gover nme nt 7 / C -

Storage

EPARTMENTS OF STATE, JUSTICE, AND COMMERCE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED

AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1965

H E A R I N G S

BEFORE A

SUBC OMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

HOUSE OE REPRESENTAT IVES

EIGH TY -EIGHT H CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENTS OF STATE, JUSTICE, AND COMMERCE, 

THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS 

JOHN J. ROONEY, New York, Chairma n

ROBERT L. F. SIKES, Florida FRANK T. BOW. Ohio

JOHN M. SLACK, Jr., West Virginia GLENARD P. LIPSCOMB, California

NEAL SMITH, Iowu ELFORD A. CEDERBERG, Michigan

J ay B. Hows, St aff Asaiatanb to the Subcommittee

THE JUDICIARY

DEPARTMENTS OF STATE, JUSTICE, AND COM

MERCE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED

AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1965

H E A R I N G S

BEFORE A

SUBC OMM ITTE E OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIA TIO NS 

HOUSE OF RE PR ES EN TA TIVE S

EI GH TY -EIG HT II CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

SUBC OMMITTEE ON DEP ARTMENT S OF STATE, JUSTICE, AND COMMERCE, 

TH E JUDICIARY, AND RELATE D AGE NCIES APP ROPRI ATION S 

JO H N J. R O O N EY , N ew Y ork , C h air m a n

ROBE RT L. F. SIKES, Florida FRA NK T. BOW, Ohio

JOH N M. SLACK, J r., West Virgini a GLENARD P. LIPSC OMB, Ca lifornia

NEAL SMITH, Iow a ELF ORD A. CEDERBERG, Michigan

J ay B. Howb, S ta ff A ssis ta nt. to th e S ubcom m itte e

THE JUDICIARY

Printe d for the use of th e Committee on Appropriations

81-136

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1964
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

CLA R E N CE CA NN ON, Missouri, Chairman

GEORGE H. MAH ON , Texas 

H A R R Y R. SH EPP ARD, California 

A L B E R T TH OM AS , Texas 

M IC H A EL J. KI RW AN , Ohio 

JA M IE L. W H IT TE N, Mississippi 

GEO RG E W. AN DR EW S, Alabama 

JOHN J. RO ONEY , New York 

J. VA UG HAN GAR Y, Virginia 

JO HN E. FO G AR TY, Rhode Island 

R O B E R T L. F. SI KE S, Florida 

OTT O E. PA SS MAN , Louisiana 

JOE L. EV IN S, Tennessee 

EDW AR D P. BOLA ND, Massachusetts 

W IL LI AM H. N ATCH ER, Ken tucky 

D A N IE L J. FL OO D, Pennsylvania 

W IN FIE LD K. DEN TO N, Indiana 

TO M ST EED , Oklahoma 

JO SE PH M. M ONTO YA , New Mexico 

GE ORGE E. SH IP LE Y, Illinois 

JOHN M. SL A CK, Jr., West Virginia 

JOHN LE SI NSK I, Michigan 

JO HN J. FLY N T , Jr., Georgia 

N E A L SM IT H, Iowa

R O BER T N. GIAI MO , Connecticut 

JU LI A BU TLER HAN SE N, Washington 

ED W AR D R. FI NNEG AN , Illinois 

CH ARLE S S. JO EL SO N, New Jersey 

JO SE PH P. AD DAB BO , New Yor k 

JOHN J. M cF ALL , California

BEN F. JE NS EN , Iowa

W ALT HOR AN , Washington

G ERA LD R. FO RD , Michigan

HAR OLD C. O ST ERTAG , New Yor k 

FR A N K T. BO W, Ohio 

CH ARLE S R A P E R JONA S, North Carolina 

M ELVIN R. LA IR D, Wisconsin 

ELF O RD A. C E D E R B E R G , Michigan 

GLEN A R D P. LI PS COM B, California 

JOHN J. RH OD ES , Arizona 

JOHN R. PI LL IO N, New Yor k 

W IL LI AM E. M IN SH AL L, Ohio 

R O B E R T H. M IC H EL, Illinois 

SILV IO O. CO N TE , Massachusetts 

W IL LI AM H. M IL LIK E N , Jr., Pennsylvania 

E A R L WILSO N, Indiana 

OD IN LA NG EN, Minnesota 

W IL LI AM H E N R Y HAR RI SO N, Wyoming 

BEN R EIF E L, South Dak ota 

LO UIS C. W YM A N , New Hampshire

K enn eth Spr an kl e, Clerk and Sta ff Director

( I I )
DEPARTMENTS OF STATE, JUSTICE, AND COMMERCE, 

THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS, 1965

Wedne sday, J anuary 15, 1964. 

TH E JU DIC IA RY

Mr. R ooney. Th e com mittee will please now come to ord er.

We shall, this morning , commence con sideration of the req uest for 

appro priat ion s in the coming fiscal year, to wit, the 1965 fiscal ye ar for 

the Dep artm en ts of State , Justice, Commerce, the Federal jud iciary , 

and rel ate d agencies.

Th e first of these item s to which we shall direct our attention this 

mo rning is for the jud iciary .

IN C R E A SE S REQ U E ST E D

Th e to tal req ues ts for the Feder al jud iciary for fiscal year 1965 are 

in the am ou nt $70,452,700.

This is an increase of $4,524,800 ove r the to tal appro pri ations in 

the cu rre nt fiscal year.

SU MM AR Y OF A P PR O PR IA T IO N R E Q U E ST S

We shall at this point ins ert in the reco rd page s I, II , and III of 

the justificatio ns.

(Th e pages referred to follow:)

Comparative summary of appropriations and appropriation estimates

C o u rt or se rv ice

1964

ap pro pri at ed

1965

es ti m at e

In cr ea se ( + ) 

or d ecre as e ( —)

1965 co m pa re d 

w it h 1964

A n n u al ap pro p ri ati o n s (g en er al a cco unt) :

Sup re m e C o u rt________ ____ _ $2,201 ,40 0 

388,000 

989,000 

1,109, 500

53,440.000

$2,185, 700 

403,000 

1,043, 500

1,186,000

56, 764, 500

—$15,700

+15 ,0 00

+54 ,5 00

+7 6, 50 0

+3 ,3 24 , 500

C ourt of C ust om s an d P a te n t A p p e a ls ____ _

C ust om s C o u rt.................... .............

C o u rt o f C la im s......................................

C ourt s of ap pea ls , d is tr ic t co urt s, an d oth er ju dic ia l 

se rv ic es ...................................................

T o ta l an n u al ap pro pri at io ns (g en er al a c c o u n t) .. . 58,1 27,9 00 

7,800,00 0

61,582, 700 

8,87 0, 000

+3, 45 4, 800 

+ 1,070,000 A ppro pri at io ns (s pe cial a c co u n t) ............ .............................

G ra nd to ta l....................................................................... 65,927 ,900 70,4 52,7 00 + 4 , 524,800

(1)
2

Sum ma ry of positions

1963 actua l 1964 estim ate 1965 estim ate

To ta l nu m be r of pe rm an en t p ositions........... ................... . .......... 5,684 5, 713 5,833

Fu ll- tim e eq uiva lent of othe r posit ions ______ _____ ______ 209 226 275

Avera ge num be r of all em plo vees_____ _ _________________ 5,680 5,812 5,976

Em ploy ees in pe rm an en t positions , e nd of yea r_____________ 6, 516 5,587 5,712

Em plo ye es in oth er pos itions, e nd of ye ar ............... . .............. 344 356 400

Comparative sum mary of obligations by object

[In t ho us an ds of dollars]

Person al services an d benefits:

11 Pe rso nnel compensatio n:

Pe rm an en t po sitio ns ..............................

Position s o the r th an p er m an en t....... .

Othe r personne l c om pensati on______

To tal, person nel co mp ensat ion .........

12 Perso nnel benef its______________—..........

13 Benefits for form er perso nnel___________

To tal, person nel service s a nd b en ef its...

Con tra ctua l services and sup plie s:

21 Tr av el and tra ns po rta tio n of persons ____

22 Tr an sp or tatio n of th ings _______________

23 Ren t, comm unications, a nd ut ili tie s_____

24 Pr in tin g an d repr od uc tio n............................

25 Other services_________________________

26 Sup plies an d m ate ri als .................... ..........

To tal, co ntractua l services and sup plies. 

Acqui sition of cap ita l assets:

31 Eq ui pm en t........................ . . . .........................

Tot al ob ligations____________________

1963 actua l 1964 esti ma te 1965 esti ma te

45,468 48,919 52,035

4,825 4,967 5,151

353 660 514

50,647 54, 544 57,700

3,007 3,291 3,498

25 25 25

53,680 57,860 61,222

3,563 3,733 3,779

37 55 57

1,298 1,490 1,611

639 620 724

367 478 605

534 477 582

6,437 6,852 7,358

1,646 1,216 1,873

61,763 65,928 70,453

A D D IT IO N A L PO SIT IO N S R E Q U E ST E D

Mr. R ooney. Page II indicates tha t in the total request for the 

Federal judiciary there are 5,833 permanent positions requested, 

which would be an increase of 120 permanent positions over the 

number authorized in the current fiscal year.

The judiciary is also requesting an additional 49 full-time equivalent 

of other positions over the number they have in the current fiscal year.
COURT OF CUSTOMS AND PATE NT APPEALS

W IT N ESSES

H O N . EU G EN E W O RLEY , C H IE F JU D G E 

I. JA C K M A R TIN , A SSO C IA TE JU D G E 

G EO R G E E. H U T C H IN SO N , M A RSH A L

S alaries an d E xp en se s

Object classification

[In thou sands of dollars]

11 Personnel compensation:

Permanen t positions_________

Positions o ther th an perman ent. 

Other personnel co mpensation..

1963 actual

312

4

1964 estimate

330

10

2

1965 estimate

343

10

u

19

21

23

21

25

26 

31

Total personnel com pens ation.

Personnel bene fits_______________

Travel and tran spo rtation of persons. 

Ren t, communications, an d utilities.

Prin ting and re prod uction.......... ....

Other service s............................. . . . .

Supplies and materials___________

Eq uip me nt_____________________

Total obligations________________________________

316

18

3 

17

1

2

4

361

341

19

1

3

17

1

2

4

388

354

20

1

3 

18

1

2

4

403

Personnel summ ary

1963 actual 1964 estimate 1965 estimate

Tota l num ber of perm anen t positions____________________ 28 29 30

Full-time equivalent of other positions___________________ 1 1 1

Average n umb er of all employees________________________ 28 29 30

Employees In perma nent positions, end of year........ . .............. 28 29 30

Employees in other positions, end of year-------------------------- 1 0 0

Program and financing

[In thou sands of dollars]

1963 actual 1964 estimate 1965 estimate

Program by activities: Salaries and expenses (obligations ).. .. 361

9

388 403

New obligational auth ority (appropriatio n)__________ 370 388 403

Mr. R ooney. While it is customary to commence consideration of 

the requests for the Federal judiciary with the item entitled “Supreme 

Court of the United States,” we understand tha t tha t Court is in 

session this morning. Accordingly, we have an understanding that we 

shall hear their requests this afternoon. Therefore, we shall at this 

time proceed to consider the request for the Court of Customs and 

Paten t Appeals which appears beginning at page 36 of the justifications, which page we shall insert a t this point in the record, together 

with pages 37 through 44.

(The pages follow:)
$388,000

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Sa larie s an d ex pe ns es , C ourt of C ust om s an d P a te n t A pp ea ls:

1964 a p p ro p ri ati o n in a n n u al a c t__________________________________________ ____ ________

N et di ffer en ce , 1965 ov er 1964:

R eq uir em en ts Diff eren ce , 

increase ( + ) 

or d e1964 ap pro ­ cre ase (—)

priat ed

1965

es tim at e

Sa larie s a n d e xp en se s....................................................... $388,000 $403,000 +$ 15 ,000

T o ta l e st im ate for 1965_____________ . _________________________________________________ 403,000

+15 ,000

Analy sis by object

O bjec t 1964 es ti m at e 1965 est im at e

In cr ea se (+ ) 

or d ecre ase (—)

11*” Per so nne l co m pen sa ti on........................................ ....... _ $341,000 

18,600 

1,000 

3,0 00 

17,000 

1,000 

2,000 

4,40 0

$353,700

19.500 

1,000 

3,000

18.500 

1,000 

2,0 00 

4,300

$12, 700 

900 12* Per so nne l b e n e fi ts .. __________________ ____ . _____ ____

21 ’ T ra v el an d tr an sp o rt ati o n of per so ns ......................... .........

23 ’ R en t, co m m unic at io ns, an d u ti li ti e s______ _______ ____

24 P ri n ti n g an d re p ro d u cti o n _____________________ . ............ 1,500 25 O th er s er vic es . _ ...... ...................... .. . . .

26 Sup pl ie s a n d m ate ri al s...... ..............................................................

31 E q u ip m e n t.................... . ........................................ ....... ................. -1 0 0

T o ta l obli gat io ns____________ ____________ ____________ 388,000 403,000 15,000

Summ ary of increased requirements for 1965

Nature of expense (or savings):

Deductions:

Nonrecurring cost of equipment for additional secretary au- Amount thorized for the court for 1964__________________________ —$400

Funds for an extra compensable day in 1964 not required in 1965- —750

Additions:

1. Additional clerical position for the clerk’s office___________ 5, 350

2. Pay costs under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

(increases scheduled to tak e effect on Jan. 6, 1964)______ 4, 800

3. Provision for within-grade salary advancements___________ 4, 500

4. To cover an increase in the volume and cost of printing required by the court___ _____________________________ 1, 500

Net increase, 1965 over 1964_______________________ 15, 000

JU STIF IC A TIO N Language changes

None.

Objectives

This appropriation is for the salaries of the chief judge, four associate judges, 

and other officers and employees of the Court of Customs and Pa ten t Appeals 

as well as for communications, supplies, and other incidental expenses of the court. 

For data as to the functions of the court, its jurisdiction, and basic sta tutory 

authorities, reference is made to section G of the Digest of Appropriations, the 

Judiciary, on file with the Bureau of the Budget and the Appropriations Committees of the Congress.

General justification

There has been a very sharp increase in the volume of appeals to the court 

during t he past 7 years. Whereas, the number of appeals in customs cases has 

remained at relatively the same level; appeals in pate nt and trad emark cases have 

increased 300 percent from 63 in 1956 to 251 in 1963. The court in 1963 disposed
5

of 213 patent and trademark cases compared with only 70 cased disposed of during 

1956. Despite the increase of 300 percent in the volume of appeals to the court, 

the approparia tion for the operation of the court since 1956 has been increased only 

40 percent, much of which was due to pay legislation. Exclusive of the chief 

judge and four associate judges, there are currently only 24 positions authorized 

for the court compared with 21 positions authorized in 1956, an increase of only 

14 percent.

A summary of th e business of th e court from 1956 to 1963 follows:

1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963

C ust om s cas es: 30 24 Pen din g, be gi nni ng of y ear........... 21 23 20 30 35 39

D oc ke te d d u ri n g y ea r__________ 31 40 42 40 45 32 29 37

Dispo se d of d u ri n g y ea r________ 29 43 32 35 41 41 35 31

Pen din g, en d of y ear....................... 23 20 30 35 39 30 24 30

P a te n t an d tr ad em ark case s:

148 207 P endin g, be gin nin g of y ear........... 91 84 92 92 129 134

Doc ke te d d u ri n g y e a r __________ 63 82 83 107 127 126 174 251

Dispo se d of d u ri n g y ear________ 70 74 83 70 122 112 115 213

Pen din g, en d of y e a r....................... 84 92 92 129 134 148 207 245

’’’’ A graphic presentation of the number of appeals to the court during the past 

8’years is included herein as “Exhibit A.”

Detailed, justification

An appropriation of $403,000 is requested for 1965, a net increase of $15,000 

over the appropriation for 1964. The net increase in budg etary requirements is 

explained below:

Deduction for nonrecurring cost of equipment authorized for 1964

The appropriation for fiscal year 1964 included the sum of $400 for procurement 

of equipment for the secretary to the c ourt’s new judge. Inasm uch as this was a 

nonrecurring expense, it is being deducted in establishing the budg etary requirements for 1965.

Deduction for extra compensable day

The sum of $750 ($700 for compensation and $50 for related benefits) representing th e cost of an extra compensable day in fiscal year 1964 has been deducted in 

establishing the requirements for fiscal year 1965. Employees of the court who 

are paid biweekly will be compensated for 262 days in 1964, whereas, in 1965 

there are only 261 compensable days.

New position, clerk’s office

The sum of $5,350 is requested for the employment of a clerk-stenographer for 

the clerk’s office, as follows:

Personnel compensation, grade JS P- 5_____________________________ $4, 700

Personnel benefits______________________________________________ 350

Equipment (nonrecurring)_______________________________________ 300

To tal ___________ ______ _________________________________ 5, 350

The sharp increase in pa tent appeals to the court, as revealed in the accompanying statistics on appeals for th e 7-year period from 1956 to 1963, has resulted in a 

prop ortionate increase in the workload of the office of the clerk since the filing and 

disposition of all cases is centered in t ha t office. There has not been any request 

for ad ditional help for the clerk since 1929 when the court assumed jurisdiction in 

pa ten t cases. It seems both desirable and necessary that the request for this 

additional employee be subm itted at this time.

Pay costs under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

An additional $4,800 ($4,500 compensation and $300 related benefits) will be 

required in fiscal year 1965 to cover the full-year cost of increases in salary to be 

granted court employees effective Jan uary 6, 1964, p urs uan t to the provisions of 

the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962.

Provision for within-grade salary advancements

It is estim ated th at $4,500 will be required in fiscal year 1965 to grant court 

employees within-grade salary advancem ents corresponding with those provided
6

by title VII of the Classification Act of 1949, as amended. The estimate includes 

$4,200 for personnel compensation and $300 for related G overnment contributions 

to th e civil service retirem ent fund and for Federal employees group life insurance. 

Due to t he small turnove r in the personnel of the court no savings can be anticipated to offset t he cost of within-grade salary advancem ents.

Increase in volume and cost of printing required by the court

An increase of $1,500 is requested for printing and reproduction to cover the

increase in rates being charged by the Government Printing Office for materials 

and labor and also to compensate for th e rapid increase in size and volume of th e 

decisions of the court which are printed and bound by that Office. The cost 

depends upon the volume of material to be printed and bound and the rates 

charged by the Government Printing Office at the time t he work is done. The 

total number of pages to be prin ted and bound for both the customs and the 

paten ts volumes has increased from 749 pages in 1961 to 937 in 1962 and the 

estimate for 1963 is 1,100 pages. Concurrently there has been a general increase 

in cost of printing which has been applied to all governmental departm ents of 

6 percent which is based on total volume of billings which includes labor, paper, 

and commercially procured work.
7

IN CR E A SE S R E Q U E ST E D

Mr. Rooney. As you will note, this request is in the amount of 

$388,000 which would be an increase of $15,000 over the amount for 

this court in this current fiscal year. The requested increases are 

set forth at page 38 of the justifications.

There is a request for one additional $5,350 clerical position for 

their clerk’s office.

We are pleased to have with us this morning the Chief Judge of the 

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, our distinguished former 

colleague, the Honorable Eugene Worley of Texas.

Do you wish to make a statement with regard to this, Chief Judge 

Worley?

Judge Worley. I do no t know of any detailed explanation.

It is all contained in the pages you cited, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. I find myself intrigued right at the start of these 

hearings because I think this committee will give faithful devotion 

to the request of the distinguished President of the United States, 

who comes from your State and is trying to cut down Federal employment.

A D D IT IO N A L P O SIT IO N R E Q U E ST E D

We now have a request before us for an additional position. Can 

you not help the President of the United States in the coming fiscal 

year by getting along with the number of positions you presently 

nave?

Of course, I do want you to understand tha t my present information is tha t the bulk of the courts; to wit, the district courts and the 

courts of appeals are going to forgo any requested additional positions set up in their budgets last fall.

Judge Worley. Mr. Chairman, my court is in complete accord with 

the President’s economy program and your interest in furthering tha t 

objective.

The new place requested is solely for the benefit of the litigants in 

expediting tneir appeals to our court. As you know, pa tent appeals 

have nearly doubled in the past 2 years. The increased volume has 

put the clerk’s office behind in processing appeals, but I doubt if the 

litigants, who are also taxpayers, would strenuously object to forgoing 

this additional service to them at this time. At any rate, I think we 

should save t hat money this year and take another look next year.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. Rooney. Very well. Thank you very much, Judge Worley.

Judge Worley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
8

CUSTOM S CO UR T

W IT N ESSES

PA U L P . RA O, JU D G E 

SC OVEL R IC H A R D SO N , JU D G E 

EDW A RD J. CAREY , C LER K

V IR G IN IA M. H O R N C A STLE, C H IE F D E PU T Y C LER K

S ala rie s and E x pen ses

Object classification

[In th ou sa nd s of dollars]

1963 a ctu al 1964 estim ate 1965 estim ate

Pe rso nnel com pensa tion:

Pe rm an en t position s_____________________________

Po sit ions othe r th an p er m an en t_____ ______________

Other p ersonnel co mp ensat ion _________ _________

768

15

838

8

5

890

8

3

12

21

22

28

24

28

26

31

Tot al personn el c om pen sa tion.._________________

Perso nnel ben ef its ,_________. ____ ____________ _______

Tr av el a nd trans po rta tio n of persons......................................

Tr an sp or tatio n of th in gs_______ ______________________

Ren t, comm unica tions, a nd u tilities ___________ _______

Print in g an d repr od uc tio n............. .......... . ..............................

Othe r ser vic es..... ...................................................................

Supplies an d materials____________________ _____ ______

E quip m en t. _____ ___________________________ _______

773

50

26

3

10

6

11

5

22

850

55

25

5 

11

9

13

6 

15

900

58

25

5 

11

9

13

6 

16

Tot al obligations_______________ ____________ _______ 906 1,044

H

Personnel summary

1963 act ua l 1964 es tim ate 1965 esti mate

Tot al nu m be r of pe rm an en t p ositio ns_________ __________ 91 92 96

Fu ll- tim e e qu ivalen t of other p o sit io n s.. _____ ______ 3 1 1

Average n um be r of all em plo yees ___ . ______ ________ 90 92 96

Em plo yees in pe rm an en t pos itions, end of y ea r . . _____ _ 86 91 95

Em plo yees in o ther po sitions , e nd of y e a r ._________ _____ 5 1 1

Program and financing

[In th ou sa nd s of dollars]

1963 act ua l 1964 estim ate 1965 esti ma te

Program b y ac tiv ities: Salaries an d expense s (o bligat io ns) .... 

Fi na nc ing: Un obligate d balanc e lapsing. .

906

25

989 1,044

New o bligatlonal au th or ity (app ro pr iatio n) ___________ 931 989 1,044

Mr. R ooney. The next item , gentlem en, is th at for the Cus tom s 

Co urt. It is to be found beginning at page 45 of the justificatio ns 

which page we shall ins ert at this point in the record, tog eth er with 

page s 46 thr ough 53.

(The pages follow:)
9

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Sa larie s an d e xp en ses, C ust om s C ourt : Ju di ciar y

1964 ap pro pri at io n in a n n u al a c t . ________ _______ _____________ __________ . ___________ . . $989,000

N et differen ce , 1965 ov er 1964:

R eq uir em en ts D iff eren ce , 

increa se ( + )

1964 ap pro ­

pri ate d

1965

es ti m at e

or d ecre as e (—)

Sa larie s an d e xp en se s____________ _____ __________ _ $989,000 $1,043 ,500 +$ 54 ,500

T o ta l es ti m at e for 1965............................................................................................................................... 1,04 3,50 0

Analysis by object

O bje ct 1964

es ti m at e

1965

es tim at e

In cr ea se + or 

de crea se (—)

11 Per so nne l com pen sa tion........... ............... ............. ..................... $850,000

54.700 

25,300

5,0 00

11,100

9,000

12.7 00 

6,200

15,000

$899,800

58,500

25,300

5,000

11,100

9,00 0

12,700

6,20 0

15,900

$49,800

3,800 12 Per so nn el be ne fits __________________________________

21 T ra v el an d tr an sp o rt ati o n of p ers o n s. ______ ____________

22 T ra n sp o rt ati o n of t h in g s______ ____ __________ __________

23 R en t, co m m un ic at io ns , an d u ti li ti es..............................

24 P ri n ti n g a n d r ep ro d u cti o n _____________________ ___

25 O th er se rv ic es __________________ ____________

26 Sup pl ie s an d m ate ri als ......................... ........... .............

31 E q u ip m en t___________ ________ _____ _____ 900

T o ta l obli gat io ns________________ ___________ _______ 989,000 1,04 3,50 0 54,5 00

Summary of increased requirements for 1965

Nature of expense (or savings):

Deductions: Deductions for the cost of an extra compensable Amount

day in 1964 not required in 1965________________________ — $2, 300

Additions:

1. 1 additional court reporter position_________________ 13, 200

2. 3 additional bailiff po sitions________________________ 15, 500

3. Additional amount required under the Federal Salary

Reform Act of 1962 (increases scheduled to take effect

on Jan. 6, 1964)____ _______ ________ ________ 15, 500

4. Provision for within-grade salary a dvancemen ts_______ 12, 600

Net increase, 1965 over 1964........................ ........... ..... 54, 500

JUSTIFICA TION

Language changes

None.

Objectives

The estim ate under this title is to provide for the salaries of the judges and 

supp orting personnel of the U.S. customs court, and the necessary operating 

expenses of the court, including traveling expenses, expressage, communication 

services, prin ting and binding, supplies, equipment including furniture, new 

books and regular continuations of reports, encylopedias, digests, and pocket 

par ts for various sets, and miscellaneous items of expense for th e fiscal year 1965. 

For data as to the functions of the court, its jurisdiction, and basic sta tut ory 

authorities, reference is made to section H of the “ Digest of A ppropriations, the 

Jud icia ry,” on file with the Bureau of the Budget and the Appropriations Committees of Congress.

Detailed justification

An appropriation of §1,043,500 is requested for fiscal year 1965, a net increase 

of $54,500 over the appropriation for fiscal year 1964. The increase in requirements is explained below.
10

Deduction for extra compensable day

The sum of $2,300, representing the cost of an extra compensable day in fiscal 

vear 1964, has been deducted in establishing the requirem ents for fiscal year 1965. 

Employees of the court, who are paid biweekly, will be compensated for only 

261 days in fiscal year 1965, whereas, in 1964 there were 262 compensable days. 

Additional court reporter position {JSP-1 S')

The U.S. customs court has nine judges and five court reporters. Most courts 

have a court reporter for each judge. Since all of the decisions of the judges of the 

customs court are required to be in writing, it is necessary to have transcriptions of 

proceeding both when a judge is sittin g in New York and when he is on circuit. 

The 5 cou rt reporters have to cover 17 to 20 out-of-town circuits each year, some 

of which extend several weeks. The court arranges its New York and outport 

dockets so as to make the maximum use of its court reporters, and it has been 

fortunate t ha t none of its reporters have had a serious illness or emergency in th e 

past 20 years. When some reporters are taking testim ony in New York and others 

are on circuit, should one repo rter become ill or have another emergency, the 

court would be without a replacement.

The customs court had six court reporters prior to World War II when it lost 

one to the service. Since th at time the increase in volume of cases at out port 

dockets has caused an increase in the number of trav el days. Also, no tra nscribing can be accomplished by a reporter on circuit. The addition of another 

reporter would permit more expeditious transcrip tion of notes and hence facilitate 

the disposition of cases.

The increased use of pretrial conferences and examinations before tria l require 

th at a cou rt reporter be available for this service on short notice. The court has 

also extended the practice of holding predocket calls in New York for out-of-town 

circuits in order to dispose of as m any cases as possible th at will not be ready for 

tria l at the outports. A court reporter is required to be present at these predocket 

calls.

In order to provide more efficient service to the judges, more expeditious tran ­

scription of notes, adeq uate service for the various court procedures, and coverage 

in the eve nt of illness or other emergency situation s; a request is made for one 

additional court repo rter position in grade JSP -13.

Costs involved

Compensation______________________ ____ _____________________ $11, 700

Benefits______________________________________________________ 900

Equip me nt___________________________________________________ 600

To tal ..................................................................................................... 13, 200

Three additional bailiff positions (JS P-5)

Under section 873, title 28, United States Code, the customs court is authorized 

to appoint criers, bailiffs, and messengers as it may require, which criers shall also 

perform the duties of bailiffs and messengers and such other duties as the court 

directs. The customs court now has three bailiffs to serve nine judges, and this 

has n ot worked satisfactorily for the reason th at frequently judges are without the 

services of a bailiff. As a compromise between the situation we now have and 

requesting at this time a bailiff for each judge, the judges are asking for only three 

additional bailiffs.

Bailiffs assist the deputy marshal in the courtrooms in maintaining order, 

handling and marking exhibits, etc. The bailiffs also perform clerical duties in 

the marshal’s office, main tain and issue supplies; and perform messenger service 

for the judges. The court requests three additional bailiff positions in the marshal’s office a t grade JSP -5.

Cost involved

Compensation________________________________________________ $14, 100

Benefits______________________________________________________ 1, 100

Fur niture for new personnel_____________________________________ 300

To tal__________________________________________________ 15, 500

Requirements under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

An additional sum of $15,500 will be required in fiscal year 1965 to cover the

cost of increases in salary effective Jan uary 6, 1964. The following is a breakdown by fiscal year of the cost of pay increases under the Federal Salary Reform 

Act of 1962:
11

1964

bu dg etary

req uir em en ts

1965

bu dg etary

requ ire men ts

1st phase (effec tive Oct. 15,1962):

Co mp ensat ion ________ ______________________________ _________ __ $8,500

Benefits __ ____________________ ___________________ ____ ______ - 500

To tal - - ______________________________ ____ ________ 9,000

2d phase (effective J an . 6,196 4):

Co mp en satio n____________________________________________________ 14,000

1,000

$14,500 

Benefits . - - ____________________________________________ ____ - 1,000

To tal ...................... .......................................................................... 15,000 15,500

Grand t ota l_____________________________________________________ 24,000 15,500

Provision for within-grade salary advancements

It is estimated tha t $12,600 will be required in fiscal year 1965 to grant court 

employees within-grade salary advancements corresponding with those provided 

by title VII of the Classification Act of 1949, as amended. Of the total requested, 

$11,800 is for personnel compensation and $800 for related Government contributions to the retirement fund and for group life insurance. The estimate is net 

of anticipated savings due to turnover and it represents the minimum amount th at 

will be required to meet such costs.

IN C R E A SE S R E Q U E ST E D

Mr. Rooney. The request is in the amount of $1,043,500, which 

would be an increase of $54,500 over the amount appropriated for 

this court in the current fiscal year.

The increases are set forth on page 47 of these justifications and 

included therein is a request for an additional court reporter position 

and three additional bailiff positions.

These are the only items contained in the request which are not 

mandatory, is tha t correct, Judge Richardson?

Judge Richardson. That is right, Mr. Chairman.

Judge Rao. Mr. Chairman, may I at this time express the regret 

of Chief Judge Webster Oliver of our court for not being present. 

He is th e only judge in New York covering the first division.

Judge Wilson is on docket and he has cases scheduled for each day 

with witnesses coming in from all over the United States of America. 

He has requested me to come here and extend his regrets for not 

being present and undoubtedly you may know th at the chief judge 

recently lost his wife.

Mr. Rooney. Yes; I am familiar with tha t sad fact and it is indeed 

unfortunate we do not have the pleasure of the presence of Judge 

Oliver this morning. I have known Judge Oliver for a great many 

years and in fact I remember when he first went on this bench.

How many years ago was that?

Judge Richardson. Twenty-three or twenty-four years ago.

Judge Rao. He was elevated in 1940. I was assistant attorney 

in 1941. I did not think it was so long.

Mr. Rooney. You used to come here years ago with exhibits?

Judge Rao. Yes, sir.

Mr. Rooney. Then you had a successor who did not show up 

with exhibits; do you recall that?

Judge Rao. Yes.

Mr. Rooney. He is now on the southern district bench?

Judge Rao. Tha t is right.
12

WORKLOAD CHART

Mr. Rooney. Do you have the usual workload chart containing 

the statistics of the court’s work for the past 5 years?

Judge Richardson. Yes, we do.

Mr. Rooney. We shall at this point insert in the record the workload chart requested.

(The chart follows:)

Wo rklo ad chart

Fis ca l

yea r

Classific ati on

cas es

rece ived

R ea ppr ai se ­

m ent 

cases 

rec eive d 

(app ea ls, 

revi ew s, 

p eti ti o n s, 

a n d r em an ds of 

pr ot es ts)

T o ta l, all 

cases 

rece ived 

In co urt

Classific ati on

cases

de cide d

1959........... 33,829 22,493 56,322 26, 094

1900 ........ 33,397 20,031 53,428 50,336

1961 . . . . 28.212 26,917 55, 129 47, 098

1962 ......... 22,926 18, 017 40, 943 35,479

1963........... 22,098 13, 789 35,887 17, 111

Rea ppralse - 

nie nt 

cases 

de cide d 

(app ea ls, 

review s, 

p eti ti o n s, 

mid remands of 

pr ot es ts)

T ota l, a ll 

cases 

de cide d 

in co urt

Clas sific ati on 

cas es 

pen di ng 

at close 

of fiscal 

ye ar

R ca ppraise - 

m ent 

cases 

(app ea ls, 

revi ew s, 

p eti ti o n s, 

an d rem an ds of 

pr ote st s) 

pen din g 

a t close 

of fisca l 

ye ar

T ota l, all 

cases 

pe ndi ng 

a t close 

of fiscal 

ye ar

21,074 47,168 130,610 88,618 219,228

32, 499 82,835 113,671 76,150 189, 821

12,973 60, 071 94. 785 90, 094 184, 879

14,085 49, 564 82, 232 94,026 176, 268

8,582 25,693 87,219 99,233 186,452

additional positions requested

Mr. Rooney. Judge Richardson, if you would please direct your 

attention to the requested increase insofar as these four positions are 

concerned, we would appreciate it.

Judge Richardson. First is the matter of the court reporter. We 

have nine judges and five court reporters. Our court is one of the 

few courts and I guess maybe the only one in the Federal system 

which requires all of our decisions be in writing, which necessitates 

transcripts of all of our proceedings. Our court reporters, in addition 

to the work they do in New York City, have to go on from 17 to 20 

outport dockets. When they are out of town they cannot do any 

transcribing, which means that that work gets behind if they do not 

get assistance.

Mr. R ooney. How many court reporters do you have at the present 

time?

Judge Richardson. Five. We did have six, Mr. Chairman, up 

until the war but one was lost during the war and no replacement was 

made. We have held off on this request for 2 years b ut we feel the 

situation has developed now where it is imperative we make the 

request for the increase, as much as we regret to do so with the 

President’s request for economy.

Then, too, the increase in the predocket calls—tha t is when we 

call the calendar in New York when the attorneys can be there to 

reduce the number of files that will have to be sent to the outports, 

and we have to have a reporter present there—then the lawyers seem 

to have increased the use of the pretrial and examination before trial 

procedures, which means having court reporters present. That is 

additional work for them. They have not been doing so much of
13

th at in the pa st and som etim es those tra nscripts are 60 to 100 pages 

and have to be rea dy overn igh t for the trial.

To provide for what we figure is more efficient service to the judges, 

more expeditio us tra nscri pts of notes, adequate service for various 

court procedures and coverage in the ev ent of illness and emergencies 

which we h ave no t been covered on in the past, bu t have been fortu ­

na te in no t hav ing a serious illness or emergency, we respec tfully 

req uest we be given the money for a new court repo rte r at the classification JS P-13 in the am ount of $11,700.

Mr. R ooney. W ha t was the amount?

Jud ge Richardson. $11,700. The add itio nal am ou nt the re covers 

benefits, equ ipm ent, a nd so f orth t hat is pu t in by sta tu te or regulation.

Mr. R ooney. This would include the $900 equip me nt item on 

page 46 of the justifications?

Jud ge Richardson. Yes, it would. Mr. Chairma n.

Mr. R ooney. You may proceed, Jud ge.

Jud ge Richardson. With resp ect to the req uest for the thr ee 

bailiffs, we were aware at the time we mad e the req uest for the three 

bailiffs th at in a large numb er of the courts—each judge has his own 

bailiff. We were tem pte d to get along with the three for the nine 

judges bu t the arr angeme nt has not been entirely satisfactory .

The stat ut e aut hor izes us to appoint criers and bailiffs and messengers, as the court may require.

W hat the co urt ma y require is su bje ct to the opinion or decision of 

the Appro priatio ns Comm ittee. These bailiffs perform the services 

of messengers a nd other duties as the co urt directs, including, as Jud ge 

Rao said, clerical work in the ma rsh al’s office, ma intain ing ord er in 

the cou rtro om, marking exhib its, and so forth.

Fo r inst ance, we ju st had one trial las t week th at lasted 4 days in 

which th ere were a bo ut 28 different exh ibits and a numb er of them were 

small vials of diamond dust, each one worth ab ou t $200 or $300 and 

the re was also a large numb er of people in the cou rtro om and so on.

Som ebody would go back to cau tion them to keep qu iet so the y did 

no t dis tur b the proceedin gs of the court.

There had to be someone to assist the clerk in marking all of these 

differen t exhibits and see th at the y were pu t in the va ult for safekeeping.

Sometimes we have exhibits, such as in the Pepperidge Farms case, 

which have to be k ept in refrigeration and only brought into the co urtroom for a short while and then carried back to be preserved.

Otherwise, the y would no t be in shape when the time comes for 

writing the opinion.

So, we are also asking for those three bailiffs w’hich is a compromise 

betw een t he situa tio n we have now of three an d asking for one for each 

judge. , t

.

Mr. R ooney. Is the re anyth ing you wish to add, Judge Rao ?

Jud ge R ao. I know we are very busy up there and in ma ny instances a lawyer will refer to a case and then turn to the bailiff in the 

courtroom and ask him to go to the librar y to get a book. Th ere is 

no one in our courtroom at all to do th at , no one in our cou rtro om to 

even tak e an exhibit a lawyer wants to pres ent to the witn ess on the 

witness sta nd because we have only one bailiff or marshal in the 

court who acts as marshal-bailiff-messenger and eve rythin g else. 

Th at is the way we h ave been run nin g our c ourt.
14

We rea lly need the three men. If we did no t need the m we would 

no t ask for them because we are cogniza nt of the fac t th at the Preside nt wa nts to cu t down expenses as well as Congress wants to cu t 

down expenses.

We wish to coopera te in every way possible bu t we really do need 

these men.

Mr. R ooney. Mr. Bow?

TRAVEL COSTS

Mr. Bow . What was your a ctu al travel expense cost las t year?

Ju dg e Richard son. Mr. Carey?

Mr. Carey. $26,000. T hat is on page 8-5.

Judg e Richardson. That is item 21 on page 8-5.

Mr. Bow . You do no t have 1963 in, bu t in 1964 you estimate, and 

in 1965 w hat? These are no t your actu als?

Mr. R ooney. You are asking for the act ual 1963 figure, Mr. Bow?

Mr. Bow . Yes, the l ast year. Was th at $26,000?

Mr. Carey. Yes, sir.

Mr. Bow . In rou nd figures?

Mr. Carey. Yes, sir.

Mr. Bow . You have all nice round figures on all of these; you 

found no way at all to reduce any of these other items; is t hat right?

Judg e Richardson. No, we hav e not, Mr. Bow.

Mr. Bow. It looks as tho ugh you ju st picked up your 1964 estima tes and used them for 1965. I wond ered wh eth er you made any 

review of them to see if you could reduce some of th ese 1965 estim ates?

Judge R ao. We hav e gone thr ough every one of thes e item s at two 

judges’ mee tings since the announcem ent by the Pre sid ent.

Mr. Bow . You found th at they will be identical with wh at you 

reques ted las t year?

Jud ge R ao. Tha t is righ t.

EQU IPM ENT ALLOWANCE

Mr. Bow. I see t hat your equip me nt allow ance is $900 because of 

the add itio nal personnel requ ested.

Judge Richardson. Add itional personnel.

Mr. Bow . What equip me nt is that?

Judge R ichardson. Mr. Carey, do you hav e th at?

Mr. Bow. Tak e your 1964 estimate and tell us wha t you spend 

$15,000 for, or intend to spend it for.

Mr. Carey. Jud ge Ric hard son machine —th ere will be a mac hine 

for the rep orter —desks and chairs.

Mr. Bow . Tha t is the $900 a ddition al, bu t I am talkin g now a bo ut 

the $15,000.

Judge Richardson. Par t of th at was in the conv ersion from the 

folded system of filing to flat filing and the purchase of new file 

cabinets.

Mr. Bow . Is th at complete now?

Judge Richardson. Almost.

Mr. Bow. Wh y do you hav e to h ave th at this yea r?

Jud ge R ao. Only one division has been completed.

The Reapp raisem ent Division has not been.
15

Mr. Bow. Do you have a l ist of the equ ipm ent you are purch asi ng 

in 1964?

Mr. Carey. No; we do no t hav e th at with us.

Jud ge R ao. The marshal does th at . If we knew, we would have 

brought it. Pract ica lly every thi ng was spen t on th at beca use we 

bought files.

In the print ing of the envelopes and transform ing the court------

Mr. Bow. How ma ny vea rs has yo ur req uest for equip me nt been 

$15,000?

Mr. Carey. We spe nt more than th at in 1963, Congressman. 

Tha t was $22,000.

Mr. Bow . This is j us t a rou nd figure y ou used?

Mr. Carey. Yes.

Mr. Bow . You do no t have an est imate as to wh at equip me nt you 

are act ually go ing to buy ?

Mr. Carey. No, sir.

Mr. Bow . In other words, you do no t know whether, in yo ur 1965 

est imate you are going to spend $15,000 or $9,000? You do no t have 

any idea as to the exa ct equip me nt you are going to buy?

Jud ge Richardson. On th e basis of p ast experience, Mr. Congressman, thi s is an estim ate . In fact, so far as dollars and cen ts are 

concerned, we had th at when we went o ver it with the marshal. The 

Ad ministrative Office rou nds out all of our figures und er some new 

dire ctiv e they have from the Burea u of t he Budget.

Jud ge R ao. At the las t mee ting we had it was reco mmended we 

buy 50 filing cabinets. We cu t t hat down to 10. When 1 wen t t o the 

cha irm an of th e com mittee and also sp oke to the head of th e Division, 

he said th at 10 files were no t enough. Some of these files are old and 

mad e of wood. If the drawers are fully exte nded, they mig ht fall on 

the person wor king ther e.

We are try ing to repla ce those and even if we had $20,000 we could 

use it to replace and modernize the filing system . Th e equip me nt 

we have there is disgraceful bu t slowly and surely we are making it 

look like a place where persons can work w ithout being h urt.

Mr. Bow . Tha t is all.

Mr. R ooney. Very well.

Th ank you, Judge Ric hardso n, Judge Rao, and Mr. Carey.

Judge Richardson. May the reco rd show 1 wish to extend our 

thanks to you.

Mr. R ooney. Th an k you very much , Judge.

31 -1 36 — 64------ 2
CO URT OF CL AIM S

Wednesday, J anuary 15, 1964.

W IT N ESSES

H O N . M A RVIN JO N ES, C H IE F JU D G E 

W IL SO N COW EN , C H IE F C O M M IS SIO N E R 

FR A N K T. PE A R T R E E , CLERK

J. G EO R G E STEW A RT, A R C H IT E C T O F T H E C A PIT O L 

CH A RLES A. H EN LO C K , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E O FFIC E R , O F F IC E OF 

T H E A R C H IT E C T OF T H E C A PIT O L

Mr. R ooney. Th e nex t item, gentlem en, is th at for the Co urt of 

Cla ims and is to be foun d beginning at page 54 of the justificatio ns. 

Salaries and E xpe nses

Object classification

[In th ou sa nd s of dollars]

11 Pe rso nnel co mp ensat ion :

Per m an en t posit ion s_______________________ ____ —

Po sit ions ot he r th an p er m an en t____________ _______

Other pe rso nnel co m pen sa tion.........................................

1963 ac tu al

846

7

1964 estim ate

896

8

6

1965 e sti ma te

925

8

3

12

21

23

24

25

26 

31

Tot al pe rso nnel co mpe ns ation___________________

Perso nnel be ne fit s____________________________________

Tr av el and tra ns po rtat io n o f pe rson s......................................

Ren t, co mm unica tio ns, a nd ut ilitie s........................ ............

Pr in ting an d re pr od uc tio n----------------------- -------------------

Other servic es________ _______________________________

Supplies a nd m aterials-------- ------ --------------------------------

E q u ip m en t. .. .............................................................—..............

853 909 936

57 60 62

10 23 23

10 11 11

87 80 130

1 1 1

7 6 6

8 8 6

To ta l o bligations_______ ____ _______________________ 1,033 1,100 1,176

Personnel summ ary

1963 actua l 1964 est im ate 1965 estim ate

Tot al n um be r o f pe rm an en t p ositions_________ ____________ 83 86 86

Fu ll- tim e eq uiva lent of oth er p ositions......................... .. ...... 2 2 2

Average nu mbe r of all employees ______________________ 83 85 87

Em plo ye es in p er man en t positions , end o f y e a r.. __ ________ 82 83 85

Em ploy ees in o th er positions, e nd of y ear____________ ______ 6 4 4

Program and financing

[In tho us an ds of dollars]

1963 a ctua l 1964 est im ate 1965 estima te

Prog ram by ac tiv ities: Salaries an d expense s (o bli gat io ns) .... 

F in a n c in g • Un obligate d balan ce lapsin g ________________

1,033

1

1,100 1,176

New ob lig ation al aut hority (app ro pr iatio n) ___________ 1,034 1,100 1,176

Mr. R ooney. We shall insert at thi s po int in the record pages 55 

through 61 of these justifications.

(The pages follow:)
17

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Salar ies an d e xp en ses, C o u rt o f C la im s: Ju dic ia ry

1964 ap pro pri at io n i n annual a c t . . . .................. ................... ................. ............. ............................ ......... $1,100 ,00 0

N e t differen ce , 1965 ov er 1964:

R equir em ents Diff eren ce , 

in crea se (+ ) 

or d e1964 a ppro ­ cre ase (—)

p ri ate d

1965

est im at e

$1,1 00, 000 $1,176 ,500 +$ 76 ,500

T o ta l es ti m at e for 1965................................................................. ........................................................ ......... 1,176.50 0

Analysis by object

O bj ec t

1964

est im ate

1965

es ti m at e

In cr ea se or 

de crea se (—)

to

11 Per so nne l com pen sa ti on______________ __________ _______ $909,400

60,2 00

23,3 00

11,400

80,000

1,000

6,400

8,300

$936,000

61,900

23,3 00

11,400

130,000

1,000

6,400

6,500

$26,600

1,700 12 Per so nnel b en efi ts ____ ______ _ ____ _ . . ____________

21 T ra v el an d tr an sp o rt ati o n of p er so ns_____ _____________

23 R en t, co m m unic at io ns, an d u ti li ti es____ ________________

24

25

P ri n ti n g a n d re p ro d u cti o n ____________ ___________ ______

O th er se rv ic es __________________________ _______________ 50,0 00

26 S upp lies a n d m ate ri als ________________ _____ _______ ___

31 E q u ip m e n t________________________________ ____ _______ -1 ,8 0 0

T o ta l obli gat io ns____________________________ _______ 1,100, 000 1,176,50 0 76,5 00

Summ ary of increased requirements for 1964

Nature of expense (or savings): Amoun t

Deductio ns: Nonrecurring expenses authorized for 1964________ —$4,900

Additions:

1. Pay costs under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

(increases scheduled to take effect on Jan . 6, 1964)______ 11, 700

2. Provision for within-grade salary advancements_________ 8, 500

3. Additional amount required to main tain a normal employment level (reduction of lapse)_____________________ 11, 200

4. Nonrecurring cost of publishing bound volumes of the

court’s decisions______ ___________________________ 50,000

Net increase, 1965 over 1964_____________________ 76, 500

JU STIF IC A TIO N

Language changes

None.

Objectives

This appropriation is for the salaries of the Chief Judge, four associate judges, 

and other officers and employees of the Court of Claims as well as for travel, 

communications, printing, and other incidental expenses. For data as to the 

functions of the court, its jurisdiction and basic s tat uto ry authorities, reference is 

made to section I of th e “Digest of Appropriations, The Judiciary,” on file with 

the Bureau of th e Budget and the Appropriations Committees of the Congress. 

Detailed justification

An ap propriation of $1,176,500 is requested for 1965, a net increase of $76,500 

over the amount appropriated for 1964. The net increase in requirements is 

explained below:

Deduction for nonrecurring expenses

The appropriation for 1964 included the sum of $1,800 for the procurement of 

furn iture and equipment for new personnel, specifically, the three law assistants 

authorize d for the trial commissioners. Since i t is a nonrecurring expense, it has
been deducted in establishing the budge tary requirements for 1965. The sum of 

$3,100 ($2,900 for compensation and $200 for benefits) representing the cost of an 

extra compensable day in 1964 also has been deducted. Employees of th e court 

who are p aid biweekly will be compensated for 262 days in fiscal year 1964 whereas, 

in 1965 there are only 261 compensable days.

Requirements under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

An additional $11,700 ($11,000 for personnel compensation and $700 for related 

benefits) will be required in fiscal year 1965 to cover th e full-year cost of increases 

in salary to be granted employees of the court effective January 6, 1964 pu rsuant 

to the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962.

Provision for within-grade salary advancements

It is estim ated t ha t $8,500 will be required in fiscal year 1965 to grant officers 

and employees of th e court (except judges, commissioners, the clerk of th e court 

and several employees serving in ungraded positions) within-grade salary advancements corresponding with those provided by title VII of the Classification Act 

of 1949, as amended. Of the total requested, $8,000 represents increases in 

compensation and $500 is for related Government contributions to the retireme nt 

fund and for group life insurance. The estimate is net of anticipa ted savings 

due to turnov er in personnel.

Additional amount required to maintain a normal employment level

The appropriation for the fiscal year 1964 was $14,000 below the budget estimate. This reduction in the estimate was offset by a savings resulting from a 

delay in the appo intm ent of three law clerks for tria l commissioners authorized 

for 1964. The court, during the first half of th e year, was operating under continu ing resolutions of Congress and, therefore, lacked the a uth ority to make the 

appointments. The court is expected to have a full complement of employees 

in the fiscal year 1965, and, therefore, requests the restoration of $11,200 ($10,500 

for personnel compensation and $700 for related benefits) which would in effect 

con stitute a reduction of lapses. The additional funds will be required in order 

to maintain what would be considered a normal employment level based on the 

total authorized positions.

Cost of making current the printing and binding of the court’s reports

This item of $50,000 for prin ting and binding is a nonrecurring one and is 

requested in order th at the publication of the court’s bound volumes may be 

brought up to date. During recent years the number required for euch year has 

increased from three to four, and the ir publication is now 2% years behind. From 

a research standpoint this has proven to be a disadvantage to counsel practicing 

before the court as well as to the court itself. It is planned to close this gap 

during the fiscal year 1965 if this money is made available. It is also anticipa ted 

th at once made current then publication will remain so within the limits of the 

court’s regular allowance for printing.

Mr. R ooney. The req uest for the Co urt of Claims consists of two 

item s; the first entitle d “Salaries and expense s,” and the second 

“Repai rs and impro vem ent s.”

IN C R E A SE S R EQ U ESTED

The pages to which I have just referred and which have ju st been 

inserted in the record refer only to salaries and expenses and indicate 

th at the req uest for thes e purp oses is in the am ount of $1,176,500 

which would be an increase of $76,500 over the am ount appro pri ate d 

in the cu rre nt fiscal year.

Th e requ ested increases are set f orth on page 57 of the ju stification s. 

With the exception of items No. 3 and 4 on this page, do T understand 

corre ctl y th at the oth ers are ma ndato ry?

Mr. Cow en. Yes, sir.

Judge J ones. Yes, sir.

Mr. Rooney. We are prima rily conc erned with item No. 3, the 

addit ion al am ou nt requird to ma int ain normal emplo yment levels, 

$11,200 and the cost of $50,000 for the pub lishing of bound volumes 

of the co ur t’s decisions; is that correct?
19

Jud ge J ones. Yes, sir.

Mr. Rooney. We are indeed pleased and honored to hav e with us 

Ihe distinguish ed Chief Judge of the Co urt of Claims, the Honorab le 

Ma rvin Jones, of Texas.

Workload Statement

Judge Jones, do you wish to ma ke a statem en t with reg ard to the se 

requested increases?

Judge J one s. I have a sta temen t of the wor k th at I would like to 

file a t this point in the record.

Mr. R ooney. Is this your workload statem en t?

Judge J one s. Yes.

Mr. R ooney. We shall ins ert t his four-page stat em en t at this po int 

in the record.

(The sta temen t follows:)

During the court year, from September 30, 1962, to September 30, 1963, the 

court disposed of 459 petitions and 9 appeals representing 869 claima nts. Except 

for 38 of these cases, in which no given amounts were claimed, the total amoun t 

claimed was $85,789,434.26. Of the cases disposed of, the court rendered jud gments for c laimants in the sum of $10,161,523.24, of which $2,819,857.53 carried 

interest. A number of these judgments were bases on settlements between the 

parties. Also, the court rendered judgments for the United States on counterclaims in the amount of $685,814.35, of which $121,081.40 carried interest. The 

clerk has reported to the Congress the business of the court for the above period, 

showing the names of the claimants, the amounts involved, the nature of the 

cases, and the disposition thereof.

The number of p etitio ns and appeals pending on September 30, 1963, tota led 

1,489 representing 2,682 claimants. Of this tota l there were 66 class case petitions 

involving 766 claimants. While tes t cases in all probability will dispose of the 

majority of the petitions in this latte r group, practically all of the other 1,423 

petitions will require individual trials before the commissioners and disposition 

by the court.

Report of the U.S . Court of Claims fo r the court year ended September 30, 1963

P endin g 

S ep t. 3 0,1 962

Filed D is po se d Pen din g

S ep t. 30,19 63

P e ti ­

tioner s

P la in ­

tif fs

P e ti ­

ti oner s

P la in ­

tif fs

P e ti ­

ti oner s

P la in ­

tiffs

P e ti ­

tion er s

P la in ­

tif fs

Cas es o th er th a n c lass c as es ................. 1,487

73

1,967

837

361 475 441 542 1,407 1,90 0

C la ss c a s e s ,,____ __________________ 11 247 18 318 66 766

A pp ea ls fro m th e In d ia n C la im s 

C om m is si on .............. ............................. 13 13 12 12 9 9 16 16

T o ta l________________________ 1,573 2,81 7 384 734 468 869 1,489 2,682

Cas es o th er th a n clas s ca ses:

Se rv ice p a y ____________________ 144 144 24 24 43 43 125 125

Con gr es sion al .................. ............... 37 55 0 0 6 6 31 49

C o n tr act . ...................... ............... 368 380 66 67 84 89 350 358

In d ia n . . ____________________ 7 79 2 2 1 1 8 80

M is cc lla neo us................................ .. 32 33 9 9 12 12 29 30

P a te n t . . ...... ......... ...... 75 78 12 12 13 13 74 77

P ro p ert y (t a k e n )_______________ 67 359 37 105 26 100 78 364

Tax . _______ ____________ 445 519 139 183 165 187 419 515

T ra n sp o rt ati o n o f p ro p e rty _____ 201 209 36 37 61 61 176 185

Ja pan es e re lo ca tion p ro g ra m ____

C iv il ia n p av __________________

2

109

2

109

0

35

0

35

0

30

0

30

2

114

2

114

D e p a rtm e n ta l.................. ................. 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1

C la ss ca ses :

A la sk a R a ilr o a d ., .................. ......... 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0

F ir ef ig hte rs ......................................... 12 121 0 0 7 110 5 11

C iv ilia n p a y ________ __ ____ ___ 33 600 11 247 3 159 41 688

Se rv ice p av ________ ________ 27 115 0 0 7 48 20 67

A pp ea ls fro m In d ia n C la im s C om ­

m ission _________________________ 13 13 12 12 9 9 16 16
20

TAX AN D PR O PER TY (T A K EN ) CA SE S

As of the close of business on September 30, 1963, there were 419 petitions 

representing 515 claimants seeking tax refunds on the Court of Claims dockets, 

with a total amount claimed of $225,173,544.67 toge ther with interest. Six 

percent interest, as perm itted by statute, on this amount is $13,510,412.68 per 

annum.

As of the close of business on September 30, 1963, there were pending 78 petitions representing 364 claimants in which the tota l sum of $18,978,553.95 1

 was claimed for the taking of prop erty without paymen t of jus t compensation. Interest at 4 percent as part of jus t compensation on th at sum tota ls $759,142.15 

per annum.

Petitions to the Supreme Court for writs of certiorari

Petitions for certiorari pending Oct. 1, 1962___________________________ 18

Petitions for certiorari filed Oct. 1, 1962, to Sept. 30, 1963_______________ 27

To tal_____ _____ _________ ______________ _____ ______________ 45

Record for court year Oct. 1, 1962, to Sept. 30, 1963:

Petitions for certiorari denied___________________________________ 30

Petitions for certiorari granted and decision affirmed_______ ,________ 0

Petitions for certiorari granted, decision reversed, and case re mande d. _ 2

Petitions for certiorari granted bu t not acted upon_________________ 2

Petitions for certiorari filed but not acted upon____________________ 9

Petitions for certiorari dismissed by stipulation____________________ 1

Petitions for writ of certiorari granted b ut writ dismissed by s tipulation. . 1

To tal............. ............... ................... ......................................................... . 45 Records prepared for a ttorneys of record but not filed__________________ 14

Mr. R ooney. Hu rriedly scan ning this sta tem ent, it would appear 

th at this is s trictly a wor kload sta tem ent?

Judge J ones. Yes, sir.

EX PL A N A TIO N OF IN C R E A SES

Mr. R ooney. Do you hav e anyth ing with rega rd to these requ ested 

increases?

Judg e J one s. Th e $11,700 is the am ount elim inated this year, or 

ded ucted. We absorbed th at because of the fact we had to ope rate 

on last ye ar ’s basis since the app rop riation was not made. We did 

no t get these thr ee add itio nal law clerks until aft er the general 

appro pri ations for this year were made , so we have those clerks now 

and they are needed.

We will hav e the full year with them and this curre nt yea r we only 

had 6 months, bu t for the coming year we will hav e the full tim e of 

those personnel.

Then there is an increase in the classification of the law clerks if 

they s ta y over an ex tra y ear. Tha t is an action of the J udicia l Conference th at gives the m an increase if the y serve more than 1 yea r. 

Most of them do no t serv e more than 1 year. Th ey are worth more 

if any of the good ones are willing to sta y over an extra y ear.

Th e Judic ial Conference asked for the chan ge in classification and 

th at is the reason for the add itio nal am ount. We need th at $11,000 

plus for the next year b ecause of the current situation.

Th e $50,000 item is for the publication of o ur volum es. Because of 

the increase in business and the delay in securing a rep orter who was 

qualified to do the work , we got behind with these volumes. Fo r 3

1

 Of which $15,748,385.65 is the total amo’mt claimed in 64 petitions representing 338 claimants pertaining 

to the taking of lands; of which $3,230,168.30 is the total amount claimed in 14 petitions representing 26 

claim ants pertaining to the taking of personal property.
21

previous veal's we have turned back money because these people 

simply could not take care of getting the volumes ready to be published.

The $50,000 is to bring us up to date in the bound volumes of the 

work of the court. It is a big advantage in time saved not only to the 

court but to the lawyers practicing before the court to have the 

bound decisions. We are years behind and we want to have those 

brought up to date. This is a nonrecurring item. We will have the 

regular appropriation bill tha t will take about four or five volumes 

each year. These volumes cost about $6,000 apiece to be published 

at the Government Printing Office and tha t is why we have this 

request. We wanted to bring them up to date. We are sorry we have 

gotten behind in those publications and at this time it makes it a 

little difficult.

Of course, this is up to the committee and if they feel we can defer 

half of that, if necessary for the whole year, but I think it would be 

very advantageous-----

Mr. Rooney. Of course, Judge Jones, you know that we are confronted in our deliberations, with regard to these requested appropriations, with the statement of the President th at he wants to cut down 

and cut back appropriationwise?

Judge J ones. I am in sympathy with tha t idea.

Mr. Rooney. What can you do to help us?

Judge J ones. This is the only thing tha t I can suggest.

Mr. Rooney. In view of the fact tha t the court’s work was less 

in the past year than it was the year before?

Judge J ones. Tha t showing is not correct because of this fact——

Mr. Rooney. These are your figures?

Judge J ones. I know, but these cases are getting far more complicated. We are getting into the electronic and space fields and the 

big contract cases are becoming more complicated. The cases are 

much more important and involve much more in the taking of testimony and in record decision than they did earlier.

The Government is doing things on a much bigger scale.

While we have a few less plaintiffs and a few less cases-----

Mr. Rooney. Many less plaintiffs? The number of plaintiffs disposed of in the chart you presented us with show you had 869 as 

compared with 3,131 the year before.

Judge J ones. Tha t is the usual class of cases. We had a great 

group of class cases, firefighting and other cases where one of them 

disposed of a great number. The cases tha t really take the time are 

the regular cases.

You will notice there was not much reduction although we had a 

slight reduction in the number of petitions.

Mr. Rooney. 468 as compared with 527 the year before; is tha t 

correct?

Judge J ones. 475 plaintiffs and 361 petitions.

Mr. Rooney. 468 is the figure I see on this chart which I have 

before me.

Mr. Cowen. Mr. Chairman, the top figure is 1,487.

Mr. Rooney. I am looking at the number of petitions disposed of; 

468 total, and tha t compares with about 527 in the previous year.

Mr. Cowen. Tha t is right.

Mr. Rooney. Is tha t correct?
22

Judge J ones. Tha t is corr ect, bu t if you will look at it, a good 

man y of those are class cases and th at does no t mean mu ch because 

one decision might dispose of a great ma ny of the class cases.

Th e firefighter cases, we disposed of a great numb er by the trial 

of one case which sets a p attern a nd then i t is ju st a m at te r of au dit ing 

calc ulation as to the oth ers at th at time. Th e reg ula r cases hav e 

reduce d some bu t I wish the com mittee had the op po rtu nity to look 

at some of thes e petitions and the tim e it tak es to tr y some of these 

cases, as well as the volume of w ork invo lved in them.

Of course, we are still con side rably behind.

Ta ke these 1,489 cases and the reg ula r case total which is 1,407, 

those have to be tried aside from class cases. Tha t is where the te st 

rea lly comes. When you tak e th at numb er of reg ula r cases disposed 

of, and we dispos ed of 441 pet itio ns, and if you t ak e 1,407, th at would 

be ab ou t 3 y ears’ work.

Mr. R ooney. That figure would com pare with 474 in the previous 

yea r, would it not?

Judge J ones. Yes, sir.

Mr. R ooney. Judge Jones, wh at would be the consequence of 

defe rrin g thi s req ues ted $50,000 item for printing?

Judge J one s. Well, I do no t know. If you defe rred th at item 

altogeth er, I do no t know. We have had special help down the re in 

try ing to get thes e volu mes read y for printing. I would ha te to hav e 

them all defe rred , the whole thi ng deferred, beca use on the pri nting 

we have tur ned back $17,000 one year and $30,000 ano the r, and 

$53,000 anoth er yea r. A good pa rt of th at was supp osed to be for 

volum es; is th at corr ect?

Mr. Cowen. T hat is correct.

Jud ge J one s. We turned th at back to the Treasury because with 

this increase in the imp ortance of the cases and the am ounts in volved 

and the increases due to the war, thes e peop le simply got beh ind in 

gettin g the volumes ready. I would like to coo perate in every way 

th at I can bu t I would be willing to say th at we need to get these 

out. Le t us say we defer half of th at until next ye ar and no t do it 

all this year. I do no t think we would be parti cu larly hu rt, but I 

would like to get some of those volumes ou t because when we get 

ou t as m any cases as you see there, we h ave to keep a lin e on the decisions you have made. It is pr et ty hard to do th at with a numb er 

of thes e slip opinions carrying over a period of yea rs, unless this is 

in volume form and indexed.

Fo r th at reason, we would like to get some of these pri nte d.

If you wish, we could get the whole thi ng bu t I do no t think we 

would be great ly hu rt if we could get $25,000 and defer u ntil next year 

the add itio nal ones.

If we ever get these volum es current, I think we will no t hav e any 

tro uble and it will be a regular appro priation. If you will look over 

the recor d, you will see tha t we turne d back enou gh to m ore than make 

thi s up.

LA PS E TO TREA SU RY

Mr. R ooney. How much was lapsed in the Treasury out of this 

appro pri ation for salaries and expenses in fiscal 1963?

Mr. P eartr ee. Betwee n $600 and $700 turned back.

Judg e J ones. We were gettin g ou t some addition al volumes d uring 

th at time, 1963. If y ou will go bac k to anoth er date------
23

Mr. P eaktree. The figures on the yea rs we fell beh ind on the 

volumes show th at for 1958 and 1959——

Judge J one s. T hat was $17,000 in 1959 and $30,000-plus in I960 , 

and then we tur ned back $53,000 int o the Treas ury.

That is from the printing. I do no t know , bu t ma ybe I should no t 

hav e done this; bu t if we did no t need this, we would no t ask for it.

Tho se of the com mittee who have been here a while, including the 

chairman, are aware of th at fact. We do no t spend any money we 

do no t feel is useful.

I would very mu ch like to hav e enough to pr int a par t of th at because we have made all of our plans. If you could defer $25,000 of 

th at , I would no t feel bad at all ab ou t it, bu t I would no t like to see 

the whole thi ng ou t because I would like to make some progress on 

this if we could. I know wha t yo ur prob lem is a nd I app rec iate i t, too.

Mr. R ooney. Of course, I am thinking of the fac t th at these plans 

were made before the Preside nt’s stat e of the Union address. You 

and I are bo th g reat adm irers of the Pre sident.

Judge J one s. Yes, sir; we certainl y are. I think he is doing a 

wonderful job and I just hope he does no t overwork.

I do no t know, bu t we will acc ept wh ate ver the comm itte e does. 

I think it would be wise if you gave us enough to pr int pa rt of this . 

This would defe r $25,000.

printe d volumes

Mr. Bow . How ma ny volumes beh ind are you , Jud ge?

Jud ge J ones. We are ab ou t 2^ years behind. Tha t would be 

ab ou t 12 volumes behind, I guess.

Mr. Bow. If you g ot $25,000, how many volumes could you print ?

Jud ge J one s. With $25,000 we could pr int four of five volum es, 

possibly five, bu t I think fou r, depen din g on the size of the volumes.

Mr. Bow . That would still leave you what?

Judge Jon es. We would still be behind.

Mr. Bow . Eig ht volumes?

Jud ge Jon es. Yes, possibly seven; bu t we are going to have the 

volumes ready so we would like to pr int as ma ny as possible.

Then we can catch u p and the n the r egula r appro pri ation will tak e 

care of it. We bow to the w ishes of the comm itte e bu t I would like 

very mu ch to get some of those pr inted and on the w ay, if we can.

TRA V EL CO ST S

Mr. R ooney. How mu ch was actua lly spent for tra vel in 1963?

Jud ge J ones. Do you have the figure, Mr. Peart ree ?

Mr. P ear tree. $12,958.07.

Excuse me; th at is the wro ng figure, $10,326.07.

Mr. R ooney. How mu ch was actua lly spent for tra vel in the year 

before?

Mr. P eartree. Tr an sportat ion of persons.

Th e year before w as the figure I gav e you before, $12,958.07.

Mr. foooNEY. How come you ask for $23,300 now?

Judge J ones. We feel we have to send these people all over the 

co un try as we get cases set. We certa inl y like to hav e enough to 

cover the tra vel expenses because you ge t cases se t and ru n ou t of
24

money and, as suggested by Mr. Cowen, the work of this c ourt on the 

wes t coa st has increased tremendo usly because the Government is 

spending so much money ou t on the west coast. Travel ou t there is 

going to tak e more money. We have redu ced th at all we can by 

setting as ma ny cases as we conven iently can so th at a trial commissione r can try a case in one place and the n go to ano ther.

We have gone over thes e figures very car efully and I think th at is 

the lowest th at we felt would give us assuranc e.

Mr. R ooney. Th e po int is th at in 1963 you asked for $20,000 and 

you were allowed it, bu t you spe nt $10,326.07. Wh y did no t the 

difference go back to the Treas ury ?

Judge J one s. We p rob ably absorbed th at in some of these, in taking 

care of some of these oth er things.

Mr. P ear tree. Tha t is c orrect. The extra volume las t year came 

ou t of th at ; $6,300 came ou t of that.

Judg e J one s. How ma ny volumes did we print ?

Mr. P eartree. Fo ur or five the year before. That was tru e the 

year before, and in 1962 as well. The re were 2 volum es ou t of th at .

Mr. R ooney. Wh y were no t the volum es included in supplies and 

ma terials or printing and rep roduction? We are talkin g now only of 

travel. You obtained $23,000 for tra vel and spent bu t $10,000. 

M y question is: Why did not the difference laps e into the Treas ury ?

Judge J ones. Our overall am ount was spen t for thin gs th at we 

actua lly had to have, almost. I do not know. I t was a lum p appro priation. We might have transferred some.

Mr. P ear tree. It all wen t into printing.

Mr. R ooney. Wh y shou ld it?

Mr. P eartree. It is simply th at the print ing costs have gone up, 

and it is a prob lem of keeping up with the m. If you look at our 

print ing figures, we were allowed $67,500; the print ing figure was 

$88,000.

Mr. R ooney. Did we no t allow you eve ry nickel you asked last 

year for printing?

Mr. P eartr ee. Yes.

Judge J ones. I thi nk you did. The record will show.

Mr. P eartr ee. Co rre ct; $15,000 for this year.

Judge J ones. We than k you, gentlemen.

STA TUS OF B U IL D IN G PLA N S

Mr. R ooney. Befo re we conclude, I should like to ask Chief J udge 

Jones: W hat is the s itu ati on with regard to your m oving?

Judge J one s. Th ey opened the bids ye ste rday for the new building . 

Th ey hope to let the co ntract in Fe bruary. Th ey claim it will tak e 

about 2 years to finish the bu ilding. I t p robably will tak e more than 

th at , bu t I do no t know. Mean tim e, they say they a re going to have 

to move us to othe r qu arters while the buildin g is being finished.

Mr. R ooney. W ha t happens w ith regard to this r equest now before 

us for repa irs?

Judg e J one s. Mr. Stew art , I underst and, is coming up this aft ernoon to explain th at . I think he has had a meetin g with GSA abou t 

th at . He will explain th at to you this afternoon .

Mr. R oonf.y. Very good, Jud ge.

Judg e J one s. We pro bably will not need it ourselves. I do not 

wa nt to invade th at field.
25

R ep air s an d I m pr ovem en ts

Program, and financing

[In tho us an ds of dollars]

1963 actua l 1964 est im ate 1965 estimate

Pro gra m by act ivi tie s: St ru ctur al an d me chani cal m aintenance (obliga tions) (object class 25)____________ ______ ___

Fin ancin g: Unobligate d balan ce lapsing........................................ 8

2

10 10

New obligational au th or ity (app ro pr iatio n) ___________ 10 10 10

Mr. R ooney. You req uest $9,500, which is the sam e am ount as 

has been appro priated ove r a great numb er of fiscal yea rs for repairs 

and impro vem ents to the Co urt of Claims building.

We shall insert at this po int in the record pages 62 throug h 64 of 

the justificatio n.

(The pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Repairs and im prov em en ts, Cou rt of Clai ms: Jud icia ry

1964 a pp ro priatio n in an nu al a ct__________________ ______________________________ _______$9,500

Net difference, 1965 over 1964:

Re qu ire men ts Difference,

Increase ( + ) 

or de1964 ap pro­ crease (—)

priated

1965

estim ate

Repairs to bu ild ings .......................... ............................. $9,500 $9,500

To tal e sti mate for 1965............................................ . ....................................................... ................ 9, 500

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

Language changes

None.

Objectives

This appropriation is to provide for structural repairs and im provements to the 

Court of Claims buildings, including the repairs and maintenance of the mechanical equipment. The appropriation is for expenditure by the Architect of the 

Capitol. The estimate is subm itted at the direction of the chief judge of the 

court.

Detailed justification

The amount requested for general annual repairs; namely, $5,000, is the same 

as allowed for 1964 and provides for the annual repair and upkeep of the heating 

and plumbing systems, roof, and two elevators, and for electrical, carpentry, 

millwork, plastering, ironwork, air-conditioning and refrigeration systems, and 

miscellaneous ann ual repairs.
26

The breakdown of this item follows:

Breakdown of estimate

Repa irs and maintenance of heating system---------------------------------------

Repairs to roof__________________________________________________

Electrical repairs and replacements--------------------------------------------------

Plumbing repairs________________________________________________

Maintenance and repair of elevators------------------------------------------------

Carpen try a nd millwork, plastering, and hardware ------------------------------

Maintenance, air-conditioning systems---------------------------------------------

Miscellaneous___________________________________________________

$600 

800 

500 

400 

300 

900 

1, 000 

500

Tota l general annual repairs________________________________ 5, 000

The amount requested for annual painting; namely $4,500, is the same as allowed 

for 1964 and provides for necessary painting throughout the building. The 

building is nearly 100 years old and there are numerous air cracks in the walls 

and ceilings, necessitating painting more often than would be normally required

The to tal, therefore, requested for th e Court of Claims, fiscal year 1965, und er 

“R epairs a nd improvements,” is $9,500.

GE NE RA L ST AT EM EN T

Mr. Rooney. Do you have a statem ent with regard to this?

Mr. Stewart. Yes.

Mr. Rooney. We shall insert your letter at this point in the 

record.

(The letter referred to follows;)

Architect of the Capitol, 

Washington, D.C., January 15, 1964-

Hon. J ohn J. Rooney,

Chairman, Subcommittee on the Judiciary,

Committee on Appropriations,

House of Representatives.

My Dear Mr. Chairman: The U.S. Court of Claims has occupied its present 

qua rters at 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue since 1899. Appropriations for 

construction, repair, and improvements of the buildings occupied by the court 

have been placed under the Architect of the Capitol by Congress ever since the 

court began occupying the buildings.

The Architect of the Capitol has performed his duties by virtue of authority 

granted in annual appropriation acts, and not throu gh any basic statute.

An appropriation of $9,500 was allowed the Architect for the fiscal year 1964. 

As of Jan uar y 1964, obligations, totaling $1,849 have been incurred, leaving a 

present available balance of $7,651.

An appropriation of $9,500 has been requested in the budget for th e fiscal year 

1965. This request may now be withdraw n, as we are advised th at the court 

will vacate its present qua rters and move to tem porary quarters during th e fiscal 

year 1964.

It is understood tha t the General Services Administration proposes to take over 

jurisdiction of the Court of Claims buildings at 17th and Pennsylvania Avenue, 

when those buildings are vacated by the court.

The Architect of the Capitol is not informed as to future disposition of these 

buildings, having no concern with this phase of ad ministration.

In order th at there may be no doubt as to the inten t of Congress th at the 

Architect of the Capitol be relieved of all duties and responsibilities in connection 

with these buildings after they have been vacated by the Court of Claims, it is 

requested th at the following para graph be included in the Jud iciary Appropriation 

Act for 1965:

“When the braidings at Seventeenth Street and Pennsylvania Avenue northwest

in the City of Washington are vacated by the United States Court of Claims, the

Architect of the Capitol shall cease to perform any duties in connection with such

buildings and any duties theretofore performed by him with respect to these buildings

shall thereafter be performed by the General Services Administration. Such amounts

of the appropriations herein provided for expenditure for such buildings by the Archi-
27

lect of the Capitol as may be unobligated at the time of transfer of duties shall be

transferred by the Architect of the Capitol to the General Services Administration.”

Congress has set a precedent in this matter. For many years, the Architect 

of th e Capitol was responsible for the repair and improvement of the Dis trict of 

Columbia Courthouse and the U.S. Court of Appeals Building in Judiciary 

Square, by virtue of autho rity granted in annual appropriation acts. When 

those buildings were vacated by the courts in 1952, the Appropriations Committee 

included language, similar to th at requested in this letter, in the Judiciary Appropriatio n Act, 1953, which was adopted by the Congress and is identified as 

section 404 of th at act (66 S tat. 571), term inating the duties of the Architect of 

the Capitol and transferring those buildings to the jurisdiction of the General 

Services Administration.

Yours very truly, J. George Stewart,

• Architect of the Capitol.

W IT HDRAW AL OF BUD GET R E Q U E ST

. Mr. Stewart. If you will take notice of the third paragraph,

where $9,500 was allowed the Architect for the fiscal year 1964 and 

as of January 1964-----

Mr. Rooney. The balance of $7,651?

Mr. Stewart. That is right. The appropriation for the coming 

year of $9,500 has been withdrawn.

Mr. Rooney. The net result of this letter, which I have already 

read, is you are withdrawing the $9,500 request; is tha t right?

Mr. Stewart. That is right.

N E W LANGUAGE REQ U E ST E D

Mr. Henlock. We are asking for some language in the bill to make 

sure the Architect of the Capitol is relieved of all duties in connection 

with these buildings which he has had charge of for 60-odd years by 

virtue of annual appropriation acts rathe r than a basic statute.

We are following precedents your committee followed in the case 

of two courthouse and Court of Appeals buildings when the courts 

moved out of those buildings.

Mr. Rooney. You know better than that.

Mr. H enlock. I have section 404 of the Judicial Appropriation 

Act for 1953, where the identical procedure was followed. All we 

are doing is following the precedent.

Mr. Rooney. We are in a different day and age. Do you know that 

this is subject to a point of order?

Mr. Henlock. If we had a basic statute, Mr. Chairman, we would 

feel it was a matter perhaps for the Public Works Committee, but 

this is simply clarifying what the intent was of what the Appropriations

* Committee has been doing for 60-odd years.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. Rooney. Thank you, Judge Jones and gentlemen.
Wednesday, J anuary 15, 1964.

CO UR TS OF AP PEAL S, DIS TRIC T CO UR TS, AN D OT HE R 

JU DIC IA L SERV ICES

W IT N ESSES

H O N . W IL L IA M J. CAM PB ELL, C H IE F JU D G E , U.S. D IS T R IC T C O U RT, 

N O R T H E R N D IS T R IC T OF IL L IN O IS

M A T TH E W F. M cG U IR E , C H IE F JU D G E , U.S. D IS T R IC T COU RT, 

D IS T R IC T OF COLU M BIA

CARL A. W EIN M AN, C H IE F JU D G E , U. S. D IS T R IC T COU RT, SO U T H ­

ER N D IS T R IC T O F O H IO

W A RR EN O LN EY III, D IR E C T O R , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E O FFIC E, U.S. 

C O U R TS

JO H N C. A IR H A R T , A SSIS TA N T D IR E C T O R , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E 

O FFIC E , U.S. CO U R TS

D A R W IN H . ANDER SO N, A SSIS TA N T C H IE F O F B U SIN ESS A D M IN IS ­

TR A T IO N , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E O FFIC E, U.S. COU RTS

EDW ARD V. G ARABEDIA N, B U D G ET O F F IC E R , A D M IN IS TR A TIV E 

O FFIC E , U.S. CO U RTS

Mr. R ooney. Th e nex t general item is entitled “C ourts of Appeals, 

Distri ct Courts, and Ot her Jud icial Serv ices.” It is to be found 

beginning at page 65 of the justifications, which page we shall ins ert 

at this po int in the re cord.

(Page 65 follows:)

Summ ary statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Cou rts of Appea ls, Distri ct Co urts, an d othe r Ju dicial Services (exclusive of sala ries an d expenses of referees):

1964 a pp ropriatio n in ann ua l a c t . . . . ........................ ................................................................ .

N et difference, 1965 over 1964:

Jud icia ry

$53,440,000

Req uiremen ts Difference, 

increase (+ ) 

or de1964 a p­ crease (—)

pr op ria ted

1965

estim ate

Salaries of jud ges__________________ ______ _______ $11,200,000

30.650,000

5,500,000

4,500,000

1,590,000

$11,200,000

32,940,000

5,500,000

5,065,000

2,059,500

Salaries of s up po rting personnel....... ............................ +$2,290,000 Fee s of jurors and comm ission ers,.................. ..............

Tr av el and miscellaneou s e xpe nses_______________ +665,000

+469,500

Salarie s an d expenses, Adm inist rativ e Office, U.S. 

Cou rts......... ..................... . ............... ............................

Tota l......................................................................... 53,440.000 56,764,500 3,324,500 +3,324,600

Tota l e sti mate for 1965....................................................................................................................... 56,764,500

IN C R E A SE S R EQ U ESTED

Mr. R ooney. It is ind ica ted th at the req uest for five a pprop riation 

items—“Salaries of judg es,” “S alaries of supporting person nel,” 

“Fees of jur ors and com mission ers,” “T rav el and miscellaneous 

expenses,” “Salaries and expenses, Ad mi nis tra tiv e Office, U.S. 

Co ur ts” —is in the am ou nt $56,764,500, which would be a reques ted 

increase of $3,324,500 over the appro priation s for these purposes in 

the cu rre nt fiscal year.
29

Do vou have a general s tate men t with regard to this, Judge Camp ­

bell-? *

General Statement

Judg e Campbell. A very brief one. I would prefer, if the Chair 

pleases, to com ment, if you desire com ment, item by item as we go 

down.

I would like briefly, first of all, for the record to prese nt those who 

are prese nt with me today. Chief Ju dg e Mc Guire, Dist ric t of 

Colum bia; Chief Judge We inm an of Ohio ; Mr. Olne y, Direc tor of the 

Ad mi nis tra tiv e Office; and Mr. Ai rhart, his assis tan t.

Th e Chair has co rrectly noted th e requ est for addit ion al approp ria ­

tion s, appro xim ate ly million, and the requ est for app rox imately 

170 addition al positions.

I should like to say by way of ope ning our pre sen tation , Mr. 

Ch airma n and mem bers of the comm itte e, th at thi s was carefully 

analyzed by our Co mm itte e on the Bu dget and gone over very car efully and cut down by the Ad mi nis tra tiv e Office as well as by our 

com mittee, the n presen ted to the Jud icial Conference of the United 

State s at their last meetin g, where it rece ived full discussion and 

care ful con sideration .

It rep res ents wh at we thou gh t in September of 1963 a nd wh at the 

Jud icial Con ference thou gh t was a min imu m th at was needed for 

the pro per and efficient ad mi nis tra tio n of the courts for this coming 

fiscal year.

Yo ur Co mm itte e on the Budget, Comm itte e of the Jud icial Co nference, which appears before you tod ay, has, of course, held more 

rec ent meetin gs since the Jud icia l Conference of the Un ite d State s 

has had its Sep tem ber mee ting. We are very well aware th at the 

ove rall appro priat ion situatio n has changed som ewhat since the 

tim e the Jud icia l Conference me t in Sep tem ber of last year.

Altho ugh th ese requ ests, Mr. Chairm an, repres ent our bes t judgme nt, 

in the effo rt to p rovide only the m inimum of wh at is need ed to ma intain the courts, we realize th at in the face of the prese nt req uest for 

econ omy , thr ough all app rop riations, th at your c ommittee has a ta sk 

to perform with reference to reductions. We recognize th at this is so. 

We feel th at it is our du ty un der t he st at ute to prese nt to you w ha t we 

think are the minim um needs and th at we are doing. We realize th at 

th e discretion is with your committee as to wh at, if any, economies in 

these req ues ts should be effected in lig ht of the overall situation an d 

possibly wh at, if any , of them sho uld be postponed ra th er th an going 

ahead with cer tain impro vem ents at the prese nt time.

We are prepar ed to coo perate to the fullest and to acc ept wh atev er 

decisions your com mittee makes. Th e disc reti on is you rs, of course. 

We wan t you to know th at we app rec iate the fine attentio n yo ur 

com mittee has given our requests in the p ast and your kind ness to the 

judic iar y in the m at ter of appro pri ations. Whatev er you feel in the 

exercise of you r pro per discretio n sho uld be done w ith o ur req uest, we 

no t only acc ept bu t will coo perate and abid e by it.

I think possibly w ith reference to each of th e five items I could make 

a b rief co mm ent as you reac h them, bu t I do no t think I need make a 

fu rth er open ing statem en t at this tim e, Mr. Ch air ma n.

Mr. R ooney. Do you also hav e a statem en t, Judg e McGuire?
Judge McGuire. I subscribe totally to what Judge Campbell has 

said.

Mr. R ooney. Judge Weinman?

Judge Weinman. 1 have no statement at this time, sir.

Salaries of J udges

Object classification

[In tho us an ds of dollars]

1963 a ctua l 1964 est im ate 1965 estim ate

11 Perso nnel com pensa tion: Pe rm an en t po sitio ns -........... .......

12 Pe rsonnel ben efits________________ ____ ____ ____ _____ 10,519 

346 

25

10,819

356

25

10,819

356

25 13 Benefits for former pe rs on ne l1

............. ........................ ..........

Tot al o b li gati ons___________ ______________________ 10,890 11,200 11,200

• Widows of Supre me C ou rt Ju stices.

Personnel summary

1963 ac tual 1964 estim ate 1965 est im ate

Tot al num be r of pe rm an en t positions :

Ac tive ju dges .... . . . . ____________ ____________ 385 385 385

94 Senior an d resigned ju d g e s_______________ ............... 90 94 Ave rage nurnl>er of all ju dges . . . ............................. ..................... 454 466 466 N um be r of judg es at en d of year :

Ac tive ju dges . _________ ______ . . _____________ 363 372 372 Senior an d resigne d j udges - ________ . ___ 90 94 94

Program and financing

[In th ou sand s o f dolla rs]

1963 actua l 1964 es tim ate 1965 est im ate

Program b y act ivities: salaries a nd b enefits (ob ligations).........

Fin an cing : Unobligate d balanc e lapsin g- . . . ______ ____ 10,890

70

11,200 11,200

Ne w obliga tlonal a ut ho rity (app ro pr iatio n) ..................... 10,960 11,200 11,200

Mr. Rooney. The first item, entitled “Salaries of judges,” is in the 

amount $11,200,000 and does not contain a requested increase; is that 

correct?

Judge Campbell. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. How much of this appropriation lapsed into the 

Treasury at the end of the last fiscal year, June 30, 1963?

vacancies anticipated

Judge Campbell. The estimate before is based on the assumption 

that there would be an average of 13 vacancies during the fiscal year. 

We currently have 14 vacancies. It appears at the present time tha t 

that is about an accurate estimate. I do not have it in dollars.

Mr. Anderson. $70,000 lapsed.

Mr. Rooney. We shall at this point insert in the record pages 66 

through 69 of the justifications.

(The pages follow:)
31

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Salaries of Judges: Jud iciary

1964 approp ria tio n in an nu al a ct____________________________________________________ $11,200,000

Net difference , 1965 over 1964:

Req uiremen ts Difference, 

increase ( + ) 

or de1964 ap pro­ crease (—)

priated

1965

estim ate

Co mp ensat ion a nd b e n e f i t s . . .............. $11,200,000 $11,200,000

To tal estim ate for 1965___________________________________________________________ 11,200,000

Analysis by object

Object 1964

es tim ate

1965

estim ate

Increase or 

decrease (—)

11 Personne l co mpe ns ation____________ ___________ . . $10,819.000 

356,000 

25,000

$10,819,000 

356,000 

25,000

12 Perso nnel be ne fit s______________ '._______ _____________

13 Ben efits for form er perso nnel (or su rvivors i) ___

Tot al o bligations.................. ............................ .............. ......... 11,200,000 11,200,000

1

 Widow s of Su pre me Cou rt Ju stices.

JUSTIF ICATIO N

Language changes

None.

Objectives

Fund s appropriated under this heading are for the salaries and benefits of all 

U.S. circuit and distric t judges, and all justices and judges who have retired or 

resigned in pursuance of law. Annuities to surviving widows of Supreme Court 

Justices also are payable from this appropriation . For basic sta tut ory authorities, reference is made to section K of the “ Digest of Appropriations, the Judiciary,” on file with the Bureau of the Budget and the Appropriations Committees 

of the Congress.

General justification

At the present time there are 385 authorized judgeships, 78 for the U.S. courts 

of appeals and 307 for the U.S. district courts. As of June 30, 1963, there were on 

the roll and in a pay status, 74 active circuit judges and 289 active d istrict judges. 

In addition, there were 86 senior judges and 4 resigned judges, or a grand tota l of 

453 judges in a pay status. There were 22 judgeship vacancies on June 30, 1963, 

4 in the U.S. courts of appeals and 18 in the U.S. district courts, including 4 

district judgeships created by the act of May 19, 1961, Public Law 87-36. It is 

expected th at in 1965 there will be an average of only 13 vacancies, which is 

considered a normal level. Consistent with the patte rn which has existed over 

the past several years, it is anticip ated th at there will be, on the average, 94 

senior and resigned judges on the roll in 1965.

The following table shows the average number of judges on the roll during the 

past 4 years and the estimates for 1964 and 1965:

Fiscal year Ju dg eships Vacancies Filled

Re tir ed

an d

resigned

judges

Tot al

jud ges

1960........................................................... 316 16 300 81 381 1961................................................. ............ . > 313 14 299 81 3sn 1 9 6 2 .. .. ................................................. 385 53 332 91 423

1963_______ _____________ ___________ _ 385 21 364 90 454 1964 (estim ate).......................... ....................... 385 13 372 94 466 1965 (estim ate)............ . .................................... 385 13 372 94 466

1

 Re duction du e to A laska sta teh ood.

31 -13 6— 64------ 3
32

N UM B E R OF JU D G ES

Mr. R ooney. How ma ny judg es does this provide for?

Mr. Ande rson. It provides for an average of 466 judges.

Mr. R ooney. How ma ny r etired judg es does it provide for?

Mr. Anderson. I t provides for 90 retire d and 4 resigned, a tot al 

of 94 in th at category .

Mr. R ooney. How much lapse is p rovided?

Mr. Anderson. Th irteen lapse.

Judg e Campbell. That is the cu rre nt one. We hav e 14 vacancies 

at presen t.

Mr. Anderson. Yes, but the lapse is 13.

Mr. R ooney. When you answ ered a while ago when I put the 

question, how ma ny judg es does it provide for, you gave the figure 

466. That included the active judges, also retire d and resigned?

Mr. Anderson. That is c orre ct, active, retired, and resigned.

Judg e Campbell. If I could observe paren the tically, if H.R. 8986 

shou ld pass this session, it would require us to come in for a sup plementa l.

Mr. R ooney. I am with you on th at one.

Ju dg e Campbell. I thou gh t possibly you mig ht be. I would like 

nothi ng be tte r than to appear on such a reques t. I t is much needed 

bo th by Members of Congress and by the judicia ry.

Salaries of Supporting P ersonnel

Object classification

[In t housands of dollars]

1963 actual 1964 estimate 1965 estimate

Personnel compensation:

Perm anen t positions....... ........... ................ .......................... 26,593

308

101

28,078 

365 

327

30,372 

365 

190

Positions other than permanent.............. . ........................

Other personnel compensation.............................................

Total personnel compensation_____________________ 26,002 28,770 30,927

Dire ct obligations:

11 Personnel compensation_________ _______________ 25,801

1,908

28,545

2,105

30,687

12 Personnel benefits................. . .................................. . 2,253

Tota l direct obligations.............................. ................ 27,709 30,650 32,940

Reimbursable obligations:

11 Personnel compensation. __ ________________ 202

15

225

17

240

12 Personnel benefits......................... ..................... . ......... 18

Total reimbursable obligations................................... 217 242 258

Tota l obligations...____ ______________ _____ 27,925 30,892 33.198

Personnel summary

1963 actual 1964 estimate 1965 estimate

Tota l number of perm anen t positions............ . ........... .............. 3,866

75

3.800 

3.752 

111

3.885 

85

3.885 

3,800

120

3,977

85

3,970 

3,892 

120

Full-time equivale nt of other positions............... . .....................

Average number of all employees____ ______________ ____

Employees in perm anen t positions, end of year....... ......... ..

Employees in other positions, end of year..’..............................
Program and financing

[In tho us an ds of dollars ]

1963

ac tual

1964

est im ate

1965

estim ate

Pro gra m by acti vit ies :

Salaries a nd ben efits:

Direct p ro gr am ..................................................... ................ 27,709

217

30,650

242

32,940 Ke imbursa ble pro gra m . . ............................. ..................... 258

To ta l o bligations _______________________________

Financing :

Advan ces and reim bu rsem en ts from oth er ac co un ts______

Un obligate d balanc e l ap sing ......................................... . ...........

27,925

-2 17

279

30.892

-2 42

33.198

-2 58

Ne w obligational au th ority (app ro pr iatio n) ................. . 27,968 30,650 32,940

Mr. R ooney. The next item is entitled “Salaries of su pp ortin g 

person nel” and is to be foun d beginning at page 70 of thes e justifi ­

cations, which page we shall inse rt, tog eth er with pages 71 th rough 

88 of the justificatio ns.

(The pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriatio n

Salaries of su pp ortin g person nel, th e jud iciary: Jud icia ry

1964 app ro pr iatio n in an nu al act............ ............................ .......... ............... ................................ . . $30,650,000

Net difference, 1965 over 1964:

Req uiremen ts Difference, 

increase ( + ) 

or de1964 ap pro­ crease (—)

priat ed

1965

est im ate

Co mp ensation an d relat ed b enefits......... . .................... $30, 650,000 $32,940,000 +$2, 290,000 +2 , 290,000

To tal estim ate for 1965.................................... ............................ .......... ................... .......... ........... 32,940,006

Analy sis by object

Object 1964 esti m ate 1965 estim ate

Increa se (+ ) 

or

decrease (—)

11 Person nel com pe nsation............................... ............................. $28,545,000 

2,105,000

$30,687,000 

2,253,000

$2,142,000 

148,000 12 Personne l benefits.......................................... .............................

To ta l (direc t) oblig ations ____ _________ ______ _______ 30,650,000 32,940,000 2,290,000
An aly sis of increases requested by class of personnel

E sti m ate , 1964 A dd it io n al per so nn el F ed er al

S al ary

Ref or m

A ct

W it h in -

gr ad e

pro m oti ons

Ju d ic ia ry

sa la ry

p la n

D educti on 

for e xtr a 

d ay in 

1964

E sti m ate , 1965

Pos itio ns A m o u n t Posi tions A m o u n t Posi tion s A m o u n t

Per so nnel co m pen sa tion: Clerk s of cou rts __________________________ 1,41 2 $10.315.00 0 15 $87,000 $259,000 $185,000 $380,000 -$ 39,0 00 1,427 $11,187 ,000 Pr ob atio n sy ste m __________________________ 888 7,080,00 0 77 >374,000 173,000 156,000 240,000 -2 5 ,0 0 0 965 7,9 98,00 0 830 6,3 00, 000 168,000 102.000 -2 4 ,0 0 0 830 6,5 46,00 0

320 1.500,000 20,000 28,000 -5 ,0 0 0 320 1,54 3,000

314 2,7 25, 000 62,500 -1 0 ,5 0 0 314 2,777,00 0

O th er p erso n n el. . ________________________ - ..................... 121 850,000 17,500 12,000 -3 ,5 0 0 121 876,000

T o ta l, co m pen sa ti on__________________- _____________ 3,885 28,770 ,00 0 92 461,000 700,000 483,000 620.000 -1 07.0 00 3,97 7 30,927,0 00 2,271,000 2,122,00 0 34,0 00 48,300 32,200 42,5 00 —8,000

Tot al comp ensat ion a nd benefits ________________ 3,885 30,892 ,00 0 92 495,000 748.300 515,200 662,500 -1 15,0 00 3,97 7 33,198,0 00 -2 58,0 00 Le ss: A n ti cip ate d r eim b u rs em en ts ------------------------------------- -2 42,0 00 -5 ,3 0 0 -3 ,2 0 0 -7 ,5 0 0

30,65 0,0 00 495,000 743,000 512,000 655,000 -1 15 ,0 00 32,940 ,000

1 10 -m on th pr ov is io n.
35

Summary of increased requirements for 1965

Nature of expense (or savings):

Deductions: Funds for an extra compensable day in 1964, Amount

not required in 1965_________________________________ —$115, 000

Additions:

1. 44 additional probation officers----------------------------- 1 277, 000

2. 33 clerk-stenographers for p robatio n offices-------------- 1 124, 500

3. 15 additional deputy clerks_______________________ 93, 500

4. Pay costs under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

(increases scheduled to take effect on Jan. 6, 1964) _ 743, 000

5. Provision for within-grade salary advanc ements------- 512, 000

6. Reduction of lapse (difference between full- and partyear cost of judiciary salary plan)_______________ 655, 000

7. 1-year extension of authority for pretrial examiner

division of th e U.S. District Court for the Southern

District of New York______________________________________

Net increase, 1965 over 1964-------------------------- 2, 290, 000

* > 10 -m on th pro vis io n.

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

Language changes

None.

Objectives

This appropriation is for paym ent of compensation and benefits of all supporting 

personnel of the U.S. courts of appeals and the U.S. district courts, with the 

exception of referees in ban kruptcy and their clerical assistants. For data as to 

the classes of personnel covered and basic sta tutory authorities, reference is made 

to section L of the Digest of Appropriations, the Judiciary, on file with the Bureau 

of the Budget and the Appropriations Committees of th e Congress.

General justifixation

The supp orting personnel of the U.S. courts provided for by this estimate are 

required to assist the judges in the conduct of hearings, trials, and other judicial 

functions, and to man the component offices of the courts including the Federal 

prob ation system. The estimate for 1965 provides for the appointment of 44 

additional officers and 33 clerk-stenographers for the prob ation system and 15 

deputy clerks for the U.S. courts of appeals. Provision also has been made for 

within-grade salary advan cements, the difference between the full- and part-year 

cost of salary increases to be granted pursua nt to the Federal Salary Reform Act 

of 1962, effective Jan uary 6, 1964, and the difference between the full- and partyear cost of the judic iary salary plan.

The following is a summ ary of the judicial business of both the circuit and 

distric t courts:

Courts of appeals

Filings in the courts of appeals during the fiscal year 1963 increased for the

* fifth consecutive year to a record 5,437 cases, 614 more than in 1962. Criminal 

appeals increased 25 percent, from 773 in 1962 to 965 in 1963, and there were 20 

perc ent more private civil appeals, 2.030 in 1963 compared with 1,692 in 1962. 

There was an increase in ad ministrative appeals of 11 percent, from 1,024 to 1,141 

bu t a slight reduction in U.S. civil and other appeals.

* During the year the courts disposed of 5,011 cases, 844 more tha n in 1962, bu t 

notwithstand ing this increase of over 20 percent in term inations, the backlog of 

pending cases rose from 3,031 at the beginning of the year to 3,457 a t the end of 

the year.

The following table shows caseload data for 

the p ast 5 years:

F is ca l y ea r

1959 „...............................................................................................................

1960 ..................................................................................................................

1961 ..................................................................................................................

1962 ..................................................................................................................

1963 ..................................................................................................................
The district courts

Civil cases.—There was a tota l of 63,630 civil cases filed in the U.S. district 

courts during fiscal year 1963 as compared with 61,836 cases filed in the previous 

year, an increase of 1,794 or 2.9 percent. During 1963, there were 62,379 cases 

term inated, 4,383 (7.6 percent) more t han in 1962 but 1,251 less than the number 

filed in 1963. Consequently, the pending caseload increased from 67,968 a year 

ago to 69,219 on June 30, 19K3.

The following table shows the number of civil cases filed, term inate d, and 

pending in the U.S. di strict courts for the past 10 years:

Fi sc al ye ar File d T erm in at ed

T erm in ate d 1

(e xc luding 

Alask a)

Pen din g, 

en d of yea r

1954___________________ ____ ______________ _ 59,461 57,903 (56,381) 68,431 19 55 .................. ............................ .................................. 59,375 58,974 (57,269) 68,832 19 56 ... ................... ............. .................................. 62,394 67,700 (65,474) 63, 526 19 57 ........................ .............................. ........................... 62,380 63,5 68 (61,625) 62,338 1958................................... . .................................... . 67,116 61,285 (59,295) 68,168 1959. ................ . ......... .......................... ....... ................... 57, 800 62,172 (60,241) 63, 796 1960__________________________________________ 59,284 61,829 (57,449) 61,251 1961.......... ................. ........................................................ 58,293 55,416 (55,297) 64,128 196 2. ..................... .................................. ......................... 61,836 57,996 (57,830) 2 67,968 1963__________ _____ ___________ _____ ________ 63,630 62,379 (62,210) 69,219

1

 Excl ud es ci vi l an d p ri v ate cases te rm in ate d in th e D is tr ic t C o u rt of A la sk a. In th e tr an sf er of ju ri sdic ti on to th e S ta te co urt s in F eb ru ary 1960, m os t of th es e ca ses be ca m e S ta te c ases and, ther ef or e, sh oul d 

n o t be u se d in a co m pa riso n of d is tr ic t co u rt w or k.

J

 In cl udes 1,739 elec tric al c ontr ac ti ng ca ses .

Criminal proceedings.—There were 36,168 defendants prosecuted for criminal 

offenses in the U.S. district courts during 1963, 60 more tha n in 1962. The 

number of criminal defendants whose proceedings were term inated was 1,627 

more th an in the previous year an d 97 more tha n the number filed on in 1963. As 

of Jun e 30, 1963, there were 12,813 defendants in pending criminal cases compared 

with 12,910 a year ago. The following table shows the number of defendants 

filed on in original proceedings, terminations, and the number pending at the 

end of th e year for each of the past 6 years:

Fis ca l ye ar C om m en ce d T erm in ate d P en d in g

1958________________________ ____ _______________ 35,0 15 34,7 78 9,948 1959_________ _______ 35’ 517 34,7 44 10 558 1960......... .......... .. ........ ................ ......... ..................... 35’ 017 34,5 67 10 845 1961_____________ ____________________________________ 35j 139 34,4 03 11 440 1962________________ ___________________ ____ _________ 36 J 08 34^638 12,910 1963________ ____ ____________________________________ 36,1 68 36,2 65 12,813

Probation.— Aa of Jun e 30, 1963, there were 38,894 persons under supervision 

of Federal probation officers compared with 36,663 a year ago, an increase of 

2,231 or 6.1 percent. Probation officers also were required to conduct a greater 

number of presentence and preparole investigations, 33,263 in 1963 compared 

with 31,867 in 1962, an increase of 1,396, or 4.4 percent.

Passport applications.— The district courts processed a record number of passport applications during fiscal year 1963, 294,267. This was an increase of 18 

percent over the 249,655 applications processed in the previous year.

The following is a summary of the total passport applications filed, the number 

and the percentage of applications processed by the district courts:

M

Fis ca l y ca $ l

T ota l pas sp ort 

ap plica tions 

filed

N u m b er of 

p as sp ort ap p li ­

ca tions filed 

in th e d is tr ic t 

co urt s

Per ce nta ge of 

ap plica tions 

filed i n th e 

d is tr ic t co urt s

19 57... 4 ............ ............... ............................................ 564,397 171 737 30 4 1958________________________ ________ 653*074 185 684 ‘>8 4 1959____ . 702 021 197 828 9 8 9

I9 6 0 ______ < ____________________ _ 830, 034 222*141 8

1 9 6 1 .. .. ................ ji g .. .. .. .. .. •»,* 845,’ 856 220 699 26 1 1 9 6 2 .. .. .......... .. - 2' - J _ jC _____ ___________________ 866,112 249,655 28 8 1963................. . . - - ■ « - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,02 6,0 27 294,267 28 .7
37

The number of passport applications filed during the first 5 m onths of the fiscal 

year 1964 is 9.5 pe rcent in excess of the number filed during the same period of th e 

previous year. If this trend should continue, the courts will process in excess of 

320,000 applications in 1964 and 350,000 in 1965.

Naturalization.— The number of petitions for naturalization continued to 

decrease with 95,885 petitions received in 1963 compared with 101,804 in 1962. 

The number of aliens naturalized also dropped slightly, from 98,573 in 1962 to 

98.398 in 1963.

Effect of new district judgeships

As of June 30, 1963, 58 of the district judgeships created by the act of May 19, 

1961, were filled. The result has been a noticeable increase in the number of 

cases tried, an increase in the a mount of time devoted to trials by the judges and 

a decided increase in the number of cases terminated. During 1963, as compared 

with 1961, there was an increase in civil term inations of 13 percent, of criminal 

defe ndants in cases term inated of 5 percent, of trials (civil and criminal) of 14 

perce nt, and of days spent by judges in tria l (trial days) of 20 percent. These 

statistics would clearly indicate th at the additional judgeships have made a substa nti al contribution to the work of th e courts.

Detailed justifications

An appropriation of $32,940,000 is requested for fiscal year 1965, which is 

$2,290,000 over the amount appropriated for 1964. The increase in budgetary 

requirements is explained below:

Deduction for extra day

Employees who are paid on a biweekly basis will be compensated for 261 days 

in fiscal year 1965 whereas there are 262 compensable days in 1964. The sum of 

$107,000 representing one day’s compensation and $8,000 for related Government 

contributions to the retirement fund, group life insurance, and health benefits 

have been deducted in establishing the budgeta ry requirements for 1965.

Request for additional probation officers

It is requested th at $277,000 be provided for the employment of 44 ad ditional 

probation officers in grade JS P-9 at $7,030 per annum. The sum of $258,000 

is for their compensation and the rem aining $19,000 for related benefits—Government contributions to the retireme nt fund, for group life insurance and health 

benefits. In addition, the sum of $78,000 is included under the heading “Travel 

and miscellaneous expenses” for the nonrecurring expense of providing general 

office equipment and to cover their expenses of travel, communications, supplies, 

etc. The estim ates are based on the officers serving for an average of only 10 

months in fiscal y ear 1965.

In fiscal year 1963 th e workload of the probation system again showed a substantial increase. Although the addition of 44 officers would prevent the average 

workload from rising higher, the request is based not on overall increase but on a 

district by district evalu ation of curren t needs.

In 25 districts the W’orkloads have risen to serious proportions. The heavier 

demands of presentence investigation work and the larger number of persons under 

supervision have limited critically the amoun t of time the officers can devote to 

each case. The seriousness lies in the resulting inadequate supervision and less 

comprehensive investigative work. The addition of 44 officers will enable the 

probation system to move rapidly to correct the deficiencies which at present 

pose a threa t to adequate community protection.

Request for additional clerk-stenographers for probation system

The sum of $124,500 ($116,000 compensation and $8,500 benefits) will be needed 

for the employment of 33 clerk-stenographers for an average of 10 months in 1965. 

The sum of $26,500 is included under the heading “Travel and miscellaneous 

expenses” for general office equipment and miscellaneous expenses. These clerkstenographers will be required to serve the additional officers requested above. 

Request for additional deputy clerks

The sum of $93,500 is requested for the employment of 15 additional deputy 

clerks to serve in the offices of the clerks of the U.S. courts of appeals. The 

estimate is based on the employees being classified in grade JSP-7 at $5,795 per 

annum and includes $6,500 for related benefits—G overnment contrib utions to the 

retirem ent fund, for group life insurance and health benefits. In addition to the 

amount required for compensation and benefits, the sum of $13,500 is included 

under the appropriation “Travel and miscellaneous expenses” to provide the
38

new deputies with general office equipment and to cover such miscellaneous 

expenses as communications, printing, supplies, etc.

Although 10 additional judgeships were authorized for the courts of appeals by 

the act of May 19, 1961, no funds for additional deputy clerks to handle the resulting increase in the work and administrative functions of these courts have been 

provided. The caseload of the courts of appeals continues to increase stead ily. 

During the 5-year period ended June 30, 1963, the number of cases commenced 

in the courts of appeals increased 45 percent from 3,754 in 1959 to 5,437 in 1963. 

The needs of these courts have been met to a limited extent by the authorization 

of temporary assistance.

Requirements under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

An additional $743,000 will be required in fiscal year 1965 to cover the full-year

cost of pay increases to be granted supporting personnel of the U.S. courts of 

appeals and the U.S. district courts effective Jan uar y 6, 1964, pursuant to the 

Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962. The following is a breakdown by fiscal year 

of the increases provided under compensation schedule II (2d phase) of the act.

T o ta l p ay 

costs

C ost in 

1964

B u d g eta ry

re quir em en ts ,

1965

C om ii en sa ti on............ ................. . ................. . _ .................................... $1,3 57,0 00

93,000

$662,000

45,0 00

$695,000 

48,0 00 B en efi ts .................................... ..................... ..............................

T o ta l. _ .................... .............................. .................................... 1,450,000 707,000 743,000

The budgeta ry requirements were established by application of the rates 

actually payable under the new pay scales, augmented to the extent of approximately 6.8 percent to cover the cost of related benefits—Governm ent retireme nt 

contributions, employer FICA taxes, and Government contributions to employee 

life insurance premiums. The estimate is net of indirect obligations resulting 

from the pay increases, th at is, amounts to be reimbursed from other agencies or 

accounts.

Pay costs in the fiscal year 1964 are being absorbed to the extent of $172,000. 

No further absorption is possible without seriously affecting the execution of 

essential functions by the courts, particularly in view of the need for additional 

personnel for the probation system and in the offices of the clerks of the U.S. 

courts of appeals.

Within-qrade salary advancements

All of the personnel provided for by this appropriation, with the exception of 

clerks of court, court reporters, National Park Commissioners, and other officers 

and employees serving in ungraded positions at rates fixed by the Judicial Conference, are subject to the promotional plan for judiciary personnel and will be 

granted step increases corresponding with those provided for by title VII of the 

Classification Act of 1949, as amended.

It is estim ated that these within-grade salary advancements will cost $512,000 

of which $480,000 represents increases in compensation and $32,000 related 

benefits—G overnment contributions to the civil service retirement fund and for 

group life insurance. The estim ate, which represents approximately 85 percent 

of the full potentia l cost of step increases, is net of anticipated savings due to 

turn over of personnel and the filling of vacancies at lower rate s of pay. The 

estim ated cost of within-grade salary advancements to be granted in 1965 is 

somewhat higher than the estim ate for 1964 by virtue of the provisions of the 

Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962 relatin g to the minimum increase on grade-tograde promotions and the waiting period for within-grade increases. Also, 

employees who are regraded under the judiciary salary plan in many instances 

will be placed in the base rates of the respective grades and will be entitled to 

within-grade salary advancements upon the expiration of 1 year from the date of 

reclassification, whereas prior to such reclassification they would have been 

required to serve 2 or even 3 years to be eligible.

Reduction of lapse (difference between the full- and part-year cost of the judiciary

salary plan)

The budget estimate for the fiscal year 1964 included a request for funds for the 

implementation of th e “judiciary salary plan .” For a detailed description of th e 

plan, reference is made to pages 41-45, 47-50, 55 and 63-69 of the hearings before
39

the subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, 

on the judiciary appropriation s for 1964.

The estim ate for 1964 was based on the annu al cost of th e plan, but the Congress, apparen tly takin g into account the fact th at there would be some delay 

in adju sting the grades and salaries of the employees, approved approximately 

one-half of the sum requested.

The amount allowed for 1964 will be sufficient particularly in view of the delay 

in the ena ctm ent of the appropriation bill. Of course, in 1965 the appropriation 

must be augm ented to the extent of the difference between the full-year and 

part-year cost of the salary adjustm ents. The recurring annual cost of the plan, 

the amounts allowed for 1964 and the bud geta ry requirements for 1965 are as 

follows:

« Re curri ng

an nu al

cost

Amou nt 

allowed 

for 1964

Bud ge tary

req uireme nts,

1965

Pe rso nnel comp ensation :

Dep ut y clerks (d istri ct co urts) ________________________ $785,000

500,000

$412,000

260,000

$373,000

* Pr ob atio n sy ste m ___________________________________ 240,000

Tot al pers onnel com pe nsation____________ __________ 1,285,000 

90,000

672,000 

48,000

613,000 

Pe rso nnel ben efits ______________________________________ 42,000

Tota l comp ensat ion a nd b enefits_____________________ 1,375,000 720,000 655,000

N ot e.—Provis ion for ad justing th e grades an d sala ries of clerical perso nnel in th e offices of referees in 

ba nk ru pt cy is in clud ed in t he ap pr op ria tio n for “ Expen ses of Referees.”

Continuing authority for pretrial examiner division of the U.S. District Court for

the Southern District of New York

The Congress in fiscal year 1964 granted a 1-year extension of the autho rity 

and the funds for a pretrial examiner division in the Southern District of New 

York on an experimental basis. The program which was initiate d on December 

7, 1961, has not yet been completely evaluated and, therefore, it is requested 

th at a further extension of 1 year be granted. The following is a breakdown of 

the staff and the annual cost of the program :

Salary 1

and benefits

Examiner, ung raded_____________________________________________ $15, 865

Examiner, ung raded___________________________________________ 15, 865

Clerical assistant, JS P- 4________________________________________ 4, 355

Clerk-typist, JS P- 4____________________________________________ 4, 495

Tota l salaries___________________________________________ 40, 580

Related benefits (estimate)______________________________________ 3, 020

To tal________ ____ _______ ________ ____ _______________ 43,600

1

 Rates effective J an . 6, 1964.

IN C R E A SE S R E Q U E ST E D

Mr. R ooney. Th e req uest for “Salaries of support ing perso nnel” 

is in the am ou nt $32,940,000, which would he an increase of $2,290,000 

over th e a mo unt a pp ropriat ed in the cu rre nt fiscal yea r. Th e increases 

are listed at page 73 of the justifications.

Inc lud ed at page 73 of the justifi cation s and the req ueste d increase 

of $2,290,000, we find prov ision for 44 add itio nal probati on officers, 

33 clerk -steno gra phers for p rob ation officers, and 15 ad dition al de pu ty 

clerks, a tot al of 92 add itional position s.

In view of the Pr esiden t’s sta te of the U nion message, wha t is y ou r 

position wi th regard to these req ueste d add itio nal pos itio ns at the 

prese nt time, since thi s bu dg et was, as you said, ma de up ba ck in 

September?
40

Judg e Campbell. We recognize that obviously the re would possibly 

have to be some red uction here. Of cou rse, we leave th at entirely to 

the discretion of the comm itte e and will abide by wh ate ver the 

comm itte e does.

ADDIT IO N A L PRO B A TIO N O FFIC E R S

I should point out, however, th at there hav e been no addit ion al 

probati on officers in our service since 1962. Th e wor k of the pr ob ation de pa rtm en t has g rea tly increased, and the re is a crying need.

Mr. R ooney. Tha t was o nly a y ear ago.

Jud ge Campbell. No, it is long er th an th at . I meant to say, 

actua lly, in 1962. We pu t them on in 1962. That would be the 1961 

bu dg et, would it not, th at we g ot the addition al officers? We pu t 

some on in 1962. Since then we hav e made no req uests for a dditio nal 

probati on officers.

Th e 44 th at we a sk, we feel and the conference felt, up on the presentatio n of our comm ittee and also the com mittee that h andles pro bation 

for the judicial conference, th at the need of the add itio nal officers was 

more than justified by th e increased w orkload, which is due not only to 

a great er use of pres entence inv estigations by a greater numb er of 

jud ges thr ou gh ou t all of the system, bu t also by the increase in the 

type of work th at is being done.

Th e Congress has exte nded the prov isions, for exam ple, of Yo uth 

Offenders Act to include u p to the age of 26 anyone who is a ju venile. 

Juv enile cases req uire conside rably more work by pro bat ion officers 

th an do the reg ula r cases. Tha t has increased the load on each 

officer.

Also the load with the parolees th at we have to supervise with our 

pro batio n staff for the De pa rtm en t of Justice has incre ased considera bly since 1962. The actua l figures we hav e and we can furn ish 

if your com mittee would like them .

We would like to point out, apro pos the Presiden t’s state of the 

Union message, th at this also happen s to be a field wherein economy 

can be achieved by increasing positions. There has definitely been 

demo nstrated , bo th in the so-called Michiga n exp erim ent in the S tate 

court s and in a survey which we have made in our courts, th at to the 

ex tent t hat we have add itio nal officers who can give compet ent supervision, judges use pro bat ion more than impriso nment. To the ex ten t 

th at offices throu ghout our system are und erstaffed in the pro bation 

de pa rtm en t, judges are reluctan t to place def endants on pro bation 

and are more inclined to impose a term of impriso nment.

The cost of supervi sing a defen dant on pro bation is one-tenth of 

th at of ma intain ing a pris oner in a Fed eral ins tituti on. The total 

cost per y ear of the Bureau of Prisons is $1,953 per prisoner, while for 

supervisin g a probationer it is $206 per ye ar.

Accordin gly, we feel th at to the exten t th at the c ommittee can give 

us add itio nal officers, an overall economy will be effected in th at m ore 

defen dants will be placed on pro bation rath er than com mitted.

Th e two exp erim ents, the one con ducted in Michiga n by St ate 

courts a nd the one con duc ted by o ur own service, the survey conducted 

by o ur own servic e, reveals th at ju dges make greater use of p rob ation 

if the re is adeq uate probati on staff. We feel th at we are urg ently 

sh ort at the present time a great ma ny of thes e 44 officers, th at all
41

of them could be put to work immediately and effect an overall 

saving.

However, again, the chairman asks me in view of the state of the 

Union message—the only thing I can say is we do realize your committee is going to have to cut our request. I am sure the judicial 

conference will agree when it meets the next time, at least I will tell 

them it will be necessary. We leave to your discretion to what 

extent, in order to bring us within the purview of the entire economy 

program this, what we regard as a reasonable request, minimum 

request, should be reduced.

1 should observe also tha t to the extent you reduce the number of

* officers th at you may allow us, the requested clerk-stenographers and 

supporting personnel for probation officers should likewsie proportionately be reduced.

Would you like me to comment on the clerks also, Mr. Chairman?

• Mr. Rooney. Of course, for the record I should explain tha t the 

Bureau of the Budget does not exert control over this request for 

the judiciary as it does over requests for branches of the executive 

department.

Judge Campbell. Tha t is correct, sir.

Mr. Rooney. It is traditional tha t whatever is asked by the 

judiciary is allowed and forwarded to the Congress by the Bureau 

of the Budget.

Judge Campbell. Yes, sir.

Mr. Rooney. In view of the fact tha t this budget and this particular bill this year will contain not a single additional person for 

an agency such as the Department of State and will contain fewer 

positions for the Department of Justice, 1 should think it only in 

order tha t we should very carefully scan this entire request for the 

judiciary. Would you agree with me?

Judge Campbell. I agree with you, sir. But again, I do not want 

to appear in opposition, but tha t discretion is properly vested in 

you and your committee, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. That monkey is really getting around this room.

Judge Campbell. He will land on your back any minute.

Mr. Rooney. You p ut him there just as soon as you sat down.

Judge Campbell. However, I will again repeat, taking him off your 

back and putting him on mine, Mr. Chairman, we know you are going 

» to have to cut this. We are satisfied with whatever it has to be reduced this year.

Mr. Rooney. Now I am sure the monkey does not know where he is.

Judge Campbell. Let us leave him in the middle of the table.

» Judge McGuire. Put him back in the cage.

Judge Campbell. I think an exercise of sound discretion on both 

sides of the table indicates tha t whatever is done is more or less in the 

way of postponement. Of course, we can eliminate it altogether, 

but I think that effect would definitely be harmful to the general 

administration of criminal justice.

I do think a substantial reduction will be given us. I might say we 

expect it and we certainly will cooperate with whatever you do.

Chief Judge McGuire calls my attention to the fact tha t there has 

been an increase in criminal cases. Those statistics are available to 

the committee.
42

JU D IC IA R Y SA LA RY PL AN

Mr. Rooney. What do you now estimate as the annual cost of the 

judiciary salary plan?

Judge Campbell. It is twice what you appropriated last year. It 

is on page 73. It is item 4.

Mr. Rooney. Item 6.

Judge Campbell. $655,000. Incidentally, apropos of that, Mr. 

Chairman, your estimate last year in allowing one-half proved to be 

exactly accurate.

Mr. Rooney. We just happened to stumble into that.

Judge Campbell. I think it was very efficient stumbling because 

you h it right on the head.

Mr. Airhart. You came within 1 day. Our bill was signed 

December 30.

Mr. Rooney. We had no idea of that. I think you may be laboring 

under a misapprehension here insofar as this committee is concerned 

on this matter. As I say, we had no idea that the bill was not going 

to be taken up in the other body until the time it was actually taken 

up and tha t it would not become a public law until the end of the 

year. It would appear now, Mr. Airhart, tha t you are taking it for 

granted tha t we allowed exactly half. This is not the fact. We 

thought your figures were too high when we allowed the amount tha t 

we did.

Mr. Airhart. Then I did misunderstand.

Mr. Rooney. Completely.

Judge Campbell. I likewise misunderstood. I understood it had 

been allowed but tha t only sufficient funds were being appropriated 

to put it into effect for the rest of the fiscal year. That was the understanding I received.

Mr. Rooney. We figured that the plans you had were not sufficient 

to warrant the allowance of the full amount. That was the reason 

for the reduction.

Judge Campbell. I must confess the misapprehension then because 

both Judge McGuire and I, after consultation and consideration of the 

committee’s report, assumed that it was granting the request and the 

allowance was exactly one-half, as I indicated before. We would have, 

of course, regardless of when it was signed, put it in effect only to 

allow half a year.

Mr. Rooney. I will ask t hat question again so as to have it clear 

on the record. What do you now estimate as the annual cost of the 

judiciary salary plan?

Mr. Airhart. The annual cost estimate as of now is $1,375,000.

W IT H IN -G R A D E SA LA RY ADVAN CEM EN TS

Mr. Rooney. How did you arrive at the figure $512,000 for withingrade salary advancements?

Judge Campbell. That is under the regular civil service table of 

promotions or change in salary grades. After a certain number of 

years an employee goes into different grades.

Mr. Rooney. Do you have some data on this?

Judge Campbell. Yes.

Mr. Garabedian. The method of arriving at the requirement for 

within-grade salary advancements was by application of the within-
43

grade salary increases to each of the various positions in the judiciary. 

This is by actual application to each position. There are some 

3,459 positions covered by this appropriation, salaries of supporting 

personnel.

We estimated on the basis of experience that there would be approximately a 15-percent turnover. Here again this is based on the actual 

turnover in fiscal 1963. By taking 85 percent of the maximum potential cost of within-grade salary advancements, we arrived at the 

estimate for fiscal year 1965.

Judge Campbell. These are all to be actual ; however, any t hat are 

not used would result in a refund to the Treasury, would it not?

Mr. Garabedian. Yes sir; any balance would revert back to the 

Treasury.

Judge Campbell. This follows the regular civil service table.

Mr. Rooney. Out of this appropriation at the end of fiscal 1963, 

how much lapsed into the Treasury?

Mr. Anderson. $279,000, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. Out of the entire item entitled “Salaries of supporting 

personnel”?

Mr. Anderson. Yes, sir.

Judge Campbell. Would you like anything about the clerks 

tha t are in there? There are 15 positions there.

Mr. Rooney. I expect they fall into the same category as the one 

that monkey was concerned with.

Judge Campbell. Precisely, Mr. Chairman. I think we understand each other. Certainly, we do realize we cannot be any different 

from any other branch of the Government.

Fees of J urors and Commissioners, U.S. Courts

Object classification

[In thous and s of dollars]

1963

actual

1964

estim ate

1965

estimate

11 Personnel compensation:

Fees of U.S. commissioners.............................................

Fees of jury commissioners____ _____ ____________

864

10

2,852

864

10

2,916

864 

10 

Fees of jurors _______________________________ 2,916

Total personnel compensation__________________ 3,726 

36

1,567 

71

3,790

36

1,602

72

3,790

36

1,602

72

12 Personnel benefits. ____ .................................... ................

21 Travel land transportation of persons (jurors)__________

25 Other services (meals and lodging furnished juro rs)...........

Total obligations________________________________ 5,400 5,500 6,500
Program and financing

[In tho us an ds of dollars]

1963

ac tu al

1964

estim ate

1965

est im ate

Pr og ram by ac tiv itie s:

Fees a nd rela ted ben efits o f U .S. c ommissione rs_________

Fees of jury co mm ission ers ____ ___________ __________ 900

10

4,490

900

10

4,590

900

10

4,590 Fees, ex penses, a nd costs of juror s_________________ ____

Tota l obligations- . . . _ .. ........................... . .. 5,400

100

5,500 5,500 Fi na nc ing: Un obligate d balan ce lapsing........................................

New ob ligational a uth ority (app ro pr iatio n) ___________ 5,500 5,500 5,500

Mr. R ooney. Th e next and third item is entitled “ Fees of ju rors and 

com mission ers,” and is to be found beginning at page 89 of the ju stifications. We shall at this point insert pages 89 thr ough 93 of the 

justifications.

(The pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Fee s of juror s a nd comm issioners, U.S. cou rts: hidiciary 1964 approp ria tio n in an nu al a ct ................... ..................................................................................... $5, 500,000

N et difference, 1965 over 1964:

Req uiremen ts Difference, 

incre ase (+ ) 

or de1964 ap pr o­ crease (—)

pr iated

1965

es tim ate

Ju ry costs________________ ________ _ $4,600,000 

900,000

$4,600,000 Co mm ission ers ’ fees an d relate d b en efi ts .............. . 900,000

T ota l............................................... ....................... 5,500,000 5, 500,000

Tot al es tim ate for 1965........................................................................................................................ 5,500,000

Analysis by object

1964

estim ate

1965

est im ate

Increase (+ ) 

or

decrease (—)

11 Perso nnel com pensa tion:

Fees of U.S. com missione rs________________________ $864,000

10,000

2,916,000

36,000

1,602,000

72,000

$864,000

10,000

2,916.000

36,000

1,602,000

72,000

Fee s of jury commis sioners_______ _________ _______

Fees of jur or s............. .......... ..................................

12 Perso nnel benefit s................................. . ............ . .....................

21 Tr av el and tra ns po rta tio n of persons (ju rors).......... ............

25 Other services (meals an d lodging furn ish ed ju ro rs )_____

Tot al o bligations .________ _____ ____________________ 5,500,000 5.500,000

JUST IFICATION

Language changes

None.

Objectives

This appropriation is for fees, expenses, and costs of jurors; compensation of 

jury commissioners; fees of U.S. commissioners, including related Government 

contributions to the civil service retireme nt fund and matching taxes under the 

Federal Insurance Contributions Act, as amended, and the compensation of voting
45

referees appointed pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1960. For basic st atu tor y 

authorities, reference is made to section M of the “Digest of Appropriations, 

the Judicia ry,” on file with the Bureau of the Budget and the Appropriations 

Committees of th e Congress.

General justification

The amount of service and the compensation of jurors depend largely on the 

number of jury trials requested by the parties to civil and criminal cases in the 

courts. The earnings of commissioners are directly related to the volume of 

cases presented by Federal law enforcement officials. The following table shows 

the trend in the cost of jurors and commissioners during the past 8 years, the 

amount appropriated for 1964, and the estimate for 1965:

Fis ca l ye ar J u ry co sts Per ce nta ge

ch an ge

Fe es of c om ­

mission er s 

an d re la te d 

be ne fits

Per ce nta ge

ch an ge

1956 ............ ..................... $3,729.814 $590,519

1957 ................................................................. 3,72 9, 726 0 617,020 + 4 .5

1958 .............................................. - ................. 4,1 96,30 0 • + 1 2.5 783,700 ’ + 27 . 0

1959 __________ ______ __________________ 4.2 10, 243 + .3 791.826 + 1 .0

1960 _____ _____ _______________________ 3,8 94, 159 —7. 5 803,562 + 1 .5

1961 . _________________________ ____ ____ 3,767,974 - 3 .2 830,976 + 3 .4

1962 ................................ ....... ......... ......................... 4.2 58, 104 + 1 3 .0 841,757 + 1 .3

1963 _________ ___ ____ ___________________ 4.50 2,8 55 + 5 .7 894.294 + 6 .2

1964 ( es tim at e) ______________________________ 4,6 00.00 0 + 2 .2 900,000 + •6

1965 ( esti m ate )....... ..................... . ................................. 4,6 00,00 0 0 900,000 0

1

 In cr ea se d u e p ri m ari ly to s ta tu to ry incr ea se in fees o f ju ro rs effec tiv e S ep t. 7, 1957. 

in c re a s e d u e pri m ari ly to s ta tu to ry in crea se in fees o f com m is si on er s ef fe ct iv e S ep t. 2,1 95 7.

Petit jury costs during 1962 aggregated $3,799,000, almost $300,000 more t han 

in the previous year and $600,000 more than in 1961. The increase in th e cost of 

petit juries which is in relatively the same proportion as the increase in th e number 

of jury trial days, is due to the activities of th e a dditional district judges a ppointed 

pur suant to the omnibus judgeship legislation. Since 1961 petit jury costs have 

increased 18.7 percent whereas, during the same period the number of jury tria l 

days has increased 17.3 percent, from 13,080 in 1961 to 15,348 in 1963. This 

would indicate th at the courts have not relaxed their efforts to improve on their 

systems of calendar control and juror utiliz ation.

Fees and allowances of grand jurors in 1963 aggregated $704,000—$53,000 less 

than the previous year but $137,000 more tha n in 1961.

The fees and related benefits of U.S. Commissioners increased 6.2 percent from 

$842,000 in 1962 to $894,000 in 1963. The earnings of the Commissioners are, of 

course, uncontrollable as they are directly rela ted to the volume of cases presented 

by law-enforcement officials. Inasmuch as the number of defendants in criminal 

proceedings commenced in the United States district courts has remained at 

relatively the same level, it must be assumed th at the increase in fees is due to a 

greater number of petty offense cases being referred to U.S. Commissioners. The 

number of U.S. Commissioners designated to try petty offenses has increased 13 

percent from 334 on Jan uar y 1, 1962, to 379 as of December 1963.

INCR EASE REQUEST ED

Mr. Rooney. They indicate t hat the request is in the amount 

$5,500,000, the same amount asked for the current fiscal year.

INCREA SE IN 1964 OBLIGATIONS OVER 1963

What have been the obligations for the first 6 months of fiscal year 

1964 as compared with 1963 fiscal year?

Mr. Anderson. As of December 31, 1963, payments to jurors were 

$1,782,191. A year ago, $1,716,616, or an increase of 3.8 percent in 

the 6 months.

Judge Campbell. May I observe th at tha t is in the face of a great 

increase in the number of judges who are trying cases, due to the
omnibus bill creating the add itional judg eships. Th ere are ma ny 

more distric t judg es try ing jury cases now than form erly. I think we 

have effected su bstan tia l economies.

T ravel and M isce ll an eo us E xpe nse s, U.S. C ourts

Object classification

(In thousand s of dollars]

Direct obligations:

21 Travel and tr ansp orta tion of persons______________ 22 Transp orta tion of thin gs............ ....................................

23 Rent, communications, a nd utilities_______ _____ .. 24 Printing and reprodu ction__________________ ____

25 Other services__ ________ _______________ ______

Tran scripts ordered by courts________ ______ .. 26 Supplies and materials....................................................

31 Equipment:

General office______________________________

Lawbooks, accessions________ ________ _____

Lawbooks, contin uations______ ____ _________

Total direct obligations___ ________________

Reim bursable obligations:

23 Re nt, communications, an d u til iti es ..... ........... ........... 24 Pri nti ng and rep roduction...................... . .....................

26 Supplies an d materials___ __________ _____ _____

31 E qu ip m en t.......... ................... ........ .............. ...............

To tal reimbursable obligations___ ______________

Total obligations___________________ _________

1963 actual 1964 estimate 1965 estim ate

1,794 1,890 1,925 23 36 38 715 783 944 282 267 292 46 72 197 149 200 200 328 293 363

268 127 213 307 153 153 615 678 740

4,527 4,500 5,065

3 3 3

6 6 6

9 9 9

4 2 2

23 20 20

4,550 4,520 5,085

Program and financing

[In thousands of dollars]

1963 ac tual 1964 estimate 1965 estim ate

Program b y activities:

Travel and miscellaneous expenses:

Direct program__ _______________ 4,527 

23

4,500

20

5,065

20 Reimbursable program ....................................

Total obligations............. ........... ................. 4,550 4,520 5,085

Financing:

Unobligated balance lapsing___ ______

Advances and reimbursements from other ac co un ts____ —23 -2 0 -2 0 143

New obligational autho ritv (appropriation), 4,670 4,500 5,065

Mr. Rooney. Tf there are no questions with reg ard to fees of 

commissioners and juro rs, we shall proceed to the fourth item entitled 

‘‘Tr av el and misce llaneous expenses.” This begins at page 94 of the 

justifi cations, which page we shall insert at thi s po int in the record 

together with page s 95 through 110.

(Th e page s follow.)
47

Statement relating appropr iatio n estimate to current appropriation

Tr av el a nd m isce llan ous exp ense s, U.S. cou rts : Judic iar y

1964 ap prop ria tio n in an nu al ac t____________________________________________________ $4,500,000

N et dlfle rence, 1965 o ver 1964:

Req uiremen ts Difference, 

increase (+ ) 

or de1964 ap pr o­ crease (—)

priated

1965

estim ate

T ra v el ex pe ns es $1,890,000 

2,610,000

$1,925,000 

3,140,000

+$35,000

M is ce llan eo us erp en se s +530,000

T o ta l 4,500,000 5,065,000 +565,000

Tot al es tim ate for 1965----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6,065,000

An aly sis by object

Object

21 Tr av el a nd t ra ns po rtat io n of pe rson s.

22 Tra ns po rta tio n of th in gs ........... ..........

23 Ren t, comm unica tio ns, an d ut ilitie s.

24 Pr in ting a nd re pr od uc tio n_________

25 Other ser vi ce s.____ ______ ________

Tra ns cr ip ts or dered b y c ou rt___

26 Su pplie s a nd m aterials____________

31 Eq ui pm en t:

Gener al office_________________

Lawb ooks, accessions__________

Lawb ooks, co ntinua tio ns ______

Tot al (direc t) ob ligations_____

1964 estim ate 1965 est im ate Increa se or 

decrease (—)

$1,890,000

36.500

783.000 

267,000

72.500 

200,000 

293,000

$1.925,000 

38,000 

944,000 

292,000 

197,000 

200,000 

363,000

$35,000

1,500

161.000

25.000

124,500

70,000

127,000 

153,000 

678,000

213,000 

153,000 

740,000

86,000

62.000

4,500,000 5,065,000 665,000

Summ ary of increased requirements for 1965

Nature of expense (or savings): Additions:

1. Expenses (including nonrecurring cost of equipment) relating

to requests for new personnel under the heading “Salaries of Amoun t

Supporting Personnel”________________________________ $118,000

2. Increases in charges for local switchboard telephone and teletypewriter services by the General Services Administration

due to the distribution of operators’ salaries to using agencies. 130, 000

3. For the improvement and expansion of telephone facilities

incident to the occupancy of new buildings_______________ 10, 000

4. Additional amount required for printing opinions___________ 22, 000

5. To reimburse the General Services Administration for ten ant

alteration s and services________________________________ 115, 000

G. For participation in health (first aid) un its _________________ 8, 000

7. To cover an increase in the volume and cost of supplies being

consumed by the courts_______________________________ 60, 000

8. For additional continuation material required to m aintain court

libraries and to cover contract rat e increases_____________ 62, 000

9. Nonrecurring cost of equipment required for clerks’ offices upon

conversion to central disbursing by the Administrative

Office_________________ _______________ ________ ____ 40,000

Increase, 1965 over 1964_____________________________ 565, 000

31-13 6— 64- A
JU ST IF IC A T IO N

Language changes

None.

Objectives

This appropriation provides for the necessary trave l and miscellaneous expenses 

of the judges and supporting personnel of the U.S. Courts of Appeals and the 

U.S. distric t courts, including the probation offices, bu t excluding the offices of 

the referees in bankruptcy . The travel and miscellaneous expenses of referees, 

including compensation and benefits of clerks to referees, are paid from a special 

fund appropriation . For basic s tatuto ry authorities, reference is made to section 

N of the digest of appropriations, the judiciary, on file with the Bureau of the 

Budget and the Appropriations Comm ittees of the Congress.

General justification

During fiscal year 1963 the courts of appeals received a record 5,437 new 

appeals—12.7 percent more tha n in the previous year. The backlog of pending 

cases in the courts of appeals rose from 3,031 a t the beginning of the year to 3,457 

at the end of the year. Civil cases filed in the U.S. district courts increased 2.9 

percent, from 61,836 to 63,630. As of June 30, 1963, there were 69,219 civil 

cases pending in the district courts compared with 67,968 on June 30, 1962. 

During 1963 the number of passport applications processed by the district courts 

increased 18 percent, from 249,655 to 294,267. Probatio n officers were called 

upon to conduct a grea ter number of presentence and preparole investigations— 

33,263 in 1963 compared with 31,867 in 1962. As of June 30, 1963, there were 

38,894 persons under supervision of probation officers, whereas, there were only 

36,663 a year ago. A detailed account of the judicial business of bo th the circuit 

and distric t courts is contained in the general justifications of the appropriation 

estimate for “Salaries of supporting personnel, the judicia ry.”

Detailed justification

It is estim ated th at an appropriation of $5,065,000 will be required in 1965, 

which is $565,000 more than the sum available for the fiscal year 1964. The increase in budg etary requirements is due in large measure to changes in financing 

arrangements. The General Services Administration has announced th at it will 

bill customer agencies, effective July 1, 1964, for the full cost of communication 

services, including operators’ salaries. Heretofore, such salaries have been 

financed by direct appropriations to the General Services Administration. Also, 

the General Services Administration insists on being reimbursed for so-called 

ten ant alterations and services which heretofore have been provided at no cost 

to the judiciary.

In addition to the sum of $245,000 required by reason of the changes in financial 

arrangements referred to above, the sum of $118,000 is included for expenses relatin g to requests for additional personnel under the heading “Salaries of supporting personnel;” $40,000 for the nonrecurring cost of equipment required for 

clerk s’ offices incident to the commencement of a centra l disbursing program; and 

$162,000 to cover increases in the volume and cost of supplies, lawbooks, printing, 

etc. The increases in budgetary requirements are explained in greater detail 

below:

Expenses relating to new personnel

Under the appropriation heading “Salaries of supporting personnel” funds have 

been requested for the compensation and related benefits of 15 additional deputy 

clerks for the U.S. courts of appeals, 44 additional probation officers for the U.S. 

distric t courts and 33 clerk-stenographers for the probation offices. The sum of 

$118,000 is included herein for the procurement of general office equipment and 

to cover their expenses of travel, communications, supplies, etc., as follows:

15 d ep u ty 

clerks

44 p ro bat io n 

officers

33 cl er k- stenogra pher s

T o ta l

T ra v e l.................. ........... ....................... .................... 1

 $35,000 1 $35 000 T ra n sp o rt ati o n o f t hin gs . __ $300 750 $450 1 500 C om m unic ati ons (inclu din g p o s ta g e ).. ............... 3.00 0 13,000 5 000 21 000 P ri n ti n g a n d r ep ro d u cti o n ________ _____ ____ 600 1,800 600 3 000 O th er s e rv ic e s _____ ____ ________ ___ _ . . 300 750 450 1,500 Supp lies an d m ate ri als ...... ............... ............. ........... 1.800 4.700 3,5 00 10.0 00 G en er al office e q u ip m en t (n o n re cu rr in g ). ........ .. 7,500 22,000 16^500 46,000

T o t a l........... ........... ................. ........................... 13,500 78,000 26,500 118,000

11 0- m on th pr ov is io n.
49

The expenses relating to the increase in personnel are estim ated on a unit cost 

basis. Unit costs are derived from samplings of expenses currently being incurred 

by officers and employees in similar positions. The cost of communications, supplies, equipment, etc., will vary depending upon the nature of the duties and 

responsibilities of the position." The nonrecurring cost of general office equipment, of course, will be deducted in establishing the budgetary requirements for 

fiscal year 1966.

Increased cost of communications

The General Services Administration has announced th at it will bill customer 

agencies of the Federal telecom munications system for the full cost of communications services in the fiscal year 1965 and thereafter, including operators’ 

salaries which heretofore have been financed by direct appropriation s to the 

General Services Administration. Public Law 87-847, approved October 23, 

1962 (76 Stat. 1117), established a Federal telecommunications fund to be administered by the General Services Administration on a completely reimbursable 

basis. For ready reference, a copy of the act is included herein as exhibit B.

The General Services Administration has informed heads of agencies th at as a 

result of this change in financing arrangem ents, and the addition of operators’ 

salaries to other common costs allocated to each telephone station, the current 

average charge for local service will be increased an average of $2.35 per telephone 

station per month, or approximately 45 percent. Similarly the wordage rate for 

use of intrasystem tele typwriter service will be increased, from the current rate 

of 15 mills to a rate of 33 mills per word for messages processed by the General 

Services Administration operators. The additional cost resulting from these 

increases will be offset to some extent by a savings in long-distance costs resulting 

from the establish ment of the Federal telecommunications system long-line 

network.

It is estim ated th at an additional $130,000 will be required in fiscal year 1965 

to cover the rate increases mentioned above. The estimate is based on the 

amounts currently being paid to the General Services Administration for telephone and teletypewriter services.

Improvement and expansion of telephone facilities incident to the occupancy of new

buildings

It is requested th at the sum of $10,000 be provided for additional telephone 

equipment and services for court qua rters in newly constructed buildings. The 

additional equipment will be required as a result of changes in functional setu p 

which normally occur incident to the occupancy of new court quarters.

Additional amount required for printing opinions

Since 1961 there has been a 24 p ercent increase in the volume of opinions being 

printed for the U.S. courts of appeals and con trac t rate increases averaging 12 

percent. The following are the contract rate s obtained by competitive bidding 

in the courts of appeals for 1964 compared with the rates paid in 1961:

Price per page for straight matter

-

1961 Increa se,

pe rcen t

1st c ircuit ____ __________ $5.00 $6.00 20

2d circuit___________________ 4.75 3.75 -2 1

3d circuit ________________ 4.35 5.00 15

£ 4th circuit ______ ____ ___ 3.25 3.55 9

5th circuit 2.60 2.60

6th circuit _______________ 5.90 6.40 9

7th circ uit __ ____________ 3.45 7.40 115

8th circuit ______________ 4.60 4.60 2

9th circuit . .................__ 5.45 6.00 10

District of Co lum bia circ uit 8.50 8.50

Av era ge.............................. 4.78 5.38 12

The increase of 24 percent in the volume of opinions is in proportion to the 

increase in the number of cases term inated by the courts of appeals—5,011 in 

1963 compared with 4,049 in 1961. The sum of $15,000 was provided to cover 

the cost of printing opinions for the additional circuit judges appointed pursua nt 

to the act of May 19, 1961, but it proved to be inadequate. During 1963 the
50

tot al cost of opinions aggregated $140,000 compared with $102,000 paid in 1961 

and $114,671 paid in 1962. It is estim ated th at the sum of $143,000 will be 

required in 1964 and in 1965, which is $22,000 in excess of th e sum available. 

Tenant alterations and services

The budget estimate for the fiscal year 1962 included a request for $115,000 

for te nant alteration s and services to be provided by the General Services Administration for the U.S. courts of appeals and district courts on a reimbursable 

basis. The estim ate was based on an average annual cost of 3 cents a square foot 

for the approximately 4 million square feet of space occupied by the courts in 

post office buildings and in buildings operated by the General Services Administration. Detailed justifications in supp ort of this item appear on pages 119, 

120, and 156 of the hearings before the subcommittee of the Committee on 

Appropriations, House of Representatives, on the appropriations estim ates for 

the judiciary for fiscal year 1962.

The Congress, in the Judiciary Appropriation Act, 1962, under the heading 

“Travel and Miscellaneous Expenses,” appropriated the sum of $4,407,500, 

$572,500 more than in the previous year but $410,500 less than the budget estimate. 

It appe ared th at 'the funds requested for so-called ten ant changes had been 

denied and accordingly no funds were allotted for th at purpose in the administra tiv e allocation of t he appropriation . The fact th at it was a new item in the 

judiciary budget involving a ra the r substantial sum of money it appeared unlikely 

th at the House Appropriations Committee would have approved it without an 

affirm ative stateme nt in its report accompanying the bill, particularly in view of 

the fact th at it specifically mentioned allowances of $25,000 for trav el and $60,000 

for expenses re lating to new personnel. The subcommittee chairma n’s comment 

appe aring on page 156 of the hearings, “GiveGSA our compliments, if you will. 

It was a nice idea while it lasted,” would appear to remove any doubt th at the 

comm ittee did not intend to appropriate funds to the judiciary for ten ant alterations. The subcommittee appeared to be in complete agreement with Judge 

Campbell’s views “th at it (ten ant alteration s) should be in the same general category as furniture. It’s out of our realm.”

The General Services Administration main tains th at their “funds are not 

legally available for such expenses” and have made it quite clear tha t they would 

refuse to make any ten ant changes or render services except on a reimbursable 

basis, leaving the judic iary no alte rna tive but to resubm it the request for funds 

for reconsideration. They sta ted th at the y “are not persuaded th at remarks 

made in hearings before a subcommittee that does n ot handle GSA appropriations 

and the absence of an affirmative statem ent in the comm ittee rep ort can be held 

to make any GSA funds available.”

Executive agencies are required to budget for space, furniture, and ten ant 

alteratio ns, but just as an exception was m ade for the judiciary w ith reference to 

the space and furnitu re requirements, it appeared th at it was the intent of t he 

Congress to make an exception with reference to tena nt alterations. Fund s for 

the purchase of furnitu re and furnishings for the Federal courts after having 

been appropriated to the judiciary in 1961 and 1962 were again appropriated to 

the General Services Administration. The General Services Administration 

has and continues to finance all court space requirements. In a supplemental 

appropriation request for 1962, the General Services Administration included 

funds for furnitu re and space, presumably including tenant alterations, requ ired 

incid ent to the creation of 73 new judgeships by the a ct of May 19, 1961. Ten ant 

alterations and services, as are defined by the General Services Administration, 

usually bear a direct relatio nship to either the furniture or t he space requirements 

of th e courts, and, therefore, there would be a very fine line between what is or is 

not considered a reimbursable expense. For example, the insta llation of a partition at the requ est and for the benefit of the occupant agency would be considered a “tenant change” and would be reimbursable. This, of course, would be 

inconsistent with the present funding arrangements for court space. Also, if 

fur niture is moved from one office to another at the request of t he te nant agency, 

it would be considered a reim bursable service. On the other hand , if the General 

Services Administration were to procure new furniture for the court, the cost of 

moving the furniture and any other related expenses would be borne by the 

General Services Administration.
51

Several requests for tenant alterations by the courts have been held in abeyance 

pending a reconsideration of the ma tter by the Congress.

Participation in health {first aid) units

In April 1954 the Judicial Conference of the United States authorized the 

Director of the Adm inistrative Office of the U.S. Courts to participate in the 

establishme nt of health centers and first aid stations where the local courts 

concerned desired to participate and to include funds for this purpose in the budg et 

estimates to the extent necessary. Accordingly, $8,000 is included herein for 

participation in health units at the following locations:

Denver, Colo__________________________________________________ $1, 300

Oklahoma City, Okla 1,300

Philadelphia, Pa________________________________________________ 3, 400

Pittsburgh, Pa _________________________________________________ 200

Memphis, Te nn ________________________________________________ 800

Houston, Tex__________________________________________________ 1, 100

To tal. _________ ___ ____ ______________________ _______ 8,160

Round ed________________________________________________ 8, 000

Increased consumption of supplies

Exclusive of the requirements rela ting to new personnel referred to on page 

100, it is estima ted th at the sum of $353,000 will be required in 1965 for supplies 

and materials to be consumed by the courts— $25,000 more than the sum expended 

during 1963 a nd $60,000 in excess of the sum available for 1964.

Continuation material required to maintain court libraries

It is estim ated than an additional $62,000 will be required in fiscal year 1965 

for the maintenance of court libraries. This increase in large measure is due to the 

expanding body of the law. The enactm ent of a greate r number of laws by legislatures and the growing judicial business with an increase in the number of opionions being handed down by the courts contribute to the publication of a grea ter 

volume of statutes, reports, digests, and citations, as well as textual treatises. 

The overall increase in the volume and cost of the principa l works used by the 

courts is estimated at approximately 6 perce nt. Applying this 6-percent increase to the sum expended for continuation mate rial during the fiscal year 1963 

of $615,000, the allotment for this purpose would have to be augmented to the 

extent of $37,000.

In addition to the sum which will be required as a result of the expansion of the 

body of the law, it is estim ated th at $25,000 will be required for the upkeep of 

newly acquired sets of lawbooks. The cost of continuation material required 

annually for the maintenance of libraries is equal to a bou t 15 percen t of the initial 

cost of acquisition.

Equipment required for clerks’ offices incident to central disbursement of judiciary

appropriations

The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, with the approval of the Judicial 

Conference of the United States, in fiscal year 1965, shall relieve U.S. m arshals of 

the responsibility of disbursing judiciary appropriations and pursuant to the 

authority contained in section 604 of title 28, United States Code, shall effect 

direct settlement of all salaries and expenses. The budgetary requirements 

relating to the central disbursing program have been included under the heading 

“Salaries and expenses, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts” with the exception of the sum of $40,000 included herein primarily for the procurement of equipment th at will be required in clerks’ offices. The equipment referred to are 

data recorders and trays for plastic cards which will be utilized in coding punchcards for certification of the services of jurors. The central disbursing program 

is justified in greater detail in the following chap ter.
52

IN CR E A SE S R E Q U E ST E D

Mr. R ooney. The req uest for “T rav el and miscellaneous expenses,

U.S . co ur ts,” is in the am ount $5,065,000, which will be an increase 

of $565,000 ove r the appro priat ion for these purp oses in the current 

fiscal yea r.

Th e first item, Jud ge Cam pbell, entitl ed “Expenses rel ati ng to request s for new person nel,” und er the hea ding “Sa laries of supporting 

perso nnel,” $118,000, has to do with the m at ter we discussed a while 

ago ; is th at corr ect?

Jud ge Campbell. Precisely , and to the ex ten t th at is cut down 

th is should be, proportion ate ly. V

Mr. R ooney. The monkey is conc erned with this , too?

Jud ge Campbell. Tha t is p ar t of th e same m onk ey, Mr. Chairm an.

tra nsf er to gsa for telecommunications service

Mr. R oon ey. With reg ard to ite m No. 2, which is for tra nsfer to 

General Services Ad minis tration in the am ount $130,000, wh at is the 

purpose of this?

Jud ge Cam pbe ll. We hav e no choice in the m atter, althoug h I 

wish we had. It changes the tele phone service and telety pewr ite r 

service throug ho ut the country . Gen eral Services has estimate d 

this as our fair sh are of the co st.

As far as I am concerned, I un derst and the Congress auth orized 

them or somebody aut horized the m to pu t in thi s so-called Centrex 

thing throu ghout the c ountry. I would be glad to give it b ack to the 

Congress or whoever else star ted it.

Mr. R ooney. I would be very much surprised if Congress star ted 

th at . At least, the A pprop riations Comm itte es of Congress.

Judge Campbell. I am sure they did not, but the re seems to be 

some plan to convert all Governm ent telephones all ove r the world 

on to one system so th at in the event of emergency— I do not see 

possibly how th at will affect t he courts— bu t in the event of an emergency or something, eve rybody can be con tac ted with less delay, and 

so forth.

In the future , I understand, I am told —I do no t un de rst an d— I 

cann ot figure it out myself—I am told th at it is supposed in the futu re . 

to make all of the Fed eral telephone and com municatio n servic es all 

v

over the world much more efficient and ult im ate ly more economical.

As far as my own co urt is concerned, it has been a constan t 

nuisance and is costing more money, bu t this is our fair share.

Mr. R ooney. I take it it would be agreeable to you if the committee too k th e sam e app roach to item No. 5, which is also for reim ­

bu rse ment of General Services Administration, as it should with 

reg ard to No. 2.
53

Judge Campbell. It most certainly would, Mr. Chairman, There 

again is a m atter, as you know, you and I and your committee have 

discussed from time to time. We think it belongs with the General 

Services Administration in their budget, but they say it does not, 

that we have to ask you for this money. 1 want to give them credit. 

They do the alterations and provide the services and do it very well 

and very efficiently.

It has always been my understanding, as I think it has been yours, 

that this is part of their budget and not of ours. They tell us that 

is not so and that we have to budget for it. Is that correct, Mr. 

Airhart? You carried on the negotiations.

* Mr. Airhart. To go back, I think I should say one thing here as 

between the two items. The first item, that of our reimbursing 

GSA for telecommunications costs results from a public law which 

established a Federal Telecommunications Fund and provided for

* GSA conducting it with reimbursement. There is a basic law there 

clearly providing for that.

Judge Campbell. I knew Congress was in here somewhere, but it 

was not your committee.

Judge McGuire. Is there any teletypewriter service?

Judge Campbell. Yes, they have them in the courthouse. All 

agencies use them in the courthouse.

Mr. Airhart. Your courthouse is an exception.

Judge McGuire. In many things.

Mr. Rooney. You get it by dogsled.

Mr. Airhart. The cost increase comes from the fact tha t GSA has 

this year increased its phone service cost by something like 45 percent 

and teletypewriter service by about 50 percent.

S U P P L IE S AN D M A TERIA LS

Mr. Rooney. With regard to item No. 7, which is to cover an 

increase in the cost and volume of supplies, what is the amount now 

available for supplies and materials in the current year’s budget?

Mr. Garabedian. $293,000.

Mr. Rooney. How much are you requesting in this budget?

Mr. Garabedian. $363,000 is the allotment. It represents an increase of $60,000.

< Judge Campbell. If I may interrupt at this point, I would like to

today—I could n ot do it before today—reduce tha t request by onehalf to $30,000. I have sent to you gentlemen copies of my recent 

correspondence with the judges after the President’s announced

. economy program. I am happy to report the excellent cooperation

tha t the committee on the budget has received from all the courts, 

tha t it has effected some savings which will enable us to reduce this 

request for additional funds by one-half now.
54

Mr. R ooney. This only refers to item No. 7?

Judg e Campbell. T hat is right.

Mr. R ooney. That would mean th at you would be req uesting the 

am ou nt $323,000 as com pared with $293,000 in the cu rre nt fiscal 

yea r?

Judg e Campbell. Yes, $30,000 less.

LAW BO OK S

Mr. R ooney. With regard to item No. 8, how much is now ava ilable for books, and so forth?

Mr. Anderson. $678,000, Mr. Chairm an. w

Mr. R ooney. How m uch are you req ues ting in this bud get?

Mr. Anderson. $740,000.

Mr. R ooney. Ha ve you reflected on this, Judge Cam pbell?

Judg e Campbell. Yes, we have. *

Mr. R ooney. You and your Com mittee?

Judg e C ampbell. We have presen ted w hat we thi nk will be needed 

thi s year. How ever, bo th on this item and item No. 4, which is 

“P rin tin g opinions,” the Budget C ommittee of the Jud icial Conference 

at its last meetin g req ues ted the Conference, and the y have acceded 

to our req ues t, to appo int a c ommittee of judges, pre ferably app ellate 

co urt judg es, with a view to checking this alar min g increase in cost of 

printin g opinions and also of the con tinuation and ma intenance 

services for libraries .

It ma y well be th at it is necessary. Mr. Chairma n, our C om mittee 

on the Bu dget cannot say to a judge, “You need two books and no t 

three.” How ever, we think the re are cases where th at econ omy 

should be effected. Th e Conference is going into it carefully.

We also, being distr ict judg es on this Com mittee, with two exception s, cann ot tell the appellate court judg es th at t hey are print ing too 

ma ny opinions or th at their opin ions are too long. We t hin k, however, 

th at th at m ay be the case. An appro priate com mittee of the Judici al 

Conference has been appointed to look into this matter. I can assure 

you it is proceed ing very active ly with its work. If any economies 

can be effected in thes e two item s, the y will be within this year.

To the exte nt th at you allow us any of thes e increases, we can assure 

you th at we will no t sp end a ny more of it tha n we have to and we m ay 

be able to pay some bac k as a result of the economies we hop e this *

Co mm itte e will effect.

I t is a delicate sit ua tio n for our C om mittee on the B udget . This is 

a m at te r we ra ised with the Judic ial C onference on our own initiati ve, 

no tin g the alarming increase in these two item s. We are quite hopeful 

th at we m ay achieve as good resu lts on these as we have on some oth er 

items in the pa st.
55

SA LA RIE S AN D E X P E N S E S , A D M IN IS TR A TIV E OFF IC E

Mr. Rooney. Item No. 9, the request for $40,000, tha t relates to 

something tha t will later be covered in the next item, is tha t right?

Judge Campbell. Yes.

Mr. Rooney. “Salaries and expenses, Administrative Office, U.S. 

Courts.”

Judge Campbell. Yes; depending on whether or not tha t central 

equipment is authorized, this will either go out or stay in, Mr. 

Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. We shall at this point insert in the record this chart 

entitled “Travel of Judges on Assignment to Special Courts and 

Circuit Courts or District Courts of Other Circuits,” as well as the 

chart entitled “Travel of Senior Judges on Assignment to Special 

Courts and Circuit Courts or District Courts, of Other Circuits,” and 

the chart entitled “Services and Travel Expenses of Senior Judges 

Incident to Serving in Circuit Courts or District Courts Within 

Circuits,” all concerning the period between July 1, 1962, and June 

30, 1963.

(The charts follow:)
Travel of judg es on assignment to special courts a nd circuit courts or district courts o f other circuits, Ju ly 1, 1962, to J un e 30, 1963

Con trib ut in g courts Na me of jud ge Cou rts v isited

COUR TS OF APP EALS

1st ci rc ui t..................................

Do................ . ....................

2d circu it____________ ____

D o......................................Do.......................................

Do .......................................

4th cir cuit................... . ...........

10th c ircu it...............................

DISTRICT COURTS

4th circuit: Virginia (we st­ ern). 6th cir cu it:

Tenness ee (ea ste rn)____ Tenness ee (w e ste rn ). .. . 8th cir cu it:Iow a (sou th er n) _______ Miss ouri (w est ern)____ 9th c irc uit:

Oregon...............................Washing ton (w es te rn ).. lt)th cir cu it: Ok laho ma (nor thern, ea stern, an d west ern). 

Do ................................

W oo db ury, Pete r________ ___ do.....................................Hay s, Pa ul R ....................... Lu m ba rd , J. E dw ar d........

Mo ore , Le onard P _______ Sm ith , J. J os ep h________ Bell, J. Sp en cer...................

Lew is, Dav id T ..................

Dalto n, T e d .........................Ta ylor, Rob ert L _______ Brow n, Bailey.....................

Ste ph en son, Roy L ............ Becker, Wi llia m H .............Kilk en ny , Jo hn F ..______Boldt, George H ........ .........

Bo hanon, Luth er L _____

D au gh er ty , Fr ed erick A ..

To ta l

5th c ir c u it .. _____ ______ ........d o . . ...............................

........d o . . .......................................d o . . ..............................

6th ci rc uit........................—

Distri ct of Colum bia cir ­

cu it.

5th ci rc ui t. .........................

Ne w MexicoFlor ida (sou th er n) . . 

Pe nn sy lv an ia (e as te rn )__

Florida (s o u th e rn ). .. . 

Ne w Yo rk (so uth ern ) .

.. d o __________ Illino is (n or th er n) .

Pe nn sy lv an ia (e as te rn )__

Illino is (n or th er n) ...........

Pe rio d of desi gnation

Fr om — To —

1-28-63 2- 2-63

2-15-63 3- 1-636- 3-63 6- 8-635-20-63 5-25-635-13-63 5-18-63

11-26-62 11-30-62

12- 1-62 12-31-62

3-18-63 5- 4-63

9- 4-62 9-15-62

11- 5-62 11-17-62

9-10-62 10-22-62

11-26-62 12- 8-62

3-18-63 5- 1-63

5- 1-63 5-31-63

10-29-62 12-31-62

1- 7-63 2- 4-63

2-18-63 3- 1-63

Serv ice Co st of tra ve l

A ctu al1

da ys on ass ignmen t

Circuit

courts

Distri ct courts

Judge

Law

clerk

Secre- Re­ por ter Crier To ta l

Cases

heard

Num be r 

of tr ials

Tr ial

da ys

ta ry

5 10 ’ $228 ’$215 $443

5 14 232 232

6 19 380 261 6414 15 245 246

4 17 250 282 532

6 8 201 168 .......... 369

18 14 500 345 $357 ..........1,202

9 29 760 760

11 4 4 598 ’ 188 ___ 786

15 5 9 349 331 $327 ..........1,007

12 3 9 343 338 338 .. . 1,01913 6 11 363 515 .......... 878

. . 759 ........ 759

28 5 12 1,037 680 ___ 1,717 10 2 5 727 _____ '727

36 5 19 1,087

337

647 ___ 1,734

9 2 3 170 237 744

191 126 32 72 8,396 3,129 1,706 564 .. ....13.7 95

O i

05

«
SU M M A R Y

C on trib ut in g co ur ts N um be r of Judges Cou rts v isited

Actua l i 

da ys on 

as sig nm en t

Serv ice

Co st of tr av el

Circ uit

courts,

cases

he ard

Distri ct courts

Num be r 

of trials

Tr ial

da ys

Judge I,aw clerk Secre­ ta ry Rep orter Crier To tal

7 Circ uit co urts _________ - 57 126 $2,796 $1,271 $357 $4.424

Distri ct co ur ts ......................... 9 District co ur ts____ _____ ____ 134 32 72 5,600 1,858 1,349 $561 9,371

Tot al 16 191 126 32 72 8,396 3,129 1,706 564 13,796

1 Ac tual da ys on assi gn me nt base d on da tes of arriv al and d ep ar tu re . N um be r of d ay s 3 J u d g e als o hel d c o u rt In P u e rto Rico, th e re fo re , on ly co st of tr a n s p o rta - 

lis ted for ass ignm en ts at distric t co urts are of rec ord , wh ere as nu m be r of day s in atte nd - tl o n San J u a n to S t. C ro ix a n d re tu rn in clu ded, 

ance at circui t c ou rts w as co ns truc ted from tra ve l e xpense vouchers. s J u d g e R o g ers ’ la w c le rk serv in g Ju d g e D alt on.

Cn
Travel of senior judges on assignment to special courts and circuit courts or district courts of other circuits, Ju ly 1, 1962, to Ju ne SO, 196S

C o n tr ib u ti n g c ourt s N am e o f ju dge C o u rt s v is it ed

COURTS OF APP EAL S

1st c ir cu it . 

D o .. .. .

3d c ir c u it .. 

7th cir cu it .

9t h c ir cu it ............. ..............10th c ir cu it ..........................

D is tr ic t o f C olu m bia ci rc u it . 

D o ...................................

DISTRICT COURTS

3d cir cu it : P en n sy lv an ia 

(e as te rn ).

5th ci rc uit : F lo ri d a (s outh ­

ern ).

7t h c ir c u it : Ill in ois ( easte rn ). 

8th ci rc uit:

Io w a ( n o r th e r n ) .. ...........

M is so uri (w este rn )____

D o ..................................D o .................................

D o .................................

D o ..................................

9th ci rc uit :

N ev ad a________________

W as hin gto n (w e ste rn )..

SPECIAL COURTS

C o u rt of C ust om s 

P a te n t A pp ea ls .

C o u rt of C la im s______

D o ...............................

an d

T o ta l.

M ag n id er, C alv ert . 

____d o..........................

M ar is , A lb er t B . 

M aj or , J . E a r l.. .

Pop e, W alt er L ...............

P hil li ps, Orie L _______P re tt y m a n , E . B a rre tt . 

. . . . d o .................................

K ir k p atr ic k , W illiam H .Il o ll an d , Jo h n W _______

W h am , F re d L _________

G ra ven , H en ry N . 

Ree ve s, A lb ert L._

. . . . d o ........................

. . . . d o ........................

. . . . d o ____________. . . . d o ................... . . .

Fol ey , Rog er T . 

B ow en , Jo h n C .

Ja ck so n, Jo se ph R__

M ad d en , J . W arr en . 

. . . . d o ............................

9t h cir cu it _____ _________D is tr ic t of C olu m bia circu it ).

1st cir cu it ..............................

6t h cir cu it (F lo ri da, m id ­

dl e) .

5th cir cu it .............. ...............

___ do___________________

6th cir cu it .............................

C o u rt of C la im s_________

C o u rt of C ust om s an d 

P a te n t A pp ea ls .

Illinois (n o rt h e rn ).............. .

C olo ra do .

Tex as (w es te rn )............

F lo ri da (s o u th e rn ).. ..Flo ri da (m id d le )_____

. . . . d o _______________

___ d o _______________

N ew Y ork (s o u th ern ).

. . . . d o ......................... .L ouis ia na (e ast ern ).

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia .

9 th c ir cu it . 

.d o ........

P er io d o f desi gnat io n

F ro m — T o -

9-1 5-62 6-15-63

4- 1-63 4-12-63

2- 4-63 2- 9-63

2- 1-63 4-30-63

2-15-53 3- 1-63

3-18 -63 3-30 -634- 8-63 4-13-63

12- 3-62 12- 7-62

7- 1-62» 7-31-62

4-29-63 5-31-63

7- 1-62 8-3 0-62

11- 1-62 4- 1-63

7- 1-62 7-31-621- 7-63 2-15-63

4-15-63 6- 1-63

6- 1-63 6-30 -639- 1-62 10-31-62

10-30-62 11-30-62

11-15-62 12-31-62

12- 3-62 6-30-63

12- 3-62 5-31-63

6- 1-63 6-15-63

A ct ual * 

day s on 

as si gn ­

m e n t

• 22 

11

6

3329

138

20

142

(’)

678

C ir­ cu it

oou rts,

cases

hea rd

10

•4

126

Se rv ice

D is tr ic t co urt s

N u m b er 

of tr ia ls

T ri al

day s

10

119

Ju dge

$695

253

’ 144 

1,451

386412218139

940692

3,145

477

1,213

1,703"1,429

1,006

14,303

C ost of tr av el

Law

cl er k

Secre ­

ta ry

R epo rt- C rier T o ta l

$12

$414

144

•201

917

385

310

2,668

335454

1,035

1,006

7,869 74

$1,109

397

345

2,368

771722

218

151

910

692

5,813 

812

1,741

2,738

2,43 5

1,006

22,258

Or

OO

47

28
SU M M A R Y

Con trib ut in g courts N um be r of judg es Cou rts visit ed

Ac tual 

da ys on 

as sign men t1

Serv ice Cost of trav el

Ci rcuit

courts,

cases

he ard

Distri ct c ou rts

Num be r 

of tri als

Tr ia l

da ys

Ju dg e Law clerk Secre­ ta ry Re po rte r Crier Tot al

C ircu it courts 6 Circ ui t c ou rts ...... ....................... 63 90 $2,108 $1,454 $3,562

1 District c ourts 47 10 24 1,451 917 2,368

1 Sp ec ia l co urt s 1 <4

R tot ftl 7 111 94 10 24 3,559 2,371 5,930 ----- ———- D is tr ic t co urt s 6 D is tri ct c ou rts______________ 419 68 184 10,605 139 6,498 $74 16,177 1 Spe cia l c ou rts_______________ 6 •4 $12 151

S u b to ta l.. .. ................. 7 425 4 68 184 10,744 12 5,498 74 16.328

R pc ri n 1 co urt s 1 Circ uit courts . ____________ — o 142 28~ — — — — 1 D is tric t co ur ts __ 41 47

S u b to ta l. ....................... 2 142 28 41 47

Grand to ta l _ 16 678 126 119 255 14,303 12 7,869 74 22,258

1 Actua l d ay s on a ssi gn me nt base d on dates of ar riv al and d ep ar tu re . N um be r of day s lis ted for assig nm en ts at distric t c ou rts are of record, w herea s n um be r of day s in a ttend­ ance at circuit co ur ts w as co ns truc ted from tra ve l e xpense voucher s.

j Pay s on wh ich exp enses were cla imed includ ing 9 da ys for w hic h only cab fares wer e 

claimed . . . . > Jud ge also held co ur t In Virgin Island s, the refore , only cost of tran sp or ta tion St. 

Croix to San Ju an an d re tu rn includ ed .

8 Cases he ard on U .S. Cou rt of C laims.

* Design ati on b egan in fiscal ye ar 1962 on Oc t. 1,1961. 8 Cases he ard on U.S. Cou rt of C ustom s an d Pate nt Appea ls. i N o claim was mad e for trave lin g expenses, hence actua l d ay s on assig nm ent could no t 

be de term ined .
Services, and travel expenses of senior judges incident to serving in circuit courts or district courts w ithin circuits July 1, 1962, to Ju ne SO, 1968

Circ uit or di stric t Na me of judge Pla ce of service

Serv ice Co st of trav el

Ci rcu it

co urts,

cases

he ard

Distri ct c ourts

Ju dg e

Law

clerk Secre tary Re po rte r Crier To ta l Num be r 

of tri als

Num be r 

of tri al 

da ys

COURTS OF APP EALS

2d ci rc ui t................................ M ed ina, Haro ld R ............. 2d ci rc ui t............................... 35

35

47

16

45

31

20

58

2

42

36 

10 

36

Do............................... . Sw an, Th om as W _______ $239

40

333

534

292

363

850

$168

163

318

388

$407

203

651

1,343

644

723

850

3d ci rc ui t.... .......... . . Fo rm an , P hil lip................ 3d c ircu it_______________ Do.............................. . Maris, Al bert H.............. . ___ d o . . ................. .............. 4tl, ci rc ui t.............................. Soper. Mo rris A J............ 4th circui t............................. $421

352

360

6th ci rc ui t________ ______ McA llis ter, Th om as F.* ... Majo r, J. E arl ..................... 6th ci rc ui t................ .......... 7th ci rc ui t............................ 7th c irc ui t_______ 8th ci rc ui t...... ... .................. Sa nborn , Jo hn B ___ ____ 8th circui t........... . ............ . 9th ci rc ui t.......... . ............ . M ath ew s, Clifto n 

3______ 9th c irc uit....... ...................... Do.......... ....................... Or r, Willia m E ____ ____ _ ........do .................... D o .................................. Pope, W alt er L ...... ............ ____d o................................. . 310

709

415

704 1,014 1,021

415

Do ............ .............. ......... Stephens, Albert L______ ------do ................................... 312 10th ci rc ui t______________ Bratto n, Sam G .................. 10th ci rc ui t_____________ Do ........ .............. ............ ........d o.................................... Ne w Me xic o__ 3

12

5

8 Do ___ ______________ Hux man , Walt er A .......... Kan sas__ _______ 62

J 1,872

$131 193

♦ 1,872

D o .. .............. .................. Ph illi ps, Orie L _________ 10th circuit. .. 37 Do. . do 2 2 D istri ct of Colum bia circuit.

D o__________________

Ed ge rto n, H en ry W.»........

Pr et tv m an , F. B ar re tt___

Distri ct of Colum bia circu it.

------d o________________

15

26

DISTRICT COURTS

1st cir cu it: M as sa ch us et ts .. 

2d c ircuit:

Ne w York (n or th er n! .. Ne w York (s ou th er n) .. D o.............................

M cC ar th y, W illi am T . . . .

Brenn an , Stephen W .’.__ Clan cy , Jo hn W .................

M as sa ch us et ts................... 12 52

Ne w Yo rk (n ort her n)... 44 44 Ne w Yo rk (sou th er n) ____ 1 1 Dimo ck, Ed ward J ......... . 2d c irc uit............................. 7 Do ............................. . . . . . do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ne w Yo rk (s outh ern ). .. 5

10

3

21

28

12

Do........................... . Knox, Jo hn C ......... ............ ____do................................. . Do _____________ _ Leibell, Vin cen t L _______ ........d o .. . ................... ........... 3d circuit:

Delaw are____________ Le ahy, Pa ul C...... .............. 3d c ir c u it ___ 10 [ 168

L712 

1,999 1

31

17

1,341

< 199

1,744

4.294

D o ..........................

Pe nn sy lvan ia (e ast ern). Do............................. ____d o _____ De law are 110

1

3

18

9

Grim, Allan K _________ Pe nn sy lvan ia (eas te rn )__ $15 Kirk pa tri ck , William H .. ____do.................... ............ . 954
» • « K

4th circuit:

Che sn ut, W. Ca lv in 

7------ Hayes, J oh nson J ...............

do

M arylan d 18

13

1

3032

1

N or th Carolina (m iddle ).

PO

Nor th Carolina ( m id dl e) ...

Virginia (w estern)

1,215

35

178 154 1,547

35

Virgi nia (eastern)_____ Hutch eson, St erlin g........... tt h 'c ir cu it .......... .................. 9 1 628 107 •735

“Do d o ___ ____ _________ Virginia (eastern)............ . 4 8 Virgi nia (w es tern )........ Do R^r ko da le Alfred I) 4th circuit 10 83 133 216 do Virginia (w estern)_______ 5 7 113 96 56 265

D o Pa ul Jo hn 4th cir cuit __ 11 118 118

Do do Virginia (ea stern) . 174 174

Do do Virginia (western ) 1 1 32 32

5th circuit:

Florida (n or th er n) ........

Do

D ev an e, D oz ie r A 5th circuit 31 297 297

do . ________________ Flor ida (m id dle)................. 10 19 772 55 52 879 Flor ida (sou th er n) ____ F lo ri d a (n o rt h ern , middle, an d so uth- H oll and John W Alabam a (so uth ern ) 5 9 593 593 W hite hu rst, George W .. .. Flor ida (m idd le) 6 11 630 218 151 999

ern). Do do Flor ida (sou th er n) _______ 12 13 870 160 6 1.036

Miss iss ipp i (n or th er n) . 

Do

Cox, Allen Mississipp i (n or th er n) ___ 11 10 234 685 919

do . - M ississippi (s ou th er n) . . . . 1 1 80 80

6th circuit:

Ken tu ck y (e ast ern ). ... Mich igan (e a ste rn ).. .. Tenness ee (e ast ern ). ... 

Do

For d H ir am C .l K en tu ck y (ea stern) . 35 20 278 569 409 1,256

Pin ard . Fr an k A.® M ich igan (eastern)______ 3 15 112 1,090 1,202

D arr ljpslie R 6th c irc uit .. 29 435 406 841

do Ten nes see (eas tern ).......... . 8 6 203 4 207

7th c irc uit:

Illinois (n ort her n) ____ T^iRny W alter J Illino is (nor thern) „ 3 12 W ham, Fre d L __ do___ 10 13 1,140

74

1,140

8th cir cu it:

Cr av en , Hen ry N . 8th c irc ui t. .......................... 74

Do do Iow a (sou thern) _________ 152 218 370

De leh an t, Jo hn W _____ Iow a (n or th er n) ................... 111 111

Do do Neb raska ______________ 12 12

9th cir cu it:

Ca liforn ia (n ort hern ). . Ca liforn ia (s outh ern ). . Roe he M iehael J Californ ia (no rth ern) 10 12 We inb erg er, Ja cob Califo rnia (so uth ern) ___ 16 33 Foley , Roger T 9th c ircu it______________ 7 1

Do . (Io Arizo na. ___ __ ______ 2 4 !■ 808 879 ’ 1,687

Do . d o .. . Califo rnia (sou th er n) ____

W ashing ton (w estern). 

Do

Rnw en Jo h n C 9th circuit 12 314 314

do A ri z o n a .__ _ . . ___ 6 13 663 n>568 297 594 2,122

Do do _ W ashin gto n (e a s te rn ).__ 1 4 117 i«116 116 349

Do do W ashin gto n (w es tern )___ 11 31 18 2 20 40

Distric t of Colum bia cir ­

cu it: Distri ct of Colum ­bia .

Sc hw einh au t, Hen ry A .. . Di str ict of C olu mb ia 50 122

Tot al ........................... 617 302 586 20,209 3,466 5,474 3.167 951 33,267

gw footnotes at end of ta ble, p. 62.
Services, and travel expenses of senior judges incident to serving in circurt courts or district courts within circuits Ju ly 1,196 2, to June SO, 1963— C o n . 

SU MM AR Y

Circ uit or district

Num ber

of

judges

Place of service

Service Cost of travel

Circuit

courts,

cases

heard

District courts

Judg e Law clerk Sec reta ry Reporter Crier Total Num ber 

of trials

Num ber 

of trialdays

Senior c ircuit judges..................... ...... 163 Circuit courts_________________ 491 $5,95762 $1,349 $1,837 $9,143 193 Do____ ______________ ______ District courts________________ 17 15 $131

To tal.................................. ........ 19 491 17 15 6.019 1.349 1,837 131 9.336

Senior d istrict judg es_____ . ___ Circuit courts____________ ____ 1029 126 1,489 12,701 31 2,086 539 3,098 2.059 21,872 Do ........... ........ ..................... ........ District co ur ts. .... .............. .......... 285 571 3,036 $951

To tal................... ........... ........... 39 126 285 571 14,190 2,117 3,637 3.036 951 23.931

Grand to ta l. .. ______ _______ 58 617 302 586 20,209 3,466 5,474 3,167 951 33,267 <35

1 Judge died Mar. 11, 1963. ’ Judge retired Jan . 1, 1963. ’ Judge died Sept. 7, 1962. 4 Inc lude d in “ Summ ary” u nde r “Place of service” as circuit court. • Judge retired Apr. 22,1963. • Judge re tired Ma y 1, 1963. 7 Judge died Oct. 16, 1962. 8 Includ ed in “Sum mary” und er “ Place of service” as district court. 8 Judge died Feb. 28, 1963. 10 D eputy clerk.

• *
63

Mr. R ooney. We shall now recess un til 2 o’clock. We will the n 

tak e up this item for the “A dm ini strati ve Office” and “Salaries and 

expense of refe rees,” so th at by 3 o’clock we will be rea dy for the 

Supreme Co urt .

A F T E R N O O N S E S S IO N

Mr. R ooney. The comm itte e will please come to order.

Admin istrative Office of the U.S. Courts

*

Object classification

[In th ou sa nd s of dollars ]

Perso nnel comp ensat ion :

Pe rm an en t po sit ions .............r.....................

Position s o ther t han p er m an en t________

Othe r perso nnel c om pe ns ation_________

Tot al pers onnel c om pe ns at io n. _______

Dire ct obligations:

11 Pe rso nnel co mpe ns ation________ ___

12 Pe rso nnel be ne fit s______ __________

21 Tr av el and tra ns po rtat io n of perso ns.

22 Tra ns po rtat io n of thi ng s...... ............ .

23 Ren t, co mm unicati ons, an d ut ili tie s.

24 Pr in ting a nd r ep ro du ct io n_________

25 Ot her ser vices____________________

26 Su pplie s a nd m aterials___________ _

31 E quip m en t__________ _______ _____

Tot al dire ct o bligations ........... ........

Re im bu rsab le ob ligations:

11 Perso nnel co mpe ns ation.......................

12 Pe rso nnel be ne fit s____________ . . . . .

21 Tr av el a nd tra ns po rtat io n o f person s. 

26 Su pplie s a nd m aterials........... ..............

Tot al reimbu rsab le ob lig ations ........

Tot al ob lig ations ______ _________

1963 a ct ua l 1964 estim ate 1965 e sti mate

1,108 1,199 1,248

94 87 57

11 19 15

1,212 1,305 1,320

1,186 1,275 1,320

71 91 94

54 70 70

1 1 1

81 90 63

18 22 32

10 14 66

19 20 27

32 6 386

1,472 1,590 2,060

26 30

2 2 .........................

3

1

3

32 35

1,503 1,625 2,060

Personnel summ ary

1963 actua l 1964 estim ate 1965 e sti mate

Tota l nu mbe r o f pe rm an en t posit ions ____________ _________ 165 165 165

Full- tim e eq uiva lent of othe r posit ions _____________________ 15 13 6

Average nu mbe r of all em plov ees____ _ _________________ 170 170 164

Em plo yee s in perm an en t pos itio ns, e nd of y ea r. ___________ 155 157 158

Em plo yee s in ot he r position s, end of ye ar. ________________ 20 18 11

3 1 -1 3 6 — 64 -------5
64

Program and financing

[In t ho us an ds of dollars)

Prog ram b y activities:

Dire ct program:

1. Gen eral ad m in istrat io n....... ...........................................

2. St ud y of rules of p ractice a nd p roc edure __________

To tal d ire ct ob lig ati ons....................................... .......

Re im bursa ble pr og ram............................................ . ........ .

Tot al obligations .___ ______________ ________________

Fin an cing :

Ad vances an d reimb urseme nts from othe r acco un ts_____

Un obligate d balan ce- lap sin g__________________________

New obligational au th or ity (app ropriat ion)___________

1963 actual 1964 estim ate 1965 estflna te

1,379

93

1,480

110

1,950

110

1,472

32

1,590

35

2,060

1,503

-3 2

59

1,625

-3 5

2,060

1,530 1,590 2,060

w

Th e n ext item , gentlemen, or the las t of the five items under “C ourts 

of app eals, d ist ric t cou rts, and the oth er judicial servic es,” is the item 

entitled “Salaries and expenses, Ad ministrative Office, U S. Cou rts .”

Th is app ears in the justificatio n book beginning at page 111, which 

page we shall insert at this point in the reco rd, tog eth er with pages 

111 through 122.

(Th e pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropr iatio n

Salaries an d expenses, Adm inist rativ e Office of th e U.S . Co urts: 1964 ap prop ria tio n in an nu al Ju dic ia ry

a c t................................. -........................ .. .......... - ................................................................... .............. $1,590,000

Net difference, 1965 over 1964:

Re qu irem en ts Difference, 

increase (-|-) 

or de1964 ap pro­ crease (—)

priated

1965

estim ate

Salaries an d expen se s. ..................................................... $1,590,000 $2,059,500 +$469,500

Tot al estim ate for 1965_______________________________________________ ____ _______ 2,059,500

An aly sis by object

Object

11 Perso nnel co mpe nsation______ _____

12 Person nel be ne fit s........ . .............. ........

21 Tr av el and tra ns po rta tio n of pe rsons

22 Tra ns po rta tio n of th ings ......................

23 Ren t, comm unica tio ns, an d ut ilitie s.

24 Print in g an d re pr od uc tio n..................

25 Other se rvice s___________ _____ _

26 Supplies a nd m ate ria ls________ ____

31 Equip m en t______________________

Tota l obli gatio ns______ _____ ____

1964

es tim ate

1965

estim ate

Increase or 

decrease (—)

$1,275,000

91,000

70,000

1,200

89,800

22.500

14.500 

20,000

6,000

$1,320,000

94,000

70,000

1,200

63,300

31.500

66.500 

27,000

386,000

$45,000

3,000

-26,50 0

9,000

52,000

7,000

380,000

1,590,000 2,059,500 469,500
65

Summary of increased requirements for 1965

Nature of expense (or savings): Amount

Deductions: Extra compensable day in 1964__________________ — $4, 800

Additions:

1. Pay costs under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

(increases scheduled to take effect on Jan. 6, 1964)____ 25, 000

2. Provision for within-grade salary advancements_________ 21, 900

3. Increases in salary granted under wageboard pay schedules. 5, 900

4. Increase in charges for tele typewriter services by the General Services Adm inistration due to the distribution of 

operators’ salaries to using agencies_________________ 1, 500

5. Procurem ent of auto matic da ta processing equipment and

related expenses incid ent to the central disbursement of 

judiciary appropriations (lst-y ear cost)______________1 420, 000

Net increase, 1965 over 1964 .____ ____________ __ 469, 500

i T he annual recurring cost is estimated at $38,000 representing the cost of replacing equipment over an 

estimated useful life of 10 years.

JUST IFICA TION

Language changes

None.

Objectives

This appropriation provides for the salaries of the Director, the Deputy Director, an Assistant Director and other personnel of the Administrative Office of 

the U.S. Courts, and the necessary operating expenses of the Office, including 

travel, communication services, supplies, equipment, etc. The Director, under 

the supervision and direction of the Judicial Conference of the United States, has 

adm inistrative jurisdiction over the courts of appeals and district courts of the 

United State s, the district courts of the Canal Zone, Guam, and the Virgin Islands 

and a lesser adm inistrativ e jurisdiction over the Court of Claims, the Court of 

Customs and Paten t Appeals, and the Custom s Court. The Director also has 

adm inistrative jurisdiction over the Federal probation and ban kruptcy systems.

For data as to the specific duties and responsibilities of the Director and the 

basic s tat uto ry autho rities, reference is made to section O of the Digest of Appropriations, the Judiciary , on file with the Bureau of the Budget and the Appropriations Committees of the Congress.

Detailed justification

The estim ate for fiscal year 1965 is $2,059,500, a net increase of $469,500 over 

the amount appropriated for 1964. The requested increases and decreases in 

budgeta ry requirements are explained below”

Deduction for nonrecurring expenses

The employees of the Administrative Office, w’ho are paid on a biweekly basis, 

will be compensated for 261 days in the fiscal year 1965 whereas there are 262 

compensable days in 1964. The sum of $4,500 representing 1 day’s compensation 

and $300 for related Government contributions to the retireme nt fund, group life 

insurance, a nd health benefits have been deducted in establishing the requirements 

for 1965.

Requirements under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

An additional $25,000 will be required in fiscal year 1965 to cover the full-year 

cost of pay increases to be granted employees of the Administrative Office effective 

Jan uar y 6, 1964, pur suant to the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962. The 

following is a breakdown by fiscal year of the increases provided under compensation schedule II (second phase) of the act:

Tota l pay 

costs

Cost in

1964

1965 bud getary requirements

2d phase (effective Jan. 6,1964):

Compensation_____ __________________________ ____ $46,000

3,000

$22,500

1,500

$23,500

Benefits . ______________________________________ 1,500

Total .............................................................................. 49,000 24,000 25,000
66

The budgetary requirem ents were established by application of the rates actually 

payable under the new pay scales, augmented to the extent of approximately 

6.8 perc ent to cover the cost of related benefits—Government retir eme nt contributio ns, employer FICA taxes, and Government contributions to employee life 

insurance premiums.

Pay costs in th e fiscal year 1964 are being absorbed to the ex tent of $33,250, or 

approximately 40 percent. No further absorption is possible without seriously 

affecting the execution of essential functions and services being rendered to the 

courts.

Provision for within-grade salary advancements

This a ppropriation will provide step increases to the personnel eligible therefor 

under the promotional plan provided for by title VII of the Classification Act of 

1949, as amended. It is estimated th at these within-grade salary advancements 

will cost $21,900, of which $20,500 represents increases in compensation and *

$1,400 for related personnel benefits—Government contributions to the civil 

service retireme nt fund and for group life insurance. The estimate is net of 

anticipated savings due to turn ove r and takes into account the provisions of the 

Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962 relating to the minimum increase on gradeto-grade promotions and the timing of within-grade salary advan cements. •

Increases in salary granted under wage board pay schedules

The sum of $5,500 is included to cover adjustments in the salaries of employees 

whose rate s are fixed by action of legally constituted wage boards. In addition, 

the sum of $400 is included for related benefits—Government contributions to 

the retir ement fund and for group life insurance.

Six employees in the Administrative Office Duplicatin g Unit were granted 

increases in wages effective November 12, 1962, and again on November 10,

1963, based on recommendations of the Interdepa rtmental Lithographic Wage 

Board. Effective December 10, 1962, nine employees in the Administrative 

Office stockroom were granted increases based on a suggested wage schedule for 

employees concerned with warehousing. Funds have not previously been 

appropriated to cover these increases. The amount requested herein will reduce 

the required lapses (savings due to vacancies) and perm it what would be considered 

a normal level of employment.

Increase in charges for teletypewriter services

The General Services Administration has announced th at it will bill customer 

agencies for the full cost of communication services in the fiscal year 1965 including 

operators’ salaries which heretofore have been financed by direc t appropriation s 

to the General Services Administration. Public Law 87-847, approved October 

23, 1962 (76 Stat. 1117), established a Federal telecommunications fund to be 

administered by the General Services Administration on a completely reimbursable 

basis. For ready reference, a copy of this act is included herein as exhibit B.

The General Services Administration has informed heads of agencies th at as a 

resu lt of this change in the financing arrangement and the addition of operators’ 

salaries to other common costs, the wordage rate for use of intrasystem teletypewriter service will be increased 120 percent from the current rat e of 15 mills 

to a rate of 33 mills per w’ord for messages processed by the General Services Ad- w ministration operators. Based on the amounts currently being expended for 

teletypewriter service, it is estim ated th at an additional $1,500 will be required 

to cover the proposed rate increase.

Central disbursement of judiciary appropriations

The A dministrative Office of the U.S. Courts, with the approval of the Judicial 

Conference of the United States, shall, in fiscal year 1965, subject to the availability of funds, commence to disburse directly all appropriations for the maintenance and operation of the courts. The first-year cost of the program is estimated at $460,000, of which $40,000 is included under the heading “Travel and 

miscellaneous expenses, U.S. courts.” The second and succeeding years’ cost of 

the program will be only $38,000. The following is a breakdown of the total cost 

of the program:
67

Appropriations chargeable

Administrative Office, 

U.S. Courts

Trav el and 

miscellaneous 

expenses

Term ination of rental agreements covering data processing equipment 

presently in use.............................................. .............................................

Postage an d fees.......- __________________________________________

Printing:

Checks___ _______________________________________________

Envelopes_______ ____ _____________________________________

Punchcards and tabulator paper______________________________

Jurors’ vouchers and payroll vouchers_________________________

Ten ant alterations—specially designed space for automatic data processing equ ipm ent................................... ........... . ........................................

Maintenance of data processing e quipm ent..... -_____ ________________

Plastic embossed ca rds___ _____________________________________

Other supplies (including pape r tapes)....................... .................................

Da ta processing equipm ent and related components:

-$45,000

17,000

6,000

1,000

2,000

i 40,000 

12,000 

5,000 

2,000

$ 5,0 0 0

-6,000

-1,000

IBM equipment presently in use on rental basis............... $65,546

1440 data processing system...................................................... 236,505

20 IBM disk packs.................................................................... 10,000

2 flexowriters___ ___________________________________ 7,632

1 autom atic graphoty pe____ _________________________ 16,500

1 check signer and burster____________________________ 3,300

1 envelope stutter and sealer....................................... ........... . 7,000

1 scanner punch____________________________________ 33,700

Tota l (rounded )_____

Trays for filing plastic cards 

Da ta recorders (220 un its ). ..

380,183 ■ 380,000

i 20,000 

' 22,000

Estimated 1st year co st ...................................... ......... . ......... .........

Cost in 2d and subseque nt years: To commence ann ual program of replacem ent of AD P equipment...................... .............................................

420,000

38,000

40,000

1

 Nonrecurring.

It will be noted from the above table th at the estim ate contemplates the 

purchase of automatic data processing equipment and related components. 

The proposal to purchase rather than lease the data processing equipment is 

consistent with recommendations of the Comptroller General of the United States. 

A cost comparison, lease versus purchase, indicated th at over a period of 6 years, 

the savings on a purchase basis would be approximately $185,000 if the residual 

value of the equipment is take n into accou nt offset to the extent of the inte rest 

on capital investment.

The central disbursement of judiciary appropriation s would not only relieve 

U.S. marshals of the responsibility but would result in a considerable reduction in 

the workload of the offices of the clerks of the U.S. district courts and the U.S. 

courts of appeals. The Administrative Office will utilize electronic data processing equipment for the prep aration of payrolls for personal services and for the 

paymen t of fees and allowances of jurors and commissioners. It would also 

effect settlem ent of all travel and miscellaneous expense vouchers. Although the 

program will not result in a reduction of personnel in the clerks’ offices, it would 

reduce considerably the pre sent and future demands for add itional positions. The 

Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts has documented a stud y into the feasibility of disbursing judiciary appropriations exclusively from the Administrative 

Office. Copies of the document reflecting the results of the study will be made 

available to members of the Appropriations Committees of the Congress. The 

stud y clearly reflects the financial advantages of a central disbursing program 

over the proposals of the Department of Justice th at the disbursing functions be 

transferre d from the U.S. marshals to the clerks of court.

IN C R E A SES R E Q U E ST E D

Mr. Rooney. The total request is in the amount $2,059,500, wlrch 

would be an increase of $469,500 over the amount appropriated for the 

current fiscal year.

On page 113 is to be found a table of the increases which make up 

the total of $469,500 requested increase. The bulk of this relates
68

to item No. 5 on page 113; to wit, $420,000 for procurement of 

automatic data processing equipment and related expenses incident 

to a proposed central disbursement of judiciary appropriations.

This $420,000 represents the first year cost.

Is all of the $420,000 nonrecurring?

Judge Campbell. All but $38,000 would be the cost of replacement 

over the estimated useful life of the equipment of 10 years.

Mr. Chairman, this is equipment which your committee has 

investigated and which we feel would efficiently discharge in the 

Office of the Administrator the functions now being discharged in 

the Department of Justice with reference to disbursements, largely 

for jurors, if the function is to be transferred to the judiciary, as the 

Department of Justice proposes in pending legislation, that is.

It is thought by the Committee on the Budget of the Judicial 

Conference who have gone into this, rather than employing a requisite 

number of clerks in the Administrative Office to do this work, it could 

be done more efficiently and economically by the purchase of this 

equipment, on a nonrecurring charge, and run it more or less automatically.

Mr. Bow. May I interrupt for just a minute?

Judge Campbell. Yes, sir.

Mr. Bow. Just a second ago you said the equipment which “your 

committee” has investigated. When you refer to “your committee” 

you are referring to your Committee?

Judge Campbell. I beg your pardon.

Mr. Bow. Not the committee on this side of the table?

Judge Campbell. No.

Mr. Bow. We have had no chance to look at that.

Judge Campbell. The Committee on the Budget has inspected 

this and the reports of the Administrative Office which go into this 

matter.

Mr. Rooney. As far as the cost of this proposal is concerned, there 

should be added to the $420,000 the $40,000 which was item No. 9 

in the summary of alleged requirements in the “Travel and miscellaneous expenses” item?

Judge Campbell. Correct, sir.

Mr. Rooney. What authority is there in law to do this?

Mr. Airhart. Title 28 U.S.C., section 604 authorizes the Director 

either to disburse from the Office, or through the U.S. marshals.

Judge Campbell. The Department of Justice, Mr. Chairman, 

contends it is our function; tha t is, the function of our Administrative 

Office.

Mr. Rooney. This committee has always been impressed by the 

fact tha t it is good and healthy to have one Department checking on 

another Department and tha t is about what this amounts to. We 

think this sort of thing makes sense and I might say tha t insofar as 

I personally am concerned, I am going to help President Johnson 

insofar as this item is concerned, almost half a million dollars.

There are no savings whatever in this proposal, is that a 

fair statement?

Judge Campbell. No, sir; that is not. There are savings in the 

Department of Justice-----

Mr. Rooney. I am speaking of dollar savings.
69

Judge Campbell. There would be to the Department of Justice 

but not to us, obviously.

Mr. Rooney. No; there would not be to you and there would not 

be to the Department of Justice either, except tha t it gives some 

deputy marshals more time. That is about it, is it not?

Judge Campbell. Therefore, I suppose they would not need additional deputy marshals. Far be it from me to present Mr. A ndretta’s 

case.

Mr. Rooney. This is no new case, Judge Campbell, as you know 

and as Judge McGuire knows. We have been over it many, many 

times. We think it is good to have one office check on another. 

Besides, I personally feel tha t you people are too busy over there in 

the Administrative Office. You could not handle this.

Judge Campbell. Not without the equipment, they could not. 

rules committee

Mr. Rooney. How much is in here for the so-called rules group?

Judge C ampbell. We have absorbed tha t p retty well now and held 

it down. What is the actual amount allocated for that?

Mr. Garabedian. $110,000.

Mr. Rooney. Where does th at appear?

Mr. Garabedian. It is a limitation in the language of the appropriation.

Judge Campbell. We did not spend $110,000 for the rules this 

year.

Mr. Rooney. How much was obligated for the rules group in fiscal 

year 1963?

Mr. Garabedian. The sum of $92,592.07.

Judge Weinman. Spent?

Mr. Garabedian. In 1963.

Judge Weinman. How much was allocated?

Mr. Garabedian. $110,000.

Mr. Rooney. We do not deal with allocations. We talk of either 

expenditures or obligations, Judge.

You are referring now, are you not, to obligations of how much?

Judge Campbell. $92,592 and some cents.

Mr. Rooney. Fiscal year 1963.

What do you estimate the obligation will be in fiscal year 1964, the 

current fiscal year?

Mr. Garabedian. At the present time I have no reason to believe 

tha t we will spend less than $110,000. I am not familiar with exactly 

what the program consists of. Therefore, I cannot add to that. Obligations of $50,041 were incurred through December 31, leaving a 

balance of approximately $60,000 for the remainder of the year.

Judge Campbell. If I might inject at this point, Mr. Chairman, 

the Budget Committee has carefully watched this item. It has seen 

to it tha t this $110,000 is not spent. There is every reason to assume 

we will use the same scrutiny in the activities of the Rules Committee 

the next fiscal year as we have in the past. I think your committee, 

Mr. Chairman, has reason to be pleased with the activities of our 

Committee in this regard in the last year, since we have taken over the 

handling of these funds.
70

Mr. R oon ey. As I understand this situatio n at page 113 of the 

justifi cat ion s, there are no add itio nal employees req ues ted in the coming y ear; is th at c orrect?

Judg e Campbell. Tha t is correct.

Mr. R ooney. So, of the five subitem s which co ns titute the item 

Co ur ts of Appeals, Di str ict Courts and oth er Judic ial Services, the 

only req ueste d add itio nal employees are the 92 to which previous 

reference was mad e und er trav el?

Judg e C ampbell. Sup portin g personnel.

Mr. Garabedian. Salaries of supporting personnel.

Mr. R ooney. Under salaries of su pporting personnel; am I cor rect?

Judg e Campbell. You are correct, sir.

Mr. R ooney. Tha t is on page 73?

Ju dg e Campbell. Cor rect, sir.

Salaries of Referees

Object classification

[In th ousa nds of dollars]

1963

actual

1964

estimate

1965

estimate

11 Personnel compensation:

Perman ent positions....... .................................... ........... 2,011

349

2,048 

328

2,445

262 Positions oth er than permanent..... ........... . ..................

Total personnel compensation.......................... ......... 2,360

173

2,375

175

2,707

198 12 Personnel benefits....... ........................ . .............. ................

Total obligations............. ............................... ............... .. 2,534 2,550 2,905

Personnel summ ary

1963

actual

1964

estim ate

1965

estimate

Total number of perm anen t positions................. . ..................... 141 142 164 Full-time equivalent of othe r positions___ _____________ 27 27 21 Average numbe r of all employees___________ _____ _____ . 163 165 185 Employees in perm anent iwsitions, end of ye ar ....................... 140 138 163 Employees in other positions, end of year. ’______________ 54 54 43

Program and financing

[In thousands of dollars]

1963

actual

1964

estim ate

1965

estimate

Program by activities: Salaries and benefits (obligations)____

Financing: Unobligated balance lapsing___________ .. ... 2,534

19

2,550 2,905

New obligational a uth ority (appropriation) 2,552 2,550 2,905

Mr. R ooney. Th e next item , gentlem en, is en titled “Sa laries of 

referees” and is to be foun d beginnin g at page 124 of the com mittee 

print.

We sh all at this point ins ert in the record page s 124 thr ough 132 of 

the justifications.

(The pages follow:)
71

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Sa larie s of refere es, U .S . co ur ts (spe ci al fu n d ): Ju di ciar y

1964 appro pri at io n in an nual a c t_________________________________________ _______________ 12,650 ,000

N et d iff eren ce , 1965 o ve r 1964:

R eq uir em en ts Diff eren ce , 

inc reas e ( + )

1964 appro ­

p ri ate d

1965

es ti m at e

or d ecrea se (—)

$2, 550,000 $2,9 05,0 00 (+ )$ 35 5,00 0 (+ )3 5 5 ,000

T o ta l es tim at e for 1965________________________________________________________________ 2,905, 000

Analysis by object

O bj ec t 1964

est im ate

1965

es ti m at e

In cr ea se (+ ) 

or

de crea se (—)

11 Per so nn el co m p en sati o n _________ _______ _____ _________ $2,375 ,000 

175,000

$2,707 ,000 

198,000

$332,000

12 Pe rs on ne l be ne fits _____________________________________ 23,000

T o ta l o b li gati ons__________________ ___________________ 2,5 50, 000 2,9 05, 000 355,000

Summary of increased requirements for 1965

Nature’of expense (or savings): Additions:

1. Amount required to compensate referees currently in an appoint- Amo unt

ment s tat us (reduction of lapse)_________________________ $50, 000

2. 2 additional full-tim e referees; 1 additional pa rt-time referee; the

conversion of 2 part-time referees to a full-time sta tus ; and 

salary adjustments approved by the Judicial Conference of 

the United States in March 1963________________________ 70, 00

3. Anticipated additional amount that will be required for new

referee positions; the conversion of part-time referees to a 

full-time s tatus and salary adjustments expected to be a uth orized by the Judicial Conference in March 1964____________ 235, 000

Increase, 1965 over 1964_____________________________ 355, 000

JU S TIF IC A TIO N

Language changes

None.

Objectives

The district courts of the United States are constituted courts of bankruptcy , 

vested with original ju risdiction at law and in equ ity in proceedings brough t under 

the b ankruptcy statutes. This jurisdiction primarily is exercised thr oug h referees 

appointed by the several district courts. Their compensation and benefits are 

paid from th is appropriation, which is derived from a special fund in th e T reasury 

to which are deposited payments of fees and charges by parties to the proceedings. 

No appropriation from the general fund of the Treasury is required.

Reference to basic sta tut ory authorities are contained in section P of the 

“Digest of Appropriations, The Ju diciary,” on file with th e Bureau of the Budget 

and the Appropriations Committees of the Congress.

General justifications

The number of bankruptcy cases filed during fiscal year 1963 reached another 

alltime high of 155,493. The number of cases filed, th e numerical and percentage 

increases in filings during th e past 10 years are as follows:
72

Fis ca l ye ar Cas es filed N um er ic al

incr ea se

Per ce nta ge

inc reas e

1954________ 53,136 13,049 32 .6 1955....................................... 59,404 6,268 11. 8 1956_______________ 62,086 2’ 682 4. 5 1957_____________ _____ 73 j 761 l l ’675 18.8 1958_________________ 9 l’ 668 17,907 24.3 1959_____________ _____ 100’ 672 9,004 9. 8 1960_____________ . 110,034 9,362 9. 3 1961________ 146,643 36^609 33 .3 1962____________ 147’ 780 h 137 .8 1963__________________ 155,493 t, 713 5. 2

During the year 141,440 cases were closed as compared with 155,493 cases 

filed^ resulting in an increase of more than 10 percent in the pending caseload from 

133,761 at the beginning of the year to 147,814 on June 30, 1963. A graphic 

presenta tion of bankruptcy cases filed and pending, fiscal year 1905-63, appears 

as exhibit C. Exhibits D and E reflect the number and ratio of business to 

nonbusiness bankruptcies commenced fiscal years 1940-63.

Of the tota l cases filed in 1963, 89.5 percent were nonbusiness bankruptcies 

(wage earners) and 10.5 percent were business bank ruptcies (which includes 

merchants, manufacturers, others in business, farmers, and the professional 

groups). During the past 3 years, the proportion of business to nonbusiness cases 

has remained virtually constant. The following table shows the volume and 

rati o (percentage) of business to nonbusiness filings for the past 10 years:

Fis ca l ye ar N onb us in es s Per ce nta ge 

of to ta l

B us in es s Per ce nta ge 

of to ta l

T ota l fil ings

1954____________ 44 248 83 3 8 888 16 7 53 136 1955______________ 50, 219 84 5 9 185 15 5 59 404 1956________________ 52,608 84 8 9 478 15 2 62 086 1957________________ 63,617 86 3 10, 144 13 7 73 761 1958___________ ____ 80, 264 87.6 11, 404 ’ 12 4 91 668 1959______________ 88 943 88 3 11 729 11 7 lo o’ 672

1960______________ 97,7 50 88.8 12, 284 11 2 li o ’ 034 1961______ _____ 131 40 2 89. 6 15, 241 10 4 146 643 1962__________ 132,125 89. 5 15, 655 10 5 147 780 1963___________________ . 139,191 89.5 16,302 10.5 155’ 493

At the beginning of fiscal year 1964 the balance of the “Referees’ salary and 

expense fund” was approximately $9,629,000. It is estimated that receipts to 

be deposited into the fund during fiscal year 1964 will aggregate $9,026,000, 

bringing the total available for appropriation to $18,655,000. Deducting the 

appropriations of $2,550,000 for “Salaries of referees,” and $5,250,000 for 

“Expenses of referees,” a balance of $10,855,000 would remain in the fund as of 

June 30, 1964. It is estimated th at during fiscal year 1965 receipts to be deposited 

into the fund will aggregate over $10 million. Deducting the appropriation 

estim ates for fiscal year 1965 of $2,905,000 for salaries of referees and $5,965,000 

for expenses of referees there would be a surplus in 1965 of well over a million 

dollars and the balance in the fund at the end of the year will be in excess of 

$12 million.

Detailed justification

The appropriation request for 1965 for “Salaries of referees” is $2,905,000, 

which is $355,000 in excess of the obligational authority granted for 1964. The 

increase in budgetary requirements is explained below:

Reduction of lapse

The appropriation for “ Salaries of referees” for the fiscal year 1964 was $50,000 

less than the budget estim ate. This action may have been prom pted by reason 

of the fact th at in 1963 a savings of over $50,000 was realized, $47,500 of which 

was transferred to the appropriation “Expenses of referees.”

The savings referred to was due to a delay in the enac tment of the appropriation 

bill and was not of a recurrring natu re. It is requested th at the sum of $50,000 

($47,000 for compensation and $3,000 for related benefits) be restored to the approp riation to cover the salaries and benefits of referees currently in a pay status. 

In all probability, a supplemental appropriation will be required in fiscal year 

1964.
73

Additional referees, changes in arrangements, and salary adjustments

The Judicial Conference of the United States in March of 1963, on the basis of a report and recommendations of its Bankruptcy Committee, the recommendations of the Director of the Administrative Office, judicial counsels and the district judges, authorized two additional full-time referees a t $15,000 per annum, a part- time referee a t $7,500 per annum and the conversion of two part-tim e referees to a full-time sta tus with increases in salaries from $7,500 to $15,000 per annum. It also authorized salary adjustments for five full-time referees and five part-time referees aggregating $12,500. The action of the Judicial Conference was to take effect on July 1, 1963, or as soon thereafter as appropriated funds are available. The new positions, conversions, and salary adju stments will cost $70,000— 

$65,000 for salaries and $5,000 for related benefits—Governm ent’s contributions to 

the retirement fund and for group life insurance and health benefits.

Additional positions, changes in salaries and arrangements for referees expected to be

authorized by the Judicial Conference in March 1964

The sum of $235,000 has been included in anticipation of the authorization of

additional positions and changes in salaries and arrangem ents for referees by the Judicial Conference in March 1964. Of this sum, $220,000 is for personnel com­ pensation and $15,000 for related benefits. The Judicial Conference of the United States authorized the inclusion of this request for funds in the budget for the fiscal year 1965, in an attempt to avoid the delays experienced in the past in the implementation of its action s which have necessarily been subject to the availability of funds. The estimate contemplates the creation of nine full-time referee positions and the conversion of nine part-tim e referees to a full-time status. It also provides for some salary adjustm ents for full- and part-tim e referees.

Mr. R ooney. Th e inserted pages ind icate th at the r equest is in the 

am ou nt $2,905,500, which would be an increase of $355,000 over the 

am ou nt approp ria ted for salaries of referees in the cu rre nt fiscal year. 

The increases are set fo rth a t page 126 which has already been i nserted 

in the record.

R ED U CTIO N OF LA PS ES

With regard to item No. 1 on page 126, since this appro pri ation 

for 1964 was $50,000 less than 1963, how do you explain a req uest 

for a reduction of lapse?

Mr. Airh art. Mr. Chairma n, the 1964 ap pro priat ion missed by 

$50,000 giving us enou gh to pay the salaries of referees on b oard. We 

are asking for a sup ple me nta l for 1964 and asking for $50,000 in 

1965 for the same reason.

Judge Campbell. Does th at no t include the temporarie s?

Mr. Airh art. No.

Mr. R ooney. Accordin g to page 131 of these justifications, Mr. 

Ai rhart , aft er the $50,000 cut was made and the acti on with regard 

to these referees was to take place on Ju ly 1, 1963, or as soon there aft er 

as appro priat ed funds were availab le, and since the appro priat ed 

funds did no t become ava ilab le until Decem ber 30, 1963, would it no t 

be fair to expect th at instea d of yo ur req uesting $50,000 the action 

should go the oth er way?

Mr. Airh art. I do no t follow you, Mr. Chairma n.

Mr. R ooney. You were no t to do an yth ing ab ou t this m atter of 

thes e referee salary ad justm en ts for five full-tim e referees and five 

pa rt time ? The entire action with regard to the referees was contingent upon tak ing effect as soon aft er Ju ly 1, 1963 as appro priat ed 

fun ds were available. Th e fun ds did not becom e available until 

Decem ber 30.

Mr. Airh art. Th at is correct, sir.

Mr. R ooney. This being so, instea d of yo ur now as king for $50,000, 

why shou ld you no t be pu tti ng money back since the cu t was only 

$50,000?
74

Mr. Airh art. This applied, Mr. Chairm an, to those alread y on 

the rolls, no t the referees pu t on the rolls afte r, or whose salaries 

were raised afte rwa rd.

Mr. R ooney. If you will look at page 131, you will find this:

* * * The action of the Judicial Conference was to take effect on July 1, 1963, 

or as soon thereafter as appropriated funds are available.

W ha t is the answer to that?

Judge Campbell. Th e answ er is th at I thi nk you are referring to 

the new ones instead of the othe r ones. The lapse ends up at the top 

of page 131 and I think the language from which you are rea din g is on 

the new one down below on the page, red uct ion of lapse, which ends 

at the end of the first parag rap h.

Th e m at te r you were readin g is und er the cap tion “A ddition al 

Referees.” None of those hav e been pu t into effect as yet. The se 

are the old ones th at hav e been working all along, as I understand it.

Mr. Airha kt. T hat is correct.

Judge Weinman. It star ts at the bottom of page 130 and finishes 

at the top of 131.

Judge Campbell. Th e item of lapse is above there.

Mr. Rooney. Very well.

Th e third item on page 126 of $235,000, this is only an antic ipa ted 

thing, is it?

Judge Campbell. On the basis of the present filings; yes, sir. Our 

Budget Comm ittee, Mr. Bow, hope s this is a tem porar y situatio n, 

bu t we do no t know. On the basis of the present filings, i t is justified 

in order to give service to thes e add itio nal applica nts, bu t we hope it 

is a tem po rar y increase. Therefo re, we did no t accept the recomme ndation of the C om mittee on Ba nk ruptcy of the Judic ial Conference 

which asks for the positions perma nen tly. We ask merely the 

tem porar y help, th at it be made available to us to meet the prese nt 

emergency and the n see wh eth er or not this trend continues.

Is th at wh at it is for?

Mr. R ooney. No.

Judge Campbell. Is th at the same thing, the tem porary?

Mr. Airha kt. No.

Judge Campbell. The n you tell me.

Mr. Airh art. Our sit ua tio n here is th at in yea rs pa st we have 

waited un til the Conference acted either Ma rch or September, the n 

in the next appro priation we have asked for sufficient fun ds to provide add itional referees.

Mr. R ooney. Let us no t waste too much time on this.

Mr. Airh art. Here we are rea dy to reco mmend to the Co nference, and we are tr yin g to save a y ea r’s time because of the caseload 

rise.

Mr. R ooney. We will tra de y ou any time 50 for 235.

Judg e Campbell. You have mad e an agre ement.

Mr. R ooney. We ju st saved the difference between 50 and 235.

Are the re any questions?

B A N K R U PT C IE S CA SE S

Mr. Bow. Mr. Chairma n, I think we cann ot let the record go by 

wi tho ut------
75

Mr. R ooney. I know wh at you hav e in mind and I am going to 

get th at table.

Mr. Bow . I call attention to page 128 a nd the opening senten ce:

The number of ban kruptcy cases filed during fiscal year 1963 reached another 

all-time high of 155,493.

It is amazing.

Tha t is all, Mr. Chairma n.

Jud ge Campbell. Mr. Chairma n?

Mr. R ooney. Who is going to answer thi s question?

Jud ge Camp bell. M ay I ask for a slight correction of the record?

Mr. R ooney. Not at this point. I could no t concede you one 

second at thi s point. My que stion is------

Judge Campbell. I used lang uag e when I said “T hat is a deal.”

Mr. R ooney. Jud ge, my question is: Is it no t the fact th at this 

prese nt increase in ba nk ruptcy proceeding s filed in 1962 is the lowest 

in the last 10 years and th at 1963 was the third lowest, percen tagewise?

Judge Campbell. That I will concur in.

Mr. R ooney. T hat is all I wa nte d to know.

Mr. Bow . Th an k you.

additional positions

Mr. R ooney. Insofa r as item 2 at page 126 is c oncerned, wh at is the 

tot al numb er of addition al position s req ueste d and wh at is the cost?

Mr. Gara bed ian. The Judic ial Conference in Marc h of 1963 authorize d the creatio n of two add itio nal full-time referee positions, one 

add itio nal part-tim e referee position------

Mr. R ooney. You are telling me wh at they did and I am asking 

you how man y and the cost?

Mr. Gara bed ian. Two full-time positions, one part- tim e position , 

two convers ions from pa rt time to full time, and several salary 

adjus tm ents.

Mr. R ooney. At w hat c ost, and I am speaking of the positions now 

and no t salar y adjus tm ents.

Mr. Gara bed ian. At a cost of $70,000.

Mr. Airh art. Ju st the positions.

Mr. R ooney. Do you un derst and th at includes the conversions?

Mr. Garabedian. The three add itio nal positions, Mr. Ch air ­

ma n—

Mr. R ooney. Or t he salary adjus tm ents?

Mr. Garabedian. Th at is $37,500.

Mr. R ooney. Let us hear th at again.

Mr. Garabedian. The three add itio nal positions will cost $37,500, 

plus a nom inal amoun t for rela ted benefits.

Mr. R ooney. What would you say was nom inal in th at regard ?

Mr. Garabedian. 7.5 perc ent or appro xim ate ly $3,000.

Mr. R ooney. Go ahead, please.

Mr. Garabedian. Conversions will cost $15,000 and the salary 

ad justm en ts $12,500. plus related benefits, which would be app roxima tely $1,000.

Mr. R ooney. Are ther e any furth er questions, gen tleme n, with 

regard to the item of “Salaries of refe rees” ?

Mr. Lipscom b. No questions.
E x pen ses of R e fe r e e s

Object classification

[In th ousa nds of do lla rs]

11 Per so nne l co m pen sa tion:

P erm a n en t po si tion s............ .........

Posi tions oth er th a n pe rm an en t. 

O th er pe rs on ne l co m pen sa ti on..

1963 a ctu al

2,985

277

194

1964 e st im at e

3,330

320

244

1965 e st im at e

3, 582 

570 

246

12

21

22

23

24

25

26 

31

T o ta l pe rs on ne l co m pe ns at io n.

Per so nne l ben efi ts ..... ..............................

T ra v el an d tr an sp o rt ati o n of per so ns .

T ra n sp o rt ati o n of t h in g s____ _______

R en t, co m m un ic at io ns, an d u ti li ti es.

P ri n ti n g an d re p ro d u c ti o n .. ................

O th er services-_____ _____ - ..................

Supplies a n d m ate ri als _____________

E q u ip m en t.................................................

T o ta l obl ig at io ns_________ _______

3,456 

247 

112 

8 

461 

76 

24 

133 

336

3,895

282

120

10

577

72

19

112

163

4.398

308

130

11

560

90

30

140

298

4,853 5,250 5,965

Personnel summary

T o ta l n u m b er of p erm an en t po si tion s............ ..

F ull-t im e eq u iv ale n t of o th er p o sit io n s..............

Ave ra ge n u m b er of al l e m plo yee s..........................

Em plo ye es in p erm an en t iw si tion s, e n d of y ea r 

E m plo yee s in o th er po si tion s, e n d of y ear...........

1963 a ctu al 1964 est im at e 1965 es ti m at e

633 633 633

69 77 139

680 702 760

624 625 625

109 117 179

Program and financing

[I n th o u san d s of do lla rs]

Pro gr am b y ac tivitie s: C le rk hir e an d misce llan eo us e xp en se s 

of ref ere es (o bligat io ns)......... . .......................................... . ...............

F in an ci ng: U no bl ig at ed ba la nc e la psi ng!_______________ ____

N ew ob liga tion al au th o rit y (ap p ro p ri a ti o n ). .................

1963 actu al 1964 e st im at e 1965 es ti m at e

4,853

44

5,250 5,96 5

4.898 5,250 5.96 5

Mr. Rooney. Finally , we get to the “ Referees exp enses” fund on 

page 133 of the justifications and we shall at this poin t insert in the 

record pages 133 through 152 of the justificatio ns.

(The pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimates to current appropr iatio n

Exp en se s of refere es, U! S. court s (special fu n d ): .fudicia ry

1964 a ppro pri at io n in an n u al a c t...... ....................................................................................... ............. .. $5,250,1X10

N et d iffe re nc e, 1965 o ve r 1964:

R eq uir em en ts Diff eren ce , 

in crea se ( + ) 

or d e1964 ap pr o- crease (—)

1

 pria te-1

1965

es ti m at e

Cle rk hi re co m pe ns at io n an d Ix m ef its _______

\1 isce lla ne ou s ex pe ns es

.......... .1 $4,176,600

1.07 3,400

$4. 705 ,500

1. 259, 500

+.$528, VMM) 

+1 86, 1(X)

T o ta l........... ........... ....................................... ............ I 5.250.000 5.965.000 +7 15 .000

T ota l es ti m at e for 1965_______ ___________ _____ 5,9 65. 000
77

An aly sis by object

O b je ct

11

12 

21 

22

23

24

25

26 

31

P e rso n n e l c o m p e n s a ti o n -------------------------------------------------------

P e rso n n e l b e n e fits . - ------------------------------------------------------------

T ra v e l a n d tra n s p o rta ti o n of p e rs o n s ----------------------------------

T r a n s p o r ta tio n of t h in g s ------------------------------------------------------

R e n t, c o m m u n ic a ti o n s , a n d u tilitie s _______________________

P r in tin g a n d r e p r o d u c ti o n ..................................................................

O th e r s e r v i c e s ..---------- ---------------------------------------------------------

S u p p li e s a n d m a te ria ls _____________________________________

E q u ip m e n t_________________________________________________

T o ta l o b li g a tio n s .....................................................................................

1964 e s ti m a te 1965 e s ti m a te In cre a se o r 

d ecre ase ( —)

$3,8 95 ,0 00 $4 ,3 98 ,0 00 $5 03 ,000

28 1,60 0 307,50 0 25 ,900

11 9,5 00 130,0 00 10 ,500

10,00 0 11,00 0 1,00 0

577,00 0 560,50 0 -1 6 ,5 0 0

72 ,000 90 ,000 18 ,000

19 ,00 0 30, 000 11 ,000

112,50 0 14 0,0 00 27 ,500

163,40 0 29 8,00 0 134,60 0

5, 250,0 00 5,9 65 ,0 00 71 5,00 0

Summ ary of increased requirements for 1965

Nature of expense (or savings):

Deductions: Amount

Extra compensable day in 1964 n ot required in 1965______ — $14, 000

Funds authorized for 1964 for furnitu re and furnishings required incident to the occupancy of new buildings______ —13, 400

Funds provided in 1963 for the rental of office space for new 

referees and referees expected to be displaced by new 

judges proved to be in excess of actual requ irem ents_____ —90, 000

Additions: 1. Pay costs under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

(increases scheduled to take effect on Jan. 6, 1964)----- 82, 000

2. Provision for within-grade salary advanceme nts-------- 76, 900

3. Reduction of lapse (difference between full-year and

part-year cost of judiciary salary pla n)____________ 125, 000

4. Increase in the allotmen t for temporary employment of 

clerks for referees so as to provide greater flexibility 

in the assignment of personnel to areas with rising 

caseloads: Compensation______________________ $250, 000

Related benefits____________________ 9, 000

Furniture and equipment (nonrecurring) _ 30, 000

-------------- 289, 000

5. Increases in charges for local s witchb oar d telephone and

teletypewriter services by the General Services 

Administration due to the distribu tion of operato rs’ 

salaries to using agencies________________________ 18, 000

6. For t enant altera tions and other services to be performed

by the General Services Administration on a reimbursable basis__________________________________ 8, 000

7. Additional amount required for postage and fees as a

> resu lt of an increased caseload and higher postal rates

authorized by the act of Oct. 11, 1962_____________ 47, 500

8. To cover expenses relating to new referees and the expansion of the facilities of part-time referees to be

converted to a full-time s tatus____________________ 120, 000

• 9. Additional amount required for the prin ting of forms,

letterheads, envelopes and other ma terial__________ 10, 000

10. To cover an increase in the volume and cost of supplies

being consumed by referees_____________________ 15, 000

11. Fur niture and furnishings required incident to the occupancy of new buildings scheduled to be completed

during fiscal year 1965 or 90 day s the rea fter________ 41, 000

Net increase, 1965 over 1964____________ 715,000
78

JUSTIFICATION Language changes

None.

Objectives

Office and other expenses of referees, including compensation and benefits oclerical employees, are payable upon authoriza tion of the Director of the Adf 

min istrativ e Office of the U.S. Courts. This appropriation is derived from a 

special fund in the Treasury to which are deposited paymen ts of fees and charges 

by parties to the proceedings. No appropriation from the general fund of the 

Treasury is required. Reference to basic sta tut ory authorities is contained in 

section Q of the “Digest of Appropriations, the Jud icia ry,” on file with the 

Bureau of the Budget and the Appropriations Committees of the Congress. 

General justification

Caseload data appear in the account for “Salaries of referees.”

The estim ate for 1965 includes funds for the employment of additional clerks 

for referees on a temp orary basis to cope with the rising caseload. Provision 

has been made for within-grade salary advancements; the difference between the 

full-vear and part-year cost of salary increases authorized by the Federal Salary 

Reform Act of 1962, effective January 6, 1964; and the difference between the 

full-year and part-yea r cost of the judiciary salary plan. Also, the estim ate 

includes funds for furniture, equipment, and other expenses in relation to the 

appointme nt of additional referees and the conversion of part-tim e referees to 

a full-time status. Funds have been included for furniture and furnishings required incident to the occupancy of new buildings, ten ant alterations and other 

services to be performed by the General Services Administration on a reimbursable 

basis, and increases in the cost and volume of supplies and printing required by 

referees.

Detailed justifications

The appropriation request for 1965 is $5,965,000, or $715,000 in excess of the 

obligational authority granted for 1964. The increases requested as well as the 

deductions are explained below:

Deduction for extra compensable day

The sum of $14,000 representing the cost of an extra compensable day in 1964 

($13,000 compensation and $1,000 benefits) has been deducted in establishing the 

budgetary requirements for 1965. Employees who are paid on a biweekly basis 

will be compensated for 262 days in fiscal year 1964, whereas there are only 261 

compensable days in 1965.

Deduction for nonrecurring cost of furniture for new buildings

The sum of $13,400 authorized for the procurement of fu rniture and furnishings 

in 1964 for referees in bankruptcy and their staffs incident to the occupancy of 

new buildings has been deducted. The amount required for this purpose in 1965 

has been included below as an increase in b udgetary requirements.

Reduction in the allotment for the rental of office space

The Congress in 1963 provided the sum of $110,000 for the rental of office space 

in commercial buildings for new referees and referees expected to be displaced by 

new judges, which proved to be $90,000 in excess of actual requirements. The 

budget estimate for 1965 is net of this savings.

Requirements under the Federal Salary Reform Act of tf)62

An additional $82,000 will be required in fiscal year 1965 to cover the full-year 

cost of pay increases to be granted clerks to referees effective Jan uary 6, 1964, 

pursua nt to the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962. The following is a brea kdown by fiscal year of the increases provided under compensation schedule II 

(second phase) of the act:

T o ta l p ay 

co st s C os t in 1964

B udgeta ry

re quir em ents ,

1965

C o m p en sa ti o n .............. $150,000

10,500

$73,500

5,0 00

$76,500

5,5 00

B en efi ts . . . .

T o ta l.......................... 160,500 78,5 00 82,00 0
79

The estim ate was derived by application of rates actually payable under the 

new pay scales, augmented to the extent of approximately 6.8 percent to cover 

related benefits. Pay costs in 1964 are being absorbed to the extent of $57,500. 

No further absorption is possible, particularly in view of the rising bankruptcy 

caseload a nd the need for ad ditional personnel.

Provision for within-grade salary advancements

All of the clerks to referees are subject to the promotional plan for judicial 

personnel and will be granted step increases corresponding with those provided 

for by title VII of the Classification Act of 1949, as amended.

It is estimated th at these within-grade salary advancem ents will cost $76,900, 

of which $72,000 represents increases in compensation and $4,900 related benefits— 

Government contributions to the civil service retirement fund and for group life 

insurance. The estimate, which represents approxim ately 80 percent of the full 

potential cost of step increases, takes into account anticipated savings due to 

turn over of personnel and the filling of vacancies at lower rates of pay. The net 

cost of within-grade salary advancem ents in 1965 is expected to be slightly 

higher tha n in 1964 by virtue of th e provisions of the Federal Salary Reform Act 

of 1962 relating to the minimum increase on grade to grade promotions and the 

waiting periods for within-grade salary advancements. Also, employees who are 

upgraded under the judiciary salary plan in many instances will be placed in the 

base rates of the respective grades and will be entitled to within-grade salary 

advancements upon the expiration of 1 year from the date of reclassification, 

whereas, prior to such reclassification they would have been required to serve 2 

or even 3 years to be eligible.

Reduction of lapse {difference between full-year and part-year cost of the judiciary

salary plan)

The budget estimate for the fiscal year 1964 included a request for funds for the 

implementation of the judiciary salary plan. For a detailed description of the 

plan, reference is made to pages 41-45, 47-50, 55, and 63-69 of the hearings before 

the Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Represen tatives, 

on the Judiciary appropriation estimates for 1964.

The estimate for 1964 was based on the a nnual cost of the plan, bu t the Congress, ap parently taking into accou nt th at there would be some delay in adjusting 

the grades and salaries of th e employees, approved approximately one-half of the 

sum requested. The amount allowed will be sufficient for 1964, particula rly in 

view of the delay in the enactment of the appropriation bill, but, of course, in 

1965 the appropriation must be augmented to th e extent of the difference between 

the full-year and p art-year cost of the salary adjustments. The recurring annual 

cost of the plan as it relates to employees in the bankruptcy system, the amount 

allowed for 1964, and the budgetary requirements for 1965 are as follows:

Re curring

an nu al

cost

Amou nt 

allowed 

for 1964

Bu dg etary require me nts, 

1965

Person nel c om pe ns at io n, .................- __________ ____________ $257,500 $140,000 $117,500

Person nel b en efits ____ . . _______________________ 17,500 10,000 7,500

275,000 150,000 125,000

Employment of additional clerks for referees on a temporary basis

There was a very sudden and sharp increase in bankruptcy case filings during

the last half of fiscal year 1963 an d early in 1964. This increase cann ot be fully 

accounted for nor can it be determined whether the trend in filings will continue, 

level off, or decline. The Judicial Conference of the United States, on the recommendation of its Committee on Suppo rting Personnel, authorize d the inclusion 

of a request in the 1965 budget for some 50 to 60 additional clerical employees 

for referees in bankruptcy , bu t on a tem porary basis pending a more positive

31-136— 64----- 6
ment of personnel to areas with rising caseloads. The sum of $289,000 is included for additional temporary employees as follows:

Personnel compensation_______________________________________ $250, 000

Related benefits________________________________________ _____ 9, 000

Fur niture and equipment (nonrecurring expense)__________________ 30, 000

To tal ..................................................................... ................. ........... 289,000

The amount stated above for furniture and equipment was derived by application of a unit cost of $500, which is believed to be sufficient to provide the new 

clerks with typewriters, desks, chairs, etc. The expense, of course, is nonrecurring 

and will, if allowed, be deducted in 1966.

Increase in the cost of communications

The General Services Administration has announced th at it will bill custom er 

agencies of the Federal Telecommunications System for the full cost of communications services in th e fiscal year 1965 and thereafter, including operators’ salaries 

which heretofore have been financed by direct appropriations to the General 

Services Administration. Public Law 87-847, approved October 23, 1962 (76 

Sta t. 1117), established a Federal telecommunications fund to be administered 

by the General Services Administration on a completely reimbursable basis. For 

ready reference, a copy of the act is included herein as exhibit B.

The General Services Administration has informed heads of agencies t ha t as a 

result of this change in financing arrangements, and the addition of ope rato rs’ 

salaries to other common costs allocated to each telephone station, the curre nt 

average charge for local service will be increased an average of $2.35 per telephone 

station per month, or approximately 45 percent. Similarly, the wordage rate 

for use of intra system teletypewriter service will be increased, from the current 

rate of 15 mills to a rate of 33 mills per word for messages processed by the General 

Services Administration operators. The additional cost resulting from these 

increases will be offset to some extent by a savings in long-distance costs resu lting 

from the establishm ent of the Federal Telecommunications System long-line 

network.

It is estimated th at an additional $18,000 will be required in fiscal year 1965 

to cover the rate increase mentioned above. The estimate is based on th e am ounts 

currently being paid to the General Services Administration for telephone and 

teletypewriter services.

Tenant alterations and services

The sum of $8,000 is included for so-called ten ant alterations and services by 

the General Services Administration on a reimbursable basis. The estimate is 

based on a unit cost of 3 cents per square foot of space occupied by referees in 

post office buildings and in buildings operated by the General Services Administration.

A request for funds for this purpose for the fiscal year 1962 was denied by the 

Congress. The General Services Administration maintains th at their “funds are 

not legally available for such expenses” and have made it quite clear th at they 

would refuse to make any ten ant changes or render services for the benefit of 

occup ant agencies except on a reimbursable basis, leaving the judic iary no alternativ e but to resubmit the requ est for funds for reconsideration. For a more 

detailed account of the events which led to the resubmission of the request and 

the position take n by the judiciary, reference is made to pages 105 through 108 

of this document.

Additional amount required for postage and fees (penalty mail)

It is estimated th at an additional $47,500 will be required in 1965 to cover an 

increase in the volume of mail and higher postal rates authorized by the act of 

October 11, 1962. The amoun t to be paid to the Post Office Dep artm ent for 

mailing notices of bank ruptcy proceedings to creditors and other parties of interest, is based on the average number of cases handled by the referees. The cost 

per case in 1963, computed on the basis of the quantity of envelopes and cards 

ordered dprjnfe'ihe year, less a 6-percent allowance for waste, was jus t under 

$1.73. Takhig into acco unt the difference between the full-year and part-year 

cost of the postaf'#ate increases effective Jan uar y 4, 1963, and the bulk rate 

increases scheduled to take effect in Jan uar y 1964 and Jan uar y 1965, the unit cost 

per case will be $1.83 in 1964, $1.90 in 1965, and $1.93 in 1966.

*The sum of $277,501) is currently available for the postage and fees of referees 

in bankruptcy.
On the basis of an estim ated 170,000 cases to be handled by referees during 

fiscal year 1965 a t $1.90 per case, the sum of $325,000 will be required.

Expenses relating to request for additional referees

Under the appropriation “Salaries of referees” funds have been requested for 

additional referees in bankruptcy and the conversion of some part-tim e referees to a full-time sta tus which actions, in tota l, would represent an equivalent of 16 full-time positions. The sum of $120,000 is included in this appropriation to cover the expenses (including the cost of equipment, furniture, and library facilities) of the new referees and to provide for an expansion of the facilities of part-tim e referees who are to be converted to a full-time status . The expenses 

are itemized below:

Travel_______________________________________________________ Tra nsp ortatio n of things---------- - -------------------------------------------------

Rent, communications, and utilities-----------------------------------------------

Printing and reproduction-----------------------------------------------------------

Other services---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Supplies----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Furniture and equipment, including libr ary (nonrecurring)-----------------

$10, 500 

1, 000 

8, 000 

8, 000 

3, 000 

12, 500 

77, 000

To tal_____________ _______ - ______ _____________________ 120,000

The cost of travel and miscellaneous expenses are e stimated on a unit cost basis. Unit costs are derived from samplings of expenses currently being incurred by 

established offices. The sum of $77,000 representing the cost of furnitu re and equipment, including library facilities, is the amount that will be required to establish the offices of 11 new f ull-time referees. It is estimated that approxim ately $7,000 will be needed 

for each new office as follows:

Chambers_____________________________________________________ $U ~30 General office spa ce------------ ----------------------- ----------- -------------------- 2, 490 Cou rtroom____________________________________________________ 2, 845

Tot al___________________________________________________

1

 Nonrecurring expense.

1

 7, 065

Additional amount required for printing and reproduction

It is estim ated tha t an additional $10,000 will be required in fiscal year 1965 

for the printing of forms, letterheads, envelopes, and other material required by referees. On the basis of past experience, it is expected th at obligations for prin ting and reproduction in 1965, exclusive of the requirements of new referees referred to on pages 148 and 149, will aggregate $82,000, which is $6,000 more than the amount expended in 1963 and, $10,000 in excess of the sum available in 1964. The increase in p rinting requirements is due in large measure to the rising caseload. Increases in the rates charged by the Government Printing Office for 

materials and labor is, of course, a contributing factor.

Increased volume of supplies being consumed by referees

In addition to the requirements relating to new referees referred to on pages 

148 and 149, the allotm ent for supplies and materials for the fiscal year 1965 must be augmented to the extent of $15,000. The increase in the consumption of 

supplies in the offices of the referees in bankruptcy is due in large measure to the installatio n and use of photocopy equipment for the reproduction of petitions, 

schedules, lists of creditors, etc., to be furnished parties on request. Fees paid 

by parties requesting copies of such documents are deposited in the referees’ 

salary and expense fund.

Furniture requirements incident to the occupancy of new buildings

The General Services Administration has assumed the responsibility for all of 

the furn iture requirements of the co urts with the exception o f the requirements of referees in bankruptcy since the ban kru ptcy system is financed out of a special 

fund in the Treasury. Furnitu re a nd furnishings req uired by the referees in ban kruptcy incident to th e 

occupancy of new buildings scheduled for completion during fiscal year 1965, or 

within 90 days thereafter, are as follows:
82

Location: Estimate

Bakersfield, Calif_____________________________ ______ ______ $1, 324

New Albany, Ind___________________________________________ S71

Hannibal, Mo___________________________ 1,472

Albuquerque, N. Mex__________________. . . . . . _______________ 1, 838

Ogden, Utah______________________ 421

Cheyenne, Wyo____________________________________________ 2, 885

lteno, Nev__________________________ 2, 877

Chicago, Ill_____________________ 29, 516

To tal....................................................................... . ............... ............. 41,204

Total (rounded )________ _____ ____________________________41, 000

The estim ates were furnished by the General Services Administration in accordance with an agreement between the Director of the Administrative Office of 

the U.S. Courts and the Administrator of the General Services Administration.

The estimates, which were prep ared by the General Services Adm inistration’s 

regional offices, were reviewed, in some instances reduced, by the Administrative 

Office of the U.S. Courts so as to represent the minimum requirements of the 

referees who are to occupy space in the new building.

IN CREA SE S RE QU ES TE D

Mr. R ooney. The se p ages ind ica te th at the requ est is in the am ou nt 

$5,965,000 which would be an increase of $715,000 over the appro ­

pri ation for the cu rre nt fiscal year.

Th e increases are s et forth on page s 135, 136, and 137.

(Discussion off t he record.)

PR OV ISIO N FOR W IT HIN -G RADE SAL ARY AD VA NC EM EN TS

Mr. R ooney. You have an item of $76,900 en titled “P rovisio n for 

Wi thin-G rad e Salary Advanceme nts .” This is ref erred to at page 142 

of the justifications.

It would app ear from this th at you are a very conv incing and 

estimable gentlem an, Judge Cam pbe ll. You like to tak e care of 

your people and you are to be com plim ented for th at . This would 

mean th at these employees would get a reg ula r pa y raise under the 

pa y raise legislation las t enact ed; they would ge t an increase und er 

the jud iciary salary pla n; th ey would get w ithin-gra de salary advances.

What is thi s $76,000? This would move it along a little fas ter, would 

it not?

Jud ge Campbell. No; it is all the same thing. It is no more than 

the positions justified for the work the y are doin g as com pared with ♦

other officers of the Govern ment in the executive or legislative b ran ch.

Mr. R ooney. This is s ort of a p rimer. Ma ybe th at is not th e word.

Judge Campbell. Sort of an inducemen t to keep help.

Mr. R ooney. A h astener. You say y ourself at page 142 th at pri or *

to such reclassification they would hav e been req uired to serve 2 or 

even 3 y ears to be eligible.

Judg e Campbell. That is righ t.

Mr. R ooney. So th at thi s is a prim er to move the whole thing 

along f aster.

Judge Campbe ll. It is g iving them the benefit of new grade s.

Mr. R ooney. Higher and fas ter. I find no fau lt with it. After 

all, I help ed you with it.

Judge Campbell. You certainl y did, and I am most grateful. As 

a r esu lt of your help, we are able to keep employees who would othe rwise be pirat ed into the executive branch of the Governm ent where
83

they are paid more. This gives them the salaries of the grade to 

which they are entitled and the necessary in-grade advancements of 

those various grades.

TEM PO R A RY EM PLO Y M EN T OE CLER K S FO R R E F E R E E S

Mr. Rooney. You have an item of $289,000 here in connection 

with the temporary employment of clerks for referees.

Judge Campbell. That is what I thought I was talking to before 

when I erroneously spoke on the lapse.

Mr. Rooney. How many of these clerks? 

v Judge Campbell. What is the total number?

Mr. Garabedian. Sixty-two, Mr. Chairman. That is, equivalent 

positions.

Mr. Rooney. Gentlemen, we thank you and appreciate your 

• patience with us today.

Judge Weinman. May we thank you.

Judge Campbell. May I, on behalf of our committee, express our 

appreciation to you, Mr. Chairman and members of your committee, 

not only for your patience with us today but for vour constant and 

recurring understanding of our problems.

May 1 again thank you for the fine assistance you have given the 

judiciary in the past, and we hope to merit your confidence by continued watchfulness on the part of our committee on the budget 

with reference to future handling of funds tha t you appropriate to us.

Mr. Rooney. Thanks to the cooperation of yourself, Judge Campbell, Judge McGuire, and Judge Weinman, I think the rapport between 

this committee and the Judicial Conference has certainly become 

greatly advanced in the number of years since we have been doing it 

this way.

Judge Campbell. Thank you very much.

Judge McGuire. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. You are 

very kind.

Wednesday, January 15, 1964.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

W IT N ESSES

H O N . H U G O L. BLA CK, A SS OCIA TE JU S T IC E 

H O N . T O M C. CLA RK, A SSOCIA TE JU S T IC E 

JO H N F. DA VI S, CLERK

T. P E R R Y L IP P IT T , M A RSH A L

MISS H ELEN NEW M AN, LIB RA R IA N

DIN A R. ZU CCO N I, A SSIS TA N T TO T H E M A RSHA L

J. G EO R G E STEW A R T, A R C H IT E C T OF T H E C A PIT O L

CHARLE S A. H EN LO C K , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E O F F IC E R , O F F IC E O F T H E

A R C H IT E C T O F T H E C A PIT O L

Mr. Rooney. The committee will again please come to order. 

We have the item for the Supreme Court of the United States now 

before us. We are pleased to welcome once again Associate Justice 

Black and Associate Justice Clark of the U.S. Supreme Court.
84

Incid entally, it occurre d to me th at Mr. Jus tice Clark is entitled 

to parti cu lar com menda tion because of the fac t th at he has such a 

fine son, Ram sey.

Justice Clark, Th an k you. I shall tell Ram sey.

Mr. R ooney. You know, he is really ru nning tha t division he heads 

in the De pa rtm en t of Jus tice and his budget for the coming yea r is 

24 fewer position s. Th is is a great credit to you and to him.

Justice Black. He is a Tex an.

Mr. R ooney. Of course.

Justice Clark. He tak es after his mo the r.

Mr. R ooney. We are glad to welcome all those present, including 

the Ar chitect of the Capitol. *>

The justifications for the Supreme Co urt begin at page 1 of the 

justifi cation s book which page we shall insert in the reco rd at thi s 

point.

(Page 1 follows:) »

Summ ary statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Supre me Cou rt of the United Sta tes : Judtetarv

1964 a pp ro priatio n i n an nu al a ct_____________ ____ —_____ _____ _____________________ $2,201,400

Base for 1965................ ............................................................................................................................ 2,201,400

N et difference, 1965 ov er 1964:

Re qu ire men ts Difference, 

increase (+ ) 

or de1964 ap pro­ crease (—)

priat ed

1965

estim ate

1. Salaries, Supre me C ou rt- _____ ___ ____ ____

2. Pr in tin g an d bin din g, Supre me Cou rt re p o rt s.. ..

3. Miscellan eou s expen ses, Supre me C ou rt . ...

4. Care of the b uildin g an d g rou nds, Supre me Court5. Au tom obile for Chief Ju stice, Supre me C our t___

6. Books for th e Supre me C our t____ ____________ _

Tota l.......... . ................... ...........................................

$1,588,000 

138,000 

85,000 

348,000 

7,400 

35,000

$1,613,000 

138,000 

87,000 

304,600 

8,100 

35,000

+$25,000

+2, 000

-43,40 0 

+700

2,201.400 2,185.700 -15,70 0 -15,70 0

Tot al estim ate for 1965___________________________ _____________________ - .................. 2,185,700

Mr. R ooney. The total req uest is in the am ou nt $2,185,700, which 

would be a decrease of $15,700 below the a mou nt a pp ropriat ed for the 

Supreme Co urt in the cu rre nt fiscal year.

Mr. Justice Black, do you wish to make your statem en t at this 

time?

General Statement

Justice Black. My stat em en t will be very short. Tha t is, th at 

we are very happ y to prese nt our req uest for no increase, no net 

increase. We do hav e one add itio nal employee, the necessity for 

whom is explained in the statem en t here. He is needed in the 

lib rary. He has a name which is som ewhat misleading. In the main, 

he could probably be classified as a messenger who helps stack the 

books and pu t the books up and carry books around , tra vel from one 

lib rary to ano the r.

Mr. R ooney. This gen tlem an is to be foun d at page 9 of the 

justifications?

Justice Black. That is rig ht. Outsid e of th at , so far as any 

increases are concerned, rem embering there is no net incre ase, so far 

as some increases are concerned at some points, they are bro ught
85

ab ou t by stat ut or y req uir em ents for increases in wages. We will be 

very glad to answ er anyth ing ab ou t any parti cu lar item in which you 

are intere ste d. We are glad th at we are no t asking for an increase 

possibly due to the fac t th at Tom Clark is from Texa s.

Mr. R ooney. And , Mr. Justi ce Bla ck, you ma y be assured th at 

mak es our work muc h easier because we are going to fully coo perate 

with the Preside nt of the Un ited State s.

Justice Black. That is fine.

Mr. R ooney. Th e item for the Suprem e Co urt of $2,185,700, to 

which we made reference a w hile ago, is composed of six subitem s. 

Salaries, Supr eme Court of the United States

Object classification

[In th ou sa nd s of dollars]

1963 actua l 1964 estim ate 1965 esti ma te

11 Pe rson ne l c om pensati on:

Pe rm an en t posit ions _____ ________________________ 1,335

72

1,403

81

8

1,433

81

4

Po sit ions ot he r th an p er m an en t........................................

Other pe rso nnel co mpe ns ation...........................................

Tota l perso nnel co m pen sa tion. . _________________ 1,408

75

1,492

96

1,518

12 Pe rsonne l b en efits ________ _______ ___________________ 95

Tota l o blig at io ns __ _______ ____ ____ ________________ 1,483 1,588 1,613

Personnel summ ary

1963 a ctua l 1964 estim ate 1965 estim ate

Tot al nu mbe r o f pe rm an en t p o s it io n s .. ....... ... ..................... __ 168 168 169

Fu ll- tim e eq ui va lent of all o ther position s__________________ 17 20 20

Average nu mbe r o f all e mp loy ees____ _____________ _____ 178 184 184

Em plo yees in pe rm an en t jxts itions, e nd of ye ar_. ________ _ 162 164 164

Em plo yees in other positio ns, end o f y ear. .............................. 38 42 42

Program and financing

[In th ou sa nd s o f dollars]

1963 a ctua l 1964 est im ate 1965 estim ate

Prog ram b y activ ities: Salaries, Su prem e Cou rt (oblig ations ).. 

Fin an cing : Uno bligated balan ce lap sing ___________________

1,483 

10

1,588 1,613

Ne w ob lig ationa l a uth ority (a pp ro pr iatio n) ___________ 1,493 1,588 1,613

Mr. R ooney. The first of thes e is entitl ed “Salaries, Supreme 

Co ur t.” In con nection with this, w’e shall inse rt pages 2 thr ough 9 

of the justifications at this point in the record.

(The pages follow:)
86

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Salaries , Supre me Cou rt of the Un ited States:

1964 ap prop ria tio n in a nn ua l a c t.......................... ...............................................................- ............ $1,588,000

Base for 1965_____ _________ _______________ ________—................................- ..........- ........... 1,588,000

N et differ ence , 1965 ov er 1964:

Re quire me nts Difference, 

increase ( + ) 

or de1964 appro­ creasef—)

priat ed

1965

est im ate

Salaries, Supre me C ou rt........... . ..................... ............ $1,588,000 $1,613,000 +$25,000

To tal e sti mate for 1965-------- ------------- --------- - ------------------------------------------------------- 1,613,000 „

Statement showing analy sis by object

Object

1964

estim ate

1965

estim ate

Increa se (+ ) 

or

decrease (—)

11 Personne l com pe ns atio n........ ....................................................

12 Person nel be ne fit s................... ........... ............... .....................

$1,492,229 

95,771

$1,518,000

95,000

+$25.771 

-7 71

T ota l_______________ _____ ________________________ 1,588,000 1,613, 000 +25,000

Summary of increased requirements for 1965

Nature of expense (or savings):

1. Pay increase, Public Law 87-793 (compensation, $14,000; and Auount

benefits, $1,501)___________________________________ — $15,501

2. Provision for within-grade salary advancements (compensation,

$11,732, and benefits, $1,268)___________________________ 13,000

3. New position, under library assista nt_______________________ 4, 268

4. Less 1 extra compensable day in fiscal year 1965-------------------- —4, 229

5. Net decrease in payment due the employees’ compensation fu nd . —3, 540

Increase, 1965 over 1964_______________________________ 25, 000

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

Language changes

None.

Objectives

The appropriation here requested is to provide the necessary moneys to pay the 

salaries of the members of the Supreme Court of the U nited States, the Officers of 

the Court, their respective staffs, and the Court’s custodial employees.

General justification

The following statem ent reflects the casework of the Court for the past three 

terms:
87

Statement showing the number of cases filed, disposed of and remaining on dockets

at conclusion of October terms 1960, 1961, and 1962

(O ct ob er te rm 1962 en d ed J u n e 17, 1963, c or re sp on ds to fisc al yea r 1963]

O rigi na l A ppel la te M is ce llan eo us T o ta l

1960 1961 1962 1960 1961 1962 1960 1961 1962 1960 1961 1962

N u m b er of ca ses on do ck ­

e t s . . _______ __________ .12

1

13

0

16

7

1.046

887

1,062

860

1,182

972

1,255

1,040

1,510

1,297

1,627

1,371

2,313

1,928

2,58 5

2,15 7

2,824

2,350

N u m b er di sp os ed of d u rin g te rm s________ ..

N u m b er re m ai nin g 

on dock ets _______ U 13 8 159 202 210 215 213 256 385 428 474

D is tr ib u ti o n of ca ses disp os ed of d u ri n g t erm s:

O rigi na l ca se s_________ ___________________

A ppel la te cases on m e rit s_________________

P eti ti o n s for c ert io ra ri ____________________

M is ce llan eo us d ock et a p p lic a tio n s .. ............

D is tr ib u ti o n of ca ses re m ai nin g on do ck et s:

O rigi na l ca se s________ ____ _______________

A ppel la te ca ses on m e ri ts .................................

P eti ti o n s for c ert io ra ri ______________ _____

M is ce llan eo us d ock et ap p li cati o n s________

T erm s

H50 1961 1962

1 0 7

259 195 282

628 665 690

1,04 0 1,297 1,371

11 13 8

85 118 108

74 84 102

215 213 256

An appropriation of $1,613,000 is requested for salaries of the Supreme Court 

staff for 1965. This represents a net increase of $25,000 over the 1964 estim ate 

for this item.

Detailed justification

A ctu al 1963 E sti m ate 1964 E sti m ate 1965

N u m ­

be r

of

po sition s

A ver ­

ag e

n u m ­

ber

em ­

ploy ed

C os t

N u m ­

ber

of

po sition s

A ver ­

age

n u m ­

ber

em ­

ploy ed

Cos t

N u m ­

ber

of

po sition s

A ver ­

age

n u m ­

be r

em ­

plo ye d

Cos t

F u ll -t im e e m p lo y m e n t_____

P art -t im e e m p lo y m e n t____

T em p o ra ry e m p lo y m e n t___

168

20

161

17

$1,335,256 

68,348 

3,911

168

20

164

20

$1, 402, 872

76,128

5,000

8,22 9

4,700

10,300

75,000

5,771

169

20

164

20

$1,432,872

76,128

5,000

4,000

4,700

10,300 

77, 769

2,231

R eg ula r pay in exc ess of 52- 

week b ase_______________

E m p lo y er’s c ontr ib uti ons: 

Life in su ra n ce......... ......... 4,185

10,168 

70,998

H ealt h ben efi ts ________

R eti re m en t fu n d _______

E m plo yee s’ co m pe ns ation fu n d ........................

T o ta l......... . .................

S a v in g s .......... ................... . . .

188 178 1,492, 866 

10,134

188 184 1,588,000 189 184 1,613,000

T o ta l appro pri ati on 

or e sti m a te . _______ 1, 503, 000 1,588,000 1,613,000

Pay increase, Public Law 87-793

The sum of $15,501 is required to cover the increase in salaries provided for by 

the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962, Public Law 87-793, approved October 11, 

1962. This estimate is for the increase in pay effective Jan uar y 5, 1964, and 

includes $14,000 to cover increases in compensation and $1,501 for related benefits—agency contributions to the civil service retirem ent fund.

The increased cost for salaries was determined by applying the new ra tes effective Jan uar y 5, 1964, to the pres ent complement of employees. The total increase
88

for salaries is $40,000 which represents a full fiscal year’s cost, less $20,000 requested in fiscal year 1964 due to the increase for p art of t ha t year. The tota l 

increase for fiscal year 1965 for compensation is therefore $20,000 of which $6,000 

can be absorbed. A net increase of $14,000 for compensation is requested for 

fiscal year 1965.

Provision for within-grade salary advancements

The sum of $13,000 is required to grant regular within-grade salary increases 

which will become due in 1965. The estim ate includes $11,732 to cover increases 

in compensation and $1,268 for related benefits—agency contributions to the civil 

service retirem ent fund.

New position, under library assistant

$4,268 is requested to establish one new position, under library assistant, at 

grade 3. The a dditional under lib rary assistant is needed to work with the present 

two under library assistants reshelving books used by attorney s and members of 

the Court, shelving new books, and filing new supplementary material, including 

pocket parts, advance sheets, and loose leaf services. The under library assistants 

are also required to perform numerous messenger duties between the libra ry and 

the Justices’ chambers, the Library of Congress and the Capitol. Since 1947, 

when the staff was enlarged from one to two under library assistants in the main 

reading room, the book collection has grown by 50,000 volumes.

Less 1 extra compensable day in fiscal year 1965

The amoun t of $4,229 for the 1 additional compensable day in fiscal year 1964 

and not required in fiscal year 1965 is deducted from this estimate.

Net decrease in payment due the employees’ compensation fund

The sum of $2,231 is required to reimburse the Bureau of Employees’ Compensation in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 785. This figure was furnished to us by 

the U.S. Departme nt of Labor for pay ment in fiscal year 1965. The amount of 

$5,771 required for this purpose in. fiscal year 1964 is deducted from this allotmen t 

resulting in a net decrease of $3,540 for this item.

IN C R E A SE S R E Q U E ST E D

Mr. R ooney. The am ount req ueste d for sala ries is in the sum of 

$1,613,000, which would be an increase of $25,000 over the am ou nt 

appro priated for the curre nt fiscal yea r.

The se increases are set forth at page 4 of the justificatio ns, from 

which it would appear th at all of this am ount is m anda tory e xcep t for 

$4,268, which is com pensation for the new position of under lib rary 

ass istant. Am I correct in th at?

Justice Black. Tha t is right.

P rinting and Binding Supreme Court R eports

Program and financing

[In thousands of dollars]

1963 actual 1964 estimate 1965 estimate

Program by activities: Prin ting and binding Supreme Court 

reports (obligations) (object class 24)_________________ 138 138 138 Financing: New obligational au tho rity (appropriation) ......... 138 138 138

Mr. R ooney. The second item is entitled “P rin tin g and Bin din g 

Supreme Co urt Re po rts .” We shall at this point insert pages 10 

throug h 12 of the justifi cations, which indicate th at the am ou nt is in 

the am ou nt $138,000, the sam e am ount as for the cu rre nt fiscal year.

(Th e page s follow:)
89

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

P ri n ti n g a nd bin din g Supre m e C ourt r ep ort s: Judxcta ry

1964 a p p ro p ri ati o n in a n n u al a c t_______________ ____ ___________________________________ $138,000

Ba se for 1965___________ ______________________________________________________________ 138,000

N et differen ce , 1965 o ver 1964:

R equir em en ts Diff eren ce , 

in crea se (+ ) 

or d e1964 a p p ro ­ cre as e (—)

pri ate d

1965

es ti m at e

$138,000 $138,000

« T o ta l es ti m at e for 1965________________________________________________________________ 138,000

Statement showing analysis by object

< O bj ec t

1964

est im ate

1965

es ti m at e

In cr ea se (-+-) 

or

de crea se (—)

24 P ri n ti n g an d re pro duct io n ______________________ _____ $138,000 $138,000

T ota l _____________________________________ 138,000 138,000

JU STIF IC A TIO N

Language changes

None.

Detailed justification

An appropriation of $138,000 is requested for printing and binding Supreme 

Court reports in fiscal year 1965. This amount is the same as the estimate for 

fiscal year 1964. This work is required by statu te and is performed by the Government Printing Office at rates fixed by th at agency. The actual expenditures 

during the past 3 years have been as follows:

1961 1962 1963

F or sl ip o p in io n s. _______ _________ ____ ___ ___________ ____ $60,231

29,769

$63,538

38,7 83

$62,766

F o r p re li m in ar y p ri n ts a n d b ound v o lu m e s .. ............. ........... . 75,234

T o ta l _____________________ __________ ______________ 90,0 00 102,321 138,000

The cost of prin ting and binding Supreme Court repo rts depends upon the 

volume of m aterial to be prin ted and bound and the rates being charged by the 

Government Printing Office a t the time the work is done. It is estim ated th at 

the printing of slip opinions for the fiscal year 1965 will cost $69,000. The remainder of $69,000 will be used to prin t preliminary parts and the bound volumes 

of the U.S. reports.

Mr. R ooney. W ha t are the pre sen t est imate s of obligation for 

fiscal year 1964, the cu rre nt y ear?

Mr. Davis. Throu gh Decem ber we hav e obliga ted $38,311.

Mr. R ooney. Can you tell us how th at compares with the previous 

period, the same period the year before?

Mr. Davis. The same da te las t year was $54,116, which is ab ou t 

$15,000 or $16,000 more . The difference is because we hav e no t ye t 

obliga ted the expense which we are cer tain to have to obligate for 

cer tain bound volum es.

In the $54,000 the year before the re was an obligation for some 

bound volumes which we will hav e to obligate bu t hav e no t ye t $one.
M iscella n eo u s E x pe n se s, S u pr em e Goubt of t h e U n it ed S ta tes

Object classification

[In thousands of dollars]

1963 actual 1964 estimate 1965 estimate

21 Travel and transportation of persons.......... ........................ 1

2

15

15

7

20

25

1

2

18

15

9

21

21

22 Transportation of things....... ’. . . ............ ...... ........- .......... 2

18

15

4

22

19

23 Rent, comm rnica tlons, an d u tilitie s........... . .......................

24 Printin g and reproduction______________________ ____

25 Other services........... ....................................................... .

26 Supplies a nd materials..................................................... .

31 E qu ip m en t............. ............................. . ................... . ...

Total obligations........... ...... ............................. ................ 79 85 87

Program and financing

[In thousands of dollars]

1963 actual 1964 estimate 1965 estimate

Program by activities: Miscellaneous expenses, Supreme 

Cou rt (obligations)____ _____________ _____ _______ _ 79 85 87 Financing: New obligational auth ority (appropriation)....... . 79 85 87

Mr. R ooney. The third item is entitled “M iscellaneous expense s," 

and is to be found beginning at page 13 of the justifications, which 

pag e we shall insert, tog eth er with pages 13 throu gh 17.

(The page s follow:)

State ment relating appropriation estimate to current appropriatio n

Miscellaneous expenses, Supreme Court of the United S tates: Judiciary 1964 appropriation in a nnu al a ct ..................................... .... ..................................................... $85,000

Base for 1965 ________________________________________________________________ 85,000

Ne t difference, 1965 over 1964:

Requirements Difference, 

increase (+) 

or de1964 appro­ crease (—)

priated

1965

estimate

Miscellaneous expenses. Supreme Co urt .................... $85,000 $87,000 +$2,000

Total estimate for 1965....... ................................................................................. ................ 87,000

Statement showing analysis by object

Object 1964 estim ate 1965 estimate

Increase (+ )

or

decrease (—)

21 Travel and tran stwrtation of persons................................ .. $1,000

2,000

15,000

15,000

7,200

20,000

24,800

$1,000

2.000

18,000

15,000

9,200

21,000

20,800

22 Tran sportation of things .' ................. .............

23 Rent, communication, and utilities.... .................................

24 Prin ting and reproduction .................... ......... .............. +$3,000

25 Other services . . ...................... . +2,000

+1,000

-4,000

26 Supplies and m aterials............... . .........................................

31 Eq uip me nt....... ........................... ....................... ...... .........

Total................................ ................................ . 85,000 87,000 +2,000
91

Summary of increased requirements for 1965

Nature of expense (or savings): Amount

1. Increase in cost of telephone service________________________ $2, 600

2. Increase in cost of postage, Public Law 87-793______________ 400

3. Increase for reupholstery of fu rni tur e_______________________ 2, 000

4. Increase in cost of supplies and materials___________________ 1, 000

5. Less cost of a passenger carrying autom obile________________ —4, 000

Increase, 1965 over 1964_______________________________ 2, 000

JUST IFICATIO N

Language changes

The following language is deleted: “including purchase of one passenger m otor 

w vehicle (at not to exceed $5,000 for replacement only), and hire of passenger

motor vehicles, $85,000.’’

Objectives

This appropriation provides for the miscellaneous expenses of the Supreme 

« Court which include the purchase of office, janitoring, and other housekeeping

supplies, materials and equipment; trav el (including automobile tran sportat ion 

for the Court and its officers); communication services; and p enalty mail. Print ­

ing and binding, except for the U.S. Reports, also is paid for from this appropriation.

General justification

An appropriation of $87,000 is requested for 1965 to supply the Court’s needs 

for supplies and equipment, and for other miscellaneous expenses. The amount 

requested is $2,000 in excess of last year ’s appropriation.

Increase in cost of telephone service

The amount of $2,600 per annum is requested to defray increased costs caused 

by the improvement and expansion of telephone services in the Justices’ offices, 

the marshal’s office and the library.

Increase in cost of postage

An additional $400 is needed for postage (penalty indicia) because of the statutory increase under Public Law 87-793. This amounts to an increase of approximately 25 percent.

Increase for reupholstery of furniture

A $2,000 increase is requested to repair and recover the numerous le ather chairs 

and couches in the Supreme Court building. After 28 years the furn iture is deterio rating at a very rapid rate and the $2,000 previously authorized for th is work 

has not been sufficient to keep the repairs current.

Increase in cost of supplies and materials

An additional $1,000 is requested for this item. This increase is primarily 

caused by having two more retired J ustic es who must be supplied w ith stationery 

• and other office supplies.

Less cost of a passenger carrying automobile

The $4,000 which was gran ted in last year ’s appropriation for the purchase of a 

passenger carrying autom obile has been deducted from this y ear ’s estimates.

A

IN C R E A S E R E Q U E ST E D

Mr. R ooney. These pages indicate th at the request is in the amount 

$87,000, which would be an increase of $2,000. This increase is set 

forth at page 15 of the justifications. This deduction of $4,000 under 

passenger-carrying automobile was a nonrecurring item?

Mr. Davis. Yes, sir.

Mr. Rooney. If there are any questions, gentlemen, please interrupt me at any time.

The fourth item is “Care of building and grounds,” which we shall 

skip at this moment and ask the Architect and his staff to wait until 

we finish the fifth and sixth items.
92

A uto m obi le fo r t h e C h ie f J ust ic e

Object classification

[I n thou sand s of dollars]

1963 ac tual 1964 estim ate 1965 est im ate

11 Pe rso nnel co mp ensat ion : Pe rm an en t po sition s. - . . .......... 5 5 5

21 Tr av el a nd trans po rta tio n of pers ons _ ........_................... 1

26 Supplies an d materials___ . . . - ______ - ............- ___ 1 1 1

To tal obligations.............................................- ............ .......... 7 7 8

Personnel summary

1963 actu al 1964 estim ate 1965 est im ate

To tal nu mbe r of perman en t posit ions........................................... 1 1 1

Average n um be r of all em ployees . _________ _______ 1 1 1

Em plo yees in pe rm an en t pos itions, e nd of y e a r ____ __ ___ 1 1 1

Em plo yees in othe r positions, end of year .. __________ 0 0 0

Program and financing

[In th ousan ds of dollars]

1963 ac tual 1964 es tim ate 1965 estim ate

Pro gra m by activ itie s: Autom obile for the Ch ief Justice 

(obligations) _____- --- -- -- --- - ____ ______________ ____ 7 7 8

Fin an cing : N ew ob lig ationa l a ut ho rity (ap pr op riatio n) .. 7 7 8

Mr. R ooney . The fifth item is th e automobile for the Chief J ustice. 

In thi s connection, we shall insert pages 28 thro ugh 32 of the jus tifi cations.

(The pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriatio n

Au tom obile for t he Chief J ustice , Sup rem e Co urt: Judicia ry

1964 ap prop ria tio n in ann ua l act........ . ................................... ....................................................... . $7,400

Base for 1965 ........................................................................................................................................... 7,400

Net difference, 1965 over 1964:

Req uiremen ts Diff erence, 

increase (+ ) 

or de1964 ap pro­ crease (—)

priated

1965

estim ate

Autom obile for the Chief Justi ce , Su prem e C o u rt. .. $7,400 $8,100 +$700

To tal e stima te for 1965___________________________________________________________ 8,100
93

Statement showing analysis by object

Object 1964 estim ate 1963vstlmate

Increase (+ )

' or

decrease (—)

11 Personne l c om pe ns ation_________ .. .. . $5,238

442

500

276

944

$5,427

453

1,000

276

944

+$189

+11

+500

12 Personne l benefits - _______ _____ _. _...............................

21 Tr av el a nd tra ns po rta tio n of pers ons___________________

25 Other ser vic es_________________________ ____________

26 Supplies an d materials_______ ______ __________________

Tota l___ _____ ___________ . 7,400 8,100 +70 0

Summ ary of increased requirements for 1965

Nature of expense (or savings): Amoun t

1. Pay increase, Public Law 87-793____________________________ $54

2. Provision for within-grade salary a dvancement (compensation $154

and benefits $11)______________________________________ 165

3. Less 1 extra compensable day in fiscal year 1965_______________ —19

4. Increase in cost of rental of an automobile___________________ 500

Increase, 1965 over 1964__________________________________ 700

JU ST IF IC ATI ON

Language changes

None.

Objectives

To provide for an automobile for the Chief J ustice of the United States. 

Detailed justification

This appropriation covers the cost of providing an automobile for the Chief 

Justice of the United States. Services included are the chauffeur’s salary, 

employer’s contributions for life insurance, health benefits and the retirement 

fund, gasoline and oil, repairs and rental.

An appropriation of $7,600 is requested for this item for 1965. This represents 

an increase of $200 over the 1964 estimate for this item.

Pay increase, Public Law 87-793

The sum of $54 is required to cover the increase in salary for the chauffeur to 

the Chief Justice, provided for by the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962, Public 

Law 87-793, approved October 11, 1962. This estimate is for the increase in pay 

effective Jan uar y 5, 1964.

Provision for within-grade salary advancement

The sum of $165 is required to grant a regular within-grade salary increase 

which will become due in 1965. The estimate includes $154 to cover an increase 

in compensation and $11 for related benefits—agency contributions to the civil 

service retireme nt fund.

Less one extra compensable day in fiscal year 1965

The amount of $19 for one additional compensable day in fiscal year 1964 and 

not required in fiscal year 1965 is deducted from this estimate.

Increase in cost of rental of an automobile

The cost of rentin g an automobile for the Chief Justice has been increased from 

$500 to $1,000 a year.

IN C R E A SE R E Q U E ST E D

Mr. Rooney. These pages indicate that the amount $8,100 is 

required for this purpose, which would be an increase of $700 over the 

amount appropriated for the current fiscal year.
94

Page 32 shows that the cost of renting an automobile for the Chief 

Justice has been increased from $500 to $1,000 a year. How come?

Justice Clark. That is what the manufacturer charges.

Mr. Rooney. Who are they?

Justice Clark. General Motors cars, a Cadillac. I suppose it is 

General Motors.

Mr. Rooney. This is the first I have heard of this sort of thing.

Justice Clark. The Chief told me they had upped it to a thousand 

dollars.

Mr. Rooney. Does anyone know whether or not the rest of the 

Government is going to run into the same sort of increase?

Mr. Lippitt. Tha t is my understanding, tha t it is true throughout *

the Government. I know it is in the case of the Department of 

Justice.

Mr. R ooney. The difference between the thousand dollars for 

the rental of the car and the $8,100 is made up, is it not, of the chauf- >

feur’s salary-----

Justice Clark. Within-grade salary increases-----

Mr. Rooney. Overtime, gas, and oil?

Justice Clark. There is no increase in gas and oil. It is in here 

but for the same amount.

Mr. Rooney. I am saying the difference between the thousand 

dollars and the $8,100-----

Justice Clark. Yes.

Mr. Rooney. I was asked this question once on the floor, and I 

had to guess the answer.

Mr. Lippitt. That is correct, sir.

Books for the Supreme Court

Program, and finan cing

[In th ou sand s of dollars]

1963

actual

1964

est im ate

1965

est im ate

Prog ram by activ itie s: Purcha se of books an d periodicals 

(obligations) (object class 31)......... ................... ........................... 35 35 35

Financing : Ne w obliga tional au th or ity (a pp ro pr iatio n).. ........ 35 35 35

Mr. Rooney. The final item of the six items entitled “Books for 

the Supreme Court,” justifications in regard thereto begin at page 

33 thereof, which page we shall insert, together w'ith pages 34 and 35.

(The pages follow:)

Statem ent relating appropriation estimate to current appropriatio n

Books for th e Supre me Cou rt: Jud icia ry

1964 app ro pr iatio n in an nu al a ct____________________________________________________ $35,000

Bas e for Ilk 5................................. .............................— ............— ------ -------------- —.......... -......... 35,000

N et d iffer ence , 1965 over 1964:

Re qu ire me nts Difference, 

increase (-)-) 

or d e1964 appro­ crease (—)

priated

1965

estim ate

$35,000 $35,000

Tot al e stim ate for 1965....................................................................................................................... 35,000
Statement showing analysis by object

Object

1964

estimate

1965

estimate

Increase (+ ) 

or

decrease (—)

31 Equip me nt________ _______ ______________ $35,000 $35,000

Total ............... . .............. ........... ........... ....... . 35,000 35,000

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

Language changes

None.

Objectives

This appropriation provides for the purchase of books and periodicals for the 

Supreme Court.

Detailed justification

An appropriation of $35,000 is requested for fiscal year 1905 for books and 

periodicals for the Supreme Court, to be purchased by the librarian of the Supreme 

Court, under the direction of the Chief Justice.

Our estim ates for fiscal year 1905 are as follows:

Continuations: Citators, codes, congressional hearings, court reports, 

digests, encyclopedias, legal periodicals, looseleaf services, pocket 

supplements, session laws, statutes, etc_________________________

New books and additional materials______________________________

$28, 500 

0, 500

Total estimate_________________________________ ________ 35,000

The above estimates represen t (he same amounts requested and appropriated 

for the fiscal year 1964.

Mr. Rooney. This request is in the same amount as in the current 

year, to wit: $35,000. We are again indebted to you, Mr. Justice 

Black and Mr. Justice Clark and ladies and gentlemen, for your 

kindness in being here.

Justice Clark. We are always glad to be here.

Justice Black. I would not miss it.

Care of Buildings and Grounds, Supreme Court

Program and financing

[In thousands of dollars]

1963 actual 1964 estimate 1965 estimate

Program by activities: Structural :ind mechanical care of Supreme Court Building and Grounds, including supplying 

of mechanical furnishings and equipment (obligations)........ Financing: Unobligated balance lapsing-..................................

New obligational auth ority__________________ ____

3 1- 13 6— 64 ------7
96

Object classification

[I n th ousa nds of dollars]

11

12

25

26

31

Per so nnel c om pen sa tion :

P erm an en t posi ti ons.......................................

O th er pe rs on ne l co m pen sa ti on....................

T ota l pe rs on ne l com pen sa ti on.................

Per so nn el ben efi ts...................................................

O th er se rvice s:

G en er al a nnual re p air s........ . ........................

A nnual p ain ti n g........ ........... ...........................

M ai nte nan ce , ai r- co nd iti oni ng s y s te m .. .

Lig ht in g im pro vem ents.................................

Ele va to r im pro vem en ts ...............................

P oin ti ng ex te rior st onew ork .........................

Sup plies a nd m ate ri als...........................................

E q u ip m en t, a n n u a l.................................................

T o ta l ob liga tions......... ............... .................— -

1963 ac tu al 1964 est im at e 1965 estim at e

197 198 213

47 49 52

244 247 265

16 17 18

4 9 9

3 3 3

1 4 2

33 49 1

12

9

9 6 6

1 1

318 348 305

u

>

Personnel sum ma ry

1963 ac tu al 1964 es tim at e 1965 es ti m at e

T o ta l n u m b er of perm an en t po si tions.......... . .................................- 33 33 33

•\ ver ag e m iinl ie r of all e m pl oy ee s __________________ 33 33 33

Em pl oye es in perm an en t po si tion s, en d of y ea r ............- - 33 33 33

Em pl oye es i n oth er pos itio ns, e nd of y ea r------------ --------- . . . 0 0 0

Mr. Rooney. Now, gentlem en, we shall ret urn to item No. 4, entitled “Care of building s and grounds, Sup rem e C ou rt,” which app ear s 

beginnin g at page IS of the justifications. We note tha t the req ues t 

is $43,400 less tha n the am ount appro priat ed for the curre nt fiscal 

year. The details are summarized at page 22 of these justificatio ns. 

We shall at this point insert in the reco rd pages 18 through 27 of the 

justifications.

(The pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

C are o f t h e buildin g a nd gr ounds, Supre m e C ourt :

1964 a ppro pri at io n in an n u a l a c t.....................- .........................................................................................

B as e for 1965......................................................................................................................................................

N et di ffer en ce , 1965 o ve r 1964:

R eq uir em en ts D iff eren ce , 

increase (-(-) 

or de1964, ap p ro ­ cre ase ( - r )

pri ate d

1965

es ti m at e

C ar e of b uildin g an d g ro u n d s........ ........................ ......... $348,000 $304,600 —$43,400

T ota l est im ate for 1965................................................................................................................... .......

Ju di ci ar y

$348,000

348,000

304,600

*
97

Statem ent showing analysis by object

Object

w

1112

25

26

31

Personnel compensation .................................... -

Personnel benefits:

Payment to employees’ life insurance fun d.. 

l’ayment to employees' health Ixmeftts fund

Con tributio n to retirem ent fun d...................

Other services:

General ann ual repairs..................................-

Annual p ain ting-................. ...... ....................

Main tenance, air-conditioning s ystem_____

Snow remo val....................... -........... ...........

Lighting im provements.................................

Elevator improvements............- ....................

Supplies and ma terials......... -........ ----------------

Equipment: An nual............. . ..............................

To tal...................... - ..................--- -................ -

1964 estimate 1965 estimate

Increase (+ ) 

or

decrease ( —)

• $247,300 $264,800 +$17,500

700 700

3,600

12,300

3,600

13,800 +1,500

9,000

3,000

9,000

3^000

3,800 1,800 -2,0 00

150 150

49,400 

12,000

1,000 -48,400 

-12,000

6^000

750

6,000

750

348,000 304,600 -43,400

i Excludes $8,900 proposed pay supplemental.

Summ ary of increased requirements for 1965

Natu re of expense (or savings):

1. Deduction for a nonrecurring amount of $2,000 in the air-conditioning item allowed to provide more effective control over 

tem perature conditions in the courtroom and the Chief Jus- Amount

tices’ cham bers______________________________________ — $2, 000

2. Deduction for a nonrecurring amount of $49,400 allowed to

improve lighting conditions in the reading room of the Bar 

Library, including its north and south bookstack wings____ —49, 400

3. Deduction for a nonrecurring amount of $12,000 allowed to

effect safety improvements on elevator No. 4_____________ —12, 000

4. Cost of wage rate changes authorized by .'ub lic Law 763,

$13,810; increased costs under the Classification Act, $690; 

increase in the overtim e and holiday pay allotment resulting 

from increases in basic pay rates, $3,000: Total increase in 

personnel compensation_______________________________ 17, 500

5. Increase in cost of contribution to retireme nt fund, authorized

by .Public Law 854, 84th Congress_____ ________________ 1, 500

6. Improvement of lighting in critical bookstack areas_________ 1, 000

Net decrease, 1965 under 1964_________________________ — 43, 400

*

*

JUSTIFICATION

Objectives

This appropriation , for expenditure by the Architect of the Capitol, is to provide 

for the stru ctural and mechanical care of the U.S. Supreme Cou rt building and 

grounds, including maintenance and operation of mechanical equipment. The 

Architect performs his duties under autho rity of the act of May 7, 1934 (48 Stat. 

668).

The mechanical equ ipment includes such items as the air conditioning, refrigeration, and ventilating systems with more than 1,000 pieces of equ ipment; electrical 

transformer stations; 300 plumbing fixtures and related piping; 8 elevators and 

5 dumbwaiters; electric fixtures and wiring.

A force of 33 employees is required for the fiscal year 1965 to cover 3 shifts 

daily and is made up of 1 supervising engineer; 1 foreman, 3 mechanics, 5 attend ­

ants, and 4 assistant att endants in the heating, ventilating, air conditioning and 

refrigeration dep artm ent; 1 electrician foreman and 3 electricians; 1 steamfitterplumber foreman, 1 steamfitter and 1 steam fitter-plu mber; 1 elevato r mechanic 

foreman and 1 mechanic; 1 marble mason; 1 woodwork finisher and painter; 1 oiler 

and greaser; 1 laborer-gardener foreman and 2 grounds main tenance men; 1 sub ­

station helper; 1 storekeeper and 2 general laborers.
98

Detailed justifications

The following table is a comparison of the cost of full-tim e employment and 

other objects of expenditures for the fiscal years 1963, 1964, and 1965; also of 

savings realized in 1963:

Actua l, 1963 Es tim ate, 1964 Es tim ate, 1965 Em ploy ­

men t, 

Septe mPos i­ ber 1963 tion s

M an -

year s

Cost Positions

M an -

years

Cost Position s

M an -

year s

Co st

Person nel com pensa ­

tio n: Full-tim e 

em ploy men t ____ 33 33 $243,595

74,838

4,967

33 33 $256, 200

100,700

33 33 $264,800

39,800

33 Other ob jec ts o f expe nd itu rc __ ______

Savings ____________

To tal e sti mate o r 

ap prop ria tio n 323,400 348,000

8,900

304,600 Propo sed sup plem en ­

ta l du e to pa y 

increases ________

Personnel compensation (increased from $247,300 (excludes proposed

pay supplemental) to $264,800)_______________________________ $264, 800

This allotment provides for 33 positions—the same number as 

allowed for 1964—2 of which are compensated under the Classification Act of 1949, as amended, and 31 on a prevailing wage-rate 

basis under the provisions of Public Law 763, 8§d Cong. For 1965, 

an increase of $17,500 is requested, of which $13,810, is required to 

meet the cost of wage-rate changes authorized by Public Law 763;

$690 for increased costs under the Classification Act, and $3,000 

increase in the overtim e and holiday pay allotmen t resulting from 

increases in basic pay rates.

Payment to employees’ life insurance fund (no change)_____________ 700 This item is the same as allowed for 1964 and is requested to 

cover the cost of Government insurance contributions required by 

Public Law 590, 83d Cong., Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance Act of 1954.

Paym ent to employees’ health benefits fund (no change)___________ 3, 600

This item is the same as allowed for 1964 and is requested to cover 

the cost of Government contribution to the employees’ health benefits fund required by Public Law 86-382, 86th Cong, approved 

Sept. 28, 1959.

Contribution to retirement fund (increased from $12,300 to $ 1 3 ,8 0 0 ) 1 3 , 800 

This represents an increase of $1,500 over the amoun t allowed 

for 1964. The item is requested to cover the cost of G overnment 

contribution to retirement fund required by Public Law 854, 84th

Cong., title IV, Civil Service Retirement Act Amendments of 1956. »

The additional cost results from increases in basic pay rates authorized by Public Law' 763.

General annu al repairs (no change )_____________________________ 9, 000

This is the same as allowed for 1964 and provides for the regular 

annu al repair and struc tura l upkeep of the building and its mechan- *

ical equipment, such as repairs to elevators, roof, carpentry, electrical, plumbing, heating, ventilatin g and steam equipm ent, kitchen

and other miscellaneous equipment, and general stru ctural repairs 

and improvements. It also provides minor repairs on the grounds, 

such as repairs to fountains, drains and catch basins, lawn sprinkler 

system and paving.

Annual painting (no change)___________________________________ 3, 000

This is the same as allowed for 1964 and provides for necessary 

painting throughout the building.
99

Maintenance, air-conditioning s yst em __________________ ___

For 1964, $1,800—the regular annual amount—is again requested for 1965 for the annu al routine care and maintenance of 

the air-conditioning and refrigeration systems. The breakdown

$1, 800

of the annual recurring amoun t follows:

Air-conditioning estimate:

Maintenance:

Air filters_____ _____________________________ $500

Oil and grease___ . __________________________ 100

Cleaning equipment_________________________ 100

Pa int--------------------------------------------------------- 100

Refrigera nts________________________________ 100

Contingency for special repairs________________ 300

Miscellaneous______________________________ 100

Repairs:

Refrigeration.____ __________________________ 300

Automatic controls__________________________ 100

Miscellaneous_______________________________ 100

Total, annu al recurring item s_______________ 1, 800

Snow removal (no change)_____________________________________

This is the same as allowed for 1964 and provides for snow 

removal from walks and approaches.

Lighting improvements—nonrecurring item _______________________

For 1964, a nonrecurring amou nt of $49,400 was allowed to improve 

lighting conditions in the reading room of the Bar Library, including 

its north and south bookstack wings.

For 1965, a nonrecurring amount of $1,000 is requested to improve 

lighting conditions in critical bookstack areas.

The lighting provided under the original building construction contra ct for the several bookstack areas throughout the building does not 

provide sufficient illumination on the lower shelves. Consequently, the 

book titles on such shelves are difficult to read. Practically all of the 

bookstack areas are completely devoid of d vlight.

The lighting in many of the bookstacks already has been updated to 

present day standards of illumination by the installatio n of low-cost 

commercial fluorescent fixtures. Such installatio ns have been accomplished progressively by the building maintenance personnel with complete satisfaction to the occupants. The result is th at all book titles 

are now readable.

A request for $1,000 is included in the 1965 budget to procure the 

necessary fixtures to continue this program in the remaining critical 

bookstack areas. All installatio n work associated therewith will be 

performed by maintenance electricians regularly employed in the 

Supreme Court Building.

Supplies and materials (no change)______________________________

* This is the same as allowed for 1964. The item provides supplies

and materials for the stru ctural and mechanical care of the building: heating, plumbing, electrical, carp entry, hardware, and other 

general miscellaneous supplies.

It also provides supplies and materials for the care of the grounds; 

«r pla nt material, seed, soil, sod, sprays, fertilizers, and other miscellaneous supplies.

Annual equipment (no change)_________________________________

This is the same as allowed for 1964 and provides tools, mowers, 

brushes, miscellaneous equipment, and repairs to same.

The total, therefore, requested for the care of the Supreme Court 

building and grounds, for the fiscal year 1965, under the Architect of 

the Capitol, amounts to ___ ______ _____________________________

150

1, 000

6, 000

750

304, 630
100

Mr. Rooney. The Court must have finally given up on the bookcases. Is that a fair statement?

Mr. Stewart. On the bookcases, yes.

Mr. Rooney. It would appear from page 20 tha t you have deducted three nonrecurring items totaling $63,400 and added three 

items totaling $20,000 even, giving us the total decrease in 1965 

under the current year appropriation of $43,400. Is tha t right?

Mr. Stewart. That is right.

1N CR EA SES REQ U EST ED

Mr. Rooney. Of the three items totaling $20,000, am I correct 

in saying that $17,500 is mandatory for wage rate increases authorized 

by law, and so forth, and $1,500 thereof is also required by law and, 

finally, tha t the oidy increase is an item of a thousand dollars for 

improvement of lighting in critical hook stack areas over in the 

Supreme Court; is that correct?

Mr. Stewart. Yes. That is only for the purpose of fixtures. We 

intend to install this with our regular help there at the building.

Mr. R ooney. This is all right, gentlemen. Pretty good for a 

change. Thank you very much.

Thursday, J anuary 30, 1964.

SUPPLEMENTAL ESTIM ATE, (X)URTS OF APPEALS,

DIST RICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICES 

Salaries oe Referees, Fiscal Year 1964 

W IT N ESSES

HON. M A TTH EW F. M cG U IR E , C H IE F JU D G E, U. S. D IS T R IC T COU RT,

D IS T R IC T OF COLUM BIA

JO H N C. A IR H A R T, A SSIS TA N T D IR EC T O R , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E

O FFIC E , U.S. COU RTS

D A R W IN H. ANDER SO N, A SSIS TA N T C H IE F O F B U SIN E SS A D M IN ­

IS T R A T IO N , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E O FFIC E, U. S. C O U R TS

Mr. Rooney. We have a supplemental request for the judiciary 

entitled “Courts of appeals, district courts, and other judicial services, 

salaries of referees,” which is to be found at page 10 of the House 

Document No. 203, for an additional amount for “Salaries of referees,” 

to he derived from the referees’ salary and expense fund established 

in pursuance of the act of June 28, 1946, as amended (11 U.S.C. 68, 

102), $65,000.

We shall at this point insert in the record pages 1, 7, and 8 of the 

justifications.

(The pages follow:)
101

For an additional amount for “Salaries of referees,” to be derived from the 

referees’ salary and expense fund established in pursuance of the act of June 28, 

1946, as amended (11 U.S.C. 68, 102), $65,000.

Salaries of referees, 1964

Supplemental req ues t________________________________________ $65, 000

Present appropriation________________________________________ 2, 550, 000

Obligations to Dec. 31, 1963_______________________________ 1, 290, 640

Expenditures to Dec. 31, 1963_____________________________ 1, 076, 890

Budget estimate next fiscal year............. ------- ------------------------------ 2, 905, 000

JU STIF IC A TIO N

The sum of $48,000 will be required for the paymen t of salaries and related 

benefits of full- and part-tim e referees serving in positions which were authorized 

and for which funds were provided in 1963. The Congress for 1964 appropriated 

$2,550,000, which was $50,000 less th an the sum provided in the Judiciary Appropriation Act of 1963 and $50,000 below the budget estim ate. This action app arently was prom pted by reason of the fact th at in 1963 a savings of $47,500 was 

transferred to the appropriation “Expenses of referees” to cover “pay costs” under 

' the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962. The savings was due to a delay in the

enactment of the appropriation bill and was not of a recurring nature. The 

probability of the need for the restoration of all or a portion of the sum denied in 

1964 was mentioned in a lette r dated June 20, 1963, to the chairman of the Senate 

Appropriations Subcommittee following the release of the report of the House 

Committee on Appropriations on the judiciary appropriation bill, 1964.

An additional $17,000 will be required for the appo intm ent of two additional 

full-time referees; one additional part-time referee; the conversion of two part-time 

referees to a full-time status ; and some salary adjustments authorized by the 

Judicial Conference of the United States in March 1963, subject to the availability of funds. The timing of the Conference action was such th at a request 

for funds could not be included in th e annual budget estim ate for 1964. In view 

of a very sharp increase in the bankruptcy caseload, it was n ot considered advisable to defer the submission of the request for funds any longer than necessary. 

The budget estim ate for 1965 provides for the full-year cost of the new referee 

positions, conversions, and salary adju stments. The amount included herein 

represents a 3-month provision in anticipation of the funds being made available 

on or about April 1, 1964.

Mr. Rooney. The first question, ( ’liief Judge McGuire, is, was any 

of the 1963 fiscal year appropriation for this purpose unused and if so 

how much?

Judge McGuire. Mr. ( ’hainnan, if I may answer tha t question by 

making a request, I would like to spread on the record, if I may, the 

formal justification in the form of a statement that I have prepared 

and which explains the situation in detail.

Mr. Rooney. Very well, Judge McGuire.

«r

General Statement

Judge McGuire. We are bringing before you a supplemental 

< request for an appropriation of $65,006 for salaries of referees for the

current fiscal year. The estimate is made up of two items: One, 

$48,000 needed to complete payments of salaries to referees currently 

serving in positions for which funds were provided in 1963, and two, 

$17,000 for the appointment of two additional full-time referees, one 

additional part-time referee, the conversion of two part-time referees 

to a full-time status and certain salary adjustments authorized by the 

Judicial Conference in March 1963.
IN CR E A SES RE QUEST ED

The req uest for $48,000 is in the natur e of a restoration of the 

reduct ion for 1964 below the base app rop riation for 1963. The 

amount appro priated for 1963 was $2,600,000. The budget estimate 

for 1964 was in the same am ount—no increases were requ ested. 

Betw een the time the 1963 appro pri ation hill was ena cted and the 

House Appro priatio ns Comm ittee Report on 1964 was rendered, a 

sum of $47,500 had, by au thor ity of Congress, been transferred from 

the appro pri ation for “Salaries of referees” to the app rop riation for 

“Ex penses of referees” to partially cover sala ry increases under the 

Fed eral Salary Reform Act of 1962. In the table of allowances for 

1964, then, the am ount recommended for appro priation by the House 

Appro priations Comm ittee was $2,550,000 and was com pared with an 

appro priat ion for 1963 of $2,552,500 with the com ment th at the 

allowance was $50,000 below the budget est imate and $2,500 below 

the am ou nt available for 1963.

The appro pri ation of $2,600,000 for 1963 included increases, on an 

ann ual basis, of $230,000. Because the act was not passed until 

mid -October 1962 there resu lted a savings of more than $60,000. 

The bala nce rem aining aft er $47,500 was transferred to the ap propria tion for “Expenses of re ferees” reverte d to the Treas ury .

R should he note d th at it was imm edia tely recognized th at the 

amount recommended for appro pri ation by the House Appro priations 

Comm itte e may be ina dequate and in the “no ap pe al” lette r of J un e 

20, 1963, to the chairman of the Senate Appro priations Subco mm ittee 

concerned with jud iciary approp ria tio ns it was sta ted:

In all probability, all or a portion of the sum denied by the House will be rerequired to cover the salaries and related benefits of referees curre ntly in a pay 

status. On the other hand, the amount recommended by the House may prove to 

be sufficient. Under the circumstances we have elected not t o appeal the House 

allowance, but instead will, if it should become necessary, retu rn in J anuar y 1964 

with a request for a supplemental appropriation.

The second item of increase—$17,000—will be needed to pu t into 

effect the new positions and changes I men tioned earlier . We shall 

be glad to provide the details of these chan ges if the comm itte e so 

desires.

Mr. R ooney. Of the amo unt presen tly req ues ted , how much is for 

salary adjus tm ents, additional positions, and so forth?

Jud ge McGuire. The second item of incre ase, $17,000, will be 

needed to put into effect the new positions and changes , as I sta ted 

earlier in the sta tem ent.

I think in this connection I shou ld call on Mr. Ai rhart, who is m ore 

fam iliar with the actual details tha n I am.

Mr. Airha rt. $48,000 is for the loss in the base approp ria tio n; 

$17,000 is for salary adjus tm ents and new position s. There is one 

full-time position inclu ded and one part-tim e and two conversions.

Mr. Rooney. According to page 8 of these jus tifica tions you speak 

of the appoint me nt of two additional full-time referees.

Mr. Airh art. Tha t is right. Tha t is because of the conversio n.

Mr. R ooney. Which is right?

Mr. Airhart. What I ju st gave you is correct. Th ere will be 

convers ions from pa rt time to full time plus one new full-tim e posi-
103

Mr. Rooney. On page 8 you say:

For the appointment of tw o additional full-time referees; one additional parttime referee; the conversion of two part-time referees to a full-time sta tus ; and 

some salary adjustments.

Am I reading correctly?

Mr. Anderson. Yes, sir.

Mr. Rooney. How do you jibe tha t with what you have just said?

Mr. Airhart. I do not.

Mr. Rooney. Which is correct?

Mr. Anderson. If 1 may answer that, the amount of $17,000 we 

are asking for in this supplemental is for placing on board two additional positions full time and one part time and the adjustments will 

amount to about $4,000.

Mr. Rooney. There will he no conversion?

Mr. Anderson. There will be conversions of two part-time to 

full-time positions.

Mr. Rooney. What you are saying is exactly what I just read to 

you from page 8 of the justifications, and 1 asked Mr. Airhart which is 

correct, what he said a while ago or what is in the justifications which 

you now say is the fact.

Mr. Anderson. We expect there will be two conversions of referees 

from part-time to full-time status.

Mr. Rooney. Let us not confuse the record. Did I understand 

you to say this was for the appointment of an additional referee?

Mr. Anderson. There will be three additional referees, two fulltime and one part-time.

Mr. Rooney. Thank you, Judge McGuire and gentlemen.

Judge McGuire. Thank you very much.

T hursday, March 26, 1964.

SUPPLEME NTAL ESTIMATE, SUPREME COURT OF THE 

UNITED STATES

Salaries and Miscellaneous Expenses

w it n esses

JO H N F. DAV IS , C LER K

ED W ARD H. F A IR C L O T H , A SSIS TA N T C LER K

T. P E R R Y L IP P IT T , M A RSHA L

DIN A ZU C C O N I, A SSIS TA N T TO T H E M A RSHA L

Mr. Rooney. The committee will please now come to order.

This morning we have some supplemental requests for our consideration with regard to the Supreme Court of the United States. 

They are contained at page 7 of Plouse Document No. 284.

The first is a request for an increase in the amount $209,000 for 

salaries, and an increase of $36,000 in miscellaneous expenses. 

justification data

We have some justifications which we shall insert at this point in 

the record, pages 2 through 15 thereof.

(The pages follow:)

31-136— 64-----8
104

For an additional amount for “Salaries, Supreme Co urt,” $209,000.

Program and financing

[In thousands of dollars)

1965 original 

estimate

1965 revised 

estim ate

1965 Increase

Procram by activities: Salaries, Supreme Court (obligatio ns).. 1,613 1,822 209 Financing: New obligational auth ori ty (appropriatio n)_____ 1,613 1,822 209

Object classification

[In thousand s of dollars) J

1965 original 

estimate

1965 revised 

estimate

1965 increase

11 Personnel compensation:

Perm anen t positions______ __________ __________ 1,433

81

4

1,623

85

5

190

3

1

Positions other than pe rma nent. _____ ___________

Other personnel com pensati on __________________

Total personnel compensation ______________ 1,518

95

1,713

109

195 12 Personnel benefits______ ________ __________ ______ 14

Total obligations......... ....................................... .............. 1,613 1,822 209

Personnel sum mary

1965 original 

estimate

1965 revised 

estimate

1965 increase

Total number of permanent positions............ . .......................... 169

20

184

164

42

190

20

205

185

43

21 Full-tim e equivalent of all other positions________________

Average num ber of all employees . ... ________________ 21

21

1

Employees in permanen t positions, end of year . ...................

Employees in other positions, end of year. _______________

I

*
105

Detail of personnel compensation

1965 orig in al 

es ti m at e

1965 revis ed 

es ti m at e

1965 inc reas e

t

N u m - T o ta l

ber sa la ry

N u m - T o ta l

ber sala ry

N u m ­

ber

T o ta l

sa la ry

G ra des a n d rang es :

Spe ci al po si tion s a t ra te s eq ual to or 

in ex cess of $13,615:

C hi ef Ju st ic e____________________

A ssoc iate J u st ic e_________________

C le rk .......................................................

R e p o rte r_______________________

L ib ra ri an ________________________

M arsh a l_________________________

G ra de s es ta blish ed b y th e Sup re m e 

C ourt :

1 $35,5 00

8 280,000

1 19,157

1 16,53 6

1 16.0 78

1 $35,500

8 280,000

1 21,507

1 19,1 57

1 16,5 36

1 16,0 78

1 $21,507

$14,976 to $18,937: C hi ef D ep u ty 

C le rk .............................. ................... ..

$12,897 t o $16,286..................................

$10,978 t o $13,882..................................

$9,251 t o $11,715....................................

$8,459 t o $10,984....................................

$7,733 to $10,010....................................

$7,029 t o $9 ,108......................................

$6,374 t o $8 ,305......................................

$5,758 t o $7,491......................................

$5,159 to $6,743......................................

$4,636 t o $6,023......................................

$4,268 t o $5,390......................................

$3,982 t o $5,022......................................

$3,635 t o $4,675......................................

R at e Of $4,697........................................

R at e of $3,620........................................

3

3

15

4

98

5

13

2

30

15

111

25

4

1

44.658 

37.690 

160,451 

39.770 

217,922 

41.205 

94,598 

13,645 

181,293 

84,656 

55,349 

4.80 5 

108,784 

18,803 

3,640

1

3 

5

16

5

27

11

It

2

31

15

131

25

4 

1

17,4 72 

44, 658

1 17,472

63,295 2 25.605

170, 643 1 10.192

49,0 88 1 9,318

235,685 2 17,763

89,0 03 6 47, 798

101,628 

13,6 45

1 7,030

205,109 

84,6 56

4 23,816

65,7 49

4.805

2 10.4 00

108,784

18,8 03 

3,6 40

T o ta l perm anent 

D ed uct la pse s____________

N et p erm an en t (a ve rage nu m b er,

n et sala ry )................ ............................

Pos itio ns oth er th a n p erm an en t:

T em p o ra ry e m p lo y m en t____________

P art -t im e e m p lo y m en t______________

O th er pe rs on ne l co m pe nsa tion : R eg ul ar 

p ay a bo ve 6 2-w eek bas e_______________

T o ta l pe rs on ne l co m pen sa tion

169

5

164

1,474 , 540 

41,668

1,432, 872

5,0 00

76,128

4,0 00

190

5

1,5 18 ,000 ...............

1,665,441 

42,094

1,6 23, 347

6,0 00

78,5 10

4,7 43

1,7 12,60 0 . .............

190,901 

426

190,475

1,0 00

2,382

743

194,600

Salaries, Supreme Court, 1965

Req uest. . . . . . . _____________________________________________ $209,000

Included in budget___________________________________________ 1, 613, 000

Revised requ est for 1965______________________________________ 1, 822, 000

Additional amount requ ired___________________________________ 209, 000

« JU S T IF IC A T IO N

By reason of the enactment of Public Law 88-279 the expenses of the Clerk ’s 

Office, including salaries, must hereafter be met out of appropriated funds and 

the receipts of the Clerk’s Office will have to be covered into the U.S. Treasury. 

« Thus, while in the past no provision has been included in the Court’s appropriation for Clerk’s expenses, it will now be necessary th at sufficient funds be provided 

to meet all of the Clerks’ expenses.

Although not reflected in the appropriation acts, the United States will, in fact, 

recover the greater pa rt of these expenses through the fees paid to the Treasury 

Departm ent. The total amount collected by the Clerk’s Office in its most recent 

fiscal year, as reflected on the Clerk’s books as audited by Er ns t & Ern st, was 

$198,316.81. Over the past 10 years the trend of receipts has been generally up, 

so th at it can be an ticipate d th at receipts should exceed $200,000 this year and in 

the years to come.

Dealing specifically w ith the request for funds for salaries, the figure requested 

is based on the present personnel in the Clerk’s Office. Twenty-one full-time positions, one half-time employee and one tem porary employee. The num ber of 

personnel in the Clerk’s Office has not been increased in the past 3 years.
106

The r ate of compensation requested is based on the present salaries paid to such 

employees, as approved by the Court and the Chief Justice. These salaries are 

fixed on the same pay schedules as are followed with the rema inder of the Court's 

personnel. There have been no reclassifications or promotions in the Clerk’s 

Office for the past 2 years.

The only changes in the requests from the present salary schedule are made to 

reflect within-grade changes, required to keep our salaries in line with the classified civil service. No increased personnel and no promotions are included.

The following statement shows the details of the increase in the appropriation 

“ Salaries, Supreme Cou rt,” 1965 to include the Office of the Clerk:

O rigi na l e st im at e Rev ised est im at e In cr ea se

N u m ­

be r

of

po sition s

A ver ­

age

n u m ­

be r

em ­

pl oy ed

Cos t

N u m ­

be r

of

po sition s

A ve rage

n u m ­

be r

em ­

pl oy ed

Cos t

N u m ­

ber

of

po sition s

A ver ­

age

n u m ­

ber

em ­

ploy ed

Cos t

F ull-t im e em p lo y m en t..........

P art -t im e e m p lo y m en t.........

T em p o ra ry e m p lo y m en t. . .

169

20

164

20

$1,432,872

76,128

5,000

4,000

4,70 0

10,300 

77,769

2,231

190

20

185

20

$1,623,347

78,510

6,000

4,743

5,400

11,500 

90,269

2,231

21 21 $190,475 

2,382 

1,000

743

700

1,200

12,500

R eg ula r pay in*e xcess of 52- 

wee k b ase.__ ____________

E m p lo y er’s co ntr ib uti ons: 

Life in su ra nce _______

H ealt h be nef its _____

R eti re m en t fu n d _______

E m plo yee s’ co m pen sa ­

tion fu n d ____________

T o ta l esti m ate _____ 189 184 1,61 3,00 0 210 205 1,822,000 21 21 209,000

Miscellaneous Expenses, Supreme Court, 1965

For an additional amount for “Miscellaneous expenses, Supreme Court,” 

$36,000.

Program and finan cing

[I n th o u san d s of d ollars]

1965

(o rig inal

es tim at e)

1965

(re vised

es tim at e)

1965

(Inc re as e)

P ro gra m b y ac ti vit ie s: M is ce llan eo us ex pe ns es , Sup re m e 

C o u rt (o bligat io ns) ______ . _____ ________ _____ ___________ 87 123 36

F in an cin g: N ew o bl ig at io na l au th o rit y (a p p ro p ri ati o n )______ 87 123 36

Object classification

[In th o u sa n d s of doll ars ]

1965

(o rig inal

es ti m at e)

1965

(rev ised

es tim at e)

1965

(Inc re as e)

21 T ra vel a n d tr a n sp o rt ati o n o f p e r s o n s .. .. ........ . ....................... 1 3 2

22 T ra n sp o rt ati o n of t h in g s........ . ..................................................... 2 2

23 R en t, co m m unic at io n, an d u ti li ti es...................... ..................... 18 22 4

24 P ri n ti n g a n d re pro ducti on.................... ............. ............. 15 31 16 25 O th er se rv ic es _ 1 .......................... ...................................... 9 15 6

26 Supplies a n d m ate ri als ................................................................ 21 25 4

31 E q u ip m e n t........ . . ............. . ....................................... 21 25 4

T o ta l o b li g a ti o n s .. ........................ . ............................................ 87 123 36
107

Miscellaneous expenses, Supreme Court, 1965

Request_____ _____ __________________________________________ $36,000

Included in bud get____________________________________________ 87, 000

Revised request for 1965________________________________________ 123, 000

Additional amount r equired_____________________________________ 36, 000

JUSTIF ICATION

These additional funds are necessary in order to meet the miscellaneous expenses 

of the Clerk’s office, which heretofore have been met out of court fees. These 

requests are based on th e actual expenses which have been incurred in the Clerk’s 

office over the past 5 years, as reflected in the Clerk’s books as audited by Ern st & 

Ern st and approved by the Chief Justice. Generally speaking, the individual 

requests have been reached by taking an average of the expenses over the past 

years. However, in the case of rent, communications and utilities, the expenses 

recently have been increased because of added postal expenses. This recent 

increase has been taken into account in making the requests.

The largest item in these expenses is for printing and reproduction. The Clerk’s 

office incurs these expenses in large part to print and bind the Co urt’s journal, 

to engrave the certificates of admission, and to print briefs in in forma pauperis 

cases where counsel have been appointed. The item for travel also includes in 

forma pauperis costs incurred by the atto rneys appo inted in such cases. The 

item for other services includes not only the servicing and repair of office equipment, but also the cost of engrossing on certificates of admission the names of 

the admittee and his sponsor.

The following statement shows the details of the increases by object in the 

appropriation “Miscellaneous expenses, Supreme Court,” 1965 to include the 

office of the Clerk:

O bj ec t Origi na l

es ti m at e

R ev ised

es ti m at e

In cr ea se

21 T ra vel a n d tr an sp o rt ati o n of p er so ns______ _____ _______ _ $1,000

2,000

18,000

15,000

9,200

21,0 00

20,8 00

$2,600

2,000

22,4 00

31,0 00

15,200

25,000

24,800

$1,6 00

22 T ra n sp o rt ati o n o f th in g s___ _ _____ ____ ________________

23 R en t, co m m unic at io n an d u ti li tie s ............................................ 4,40 0

16,000

6,000

4,00 0

4,00 0

24 P ri n ti n g an d rep ro d u cti o n ............. ................. .............................

25 O th er s er vi ce s........................................ ............................ . .

26 Supp lie s an d m ate ri als ......................... ........... ...............................

31 E q u ip m en t.......................................... ........... ..................................

T o ta l................................................ . ....................................... 87,0 00 123,000 36,000

Mr. Rooney. Do you have a statement with regard to this, Mr. 

Davis?

Mr. Davis. Yes, sir. I am John F. Davis, Clerk of the Supreme 

Court.

Before T make any statement, I want to express our appreciation 

to the committee for taking the time and effort to take this up at this 

stage. We would not have asked the committee to do it if it had not 

been tha t the necessity for this is caused by the passage of Public 

Law 279, which changes the provisions for financing the Clerk’s 

Office, so that now we will be dependent upon-----

Mr. R ooney. You started that in motion yourself, did you not?

Mr. Davis. We started that ourselves.

Mr. Rooney. Then do not blame somebody else for it. Go ahead, 

please.

Mr. Davis. We will now be dependent upon appropriated funds 

rather than upon our fees. This bill became law only about 2 or 3 

weeks ago, so tha t we came to you as promptly as we could, but it 

had to come in as an amendment.

Mr. Rooney. We are here to hear you as promptly as we can.

Mr. Davis. I appreciate that. We appreciate it a great deal.
108

Mr. R ooney. Le t us get down to talk ing ab ou t this req ues ted 

approp ria tio n ra th er than these glittering generalities on the pa rt of 

bo th of us.

Mr. D avis. Th e two am ounts involved are an increase in salaries 

and an increase in miscellaneous expenses. Th e figure on salaries, 

which is $209,000, is based upon the pre sen t s alary scale in the Cl erk ’s 

Office of the Sup rem e C ou rt witho ut any add itions or any reclassification s. It has been adjus ted to show the increased am ount because 

of the increased salaries granted by Congress an d to reflect in-g rade 

raises. But those are the only adjus tm ents which have been made.

Th e Cl erk ’s figures on this , in case the Comm ittee wishes to go 

int o them, are in the form of our own accounts, which have been A

audited b y E rn st & Ern st ov er the years, and submi tte d and app roved 

by the Chie f Jus tice .

Th e figure with respec t to miscellaneous expenses, which is $36,000, 

is based wi tho ut any increase—let me amend th at , Mr. Ch air ma n— 1

it is alm ost entirely based upon the cost, average cost in the Cl erk’s 

Office ov er the past 5 years .

With respec t to the item 23 on “R ent, com munica tions, and 

utilitie s,” we hav e had our expenses on postage raised by the Po st 

Office. We hav e had to tak e tne last y ear as a basis ra th er than the 

ave rage of the oth er years. Tha t is the only one no t done on an 

average basis.

I would be glad to resp ond to any queries with resp ect to details.

IN C R E A SE IN SA LA RY CO ST S, 19 59 -6 4

Mr. R ooney. What hav e been the obligations for each of the last 

5 y ear s for salaries in the Cl erk’s Office of the Supreme Court ?

Mr. Davis. I would have to give it to you, sir, on the basis of— 

we hav e a fiscal yea r th at ends Sep tem ber 30. We do no t hav e the 

mo st rec ent year because it is not completed until Septe mb er 30 of 

this yea r.

Th e salaries for the year which ended Sep tem ber 30, 1963—I now 

give you salaries and agen cy con trib utions, et cetera —$193,798. Fo r 

the year ending Sep tem ber 30, 1962, the com parable figure was 

$193,175. Takin g our prese nt salary scale, the salar y expense for 

thi s year— this is an estim ate because the year is nor com pleted— 

would be about $200,000. I do no t hav e 1960 or 1961 here, although H

it is read ily available.

Mr. R ooney. All this does no t help much in try ing to get this 

picture.

Mr. Davis. I will be glad to respond to any inq uiries th at I can. »

Th e act ual salaries, of course, the positions, are set forth in our 

justification.

Mr. R ooney. If you will be so good as to take the past 5 fiscal 

years —forget ab ou t yo ur September 30 ending of the fiscal year— 

and ins ert at thi s point in the record a sta temen t of the obligations 

for the Clerk ’s Office for the pa st 5 y ears . Th ere is no reason why 

you cann ot do th at. Ma ke it up to and including Ju ne 30, 1963.

Mr. Davis. Yes, sir. Miss Zucconi has given me the figures 

thr ough 1963. There would have to be some ad justmen t for the 

2-m onth change, but it would not be ma ter ial. I will rou nd off the 

figures. 1958, $146,000.
109

Mr. R ooney. You are speaking now of regula r fiscal years as 

eve ryb ody un derst ands the m, Ju ly 1 to Ju ne 30?

Mr. DAViis. These figures, sir, are from our books, and the y are no t 

on th at b asis, bu t------

Mr. R ooney. Plea se pu t them on th at bas is and inse rt them at 

thi s po int in the record.

Mr. Davis. Yes; th at will take some comp uta tion.

Mr. R ooney. Yes, it ought to tak e all of ab ou t 15 minutes, should 

it not?

Mr. Davis. I do no t know how long it will take. It will tak e the 

accoun tants to do it. We will do it.

(The inform ation supplied follows:)

Schedrtle of sala ry expense,1 Clerk’s Office 1959-64 2

T 1959 I960 1961 1962 1963 1964 3

Salaries....... . ......... . ................ $160,055.92 $163,396. 52 $188,330.11 $198,093.94 $190, 574.84 $199,027.00

1

Includes amounts contributed toward retirem ent fund, life insurance, and health benefits.

3 These figures are for fiscal years ending Jun e 30. The audited records of the Clerk’s Office are maintained on the basis of fiscal years ending Septem ber 30. These figures are computed by adjusting the 

audited figures by a mounts shown on the books i n the Clerk's Office.

3

 Th e figures in this column are estim ated in par t since the 1964 year is not completed.

Mr. D avis. Mr. Chairma n, meanwhile these are no t far off. I 

would be glad to give them to you orally if you like.

Mr. R ooney. W ha t was 1958?

Mr. D avis. $146,000.

Mr. R ooney. Now it is u p to wh at? $209,000?

Mr. D avis. This year we figure $200,000. Fo r next year we are 

asking for $209,000.

Mr. R ooney. It is a p re tty subs tan tia l increase. Ha ve the regu lar 

Go vernm ent pay raise s in the inte rim applied to positions und er 

“S alaries in the Clerk ’s Office”?

Mr. Davis. They have, sir.

Mr. R ooney. Any reclassifications in the pa st 5 years?

Mr. D avis. There were some reclassifications back in 1959 or 1960. 

There have been none since 1961. In fact, our s alary figures—■—

Mr. R oon ey. 1961 fiscal year?

f Mr. D avis. I am talkin g of fiscal years. This will have to be

subje ct to checking with our books because our aud ited books are all 

on the Cl erk’s ye ar.

Mr. R ooney. W ha t was the figure for the oth er expenses in the

▼ Clerk ’s Offjce in fiscal year 1958?

M r/D kv ig . $24,000.

Mr. R ooney. Now you want $36,000?

Mr. Davis. Th at is right.*

Mr. R ooney. 33^ percen t increase?

Mr. D avis. Yes; bu t, Mr. Chairma n, our figures are not the same 

each year because some of our expenses depend on in forma pauperis 

cases. v

Mr. R ooney. I shou ld hav e said 50 per cent increase.

Mr. D avis. There were yea rs, for exam ple, 1961, miscellaneous 

expenses w ere up to $43,000. It is not a figure which is t he same each 

yea r. It depends upon the expenses of han dling some of these extra-
ord ina ry cases. 1960 was $37,000. The figure we are asking for, Mr. 

Ch airma n, is an average of wdiat it has been in the pa st five years. 

I am no t sure th at this is to our bes t advanta ge because the expenses 

are going up.

Mr. Rooney. Whose bes t adv antage ?

Mr. Davis. Excuse me, sir; I me ant I am not sure we could not 

justi fy a high er am ount if we took a different date. But this is a 

5-year average.

CO UR T RE V E N U ES

Mr. R ooney. What hav e been the receipts in the pa st 5 yea rs 

from fees?

Mr. Davis. Th e rece ipts have been for the pa st 5 ye ars —I am 

em barrassed again, I have to use mv aud ited figures.

Mr. Rooney. It would seem to me, with all the intellige nt people 

you have ove r there, you would know we do busin ess on U.S . gover nme nt fiscal yea rs and th at yo u would have thes e receipts, the salaries, 

and all othe r figures on the basis of Go vernm ent fiscal y ear s so we can 

make comparisons. We do no t wa nt to com pare a regular Go vernme nt fiscal y ear with your Ern st & Ern st ye ar.

Mr. Davis. There would be relatively small differences, Mr. 

Ch airma n, I will do the bes t I can to reconcile these. I had thou gh t 

the com mittee would wa nt to have audited and appro ved figures 

rather than unaudited figures. The se figures are the audit ed figures. 

I am sorry. I will tr y to give the a dju stm ents. I do no t think they 

will be ma terial. I cannot see why they should be.

The figures for reve nues for the last 5 fiscal yea rs end ing Ju ne 30 

are: 1959, $174,000; 1960, $192,000; 1961, $237,000; 1962, $160,000; 

and 1963, $199,000.

C O U R T F E E S

Mr. R ooney. So th at the legislatio n th at was practic all y forced 

upon you, from the impression you gave me at the ou tse t, has come 

about as the resu lt of the re duc tion in the amo unt of fees in the Cl erk’s 

Office; is th at a fair state me nt?

Mr. D avis. Well, it has come ab ou t from a com binatio n of the 

fees no t increasing—the fees hav e increased, bu t they hav e no t 

incre ased as fast as our expenses. It would hav e been nec essary for 

the Co urt, if th ey were to continu e on the past basis, to raise the fees, 

chan ge its rules to increase the fees.

Mr. R ooney. Would th at have been bad ?

Mr. D avis. The Co urt felt th at it was more desirab le to keep the 

fees at the pre sen t stage so th at the expenses to litigan ts would no t 

rise—it was basically on the the ory th at the Co urt should be open 

to rich and poor alike and th at if you raised the fees too mu ch, it 

would be unf air to those who could not afford it.

Mr. R ooney. As I under stand it, we are concerned with 21 positions 

here; is th at right?

Mr. D avis. Twenty-one full-time positions, Mr. Chairma n.

Mr. R ooney. Do you hav e a s tat em en t with reg ard to the am ounts 

of fees levie d by the Co urt in conn ectio n with cases before it?

Mr. Davis, t have no prepared sta temen t. I am pre pared to 

discuss the fees, of course.

Mr. R ooney. I am try ing to get for the reco rd at this point a 

sta temen t with regard to the amounts of fees.
I ll

Mr. Davis. The fees which have been received by the Court, have 

gradually increased during the past 10 years. They can be expected 

in the current fiscal year to reach $200,000. If the past trend continues, our fees in the future should grow from $200,000.

Mr. R ooney. I am referring to the amount of each fee, so much for 

this and so much for that.

Mr. D avis. The principal income from fees come from filing of 

cases to be reviewed by the Court. There is a fee of $100 for each case 

filed at the time it is filed with us. There is an additional fee of $50 

at the time the Court agrees to review the case.

The other source of material income is from admissions to practice 

in the Supreme Court. The fee for this is $25 per person. We have 

in the neighborhood of 2,500 attorneys who are admitted each year. 

This is not entire profit because there is material expense in providing 

certificates and things, b ut these are the major sources of the Cou rt’s 

income.

Mr. Rooney. Mr. Sikes?

IN C R E A SE R E Q U E ST E D FO R M IS C E LL A N E O U S E X PE N S E S

Mr. Sikes. Turning to miscellaneous expenses, you have listed a 

budget figure of $87,000. For what year?

Miss Zucconi. Fiscal 1965.

Mr. Sikes. Before we begin fiscal 1965, you are asking for an 

increase of $36,000; is t hat right?

Mr. Davis. Tha t is correct.

Mr. Sikes. Tha t is almost a 50-percent increase before we begin 

the fiscal year. Is tha t not an unusual procedure?

Mr. Davis. Yes, it is, sir.

Mr. Sikes. Is that all you have to say about it?

Mr. Davis. The reason for it, sir, is tha t when we put in our 

original estimate, we did not cover the expenses of the Clerk’s Office 

in any particular. The expenses of the Clerk’s Office were entirely 

taken care of by the fees. This is new. The entire expenses of the 

Clerk’s Office are for the first time included in our request.

Mr. Sikes. Then what you are saying is this is not an increase but 

a transfer from repayment by fees to direct appropriations.

Mr. D avis. Tha t is right.

Mr. Sikes. Is there any change in the scope of the Clerk’s Office for 

fiscal 1965 between the original estimate and the present estimate?

Mr. Davis. There is no change.

Mr. Sikes. No change. It all is simply a transfer from reimbursement by fees to direct appropriations?

Mr. Davis. Entirely so.

Mr. Sikes. All right.

Mr. Rooney. Mr. Bow?

COURT F E E SY ST EM

Mr. Bow. When were these fees you are now operating under 

established?

Mr. Davis. The admission fees were established 20 years ago, 

in 1943. Some of the other fees were adjusted about 10 years ago, 

in fact in 1950. Basically, they go back-----
112

Mr. Bo w. In oth er words , this hundred-dollar filing fee------

Mr. D avis. That goes back, I believe, to 1950.

Mr. Bo w. Th e admission fee of $25 is 20 year s old?

Mr. D avis. Yes.

Mr. Bow. Th e hundred dollars is about 12 yea rs old?

Mr. Davis. I think it is older than th at , sir. Th ere were some 

ad justm en ts made abo ut 12 years ago, bu t I think the hundred dollars 

goes back even furth er th an th at .

M r. Bow . How abou t the $50?

Mr. D avis. Tha t was the same time as the hundred dollars.

Mr. Bow. There h as been no actua l change in fees for 15 years?

Mr. D avis. About 15 years.

Mr. Bow . W ha t chan ges were made 10 yea rs ago?

Mr. Davis. At t ha t tim e we we nt on w hat we called a flat-fee basis. 

We used to hav e a sys tem where the re were ind ividual charges made 

lor ea ch paper filed. Th ey chan ged it to a flat-fee basis where they 

paid the hu ndred d ollars and the $50 add itional . Tha t was the last 

majo r change w ith res pect to the filing fee.

W ith resp ect to the admissions, the fee was raised from $15 to $25. 

I think th at was done 20 yea rs ago.

SALARY INC REA SES VERSUS COURT FEES

Mr. Bow. W ha t salar y increases have the re been since tho se fees 

were established? Take 10 yea rs. W hat percen tage increase has 

the re been? I am talkin g ab ou t increases, no t new people, ju st increases in salary.

Mr. Davis. Sir, the figures I can give you go back to 1953. These 

salarie s include contr ibu tio ns, the entire salar y cost. I do no t hav e 

the m broken down. In 1953, $96,900. Call it $97,000. In 1954, 

$99,000; 1955, $97,000.

Mr. Bow . Is this the sam e numb er of people, salary increases and 

in-gra de prom otions?

Mr. Davis. Mino r changes, places th at have no t been filled and 

we have added a lit tle to the s taff b ut basically it is the same num ber . 

I know we added a pa rt- tim e telephone operato r, and a stenogra pher.

Mr. Bow . When you get the record back , you ma y correct it.

Mr. Davis. Th is is no t based on increased personnel primarily— 

1956, $112,000; 1957, $130,000; 1958, $146,000; 1959, $157,000; 1960, 

$168,000; 1961, $193,000; 1962, $193,000; and 1963, $194,000.

Mr. Bow . W ha t was your sta rti ng figure th at you gave us?

Mr. Davis. $97,000.

Mr. Bow . W ha t is y our las t figure?

M r. Davis. The last figure I have here—again, if I give you the 

figure for this fiscal year, which is an estimate d figure, it will be 

$200,000.

Mr. Bow . The se are salaries?

Mr. D avis. These are salaries.

Mr. Bow. Tha t is appro xim ately a 50-p ercent increase.

Mr. D avis. A hundred per cent during th at period.

Mr. Bow . Du rin g th at period of time no increase in fees charged 

by the cou rt?

Mr. D avis. Tha t is r igh t. May I explain som ething?
113

Mr. Bow. You say something about this rich and poor. It has been 

a long time since I practiced over there. Is there not a right to file 

affidavits with a pauper’s oath to get a case filed?

Mr. Davis. Yes; a large part of our business is dealing with this 

kind of case.

Mr. Bow. So that the increase of fees would not deny the advantage 

of the court to the poor, would it?

Mr. Davis. It would not deny the advantages of the court to 

anyone who could take a pauper’s oath, but it would deny the advantage of the court to a low-salaried individual. I do not say it 

would deny it, Mr. Congressman. I mean it would impose a burden. 

As far as the indigents are concerned, we take care of them.

Mr. Bowr

. How many pauper’s oaths would you have filed per 

year?

Mr. Davis. About 1,500. Almost all the prisoners feel they should 

be out of prison. Every time they come to us, they file a pauper’s 

oath. Most of the people in jail seem to be poor.

Mr. Sikes. It has a tendency to impoverisn.

Mr. Bow. I believe tha t is all.

Mr. Rooney. Are there any further questions?

SA LA R IE S OF FE D E R A L CO URT CLER K S

Mr. Sikes. I note the Clerk’s salary is $21,500. How long has 

tha t been true?

Mr. Davis. It has been true for about 3 years.

Mr. Sikes. What is the comparable salary for a clerk in the district 

court in the D istrict of Columbia?

Mr. Davis. The clerk in the District of Columbia would get 

$18,500, I believe. It is about that.

Mr. Sikes. You may correct tha t for the record if it is necessary. 

That is all.

Mr. Rooney. The clerk of the district court has how many employees under him?

Mr. Davis. I do not know’.

Mr. Rooney. There is no comparison at all with the Supreme 

Court; you have 20 people.

Mr. Davis. We have 20. The clerks of the courts of appeals get 

$17,725. Although our office is bigger than any court of appeals, 

the work of our court is more comparable to the courts of appeals.

Mr. Rooney. How’ is this salary set?

Mr. Davis. It is set by the court.

Mr. Rooney. I w’onder if they are familiar with the salaries of chief 

clerks in other courts. For instance, the Customs Court, $18,512 

compared to this $21,507. The Court of Claims, $18,512. Clerk of 

the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, $17,742. As a matter of 

fact, the Director of the Administrative Office of all the courts has a 

salary of $20,000; is th at right?

Mr. Davis. I am informed it is.

Mr. Rooney. If there are no further questions, wre thank you, 

Mr. Davis.

Mr. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the time the 

committee has given us.

LIST OF WITNESSES

Page

Airhart, J. C.............. ............. .............................................. ............... ........... 28, 100

Anderson, D. H ________________________________________________ 28, 100

Black, Hon. II. L________________________________________________ 83

Campbell, W. J _________________________________________________ 28

Carey, E. J _______________________________________________ ____ • 8

Clark, Hon. T. C________________________ 83

Cowen, Wilson__________________________________________________ 16

Davis, J. F ________ ___________ ________ ________ ______________ 83, 103

Faircloth, E. H__________________________________________________ 103

Garabedian, E. V________________________________________________ 28

Henlock C. A______ ________ ___________________ _______ ________ 16, 83

Horn castle, V. M________________________________________________ 8

Hutchinson, G. E________________________________________________ 3

Jones, Hon. Marvin______________________________________________ 16

Lipp itt, T. P------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------83, 103

Martin, I. J _____________________________________________________ 3

McGuire, M. F_________________________________________________ 28, 100

Newman, Miss H elen ____________________________________________ 83

Olney, Warren__________________________________________________ 28

Peartree, F. T___________________________________________________ 16

Rao, P. P ______________________________ 8

Richardson, Scovel_______________________________________________ 8

Stewart, J. G___________________________ 16,83

Weinman, C. A_________________________________________________ 28

Worley, Hon. Eugene____________________________________________ 3

Zucconi, D. R____ _______ __________ _____ ________ __________ 83, 103

i (i)

IN D E X

P a o

Courts of appeals, district courts, and other judicial services___________ 28

Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts________________________ 63

Fees of jurors and commissioners, U.S. courts____________________ 43

Referees, expenses of_________________________________________ 76

Referees, salaries of__________________________________________ 70

Bankruptcies, number o f. _ _________ 75

Supplemental request, 1964_______________________________ 100

Salaries of judges____________________________________________ 30

Salaries of suppo rting person nel____ __________ 32

Travel and miscellaneous expenses, U.S. c ourts___________________ 46

Budget for 1965 compared w ith 1964_______________________________ 1

Court of Claim s_________________________________________________ 16

Repairs and improvements____________________________________ 25

Salaries and expenses_________________________________________ 16

Court of Customs and Pa tent Appeals______________________________ 3

Customs court__________________________________________________ 8

Increases reques ted______________________________________________ 1

Positions, additional reques ted____________________________________ 2

Supreme Court of the United States________________________________ 83

Automobile for the Chief Justice_______________________________ 92

Books for the Suprem e Co urt__________________________________ 94

Care of buildings and grounds_________________________________ 95

Miscellaneous expenses_______________________________________ 90

Supplemental req uest_____________________________________ 103

Printing and binding Supreme Cou rt rep orts_____________________ 88

Salaries____________________________________________________ 85

Supplemental req uest........... ...... 103

( i l l )

o