much of a believer in makeshift remedies. What would be your idea of a complete remedy for this situation?

Secretary LANSING. If I was going to suggest, and I hesitate to do it, I would suggest $35,000 as an adequate salary, with a certain discretionary power in the Secretary of State as to post allowances to supplement the salary in the event of very serious differences in expenses. Most men, even if they have only a small fortune, would be willing to expend $5,000 or $10,000 out of their own funds in order to have the honor of representing their country abroad, but even if it should cost them $40,000 or $45,000 a year, if they expend more than that, I really do not think it would be absolutely necessary, yet it is very hard at the present time to fix what is a proper expenditure on the part of an ambassador or minister because of the state of the world, the value of money, the high cost of living, which all enter into it, and there is where there ought to be a certain latitude in post allowances to take care of it.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think we will ever have it properly. adjusted until we have purchased embassies and furnished them for our representatives?

Secretary LANSING. No, sir; I do not.

The CHAIRMAN. Then your idea would be buy embassies and furnish them and pay the ambassador an adequate salary?

Secretary LANSING. Yes; an adequate salary.

The CHAIRMAN. Would there be any objection to making the salary at the Court of St. James materially larger than in Argentina?

Secretary LANSING. I can not see any objection. I would like to think about it, but at present I can see no objection to it. I will endeavor to get a report of expenses or an estimate by each one of our ambassadors as to what their expenses will be or have been per year.

Mr. MOORES. Is it not a fact that the British adjust the pay of their ambassadors? My only authority for it is Whittaker's Almanac. I do not think they are all alike.

Secretary LANSING. I know they do.

The CHAIRMAN. Great Britain does.

Secretary LANSING. I see no reason why a distinction should not be made. Unquestionably, Great Britain has a larger expense in France than probably any other country.

Mr. ROGERS. Great Britain pays its ambassador to Italy $35,000, her ambassador to Japan $25,000, and her ambassador to France $57,500.

Secretary LANSING. I think the simple way would be to pay a minimum salary and to grant a sufficient post allowance so that in the discretion of the Secretary the salary could be supplemented to meet necessary expenses and to regulate the standard of representation which should exist in each capital.

Mr. FLOOD. In what respect does the post allowance assist the ambassador or minister?

Secretary LANSING. It could be given to him, for example, for living expenses, for servants, if necessary, or as supplementing his expenses. We have done that through the war in order to meet, the abnormal increase in the cost of living in the different countries.

Mr. FLOOD. I have been under the impression that the post allowance was distributed on the basis of such a per cent on the salary— fixed on the cost of living-in a particular place, and applied to all officials except ambassadors and ministers.

Secretary LANSING. You say it does not apply?

Mr. FLOOD. That is my impression.

Secretary LANSING. No; it does not apply to ambassadors and ministers; but I say that it should apply to ambassadors and ministers also, and then we could put them on a minimum basis of salary with an increased post allowance.

The CHAIRMAN. That would vest a little too much power in the department and raise an objection that is often raised here. How would this plan strike you, that when we reach this question-and if we do not reach it this session we will in the next one—that we take up each country and investigate with considerable care the expenses that our ambassador has and fix a salary for that particular place without regard to the salaries paid our representatives in other countries? England undoubtedly does it, and she, therefore, could not object, and other countries follow the same practice.

Mr. CARR. Why not give a definite minimum salary to the ministers and ambassadors and then fix an allowance based on the cost of living?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; that would be a better way.

Mr. FLOOD. The department already has that authority under the contingent fund.

Secretary LANSING. That would be a discretionary power. I would be very glad to be relieved of any discretionary power, which has always been a difficulty, but there would have to be considerable discretion left to the department in regard to post allowances.

Mr. FLOOD. I think it would be better to fix it in the bill.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Secretary, referring back to my reference to Turkey and Austria-Hungary, etc., I notice that among the missions recommended, most of which I think are already authorized by existing law, are Czechoslovakia and Poland and Finland?

Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROGERS. Has not Jugoslavia been recognized also?
Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROGERS. Why is it that no provision has been made for a minister in that case?

Mr. SABATH. That comes under Serbia.

Secretary LANSING. It comes under Serbia, but I do think that should be changed to the proper name. Our minister is accredited to the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, his nomination. for that position having been confirmed last July.

Mr. ROGERS. Yes. I read in the press something about the minister of the Serbs, Slovenes, and Croats. You think that should be

changed?

Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROGERS. So far as I understand, the old Montenegro is, in part, at least, now included in the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes?

Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROGERS. And yet we have the nomenclature " Greece and Montenegro" just as of old?

Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROGERS. In other words, your suggestion to wait on the peace treaty does not seem to be decisive in this matter, because we are creating new missions based upon the theory that the peace treaty will go through and yet we are retaining all the old missions sacredly just as if there was not going to be any change in the order of things. Secretary LANSING. The new ones we recognize regardless of the peace treaty.

Mr. ROGERS. That is true, but if the peace treaty does not go through I take it that some of those things might have to be "unrecognized," if there is such a word?

Secretary LANSING. No. The recognition of Poland and Czechoslovakia and the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, has already taken place. It makes no difference whether we have a peace treaty or not; we have recognized them as independent States.

Mr. ROGERS. Take the case of the Netherlands and Luxemburg, which adjoin, and also Greece and Montenegro, which adjoin? Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROGERS. It may be that in the old days that joinder was proper, but is it still proper now?

Secretary LANSING. What is going to happen to Montenegro I do not believe anybody knows. It is at present occupied by JugoSlavia and administered as a part of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes. The United States has never formally recognized this union and there is still a Montenegrin charge d'affaires in Washington. I believe the best course eventually will be to discontinue accrediting a minister to both Greece and Montenegro. There is a state of chaos there and therefore we left it as it was. I think we can subsequently amend it if there is a determination as to what is going to be done.

Mr. ROGERS. The provision for Finland is subject to a point of order, I suppose, because it is not authorized by existing law? Secretary LANSING. No; it is not authorized.

Mr. MOORES. Mr. Secretary, I would like to ask you, to refresh my memory, what diplomatic residences we now either own or rent? Secretary LANSING. We own residences in China, Japan, Turkey, and Cuba-I think we own the one in Japan.

Mr. MOORES. We are paying ground rent, however?

Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir.

Mr. MOORES. We pay a nominal sum but we really own it?
Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir.

Mr. MOORES. You have mentioned China, Turkey, Japan and Cuba?

Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir. You should add to that the fact that we are building one in Salvador and we have an appropriatior for one in Mexico and one in Costa Rica.

Mr. SABATH. Mr. Chairman, I notice the provision for AustriaHungary. Is it not a fact that there is no such thing in existence and more, that Austria is a separate State recognized by the Allies, and, of course, by our country; and also Hungary, although we have not recognized Hungary as a separate and distinct State?

Secretary LANSING. No. They are still a dual monarchy although we are treating them separately. They are a confederated monarchy so far as we recognize them, although we have dealt with Austria as a republic, the Republic of German Austria.

Mr. SABATH. Has Lithuania been recognized by some of the foreign nations as a separate and independent State?

Secretary LANSING. I believe she has.

Mr. SABATH. Have we recognized Lithuania as a separate State?
Secretary LANSING. No. We believe in a greater Russia.
Mr. SABATH. A greater what?

Secretary LANSING. A greater Russia, a great Russia. The only one that we have been willing to recognize as separate and distinct from the old Russia has been Finland, for the reason that Russia should remain a great State instead of being divided up and becoming the prey at once of the Central Powers.

Mr. ACKERMAN. You recognize Poland as a separate State? Secretary LANSING. Yes, but that takes in a portion of Germany, a portion of Austria, and a portion of Russia.

Mr. SABATH. Including Warsaw?

Secretary LANSING. Of course, that is a resurrection.

Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Secretary, I would like to know what portion of this contingent fund goes to the chief embassies?

Secretary LANSING. The contingent fund?

Mr. FLOOD. Yes, sir.

Secretary LANSING. I do not know that I can give you the exact figures. Possibly Mr. Carr can do so.

Mr. FLOOD. We increased that fund very largely in the past five or six years for that purpose.

Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir.

Mr. FLOOD. It is for the purpose of assisting embassies?

Mr. CARR. For assisting the heads of missions in their operating expenses. I do not think, Mr. Flood, that any of the money, with the exception of one case, has ever been spent for rental of residences. I looked that up the other day and I was unable to find that it had been.

Mr. FLOOD. Just for the chanceries.

Mr. CARR. Just for the chanceries. I found in one case, when Mr. Page was in Rome, that he was permitted to apply a small part of his contingent fund, approximately $5,000 a year, to the rent of the embassy residence. That was the only case that I have so far found.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the difference between post allowances and the contingent fund?

Mr. CARR. The contingent fund is the fund for ordinary running expenses, paper, telephone, messenger, telegrams, rent, taxis where necessary, furniture, etc. The post allowance is a separate allowance for the purpose of, during these war times, augmenting a man's income in some proportion at least to the increase in the cost of living since 1914.

Secretary LANSING. And in certain cases in regard to exchange. Mr. CARR. Yes; in China, for example.

Secretary LANSING. And Chile.

Mr. CARR. In China the price of silver has sent the exchange up, so that a salary you fixed last year in gold is worth in China only half what it was in 1914, and therefore, it becomes necessary to add a supplemental allowance to bring that salary up to the purchasing power that it had in 1914.

161477-202

The CHAIRMAN. What misled me about it was, that in our city government, in Pittsburgh, the contingent fund is the same as the post allowance; that is, it is used to meet emergencies as they arise. Mr. CARR. The contingent fund in these bills is a continuing appropriation for miscellaneous running expenses.

Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Carr, in 1915 we made a considerable amount of increase in the amount of the contingent fund. The Secretary of State then stated to the committee that it was for the purpose of increasing the allowance of certain missions for the purpose of enabling them to pay rent. I recall that $15,000 of that fund was to go to London, $15,000 to Paris, $10,000 to Rome, $10,000 to Madrid, and so on. Since then we have increased that fund from $400,000 to $1,300,000. I wanted to ascertain whether there was any larger amount of money going to these missions for the purpose of maintenance?

Mr. CARR. NO. As a matter of fact, Mr. Flood, I recall that last year it was the opinion of the committee that approximately $100,000 of that contingent fund was authorized to be spent for the rent of residences of heads of missions. When I came to look that matter up in the preparation of the estimates this year, I was unable to find that any, except a small amount allowed to Mr. Page, had ever been spent for that purpose. I have not had time to inquire why. I suspect that it was merely overlooked. The large expenditure, however, from the contingent fund to which you allude was an expenditure for the running expenses of the Diplomatic Service. By that I mean rent, stationery, furniture, telegraphing, messenger service, etc.

Mr. FLOOD. Incidental expenses-expenses incident to the conditions of the war?

Mr. CARR. Yes.

Secretary LANSING. We had 100 men in London, for example, and large numbers at other capitals.

Mr. CARR. The greatest expense in that appropriation was for telegraphing, amounting to $800,000 or $900,000 a year, which, as you see, left very little out of the fund for the ordinary running expenses.

Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Secretary, may I ask you another question? Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir.

Mr. ACKERMAN. You said a few moments ago that these post allowances so far as China was concerned were used for the purpose of making up the difference in the rate of exchange, a dollar not purchasing there but half what it was in 1914?

Secretary LANSING. Yes, sir.

Mr. ACKERMAN. What is the practice observed now where the rate of exchange is so much against the country, say in Paris, Brussels, and Rome, where instead of getting 5 francs for the dollar a man can get 11 francs and 40 centimes for a dollar?

Secretary LANSING. The change is not great. The cost of living has gone up at the same time. In China it is a question of exchange entirely. So far as the European countries are concerned, where the exchange is in our favor, where they get more local money, at the same time the prices have gone up much in proportion. That is where the difficulty lies.