the union.

Mr. ROGERS. Do you know what the total budget is?

Mr. CARR. I do not have the details of the total budget, but there is a very complete history of the union in House Document 645, Sixty-second Congress, third session.

Mr. ROGERS. How long have we been appropriating this $2,000 a year for this purpose?

Mr. CARR. We used to appropriate $2,500, but in 1915 we reduced it to $2,000.

Mr. ROGERS. Was last year the first year in which we eliminated it from the act?

Mr. CARR. Last year seems to be the first year that that appropriation was eliminated. There was an appropriation in 1919.

Mr. BEGG. I want to ask you this question seriously: The league of nations is a fact in Europe, or will be. Will these other countries contribute to this organization, with the provisions as they are in the league of nations?

Mr. CARR. I do not know.

Mr. BEGG. It seems to me this is a wholly useless proposition if the league of nations functions.

Mr. CARR. NO; I should not agree to that, because this is a union made up of representatives of the legislative bodies of the world, whereas the league of nations is a league made up of the Governments of the world.

Mr. BEGG. But if I understand the league of nations rightly, it takes absolute control of matters of peace and war in all countries that are members of the league for providing a satisfactory means whereby adjustments of conditions between nations must be handled. Mr. MASON. I have read the last report on that proposition, and I have read the covenant of the league, and I think your question is very timely, for my recollection is that all of the activities are provided for. I am very strongly for this Interparliamentary Union, but since you asked the question it does seem that all the activities provided for in this Interparliamentary Union are provided for in the league of nations, and, with the exception of the United States, that has been practically adopted by all the countries. So it would seem as if this might be duplication. They get statistics and they get reports and they keep people posted upon all questions of international arbitration, and they want to bring it about.

Mr. CARR. May I suggest that quite irrespective of what the league of nations may or may not accomplish, which none of us knows at the present moment, I wonder if we clearly note the distinction between the kind of thing the Interparliamentary Union is and a league such as the league of nations, in which the different governments are represented as governments.

As I understand the matter, the International Parliamentary Union is not a governmental organization. It is an association of legislative bodies of the different governments, which is quite a different thing from an association of representatives of the executive branches of the different governments. This is for the purpose, as I understand it, of influencing public opinion in the different countries. The other kind of organization would be for the purpose of coordinating executive action in the different countries, or governmental action.

Mr. CONNALLY. Let me make this suggestion along that line. Under the form of the league of nations, even with the strong reservations proposed, the league of nations would not obtain jurisdiction of a dispute if the nations themselves decided to settle it by arbitration. So there is nothing inconsistent in the work of this union and the existence of the league of nations, because if those men by their own machinery and method of arbitrating a dispute can settle it, it is never referred to the council of the league of nations for settlement, and I think that is very attractive work which is carried on, because if private individuals can settle their disputes without resorting to the courts, good lawyers always advise them to do that.

Mr. CARR. Indeed, I should suppose the Interparliamentary Union would be a very useful adjunct to the league of nations or any other organization of that sort.

NINETEENTH CONFERENCE, INTERPARLIAMENTARY UNION.

Mr. ROGERS. In this connection, I would like to invite the attention of the committee to the item on page 23, extending the appropriation of $40,000 made for the 1919 conference of the Interparliamentary Union, which was supposed to have been held in Washington in 1915, but which was, of course, postponed because of the war, and has been postponed year after year since that time. This committee dropped this item from the current appropriation act, and I notice the department asks its restoration. I think whatever action we take should be somewhat with reference to these two items; in other words, they go together.

The committee last year dropped out both of these items. The question would naturally be presented this year whether that action shall be continued, or both items be restored, and I think it may be we will use the wording of the second item as well as that of the first for this purpose.

Mr. CARR. With regard to the second item for the Nineteenth Conference of the Interparliamentary Union, the department had the impression that the dropping of that item was largely because of the war situation, and that possibly with the restoration of peace Congress would wish to consider the holding of that congress. After all, it is a matter for the legislative branch of the Government rather than for the executive branch of the Government to consider, and the item was put into the estimates by the Secretary of State in order that it might be brought to the attention of Congress for such action as that body might wish to take.

Mr. ROGERS. Have there been conferences held in 1915 or since which in a sense replaced the one intended to be held at Washington? I was interested to see what relationship the conference which Mr. Moores has been attending bore to the one which was to have been held in Washington?

Mr. CARR. I have no information about what has taken place since the war began.

Mr. HOUGHTON. Might I suggest that we pass those items until we go into executive session?

Mr. ROGERS. Very well.

INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY CONGRESS.

Mr. ROGERS. The next new item is the item on page 16, asking for an appropriation of $400 "to pay the quota of the United States as an adhering member of the International Railway Congress for the year ending April 15, 1921."

Mr. HOUGHTON. There could not be any question about that, could there?

Mr. ROGERS. It has been dropped for four years.

Mr. CARR. The United States became an adhering member of the International Railway Congress in 1905. Although the obligation is not based upon a treaty, the expenses of the sessions of the con