President or some definite authority to select the membership of that board, who would undoubtedly take into consideration the welfare of the different interests of the people involved, which must be the stockmen, and any other interests that might come in conflict. While we may refer to it as a political board, it would be political to the extent that it was appointed by the President, but I can not see why it would not be just as right for him to appoint that board as to appoint the Board of Tax Appeals.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. The Board of Tax Appeals is located here in Washington as a part of the Treasury Department. You might as well create a board of tax appeals in the Department of the Interior and provide that their judgment shall be final. That is not parallel in my judgment at all, Senator. What you are trying to get at here is to have some local people, some local interests who know the stock people and who know the range areas, to pass on those matters that arise in the field. Now, to be of any advantage they have to be in the territory, in that particular locality. Certainly they would have to be in the limits of the State. Now, a board of tax appeals here in Washington would not help on a thing of that kind. I understood the Secretary to say he did not object to these local boards at all, providing they were advisory and selected by the stockmen themselves.

Secretary WORK. Absolutely; by the people on the ground.

Senator ODDIE. Then, Mr. Secretary, as between your proposed board and the department, in case of a dispute over a controversial question, you believe that the department should be the final arbiter? Secretary WORK. Yes, sir.

Senator ODDIE. Now, suppose the department should have made. an error in its determination, what would be the course of the stockmen?

Secretary WORK. Go to the courts. We are still subject to the

courts.

Senator ODDIE. You prefer the courts as the final arbiter?
Secretary WORK. The courts are the final arbiter.

Senator PITTMAN. Mr. Secretary, the courts do not have any authority to review questions that are within the discretion of the Department of the Interior.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. They can not review any questions

of fact?

Senator PITTMAN. No; they can not review questions of fact. The CHAIRMAN. But where you have no law you can not get to the courts. That seems to me to be the question here. If you hang up a skeleton of law, then you have no way of getting into the courts. Assistant Secretary FINNEY. We have our bill, and have provisions in it differing from this, would there be any objection to having our bill printed in the record?

The CHAIRMAN. No, indeed. (See p. 27.)

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. While it is somewhat similar to the Phipps bill, there are three sections that are different.

The CHAIRMAN. The Phipps bill, S. 752, has been printed in the committee records. (See p. 13.)

REMISSION, REDUCTION, AND REFUND OF FEES

Secretary WORK. I would like to have it inserted that the Secretary would have the right, during the periods of depletion due to drought and natural causes, to remit, reduce, or refund the fees. That is the only change we would care to make in our bill. This is the language we would like to have go in, as a proviso to section 2 [reading]:

Provided, That during periods of range depletion due to severe drought or other natural causes during the life of the permit or lease, the Secretary of the Interior may, and is hereby authorized, in his discretion, to remit, reduce, refund, in whole or in part, or authorize postponement of payment of grazing fees, so long as the emergency exists.

It is entirely possible that in a dry summer that the leases in some of the areas would be of no value to the permittee, and in that case the fees should be waived.

Senator NORBECK. Is your bill applicable to the forest also?

Secretary WORK. You see, Senator, I would like to get this clear in the public mind. During the summer in your investigation the Department of the Interior was blamed for what the Forest Service was charged with, but we did not get any credit for what they did well. If we did get that credit, I would be willing to balance one against the other, but I hope you will make a distinction between the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service.

Senator KENDRICK. In that connection, in your contention that you did not get any credit for what the Forest Service did, I think Colonel Greeley would make the same contention.

Secretary WORK. What; that he did not get any credit either? Senator KENDRICK. That he did not get any credit.

Secretary WORK. He did not get any credit from our administration, because we did not administer anything. We have had nothing to administer on the ranges.

Senator KENDRICK. I want to say, in support of what our chairman has said, as a member of the committee who attended a few hearings last summer, apparently the one outstanding objection that our western people had to the administration of the national forests was in cases where the Forest Service failed to accept or be influenced by the advice of local people who believed they understood the situation fully and who were inclined to do the thing as they believed it should be done by both the Forest Service and the people. In other words, they wanted some authorized agency, as I listened to the witnesses, whose influence, if not final, might at least be helpful in deciding questions that affected them locally. And I want to say, in connection with their statement, that at least as one member of the committee, I never have had any other idea in the world but what the final word in connection with the control of the forest should be in the hands of the Forest Service and be for it to determine. But the local influence, in my opinion, properly functioning here would do more to solve the problems of the Forest Service in regard to any conditions that may have occurred between the Forest Service and the permittees than any other one thing.

Now, I agree with you fully that a divided authority would not be wise or even advisable here. But there should be some system

established by which the people would have a large measure of local control or home rule, as they call it, in connection with these things. The chairman has indicated that with the conviction that the members of the committee drew from their meetings and the testimony submitted, and I believe that I have already said that the substitution of a local influence in working out-even I may call it working out the small details that harrass and exasperate more than they are entitled to do, would go a long way in adjusting the differences between the Forest Service as it is now operatedSecretary WORK (interposing). Of course, Senator, I can not be expected to take part in the trial of the national forest.

Senator KENDRICK. But it is the occasion of this bill.
Secretary WORK. Let me continue.

Senator ODDIE. Let me add to what Senator Kendrick has said. I listened to a large part of the testimony given by these stockmen at the hearings this summer in the public-land States. My conclusion is that if the local stockmen were given more control of the range, they would be the best conservationists of the public range in the country.

Secretary WORK. Now, if I may be allowed to continue. I do not think there is any difference between the view you have stated and ours, except we do not want to federalize this board. This bill proposes to federalize them. We object to federalizing them, because it would lead to a division of responsibility and authority. But you have your local organizations of stockmen now, all over the West. They are the people that ought to furnish the inspiration to the authority under this bill. But there is no difference between us except that.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary, if we do legalize this board, we want it by an act of Congress, rather than to have it provided for simply by a bureau-a bureau of the Government.

Secretary WORK. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And if we agree that it is meet and proper that they should exist, what objection can there be to granting it by an act of Congress instead of by bureaucratic rule?

Secretary WORK. The division of authority would exist. There would be the division of authority, and the expense. When they provide for no salary, they have traveling expenses. And this bill provides the Department of the Interior shall furnish them room and equipment and everything but salary for their operation. And that makes the department responsible for their expenses; their per diem and expenses, their traveling expenses, and room for their operations. I think that the local boards ought to have more freedom than they would have if federalized, and that the two-that the General Land Office and this local board should not properly be constituted as one board, particularly when the authority of the commissioner of the Secretary is minimized.

Senator KENDRICK. You think, in other words, the local board should be created by regulation of the department rather than authorized by law?

Secretary WORK. Yes; I think so.

The CHAIRMAN. And, then, of course, they are delegated that authority.

Senator PITTMAN. In other words, have you any authority to make a regulation unless it is authorized by law?

Secretary WORK. It has to be protected by law.
Senator PITTMAN. A legal regulation is a law?
Secretary WORK. If it is legal, it is quite so.

Senator PITTMAN. I see a great many objections to the appointment of this board by the President.

Secretary WORK. Yes, sir.

Senator PITTMAN. But suppose the law should provide for the organization of these boards by the election of the boards, there is no objection to that? That is, by these bills it should provide that the boards of the district should be elected by the people of the district, and that the authority to elect should constitute the board

Secretary WORK (interposing). Yes.

Senator PITTMAN. And that that board should try the questions of dispute in regard to priorities, what would be the objection to that?

Secretary WORK. You mean then they would try these questions? That is, they would have a hearing at home?

Senator PITTMAN. Yes; a regular trial and report their conclu

sions.

Secretary WORK. And report their conclusions to the Commissioner of the General Land Office?

Senator PITTMAN. Yes; what would be the objection to that? Secretary WORK. I would like to ask if these local stock boards are legally organized, or if they are voluntary organizations? Assistant Secretary FINNEY. I think they are voluntary. Commissioner SPRY. Are they not, Senator?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Senator PITTMAN. Whether legalized or not. That is a difference in operation between State and Government organization. This is a district organization as we organize a reclamation district. There is no objection to the organization of a district, so-called. The question is, where they have a board, how the board shall be constituted, and what would be the authority of the board.

Now, I have submitted a proposition that you give them local authority as you do a reclamation district to elect the men; and then the department receiving the returns, know that these men are the men they will deal with. I do not think you can find any objection to that. Now, the only difference is, shall they advise you, or make a finding of fact. Now, if they advise you it is advice as if I write to you a letter, or Senator Oddie writes you a letter. And it would probably have the same weight as any advice. But if they make a decision it is primarily correct, but it is subject to your decision whether it is correct or not. That is the only distinction I see in the matter.

Secretary WORK. The question is whether they shall advise the Bureau of the General Land Office or instruct it.

Senator PITTMAN. No; not instruct it. The lower court never instructs the higher court.

Secretary WORK. The question is who would be the higher court? Assistant Secretary FINNEY. The trouble is if this is passed we think this gives them final authority.

Senator PITTMAN. If they have authority to make a decision, a finding of fact, it is primarily correct, but it is subject to the review of the department.

Commissioner SPRY. Why could you not provide for hearings, that hearings shall be held before the land office as in the case of protests or contests?

Senator PITTMAN. Then can you get away from the conditions existing under the conditions now, if you try it before somebody that is totally incompetent, as Judge Finney has suggested?

Commissioner SPRY. And then you would not select the register as being the final arbiter?

Senator PITTMAN. I would not have the register have anything to do with it.

Commissioner SPRY. The registers will have nothing to do with it. they are

Senator ODDIE (interposing). Furthermore, the registers have been handicapped recently.

Assistant Secretary FINNEY. They have more than they can do. Secretary WORK. Right at that point there, before you leave that point, I do not want to leave the impression with any of you that the registers are overworked in the local land offices.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary, under the provisions of S. 2584 the register is only acting as a rubber stamp.

Secretary WORK. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. He has no discretion in the matter. He acts in a clerical capacity.

Secretary WORK. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. It is necessary to have somebody to act in that capacity. Now, whether it is the register or somebody else, in carrying out the intentions of the act, the committee had in mind, so long as it was necessary, that it would lessen the expense.

Now, you have referred several times to the additional expense that it carried in the administering of these grazing lands, and the drain on the Treasury. The answer to that, it seems to me, is that the revenue is created in the same act. So there would be no loss to the Government between what it now has and what would be applied.

Secretary WORK. If that would be taken out as a part of the administration expense.

The CHAIRMAN. That is a part of the expense.

Secretary WORK. But the point I would like to stress is that all local matter should be left to the local people and then if it is necessary for them to move up, let them come up to the land office. Do not set up more machinery. The Government is doing far too much now in many States.

Senator KENDRICK. And would it not be more consistent to provide for an organization and also provide that it should be entirely one of local plan and arrangement?

Secretary WORK. You can legalize it, of course, for specific pur

poses.

Senator KENDRICK. And then as to appointments, provide that these people be selected locally.

Secretary WORK. I think so.