TEXAS On July 17, 1936, a complaint was filed with the committee alleging that poll-tax lists in San Antonio, Bexar County, Tex.,_ had been padded, and illegal entries made by Republican workers. By preliminary inquiry, and explanations by representatives of both Democratic and Republican political organizations, the committee determined that the charges as presented were not of serious consequence, and that a hearing was not warranted. A complaint which also arose in Dallas, Tex., charging that the Oil Country Specialties Manufacturing Co., of Coffeeville, Kans., operating in Texas, had been sending out its pay checks with accompanying literature intended to influence employees politically, received the committee's attention. The nature of the complaint was general, without any specific charges, and accordingly the committee decided to take no action upon such complaint except to notify the company that such a complaint had been filed, and that all such matters would be subject to vigorous investigation if further complaints were made. WEST VIRGINIA A complaint was filed with the committee on December 11, 1936, by reference from the Department of Labor, Washington, D. C., and the State Department of Labor of West Virginia, setting forth an allegation of political coercion of employees of the Cherry River Boom & Lumber Co., of Webster County, W. Va. Specific allegations in the complaint consisted of a copy of a communication addressed to one Mr. Wendel W. Hoover, prosecuting attorney, Webster Springs, W. Va. Names and addresses of individuals who claimed they had been unduly influenced were furnished the prosecutor by the State Department of Labor of West Virginia, and reference was made to section 26, article 7, chapter 3, of the West Virginia Code, fixing penalties for coercion by employers in election. The committee directed its investigators to obtain information on the complaint, and on January 4, 1936, Investigator George F. Hurley submitted a report containing evidence which the committee believed of consequence. The report indicated that complete information had been furnished to the prosecuting attorney for the county so that he could proceed under the State laws. The committee communicated with the prosecutor and offered to furnish any information in its possession in cooperation with any efforts he might decide to make. The committee also took notice of possible need for broadening the Federal law with respect to penalties for industrial coercion and intimidation cases. This subject is discussed in part 4 of this report relating to committee recommendations, page 137. MISCELLANEOUS J. Edward Jones complaint.-On October 26, 1936, the committee received a sworn complaint from Mr. J. Edward Jones, 342 Madison Avenue, New York, in which he enclosed a sworn copy of a transcript of a dictaphone record allegedly containing the record of a conversation between Mr. Jones and Mr. John J. O'Donnell, a special representative of the Democratic National Committee, which took place in Mr. Jones' offices on October 20, 1936, and during which meeting Mr. Jones alleged that the record shows he was given certain promises and assurances of protection from prosecution on certain charges then pending against him in Federal court, if he would contribute to the Democratic campaign fund. Committee investigators were directed to New York to investigate the complaint, and they reported on December 9, 1936. Their report showed that the same stenographic transcript was submitted to the United States district attorney and the foreman of the Federal grand jury in New York, and that the grand jury had found that there was no violation of any Federal statute. The grand jury had heard all parties involved, including Mr. W. Forbes Morgan, treasurer of the Democratic National Committee, and had all the evidence before it on which to reach a decision. Mr. Morgan also notified investigators of the committee that he has specifically instructed all solicitors not to solicit anyone having difficulties with the Federal Government, and that when he (Mr. Morgan) learned that Mr. O'Donnell had been to see Mr. Jones, Mr. Morgan immediately telephoned Mr. Jones and repudiated any representations which Mr. O'Donnell may have made. Mr. Morgan also called in Mr. O'Donnell and questioned him as to his efforts, and later canceled his contract, although in an affidavit given to Mr. Morgan, Mr. O'Donnell stated that he was not aware that Mr. Jones had been involved in any controversy with any department of the Federal Government, and also denied that he had made any representations of assistance in the event of a contribution being made by Mr. Jones. In view of this report, the committee at its meeting on December 15, 1936, decided that no further action by the committee was justified. Funds from advertising questioned. The Republican National Committee filed a formal complaint with the Senate committee, charging that the Democratic National Committee had solicited campaign contributions in the guise of paid advertising in the Democratic Convention Book of 1936, and that many corporations who could not legally contribute under provisions of the Corrupt Practices Act, had purchased such advertising, and that in effect their purchases represented contributions. The committee called upon the Democratic National Committee for a report of this practice, and Mr. W. Forbes Morgan, treasurer for the committee, responded in detail, and furnished information of page rates for advertising in several large national weekly or monthly publications comparable in value and circulation with the Democratic Convention Book. These rates, when compared with the page rates charged for the Democratic book, were found to be reasonable, in Mr. Morgan's opinion. Mr. Morgan also asserted that a large number of the advertisers in the Democratic Convention Book, including corporations, had also purchased advertising in the Republican Convention Book of 1936. It was subsequently explained, in behalf of the Republican National Committee, that the Republican Committee did. not receive any funds whatever from the Republican Convention Book. That book, it was asserted, was published by a separate organization locally created for the sole purpose of financing the Republican National Convention in Cleveland. No evidence was presented to the special Senate committee that any funds produced through the Republican Convention Book went into Republican campaign funds. The Senate committee was concerned primarily with the question of whether this form of obtaining funds actually represents solicitations of contributions within the meaning of the Corrupt Practices Act, so that the party committees would be required to list advertisers as contributors, and thereby subject corporations to liabilities and penalties as contributors. After continuing the consideration of this question at several meetings the committee finally decided to consider it in connection with possible recommendations to Congress relating to advisability of some control over sale of advertising or merchandise for campaign purposes, or some law to require receipts from such sales to be reported in the regular financial reports. Literature to Civilian Conservation Corps camps.-After the election the special committee received information regarding the mailing of literature to educational advisers of the Civilian Conservation Corps, relating to procedure for absentee voting, and decided to make inquiry to determine whether such literature, sent out by the Democratic National Committee in mimeograph form, operated improperly to influence members of the Corps with respect to their voting franchise. Two letters, in particular, were called to the committee's attention, and are set forth as follows: The Democratic National Committee, through its secretary, on September 17, 1936, mailed to all camp educational advisers of the Civilian Conservation Corps camps, a mimeographed letter of the following substance: MY DEAR SIR: In connection with our general circularization of bulletins to the absentee voters here in the District and throughout the various States, it has occurred to us that the bulletins giving information regarding the necessary requirements for the registration of a voter, the payment of poll tax (if necessary), and the qualifications of voters in the different States, would be of interest to the enrollees in the Civilian Conservation Corps camps. Since you probably have a large number of absentee voters in your camp, as well as "first voters" we are attaching hereto for the general information of your department some printed bulletins which will answer the usual questions regarding qualifications of a voter, registration dates, and dates on which to apply for absentee ballots. If you consider this plan of any value as information bulletins we shall of course appreciate your posting same. Yours very truly, On September 21, 1936, the Democratic National Committee sent a letter to Democratic city chairmen, and to Democratic county chairmen in certain States and counties where Civilian Conservation Corps camps were located, reading as follows: MY DEAR SIR: We note from our mailing list that you have in your county a Civilian Conservation Corps camp, and we are writing to suggest that you contact all the absentee voters from the various States in this camp. In order to assist in furnishing information on the various State voting laws, we are attaching an information sheet showing whether or not they can vote absentee. We feel sure from the experience we have had in the past that it will be more effective for you as local representative of your Democratic Party to contact these camps locally and urge the voters to make application in ample time to receive their absentee ballots from their respective official. If there is any information we can furnish from our bureau, please write us immediately and we shall be glad to assist you further in this connection. Sincerely yours, There were attached to the letters above quoted, four sheets of information, showing in what States one could vote by mail, in what States absentee voting was not allowed, in what States voting was permitted by registered mail, and also, information relating to States where registration was still possible by mail and otherwise, before the Presidential election, together with instructions relating to registration and voting. The secretary of the National Committee, responding to inquiry by this committee, wrote in part: This information was posted as a bulletin in various Civilian Conservation Corps camps, making it available in a nonpartisan manner to any interested enrollees of the Civilian Conservation Corps of voting age. No attempt whatsoever was made to coerce the enrollees or force them to vote and the information contained in the bulletin was made available as mere factual data for those who might care to vote in the election by absentee ballot. Since it is more or less considered as a patriotic duty for every citizen of voting age to exercise his franchise as guaranteed him by the Constitution, I feel sure that our thoughtfulness in making this information available to the enrollees of the Civilian Conservation Corps camps, without any attempt to influence their decisions, ties in admirably with the educational programs being promoted by the Civilian Conservation Corps. Abuse of Franking Privilege.-Complaints were made to the committee at various times regarding the improper use of the franking privilege in sending out mail matter presumably of a political nature. Specific cases were in Michigan, which has previously been referred to in this report, and also in Illinois, where a printed address from the Congressional Record by a Member of Congress was being distributed by political organizations. To fully inform Senators of the law and regulations concerning use of the frank, the following memorandum, prepared by the Post Office Department, is set forth: Hon. AUGUSTINE LONERGAN, POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT, Chairman, Special Committee to Investigate Campaign Expenditures, MY DEAR SENATOR LONERGAN: With reference to your letter of December 7, I take pleasure in enclosing a transcript of the laws relating to the franking privilege of Members of Congress, which it is believed will give you the information desired. The law extends to Members of Congress the privilege of mailing free, under their frank, the Congressional Record and extracts therefrom, public documents printed by order of Congress, and correspondence upon "official or departmental business." Communications which a Member of Congress desires to send to his constituents, containing a recital of facts relating exclusively to his public record in Congress and requesting their views on questions pertaining to legislative matters, but embodying no comment of a personal nature or solicitation of personal favor, are regarded as upon official business and, therefore, frankable. The test of frankability of mail is whether its contents relate solely to official or departmental business. Letters and other matter mailed under the congressional frank should be wholly official and not directly or suggestively personal. There is no provision of law under which a person receiving a request from a Member of Congress for information, official or otherwise, may send such information in the mails free of postage in an envelope bearing the frank of such Member of Congress furnished by the Member. Except as indicated in the accompanying transcript, the limit of weight of public documents and matter on official or departmental business mailed under the frank of a Member of Congress is governed by the law embodied in section 577, Postal Laws and Regulations, which, insofar as it is applicable to matter mailed under the frank of a Member of Congress, provides that the limit of weight of mail matter "is hereby declared to be not exceeding 4 pounds for each package thereof * * * except for books and documents published or circulated by order of Congress." It will be seen from the foregoing that public documents are mailable regardless of their weight, and, therefore, a packing box containing public documents only is mailable under frank without regard to the weight. If a box weighs more than 4 pounds and contains any matter in addition to public documents, it is not frankable. A package containing stationery and correspondence constituting the official files of a Member of Congress addressed to himself, to be mailable under frank, must not exceed 4 pounds in weight. Correspondence sent by a Member of Congress upon official business to other than a Government official cannot be mailed under frank if it exceeds 4 ounces in weight. Official mail in franked envelopes is not entitled to be dispatched by air mail unless the regular postage for air mail is prepaid thereon. With respect to the forwarding and remailing of franked matter, you are advised that the law embodied in paragraph 3, section 612, Postal Laws and Regulations, provides as follows: "All franked matter shall be forwarded like any other, but when once delivered to the addressee may not be remailed unless properly franked again. A bulk package of franked articles may be sent by a person entitled to the franking privilege, to one addressee, who, on receiving and opening the package, may, on behalf of such person, place addresses on the franked articles and remail them for carriage and delivery to the respective addresses." Under the law, a Member-elect to Congress has the privilege of sending in the mails free of postage under his frank, from the date of his election, correspondence not exceeding 4 ounces in weight, upon official or departmental business. The privilege of a Member of Congress to send public documents free under frank continues until the 30th day of June following the expiration of his term of office, and to send correspondence until the 1st day of December following the expiration of his term. The Congressional Record or parts thereof may not, however, be carried in the mails free of postage under the frank of an ex-Member of Congress. In case of resignation of a Member, his franking privilege continues as above indicated for the same period following the effective date of such resignation. TRANSCRIPT OF LAWS RELATING TO THE FRANKING PRIVILEGE OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS Act of March 3, 1875 (39 U. S. C. 325) and Supplement paragraph 1, section 609, Postal Laws and Regulations: "The Congressional Record, or any part thereof, or speeches or reports therein contained, shall, under the frank of a Member of Congress, or Delegate, or Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico or the Philippines, written by himself, except as provided in section 185 of title 44, be carried in the mail free of postage, under such regulations as the Postmaster General may prescribe." Act of January 12, 1895 (39 U. S. C. 326) and Supplement, section 608, Postal Laws and Regulations, as amended by the act of June 18, 1934: "The Vice President of the United States, and Senators, Representatives, Delegates, and Resident Commissioners in Congress, the Secretary of the Senate, and Clerk of the House of Representatives may send and receive through the mail all public documents printed by order of Congress; and the name of the Vice President, Senator, Representative, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, Secretary of the Senate, and Clerk of the House, shall be written thereon (except as provided in sec. 162 of title 44, U. S. C.), with the proper designation of the office he holds; and the provisions of this section shall apply to each of the persons named herein until the 30th day of June following the expiration of their respective terms of office." Act of April 28, 1904 (39 U. S. C. 327) paragraph 1, section 610, Postal Laws and Regulations: "The Vice President, Members and Members-elect of, Delegates and Delegateselect to Congress, and the Resident Commissioners from Puerto Rico and the Philippines, shall have the privilege of sending free through the mails, and under their frank, any mail matter to any Government official or to any person, correspondence, not exceeding four ounces in weight, upon official or departmental business (until the first day of December following the expiration of their respective terms of office)." Act of March 3, 1875, paragraph 2, section 609, Postal Laws and Regulations: "Seeds transmitted by the Commissioner (Secretary) of Agriculture, or by any Member of Congress or Delegate receiving seeds for distribution from said Department together with agricultural reports emanating from that Department, and so transmitted, shall, under such regulations as the Postmaster General shall pre |