referred to here, but I should like to say that the job was tied up eight times because of a violation not only of the city code but of the labor set-up as it existed in Baltimore.

I should like to to answer Senator Walsh's question as to what benefits are to be derived on a project where the subcontractor bids independently, or at least, directly with the Government as against the general contractor. In a general way that situation was covered, but I should like to add to that, first, that by dealing independently and creating a competitive situation between the subcontractor and the general contractor you preclude the possibility of delay. Secondly, you stabilize the question both of amount and the cost of extra work. It will entirely eliminate the subcontractor doing extra work for the general contractor for nothing under the guise of a favor because the general contractor gave to the subcontractor that particular contract.

And more important than all, to me at least, is the fact that we will get our money on time, and in proper amounts, by dealing directly with the Government instead of dealing with the general contractor. He jobs our payments as well as his cost of the job.

I should like also to confirm this fact, that by dealing directly with the Government you set up a responsible situation, and that carries with it a definite connection on the part of the subcontractor, wherein you guarantee almost exclusively and without legislation the keeping of the work, for the contractor and for labor, in the territory, without actually making it a matter of law.

I thank you.

Senator BARBOUR. With the chairman's permission, I should now like to hand to the committee reporter the pamphlets offered by Mr. Pangborne to be kept with the record.

The CHAIRMAN. That may be done. Anything else, Mr. Fitts?

Mr. FITTS. We have two witnesses who were not able to be with us at the House hearing, representing the American Society of Heating and Ventilating Engineers. They are professionally interested but with really no money interest in this, except that they have the interest of the development of the industry at heart.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be glad to hear them.
Mr. FITTS. I will call on Mr. Mensing.

STATEMENT OF FREDERICK D. MENSING, PHILADELPHIA, PA.

Mr. MENSING. When we were requested by the Heating and Piping Contractors National Association at their last meeting, and the American Society of Heating and Ventilating Engineers of Pittsburgh, to sit in on this matter the question was discussed by that body as to whether we could ethically do it.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you an engineer?

Mr. MENSING. Yes, sir; trading as Mensing & Co., engineers. The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed.

Mr. MENSING. There was a code adopted by all engineering societies in the United States, drawn up by a committee made up of those engineers, and I will read it, the tenth clause [reading]:

He will interest himself in the public welfare in behalf of which he will be ready to apply his special knowledge, skill, and training for the use an benefit of mankind.

That is our excuse for being here. We have no financial interest in it one way or the other. This society was very careful in its council meeting to place itself on record with that intent, and with your permission I will read their resolution [reading]:

Voted: That H. R. bill 9975 relating to contracts for the erection or alteration of public buildings has the approval of the society in so far as it will further the progress of the art in which we are interested; through the preparation of separate plans and specifications for different classes of work; and that the president of the society be empowered to appoint delegates to appear at the hearings to present this view for the consideration of the committee.

That is the only reason we are here. The American Society of Heating and Ventilating Engineers, as you may or may not know, is unique inasmuch as it operates a research department at Pittsburgh through the courtesy of the United States Government in the Bureau of Mines Building. Forty per cent of all moneys paid by way of dues to that society go into that research work, and this society is strongly in favor of this ethical movement to better building conditions for the United States Government.

As to the matter of practicablity, the other member of my committee, Mr. John Cassell, of Philadelphia, over a period of a great number of years spent more than $100,000,000 in the construction of Philadelphia schools without one word of adverse criticism that I have ever heard of from anyone in the matter of that expenditure, while he was doing work as outlined in this bill.

I should like to have Mr. Cassell speak to you.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. The committee will be glad to hear Mr. Cassell.

STATEMENT OF JOHN D. CASSELL, PHILADELPHIA

Mr. CASSELL. Mr. Chairman, with that very elaborate introduction I hardly know what to say. But prior to September of 1931 and for 12 years I was superintendent of buildings of the public schools of Philadelphia. All during that time and for six years prior to that time all our contracts were separated. We separated them into five divisions: General building construction, heating, plumbing, electrical work, and ventilation.

During all that time I can not recall one instance where there was any difficulty between the general contractor and the other contractors on the work. I claim it is a benefit. While I can not prove it as there was no comparison, for at the time we started we changed over from what was frame construction to reinforced concrete construction. So that while I do know it very definitely, yet I can not offer anything by way of comparison to prove my assertion. But I do know that we got a better class of contractors, and that goes beyond question.

If one is allowed to bid directly to the Government or the munici pality or the Commonwealth, you are bound to have a better grade of men than if you allow a building broker to collect the bids.

And, gentlemen of the committee, let me say about that matter, that nine-tenths of the contractors in this country to-day are only building brokers. I do not say that disparagingly, and they are probably doing a good job, but I am saying to you that some of these

general contractors do nothing but employ a carpenter foreman and maybe 8 or 10 carpenters on a good-sized job, and for the other parts of that job it is a matter of brokerage or is let out-the matter of the pouring of the concrete, the laying of stone, the brickwork, the heating, everything is separate with the exception of a few carpenters. I know that that is true because it was done on our work, other than the portion we had separated.

And that makes the work very difficult to handle. We know this, that the general contractor, if he has a special man he can appeal to and get a low bid from, he will protect that man in the face of anything you as an inspector for the job may bring forward. I have had that thing to fight. It is nicer, Mr. Chairman, to control your contract than to have to go through what Mr. Fitts has outlined to you. It is quicker, it is more beneficial to both parties. And I am sure you know what I am talking about. For instance. if you are a general contractor and you are going to protect Mr. Fitts as a subcontractor, you will hedge, and you will be waiting for results, which are not always forthcoming until you are forced to do it.

I unhesitatingly say, with all the force within me, that this is a principle that should be advocated by governments, and the Federal Government will make no mistake in adopting it. I am in favor of the enactment of this bill.

The CHAIRMAN. I thank you. Mr. Fitts, who is your next witness? Mr. FITTS. Mr. McDonagh, representing the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be glad to hear Mr McDonagh.

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH S. McDONAGH, LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. McDONAGH. I am appearing in behalf of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. I heard the previous gentleman make a statement about the abuse going on by general contractors. I do not think that is a secret to any Member of Congress. They know that the peddling of contracts has become a scandal throughout the country.

We have a case now in Albuquerque, N. Mex. Under the present law and under the present executive order made by the Secretary of Labor, and he has made four decisions, the electrical contractor on that job went out of business and could not finish the contract because he took it so low he could not pay the prevailing rate of

wages.

The CHAIRMAN. How did the Secretary of Labor come in on that matter?

Mr. MCDONAGH. He was brought in as conciliator in a dispute, and his department set the prevailing rate of wages for labor after a strike out there.

After the electrical contractor went broke the bonding company came in to the Department of Labor and insisted that a new rate

of wage be made, which was after the contract price for the job had already been let or agreed upon.

The Secretary of Labor has made another decision upholding his previous position, that the prevailing rate that had been made should stand for the life of the contract.

Now, that situation has been brought about by no other avenue than the peddling of contracts by the general contractor.

As far as the electrical workers are concerned, we are interested in our contractors, we are interested in the men who are engaged in the electrical industry, and we believe that for the best interests of the trade and for the best interests of the Government it would be better to let electrical contractors figure direct or contract direct with the Government for that particular class of work.

There is the matter of craft pride. They have a recognized trade responsibility, and they are financially O. K.

As far as the international branch of the electrical workers are concerned, we never have any disputes. If we have a little mix-up in our industry the contractor and the organized force get together and we iron it out through a board of mediation.

I am speaking for 130,000 organized electrical workers affiliated with the American Federation of Labor.

After two years' experience around this city trying to have our work straightened out where there have been abuses by general contractors, I say there is no question-and Mr. Wetmore is sitting there and can tell you about it, and the files of the Secretary of Labor are full of it; we have been trying to get the general contractor to behave himself and to sublet his work to legitimate and financially responsible subcontractors. But they do not do it. I mean any subcontractor that can get a bond.

I will say that there are a lot of straw contractors put up by general contractors; and the bonding companies and the general contractors are now going to appear and tell you that the best thing to do is to deal with them because they will cut down the cost of operation. But if they cut down the cost of Government construction at the expense of the American standard for the working man, I say that will not be so good.

That is about all that I have to say. I am just appearing in behalf of the organization I mentioned.

The CHAIRMAN. You do not seem to have a particularly high opinion of general contractors.

Mr. McDONAGH. I have not a high opinion of the general political contractor, who has been sitting pretty and cleaning up on this general construction work.

The CHAIRMAN. Who is that? Let us get down to something more definite.

Mr. McDONAGH. I do not know. But if you will ask the Secretary of Labor he might go into it thoroughly.

The CHAIRMAN. But when you make such a statement as that I think you should explain what you mean.

Mr. McDONAGH. Well, I might. I will say that they have a hearing now over in the House, and Mr. Welch, a member of the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds of the House of Representa

tives, has asked that they be brought before them and enumerate a list of contractors for investigation as to their tactics. So that is a public matter. It is not a matter of my private statement at all. The CHAIRMAN. Who will you have next, Mr. Fitts?

Mr. FITTS. Robert J. Barrett, a member of the board of directors of the National Association of Master Plumbers, and past president of the Washington, D. C., association.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be glad to hear Mr. Barrett. STATEMENT OF ROBERT J. BARRETT, MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MASTER PLUMBERS, AND PAST PRESIDENT OF THE WASHINGTON, D. C., ASSOCIATION, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. BARRETT. Gentlemen of the committee, I am pinch-hitting today for my national president, Mr. P. W. Donohoe, of Boston, who has been unable to get here.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, some pinch-hitters make hits.

Mr. BARRETT. Well, our local team has been making some pretty good hits recently, and if I can do as well I will be pleased.

I will say that I have been in business here for a number of years, and my practice used to be to bid almost exclusively on Government work, up until about four or five years ago when there was an order put through by the Government whereby there would be no more separation of mechanical equipment from the general contract. That threw me into competition with the average general contractor.

I can tell you frankly that on these projects that are now going on in the city of Washington I have not bid on a single job because I knew it was useless.

I belong to a local association here with a membership of approximately 100, all told, in the city of Washington, and I suppose in this city we have about 250 licensed men. I do not know of but one local man who figures on any of this Government work now going on, because we have been unable to be low through the hands of general contractors.

I might say that we have not a real fight with the legitimate general contractor. But in recent years, I might say since the World War, there has been set up what we call brokers. A great many of these firms know nothing about the building business. It is just a case of a number of moneyed men getting together and calling themselves contractors, and making a front, and going out and figuring on public and private work.

Now, under the practices of these men it has almost been impossible for a contractor in any of the mechanical lines to make a living. Numbers of men have been forced into bankruptcy.

Quite a number of architects, and the American Institute of Architects, use the practice now of separating mechanical equipment, from the general contract.

I heard Senator Walsh just a few minutes ago ask a question which I should like to answer, about what delay would be caused. I will cite a definite instance: In the Senator's State, in the city of Boston, we have a firm of architects, Maginnis & Walsh, who, I sup