GOVERNMENT

Storage

I

,Ap k /_

-0

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

AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1964

(Z5LU

J ]

______o

r -

E""

<

EC

CD

3

- - LT)

3 *

□

3 — — o

00

X =

H E A R IN G S

BEFORE A

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

EIGH TY -EIG HT H CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENTS OF STATE, JUSTICE, AND COMMERCE, 

THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS 

JOHN J. ROONEY, New York, Chairman

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

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

NEAL SMITH, Iowa ELFORD A. CEDERBERG, Michigan

J ay B. Howe, Sta ff A ss is ta n t to th e Su bc om m itte e

THE JUD ICIARY

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

DEPARTMENTS OF STATE, JUSTICE, AND COM

MERCE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED

AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1964

H E A R I N G S

BEFORE A

SUBC OMM ITTE E OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON AP PROP RIAT IONS 

HOUSE OF RE PR ES EN TA TIVE S

EIGH TY -EIGHT H CONGEESS

FI RST SESSION

SU BC OM MITTE E ON DEP ART M EN TS OF ST AT E, JU ST IC E, AND COM MERCE, 

TH E JU DIC IA RY, AND RE LA TE D AG EN CI ES APP ROPR IA TIO NS 

JOHN J. ROONEY, New York, Chairma n

RO BE RT L. F. SI K ES , F lo ri da FR ANK T. BOW , Ohio

JO HN M. SLAC K, J r., W es t V irgi ni a GL EN AR D P. LIPS CO MB, C al if or ni a

NE AL SM IT H, Io w a ELF ORD A. CE DE RB ER G, M ichiga n

J ay B. H ow e, S ta ff A s s is ta n t to th e S u b c o m m it te e

THE JUDICIARY

Printe d for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

98777

U.S . GO VE RN MEN T PR IN TIN G O FFIC E 

WAS HI NG TO N : 1963
COMMITTEE ON APPROP RIATIONS

CLA R E N CE CA NNON, Missouri, Chairman

GE ORG E H. MAH ON , Texas 

H AR R Y R. SH EPP ARD, California 

A L B E R T TH OM AS , Texas 

M IC H AEL J. KI RW AN , Ohio 

JA MIE L. W H IT TE N , Mississippi 

GE ORG E W. AN DREW S, Alabama 

JOH N J. ROONEY, New York 

J. VAU GH AN G AR Y, Virginia 

JOH N E. FO G A R TY, Rhode Island 

RO BERT L. F. SI KE S, Florida 

OTT O E. PA SS M AN , Louisiana 

JOE L. EV IN S, Tennessee 

JOH N F. SH E LLE Y, California 

EDW AR D P. BO LA ND, Massachusetts 

W IL LI AM II. 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 STEED , Oklahoma 

JO SE PH M. M ON TO YA, New Mexico 

GEORGE E. SH IP LEY, Illinois 

JOHN M . SLA CK , Jr., West Virginia 

JOHN LE SI N SK I, Michigan 

JOHN J. F L Y N T , Jr., Georgia 

N E A L SM IT H, Iowa

R O B E R T N. GI AI MO, Connecticut 

JU LI A B U T LE R HAN SE N, Washington 

ED W A R D R. FIN N EGAN , Illinois 

CH A R LES 8. JO EL SO N, New Jersey 

JO SE PH P. AD DABBO , New York

BE N F. JE NSE N, Iowa

W ALT HOR AN , Washington

G ER A LD R. FO RD, Jr.. Michigan

HAR OLD C. O STER TAG , New York

FR A N K T. BOW, Ohio

CH A RLE S R A P E R JONAS, North Carolina

M ELVIN R. LA IR D , Wisconsin

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

G LEN A R D P. LI PS COM B, California

JOH N J. RH OD ES , Arizona

JOH N R. PI LL IO N, New York

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

RO BERT II. M IC H EL, Illinois

SILV IO O. CO N TE, Massachusetts

W IL LI AM II. M IL LIK EN , Jr., Pennsylvania

EA R L WILSO N, Indiana

OD IN LA N G EN , Minnesota

W IL LI AM H E N R Y nAR R IS O N , Wyoming

BE N R E IF E L, South Dakota

LO UIS C. W YM A N , New Hampshire

K enneth Spra nk le, Clerk an d S ta ff Direc tor
DE PA RT MEN TS OF ST AT E, JU ST IC E, AND COM MER CE, 

TH E JU DIC IA RY . AND RE LA TE D AG EN CIE S A PPRO ­

PR IA TI ONS FO R 1964

Monday, J anuary 28, 1963.

Mr. Rooney. The committee will now please come to order.

Gentlemen, I understand that Mr. Bow is on his way here by air 

from Ohio, and that Mr. Sikes will be here later in the day.

CO M M IT TEE R U L E S

We shall proceed with this first meeting of this subcommittee in 

the new 88th Congress, and the first m atter for your consideration is 

adoption of the rules of the subcommittee. I have handed each 

member a copy of these rules and they are the same as the rules that 

have been in existence for this subcommittee during all of the 18 

years I have been a member of it. There is not any change whatever.

It might be well if you read these rules so—particularly the new 

members—you will understand exactly how we proceed. I shall 

endeavor to accommodate every member as far as I can with regard to 

the times of meeting, whether we will work until 12:30 one day or 

quit at 12 promptly another day or come back at 1:30 rather than 2 

o’clock in the afternoon.

Generally speaking the hours are from 10 to 12 and 2 to 4. Of 

course, the questioning begins with the chairman and the members on 

the majority side and then goes to the minority side with the privilege 

of the chairman to intervene at any point.

Is there objection to the adoption of the rules of the last Congress 

which are contained in the sheet handed each member as the rules for 

the 88th Congress?

Mr. Cederberg. I move their adoption.

Mr. Rooney. Very well. Without objection, the rules are adopted 

and now a comment or two on the summary amount requested of the 

committee.

Summary of Appropriation Requests

You will find a summary of the bill at page II, which indicates that 

the requested amount in the budget estimates submitted by the 

Bureau of the Budget for the coming fiscal year is $2,239,050,900. 

This, of course, is exclusive of the funds which must be supplied for 

the Bureau of Public Roads which comes to the neighborhood of 

another $3 billion.

THE JUDICIARY

The first part of the bill to which we shall direct our attention is 

that entitled the “Judiciary.” The total request for the Federal 

judiciary for fiscal year 1964 is in the amount $67,140,900. This is 

an increase of $5,570,200 over the amounts appropriated to date in

(1 )
the curre nt fiscal year and is an increase of $4,188,200 when the pro ­

posed pay ac t su pp le m en ta l are included.

SU MM AR Y OF A PPR O PR IA T IO N S AN D ESTIM A TES, 1963-6 4

We shall ins ert a t this p oin t pages I, II , and I II of the ju stification s. 

(Th e page s follow:)

T h e J udic ia ry

Comparative sum mary of appropriations and appropriation estimates

C o u rt o r service

1963

ad ju st ed 1

1964

es tim at e

In cr ea se (+ ) 

or d ec reas e 

( - ) 1964 

co m pa re d 

w it h 1963

A nnual a ppro pri ati ons (g en er al a c co u n t) :

Sup re m e C o u rt...... ......... ............. .................................. ................. $2,065,376 $2,212,000 +$ 146,6 24

C o u rt of C ust om s an d P a te n t A p p e a ls ............ ............. ......... 370,000 390, (MM) +20 ,000

C ust om s C o u rt_________________________________________ 942,000 989,000 +4 7, 00 0

C o u rt of C la im s___ ____ _______ _____________ _____ - 1,054,500 1,123, 500 +6 9,00 0

C ourt s of ap pea ls , d is tr ic t co ur ts , an d oth er ju di ci al 

se rv ic es ...... ........... ....................................................................... -- 50,966,000 54, 370, 400 +3 ,4 04 ,4 00

T ota l, an n u al ap pro pri at io ns (g en eral a c co u n t) ________ 55,3 97,8 76 

7,555,000

59,084,900 +3, 68 7, 02 4

A ppro pri at io ns (spe cial a c c o u n t) .. ..................... ......... ..................... 8,0 56, 000 +5 01 ,00 0

G ra nd to ta l.... ................................................................... ............. 62,9 52,8 76 67,140 ,900 +4, 18 8,02 4

* In cl ude s pr op os ed s u p p le m e n ta l for pay in cr ea se s.

Summ ary of positions

1962

actu al

1963

es ti m at e

1964

es tim at e

T o ta l n u m b er of p erm an en t po si tion s_______ ____ ___________ 5,551 5,701 5,711

F ull-t im e eq u iv ale n t of oth er p o s it io n s ____ _____ ___________ 203 204 204

A ve ra ge n u m b e r of a ll e m p lo y e e s __ ________________________ 5,374 5,80 9 5,833

N u m b er of e m pl oy ee s a t end of y ear.................................. ............... 5,691 5,871 5,895

Comparative sum mary of obligations by object

[I n th ousa nds of dollars]

Per so na l se rv ices a n d be ne fit s:

11 Per so nn el c om pe ns at io n:

P erm a n en t po si tion s____________________________

Pos itio ns oth er th a n p erm an en t...................................

O th er pe rs on ne l co m pen sa tion__________________

T o ta l pe rs on ne l c om pen sa ti on_________________

12 Per so nne l be nef its__________________________________

13 B en ef its for fo rm er pe rs on ne l............ ......... ..........................

T o ta l pe rs on al s ervice s an d ben efits _______________

C o n tr actu al se rv ices a nd s up pl ie s:

21 T ra v el an d tr an sp o rt ati o n o f p er so ns ________________

22 T ra n sp o rt ati o n o f th in g s____________________________

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

24 P rin ti n g a nd re pro duct io n__________________________

25 O th er se rv ic es ................. .............................................. ............

26 S upp lies a nd m a te ri als .. _____ ___________ __________

T o ta l, c ontr actu al se rv ices a n d s u p p li es___________

A cq uis itio n o f c apit al a ssets: 31 E q u ip m e n t............................... .

G ra nts an d fixed ch arge s: 42 In su ra nce cl aim s an d in dem ­

nit ie s____ _____________ ____ _________ ___________________

T o ta l ob liga tion s.

1962 ac tu al 1963 esti m at e 1964 es ti m at e

$41,941 

4,620 

124

$46,145 

4,902 

335

$49,968 

4,937 

649

46,6 85

2,764 

31

51,3 82

3,073

25

55,554

3,35 6

25

49,4 80 54,480 58,935

3,40 3

73

1,136 

563 

342 

432

3,796

55

1,411

580

418

394

3,79 6

55

1,486

635

538

459

5,94 9 

2,458

1

6,654

1,51 9

6,969 

1,237

57,888 62,653 67,141
3

Mr. Rooney. You will note tha t at page II it is indicated tha t 

they are requesting 5,711 permanent positions in 1964 fiscal year, 

which would be an increase of but 10 positions over the number they 

have authorized in the current fiscal year.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITE D STATES

W IT N ESSE S

HON. TO M CLA RK, A SSO C IA TE JU S T IC E

HON. A R T H U R J. G O LD B ER G , A SSO C IA TE JU S T IC E

JO H N F. DAV IS, C LER K

T. P E R R Y L IP P IT T , M A R SH A L

M A R IO E. C A M PIO L I, A SSIS T A N T A R C H IT E C T O F T H E

C A PIT O L

W A LTER L. R U B EL, C O O R D IN A T IN G E N G IN E E R 

CHA RLES A. H EN LO C K , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E A SSIS T A N T

Mr. Rooney. The first Court to which we shall direct our attention 

is the Supreme Court of the United States. This item appears at 

page 322 of the committee p rint and beginning at page 1 of the justifications.

The total request for the Supreme Court of the United States is 

in the amount $2,212,000, which would be an increase of $165,800 

over the amounts appropriated to date in the current fiscal year. Is 

tha t correct?

Mr. Justice Clark. Yes, sir.

Mr. Rooney. We are pleased and honored to have with us the distinguished Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, the Honorable 

Tom Clark and the distinguished Associate Justice of the Supreme 

Court, the Honorable Arthur Goldberg.

Will you please proceed, Mr. Justice Clark?

General Statement

Mr. Justice Clark. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, it is good to be 

here again. I am sorry that Justice Black is not with us today but he 

asked me to give you his highest regards and say tha t he is sorry to 

have broken his 18-year-old record. He has a good substitute.

Mr. Rooney. I think he was coming here before I became a member of the committee 18 years ago. I am sure he was.

Mr. Justice Clark. Is tha t so?

Mr. Rooney. I think so.

Mr. Justice Clark. So I have brought with me Justice Arthur 

Goldberg.

These gentlemen are always very kind and considerate of us, with 

the exception of one or two infinitesimal items. We never have any 

controversy of any kind. They are most kind.

We appear here and the chairman reads off the appropriation items 

and most of the time we are back writing dissents and opinions, or 

something, very quickly.

I know that you will enjoy the work incident to the budget much 

more than you did with the Labor Department.

Mr. Justice Goldberg. I am sure I will.
4

Mr. Justice Clark. Our appropriation request, as you indicated, 

is the same as last year with the exception of the salary raises. Then 

we do have one item of a car. As you remember, the committee 

bought us a car in 1957, a Chrysler, and it will be 6 years old this 

August.

The one item of $4,000 is for that and then the other item tha t I 

suppose 1 might mention is the printing of our opinions by the 

Government Printing Office. That item will be the same as this year 

when you add on the supplemental request. We have had on the 

average, as I check into it, about three volumes of reports a year. 

One year, or perhaps 2 years ago, I think it was in 1960 term, we had 

four volumes. We estimate that our work next year will be about the 

same as it is this year. So we have put the appropriation request for 

this item in the same amount.

The others are just continuations of the same old practice. There 

is a continuance of our rehabilitation of the chairs since the furniture 

at the Court has not been reupholstered since 1935. We started doing 

some of that work a couple of years ago and this is just the completion 

of it.

The other item is providing a continuance of the lighting program 

in the library. This will end or complete t hat program and tha t is 

under the Architect, I believe.

Mr. Chairman, I believe th at is about the sum and substance of it.

Arthur, would you like to say a word?

Mr. Justice Goldberg. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I cannot really add to what my distinguished colleague, Justice 

Clark, has had to say except to express my pleasure at being here and 

my regret that Justice Black is not here. I am a very inadequate 

substitute for him.

I can make one general observation which has been called to mind. 

After presenting to a Subcommittee on Appropriations the budget of 

the Department of Labor, this budget is of a different character and of 

a different amount. However, I merely support what Justice Clark 

has said and again express my extreme pleasure at being here.

Mr. Rooney. Thank you, Mr. Justice Goldberg.

Salaries

Program and financing

[In thou sands of dollars]

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

Prog ram by activities: Salaies, Supreme Court (obligations ). 

Financing: Unob ligated balance lapsing__________________ 1,435

44

1,513 1,588

New obligatio nal auth ority ____________

New obligational autho rity :

App ropriation.................................................

Proposed sup plemental due to pay increases.

1,479 1,513

1,479 1,494

.......... 19

1,588

1,588
5

Object classification

[In tho us an ds of do llars]

1962 actua l 1963 estim ate 1964 estim ate

11 Perso nnel co mpe nsation:

Pe rm an en t position s.................... ................... .............. . 1,280

74

1,347

80

1,404

80

8

Positions o ther t ha n pe rm an en t____ _________ ____ _

Othe r p ersonn el co mpe nsation............. ............................

To tal p ers onnel c om pen sa tion................................ . 1,354

81

1,427

86

1,492

12 Personne l benefit s........................................................................ 96

To tal o bli gati ons. .______________ __________________ 1,435 1,513 1,588

Personnel summary

-•

♦

1962 ac tual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

To tal n um be r of perm an en t position s............................................. 168 168 168

Fu ll-tim e e qu iv al en t of oth er positio ns_____ _______________ 18 20 20

Average nu m be r o f all em plo yees__________________________ 178 182 183

Num be r of employ ees at en d of y ea r_______________________ 198 204 205

Mr. Rooney. The first of the six items which make up the appropriation total for the Supreme Court of the United States is for 

salaries. It appears at page 322 of the committee print.

We shall at this point, in connection therewith, insert pages 2 

through 9 of the justifications.

(The pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Salaries, Supre me C ou rt of the Un ite d States: Jud icia ry

1963 ap prop ria tio n in an nu al a ct................................ . ......................................... ............................. $1,494,000

1963 proposed s up plem en tal due to pa y i nc rea se___ __________________________________ 19,000

Base for 1964.......................................................................................................................................... 1,513,000

Net difference, 1964 over 1963:

Re qu ire men ts

Difference 

(+ ) or ( - )

1963

ad juste d

1964

est im ate

Sala ries, Su prem e C ourt ................................................ $1,513,000 $1,588,000 4-$75,000

To tal estim ate for 1 964....__________ ________________________________ ____ ________ $1,588,000

S u pr e m e C o u r t Sa la r ie s

Statem ent showing analysis by object

Object

1963

estim ate

1964

es tim ate

Increa se (+ ) 

or

decrease (—)

11 Personnel com pe ns ation...... ....................................... . ............ $1,427,000 

86,000

$1,492,229 

95.771

+$65,229 

12 Personne l be ne fit s___ ________. ________ ______________ +9, 771

Tot al ___________________________ _____ ____________ 1,513,000 1,588,000 +75,000
6

S u pr e m e C our t Sa la rie s

Summ ary of increased requirements for 1964

Nature of expense (or salvings): Am oun t

1. Pay increase, Public Law 87-793 (compensation $57,000 and

benefits $4,000)_______________________________________ $61, 000

2. 2 extra compensable days in fiscal year 1964________________ 8, 229

3. Paymen t due the employees’ compensation fund -------------------- 5, 771

Increase, 1964 over 1963_______________________________ 75, 000

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

Language changes

None.

Objectives

The appropriation here requested is to provide t he necessary moneys to pay the 

salaries of the members of the Supreme Court of the United State s, the officers of 

the Court, their respective staffs, and the Court’s custodial employees.

General justification

The following statement reflects the casework of the Court for the past three 

terms:

Statement showing the number of cases filed, disposed of, and remaining on dockets at

conclusion of October terms 1959, 1960, and 1961

(O ctob er te rr a 1961 e nded Ju n e 25, 1962—co rr es po nd s to fiscal y ear 1962]

Origi na l A ppe llat e M is ce llan eo us T ota l

1959 1960 1961 1959 1960 1961 1959 1960 1961 1959 1960 1961

N u m b er of cases on 

do ck ets _________ ______ 12 12 13 1,047 1,046 1,062 1,119 1,255 1,510 2,178 2,313 2,585

N u m b er di sp ose d of d u rin g te rm s____ _________ 0 1 0 860 887 860 962 1,040 1,297 1,822 1,928 2,157

N u m b er re m ai nin g 

on dock ets ______ 12 11 13 187 159 202 157 215 213 356 385 428

T erm s

1959 1960 1961

D is tr ib u ti o n o f ca ses di sp os ed of d u ri n g ter m s:

O rigi na l ca ses_____ ______________________ ____ _________ . 0 1 0

A ppel la te case s o n m e ri ts _______________________ _______ 215 259 195

P eti ti o n s for ce rtio ra ri _____ _________ _____ _________ 645 628 665

M is ce llan eo us d ock et a ppli ca ti ons......... 962 1,040

11

1,297

13

D is tr ib u ti o n of ca ses rem ai nin g on do ck et s:

O rigi na l ca ses____________ ______ . ___________________ 12

A ppel la te ca ses on m e ri ts ........................ ...................................... 116 85 118

P eti ti o n s for ce rt io ra ri ____________ _________________ ____ 71 74 85

M is ce llan eo us d ock et appli ca ti ons............. ................................ 157 215 213

An appropriation of $1,588,000 is requested for salaries of the Supreme Court 

staff for 1964. This represents an increase of $75,000 over the 1963 estimate for 

this item.
Detailed j ustification

A ct ual 1962 E sti m ate 1963 E sti m ate 1964

N u m ­

be r

of

po sition s

A ve rage

n um ber

em ­

ploy ed

C ost

N u m ­

be r

of

po sitions

A ver ­

age

n u m b er

em ­

pl oy ed

C os t

N u m ­

ber

of

po sition s

A ver ­

age

num ber

em ­

plo ye d

C ost

Full-t im e em p lo y m e n t. . 

P art -t im e em p lo y m e n t. . 

T e m p o r a r y e m p lo y ­

m e n t________________

168

20

160

18

$1,2 80,1 59

68,2 16

5,443

168

20

162

20

$1,3 47,0 89 

74,911

5,000

168

20

163

20

1,40 4,08 9 

74,911

5,00 0

8,229

4,500

10,500

75,000

5,771

R eg ul ar p ay In ex cess of 

52-week bas e............ .

E m p lo y er’s co n tr ib u ­

tio ns -

Life in su ra n ce_____ 4,056 

9.71 4 

67,2 74

4,500

10,500

71,000

H ea lt h ben efits ____

R eti re m ent fu n d ___

E m p lo y e e s ’ c o m ­

pe nsa tion fu n d ___

T o ta l....... ................. 188 178 1,434,862 

44,138

188 182 1,513,000 188 183 1,588,000

Sav in gs________________

T o ta l, ap p ro p ri ­

ati o n or es ti ­

m ate ............ ......... 1,479,000 1,513,000 1,58 8,00 0

Pay increase, Public Law 87-793

The sum of $61,000 is required to cover t he increase in salaries provided for by 

the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962, Public Law 87-793, approved October 11, 

1962. The estimate includes $57,000 to cover increases in compensation and 

$4,000 for rela ted benefits—agency contributions to the civil service retireme nt 

fund.

For fiscal year 1963, th e increased cost for salaries was determined by applying 

the new rate s effective October 14, 1962, to the present complement of employees. 

The total increase for salaries is $58,500 which represents a full fiscal y ear’s cost, 

less $16,900 due to lower pay scales for part of year, resulting in a net increase of 

$41,600 of which $22,600 can be absorbed. The proposed supplemental for fiscal 

year 1963 is $19,000.

For fiscal year 1964, the increased cost for salaries as a result of th e p ay increase 

effective October 14, 1962, is $39,500, the additional cost for the balance of the 

fiscal year as a result of the pay increase effective Jan uary 5, 1964, is $19,900. 

The total increase for compensation is therefore $59,400 of which $2,400 can be 

absorbed. A ne t increase of $57,000 for compensation is requeste d for fiscal year 

1964.

Two extra compensable days in fiscal year 1964

An amount of $8,229 will be needed to pay for the 2 additional compensable 

days above the number of days in fiscal year 1963.

Payment due the employees’ compensation fun d

- The sum of $5,771 is required to reimburse the Bureau of Employees’ Compensation in accordance with section 209 of Public Law 86-767, approved September 13, 1960. This amount was paid as follows: $523 for medical expenses 

and $5,248 for nonfatal compensation. This compensation was paid to our 

cabinetmaker for the partial amputatio n of several fingers which occurred while

« he was operating a woodwork shaping machine in our carp enter shop.

Mr. Rooney. The salary request is in the amount of $1,588,000, 

which would be an increase of $94,000 over the amount appropriated 

to date in the current fiscal year.

At page 4 of the justifications will be found the requested increases, 

and a t tha t page are set forth three items which make up the amount 

of $75,000 which is for pav increases, 2 extra compensable days in 

the coming fiscal year, and payment due to the Employees Compen-
8

sation Fund. This amount, plus $19,000 for the same purpose in 

the current fiscal year, would bring the total to $94,000, as shown a t 

page 321 of the committee print.

P rin ti ng an d B in d in g of Su pr em e C ourt R ep ort s

Program and financing

[In th ousa nds of do lla rs]

1962 a ctu al 1963 esti m at e 1964 est im at e

P ro gra m b y ac tivitie s: P rin ti n g an d bin din g Sup re m e C ourt 

re port s (o bl ig atio ns ) (o bj ec t cla ss 24) ______________________ 102

3

108 141 F in an cin g: U no bl ig at ed ba la nc e la psi ng......... ................................

N ew ob liga tion au th o ri ty (a p p ro p ri ati o n )_____________ 105 108 141

Mr. R ooney . The next of the items to which we shall direct your 

attention is entitled “Printing and Binding of Supreme Court Reports.” This appears at page 324 of the committee print. We shall 

insert, at this point, pages 10 through 14 of the justifications.

(The pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

P rin ti n g a nd bin din g Sup re m e C o u rt r ep ort s: Ju di ciar y

1963 ap pro pri ati on in an n u al a c t_____ _________________________ ________________________ _ $108,000

Bas e for 19 64 ......................................... ................................................................................. ..................... .. 108,000

N et di ffer en ce , 1964 o ver 1963:

R eq uir em en ts

Diff ere nc e 

1963 appro ­ (+ ) or ( - )

pri ate d

1964 est im ate

P ri n ti n g a nd b in din g Sup re m e C o u rt r ep o rt s............. $108,000 $141,000 +$ 33 , (100

T o ta l es ti m at e for 1964............................................................................................................................... 141,000

Statement showing analy sis by objects

O bj ec t 1963 est im at e 1964 es tim at e

In cr ea se (+ )

or

de crea se (—)

24 P ri n ti n g a nd re pro ducti on...................... ................................... $108.000 $141,000 +$ 33 ,000

T o ta l.................................................................................................. 108,000 141,000 +3 3, 00 0
9

Summary of increased requirements for 1964

Na ture of expense (or savings):

1. For increase in both cost and volume of the p rinting and reproduction of slip opinions, p reliminary parts, and bound volumes Amount

of Supreme Court Re ports______________________________$33, 000

Tota l incre ase_______________________________________ 33, 000

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

Language changes

None.

Detailed justification

An appropriation of $141,000 is requested for printing and binding Supreme 

Court Reports in fiscal year 1964. This amoun t is the same as the estimate for 

fiscal year 1963. This work is required by st atute and is perform ed by the Govern- 

-4 ment Printin g Office at rates fixed by th at agency. The actu al expenditures

during the past 3 years has been as follows:

1960 1961 1962

F or sl ip o pin io ns. . ___________________________________ $53,531 

31,5 90

$60,231 

29,7 69

$G3,538 

F or pre li m in ar y p ri n ts an d bo u n d vo lu m es _____ ____________ 38,783

T o ta l______ ___________ _______________________________ 85,121 90,0 00 102,321

The cost of prin ting and binding Supreme Court Reports depends upon the 

volume of material to be prin ted and bound and the rate s being charged by the 

Government Printin g Office a t the time the work is done. It is estim ated th at 

the printing of slip opinions for fiscal year 1964 will cost $69,000. The remainder 

$72,000 will be used to p rin t preliminary parts and the bound volumes of the U.S. 

Reports. If a supplemental appropriation of $33,000 for 1963 is granted , there 

will be no increase in appropriation s between 1963 an d 1964.

Mr. Rooney. The request is in the amount of $141,000 which would 

be an increase of $33,000 over the current fiscal year appropriation.

What is the purpose of this increase?

Mr. Justice Clark. There would not be any increase when you 

add in the supplemental. That has not been approved yet.

Mr. Rooney. What is the amount of the proposed supplemental?

Mr. Justice Clark. $33,000, the same as this increase. It is just 

a continuation of the same amount we have estimated for this present 

fiscal year. There is no increase.

Mr. Rooney. We may find reference to this at page 12 of the 

justifications.

At this point, are there any questions, gentlemen?

Miscellaneous Expenses

Program and fina ncing

[In th ousa nds of do lla rs]

1962 ac tu al 1963 est im ate 1964 es ti m at e

P ro gra m b y ac tivitie s: M is ce llan eo us ex pe ns es , Supr em e 

C o u rt (o bli gat io ns) ............................................................................... 83 79 87

Fin an cin g: N ew o bligat io nal a u th o rit y (a p p ro p ri ati o n )............. 83 79 87
10

Object classification

[In thous ands of dollars]

21 Travel and transportation of persons.

22 Tra nsp orta tion of thing s__________

23 Rents, communications, and utilities.

24 Pri nting and rep roduction___ _____

25 Other services___________________

26 Supplies an d mater ials.......................

31 Eq uip ment..... ......... ................ .........

Total obligations_______________

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

1 1

2 2 2

16 15 15

14 15 15

8 6 9

22 19 20

21 21 25

83 79 87

Mr. R ooney. Tf not, the next item is entitled “M iscellaneous expenses.” It app ears at page 326 of the com mittee print.

Th e req uest is in the am ou nt of $87,000, and the justifi cation s in 

regard the ret o begin at page 15.

We shall insert th at page, tog eth er with pages 16 throu gh 19 of 

these justifications, at this po int in the record.

(Th e page s follow:)

Statem ent relating appropriatio n estimate to current appropriation

Miscellaneous expenses, Supreme Court of the United States: Judiciary 1963 appropriation in an nual act ................................................................................................. $79,000

Base for 1964.................................................................. . ............................................................ 79,000

Net difference, 1964 over 1963:

Requirem ents

Difference 

1963 appro­ (+ ) or ( -)

priated

1964 estimate

Miscellaneous expenses, Supreme Court................ $79,000 $87,000 +$8,000

Tota l estim ate for 1964___ ___________________________________________________ 87,000

Statem ent showing a naly sis by object

Object

1963

estim ate

1964

estim ate

Increase (+ ) 

or

decrease ( —)

21 Travel and transportation of persons_______ __________

22 Transportation of things....... ... ......... ......... .............. .......... $1,000

2,000

15.000

15,000

6,200

19,000

20,800

$1,000

2,000

15,000

15,000

9,200

20,000

24,800

23 Rent, communication, and utilitie s______ ____________

24 Printin g an d reproduction___ __________________ ____

25 Other services____ _________________ ______ _ . . . . +$3,000

+1,000

+4,000

26 Supplies and materials............................... .. .

31 Eq uip ment..... ..................... ................ . ........

To tal........................... ........................... 79,000 87,000 +8,000

Sum ma ry of increased requirements for 1964

Nature of expense (or savings): Am oun 1. Increase for reupholstery of fu rniture_______________________ $3, 000

2. Increase in cost of supplies and materials____________________ 1, 000

3. For purchase or hire of a passenger-carrying autom obile for

replacement of 1957 C hrysler____________________________ 4, 000

Increase, 1964 over 1963______________________________ 8, 000
11

JUST IFICATION

Language changes

To the present language: “For miscellaneous expenses, to be expended as the 

Chief Justice may approve,” the following language is added: “$87,000, including 

purchase not to exceed $5,000 (for replacement only) and hire of one passenger 

motor vehicle.”

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 transp ortation 

for the Court and its officers), comm unication services, and penalty mail. 

Printing 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 1964 to supply the Court’s needs 

for supplies and equipment, and for other miscellaneous expenses. The amount 

requested is $8,000 in excess of last year’s appropriation.

Increase for reupholstery of furniture

An additional $3,000 p er annum is requested to repair the leather chairs and 

couches in the building. The $2,000 previously authorized has not been sufficient 

to keep this necessary repair work current.

Increase in cost of supplies and materials

An additional sum of $1,000 is needed for supplies and materials to offset the 

increased cost of same.

For purchase or hire of a passenger carrying automobile for replacement of 1957

Chrysler

The amount of $4,000 is requested for the purpose of replacing the present 

passenger carrying automobile which will be 6 years old in August 1963. According to the General Services Administration stand ards for replacement of passenger 

carrying automobiles, they are to be replaced at the end of 6 years or when they 

have been 50,000 miles, whichever comes first.

Mr. Rooney. Page 17 contains reference to the requested increase 

of $8,000 over the amount appropriated for miscellaneous expenses 

in the current fiscal year; to wit, $79,000.

You will note proposed new language at page 326 of the committee 

print, including the purchase of one passenger motor vehicle, not to 

exceed $5,000 for replacement only and the hire of passenger motor 

vehicles, $87,000.

However, as I understand it, the increase in connection with the 

automobile for the Court is for the replacement of a 1957 Chrysler, 

which has now many miles on it? I believe you made reference to that.

Mr. L ippitt. 26,000 miles.

Mr. Rooney. Are there further questions?

Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, is this the only automobile the Court 

has?

Mr. Justice Clark. Other than a truck; yes. The Chief Justice 

has a car but this car is for the other Justices.

Mr. Smith. I see so many Cadillacs around Washington I could 

not believe there is only one in any Department.

Mr. Justice Clark. We only have one. We have a truck tha t we 

use to carry supplies around and other materials.

Mr. Rooney. I think you will find tha t the Supreme Court fiscal 

management is fairly conservative in every regard.

Mr. Justice Clark. I am glad to hear you say th at, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Rooney. I mean it.

Mr. Justice Clark. I know you do. You do not say anything 

you do not mean.
12

A uto m obi le fo r t h e C h ie f J ust ic e

Program and financ ing

[In thousands of dollars]

1962

actual

1963

estim ate

1964

estim ate

Program by activities: Automobile for the Chief Justice 

(obligations) _ ______________________________ 7 7 7

Financing: New obligational a uthority (appropriation). 7 7 7

Object classification

[In thousands of dollars]

1962

actual

1963

estimate

1964

estimate

11 Personnel compensation: Permanent positions.......... ........

26 Supplies a nd materials____________ ____- -....................-

Tota l obligations________________________________

5

1

5

1

5

1

7 7 7

Personnel sum mary

1962

actual

1963

estimate

1964

estimate

To tal number of permanent positions----------------------- -------

Average number of all employees____________ __________ -

Num ber of employees at end of year........... ...............................

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Mr. Rooney. The next item concerns one of these automobiles, 

which is the automobile for the Chief Justice, and is a request in the 

amount of $7,400.

This appeal’s at page 329 of the committee print, and at pages 35 

through 39 of the justifications, which we shall insert a t this point in 

the record.

(The pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriatio n

Automobile for the Chief Justice, Supreme Court: Judiciary

1963 appropriation in annu al act_____________ ___________________________________ $6,800

1963 proposed supple mental due to pay increase____ ______________________________ 176

Base for 1964............................................................................................................................. 6,976

Net difference, 1964 over 1963:

Requirements

Difference 

( + )o r ( —)

1963

adjusted

1964

estimate

Automobile for the Chief Justice, Supreme Cou rt... $6,976 $7,400 +$424

Total estim ate for 1964............................................... .......................... . ........... -.............. . . . 7,400
13

Statement showing analysis by object

Object

1963

estim ate

1964

estim ate

Increase (+ ) 

or

decrease ( —)

11 Personnel compensation____________________________ $5,070 

430 

500 

276 

700

$5,238 

442 

500 

276 

944

+$168

12 Personnel benefits_______ __________________________ +12

21 Travel and tran sportation of persons__________________

25 Other se rvices ..________ __________________________

26 Supplies and materials_____________________________ +244

To tal.................................................................................... 6,976 7,400 +424

Summary of increased requirements for 1964

Nature of expense (or savin gs): Amoun

1. Pav increase, Public Law 87-793 (compensation $128, and benefits

$12)____________________________________________ ______ _ $140

2. Two extra compensable days in fiscal ye ar 1964_________________ 40

3. Increase in cost of operation of autom obile_____________________ 244

Increase, 1964 over 1963___________________________________ 424

J u st if ic a tio n

Language changes

None.

Objectives

To provide for an automobile for the Chief Justice 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 $7,400 is requested for this item for 1964. This represents 

an increase of $424 over the 1963 estimate for this item.

Pay increase, Public Law 87-79S

The sum of $140 is required to cover the increase in salary for the chauffeur to 

the Chief Ju stice, provided for by the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962, Public 

Law 87-793, approved October 11, 1962. The estimate includes $128 to cover 

increases in compensation, and $12 for rela ted benefits—agency contributions to 

the Civil Service Retirement Fund and to the Group Life Insurance Fund.

Two extra days in fiscal year 1964

An am ount of $40 will be needed to pay for the 2 additional compensable days 

above the number of days in fiscal year 1963.

Increase in cost of operation of automobile

The sum of $244 is needed to pay the cost of gas, oil, and other operating expenses which have increased in the last 2 years.

Mr. Rooney. This is a request for $600 over the amount appropriated to date for this automobile in the current fiscal year. The increase is for mandatory pay act money plus $244 increase in operating 

expenses of the automobile.

Mr. Justice Clark. That is gasoline, oil, and the like.

Mr. Rooney. I t might be well to point out that this amount of 

$7,400 includes the chauffeur’s salary.

Mr. Justice Clark. Yes, sir.
14

Books

Program and financing

[In thousands of dollars]

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

Program by activities: Purchase of books and periodicals 

(obligations) (object class 31)________ _________________ 38 35 35

Financing: New obligational a uth ority (appropriatio n). 38 35 35

Mr. Rooney. The next is the item entitled books for the Supreme 

Court which appears at page 330 of the committee print.

We shall insert at this point in the record pages 40 through 42 

of the justifications.

(The pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Books for the Supreme Court: Judiciary

1963 app ropriatio n in annual ac t_____________________ ___________ __________________ $35,000

Base for 1964.............................................................................................................................. 35,000

Net difference, 1964 over 1963:

Requirem ents

Difference 

1963 appro­ (+ ) or ( -)

pria ted

1964 estimate

$35,000 $35,000

Total estimate for 1964.............................................................................................................. 35,000

Statement showing analysis by object

Object

1963

estim ate

1964

estim ate

Increase (+) 

or

decrease (—)

31 Eq uipm en t.. . . . $35,000 $35,000

To tal ................. ........... ....................................................... 35,000 35,000

JU STIF IC A TIO 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 1964 for books and 

periodicals for the Supreme Court, to be purchased by the Librarian of the 

Supreme Court, under the direction of th e C'hief Justice.

Our estimates for fiscal year 1964 are as follows:

Continuations: Citators, codes, congressional hearings, court reports, 

digests, encyclopedias, legal periodicals, looseleaf services, pocket

supplements, session laws, statutes, etc_________________________ $28, 500

New books and additional materi als______________________________ 6, 500

Total estimate__________________________________________ 35, 000

The above estim ates represent the same amounts requested and appropriated 

for the fiscal year 1963.
15

Mr. Rooney. They indicate tha t the request is in the amount of 

$35,000, the same amount as appropriated for books for the Supreme 

Court in the current fiscal year.

Care of Buildings and Grounds

Program and financing

[In thou sands of dollars]

1962 actual 1963 estim ate 1964 estimate

Program b y activities: Structur al and mechanical care of Supreme Court Building and Grounds, including supplying of 

mechanical furnishings and equipme nt (obligations)----------

Financing' Unobligated balance laps ing-...........................

280

5

323 354

New obligational autho rity (appropriation)....... ........... . 284 323 354

Object classification

[In thou sands of dollars]

11

12

25

26

31

42

Personnel compensation:

Permanent positions ......................................................

Other personnel co mp ens ation. ........ ...... .....................

Total personnel co mpe nsation..... ..............................

Personnel ben efits..... ............................................................

Other services:

General annual rep airs.................. . ...............................

Annu al painting ............ ..................................................

Maintenance, air-conditioning system...........................

Lighting improv em en ts.................................................

Elevator improvements..................................................

Pointing exterior stonework...........................................

Roof repairs......................................................................

Supplies and materials...........................................................

Equipment, ann ual..... ........... . .............................................

Insurance claims and indemnities.........................................

Tota l obligations............................................................... .

1962 actual

187

45

232

15

2

4

2

10

9

5

1

280

1963 estimate

194

49

243

17

9

3

2

33

10

323

1964 estimate

198

49

247

17

9

3

4

55

12

354

6 6

1 1

Personnel summary

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

Total num ber of perman ent positions......... . ........... .................. 33 33 33

Average numbe r of all employees_____ ______ _______ . 33 33 33

Num ber of employees a t end of year_____________________ 33 33 33

Mr. Rooney. The next of the items for the Supreme Court is entitled “Care of Buildings and Grounds.” This appears at page 327 

of the committee print, and beginning a t page 20 of the justifications.

We shall insert, at this point, pages 20 through 34 of these 

justifications.

(The pages follow:)

9877 7— 6: 2
Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriatio n

Care of the building and grounds. Supreme Court: Judiciary 1963 app ropriation in annual ac t........................ . ....................................-........... ........... ......... . . . $323,400

Rase for 1964 ............................................................................................................................. 323,400

Net difference, 1964 over 1963:

Requirements

Difference 

1963 appro­ (+ ) or ( - )

priated

1964 estimate

$323,400 $353,600 +$30,200

Total estimate for 1964.......... . ............ ................... . ....................................... . . . . . . . . ........ $353,600

Statement showing analysis by object

Object

1963

estim ate

1964

estim ate

Increase (+ ) 

or

decrease (—)

11 Personnel compensation............................. ..........................

12 Personnel benefits:

Payment to employees’ life insurance fun d— ..............

Paymen t to employees’ health benefits fund ......... ......

Con tributio n to retirement fund...................... .............

25 Other services:

General an nual repairs__________________________

$243,200

700

3,600

12,300

9, W0 

3,000 

1,800 

150 

32,900

$247,300

700

3,600

12,300

9,000

3,000

3,800

150

55,000

12,000

(+ )$4,100

Annual painting............ ................... .............................

Main tenance, air-conditioning sy stem ............... .........

Snow rem ov al ......... ...... ........................ ......... ............. (+ )2 ,000

Lighting im provements............... ..................................

Elevator impro veme nts ......... ............................. . ........ (+ )22,100 

(+ )12,000 

(-)10,00 0 Pointing exterior stonework.......... . ............................... 10,000

6,000

750

26 Supplies and materials........ . ......... ........... .......................... 6,000

750 31 Equipment: Annua l........................................ . ...................

To tal ................. ......................................... ......................... 323,400 353.600 (+ )30,200

Summ ary of increased requirements for 1964

Nature of Expense (or savings): Amount

1. Deduction for the nonrecurring cost of pointing exterior

stonework of the build ing__________________________ ( — )$10, 000

2. Deduction for the nonrecurring cost of improvement of

lighting in the reference desk section of bar libary, 2 

rooms adjoining reference desk section, and east and west 

conference rooms__________________________________ (—)32, 900

3. Cost of wage rate changes authorized by Public Law 763__ 4, 100

4. Maintenance, air-conditioning systems, increased from

$1,800 to $3,800 to allot $2,000 to provide more effective 

control over tem perature conditions in the courtroom 

and Chief Justice’s chambers, thro ugh remote instrum entation (nonrecurring)______________________________ 2, 000

5. Improvem ent of lighting in the reading room of th e bar library, including its north and south bookstack wings 

(nonrecurring)____________________________________ 55,000

6. Elevator modifications to effect safety improvements on

elevator No. 4 (nonrecurring)_______________________ 12, 000

Net increase, 1964 over 1963__________________________ 30, 200

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

Objectives

This appropriation, for exped iture by the Architect of the Capitol, is to provide for the structura l and mechanical care of th e U.S. Supreme Court 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 

Sta t. 668).
17

The mechanical equipment includes such items as the air-conditioning, refrigeration, and ventilating system s with more tha n 1,000 pieces of equipment; 

electrical transformer stations; 300 plumbing fixtures and rela ted piping; 8 

elevators and 5 dum bwaiters; electric fixtures and wiring.

A force of 33 employees is required for the fiscal year 1964 to cover 3 shifts 

daily and is made up of 1 supervising engineer, 1 foreman, 3 mechanics, 5 atten dants, a nd 4 assistant att endants in the heating, ventilating, air-conditioning, and 

refrigeration dep artm ent; 1 electrician foreman and 3 electricians; 1 steam fitterplumber foreman, 1 steamfittcr and 1 stea infitter-p lumber; 1 elevator mechanic 

foreman and 1 mechanic; 1 marble mason; 1 woodwork finisher and painter; 

1 oiler an d greaser; 1 laborer-gardener foreman and 2 grounds maintenance men; 

1 substation helper; 1 storekeeper and 2 general laborers.

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 1962, 1963, and 1964; also of 

savings realized in 1962:

Actual 1962 Estimate 1963 Estimate 1964 Em ­

ployment

Septembe r

1962

Positions

Ma nyears

Cost Positions

Ma nyea rs

Cost Positions

Ma nyearsCost

Personnel compensation: 

Full-time employ men t.

Other objects of expenditurft

33 33 $231,933

47,965

4,502

33 33 $243,200

80,200

33 33 $247,300

106,300

33

Savings

Total, estimate or 

appropriation 284,400 323,400 353,600

Personnel compensation (increased from $243,200 to $247,300), $247,300

This allotmen t provides for 33 positions—the same number as allowed for 

1963—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, 

83d Congress. For 1964, an increase of $4,100 is requested to meet the cost of 

wage rate changes authorized by Public Law 763.

Payment to employees’ life insurance fund (no change), $700

This item is the same as allowed for 1963 and is requested to cover the cost of 

Government insurance contributions required by Public Law 590, 83d Congress, 

“Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance Act of 1954.”

Payment to employees’ health benefits fund (no change), $3,600

This item is the same as allowed for 1963 and is requested to cover the cost 

of Government contribution to the employees’ health benefits fund required by 

Public Law 86-382, 86th Congress, approved September 28, 1959.

Contribution to retirement fund (no change), $12,300

This is the same as allowed for 1963 and is requested to cover the cost of Government contribution to retirement fund required by Public Law 854, 84th Congress, 

“Title IV, Civil Service Retirement Act Amendments of 1956.”

General annual repairs (no change), $9,000

This is the same as allowed for 1963 and provides for the regular annual repair 

and stru ctural upkeep of the building and its mechanical equipment, such as 

repairs to elevators, roof, carp entry, electrical, plumbing, heating, ventilating 

and steam equipment, 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 1963 and provides for necessary painting through ­

out the building.
Maintenance, air-conditioning system {increased from $1,800 to $3,800}, $3,800

For 1963, $1,800 was allowed and is again requested for 1964 for the annual

routine care and maintenance of the air-conditioning and refrigeration systems. 

The breakdown of the annual recurring amount follows:

Air-conditioning estimate

Maintenance:

Air filters__________________________________________________ $500

Oil and grease______________________________________________ 100

Cleaning equipm ent_________________________________________ 100

Pa in t_____________________________________________________ 100

Refrigerants_______________________________________________ 100

Contingency for special repa irs_______________________________ 300

Miscellaneous______________________________________________ 100

Repairs:

Refrigeration______________________________________________ 300

Automatic controls_________________________________________ 100

Miscellaneous______________________________________________ 100

Total annual recurring item s_______________________________ 1, 800

In addition to the annual a mount of $1,800, a nonrecurring amoun t of $2,000 is 

requested for 1964 to provide more effective control over tem perature conditions 

in the courtroom and the Chief Justice’s chambers.

The courtroom and the Chief Ju stice’s chambers in the Supreme Court Building 

are both subjec t to wide a nd unpredictable varia tions in the number of occupants 

participating in the Cou rt’s official functions. To maintain satisfactory atmospheric conditions under these widely varying circumstances, the operator of the 

air-conditioning systems should at all times be fully aware of the tempera tures 

prevalent in these critical areas to insure the complete satisfaction of the occupants.

When judicial proceedings are in progress in the courtroom or in the Chief 

Justice’s chambers the admittance of operating personnel to these areas is, of 

course, intolerable. For th at reason, knowledge of abnormal room conditions 

can be made known to the operating engineers only by direct complaints from 

the occupants. Development by indu stry in recent years of remotely located 

tem perature indicating devices now makes it possible to continually ascertain 

the ambien t conditions in occupied spaces without entry by unauthorized persons into such spaces.

To insure satisfactory conditions in these critical spaces, it is proposed to 

install temperature tran smitte rs in each of the four rooms. By direct connection with remotely located tem perature indicators, the tran smitte rs will provide 

at a central location in the basem ent the temperatu res prevailing in these spaces 

during all conditions of occupancy.

Designers of modern air-conditioning systems include in their plans and specifications for new installations th e necessary instrum enta tion for continually collecting and reporting performance data at a central location where such data will 

contantly be in view of the equipment operators. With this inform ation immediately available to the operators, prom pt adjustments can be made or malfunctioning of any of the system components can be corrected before the room 

conditions deteriorate sufficiently to warran t dissatisfaction on the part of the 

occupants. For such imp ortant functional areas as the courtroom and the Chief 

Justice’s chambers, instrumenta tion of the type proposed in this justification 

would be considered indispensable in presen t-day air-conditioning practice.

The estim ated cost of this proposed instrum enta tion is $2,000, and the breakdown of this estimate is as follows:

Eq uip me nt______________ ______ ______________ ____ ____ ______ $1, 200

Ins tallation ____________________________________________________ 600

Miscellaneous materials_________________________________________ 200

To tal............................ ................. ................................ ......... ............. 2,000

Snow removal {no change), $150

This is th e same as allowed for 1963 and provides for snow removal from walks 

and approaches.
19

Lighting improvements—nonrecurring item, $55,000

For 1963, a nonrecurring amount of $32,900 was allowed to improve the lighting 

in the reference desk section of the bar library, the two rooms adjoining the 

reference desk section and in t he east and west conference rooms.

At the request of the Chief Justice, a nonrecurring amount of $55,000 is requested for the fiscal year 1964 to improve the illumination in the reading room 

of the bar library, including its north and sou th bookstack wings. This room, 

including the bookstack wings, occupies an area of about 10,000 square feet on the 

third floor of th e building.

The existing illumination is provided by orna men tal chandeliers installed at the 

time the building was constructed, and also by localized lighting fixtures of inadequate capacity mounted on the digest racks and on the bookstack frames. The 

general illumination in the reading room is far below recommended standa rds, 

and ranges from 1 foot-candle to 3 foot-candles measured at table height. Some of 

the reading tables are provided with individual desk lamps to augm ent the general 

illumination, a practice which does not provide efficient, comfortable, and safe 

seeing.

• The books on the upper inclined sections of t he digest racks prese ntly receive 

about 48 foot-candles of illumination, whereas the books on the lower inclined 

sections of th e same racks are provided w ith only 15 foot-candles of illum ination. 

Both sets of books should be provided with a uniform illumination in the orde r 

of 30 foot-candles or more according to the recommendations of th e Illuminating

• Engineering Society, a national professional organizatio n dedicated to the advancement and dissemination of theoretical and prac tical knowledge of the science and 

art of illumination.

The books on the to p shelves of th e bookstacks are reasonably well illuminated, 

but those on the lower shelves receive only 5 foot-candles of illumination from th e 

existing lighting fixtures. Here again the illumination of books on all shelves 

should not be less tha n 30 foot-candles.

To produce a level of not less tha n 30 foot-candles of general illumination in 

the reading room, under the funds requested for 1964, it is proposed to insta ll 34 

ceiling-mounted down lights completely recessed in the highly ornamented reading 

room ceiling. The new illumination will be emitted through 5-inch-diameter 

apertures archite cturally incorporated in the ciling design. The typ e of lighting 

units proposed for this installation will provide efficient and ade quate illumination 

without altering, in any way, the exquisite architectural characteristics of this 

room. The ornamental chandeliers installed originally under the construction 

contract will, of course, be retain ed, primarily for aesthetic effect. The reading 

room is practically devoid of daylight, and little reflective capacity, in any, is 

provided by the dark walnut paneling on the walls and the red rug on the floor. 

These are all deterrent architectural characteristics which must be surmounted 

by the illuminating engineer.

It is proposed to reequip the digest racks with properly designed lighting 

fixtures capable of producing a uniform inte nsity of 30 foot-candles on both the 

upper and lower inclined tiers of books. Likewise, the fixtures presently m ounted 

on the bookstack frames will be replaced by new fixtures designed to produce an 

adeq uate quantity of illumination on the lower bookshelves adjacent to the 

floor level.

Breakdown of estimate

Down lighting for general illumination of reading room, consisting of 34

• recessed down lights, new branch circuit wiring, and new lighting

panelboards_________________________________________________ $20, 000

Localized lighting for digest racks, including specially designed bracketmounted fixtures, new branch circuit wiring, and accessories_______ 8, 000

Localized lighting for bookstack frames, including specially designed

bracket-type fixtures, branch circuit wiring, and accessories________ 22, 000

Contingencies_________________________________________________ 5, 000

Total est imate __________________________________________ 55, 000

Elevator improvements—nonrecurring item, $12,000

For 1964, a nonrecurring allo tment of $12,000 is requested to effect safe ty improvem ents on e levator No. 4.

Elev ator No. 4 in the Supreme Court Building is the only elevator in th at 

building of the so-called automa tic type capable of being op erated with or withou t 

an attendant. It was originally installed in 1932 as part of the building con-
20

struction program, and was subseque ntly converted in 1955 from nonautomatic 

to automatic operation. The electromechanical device which opens and closes 

the car and hoistway doors is of an obsolete design, possessing unsafe characteristics no longer tolerated by the American Stan dard Safety Code for Elevators. 

The dynamic force imposed by the heavy bronze doors upon imp act with entering 

or leaving passengers is excessive, and could result in serious physical injury.

For complete safety, and full compliance with present-day accepted practices, 

a new master door operator, a set of new safety edges, and modern photoelectric 

cell control of the door operation should be installed as soon as this elevator can 

be released from service—preferably not later tha n August 1963. A shutdown 

period of n ot less tha n 6 weeks will be required to complete the new installation.

At the same time, the present signal control should be changed to collective 

control designed for with or without att endant operation. A modern collective 

control system will expedite the service for Justices and members of their staffs 

during the evening hours, and at other times when the presence of an elevator 

operator is not available. The original basic signal control system was designed 

exclusively for operation with an att endant present, a condition th at prevails 

only during regular working hours. The fact that this elevator is now7

 being used 

frequently by Justices and members of their staffs, afte r regular working hours, 

has created the demand for more expeditious service.

The estimated cost of the new installations proposed is $12,000.

Supplies and materials (no change), $6,000

This is the same as allowed for 1963. 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 th e grounds; plant material, seed, soil, sod, sprays, fertilizers, and other miscellaneous supplies.

Annual equipment (no change), $750

This is the same as allowed for 1963, and provides tools, mowers, brushes, 

miscellaneous equipment, and repairs to same.

The tota l, therefore, requested for the care of the Supreme Cou rt Building and 

grounds, for the fiscal year 1964, under the Architect of the Capitol, amounts to 

$353,600.

Mr. R ooney. These pages indicate th at the request is in the amount 

of $353,600, a net increase of $30,200 over the appropriation for the 

current fiscal year.

Page 22 contains a list of the requested increases.

It is the fact, is it not, tha t the actual increase is $73,100, when 

nonrecurring costs are taken into consideration, Mr. Henlock?

Mr. Henlock. Yes; it is.

Mr. Davis. Mr. Chairman, we customarily, as a m atter of practice, 

do not stay for this part of the discussion.

Mr. Rooney. I understand that. I think we can take care of 

things without your help.

Do you have a statement, Mr. Henlock, with regard to this requested 

increase?

Mr. Henlock. Mr. Rooney, Mr. Campioli is representing Mr. 

Stewart. Mr. Stewart had to go to the eye doctor but will be in a 

little later this morning.

Mr. Rooney. Do you have a statement with regard to this request?

Mr. Campioli. I do have, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. Before we get into that, we should like to thank the 

associate justices for their appearance and to assure them that we 

will give their requests due consideration.

Mr. Justice Clark. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Justice Goldberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. The final item, to which we have just made reference, 

before the associate justices left, was entitled “Care of Buildings 

and Grounds.”
21

Mr. Campioli, you were trying to give us an insight into this 

requested increase of $73,100?

G E N E R A L STA T E M E N T

Mr. Campioli. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I have a short statem ent of 

explanation which I would like to present.

The items of increase are explained, briefly, as follows: $4,100 is for 

wage rate increases authorized by Public Law 763, 83d Congress, for 

Wage Board employees, resulting from changes effective December 9, 

1962.

There is a $2,000 increase under the air conditioning allotment— increasing th at allotment from $1,800 to $3,800 for 1964—to provide 

improved control over temperature conditions in the courtroom and 

’ the Chief Justice’s Chambers. At present, unsatisfactory temperature conditions in these areas can be checked and adjusted only by 

admittance of operating personnel to these areas whether or not the 

Court is in session. To insure satisfactory conditions in these areas at 

• all times, it is proposed to install temperature transmitters in each of

the four rooms affected. By direct connection with remotely located 

temperature indicators, the transm itters will provide at a central 

location in the basement the temperatures prevailing in these spaces 

during all conditions of occupancy and permit correction of unsatisfactory conditions without the necessity of going into the courtroom 

or Chief Justice’s Chambers when proceedings are going on in those 

rooms.

There is a nonrecurring increase of $55,000 for lighting improvements, requested by the Court, for areas now inadequately illuminated. 

For 1963, $32,900 was allowed to improve lighting conditions in the 

reference desk section of the Bar Library, in two rooms adjoining the 

reference desk section, and in the Eas t and West Conference Booms. 

Funds for this work will be obligated in the next several months. 

Under the allotment of $55,000, it is proposed to improve lighting 

conditions in the reading room of the Bar Library, including its north 

and south bookstacks. At present, lighting is provided by ornamental chandeliers and by lighting fixtures of inadequate capacity 

mounted on the digest racks and on the bookstack frames. General 

illumination in the reading room ranges from 1 foot-candle to 3 footcandles measured at table height, whereas it should be at least 30 

foot-candles. In the digest racks, lighting is as low as 15 foot-candles 

and in the bookstacks it is as low as 5 foot-candles, whereas lighting in 

- these areas should also be at least 30 foot-candles.

Under the funds asked for 1964, it is proposed to install 34 ceilingmounted downlights in the reading room and suitable fixtures of adequate capacity on the digest racks and bookstacks. The breakdown 

< of the estimate is given on page 32 of the justifications, and a more

detailed explanation on pages 30 to 32. If there are any questions, I 

have with me our coordinating engineer, Mr. Rubel, who prepared the 

estimate and is familiar with the details.

There is a nonrecurring increase of $12,000 for elevator improvements. Elevator No. 4 is the only elevator in the Supreme Court 

building of the so-called automatic tvpe capable of being operated 

with or without an attendant. This elevator was originally installed 

in 1932 as part of the Building construction program and was con-
22

verted in 1955 from “non au tomatic” to “a utom atic” opera tion. Th e 

elec tromecha nical device which o pens a nd closes the car a nd hoistway 

doors is of an ob solete design possessing c harac teristics no long er sanc ­

tion ed by the American Stan da rd Safety Code for elevators. Th e 

dyn amic force imposed by the hea vy bronze doors upon im pact with 

passengers entering or leaving the e levator is excessive and could r esu lt 

in serious ph ysic al injury. In th e inte res t of sa fety, a new m ast er doo r 

opera tor, a set of new saf ety edges, and m odern pho toe lectric cell contro l of the door ope ration should be inst alle d.

CON TIN GEN CY FO R L IG H T IN G IM PR O V EM EN T S

Mr. R ooney. Mr. Rub el, you are the coo rdinating engineer. It 

occurs to me th at you are doing q uite a b it of expensive coord ina ting 

when y ou inclu de $5,000 for contingencies in this lit tle job of i mp rov ­

ing the lightin g in the readin g room at the Bar Libra ry.

Mr. R ub el. It is a very difficult room to illu minate properly, 

Mr. Chairma n. It is also difficult to estim ate in adv anc e the exa ct 

am ount of the cost of thi s work.

Mr. R ooney. Wh y?

Mr. R ub el. Beca use of the na ture of the work to be done in a 

room which is highly de corativ e. It is c ustom ary in est imating alte ration work in an existing buildin g to inclu de an allow ance for conting encies to provide for unforeseen str uc tural conditions.

Mr.. R ooney. You know wh at hap pen s in the se thin gs? We 

never arr ive at the lower am ount when we g et to th e end of the roa d. 

You will wind up with $55,000. You do no t t hink yo u could pro perly 

religh t th at room for $50,000?

Mr. Cam pio li. Th e work would hav e to be done, or shou ld be done, 

from b ehind the hun g ceiling and from beh ind adjoin ing walls.

Mr. R ooney. D o no t confuse this. Could you do it for $50,000?

Mr. R ub el. It is possible th at it might be done for $50,000 bu t 

when you are doing alt era tio n work in an old building------

Mr. R ooney. It is not an old building. How ma ny years old, 25?

Mr. R ub el. It is a building which is difficult------

Mr. R ooney. How old?

Mr. Cam pio li. Tw enty-seve n years.

Mr. R ooney. Are the re any furth er questions, gentlem en?

Mr. Bow . I have a question.

Mr. R ooney. Very well, Mr. Bow.

Mr. Bow . On this $55,000 item, how man y people actua lly use 

this rea din g room?

Mr. H enlock. Th e Co urt advises me th at t here were 3,631 r ead ers 

and 2,300 visitors las t yea r.

Mr. Bow . Is th at a year?

Mr. H enlock. To be exa ct, it covers 11 mo nths.

Mr. Bow . Is i t open t he ye ar around or does it generally corres pon d 

with the sessions of the Co urt?

Mr. H enlock. I understand it is open the year aro und, except for 

the mo nth of Ju ly when it is closed for cleaning.

Mr. Bow . W hat is the bre akd ow n of the 3,600 by month? Do you 

have any idea?

Mr. H enlo ck. We were only given the agg regate figure, Mr. Bow.

Mr. Bow . Is th at an estim ate , 3,600?
23

Mr. Henlock. Tha t is an actual count for the calendar year 1962.

Mr. Bow. What is this room generally used for, a study room or 

what?

Mr. Campioli. Reading room research.

Mr. Bow. Where is it located?

Mr. Campioli. On the third floor.

Mr. Bow. Of the Supreme Court Building?

Mr. Campioli. Yes, sir.

Mr. Bow. Then we have the regular law library with the Library 

of Congress, do we not?

Mr. Campioli. Yes, sir.

It is a very fine room and extremely dark up there even on a b right 

morning like this.

Mr. Bow. Has this been in the budget before?

Mr. Henlock. No, sir.

Mr. Bow. Have they finished the other job they gave you the money 

for last year?

Mr. Campioli. Tha t will be obligated shortly.

Mr. Bow. You have not gone forward?

Mr. Henlock. Studies have gone forward.

Mr. Bow. Are there designs and plans on what you intend to do 

with this $55,000?

Mr. Rubel. Yes, sir; a general plan.

Mr. Bow. I am quite surprised by your answer to the chairman 

tha t you cannot give us a more definite figure. It is pretty well put 

out here. A lot of this is equipment.

How long has this room been open there, since the opening of the 

building?

Mr. Campioli. Yes sir; since the building was opened.

Mr. Bow. Why is there a particular need for it this year when there 

is an effort being made to try to find some places where we might 

save a little money?

Mr. Campioli. There is a trend in most of our buildings to ask 

for more light. We have begun a program of improving lighting 

conditions in the Supreme Court Building where conditions are 

especially deficient.

Mr. Bow. I wish somebody could throw some light on some budget 

figures so we could save money here.
Monday, J anuary 27, 1963. 

CO UR T OF CUSTO MS AND PA TE NT AP PEAL S

W IT N ESSES

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

H ON . I. JA C K M A R TIN , A SS OCIA TE JU D G E 

G EO R G E E. H U T C H IN SO N , M ARSH AL

Salaries and E xpenses

11

12

21

23

24

25

26 

31

Object classification

[In thousands of dollars]

Personnel compensation:

Perm anen t positions....................

Positions other t han perin anentOther personnel co mp ens ation...

Tota l, personnel compensation

Personnel benefits..............................

Travel and tr ansp orta tion of persons 

Ren t, communications, a nd utilities.

Prin ting and rep rodu cti on ......... .

Other services......... . ..........................

Supplies and materia ls........ ..............

Equ ip m en t......................................

Total, obligations............................

1962 ac tual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

295 314 331

1 10 10

2

296 324 343

17 18 19

2 1 1

2 3 3

11 17 17

2 2 2

4 4 4

334 370 390

Personnel summary

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

Tota l number of perm anent po sit ions ...________ _________ 28 29 29

Full-time equivalen t of other positions .. . 1 l

Average number of all employees__ __ _______ ________ . 26 28 29

Nu mb er of employees at end of yea r................................ ......... 28 29 29

Program and financing

[In thousands of dollars]

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

Financing: Unobligated balance lapsing....................................

New obligational a utho rity................................................

New obligational authority :

App ro priatio n.......................................................................

Proposed supple men tal due to pay increases......................

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

334

25

370 390

359 370 390

359 361

9

390

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

Custo ms and Pa tent Appe als, which app ears at page 332 of the committee pr in t and beginning at page 43 of the justificatio ns. We shall 

ins ert at this point in the record pages 43 through 50 of the justific ations.

(The justifi cation pages follow:)
25

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Salaries and expenses, Court of Customs an d Pa ten t Appeals: Judiciary

1963 appropriatio n in an nual act _______ _____ _____________ _____________________ $361,000

1963 proposed supplemental due to pay increases............................................... . ................... 9,000

Base for 1964 .............................................................................................................................. 370,000

Ne t difference, 1964 over 1963:

Requirem ents Difference, increase (+)

or decrease (—)

1963

adjusted

1964

estim ate

Salaries an d expenses_________________________ $370,000 $390,000 +$20,000

Tota l estimate for 1964_______________________________________________________ 390,000

Statement showing analysis by object

Object

1963

estim ate

1964

estim ate

Increase (+) 

or

decrease (—)

11 Personnel com pensation..................... . ..................... ........... $324,400 

17,600 

1,000 

3,000 

17,000 

1,000 

2,000 

4,000

$342,750 

18,850 

1,000 

3,000 

17,000 

1,000 

2,000 

4,400

+$18,350 

12 Personnel bene fits____ ___________ _____________ ____ +1,250

21 Travel and tra nsp ortation of persons__________ _____ ..

23 Rent, communications, and utilitie s......... ........................

24 Prin tin g and reproduction ... ................. . ...........................

25 Other services.1 ...... . .............. .............. ....................

26 Supplies and mate rials______________ _______________

31 Eq uipm en t................................ ...... ............................ .......... +400

Total, obligations__ ____ ____________ ___________ 1 370,000 390,000 +20,000

1

 Includes $9,000 proposed sup plem ental due to p ay increases.

Summary of increased requirements for 1964

Nature of expense (or savings): Amount

1. Additional amount required under the Federal salary Reform Act

of 1962_____________ ____________ ______ ______ _______ $8,200

2. One additional secretarial position for the cou rt________________ 6, 940

3. Provision for within-grade salary advancements_______________ 3, 200

4. Cost of 2 extra compensable days in 1964_____________________ 1, 660

Increase, 1964 over 1963___________________________________ 20, 000

JUSTIFICATION

Language changes

None.

Objectives

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

and other officers and employees of th e 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 tut ory 

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

Judiciary,’’ on file with the Bureau of t he Budget and the Appropriations Committees of the Congress.
26

General justification

The following table shows the caseload of the Court of Customs and Patent 

Appeals during the past 5 years:

1958 1959 1960 1961 1962

C ust om s cases :

P en din g, be gi nn in g of y ea r______________________________ 20 30 35 39 30

D oc ke te d duri n g y ear, _________________________________ 42 40 45 32 29

D is po se d of d uri n g y ea r_____ . __________________________ 32 35 41 41 35

P en din g, en d o f vear____________________________________ 30 35 39 30 24 P a te n t an d 't ra d e rn ark case s:

P en din g, be gi nni ng o f y ear______________________________ 92 92 129 134 148

D ock et ed duri n g y ea r__________________________________ 83 107 127 126 174

D is po se d of d uri ng y ear_________________________________ 83 70 122 112 115

P en d in g , en d of year____________________________________ 92 129 134 148 207

Detailed justification

An appropriation of $390,000 is requested for 1964, a net increase of $20,000 

over the appropriation for 1963 which has been adjuste d to include a proposed 

supplemental of $9,000 for "pa y costs” under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 

1962 (Public Law 87-793, approved Oct. 11, 1962). The increase in requirements 

is explained below:

Requirements under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

An additional $8,200 will be required in fiscal year 1964 to cover the full year 

cost of increases in salary which were gran ted effective October 15, 1962, and 

approximately one-half of the annual cost of increases which are scheduled to 

tak e effect on Jan uar y 6, 1964. The following is a breakdown by fiscal year of 

the total cost of pay increases under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962:

1963 prop os ed 

su p p le ­

m enta l

1964 b u d g etary r equir em ents

1965 b u d g etary re quir em ents

T ota l co st

1st phas e (e ffec tiv e Oct. 15,19 62):

C om p en sa ti o n ________ ______ ____________ $8,40 0

600

$3,3 00 

200

$11,700 B en ef its ...... ......... . .................................................. 800

T o ta l........... ......... ............. ......... ......................... 9,00 0 3, 500 12,500

2d pha se (ef fective Jan . 6,1 96 4) :

C o m p e n sa ti o n ._____ ____________ ________ 4,400

300

$4,50 0

300

8,900

B en ef its__________________________________ 600

T o ta l__________________________ ____ _ 4,700 4,8 00 9,500

G ra n d t o t a l . . ................................... ................. 9,00 0 8,20 0 4,8 00 22,000

Additional secretarial position for the court

Also included is a request in the amount of $6,940 for the employment of a

secretary for the c ourt’s new judge:

Personnel compensation, grade GS-8______________________________ $6, 090

Personnel benefits______________________________________________ 450

Equ ipment (nonrecurring)_______________________________________ 400

To tal___________________________________________________ 6, 940

Provision for within-grade salary advancements

It is estimated th at $3,200 will be required in fiscal year 1964 to grant court 

employees within-grade salary advancements corresponding with those provided 

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

$3,000 for personnel compensation and $200 to cover related benefits—Government contributions to the civil services retirement fund a nd for Federal employees group life insurance. Due to the very little turn over in the personnel of the 

court, no savings can be anticipated to offset the cost of within-grade salary 

advancements.
27

Cost of two extra compensable days in 1964

The sum of $1,660 ($1,560 for personnel compensation and $100 for related 

benefits) has been included to cover regular pay in excess of 52 weeks. Employees of the court who are paid biweekly will be compensated for 262 days in fiscal 

year 1964 as compared with only 260 compensable days in 1963.

Mr. Rooney. The request is in the amount of $390,000, which 

would be an increase of $29,000 over the total amount in the current 

fiscal year. This would entail the addition of one new position to 

the payroll.

We are pleased to have with us our distinguished former colleague 

from Texas, the Honorable Eugene Worley, Chief Judge of the Court 

of Customs and Pate nt Appeals and Associate Judge I. Jack Martin 

of that court.

Do you have a statement with regard to this, Judge Worley?

Judge Worley. I have no formal statement, Mr. Chairman.

G E N ER A L STA T E M E N T

Mr. Rooney. Do you wish to explain this requested increase of 

$29,000 and the additional position?

Judge Worley. Yes. The summary shows $8,200 is required 

under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962. There is $6,940 for 

the position of a new judge’s secretary, Judge Almond, who has been 

appointed and has begun work but as vet has not been confirmed by 

the Senate; $3,200 for in-grade salary increases; $1,660 for two extra 

compensable days.

Mr. Rooney. Would you develop something further, Judge, with 

regard to this new position?

Judge Worley. Tha t is for Judge Almond’s secretary. As you 

might recall, several years ago we created the position of Secretary 

of the Court to expedite handling of the opinions, sort of a traffic cop. 

Tha t created a vacancy in the office of the late Judge O’Connell, 

who a t tha t time was ill.

Mr. Rooney. Did tha t get out of your budget? Is tha t the idea?

Judge Worley. No. It did not get out of the budget.

Judge Martin. I think what the situation was tha t when Judge 

O’Connell was ill we did not fill tha t vacancy. We used the money 

for the new position.

Mr. Rooney. For the traffic cop?

Judge Martin. Yes. When Judge Almond was appointed he 

needed a secretary.

Judge Worley. We had agreed there would be no appointment 

made until after Judge O’Connell resigned.

Mr. Rooney. This secretary would be a GS-8?

Judge Worley. That is right.

Mr. Hutchinson. Yes, sir. Tha t is the same grade as the other 

secretaries.

Mr. Rooney. Are there any questions, gentlemen?

Mr. Smith. Aren’t employees of the court paid on an annual salary 

basis?

Mr. Hutchinson. Tha t is right.

Mr. Smith. Would you explain further the two extra compensable 

days?

Mr. Rooney. Tha t is in every item of this budget.
28

Mr. Smith. If they have an annual salary how does having two 

extra days fit in? They are paid on an annual basis, are they not?

Mr. Rooney. They are paid monthly or bimonthly and in the 

year 19G4 there will be two more working days than in the current 

fiscal year.

Mr. Smith. But if they have an annual salary their total annual 

salary will be the same, will it not?

Mr. Rooney. You still have to pay them for those days. There 

are more working days in the year. They are entitled to that by law.

Mr. Smith. If you are on an annual salary you get paid according 

to the number of working days?

Mr. Rooney. Yes.

Mr. Hutchinson. Yes, sir. The annual salary is broken down 

into an hourly rate. You are paid according to this hourly rate, which 

is converted then into a biweekly rate.

We had 260 compensable days last year. There are 262 this year. 

I think, as the chairman has said, this is true in every budget.

Mr. Rooney. It is true of every item in this budget.

Mr. Smith. You do not have an annual salary, then. You have a 

weekly salary.

Mr. Hutchinson. You have to start with something. You have 

an annual salary and from there you break it down, sir.

Mr. Rooney. In other words, it is an annual salary based on a 

year which does not have 2 extra compensable days.

Mr. Hutchinson. That is right, sir. I think that is an easy way 

to approach it.

Judge Worley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for explaining that.

Mr. Smith. In leap year do you have a reduction?

Judge Worley. You will have to ask the chairman.

Mr. Rooney. It depends on what year it is.

Mr. Smith. Tha t is all I have, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. Are there any further questions? If not, we thank 

you, Chief Judge Worley, and Judge Martin.

Judge Martin. Thank you.

Judge Worley. Thank you, gentlemen.
29

M onday, J anuary 27, 1963.

CUSTOM S CO UR T

W IT N ESSE S

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

EDW ARD J. CAREY, C LER K

Salar ies and E xpenses

Obligations by object

[In thou sands of dollars]

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

11 Personnel compensation:

Permanent positions____________________________ 735

23

799

8

838

8

5

Positions other than permanent.......... ........... ...........

Other personnel compensation__________ _____ ___

Total personnel com pensation________ __________ 758

48

22

3

10

9

2

5

19

806

52

25

5

11

9

13

6

15

850

55

25

5

11

9

13

6

15

12 Personnel benefits...... ................... . ............... ............ ........

21 Travel and transpo rtation of perso ns...___ ___________

22 Transp orta tion of things. . _______ ______ _________

23 Ren t, communications, and utili tie s._________________

24 Prin ting and reprodu ction___ _____ _____ _________

25 Other services . ____________________________

26 Supplies and materials.......... ......... ......................................

31 Eq uip me nt......... .......................... ......... .....................

Total obligations........... ................ ................ . .................. 876 942 989

Personnel sum mar y

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estim ate

Total num ber of perm anent positions___ . __________ ____ _ 90

4

91 

100

92

2

93 

93

92 

2

93 

93

Full-time e quivalent of other positions....... ................ ............. .

Average num ber of all employees............ .................................

Num ber of employees at end "of year..................... ....................

Program and financing

[In thousands of dollars]

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estim ate

Program by activities: Salaries and expenses (o bligations ).... 

Financing: Unobligated balance lapsing.. ............. ........... ........

876

19

942 989

New obligational au thority .... ..................... ........... .......... 895 942 989

New obligational authority:

App ropriation. ______________ ___________________ 895 919

23

989

Proposed su pplemental due to pay increases.......................

Mr. R ooney. The next item , gentlem en, is th at for the Custo ms 

Co urt . It app ear s at page 334 of the com mittee p rin t, and beginning 

at page 51 of the justifications. We shall insert, at thi s poi nt in the 

record, pages 51 through 57 of these justifications, which ind ica te 

th at the req uest is in the am ou nt of $989,000, which would be an increase of $70,000 over the am ou nt appro priated to da te in the cu rre nt 

fiscal yea r.

(The justifi cation pages follow:)
30

Ju di ciar y

$919,000 

23,0 00 

942,000

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Salar ies an d e xp en se s, C ust om s C ourt :

1963 a p p ro p ri ati o n in a n n u al a c t________________________________________________________

1963 pr op os ed s upple m en ta l due t o p ay in cre ases.. --------- -------------------------------------------------

Ba se for 1964-------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------

N et differen ce , 1964 o ve r 1963:

R equir em en ts D iffe ren ce , in ­

crea se (+ )

or decrea se (—)

1963

adju st ed

1964

es ti m at e

Sa larie s a n d exp en se s____ _________________________ $942,000 $989,000 +$ 47 ,000

T o ta l es ti m at e for 1964____ _____ . . . . . ________________________________________________ 989,000

Statement showing analysis by object

O bj ec t

1963

esti m ate

1964

esti m ate

In cr ea se (+ )

or

de crea se (—)

11

12 

21 

22

23

24

25

26 

31

Per so nnel co m pensa ti on____ ____________________________

Per so nnel ben efi ts ____ __________________________________

T ra v el a n d t ra n sp o rt ati o n of pe rs on s____________________

T ra n sp o rt ati o n of th in g s__________________________ ____ _

R en t, co m m un ic at io ns , an d u ti li ti e s____ ________________

P rin ti n g a n d r epro ducti on.............................................................

O th er ser vic es _________________________ ____ ____________

Supp lie s an d m ate ri als __________________________________

E q u ip m e n t_______________ ______________________________

T o ta l obli gat io ns......................... —..............................................

$806,500 

51,7 00 

25,3 00 

5,0 00 

10,600 

9,000 

12, 700 

6,2 00 

15,000

$850,000

54.7 00 

25,3 00

5,000 

11,100

9,0 00

12.7 00 

6,200

15,0 00

+$ 43 , 500 

+3,0 00

+5 00

i 94 2,000 989,000 +4 7, 00 0

i In cl ude s $23,000 pr op os ed s upple m en ta l du e to p ay in crea se s.

Summary of increased requirements for 1964

Nature of expense (or savings): 1. Additional amount required under the Federal Salary Reform Amount

Act of 1962______ ________ ___________________________ $24,000

2. Provision for within-grade salary advancements--------------------- 17, 000

3. Cost of two extra compensable days in 1964------ ------------------- 5, 500

4. To cover higher postal rate s provided by Public Law 87-793,

approved October 11, 1962--------------------------------------------- 500

Increase, 1964 over 1963______________________________ 47, 000

JUSTIFICATION

Language changes

None.

Objectives

The estimate 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, printing and binding, supplies, equipment including furn iture, 

new books and regular continuation s of reports, encyclopedias, digests, and pocket 

parts for various sets, and miscellaneous items of expense for the fiscal year 1964. 

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

auth orities, reference is made to section H of the Digest of Appropriations, The 

Judiciary, on file with the Bureau of the Budget and the Appropriations 

Committees of Congress.

Detailed justification

An appropriation of $989,000 is requested for 1964, a net increase of $47,000 

over the appropriation for 1963 which has been adjuste d to include a proposed 

supplemental of $23,000 for “pay costs” under t he Federal Salary Reform Act of 

1962 (Public Law 87-793, approved Oct. 11, 1962). The increase in requirements 

is explained below:
31

Requirements under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

An additional sum of $24,000 will be required in fiscal year 1964 to cover the

full-year cost of increases in salary which were granted effective October 15, 1962, 

and approximately one-half of the ann ual cost of increases which are scheduled 

to take effect on Jan uary 6, 1964. The following is a breakdown by fiscal year 

of the tota l cost of pay increases under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962:

1963 pr op os ed 

su p p le ­

m en ta l

1964 b u d g etary r eq uir em ents

1965 b u d g etary r equir em ents

T o ta l co st

1st ph as e (effec tiv e O ct. 15,1 962 ):

C o m pensa ti on____________________________ $21,500

1,500

$8,500

500

$30,000

2,000 B en ef its ____ ______________________________

T o ta l..................... . ......... .................................... 23,00 0 9,000 32,000

2d ph as e (e ffec tiv e J a n . 6,19 64 ):

C o m pensa ti on__ ____ ____________________ 14,0 00

1,000

$14,500

1,000

28,5 00

2,0 00 B en ef its__________________________________

T o t a l............................. . ..................................... 15,000 15,500 30,5 00

G ra n d t o ta l____________________________ 23,00 0 24,000 15,500 62,5 00

Provision for within-grade salary advancements

It is estimated th at $17,000 will be required in fiscal year 1964 t o gra nt court 

employees within-grade salary advancem ents corresponding with those provided 

by title VII of the Classification Act of 1949, as amended. Of the t ota l requested, 

$16,000 is for personnel compensation and $1,000 for related Government contribu tions to the retireme nt fund and for group life insurance. The estimate is 

net of anticipated savings due to turn over and it represents the minimum amount 

th at will be required to meet such costs.

Cost of 2 extra compensable days in 1964

The sum of $5,500 ($5,000 for personnel compensation and $500 for related 

benefits) has been included to cover regular pay in excess of 52 weeks. Employees 

of the Court who are paid biweekly will be compensated for 262 days in fiscal 

year 1964 as compared with only 260 compensable d ays in 1963.

Higher postal rates

The budget estim ate for 1964 includes an additional $500 to cover higher postal 

rates authorized by Public Law 87-793, approved October 11, 1962. This represents an overall increase of approxim ately 25 percent in postage and fees (pen alty 

mail) to be paid to the Post Office Department.

We have with us the Honorable Scovel Richardson, judge of the 

customs court, accompanied by Mr. Carey, the clerk of tha t court. 

This court, as you know, is located in New York City.

Judge Richardson, do you have a statement with regard to this?

Judge Richardson. Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. Please proceed, Judge Richardson.

GE NE RA L ST AT EM EN T

Judge Richardson. First, Mr. Chairman, and members of the 

committee, Chief Judge Oliver has asked me to express his regrets 

at not being present this morning, which is due to the fact tha t he 

had court commitments tha t he could not reschedule on short notice.

Mr. Carey has passed out to you the workload chart. We present 

tha t each year. I do not think there is anything particularly noticeable about this chart as against last years except perhaps a decrease 

in receipts of the court.

The pending cases continue to decline. It is down now to 176,000, 

which is the lowest tha t it has reached in about 8 years.
32

I explained last ye ar abo ut the fact t ha t we do have a great n um ber 

of cases th at are susp ended under tes t cases. I thi nk there are some 

25,000 cases th at are suspend ed und er tes t cases pen ding in the Co urt 

of Cu sto ms and P at en t Ap peals which are still ca rried on our calendars.

I think the re are some 31 issues involved in those app eals th at are 

pen ding there.

We have some 164 issues und er 20,000 suspended cases in our court 

in pr otes t ma tte rs.

W ORKLO AD CH ART

Mr. R ooney. At this point we shall insert the wor kload ch art .

(The ch art follows:)

Workload chart

ClassiR ea ppr ai se ­

m en t

cases

rece ived T ota l all ClassiR ea ppr ai se -

in en t

cases

de ci de d T o ta l all

C la ss ific atio n

cases

R eappra is em en t

cases

(app ea ls.

re vi ew s,

T ota l all 

cas es

Fi sc al fic ation (a pp ea ls, cases fica tio n (app ea ls, cases p en din g p eti ti o n s, pen din g

year cas es re vi ew s, re ce iv ed cases re vi ew s, de ci ded a t clo se an d re- a t clo se

re ce iv ed p e ti ti o n s, 

an d r em an d s of 

pr ote st s)

in c o u rt de ci de d p e ti ti o n s, 

an d r em ands of 

pro te st s)

in c o u rt of fisc al 

ye ar

m an d s of 

pro te st s) 

pen din g 

at close 

of fisca l 

yea r

of fisc al 

yea r

1958_____ 25,047 27,283 52,3 30 38,4 78 16,299 54,7 77 122,875 87,199 210,074

1959______ 33,8 29 22,493 .56, 322 26,094 21,074 47,168 130,610 88,6 18 219,228

I960 33,397 20,031 53,4 28 50,3 36 32,499 82,8 35 113,671 76,150 189, 821

1901______ 28,212 26,917 55, 129 47,098 12,973 60,071 94,7 85 90, 094 184, 879

19 62 .......... 22,926 18,017 40,9 43 35,4 79 14,085 49,564 82,232 94,026 176,258

Ju dg e Richardson. On the rea pprai seme nt cases there are some 

62,000 cases th at are suspen ded und er 43 te st issues pen ding in our 

court. The pen ding caseload of 176,000 does not mean we hav e 

176,000 ind ividual cases pen ding in our cou rt.

Mr. R ooney. You hav e a great ma ny sim ilar cases where, when a 

decision is m ade with regard to one parti cu lar article, all the cases fall 

in follow ing th at decision.

Ju dg e Richardson. Im po rts co ntinue and the su spensions contin ue 

to build up and when the y are dispo sed of, if the impo rte r is successful 

and the Gover nment does no t wish to try an othe r case—the y will of 

course be all sti pulat ed and some tho usa nds will go off at one time. 

increa ses request ed

Mr. R ooney. Now, Jud ge, if you will direct you rself to the 

req ueste d increases, we would appre ciate it.

Ju dg e Richardson. All right.

Mr. R ooney. Are you req uesting any addit ion al personnel?

Ju dg e R ichardson. No; we are not, Mr. Ch air man—no add itional 

pers onnel and no req uest for sal ary adjus tm ents.

Th e on ly r equests we are maki ng are those t hat th e c ou rt is ob liga ted 

to make on behalf of its employe es due to the Salary Refo rm Act, 

of 1962.

Mr. R ooney. The within-grade salar y promotion s, which are 

ma ndato ry?
33

Judge Richardson. Tha t is right.

Mr. Rooney. Beyond these mandatory requirements for witliingrade promotions, and the Pay Act increases and the cost of the 2 

extra compensable days and the increase in postal rates, are there any 

further increases requested?

Judge Richardson. No; they are not, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. These increases are all required by law. Is that the 

fact?

Judge Richardson. Tha t is all we are asking for.

Mr. Rooney. This is the best presentation in years. This is 

tremendous. You have done a good job on this budget.

Judge Richardson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Monday', January 27, 1963. 

COURT OF CLAIMS

W IT N ESSE S

H O N . M ARVIN JO N E S, C H IE F JU D G E

Mr. Rooney. The next item, gentlemen, is that for the Court of 

Claims. It appears at page 336 of the committee print and beginning 

at page 58 of the justification book.

Salaries and Expenses

Object classification

|In thousands of dollars]

11 Personnel compensation;

Per manen t positions.......... .........

Positions othe r th an perm ane nt,. 

Oth er personnel c om pensation...

Total personnel compensation..

12 Personnel benefits_______________

21 Trav el and transporta tion of persons.

23 Rents, comm unications, and utilities.

24 Prin ting and reprodu ction_________

25 Other services___________________

26 Supplies and m at eri als .. .. .. ........ .

31 Eq uip me nt__________ __________

Total obligations..................... ........

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estim ate

763 863 908

6 8 8

6

769 871 922

52 57 61

13 23 23

10 10 11

81 68 80

1 1 1

6 6 6

6 8 8

938 1,045 1,114

Personnel summary

[In thousands of dollars]

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

Total nu mber of permanent positions.......... . . 78 83 86 Full-time equi valent of other p ositions................... 2 2 2

Average num ber of all employees......... ........... . 87 90 Num ber of employees at end of yea r........................ ........ 82 87 90
34

Program and financing

[In t ho us an ds of dollars]

1962 actua l 1963 estim ate 1964 estim ate

Program by a ctiv iti es :

Sala ries and exp ense s (ob lig ations)..........................................

Fina nc ing:

Unobli ga ted balan ce laps in g............. .......................................

938

17

1,045 1,114

Ne w o bli ga tio na l a uth ori ty ................................................... 955 1.045 1,114

New ob lig ationa l aut ho rit y:

App ro pr iatio n.....................................................

Propose d su pp lem en tal d ue to pa y increases.

955 1,025

20

1,114

Mr. R ooney. Th e first item is salaries and expenses, which app ear s 

at page 59 and which run s thr ough page 67 of thes e justifications. 

We shall insert those pages at thi s point in the record.

(The justification pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Cou rt of C laim s: Jud icia ry

1963 app ro pr iatio n in ann ua l a c t .. . _____ ______ _____________________________________ $1,034,500

1963 proposed sup plem en tal d ue to p ay in cre ase s............................................... ............ . ........... 20,000

Bas e for 1964______ . . . .

N et difference, 1964 ov er 1963:

1,054,500

1. Salarie s a nd expenses.

2. Re pa irs to bu ild ings .

Req uiremen ts Difference, increase (+ )

or decrease (—)1963

ad justed

1964

es tim ate

$1,045,000

9,500

$1,114,000

9,500

+$69,000

1,054, 500 1,123,500 +69,000

+69,000

Tot al esti mate for 1964. 1,123,500

Statement relating appropriatio n estimate to current appropriation

Salaries a nd expenses, Cou rt of Claim s: .,. Judiciary

1963 a pp ropriatio n i n an nu al act_________________________________________ __ 41.02 5,000

1963 propose d s upple men tal due to p ay in cr ea se s. ............... ....................................... 20,000

Bas e for 1964...................................................................................................................- __ . . . . ___ _ 1,045,000

N et difference, 1964 ov er 1963:

Req uiremen ts Differenc e, in ­

crease (+ )

or de ­

crease (—)

1963

ad ju sted

964

estim ate

Salarie s a nd expen ses........................................................ $1,045,000 $1,114,000 +$69,000

Tota l estim ate s for 1964................................... ............................................................. ................... 1,114,000
35

Statement showing analyses by object

O bj ec t

1963

est im ate

1964

es ti m at e

In cr ea se (+ ) 

or

de cr ea se (—)

11 Per so nne l co m jx 'n sa ti on..................................................... ........... $871,000

57,4 50 

23,300

10.500

67.5 00 

1,000 

6,250 

8,000

$922,500 

61,100 

23,300 

11,400 

80,000 

1,000 

6, 400 

8,30 0

+$ 51 ,500

+3, 65 0 12 Per so nnel b en efi ts ________________ ____________ _________

21 T ra v el an d t ra n sp o rt ati o n o f p er so ns........ . ..............................

23 R en t, c om m unic at io ns, an d u ti li ti e s .........................._............ +9 00

24 P ri n ti n g a nd r e p ro d u cti o n _________________________ ____ +12 ,500

25 O th er se rv ic es _____ __________________________________

26 S upplies an d m ate ri als ____________________ _____ _______ +1 50

+3 00 31 E q u ip m e n t.......... ............... ....... ... ........... ........... ............. .. . .

T o ta l obli gat io ns_____ _____ __________ _______ _______ 1 1,0 45, 000 1,11 4,00 0 +6 9,00 0

1

 In cl udes $20,000 pr op os ed su p p le m en ta l due to pay I nc reas es .

Summary of increased requirements for 1963

Nature of expense (or savings):

D ED U C TIO N S

Amount

Nonrecurring expenses authorized for 1963__ . ________________ — $5, 500

ADD ITIONS

1. Additional amount under the Federal Salary Reform Act of

1 9 6 2 .. .. .. ____________ _____ ______ ______ _____ ____ 19,500

2. Three additional law clerks for trial commissioners__________ 23, 750

3. Provision for within-grade salary advanceme nts______ ______ 7, 650

4. Cost of two e xtra compensable days in 1964________________ 6, 500

5. Increase in the cost and volume of prin ting and reproduction

required by the cou rt_________________________ _______ 15, 000

6. Additional funds required to maintain court librar y_______ _ 1, 500

7. To cover higher postal rate s provided by Public Law 87-793,

approved Oct. 11, 1962________________________________ 600

Net increase, 1964 over 1963_________________________ 69, 000

JUST IFICATION

Language changes

None.

Objectives

This appropriation is for the salaries of th e 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 the Digest of Appropriations, The Judiciary, on file with the 

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

Detailed justification

An appropriation of $1,114,000 is requested for 1964, a net increase of $69,000 

over the amount appropriated for 1963 adjuste d to include a proposed supplemental of $20,000 for pay costs under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962 

(Public Law 87-793, approved October 11, 1962). The net increase in requirements is explained below:

Deduction for nonrecurring expenses

The appropriation for 1963 included the sum of $3,000 for the procurement of 

furniture and equipment for new personnel, specifically, the five law assistan ts 

authorized for the tria l commissioners. The sum of $2,500 also was provided to 

cover the nonrecurring expense of revising the rules of the court. These nonrecurring expenses have been deducted in establishing the budgetary requirements 

for 1964.
Requirements under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

An additional $19,500 will be required in fiscal year 1964 to cover the fullyear cost of increases in salary which were granted employees of the court effective 

October 15, 1962, and approximately one-half of the annual cost of increases which 

are scheduled to take effect on January 6, 1964. The following is a breakdown, 

by fiscal year, of the total cost of pay increases under the Federal Salary Reform 

Act of 1962:

1963 prop osed 

su pple ­

m enta l

1964 b u d g etar y re quir em ents

1965 b u d g etary r eq u ir em ents

T o ta l co st

1s t phas e (effec tiv e Oct. 15, 1962):

C o m p e n sa ti o n .__ _ . __________________ $18,750 

1,250

$7,4 50 

550

$26,200

B en ef its................ .. . 1,800

T o ta l................. .................... ................ . ......... 20,000 8,000 28,000

2d ph as e (ef fective Jan . 6,1 964):

C om pensa ti on_____ _____________ ________ 10,800

700

$11,200

800

22,000

B en ef its _________________________ ________ 1,500

T o ta l................................. ......... . ....................... 11,500 12,000 23,500

G ra nd to ta l.................... ........... ......................... 20,000 19,500 12,000 j 51,500

Additional law clerks for trial commissioners

The Judicial Conference of t he United States in Septem ber 1961 endorsed the

appointment of eight law clerks to serve the tria l commissioners of the court. 

The budget estim ate for the fiscal year 1963 included a request for funds for the 

employment of eight law clerks, however, the sum appropriated by the Congress 

would perm it the employment of only five, one for each thre e commissioners. 

It is considered most desirable and necessary th at a law clerk be assigned to the 

chief tria l commissioner and one for each two of the remaining 14 tria l commissioners as authorized by the Judicial Conference and requested last year. The 

estimate for 1964 includes a requ est for funds to employ three additional law 

clerks as follows:

Salary, grade GS-9, at $6,675 per annum_________________________ $20, 000

Rela ted benefits (Government contributions to retirem ent fund for

group life insurance and health benefits)_______________________ 1, 500

Communications______________________________________________ 300

Supplies and materials_________________________________________ 150

Furniture and equipment (nonrecurring expense)___________________ 1, 800

To tal________________ ____ _________ _________ _________ 23,750

Provision for within-grade salary advancements

It is estimated th at $7,650 will be required in fiscal year 1964 to gra nt officers 

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

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

Act of 1949, as amended. Of the total requested, $7,150 represents increases in 

compensation and $500 is for related Government contributions to the retiremen t 

fund and for group life insurance. The estimate is ne t of an ticipated savings due 

to turn over in personnel.

Cost of 2 extra compensable days in 1964

The sum of $6,500 ($6,100 for personnel compensation and $400 for related 

benefits) has been included to cover regular pay in excess of 52 weeks. Employees 

who are paid biweekly will be compensated for 262 days in fiscal year 1964 as 

compared with only 260 compensable days in 1963.
37

Increased cost and volume of printing and reproduction

An increase of $15,000 for printin g and reproduction is requested. This request 

is due to bo th th e increased cost of mate rials and labor at the Government Printing 

Office and the increase in the quantity of printing required by the court in order 

to keep abreast of its increased workload. While efforts are made to keep this 

increasing item a t a minimum by a wider use of offset prin ting and mimeographing, 

it has become increasingly difficult during recent years to meet the needs of the 

court in this regard within the amount allocated.

Additional fu nds required to maintain court library

An increase of $1,500 is requeste d in the a llotmen t for equipment. The major 

portion of this amount is expended for library needs for the use of the court. While 

the base appropriation for this acco unt has remained the same for several years 

the prices of books and periodicals have increased. In addition the library needs 

of the court have likewise increased during the years requiring the purchase of 

new sets of books as well as the replacement of obsolete ones.

Higher postal rates

The budget estimate for 1964 includes an additional $600 to cover higher postal 

rates authorized by Public Law 87-793, approved October 11, 1962. This represents an overall increase of approximate ly 25 percen t in postage a nd fees (penalty 

mail) to be pa id to the Post Office Depa rtm ent.

Mr. R ooney. The request for salaries and expenses is in the amount 

of $1,114,000, which is an increase of $89,000 over the amount appropriated for the current fiscal year.

Page 61 lists the actual increases requested and the request includes 

the addition of three additional law clerks to the payroll.

We are always honored to have with us the distinguished chief 

judge of the Court of Claims, a great public servant in our estimation 

and former member of the U.S. House of Representatives, the Honorable Marvin Jones, of Texas.

General Statement

Judge J ones. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have a statem ent I would like to submit.

Mr. Rooney. We shall insert your statement at this point in the 

record, Judge Jones.

(The statement follows:)

During the court year, from September 30, 1961, to Septem ber 30, 1962, the 

court disposed of 519 petitions and 8 appeals representing 3,131 claimants. Except for 61 of these cases, in which no given amounts were claimed, the total 

amount claimed was $137,226,417.26. Of the cases disposed of, the court rendered 

judgments for claimants in the sum of $8,628,604.20, of which $2,833,827.57 

carried interest. A number of these judgments were based on settleme nts between the parties. Also, the court rendered judgments for the United States on 

counterclaims in the amount of $309,665.06, of which $3,425.09 carried interest. 

The clerk has repo rted 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 petitio ns and appeals pending on Septem ber 30, 1962, tota led 

1,573 representing 2,817 claimants. Of this tota l there were 73 class case petitions 

involving 837 claimants. While tes t cases in all probability will dispose of the 

majority of the petitio ns in this latte r group, practically ail of the other 1,500 

petitions will require individual trials before the commissioners and disposition by 

the court.
38

Report of the U.S . Court of Claims for the court year ended Sept. 30, 1862

P en d in g Se pt. 

30, 1961

Filed D is po se d P en d in g Sep t. 

30, 1962

P e t P it’s P e t P it’s P e t P it’s P e t P it’s

Cas es o th er th a n c lass cas es ________ 1,549 1,933 412 712 474 678 1,487 1,967

Class c ases _______ ________________ 114 3,169 4 113 45 2,445 73 837

A ppea ls from th e In d ia n C la im s 

C om m is si on_____________________ 14 14 7 7 8 8 13 13

T o ta l........ ....... .................. ........... . 1,677 5,116 423 832 527 3,131 1,573 2, 817

Ca se s oth er th a n c lass ca ses;

Se rv ice p ay ......................................... 179 179 38 38 73 73 144 144

C on gre ss io na l__________________ 44 62 3 3 10 10 37 55

C o n tr a c t___________ ________ _ 385 405 89 92 106 117 368 380

I n d ia n .................................... ........... 10 10 1 73 4 4 7 79

M is ce llan eo us______ ___________ 37 45 15 15 20 27 32 33

P a te n t .......... .................................. 68 71 15 15 8 8 75 78

P ro p e rty (t ak en )________ ____ 58 318 36 237 27 196 67 359

T a x ___________________________ 471 533 120 144 146 158 445 519

T ra n sp o rt ati o n o f p ro p ert y _____ 187 195 51 51 37 37 201 209

Jap an es e re lo ca tion p ro gra m ____ 4 9 0 0 2 7 2 2

C iv il ia n p a y ._______ ___________ 106 106 44 44 41 41 109 109

Cla ss case s;

A la sk a R ail ro ad.................. ............. 3 179 0 0 2 178 1 1

F ir ef ig hte rs ......................... . ......... .. 26 345 0 0 14 224 12 121

C iv ilia n p ay _______________ ___ 34 560 4 113 5 73 33 600

Se rv ic e p ay ..................... ......... ......... 51 2,085 0 0 24 1,970 27 115

A pp ea ls from In d ia n C la im s Co mm is si on__________________________ 14 14 7 7 8 8 13 13

TA X AN D PR O PER TY (T A K E N ) CASE S

As of the close of business on Septem ber 30, 19G2, there were 445 petitio ns 

representing 519 claimants seeking tax refunds on the Court of Claims dockets, 

with a total amount claimed of $238,031,748.93 toge ther with interest. Six 

percent interest, as permitted by sta tut e, on this amount is $14,281,904.93 per 

annu m ($534,902.80 per petition).

As of the close of business on September 30, 1962, there were pending 67 petitions 

representing 359 claimants in which the tota l sum of $22,985,882.45 1 ($343,072.86 

per petition) was claimed for the taking of property without paymen t of jus t 

compensation. Intere st at 4 perc ent as pa rt of j ust compensation on th at sum 

totals $919,435.29 per annum.

Petitions to the Supreme Court for writs of certiorari

Petitions for certiorari pending Oct. 1, 1961___________________________ 15

Petitions for certiorari filed Oct. 1, 1961, to Sept. 30, 1962. _____ ________ 29

To tal______ ________ ______ ___________________ ____________ 44

Record for court year Oct. 1, 1961, to Sept. 30, 1962:

Petitions for certiorari denied___________________________________

Petitions for certiorari granted and decision affirmed________________

Petitions for certiorari granted, decision reversed, and case remanded. _

Petitions for certiorari granted bu t not acted upo n_________________

Petitions for certiorari filed bu t not acted upo n____________________

Petitions for certiorari dismissed by stip ulation____________________

25

2

1

1

1 3

2

To tal________________________________________ ________ ____ 44

Records prepared for atto rneys of record but not filed _________________ 19

1

 Of w hi ch $20,351,126.14 is th e to ta l am o u n t claim ed in 58 p et it io ns re pre se nti ng 342 c la im an ts p er ta in in g 

to th e ta k in g of la nds; of w hi ch $2,634,756.31 is th e to ta l am o u n t cl aim ed in 9 peti ti ons re pre se nti ng 17 

cla im an ts p ert ain in g to th e ta k in g of p er so na l p ro p ert y .
39

A DD IT IO N A L LAW C L ER K S

Judge J ones. In connection with these law clerks for commissioners, 

Mr. Chairman, 1 want to express appreciation at this point of the 

action of the committee in permitting us to have the five which we 

have had. They have been very helpful. They have enabled us to 

get a great deal more work out because it has enabled the commissioners in especially the simpler cases to prepare memorandums and 

recommendations t hat I think has been shown to be well worthwhile.

As you know, we have never had an increase in the number of 

judges. We have the same number the court started off with when 

it had a very minor amount of work . We would like to have, and we 

have put in here a request for, three additional law clerks which we 

think can be justified because that would be one law clerk for each 

two commissioners and one law clerk for the chief commissioner, 

who has all the assignments to make and the travel arrangements in 

sending the commissioners to various points in the country.

1 hope tha t the committee may see fit to allow this, but tha t of 

course is up to the committee.

Mr. Rooney. Do you want to make a settlement right now?

You are suggesting that?

Judge J ones. We think it is well worthwhile. I think it will be a 

saving. As you know, a great many of these cases bear interest and 

if we can get them out a little earlier it really is a net saving in the long 

run.

Mr. Rooney. What are the grades and amounts of compensation 

for these law clerks?

Judge Jones. We set tha t out in detail at page 65.

Mr. Rooney. You have three GS-9’s at $6,675 per annum?

Judge J ones. Yes, Tha t has the detail set forth there as to salary 

and the related benefits, group insurance, communications, supplies 

and materials, furniture and equipment. Tha t furniture and equipment, of course, will be a nonrecurring expense.

Repairs and Improvements

Program and financing

[In thousand s of dollars]

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964estim te

Program by activities:

Structural and mechanical maintenance (obligations)

(object class 25)........................ . ........................................ 10 10 10 Financing:

New obligational autho rity (appropriatio n)......................... 10 10 10

Mr. Rooney. Thank you very much, Judge Jones. There was 

included at page 338 of the committee print and page 68 of the justifications an amount of $9,500 for repairs and improvements. We 

shall insert at this point in the record t hat page and pages 69 and 70.

(The pages referred to follow:)
Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropr iatio n

Repairs a nd im provem ents, Cou rt of C laim s: Judicia ry

1963 ap pr op ria tio n in a nn ua l a ct............................ ..............................-- ...................................................$9, 500

Base for 1964_____ ________ ____________________ ______ ____ _________________ ________ 9,500

N et d iffer ence , 1964 over 1963:

Re qu ire men ts Diff erence, 

increase 

(+ ) or de1963 app ro­ crease (—)

priat ed

1964

es tim ate

$9,500 $9. 500

To tal est im ate for 1964_____ _________ _____ __________ ____ ________________ _____ _ 9,500

JUST IFICATION

Langtiage changes

None.

Objectives

This ajmropriation is to provide for structural repairs and improvements to the 

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

Capitol. The estimate is submitted at the direction of the chief judge of the c ourt. 

Detailed j testification

The amoun t requested for general annual repairs, namely $5,000, is the same 

as allowed for 1963 an d provides for the annual repair and upkeep of the heating 

and plumbing systems, roof, and two elevators, and for electrical, carp entry, 

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

miscellaneous annual repairs.

The breakdown of this item follows:

Breakdown of estimate

Repairs and maintenance of heating system_________________________ $600

Repairs to roof__________________________________________________ 800

Electrical repairs and repla cements_________________________________ 500

Plumbing repairs________________________________________________ 400

Maintenance and repair of elev ators________________________________ 300

Carpen try and millwork, plastering and hardwa re____________________ 900

Maintenance, air-conditioning systems______________________________ 1,000

Miscellaneous___________________________________________________ 500

Total general annual repairs_________________________________ 5, 000

The a mount requested for annual painting, namely $4,500 is the same as allowed 

for 1963 and provides for necessary painting through out 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 total, therefore, requested for the Court of Claims, fiscal year 1964, u nder 

“Repairs and improvements,” is $9,500.

Mr. Rooney. This is the same amount as has been carried in the 

bill for the current and 2 previous years.

This money is for the Architect of the Capitol in connection with 

the normal repairs and improvements to the court building.

Judge J ones. That is right. The building is rather an old building 

and requires some repair.

Mr. Rooney. I am familiar with that.

Judge Jones. We are making just as few as we can get by with.

Mr. Rooney. I guess I ought to be familiar with that, Judge.

Judge J ones. 1 would think so, Mr. Chairman.

We thank you, gentlemen, all of you. We are glad to have a chance 

to see the new members.
41

Monday, January 27, 1963.

COURT OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER 

JUDICIAL SERVICES

W IT N ESSE S

HON. W IL LIA 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 O F IL L IN O IS 

H O N . 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 O F COLU M BIA 

HON. CARL A. W EIN M AN , C H IE F JU D G E , U.S. D IS T R IC T

C O U R T, SO U T H E R N D IS T R IC T O F O H IO 

W ARREN O LN EY III, D IR E C T O R , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E O F F IC E , U.S.

COU RTS

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. COU RTS

R O Y A L E. JA C K SO N , A SSIS TA N T C H IE F O F T H E D IV IS IO N O F B A N K ­

R U P T C Y , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E O F F IC E , U.S. CO U RTS 

D A R W IN H. A ND ERSO N, A SSIS TA N T C H IE F O F B U SIN ESS A D M IN ­

IS T R A T IO N , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E O F F IC E , U.S. COU RTS 

ED W ARD V. G ARABEDIA N, B U D G ET O F F IC E R , A D M IN IS T R A T IV E

O F F IC E , U.S. CO U R TS

Mr. Rooney. The next item, gentlemen, is entitled “Courts of 

appeals, district courts, and other judicial services.”

It appears beginning at page 339 of the committee print, the item 

thereof entitled “Salaries of judges” appearing at page 339 of the 

committee print.

The details are to be found beginning at page 71 of the justification 

book.

Mr. Rooney. They indicate tha t the request for the five appropriation items under “Courts of appeals, District courts, and other 

judicial services” is $54,370,400, which is an increase of $4,610,400 

over the appropriations to date in the current fiscal year and an 

increase of $3,404,400 when anticipated pay act supplementals are 

considered.

Judge Campbell, who is Chairman of the Budget Committee of the 

Judicial Conference, I am sure has a general statement at this point, 

Would you please proceed, Judge Campbell?

General Statement

Judge Campbell. Thank you.

I certainly will, I appreciate the opportunity.

I have had the statement prepared in writing in advance, Mr. 

Chairman, and filed with you and the other members of your committee. If agreeable with you, I shall save time by just highlighting 

briefly what is in there.

Mr. R ooney. Very well. I know you are such a capable gentleman 

tha t you can highlight it so tha t your highlights are not more extensive 

than the prepared statement. We will be glad to have you do so 

and insert the prepared statement at this point in the record.

(The statement follows:)
42

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, we are pleased to appear 

before you to present the budget estimates for fiscal year 1964 for the courts of 

appeals, district courts, and other judicial services.

The estimates of appropriations for 1964 total $62,426,400—of which $8,056,000 

would be from the special fund in the Treasury to operate the ban kruptcy system 

which is self-supporting. The to tal estimate represents a ne t increase of $3,905,400 

over the appropriation s currently available after they have been adjusted by the 

amoun t of $1,311,000 to cover increased salaries due to the Federal Salary Reform 

Act of 1962.

The budget estimates contain two major items of increase. The first one— 

$1,344,000—is to cover the cost in fiscal year 1964 of salary increases pursu ant 

to the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962. This is an item which you will see 

throug hou t the budgets of the various Government agencies th at come before 

you and I assume no detailed explan ation is required. For the current fiscal 

year, I think we are going to be able to absorb a bout 20 percen t of the pay costs 

of this act for supporting personnel of the courts and we’ll need no supplemental 

for increased salaries of clerical personnel in the referees’ offices. This savings 

is due to the delay in the ultimate a ppropriation of funds for 1963 and would not 

otherwise have been possible. For 1964, we shall need the full amount requested 

because our employment level now is normal—which means there are jus t a 

few vacancies scattered around the country—and will undoub tedly continue at a 

normal rate through 1964. I should note, in additional explanation of our small 

number of vacancies, th at this is the second year in a row in which we have made 

no request for additional supp orting personnel for district courts and courts of 

appeals and the first tim e in 14 years t ha t we ha ve made no request for additional 

supporting personnel in the ban kru ptcy courts. There are a few other items of 

increase which I think are of a routine nature and therefore I will not take time 

to discuss them now.

There have been no drastic changes in the business of the courts since our last 

repo rt to you. Courts of appeals received about 300 more cases in 1962 th an in 

the previous year and although the y term inated a greater number of cases tha n 

the yea r before, the pending caseload rose by about 500 cases. In the district 

courts the civil caseload continued to rise but more than 1,700 cases resulted from 

the an titrust criminal convictions of a number of electrical manufacturing companies. Terminations in these courts also fell short of filings and the pending 

caseload rose by about 3,800 cases. The volume of criminal proceedings has 

risen only slightly. The details of our caseload status are set forth in the justifications before you beginning a t page 83. Insofar as bankruptcy cases are concerned, 

there appears to have been much to our gratification a leveling off of filings. 

In 1961, 146,600 cases were filed and in 1962, th e number was 147,800. At this 

time, based on our most recent statistics it appears th at the number of cases for 

this year will total somewhere between 147,000 an d 150,000.

The secofid major item of increase—$1,650,000—is to make it possible to pu t 

into effect what th e judicial conference has term ed the judiciary salary plan.

This plan is the first comprehensive system ever proposed for the assignment 

of grades, salaries and qualifications standards for the three largest groups of 

employees in th e judiciary—those in the offices of the clerks of district courts, the 

ban kru ptcy courts and the probation system.

Before discussing the plan itself, I thin k it will be helpful to review the background and events which have led to the need for it.

Prio r to 1940, central personnel administration for the judiciary was the 

responsibility of the Department of Justice. In 1940, legislation became effective which established the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and tra nsferred this responsibility to th at Office and the judicial conference of the United 

States.

At th at time the entire judic iary including judges and the new Administrative 

Office consisted of fewer tha n 1,800 salaried personnel. Only one of the groups 

covered in the plan before you even existed insofar as having salaried personnel 

was concerned. That one group—clerks offices of the distric t courts—consisted of approximately 900 employees.

It can readily be seen, therefore, th at personnel managem ent in the judiciary 

presente d no very complex problems. The number of employees in any given 

cou rt was very small and in most cases it was quite easy for the judges to have 

personal and detailed knowledge of who was employed, what he did, and how he 

did it.

The Department of Justice, therefore—and I thin k quite properly—while it had used the salary schedules of the civil service system for ju dicia ry employees 

had never a ttemp ted to apply the complexities of a system designed for hundreds
43

of thousands of employees in th e executive bran ch to a few hundred employees in 

the judiciary with its entirely different functions and needs.

We in the judiciary inherited, therefore, from the Departm ent a set of grades 

and salary schedules and a very simple set of guidelines to prev ent disparity as 

between the various courts. There was no need for more.

World War II which brou ght such drastic increases in both personnel and 

att endant problems to the executive branch caused little or none of this, for 

obvious reasons, to the judiciary. Our personnel increase in t he years from 1940 

through 1945 was abo ut 500 and this was due in large p art to the establishm ent of 

the probation system in 1941.

In th e later 1940’s, the only major new change in our personnel was th e changing 

of the bankruptcy system from a fee to a salaried one. Again, this was in the 

beginning only a small increase in personnel.

Through the la ter 1940’s and through the 1950’s th ere came, however, changes 

in caseload both in numbers and kinds, increases in judgeships, increases in programs and other changes resulting from the increasing complexities of our laws 

and our Government as a whole.

None of these things resulted in grea t increases in our supp orting personnel b ut 

all resulted in some. By the late 1950’s, total personnel in the judiciary including 

judges and the administrative office numbered some 4,500.

Our growth has been slow and never j ust at any one time. As our growth in 

numbers has been slow so has the growth of problems connected with numbers of 

personnel been slow.

Solutions to problems as they arose tended to simplicity and individual tre atment because problems involved few people a nd came at relatively long intervals.

When the prob ation system was established, a system patterne d on th at in use 

in clerks’ offices was provided for its personnel. Similar action was taken with 

respect to the bankruptcy system when it was p ut on a salaried basis.

By 1958, it had become increasingly apparen t th at a thorough review of these 

grade and salary plans was needed. There were mounting complaints, many of 

which seemed to have merit, as to inequities stemming from the separate administration of the three systems within the judic iary and as to inequities with respect 

to comparability with positions in the executive branch.

The supp orting personnel committee, therefore, with the approval of the 

judicial conference asked the Administrative Office to conduct a thoro ugh and 

painstaking review of the situation. The Office was also asked to make appropriate recommendations.

As a beginning, the Office placed its personnel functions in one unit so that 

there might be a single coordinated approac h to the problem. Int o this unit 

were brought for this purpose a few' people who had wide experience in the fields of 

wage and salary administration and personnel management. (Let me note here 

th at these people are no longer with the Office, but they are available if the committee wishes to question them.)

The first step after th e necessary changes were made in th e Office was to conduct 

an intensive and detailed survey of a carefully selected group of distric t courts. 

The distric t courts included in the su rvey were the following:

Virginia, eastern 

Alabama, northern 

Georgia, northern 

South Dakota 

Nebraska 

Kansas

Illinois, northern 

Wisconsin, western 

New York, southern

Texas, western

Colorado

Wyoming

Washington, eastern

Washington, western

California, southern

California, northern

New' Jersey (courtroom deputies only)

The survey included visits to the clerks, probation and referees’ offices of each 

court. Prior to visiting the courts, position descriptions, personnel organization 

charts, experience and qualification statem ents, and functional cha rts were 

requested from each office and this mate rial w’as carefully studied in advance by 

the survey teams, each of which was composed of two members from the staff 

of the Personnel Division. In the first courts visited, the survey included an in terview with every employee in all thre e offices. There became less need for such 

extensive interviewing as the work progressed and experience showed th at the 

necessary inform ation could be obtained from discussion of th e charts, qualification statem ents and position descriptions with the top officials in each office.

The interviews were designed to obtain information on: (1) the reason for the 

assignment of duties and responsibilities to par ticu lar positions; (2) the patte rn
44

of organiza tional arran gements; (3) the alinement of functions to be performed in 

the order of their difficulty; (4) the amount of supervision exercised over divisional 

offices; (5) the exten t to which positions are similar among the courts; (6) the accuracy of job titles; (7) the education or training required to discharge a p articula r 

function or handle a specific position; (8) the experience necessary for the same 

purpose; (9) the equity of allocations among and within offices; (10) disparities 

in compensation between positions in the same office and between similar positions.

Of course, one result of this survey was to confirm a characteristic of administration in the Federal courts which had been recognized from the beginning— 

th at is, that there is great divergence from district to district in the organization 

and administration of these three court offices. A civil docket clerk or a courtroom dep uty clerk in one district may have very different responsibilities and 

duties from one holding the same title in another district, and often there are 

important differences between deputy clerks in the same court with th e sam e title 

but assigned to different judges. The same differences appear in the probation 

offices and the offices of the bankruptcy referees. These characteristics of judicial 

adm inistratio n of course stem from the large amount of administrative autonomy 

that district courts must necessarily have in order to guarantee judicial independence and to permit proper adjustment to the variety of conditions in our 91 

separate districts.

Recognition of the difference of administrative practice between courts and of 

the desirability and necessity of not interfering with the administration of the 

courts has necessarily affected and even controlled the nature of the plan for classifying a nd compensating t he personnel in these thre e court offices. It is n ot possible to adop t or even adapt classification systems used by the Civil Service Commission, the Navy, the Atomic Energy Commission, although all of these were 

reviewed with this possibility in mind, because in the judicial system there are no 

centers of authority nor lines of autho rity in the usual adm inistrative sense. The 

offices in question and the employees in them are responsible when it comes to the 

execution of their duties in all imp ortant particulars to the judges of the court 

whom t hey serve. Consequently, if a plan is to be devised with the objective of 

providing equal compensation for the same or similar responsibilities and work, 

it will have to be based on something other than job titles. The solution arrived 

at is, in essence, to analyze each of the positions with out regard to title but in 

term s of its functions, to assign a value to each of the vita l functions which are 

called landmarks in the report, and to grade the position according to the total 

of the landmarks, th at is according to the value of the functions actually being 

perform ed by the incumbent. This effort to recognize and allow for the great 

variety of practice in the operation of these offices has necessarily made the proposal for classification appe ar complex. But considerable complexity is inevitable if the plan is to fit the present administrative practices of t he courts and is 

not to become a Procrustean bed for any court.

We think that the plan which is before you and which I have not discussed 

here in detail comes as close to achieving the objectives which I have referred to 

previously as can be done. The plan, as I have indicated, was arrived at by an 

extremely careful process. Since before and after its approval by the judicial 

conference, it has been reviewed by many, many people in the judiciary , and the 

only strong complaint has been th at it did not go far enough in raising grades 

and salaries which so far as my committee is concerned seems to be good evidence 

th at a middle road has been hit as between too little and too much.

In closing this part of my statem ent, I want to make two things very, very 

clear. One is that we deeply regret the timing of our request which comes at 

the same time as our request for funds for a general pay increase. I hope th at 

I have made it clear th at our timing was accidental, not intention, and th at this 

is not a general pay increase within the judiciary. This plan does not affect the 

referees in bankruptcy or the clerks of court themselves. It is entirely their 

supporting personnel, and as you will see from the cha rt we have here, when we 

reach th at point in the hearing, the maximum effect is in the low- and middlegrade levels. The second thing I want to say is tha t I have not intended in any 

way in this recapitulation to criticize the conference, its committee on sup porting personnel, or the administrative office. In point of fact, I myself served on 

the comm ittee on supporting personnel for many years, and I think th at all concerned over the years have done a fine job. This is simply another necessary 

step in continuing to do a fine job.

In closing I want to report briefly on an item which appe ared in our appropriation request for fiscal year 1962 which applied specifically to my court in the 

Northern District of Illinois as well as generally to the judiciary. You may
45

remember that in the appropriation for t ha t year, we described to the committee 

the program undertak en in Chicago to improve our court offices and that your 

committee granted a request for an appropriation of $77,000 for the necessary 

equipment and physical facility changes involved in the program.

The objectives of the program were four in number. First, the existing organization and administration of our court offices were to be given an intensive 

examination to determ ine in detail the existing situation . Second, wherever any 

improvement however small was thought possible detailed plans for changes were 

to be made. Third, planned changes were to be installed, tried , altered if experience indicated a need, and finally adopted if experience showed an improvem ent 

had actually resulted. The fourth objective was to provide to the courts in 

general the opportu nity to utilize any resulting improvements.

The first three objectives of the program have largely been completed, and I 

thin k the best illustration th at I can possibly give you of the results is th at at 

the time the court officially ordered the major changes recommended which included a consolidation of the offices of the clerk of court and the clerk of the 

bankruptcy court, there were 87 employees on our rolls in these offices. As of 

now, there are 82 employees on our rolls in the consolidated office and we have 

10 judges and 6 referees in bankruptcy, as against 7 and 5, respectively, when 

we started the program and a change for the better in every administrative and 

business operation of the court. We have much hope th at as the fourth objective 

is carried out that all of the district courts will look into the benefits of the more 

than 2 years of intensive work th at have gone into the program in Chicago.

I want also to point to this program with great pride as a splendid example of 

Government cooperation. It has involved, during its course, not only the services an d personnel of the judiciary but the specialized services and personnel of 

the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Air Force, the General Services Administration, the Archives Service and the Depar tment of Justice. We in the jud iciary are very grateful to them for so willingly assisting in ways not possible for 

our necessarily limited facilities and personnel jus t as we are grate ful to your 

committee for the cooperation in granting our request for funds for a program 

which to my knowledge was the first of its kind conducted in the judiciary.

That ends my statem ent, Mr. Chairman, and we are at your service for any 

questions you or the committee may wish to ask.

Judge Campbell. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. If you 

will do that, then, I will attem pt to highlight it.

Usually I am on the other side of this kind of a statement and I 

shall try to apply brevity to myself the way I ask it of attorneys in 

my courtroom.

I will be as high in my highlighting as I possibly can.

As the chairman has already pointed out-----

Mr. Rooney. You mean light in your highlighting.

Judge Campbell. I always ask, Mr. Chairman, for more light and 

less heat and I will try to apply that, also if I possibly can.

TOTA L A P P R O P R IA T IO N R E Q U E ST

The total amount of appropriations or estimates tha t we are requesting this year is $62,426,400, of which $8,056,000 comes from the 

special fund in bankruptcy, which is self-sustaining, which accounts 

for the difference from the figure just given by you. The $8,056,000 

is for bankruptcy courts.

Mr. Rooney. So tha t we may understand one another on this, 

when you refer to this $62,426,400 you are including the bankruptcy 

items which are special funds—a special fund for referees’ salaries and 

a special fund for referees’ expenses.

When I gave you the figure in the opening statement of $54,370,400 —

that was the correct figure, excepting the bankruptcy salaries and 

expenses figure. / / * - t
46

Judg e Campbell. Yes, sir, for which we need au thor ity to spen d 

$8 million. Th e money is ther e. Actually, the am ount of money 

we are asking for is wh at the Chairm an ind icated, $54,370,400.

Th is estim ate repres ent s a total net increase of $3,905,400 if you 

take into conside ration th at the Fed eral Salary Reform Act of 1962 

has increased sala ries b y $1,311,000.

IN C R E A SED SA LA RY CO ST S

Th ere are two ma jor item s making up our $3,905,400 increase. 

Th e firs t one, $1,344,000, would be to cover the salar y increases for 

the new fiscal year pu rsu an t to the sam e Federal Salary Reform Act 

of 1962. How ever, we hope this ye ar to be able to absorb some 20 

percen t of th at in salaries of clerical pers onnel in the referee’s offices 

and othe r places so we will need no sup ple me nta l on clerical personnel 

in the referee’s offices.

Now, the other ma jor item—

D EC R E A SE IN W O R K OF B A N K R U PTC Y COURT S

Mr. R ooney. If I recall correctly the re is in these justifi cation s an 

ind ication th at the work in the ba nk ruptcy courts has fallen off s ubsta ntial ly.

Judg e Campbell. T hat is correct, sir. T hat is, leveling off.

Mr. R ooney. Is it possible th at you do no t need all these clerks 

th at we h ave given you ove r t he last few years as a re sult of the m ou nting in ba nk ruptcy cases?

Judge Campbe ll. Not unless the re is a decrease.

Mr. R ooney. A fu rth er decrease?

Judg e Cam pbe ll. A fu rth er decrease because at the pre sen t time, 

Mr. Ch airma n, the re is merely a leveling off. Our est im ate of wh at 

it will be this year in filings is betw een 147,000 and 150,000; in 1962 

it was 147,800; in 1961 it was 146,600, so th at the re is a leveling off. 

We are all gra teful to see th at . We hope th at the leveling off continues . Th is year for exam ple, we are no t asking for any increase in 

clerks as we have had to in prev ious years by reason of increases in 

filings because we detec ted in adv ance this leveling off and we shall 

no t ask unless, which I hope does n ot happen, an increase should again 

occur.

Likew ise, this year we are asking for no add itio nal position s, eith er 

in the cle rk’s offices, the pro bation offices, or the ad ministrativ e office 

personnel, which rea lly is no t my concern—Mr. Olney is here as 

Di rec tor of the Ad minis trative Office, bu t our bu dg et com mittee as 

you know passe s on the entire budget and also has a general inter est 

in th at of the Ad mi nis trative Office.

We wa tch th at as well as our own very closely.

We are asking for absolute ly no increase in personnel this year, with 

the exce ption of two pos itions in the Ad mi nis trative Office, if you 

appro ve our jud iciary s ala ry plan.
47

JUDICIARY SALARY PLAN

That is the second major item of increase, $1,650,000—to put into 

effect what is termed a judiciary salary plan.

This is something that we have been studying, a committee of the 

Judicial Conference of which I was formerly a member, the Committee 

on Supporting Personnel has been studying this matter since 1958. 

It is not a general increase. It is a reclassification of personnel the 

need for which has grown up in the judicial system due to the great 

increase in business, starting in the 1950’s which needs to be effected 

in order to bring our personnel at the lower salary levels into parity 

internally and with those comparable other Government offices.

For example, as a matter of efficiency we have combined the 

offices of the bankruptcy clerks and the office of the clerk of court in 

my district in Chicago and found great differences in salaries of the 

people doing exactly the same type of w’ork. We have had entirely 

too much of a turnover in help. We train the help and they leave us 

to go to other Government agencies where doing the same type of 

work the grade is higher than ours.

The suggested changes were brought about by a complete survey 

of the judicial system employees by people employed just for this 

purpose in 1958 and thereafter as directed by the Judicial Conference 

of the United States. They came to us from other branches of the 

Government. They are personnel experts and they have gone through 

all of our various offices and reclassified or suggested reclassifications 

of the help to bring us in general into line with the Civil Service 

classifications, the Army and Navy, Atomic Energy and the others, 

for whom we have been in effect in our various offices through the 

country for some time now training personnel.

We feel that if we can put ourselves at a comparable grade we will 

be able to increase our efficiency by retaining the people we are now 

losing by reason of our too low grades in some positions.

It is not, as I said earlier, a general increase of all the help. It does 

not affect any of the executive help, such as clerks of court or referees 

in bankruptcy. It affects no one at all in the Administrative Office.

These are the so-called, if you will pardon the term “little people,” 

in the organization which, by reason of the turnover from the Department of Justice in 1940 to the courts to administer themselves have 

never been the subject of a complete, fair, and exhaustive classification 

system. This is to bring our help into parity with other Government 

agencies and thus increase our owrn efficiency, make it unnecessary for 

us to ask for as many people as we have had to ask for in the past— 

tha t is, an increase each year—and also to avoid this turnover.

The history and the complete report of the inspection that has been 

made by these people—they are no longer, as I say, on our payroll; 

they have done this job and then they submitted it to the Judicial 

Conference of the United States through its Committee on Supporting 

Personnel.

98777—63----- 4
48

Tha t committee gave it very careful study. During part of the 

time I was a member of the committee and I can testify that every 

judge on that committee gave this areal dedicated and objective review.

'The result is that the report went to the Judicial Conference and 

was, after further study there, again approved and now finds it way 

to you gentlemen.

As I say, it will result in the expenditure of $1,650,000 more per 

year but it is in my opinion also thoroughly justified and justifiable in 

tha t all that it does is to correct injustices th at have existed for many 

years in the help in the lower echelons of the judicial system.

Mr. Rooney. May I interrupt there?

Judge Campbell. Certainly, sir.

GRA DES OF PE O PL E TO B E N E F IT FR OM SA LA RY PL AN S

Mr. Rooney. Do you have a chart or can you furnish us with a 

chart which would indicate the grades of the people who would receive 

the $1,650,000?

Judge Campbell. Yes, sir. We have that.

Mr. Bow. Mr. Chairman, I am wondering whether there would be 

any opportunity in consideration of this chart if we could have the 

turnover of these grades, what the present turnover is?

Judge Campbell. You mean percentagewise or in jobs, sir?

I can give it to you from my own district right away. I think it 

would take a little time to compute it for the others, but we can get it.

Mr. Bow. You do not have tha t ready?

Judge Campbell. It is readily available. We can certainly furnish 

it, Mr. Bow.

Mr. Bow. I wish that could be furnished.

Mr. Rooney. Very well. We shall insert at this point in the record 

the judicial salary plan chart, which I have in my hand, together with 

the information requested by Mr. Bow.

(The chart follows:)
49

TH E JUDICIARY SALARY PLAN

25 0

Clerks to Refe rees
50

TU RN OV ER OF JU DI CIAR Y PE RS ON NE L

Judge Campbell. And if we might have leave to furnish tha t later, 

we will compile it and submit it.

(The information furnished follows:)

Turnover in fiscal year 1962 of judic iary personnel to be classified under the judic iar y

salary plan

G ra de

D ep u ty c le rk s 

(d is tr ic t co ur ts )

P ro b ati o n s yst em C le rk s to re fer ees

N u m b er 

of positio ns 1

T u rn ­

ov er

P e rce n tage

N u m b er 

of po si ­

ti o n s i

T u rn ­

ov er

P e rcen tage

N u m b er 

of p os iti o n s i

T u rn ­

over

P erce n tage

G S-1 5____ ____ . ____ 0 1 0 0 0

G S -1 4 ._____ ________ 0 11 0 0 0

G S- 13 _______________ 7 9 28 .6 64 4 6.2 1 0

G S-1 2.............................. 10 3 30.0 37 2 5. 4 1 0

G S- 11 .............................. 24 0 0 173 15 8. 7 2 o

G S-1 0_______________ 62 5 8.1 155 9 5. 8 8 o

U S-9 .................. ............. 64 10 15.6 64 6 9. 4 5 0

G P-8 ......... ....................... 68 6 8. 8 0 0 0 14 1 7.1 O S-7 ................................. 219 39 17.8 6 0 0 83 10 12.0 G S -6 ......... ....................... 266 50 18.8 27 o 0 71 10 14. 1 G o -5 ..................... . ......... 214 76 35. 5 211 22 10. 4 126 20 15.9 G S-4 ________________ 122 76 62.3 110 47 42. 7 166 43 25 9 G S -3 ___________ ____ 18 7 38 .9 8 4 50 0 126 68 54 0 G S-2 ................................. 2 1 50.0 0 0 0 7 3 42.9

T o ta l..................... 1,07 6 275 25 .6 867 109 12.6 610 155 25.4

i OS g ra de s li ste d ar e t ho se p re vai ling for th e g re at er p a rt of th e ye ar . N ew p osi ti ons a uth ori ze d and filled 

d u ri n g t h e y ea r hav e be en exc lu de d for t h e pu rp ose o f c om puti ng tu rn over.

Judge Campbell. You will notice from the graph tha t it is largely 

in the lower grades th at there are promotions requested.

Mr. Rooney. With the exception of probation.

Judge Campbell. There we are dealing in the higher grades, sir, 

but with professional not executive people. Jn the probation office 

I refer to the officers really as similar personnel because they are the 

ones th at are doing the work and they are the ones, too, tha t we are 

losing quite regularly after training them, to State systems and to 

State courts. We bring them in and we train them and then we keep 

them for only too short a time because our caseload is heavy and our 

pay is low.

It is unfortunate tha t this whole request comes a t this time. Certainly, if we could have known it we would n ot be bringing it before 

your committee, gentlemen, directly on the heels of the Federal 

Salary Increase Act; tha t is, the act that the Congress passed last 

year increasing the amount of money paid in each grade.

The study just happened to finish at the same time. The situation 

is not alleviated or corrected by the amount of money increase that 

was granted, although certainly these employees enjoy that increase 

as do all the others, but those who have been improperly graded thus 

far and improperly graded lower than their positions and abilities 

warrant, we are regrading under the plan into an adequate grade. It 

is, therefore, not an augment to the salary increase plan tha t went 

through Congress last session, but is a needed reform in our own 

system.

As I say, all of the details are contained in the written statement 

which you have. These experts tha t we used to make the survey are
51

no longer on our payroll but they are available and we can submit 

them for examination by your committee or by a subcommittee or 

investigating officer if you wish to have tha t done. We have all of 

tha t available in any greater detail tha t the committee may wish.

I think tha t covers sufficiently the highlights, Mr. Chairman, of 

the statement tha t I wanted to call to your attention and the two 

principal items of increase that make up the $3,905,000 extra tha t we 

are asking for. I said we were asking for no increase in personnel at 

any level in clerk’s offices, probation offices, or offices of referees in 

bankruptcy, and again may I note on behalf of our committee our 

gratification that bankruptcy filings are leveling off and tha t this is 

the first time since 1940 or thereabouts that we have not asked— 

what year was it-----

Mr. Airhart. 1948.

Judge Campbell. Tha t we have not asked for more positions in 

bankruptcy. It is the first year since I have had anything to do with 

the budget tha t we have not asked for more probation officers or more 

deputy clerks in the clerk’s offices.

Mr. Bow. They are still the highest in the history of the Republic.

Mr. Rooney. Oh, no.

Judge Campbell. So are the courts, Congressman Bow, and the 

number of cases are the highest in the history of the Republic and long 

may the Republic continue to prosper and increase.

Mr. Bow. Did you say Republic or Republicans?

Judge Campbell. I was quite careful, sir.

Mr. Bow. I noted that.

Judge Campbell. It is a capital “ R” and it ends with the letter 

“c,” the word that I was using.

I think the Congressman from Ohio, Mr. Chairman, is aware of 

my personal politics. I will submit to examination on tha t some 

time; but I think I would rather have it in his office.

I would like to close with one more gratifying note, and this is on 

somewhat of a personal nature, but I bring it to your attention because I think tha t it will be beneficial throughout the whole of the 

courts.

US E OF FU ND S FOR MA CH INER Y IN NO RT HE RN DI ST RICT OF IL LI NOIS

As you may recall, some 2 years ago we asked you gentlemen for, 

and received from you, $77,000 for work in my own court to buy nonrecurring items of modern machinery, to enable us to consolidate the 

offices of the referees in bankruptcy, clerks, and also the clerk of court, 

and to improve, in general, the administration of our clerk’s offices, 

with the idea tha t this could be somewhat of a guinea pig or a model 

for the rest of the clerks’ offices in increasing efficiency and reducing 

the number of employees.

I am happy to report tha t we have concluded the changes, bought 

the machinery, altered our space, and utilized all of the improvements 

tha t we, at tha t time, described to you. I think that we have had 

the excellent cooperation of all other branches of the Government 

involved, and I pay my thanks to them as well as to you gentlemen 

for having made it possible.

When we started this in 1962, we had 87 employees on our payrolls 

in these offices. At tha t time, we had five active judges sitting, 

although seven were authorized in the court. At the present time,
52

we have 10 active judges sitting, and 2 retired judges who assist in 

trial of cases approximately 6 months of the year. This, of course, 

places a greatly increased burden on the clerk’s offices because the 

work from individual judges has more than doubled what it was in 

1962.

At tha t time, also, we had only five referees in bankruptcy. We 

now have six. Thus compared, we are now turning out orders more 

expeditiously. Every order goes out the day it is entered by a judge, 

whereas heretofore there was a delay of weeks and sometimes months 

in getting orders our in accordance with the statute. They go out 

daily now. Whereas we started with 5 judges and 5 referees sitting, 

we now have 7 referees—I said 6—and 10 active and 2 retired judges 

sitting regularly. And as compared with 87 employees we started 

with, we are giving better service now with 82 and with practically 

double the volume.

I think this justifies what T said to you gentlemen when I asked 

for the $77,000 2 years ago, and I hope tha t we may—we are not 

asking for anything in tha t line this year—bu t I do hope this might 

ultimately, if followed elsewhere, result in a reduction of additional 

personnel to be asked for in the future and in general an increase in 

efficiency and economy throughout the U.S. courts.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. Rooney. We are likewise pleased to have with us the distinguished Chief Judge of the District Court of the District of Columbia, the Honorable Matthew F. McGuire. Judge McGuire, do you 

have anything to contribute to this?

Judge McGuire. T would not attem pt to contribute anything after 

I have heard Judge Campbell, Mr. Chairman. I do not have anything to say after what Judge Campbell has said.

Mr. Rooney. Judge Weinman, do you have anything to say?

Judge Weinman. No, sir.

Mr. Rooney. Mr. Olney, I am sure you have something to say?

Mr. Olney. No, sir.

Salaries of J udges

Program and financing

(In t ho us an ds of dollars]

1962 actua l 1963 est im ate 1964 est im ate

Pr og ram by a cti vitie s: Salaries a nd ben efits (ob ligations)____

Fin an cing : Ob ligations in excess of av ailabilit y (—). .. . __

10,188

-8 8

10,860 11,200

Ne w obligational au th or ity (app ro pr iatio n) ...................... 10,100 10,860 11,200

Object classification

[In t ho us an ds of dollars]

1962 ac tu al 1963 estim ate 1964 estim ate

11 Person nel comp ensation : Pe rm an en t posi tions. .. ...............

12 Person nel benefit s.............. .........................................................

9,843 

314 

31

10,491 

344 

25

10,819

356 13 Benefits for former p er so nn el 25 1

............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

To tal obligati ons.......... .................................................... 10,188 10,860 11,200

1

 Widow s of Su prem e Cou rt Jus tices.
53

Personnel summary

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

Tota l nu mbe r of perman ent positions:

Active judges_____ _______ ______ ___ ______ . ____ 385 385

90

385

95

466

371

Senior and resigned judges__________________________ 91

Average number of all judges____ _____________________ 422 452

Num ber of judges at end of year:

Active ju d g es._____ ___________ ________ . ... 356 371

Senior and resigned judges___ ________ _____ ________ 91 92 97

Mr. R ooney. Th e firs t item under “C ou rts of appeals, dis trict 

courts, and other judicia l services” is th at for “Sa laries of jud ges.” 

This appears at page 339 of the comm itte e pr in t and beginning at 

page 72 of the justificatio ns.

We shall insert at this po int in the record pages 72 thr ough 77 of 

the justifications.

(The page s follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Salaries of judges: Judiciary

1963 approp riation in annual act..................... . ......................................................................... $10,860,000

Base for 1964.............................................................................................................................. 10,860,000

Net difference—1964 over 1963:

Requirements Difference, 

increase 

(+ ) or de1963 appro­ crease ( —)

priated

1964

estimate

Compensation and be ne fits... ....... . .......................... $10,860,000 $11,200,000 +$340,000

Total estim ate for 1963...................... ................................................... . ........... ..................... n , 200,000

Statement showing analysis by object

Object

1963

estim ate

1964

estim ate

Increase (+) 

or

decrease (—)

11 Personnel compensation_______ _______

12 Personnel benefits______________ .

$10,491,000 

344.000 

25,000

$10,819,000 

356,000 

25,000

+$328,000 

+12,000

13 Benefits for former personnel (or surviv ors >).__

Total obligations__________________ ____ 10,860,000 11,200,000 +340,000

1

 Widows of Supreme Cou rt Justices.

Summ ary of increased requirements for 1964

Natur e of expense (or savings):

1. For the compensation and related benefits of 14 additional 

judges. It is estim ated tha t funds will be required to pay an 

average of 466 judges in fiscal year 1964 as compared with Amount

452 for which provision is made in the base app ropriation__ $340, 000

Increase, 1964 over 1963_____________________________ 340, 000
54

Justification

Language changes

None.

Objectives

Funds appropriated under this heading are for the salaries and benefits of all 

U.S. circuit and district judges, and all justices and judges who have retired or 

resigned in p ursuance of law. Annuities to surviving widows of Supreme Court 

justices also are payable from this appropriatio n. For basic s tat uto ry authorities, 

reference is made to section K of th e “Digest of Appropriations, the Jud icia ry,” 

on file with the Bureau of th e Budget and the Appropriations Committees of the 

Congress.

General jtestification

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, 1962, there were 

on the roll and in a pay status, 74 active circuit judges (4 vacancies) and 282 

active district judges (25 vacancies). In addition, there were 86 senior judges 

and 5 resigned judges, or a grand tota l of 447 judges in a pay status. During 

July, August, and September 1962, the number of judges on the roll increased 

from 447 to 455 and as of September 30, 1962, there remained only 18 vacancies, 

of which 7 were new judgeships created by the act of May 19, 1961, Public Law 

87-36. A further reduction in the number of judgeship vacancies is anticipated 

and, based on past experience, it is expected th at in 1964 there will be an average 

of only 14 vacancies which is considered a normal level. An increase in the 

number of senior judges also is anticipated. Consistent with the pattern which 

has existed over the past several years, it is expected that there will be, on the 

average, 95 senior and resigned judges on the roll in 1964, or 5 more tha n is 

provided for in the base appropriation .

The amount requested for 1964 will be sufficient to pay the salaries and related 

benefits of 14 additional judges, or an average of 466 judges. It also provides 

for the continuation of ann uity payments to five widows of Supreme Court 

Justices.

The following table shows the average number of judges on the roll during the 

past 5 years and estimates for 1963 and 1964:

Ju dg es hip s Vac an cies Fill ed

R et ired a nd 

resign ed 

ju dg es

T o ta l

ju dg es

Fi sc al ye ar :

1 9 5 8 .. ................... ............. ............................. >330 14 316 70 386

1 9 5 9 .. ______ _________________________ i 330 18 312 76 388

1960_______ ________________ ______ _ 316 16 300 81 381

1961_________________________________ 2

 313 14 299 81 380

1962_________________________________ 385 53 332 91 423

1963 (e sti m ate d )........................ . ............. .. 385 23 362 90 452

1964 (e sti m ate d )____________ _____ ___ 385 14 371 95 466

1

 In clu des 14 H aw ai i te rr it ori al ju dg es .

2

 R educti on d ue to A la sk a st at eh ood.

Mr. R ooney. The se page s ind iccte th at the req ues t is in the 

am ou nt $11,200,000, which would be an increase of $340,000 over the 

am ou nt appro priat ed for judges’ salaries in the curre nt fiscal year.

N U M B E R OF JU D G E S

How ma ny judges does this provide for?

Mr. Anderson. This provide s for an average numb er of 466 

judg es.

Mr. R ooney. How ma ny ret ire d judges does this provide for?

Mr. Anderson. Ninety-five, Mr. Chairma n, ret ire d and resig ned.

Mr. R ooney. I wa nt also the figure on resig ned judg es.
55

Mr. Anderson. That is 90 and 5, that is the estimate.

Mr. Rooney. Which is which?

Mr. Anderson. Retired 90, resigned 5.

Mr. Rooney. How much of a lapse is provided in this?

Mr. Anderson. We estimate tha t approximately 14 judgeship 

vacancies will prevail throughout 1964.

A D D IT IO N A L JU D G ES A LLO W ED AN D A PPO IN T E D

Mr. Rooney. The total additional judges allowed w’ithin the legislation in the last year or two were how many?

Mr. Anderson. Ten circuit court judges and 63 district judges.

Mr. Rooney. And how many have been appointed?

Mr. Anderson. All the circuit judges and all but five of the district judges are on the rolls a t this time.

Mr. Rooney. And how many of the five district judges have been 

nominated?

Mr. Anderson. I have heard of no nominations, Mr. Chairman.

Judge Campbell. Some of those have been appointed in the interim and are sitting. We have one such who is not yet confirmed in 

northern Illinois. He took an interim appointment and now his 

nomination has been sent to the Senate. If he is confirmed his salary 

will have to go back to the date he took office in early December.

Judge McGuire. We have had a judicial vacancy for 27 months, 

28 months, as a matter of fact.

Mr. Rooney. Are there any questions, gentlemen?

Mr. Slack. I have one question, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. Mr. Slack?

JU D IC IA R Y SA LA RY PLA N CHART

Mr. Slack. Judge Campbell, this chart is not clear to me at all. 

What do these figures in the left column represent?

Judge Campbell. Number of people.

Mr. Slack. Number of people?

Judge Campbell. Yes, sir, tha t would be affected.

Mr. Slack. In other words, tha t is the present number of people 

in these various grades and then the shaded portion is the salary plan?

Mr. Airhart. Tha t is the effect of the application of the plan, yes.

Mr. Slack. Which means your higher grades will be increased and 

your lower grades reduced?

Mr. Airhart. What we are trying to show is the present number, 

for instance, of grade 3, then the number tha t would exist after the 

application of the plan in total.

Mr. Slack. I see. Thank you.

Mr. Rooney. Mr. Smith?

Mr. Smith. Then you will increase the higher grades and reduce 

the lower grades?

Judge Campbell. In number of people, yes. That is the purpose.

Mr. Slack. In other words, this chart deals with numbers of people?

Judge Campbell. Yes, sir. It shows how many people would be 

affected going from grade to grade.

Mr. Slack. That is all.
S ala ri es of S upp orti ng P erso nnel

Object classification

[In th ousa nds of d oll ars ]

Per so nnel co m pen sa tion:

P erm an en t po si tion s...................... .........

Posi tion s oth er th a n p erm an en t_____

O th er pe rs on ne l co m pen sa tion______

T o ta l pe rs on ne l com pen sa tion.........

D ir ec t ob liga tion s:

11 Per so nnel co m p en sati o n .. ............

12 Per so nnel ben efi ts ____ _________

T o ta l di re ct o b li g a ti o n s.. .........

R ei m burs ab le o bl ig atio ns :

11 Per so nnel co m pen sa tion...............

12 Per so nnel ben efits ______ _______

T o ta l re im burs ab le ob liga tion s. 

T o ta l ob liga tions ....................... ..

1962 ac tu al 1963 es ti m ate 1964 esti m at e

23,1 36 26,008 28,891

292 346 365

73 74 302

23,500 26, 428 29, 558

23,493 26,2 20 29,325

1,740 1,940 2,155

25.233 28,160 31,480

8 208 233

15 17

8 223 250

25,241 28,3 83 31,7 30

Personnel summ ary

1962 ac tu al 1963 esti m at e 1964 est im at e

T ota l n u m b er of perm an en t po si tion s.............. .................... ........... 3,743 3,880 3,880 F ull-t im e eq uiv al en t of oth er po si tion s____ _______ __________ 73 85 85 A ve rage n u m b er of all e m plo ye es ____ ________ _______ ______ 3, 578 3,86 0 3.8 63 N u m b er of em ploy ee s a t en d of y ea r................................................. 3,745 3,877 3,890

Program and financing

[In th o u san d s o f dollars]

P ro gra m b y a ct iv itie s: Salar ies an d be ne fits:

D irec t pro gra m ______________ ____ _______ _____________ _

R ei m burs ab le p ro gra m ....................................................................

T o ta l o bliga tions ___________ ______________ ______ ____

Fin an cin g:

A dv an ce s a n d rei m burs em en ts f ro m oth er ac co unts (—) __

U nobligate d b al an ce la p si n g .........................................................

N ew o bl ig at io nal a u th o rit y _____ ______________ ____ _

N ew o bl ig at io nal a u th o ri ty :

A pp ro p ri ati o n .................... ................. ........... ........... .......................

Pro po se d su p p le m en ta l due to pay in cr ea se s____ ________

1962 a ctu al 1963 es ti m ate 1964 esti m at e

25,2 33

8

28,1 60 

223

31, 480 

250

25,241 28,383 31, 730

- 8

412

-2 2 3 -2 5 0

25,645 28, 160 31.480

25,64 5 27,000 

1. 160

31, 480

Mr. Rooney. Th e next item is entitled “Salaries of Supportin g 

Perso nnel” and it is to be found beginning at page 341 of the com ­

mittee print.

We shall insert at this po int in the record pages 78 thr ough 101 of 

the justificatio ns.

fThe pages follow:)
57

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Salaries of s up po rti ng personnel , th e jud iciary: Jud iciary

1963 app ro pr iatio n in an nu al act................................................................................................................ $27,000,000

1963 proposed s up plem en tal du e to pa y inc reases................................................................................... 1,160,000

Base for 1964 .......................................................................................................................................... 28,160,000

N et difference, 1964 over 1963:

Re qu irem en ts Difference, in ­

creas e (+ )

or de ­

creas e (—)

1963

ad ju st ed

1964

estim ate

Co mp ensat ion and relat ed ben efits................ .......... $28,160,000 $31,480,000 +$3,320,00 0 +3,320,000

To tal estim ate for 1964........................................................................................................................ 31, 480,000

Statement showing analysis by object

Object

1963

es tim ate

1964

es tim ate

Increa se (+ ) 

or

decrease (—)

11 Person nel co mpe nsation______________________________

12 Perso nnel benefits___________________________________

$26,220,000 

1,940,000

$29,325,000 

2,155,000

+ $ 3 ,105,000 

+215,00 0

To ta l (direc t) ob ligations______________________ _____ i 28,160,000 31,480,000 +3,32 0,000

* Inc lud es $1,160,000 propo sed s upple men tal du e to p ay increases.
An al ys is of increases requested by class of personnel

E sti m a te 1963« F ed er al 

Sal ary 

R ef or m A ct

W it hin -g ra de

pro m oti ons Ju d ic ia ry sala ry p la n O th e r 1 E sti m ate 1964 Posi ti ons A m o u n t P osi tions A m o u n t

P er so nnel c om pen sa ti on:

C le rk s of c o u rts ________________ 1,412

888

830

314

315 

121

$9,335 ,00 0

6, 490,0 00 

5,9 00 ,00 0 

2, 490,000

1,405,00 0 

808,000

$400,000

263,000 

261,000 

116,000 

40,000 

32,000

$152,300 

142, 500 

122, 700

$800,000 

500,000 $112,400 56,9 00 

48,3 00 

19,500 

11,400 

6,5 00

1,412

888

830

314

315 

121

$10, 799, 700 

7,452,40 0 

6,3 32,00 0 

2, 625,500 

1,488, 900 

859, 500

P ro b ati o n s y ste m ................................

Sec re ta ries an d la w c le rk s___

C o u rt r ep o rt ers ________ ______

C rier s ar id m es se nger s................. 32, 500 

13,000 O th er p e rs o n n e l---___ .

T o ta l, per so nnel co m pen sa tion 3,8 80 26,428 ,000

1,955,000

1,112,00 0 

76,0 00

463,000 

31,000

1,3 00,00 0 

91,000

255,000 

19,000

3,8 80 29, 558,000 

2,1 72,00 0 Per so nnel ben efi ts ____________

T o ta l, per so nal s er vi ce s a n d ben efi ts . 3,8 80 28, 383, 000 

-2 23,0 00

1,188,000 

-1 1 ,0 0 0

494,000 1,3 91, 000 

-1 6 ,0 0 0

274,000 3,880 31,73 0,0 00 

-2 50,0 00 Le ss: A n ti cip ate d r eim b u rs em en ts

T o ta l (d ir ect ) o b li g ati o n s__ 28, 160,000 1,177,000 494,000 1,375,00 0 274,000 31,48 0,0 00

i I n clu d es $1,16 0,000 pr opose d su p p le m en ta l d u e to p ay in cr ea se s. » In clu des $242,000 fo r 2 ex tr a co m pen sa bl e d ay s an d $32,000 for a re d u cti o n of la ps e (3

pos iti ons ) re quir ed b y re as on of th e cre ation of a ne w ju dic ia l d is tr ic t in th e S ta te of F lo ri da.
Summary of increased requirements for 1964

Nature of expense (or savings):

1. Additional amount required under the Federal Salary Reform Amount

Act of 1962.......................... ........... ......... ........... ............... . $1, 177, 000

2. Provision for within-grade salary advanc ements___________ 494, 000

3. For impleme ntation of ju diciary sala ry plan as approved by

the Judicial Conference of the United Sta tes___________ 1, 375, 000

4. Cost of 2 extra compensable days in 1964________________ 242, 000

5. 3 additional positions (reduction of lapse) required by reason

of the creation of a new judicial distric t in the Sta te of

Flo rida____________________________________________ 32, 000

6. Continuing authority for pre tria l examiner division of the

U.S. Dis trict Court for the Southern Dis trict of New York 

with an increase in the amoun t authorized from $38,000 to 

$38,855 augmented also to the extent of increases in s alary 

authorize d pursuant to the Federal Salary Reform Act of

1962_________________________________________________________

Increase, 1964 over 1963___________________________ 3, 320, 000

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

Language changes

The limitations of $15,950 and $21,305 on the aggregate salaries of secretaries 

and law clerks to circuit and district judges have been increased, consistent with 

the provisions of the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962, to $17,670 and $23,465, 

respectively. The new limitations reflect the second phase salary increases to take 

effect on Jan uary 6, 1964.

Objectives

This appro priation is for paymen t of compensation and benefits of all sup porting 

personnel of the U.S. courts of appeals and the U.S. district courts, w ith the exception of referees in bankruptcy and the ir clerical assistants. For da ta as to the 

classes of personnel covered and basic sta tutory authorities, reference is made to 

section L 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

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 

prohibition system . The estimate for 1964 provides for pay increases under the 

Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962; the regrading of dep uty clerks in the U.S. 

district courts and officers and employees in the proba tion system consistent with 

new classification stan dards prescribed in the judiciary salary plan as approved 

by the Judicial Conference; within-grade salary advancem ents to be granted 

court personnel ; and for an extension of the autho rity for a p retrial examiner and 

staff for the U.S. D istrict Court for the Southern District of New York.

The following is a summary of the judicial business of both the circuit and 

district courts:

Courts of appeals

Cases filed in the courts of appeals during the fiscal year 1962 increased for the 

fourth consecutive year to a record 4,823 cases. Excluding cross appeals and 

consolidations, it represents an increase of 279 cases, or approximately 7 percent, 

over th e previous year. During the year the courts disposed of 4,167 cases, which, 

exclusive of cross appeals and other duplicate appeals, is 118 less than in 1961. 

The pending backlog thus increased to 3,031 cases on Jun e 30, 1962, which, excluding the cross appeals, represents an increase of 552 over the num ber pending on 

June 30, 1961.

The pending backlog thus increased to 3,031 cases on Jun e 30, 1962, or 450 

more t han were pending on Jun e 30, 1961.
60

The following table shows caseload data for the U.S. courts of appeals for the 

past 10 years:

Fis ca l yea r Filed T e rm in ate d

Pen din g Fi sc al y ea r Fi le d T erm in ate d

P en d in g

1953 .................. 3,226 

3, 481 

3,695 

3,588 

3. 701 

3,694

3,240 

3,19 2 

3,65 4 

3, 734 

3,687 

3,70 4

1,84 5

2,134

2,175 

2,0 29

2,04 3 

2,033

1959............................. 3, 754 

3.899 

4,204

1 4,823

I (4,4 83)

3,753 

3,713 

4,04 9 

4, 167 

(3,931)

2,034 

2,2 20 

2,3 75 

3,031 

(2,927)

1954 1960______________

1955 1961______________

1956 ____________ 1962>........................... 1957______________

1958_______________

i P ri o r to 1962 al l cross ap pe al s, co m pa ni on an d oth er dupli cate ap peal s w er e eli m in ate d fro m th e co unt 

of cases c om m en ce d ex ce pt for 1 c on tr ol case for e ac h gr oup . 'P hi s re su lt ed in sm al le r publish ed figu res for 

ca se s c om m en ce d, a s we ll as ca ses te rm in ate d an d pe nd in g. In th e in te re st of confo rm ity, beg in nin g w it h 

1962 a ll c as es file d hav e be en a cc ou nt ed for. For co m par at iv e pu rp os es , th e n u m b e r of cases fil ed , te rm in ate d , an d pe ndin g, e xc lusiv e of c ross a ppea ls a n d c ons ol id at io ns , is sh ow n in pa re nt hes es .

The district courts

Civil cases.—There were a tota l of 61,836 civil cases filed in the U.S. district 

courts during fiscal year 1962 as compared with 58,293 cases filed in the previous 

year, an increase of 3,543 or 6.1 percent. During 1962 there were 57,996 cases 

term inated, 2,580 (4.7 percent) more th an in 1961 bu t 3,840 less than the number 

filed in 1962. Consequently, the pending caseload increased from 64,128 a year 

ago to 67,96S on June 30, 1962.

An unusual group of cases were filed during the fiscal year 1962 as a result of 

the an titrust criminal convictions of a number of electrical manufacturing companies. There were 1,741 such cases filed during 1962 and all but 2 of these 

cases were still pending at the end of the year. Excluding these cases for comparative purposes, the increase in filings actually amounted to only 3.1 percent 

in 1962 and th e ordinary pending load increased only 3.3 percent.

The following table shows the number of civil cases filed, term inate d, and 

pending in the U.S. d istric t courts for the past 10 years:

Fis ca l ye ar File d T erm in ate d

T erm in ate d 1

(exc lu ding 

A la sk a)

Pen din g end 

of yea r

1952. ................................................................................... 58,428 53,1 50 51,861 60,362

1953_________________________________ ________ 64,001 57, 490 56,011 66,873

1954_________________________ ________________ 59, 461 57,903 56,381 68, 431

1955____________________________ ______ ______ 59,375 58, 974 57,269 68,832

1956_______ _______ __________ __________ _____ 62,394 67, 700 65,474 63,526

1957.................. ................................ . ............................... 62,380 63, 568 61, 625 62,338

1958___________________________ ______________ 67,115 6b 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

1962............ ........... . .......................................................... 61,83 6 5L996 57,830 » 67, 968

1

 C iv il a n d pri v ate ea ses in 1960 a n d pr io r years hav e be en ad ju st ed by su b tr ac ti n g t erm in ati o n s for th e 

D is tr ic t C o u rt of A la sk a. The se we re loc al ca ses an d in th e tr ansf er of ju ri sd ic ti on to th e S ta te co ur ts in 

F eb ru ary 1960, t hese c ases be ca m e S ta te cases an d ther ef or e sh ould n o t be us ed in a co m pa riso n of d is tr ic t 

co urt w or k w it h t h e 1961 a n d 1962 f igures.

1

 I nclu des 1,739 el ec tric al c ontr ac ti ng ca ses.

Additional judge power

The act of May 19, 1961 ,authorized the ap pointm ent of 63 addition al judges for 

the U.S. district courts. Forty-nine were appointed and entered on duty prior 

to the e nd of the calendar year 1961. Examining the duty sta tus of all the new 

judges appointed during fiscal year 1962, it is estimated th at the judgepower 

available in 1962 was 10 percent more tha n in 1961. With this in mind, it is 

inte resting to note th at there was a 4.7 percent increase in the number of trials 

reporte d in 1962 as compared with 1961, but th at there was 10.1 percent increase 

in trial days. There actually was no increase at all in the number of trials or 

tria l work in the first half of fiscal year 1962 b ut during the second half the number 

of trials increased 11 percent and tria l days increased 19 percent. The statistic s 

indicate th at the district courts were able to accomplish in tria l work exactly 

what could be expected in terms of the amount of new judgepower made available 

during the year.
61

Criminal proceedings.— The number of defendan ts prosecuted in the U.S. 

district courts has remained relatively c onstant for the past several years. However, during fiscal year 1962, there was an increase of about 1,000 or 2.8 percent, 

compared with the number prosecuted in the previous year. The number of 

criminal defe ndants whose proceedings were termin ated was 235 more tha n in 

the previous year but 1,470 less than th e number filed on in 1962. Consequently, 

the defendan ts in pending criminal cases rose from 11,440 a year ago to 12,910 

as of June 30, 1962. The following table shows the number of defendants filed on 

in original proceedings, term inations, and the number pending at the end of the 

year for each of the past 5 years:

Fi sc al ye ar C om ­

m en ce d

T erm in ate d

Pen din g

19 58. .................... . .............................................................. ............... ......... 35,0 15 34,778 9

1959...................................................... . ................. . ......... ........................... 35,5 17 34' 744 10.558 1960......... ..................................................................... ......... ....................... 35,0 17 34'567 10.845 1961........... .............................................. ................. ..................................... 35,139 34,4 03 11, 440 1962................. ..................... ............. ................................................ ........... 36,1 08 34^638 12,910

Passport Applications.— The num ber of passport applications th at the district 

courts processed during the fiscal year 1962 showed a su bstantial increase over the 

previous year. During 1962, 249,655 passpo rt applications were processed, compared with 220,699 in 1961, an increase of 28,956 or 13 percent.

The following is a summary of the total passport applications filed, the number 

and percentage of applications processed by the district courts:

Fi sc al ye ar

T ota l 

pas sp or t 

ap pli ca ­

tions file d

N u m b er of 

pas sp ort ap ­

pl ic at io ns 

fil ed in 

th e d is tr ic t 

co ur ts

Per ce nta ge 

of ap pli ca ­

tion s filed 

in th e 

d is tr ic t 

co ur ts

1957............... ......... ......... . ............................................................................ 564,397 171,737 30 4 1958................................. ................................................ ................. 653’074 185’684 28 4 1959........................... .................................... ..................... ....................... 702^ 021 197,828 28 2 I 9 6 0 .._________________________ _____________ ______ _______ 830,034 222,141 26 8 1961...................................... .......................................... ....................... 845^ 856 220,699 26 1 1 9 6 2 .. ............... ......... ............. ............................................................ 866,112 249^655 28.8

Despite an increase in the number of s eparate passport offices maintained by 

the Department of State, the number of passport applications processed by the 

district courts during the past 5 years has increased by 78,000 or more than 45 

percent.

Naturalization.—The number of petitions for naturalization filed during 1962 

decreased 2 percent over 1961. Naturalization petitions in 1962 numbered 

101,804, compared with 104,352 in 1961. The number of aliens naturalized also 

dropped slightly, from 101,002 in 1961 to 98,573 in 1962.

Probation system.— The average supervision load of the prob ation officer was 

70 cases. In addition, he conducted an average of four complete presentence 

• investigations per month.

Despite the addition of 16 probation officers in fiscal year 1962, the average 

workload per officer increased for the third consecutive year. The following tab le 

shows th e workload for th e past 6 years expressed in terms of units. One u nit is 

given for each person supervised and 4 units for each presentence investigation 

a made per mon th:

E n d of fisca l ye ar

N u m b er of 

pro bat io n 

off ice rs

A ve ra ge w ork lo ad u n it

Sup er vi si on P re se nte nce

in vest ig at io n

T o ta l

1957. .......... ................... ................................ ........... 481 69 16 85 1958_______________________________________ 487 69 17 86 1959.................. ............... ...................................... 508 67 16 83 1960________________________________ ______ 506 68 16 84 1961.................................................................................. 506 69 16 85 1962..................................................................................... 522 70 16 86
62

During 1962 a total of 21,921 persons were received for supervision compared 

with 20,356 in the previous year, an increase of 1,565, or 7.7 percent. At th e close 

of fiscal year 1962, there were 36,663 persons under supervision compared with 

35,065 at the end of 1961, an increase of 1,598 or 4.6 perc ent. Probation officers 

also were required to conduct a greater number of investigations, 31,867 in 1962 

compared with 31,082 in 1961, an increase of 785, or 2.5 percent.

In 1962 the daily per capita cost of probation was 56 cents a day, compared 

with $5.35 1

 a day for Federal prisoners in Federal institutions, or a yearly cost of 

$206 compared with $1,953. Both probation and parole help to lower the institutional population and, ultimately, the cost to the taxpayer. More significant 

than these savings are the social benefits of probatio n which cann ot be measured 

in dollars and cents. The following tables show the cost of Federal probation 

compared with the cost of Federal imprisonment, fiscal year 1953 thro ugh 1962:

C os t p er d ay C ost per yea r

P ro b ati o n Im p ri so n ­

m e n t

P ro b ati o n Im p ri so n ­

m en t

1953.......... .............................................. ......... ................. $0.2 6 $3.55 $96.41 $1,295 .75 1954.____ ________________ ______ _____ _______ .27 3.41 98.26 l ’ 243.19

1955................................... ..................... . ......... ............... .27 3.6 8 97.3 7 1,34 3.20 1956_______________________ _______ _____ ____ .32 3.9 7 118.14 b 449.0 5 1957........................... ......... . ................. ............. ............. .41 4.3 8 150.74 1,598.70

1958.................. . ......... . ...................... ............. ............... .43 4.3 6 156.75 b 591.4 0 1959.................. . ............. ......... ........................................ .51 4.8 2 184.81 1,759.30 1960__________________________________ _______ .52 5.12 190.58 1,873.00 1961................................... ............................................ . .67 5.26 208.00 b 919.00 1962............ ................. . ...................................... ............. .56 5.3 5 206.00 b 953.00

Detailed justifications

An appropriation of $31,480,000 is requested for fiscal year 1964, which is 

$3,320,000 over the amount appropriated for 1963 adjuster! to include a proposed 

supplemental of $1,160,000 for “pay costs” under the Federal Salary Reform Act 

of 1962 (Public Law 87-793, approved Oct. 11, 1962). The increase in budge tary 

requirements is explained below.

Requirements under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

An additional $1,177,000 will be required in fiscal year 1964 to cover th e full-year 

cost of pay increases granted supp orting personnel of the U.S. courts of appeals 

and the U.S. district courts effective October 15, 1962, and approximately onehalf of the annu al cost of increases in salary, including related benefits, which are 

scheduled to take effect on Jan uar y 6, 1964. The following is a breakdown by 

fiscal year of the total cost of pay increases under the Federal Salary Reform Act 

of 1962:

1963 pr op os ed 

su p p le ­

m enta l

1964 bu d g etary r equir em en ts

1965 bu d g etary r eq u ir em en ts

T o ta l co st

1st pha se (e flec tive O ct . 15, 1962):'

C om pensa tion . . _______________________ $1,0 86,0 00

74,000

$440,000 

30,0 00

$1, 526,000 B en ef its ________________________________ 104,000

T o ta l___________________________________ 1,16 0,00 0 470,000 1,630,000

2d p has e (e flec tive J an . 6,19 64 ):

C o m p e n sa ti o n .__ ________________________ 662,000

45,0 00

$695 ,000

48,0 00

1,35 7,00 0 B en efi ts __________________________________ 93,000

T o ta l___________________________________ 707,000 743,000 1,450,0 00

G ra n d t o ta l____ _______ __________ _____ 1,16 0,00 0 1,177,00 0 743,000 3,0 80, 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—Gove rnment retirement 

contributions, employer FICA taxes, and Government contributions to employee 

life insurance premiums. The estimate is net of indirect obligations resulting

* In clu d in g F ed er al pr ison er s co nf in ed a t loca l ja ils u n d er co n tr act, th e per cap it a d ail y co st is $4.99.
63

from the pay increases, th at is, amounts to be reimbursed from other agencies or 

accounts.

Pay costs in the fiscal year 1963 will be absorbed to the maximum extent 

possible. Any savings realized in 1963 would be the result of a delay in appointment of law clerks, secretaries and other supporting personnel by new judges 

appo inted or to be appointed pursuant to the omnibus judgeship legislation and, 

consequently, the savings would not be of a recurring nature. Pay costs in 1964 

cannot be absorbed w ithout seriously affecting the execution of essential functions, 

particularly in view of the increased workload of the courts of appeals and district 

courts and the fact th at no additional positions have been requested.

Within-grade 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 subjec t 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 estimated th at these within-grade salary advancem ents will cost $494,000 

of which $463,000 represents increases in compensation and $31,000 related benefits—Government contributions to the civil service retirement fund and for group 

life insurance. The estim ate, which represents approxim ately 85 p erce nt of the 

full potential cost of step increases, is net of antic ipated savings due to turn over of 

personnel and the filling of vacancies at lower rates of pay. The estim ated cost of 

within-grade salary advancem ents to be grante d in 1964 is somewnat higher than 

the estim ate for 1963 by virtue of the provisions of the Federal Salary Reform Act 

of 1962 relating to the minimum increase on grade to grade promotions and tne 

timing of within-grade increases.

Judiciary salary plan

The Judicial Conference of the United States in furth ering a program which 

commenced in 1958 of reviewing, as time would permit, the classification s tand ards 

of all judiciary personnel, directed “the A dministrative Office to proceed as expeditiously as possible with a survey and the prep aration of a repo rt with respect to 

the appropriate grading and classification of personnel in the clerks’ offices, the 

probation offices, and the referees’ offices of the district courts to the end th at 

a proper and equitable classification be made for the various positions in these 

offices.”

The mate rial available in the Administrative Office perti nen t to this problem 

was studied and 17 district courts were surveyed. Prior to the visits, position 

descriptions, personnel organization charts, experience and qualification sta tements and functional charts were requested from each district. This material 

was carefully studied in advance by th e survey team s each of which was composed 

of two members of the staff of th e Personnel Division. A study of the data collected clearly indicated th at an att em pt should not be made to either adopt or 

adapt any of the classification systems used by the Civil Service Commission, the 

Atomic Energy Commission, the Navy Dep artm ent, the Post Office D epa rtment 

or others which are available. This was tr ue because of the unique nature of the 

judicial function, the independence and autonomy of the courts, the wide variation in the organizational arran gements among the courts and the lack of uniformity in the assignment of duties and responsibilities to each of the employees. 

Each of these chara cteristics was considered in th e development of a classification 

and salary plan which was specifically designed to fit the Federal judiciary and 

which in Septem ber 1961 was approved by the Judicial Conference of th e United 

States subject to the availability of funds.

Briefly, the purpose and objectives of the plan as approved by the judicial 

conference are:

(1) Establishing an equitable general salary level for the courts which is 

commensurate with the nature and importance of the function of the judicial 

branch of th e Government.

(2) Providing educational and experience requirements for all positions.

(3) Providing du ty and responsibility statem ents for all positions.

(4) Providing standa rds which are valid for the positions to be classified.

(5) Reducing the disparities in the internal salary alinement in relation to the 

difficulty and importance of the work performed.

(6) Reducing or eliminating the inequities in the present system .

(7) And, finally, by providing a basis for furthering the concept of a career 

service for supporting personnel.

98777— 63------ 5
64

The basic salary plan is designed around functions which are common to all the 

courts. Each of the functions which are designated as “landmarks” are placed 

in alineme nt with others and assigned to compensation categories. Within this 

framework each compensation category for each function is further divided into 

two, three, or four grade or salary levels. The four-level compensation category 

applies only to probation officers and represents the time and development 

essential to achieve the full professional level of probation officer. This four-level 

categ ory includes a basic trainee level, an assistant level, a nd associate level and a 

journeym an level. The three-level compensation categories apply to the technical 

or semiprofessional types of positions and include an entrance level, an associate 

or interm edia te level, and a journeyman level. The two-level categories apply to 

positions which are primarily clerical in nature, and include an entra nce level and 

a journeym an level. A schedule showing landmark functions as key positions; 

the grade levels associated with these key positions; and the alinement of the 

various key positions into compensation categories is included in this document as 

exhibit A.

The budgetary requirements for implementation of the plan are as follows:

Co mp ensat ionBenefits To tal

D ep ut y cl erks (district cou rts )____________________________ $785,000

500,000

257,500

$55,000

35,000

17,500

$840,000 

535,000 

i 275,000

Pr ob atio n officers a nd clerk -stenograp her s__________________

Cle rks to refe rees_________________________ ______________

Tota l____________________________________________ 1,542,500 107,500 1,650,000

i Th e r eq ue st for fun ds in clu ded u nd er th e ap prop ria tio n h eading “ Expenses of referees.”

The cost estimates were derived by establishing for the courts as a whole the 

number of employees expected to be placed in the various grade levels consistent 

with a pat tern which was developed by application of the new standards in 13 of 

the districts surveyed by the Administrative Office.

Approximately 50 percent of the positions will be affected by the new standards 

and the median and average grades expected to prevail for those positions w ill be 

as follows:

M ed ian grade Ave rag e g rade

Current Pro posed Cur re nt Pro posed

D ep uty clerk s, distric t c ou rts ____ ___________ GS -6................. OS -8________ 6.6 8.4

Pr ob atio n syste m:

Officers______ _______________________ QS-11......... . OS-12_______ 10.9 12.0

Cle rk- stenogra phers OS-5......... . QS -5................. 4.7 5.1

B an kr up tc y s ystem: Clerk s to r ef er ee s.............. OS -5................. OS -6................. 4.9 6.2

Cost of 2 extra compensable days in 1964

The sum of $242,000 ($225,000 for personnel compensation and $17,000 for 

related personnel benefits) has been included to cover regular pay in excess of 

52 weeks. Employees will be compensated, on a biweekly basis, for 262 days in 

fiscal year 1964 as compared with only 260 compensable days in 1963.

New judicial district in the State of Florida

The act of June 30, 1962 (Public Law 87-562) which created an additional 

judicial district for the State of Florida to be known as the middle district, and 

which also established two new places of holding court, Live Oak and St. Pete rsburg, necessitated the appointment of a clerk of court and two additional deputy

clerks as follows: p eT annum

Clerk of co urt (ung raded)_______________________________________ $15, 525

Chief depu ty clerk (GS-12)_____________________________________ 9, 475

Financial deputy (GS -7)_______________________________________ 5, 540

To tal _______________________ ________ ____ ____ - ............... 30,540

It is requested th at the sum of $30,000 be provided to cover the salaries of 

these three positions (reduction of lapse) and an additional $2,000 for related 

personnel benefits—Government contributions to the retirement fund, and 

premiums for group life insurance and hea lth benefits. The amount requested
herein is consistent with the es timate furnished to the Committee on the Judiciary, 

House of Representatives, when it was giving consideration to the bill.

Continuing authority for pretrial examiner division of the U.S. District Court for

the Southern District of New York.

The Congress in fiscal year 1963 granted a 1-vear extension of the author ity 

and the funds ($38,000) for a pretria l examiner division in the southern district 

of New York on an experimental basis. The program which was initiated on 

December 7, 1961, has not yet been completely evaluate d and, therefore, it is 

requested th at a further extension of 1 year be granted with an increase in the 

amount authorized from $38,000 to $38,855 augmente d also to the extent of increases in salary (including related benefits) under th e Federal Salary Reform Act 

of 1962 effective on October 15, 1962, and those which are scheduled to take 

effect on J anu ary 6, 1964.

Mr. R ooney. The se pages indic ate that the req uest is in the am ount 

of $31,480,000, which would be an increase of $4,480,000 over the 

am ount approp ria ted for this item in the cu rre nt fiscal year and an 

increase of $3,320,000 when antic ipated Pay Act increases ar e inc lude d.

It might be well if we called attentio n to the new members of the 

sub com mittee, th at at the beginning of the comm itte e pr int is to be 

found a ch ar t which would ind ica te wha t they rece ived pri or to last 

October, what they received beg inning Octob er 1962, and wh at the y 

will receive beginnin g Ja nu ar y 1964 under the Classification Act, 

Pub lic Law 87-793 of October 11, 1962.

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

W ith regard to this req uest for “Salari es of support ing perso nnel” 

you will find at page 81 a ch art giving a list of increases req uested.

Would it b e c orrect to say th at of the $3,320,000 increase req ueste d 

all ot this with the exception of $1,375,000 for the so-called judic iar y 

sal ary plan and $32,000 in con nection with the cre ation of a new 

jud icia l distr ict in the St ate of Flori da is req uir ed by existing law?

J udge Campbell. I think th at would be a correc t sta temen t, Mr. 

Chairma n.

Mr. R oon ey. This page 81, parti cu larly with reg ard to the 

$1,375,000 for the so-called jud ici ary sal ary plan, is furth er broken 

down at pages 98 and 99.

GR ADE D IS T R IB U T IO N U N D E R PR O PO SE D JU D IC IA R Y SA LA RY PL AN

It occurs to us, wi th reg ard to this ch art of the so-called jud iciary 

salary plan, th at this inform ation migh t be tte r be set up by way of a 

ch art show ing the figures with reg ard to the exa ct numb er of grades 

and the exa ct numb er of those grades th at will be pro moted to an 

advanced gra de or grad es. Can you do th at for us?

Jud ge Campbell. Yes, sir.

Mr. A irhart. It would still have to be an estim ate because we could 

no t give you an exa ct figure un til we have a ctu all y done this.

Mr. R ooney. We wa nt the exa ct figure th at comes to this 

$1,650,000.

Judge Campbell. Ce rta inl y we can give y ou th at.

Mr. R ooney. How could you arrive at $1,650,000 if you did no t 

have the num bers?

Mr. Airhart. By tak ing the 17 courts in which we did a detaile d 

review and app lying it overall. But it is an estimate.

Judge Campbell. But we can show, and should, the numb er th at 

we allocate in each grad e in each court th at add up to the $1,650,000 

we are asking for. Tha t is w hat the ch airma n wa nts an d we will g et it.

(The inform ation req ueste d follows:)
Present and proposed grade distrib utio n of employees to be clas sified under the j ud iciary salary plan and the total cost of reclassificatio ns

G ra de

D e p u ty c le rk s (d is tr ic t co ur ts ) P ro b ati o n s yst em C le rk s to re ferees

P re sen t P ro pose d P re sen t P ro pose d P re sen t Pro pose d

Pos itio ns Sal ary Posi tions Sal ary P osi tions S al ary Posi tions S al ary Posi tions Sal ary Posi tions S al ary

O S 15 2 $29,162 1 $16,494 7 $113,547

O S 14 9 117, 790 11 162, 698 33 449,966

G S 13 11 $132,986 34 382,242 68 830,357 80 934, 669 3 $33,509

OS- 12 17 175^738 69 657,259 40 418, 704 311 3,032, 682 6 57,533

Q S-1 1........ ........................................................... 17 150,654 129 1,049, 734 225 2, 021, 864 60 483,246 3 $26, 790 11 89, 086

G S 10 69 582,5 66 118 881,469 97 770,640 6 49,899 14 105, S93

O S -9 ........... ..................... 61 476,2 16 249 1,722,85 9 79 561,267 30 202,592 11 77,542 63 442,374

G S-8 80 563,347 189 1,19 6,35 4 7 48, 880 14 97,302 80 505, 648

O S - 7 .. - ................ ............................................... 267 1,694,659 182 1,0 27,60 3 7 45,6 56 12 82,4 93 95 597,480 90 511,035

G S -6 ______ ____ . 286 1,6 60, 048 115 602,222 33 200,114 94 575,682 67 383,323 93 484, 3d )

G S-5 ...................... ................. 240 1, 226, 410 83 391,622 194 1,051,62 7 197 998,864 133 671,258 111 525, 637

G S -4 ................. .................... 142 643,4 48 28 118,622 126 552, 760 50 209 ,560 156 697,133 108 482,352

G S -3 ...................................................................... 17 71,69 8 3 13,333 7 30,555 7 30,5 55 141 582,150 54 215,583

G S -2 ............. .................................................... 3 12,501 7 27,643

T o t a l . . . .................................................. 1,210 7,390,271 1,210 8,190, 271 888 6,6 62, 736 888 7,162, 736 633 3,2 10 ,520 633 3,4 53 ,020

« »
Deputy clerks (dis­ trict courts) Prob ation system Clerks to referees

Total salary increases...................................................... .................. ................ . ............................ $800,000 56,000

-16,000

$500,000 35,000 $242, 500 16,500 16,000 Related benefits__ ___________________________________ __________________________ . Reim bursable services..................... .............................. - ................ .................. ....................... ........

Ne t cost............... . ......... ......................................................... .................................................. 840,000 535,000 275,000

Rec apitulation: Deputy clerks (district c ourts).................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. $840,000 Pro bation sy stem......................................................................................................................................................... ............................ ................................................................. 535.000 Clerks to referees____________ ______________________ __________________________ ________ __________________ ______________ ____________________ _ 275,000

T o ta l. ..........................................- ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1,650,000

N ote.—The cost of the judiciary sa lary plan originally was estimated at $1,500,000 which estima te was a pproved b y th e Judicial Conference of th e United States. The cost of the plan will be higher by reason of the passage of the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962, a nd its provisions relating to the granting of not less tha n the eq uivalen t of 2 step Increases in salary to any officer or em ployee who is promoted or transferred to a position In a higher grade.
68

EM PLO Y EE S R E C E IV IN G MOR E THAN O N E -S T E P ADVANCE IN GRA DE

Mr. Rooney. Now, in connection with the judiciary salary plan, 

are there any employees that could receive more than a one-step 

advance in grade?

Judge Campbell. Yes. I think some of the deputy clerks would 

go from GS-6 to GS-8.

Mr. Airhart. There are other instances of that. For instance, 

as you remember, we found bankruptcy docketing clerks by and 

large were grade 3 against other docketing clerks grade 5.

Judge Campbell. There would be some that would go from GS-3 

to GS-5, and some from GS-6 to GS-8. Others would be advanced 

one grade.

Mr. Rooney. Am I to understand this chart at page 99 of the 

justifications, which would indicate the jumps in grade, only applies 

to part of the $1,650,000?

Judge Campbell. Approximately 50 percent or even more of the 

positions covered.

Mr. Airhart. This is intended, Mr. Chairman, to give the new 

overall average grades in these various groups after we have applied 

the plan to the positions. In other words, the professional probation 

area we are changing from a 6-year term from grade 9 to grade 11, 

to a 3-year, and this gives the resulting median grade.

A U TH O RIT Y IN LA W FO R PROPO SA L

Mr. R ooney. By the way, what is the authority in law for this 

proposal? Why would not a successful point of order lie against it?

Mr. Airhart. In section 604 of title 28 and elsewhere is authority 

for the Director, under the supervision of the Judicial Conference, to 

set the compensation of these groups of employees.

Mr. Rooney. Will you please set tha t statute forth at this point 

in the record?

Mr. Airhart. Yes, sir.

(The information supplied follows:)

Title 28 U.S.C. 604(a):

“The Director shall be the administrative officer of the courts, and under the 

supervision and direction of the Judicial Conference of the United States, shall:

* * * * * * *

“ (5) Fix the compensation of clerks of court, deputies, librarians, criers, messengers, law clerks, secretaries, stenographers, clerical assistants, and other 

employees of the courts whose compensation is not otherwise fixed by law; * * «

Also under 18 U.S.C. 3656:

“The Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, * * * 

shall, under the supervision and direction of the Judicial Conference of the 

United States, fix the salaries of probation officers * * *.”

Also under 11 U.S.C. 102(a)(2): B

“The actu al and necessary office and other expenses of referees shall be allowed 

when authorized and approved by the Director, including compensation of 

clerical, stenographic and other assistants of referees at rates to be fixed by the 

Director, * * *.’’

D IF FIC U L T IE S IN O B T A IN IN G Q U A L IF IE D PE R SO N N E L

Mr. Rooney. Do any of you gentlemen present have any further 

information with regard to the difficulty in obtaining qualified personnel in the area covered by the $1,650,000?
69

Judge Campbell. I think the survey indicated that; the study 

made by the Committee on Supporting Personnel. We can get that. 

I can tell you, and so can the o ther judges here, as to our own districts 

and circuits, but as to the overall country, tha t is available through 

the Committee on Supporting Personnel and we can make that available to you.

Mr. Rooney. How voluminous is t hat?

Judge Campbell. It is voluminous because it goes into detail in 

each district and then applies to tha t general area. But we can boil 

it down.

Mr. Rooney. Will you please see that each member of the committee is handed a copy of that document at your earliest opportunity?

Judge Campbell. Yes, sir.

PA SSPO R T A PPLIC A T IO N S

Mr. Rooney. At pages 86 and 88 are to be found various workload 

• figures with regard to district courts, and at page 89 is a chart with

regard to number of passport applications filed in these district courts.

Gentlemen, it might be well to remember at a future point when 

we hear the justifications of the Department of State, tha t while the 

passport applications filed in the district courts increased by 28,956 

in fiscal 1962 over 1961, the total increase in total passport applications, which includes courts other than the district courts and the 

passport agencies, increased in 1962 over 1961 by only 20,256.

What persuasion do you have on the public in using the district 

courts for passport applications rather than the passport agencies?

Judge Campbell. In my own district they have a passport office 

in Chicago. We do issue some in our Western Division a t Freeport, 

which I am sorry to say is still with us, but other than tha t they all 

go to the passport office, and I am unable to answer the question as 

to my district. I do not think any persuasion exists in the overall 

picture except the convenience of the district court offices, having 

deputies in an area where there has been an increase in travel. T 

think it is a matter of convenience of the clerk’s offices.

Do any of the other judges have that problem?

Judge McGuire. We do not have tha t problem because we do not 

issue them.

Mr. Bow. They can go to the county clerk too.

Judge Weinman. Yes, but they go to the district courts usually.

» Mr. Rooney. In New York we have the county clerk’s office, we

have the Federal court, and we have the passport office.

Judge Campbell. You use all three, then.

Mr. R ooney. Any questions, gentlemen? If there are no questions 

, we thank you, Judge Campbell, Judge McGuire, and gentlemen.
70

F ees of J urors and Commissioners

Object classification

[In thousands of dollars]

1962 actual 1963 estimate

1964 estimate

11 Personnel compensation:

Fees of U.S. commissioners. ______________________ 810 818 818

Fees of jury commissioners__________ ____________ 10 10 10

Fees of jurors __ ________________________ 2,662 2,910 2,910

Tota l personnel compensation___________________ 3,482

32

3,738 3,738

12 Personnel benefits________________ _______________ 32 32

21 Travel and transportation of persons (jurors)__________ 1, 523 

63

1,665

65

1,665 

25 Other services (meals and lodging furnished jurors )_____ 65

Tota l obligations ______________________________ 5,100 5,500 5,500

Program and financing

[In th ousa nds of dollars]

1962 actual 1963 estimate

1964 estimate

Program by activities:

Fees and related benefits of U.S. commissioners________

Fees of jury commissioners___________ ______________

843 

10 

4,248

850

10

4,640

850

10

Fees, expenses, and costs of jurors........ ............................... 4,640

Total obligation s..______ ________________________ 5,100

-300

5,500

300

5,500

Financing:

1963 app ropriatio n available in 1962__

New obligational a uth ority (appropriatio n).................... 4,800 5,800 5,500

Mr. R ooney. We will proce ed to the next item , which is entitle d 

“Fees of jur ors and com missioners.” This is to be found at page 344 

of the committee pr int and is a req uest for $5,500,000, which would be 

a decrease of $300,000 below the am ount approp ria ted for this item 

for the c urr ent fiscal year. How ever, $300,000 of the 1963 approp ria ­

tion was availab le for fiscal 1962 obligations. Is th at corre ct?

Judge Campbell. Tha t is correct.

justification material

Mr. R ooney. We shall insert at this point in the reco rd pages 102 

throu gh 109 of the justificatio ns.

(Th e pages follow:)
71

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Fees of juror s an d com missione rs, U.S . court s: Judic iary

1963 ap pr op ria tio n in a nn ua l a c t . . . . _____________ ______________________ ____ ___________ $5,800,000

Base for 1964 .......................................................................................................................................... 5,800,000

Net differ ence , 1964 over 1963:

Re qu irem en ts Difference, 

increase 

(+ ) or de1963 ap pr o­ creas e (—)

pr ia te d

1964

es tim ate

Ju ry costs............................................. .. ___________ $1,650,000 

850,000 

300,000

$4, 650,000 

Co mm ission ers ’ fees and relat ed b enefits __________ 850,000

1963 ap prop ria tio n availabl e 19 62 ........... ..................... -30 0,0 00

Gross requ ire m en ts...................... ..................... 5,800,000 5,500,000 -30 0,0 00

To ta l e stim ate for 1964............................................ ............ ..................... ........................................ 5,500,000

Statement showing analysis by object

Object

1963

es tim ate

1964

es tim ate

Inc rea se (+ ) 

or

decrease (—)

11 Perso nnel comp ensation :

Fees of U.S . comm ission ers________________________ $818,000 $818,000 

10,000 

2,910,000 

32,000 

1,665,000 

65,000

Fees of ju ry c om missioners....... . ............... ..................... 10,000

2,910,000

32,000 

1,665,000

65,000

Fees of ju ro rs ____ ____ ______ __________ ________

12 Personnel be ne fit s_________ _____________ ___________

21 Tr av el and tran sp or ta tio n of pe rson s (ju ro rs)___________

25 Othe r s ervices (me als an d lodging fur nished j uro rs )______

To ta l oblig ati ons................ . ..................................................... 5,500,000 5,500,000

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

Language changes

The amount provided in 1963 for the liquidation of obligations incurred in 

1962 has been deducted in establishing the budgetary requirements for 1964. 

Accordingly, the proviso, which is quoted below, with respect to the payment of 

prior year obligations may be deleted.

“Provided, Th at $300,000 of the foregoing amount shall be available for the pay ­

ment of obligations incurred under the appropriation for similar purposes for 

the preceding fiscal year.”

Objectives

This appropriation is for fees, expenses, and costs of jurors; compensation of 

jury commissioners; fees of U.S. commissioners, including related Governm ent 

contributions to the civil service retirement fund and matching taxes under the 

Federal Insurance Contributions Act, as amended, and the compensation of 

voting referees appointed pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1960. For basic 

statutory authority, reference is made to section M of the “Digest of a ppropriations, the judiciary,” on file with the Bureau of the Budget an d the Appropriations 

Committees of the Congress.
General justification

The amoun t of service and the compensation of jurors depends 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 7 years, the 

amount appropriated for 1963 and the estimate for 1964:

Fisca l ye ar J u ry costs P er ce nta ge

ch an ge

Fee s ol co m ­

m issi on er s 

an d re la te d 

be nef its

Per ce nta ge

ch an ge

19 5 6 .............. ................... ....... ........................................ $3,729,814 $590, 519

1957............. . ............... ............. ................ ..................... 3,729, 726 0 617,020 + 4 .5

1958_______ _______ ___________ _______ _______ 4,19 6,300 i + 1 2 .5 783, 700 2 + 2 7 .0

1959________ ______ ________________________ 4, 210,243 + .3 791, 826 + 1 .0

I960__________________________________________ 3, 894,159 - 7 .5 803, 562 + 1 .5

1961_______________________ __________________ 3, 767, 974 - 3 .2 831, 404 + 3 .5

1962 ______ _______ ______ _______ ____________ 4. 259, 612 + 1 3 .0 840,388 + 1.1 1963 (e st im at ed )______________________________ 4,650 . 000 + 9 .2 850,000 + 1-1 1964 (e st im at ed )_______________ ______ ______ 4,650,000 0 850.000 0

i I nc re as e d u e pri m ari ly to s ta tu to ry inc re as e in fees o f ju ro rs e ffec tiv e S ep t. 7, 1957.

1

 I nc re as e d u e pri m ar il y t o s ta tu to ry i nc re as e in fees o f com m ission er s ef fe ct iv e S ep t. 2,1957.

Fees paid jurors for services rendered in fiscal year 1962 were $492,000 or 13 

perc ent more t han in the previous year b ut only $50,000 more t ha n the to tal paid 

in 1959. The savings of almost a half million dollars accomplished in 1960 and 

1961, due primarily to the program conducted by the courts to develop and install 

improved and more effective systems of calendar control an d juror utilization, has 

been offset by reason of the activ ities of the additional district judges appointed 

pursua nt to the omnibus judgeship legislation. Only 51 of the 63 new district 

judgeships were filled during the fiscal year 1962 and a review of the dates of 

entry on duty of each of th e new judges revealed th at they served and were in a 

pay sta tus for a grand total of 12,899 days, or the equivale nt of 36 man-years. 

With th e appo intm ent of new judges to fill the remaining new judgeship vacancies 

and taking into account the full-year serve of th e judges appo inted in 1962, it is 

expected th at jury costs in 1963 will reach $4,650,000. No increase is requested 

for fiscal year 1964.

Petit ju ry administration

During 1962 the district courts chose 5,732 p etit juries, an increase of 266 over 

the previous year. In these jury selection operations 340,701 days of juror service were required, an increase of 7 percent over the previous year. Juror-days 

used in actual jury service or challenged were 240,175 while 100,526 remained in 

reserve. This established a juror utilization figure of 70.5 percent for the year, 

compared with 71.9 percent in 1961. Utilization for the first day of tria l only 

(second and subsequent days of trial excluded) was 51.2 percent, compared with 

52.7 percent the previous year.

A comparison of the administration of the petit jury system in the distric t 

courts during the last 3 years is as follows:
Petit jurors serving in the U.S . district courts during the fiscal years 1960, 1961,

and 1962

Num ber of juries chosen___ __________ _____ ___________

Average panel present on the first day of trial_____________

Days panels present and no new trial begun:

Num ber of days___________________________________

Num ber of juro rs__________________________________

Day s of juror service:

Tot al ..... .................................................................................

Serving:

First day of tria l_______________________________

Subsequent days of tr ia l. .. ...................... .....................

Challenged........... ..................................................................

In reserve________________________________________

Percent serving or challenged ................................ ......... .........

Percent serving or challenged excluding second and subsequent days of trial................................. ............. . ......... .........

F is c a l y e a r

1960 ' 1961 1962

5,71 9 5.46 6 5,73 2

30.2 30.7 29 .7

826 778 992

27 ,198 27, 576 31 ,975

32 2,76 9 31 8,17 5 340, 701

70 ,826 67 ,349 69,971

129,241 129,1 43 134,917

32, 632 32,261 35 ,287

90 ,070 89 ,422 100,5 26

72 .1 71. 9 70 .5

53.5 52.7 51. 2

1

 The figure for 1960 does not include Alaska, Guam , and the Virgin Islands.

A sum mary of the number of days petit juror panels were called and not used 

and the number of jurors therein, during the fiscal year ending Jun e 30, 1962, by 

district, is included as exhibit B.

Fees and related benefits of U.S. commissioners for services rendered during 

fiscal year 1963 are e stimated at $850,000 an increase over 1962 of approximately 

$10,000 or 1 percent. This anticipated increase is due to some extent to the higher 

taxes payable, effective Jan uar y 1, 1963, under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act, as amended.

No increase in the appropriation has been requested. On the contrary, the 

sum of $300,000 provided in 1963 to liquidate obligations incurred in 1962 has 

been dedu cted in establishing the budgeta ry requirements for 1964.

O BLIG A TIO N S

Mr. Rooney. What have been the obligations for the first 6 months 

of 1963 as compared with 1962?

Mr. Anderson. The obligations—and this is cash payments— 

through December, fiscal year 1963, were $1,716,616 as compared 

with $1,490,468 for the previous year. Those are cumulative payments for 6 months and they represent a 15-percent increase.

May I say in this area tha t percentage increase will not prevail the 

rest of the year, we believe, for the reason these figures are those 

which compare currently with a greater number of judges on the rolls 

than for the 6 months of the previous fiscal year. For the rest of this 

fiscal year the number of judges are comparable, so we do no t expect 

the increase to continue.

Mr. Rooney. Are there any questions with regard to this item of 

“Fees of jurors and commissioners”?

IN C R E A S E IN R A T E O F F E E S

Mr. Bow. How long has it been since there has been an increase in 

fees of U.S. commissioners?

Judge Campbell. 1950, was it not, was the last increase?

Mr. Garabedian. The last increase was 1958, Congressman.

Mr. Anderson. An increase in the rate of fees.

Mr. Bow. To what extent was tha t?
74

Mr. Garabedian. Th e increase was effective Septe mb er 2, 1957.

I do no t rem ember the exa ct increase in fees alth ough I recall it was 

in the vic inity of between 20 and 25 p ercent, in the basic fees.

Mr. R ooney. Page 106 of thes e justificatio ns seems to ind ica te the 

percen tage increase was 27 perce nt in 1958.

Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairma n, I have one question.

Mr. R ooney. Mr. Smith?

Mr. Smith. What do jurors receive now?

Mr. Anderson. $7 per day and 10 cents a mile from place of residence to place of holding court.

Mr. Smith . Were the people who were int ere ste d in the salaries of 

sup porting personnel also intere ste d in the fees paid to jurors?

Judge Campbell. Yes; bu t th at was considered by a d ifferent commi tte e of the Ju dicial Conference and they h ave n ot m ade the ir rep ort 

yet. When the y do, I hope they go into th at field and also in the *

field of allowing U.S. comm issioners in the larger are as to go on a 

salary basis. The pre sen t fees for comm issioners in a larg e city are 

ina dequate and the y hav e to sit pract ica lly all the time .

Mr. Smith . And if he has a fam ily he has to penalize his family? •

Judge Campbell. Yes. We try to reduce the a mo un t of tim e juro rs 

have to spend as much as we can. Th ey never hav e to sit for more 

tha n a mo nth and we try our bes t to sell the m on the idea, which is 

the trut h, th at this is a du ty of citiz enship and no t som ething for 

which they receive a fee com me nsu rate with the tim e they spend.

Mr. R ooney. Is it not tru e th at jur ors also consider they are perform ing a patrioti c du ty?

Judge Campbell. T hat is true. We still have the problem of 

farmers hav ing to come in where it is a grea t har dsh ip. Bu t it is an 

obligation of citiz enship. I tell every juror I imp ane l th at the fee 

the y rece ive is no t the es tim tate of the Congress of t he v alue of the ir 

services, or the estim ate of our court of the value of their services, 

th at they are c on tribu tin g the ir pa rt as citiz ens to the gover nm ent of 

the peop le and for this the y should no t expect to be paid on a time 

basis.

Th e commissioners, now, are a little different in a larg e city. In 

Chicago there was a case las t year th at was intole rab le, where a commission er made $3,500. In fac t, he would like a job in the cle rk’s 

office. To live on th at in Chicago is ridiculous.

Judge M cGui re . In the Dist ric t of Columbia he is enti tle d to $10,- 

500 a ye ar b ut he work s around the clock and he has no Gover nm ent 

insurance and none of the benefits th at would be his if he were employed on a sal ary basis. So I would think in the larger citie s the »

commissioner shou ld be pu t on a salary basis.

Judg e Campbell. It is very necessary. I do no t see how they can 

continue to exist under the prese nt system and to ask the m to continue as a pub lic service any long er is a lmo st disgraceful. »

Mr. Bow . Th ere is no othe r system th at could be used oth er tha n 

the commissioner system ? Is it antiq uated ?

Judg e M cGui re . We also use ju dges of the court of g eneral sessions 

bu t ou r volume is very larg e in the Dis tric t.

A T T IT U D E OF EM PLO Y ERS

I migh t say, in connection with wh at Judg e Cam pbe ll has said 

ab ou t juroi s, we hav e ha d very well kno wn firms in the Di str ict of
75

«

Columbia say to an employee tha t if he sits on a jury in the District 

his services will be terminated. They are not very patriotic. That 

has been my experience.

Judge Campbell. I must say in defense of some of the firms who 

have taken tha t attitude in Chicago, I have sent for the head of the 

firm and he has not had this attitude.

Mr. Rooney. I can say as a former prosecutor in Brooklyn our 

best jurors came from employees of utility companies and they were 

encouraged to serve by their employers. They were for law and order.

Judge Campbell. There is a case coming up from one of the 

circuits saying tha t is an unfair selection of jurors, tha t too great a 

percentage of jurors are coming from utility companies and banks 

and in criminal cases this supposed to work against the defendants.

Mr. Smith. You do not get a fair average of your peers when a 

large percentage comes from utility companies and banks or any 

particular segment.

Mr. Rooney. For a person having a small one-man or family 

business it is a terrific hardship.

Judge McGuire. It is.

Judge Campbell. And it is a hardship on the farmer at certain 

times of the year. But you have to have the farmer and the little 

businessman or you do not have the cross section tha t the statute 

anticipates.

Mr. Rooney. If there are no further questions the committee will 

now stand adjourned until 2 o’clock, when we will proceed with 

“Travel and miscellaneous expenses.”

A FT E R N O O N SESSIO N

Mr. Rooney. The committee will please come to order.

Travel and Miscellaneous Expenses

Object classifica tion

[In thou sa nd s of dollars]

»

»

Dire ct obligations:

21 Tr av el an d tra ns po rta tio n of pe rsons

22 Tr an sp or tatio n of th in gs ___________

23 Ren t, comm unica tio ns, an d ut ilitie s.

24 Pr in ting an d re pr od uc tio n____ _____

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

Tr an sc rip ts o rdered by c ou rts__

26 Sup plies an d materials____________

31 Equ ip m en t:

Gen eral office............. . .................

Furn iture ..................... ..............—.

Law boo ks, accession s....................

Law boo ks, c on tin ua tio ns ______

To tal dir ec t o bli gatio ns.............

Re im bu rsab le oblig atio ns:

23 Ren t, comm unica tio ns, a nd u til itie s.

24 Pr in ting and reprod uc tio n_________

25 Other serv ices____________________

26 Supplies a nd materials.........................

31 E quip m en t______________________

To ta l reim bursa ble ob lig ati ons___

To tal o bligations ________________

1962 actua l 1963 estim ate 1964 estim ate

1,705 1,890 1,890

51 36 36

645 708 779

265 269 279

92 122 122

116 110 200

252 255 285

306 172 127

668

630 437 153

487 600 678

5,218 4,600 4,550

1 1

9 10 10

1 1

1 6 6

2 2

10 20 20

5,228 4,620 4,570
76

Program and financing

[I n tho u san d s o f do lla rs]

P ro gra m b y ac tivitie s: T ra v el an d m isce llan eo us ex penses:

D ir ect pr ogra m ____________ ____ ______ ____ ____________

R eim burs able pro gra m ....... ............................................... . .........

T o ta l obl ig at io ns_____________________________________

Fin an ci ng:

A dv an ce s an d re im burs em en ts f rom o th er ac co unts (—) . . .

U nobli gate d b al an ce l apsi ng_____________ ______ ________

N ew o bliga tion al a u th o ri ty (a ppro pri ati on)____________

1962 a ctu al 1963 esti m ate 1964 estim at e

5,21 8 

10

4,600

20

4,550

20

5,228

-1 0

220

4,620

- 2 0

4,570

-2 0

5,43 8 4,6 00 4,5.50

Mr. R ooney. The next item is entitled “T ravel and miscellaneous 

expenses,” and is to be found on page 346 of the comm itte e print .

Th e justificatio ns with reg ard the reto begin at pag e 110 of the 

justifi cation book, which page we shall insert at this point in the 

record, together with pages 111 thr ough 123.

(The justification pages follow:)

Statem ent relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

*

T ra v el an d m isce llan eo us ex pe ns es , U .S . co urt s: Ju di ciar y

1963 ap pro pri at io n i n a n n u al a c t____________________________________________________________ $4,6 00,0 00

B as e for 1964................................................ . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,6 00,00 0

N et di ffer en ce , 1964 o ver 1963:

R equir em en ts Diff er en ce , 

in crea se 

( + ) or d e1963 ap p ro ­ cr ea se (—)

pri ate d

1964

es ti m at e

T ra v el ex pen se s_____________________________ _____ $1,890,000 

2,71 0,0 00

$1,890,000 

M is ce llan eo us exp en se s____________________________ 2,6 60,00 0

T o ta l_______ _______________________________

-$ 50, 000

4,60 0,0 00 4,5 50,00 0 -5 0 ,0 0 0 - 50,000

T o ta l es ti m at e for 1964.............. . .......................................................................................................... 4,5 50,00 0

State ment showing analysis by object

Obj ec t

21 T ra vel an d ti an sp o rt ati o n of pe rson s.

22 T ra n sp o rt ati o n of th in g s.................. .

23 R en t, co m m un ic at io ns , a n 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 s e r v ic e s .. ................... ......... .........

T ra n sc ri p ts o rd er ed b y c o u rt___

26 Supplies a n d m ate ri al s...........................

31 E q u ip m en t:

O en er al o ffic e__________________

Law bo ok s, a cc es sion s__________

L aw bo oks , co n ti n u ati o n s_______

T o ta l (d irec t) obligat io ns_____

1963

esti m ate

1964

esti m ate

In cr ea se ( + ) 

or

de crea se (—)

$1,8 90,0 00 $1,890 ,000

36,5 00 36,500

708,000 779,000 +$ 71 ,00 0

269,000 279,000 +1 0,00 0

122,500 122,500

110,000 200,000 +9 0,00 0

255,000 285,000 +3 0,00 0

172,000 127,000 -4 5,0 00

437,000 153,000 -2 84 ,0 00

600,000 678,000 +7 8,00 0

4,600,000 4,550,000 -5 0,0 00

»

«
77

Summary of increased requirements for 1964

Nature of expense (or sa vin gs):

DEDU CTIO N

Nonrecurring expenses authorized for fiscal year 1963 for new Amount

judges appointed pursuant to the act of May 19, 1961_____ —$330, 000

ADD ITIO NS

1. To provide for moderniz ation and expansion of telephone

facilities to efficient operating levels in new and existing

buildings_________________________________________ 42, 000

2. To cover increases in the annual cost of printin g records in

forma pauperis for the Supreme Co urt________________ 10, 000

3. To cover increased volume of photocopying supplies being

consumed by the cou rts____________________________ 30, 000

4. To cover increased volume of tra nsc ripts in forma pa up eris.. 90,000

5. For additional continuation material required to maintain

the court libraries and to cover contractual rat e increases

for such material__________________________________ 78, 000

6. To cover increased postal rates________________________ 30, 000

Net decrease, 1964 over 1963________________________ —50, 000

JUSTIFICATION

Language changes

None.

Objectives

This appropriation provides for the necessary travel a nd miscellaneous expenses 

of th e 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 trav el and miscellaneous expenses of referees, 

including compensation and benefits of clerks to referees, are paid from a special 

fund appropriation . For basic sta tutory 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 Committees of the Congress.

General justification

During fiscal year 1962 the courts of appeals received a record 4,823 new 

appeals, an increase of 279 cases or 6.6 percent over the previous year. Civil 

cases filed in the U.S. district courts increased 6.1 percent, from 58,293 to 61,836. 

There also was an increase of 2.8 percent in the number of defendants prosecuted 

for criminal offenses in the distric t courts. During 1962 the number of passport 

applications processed by the distric t courts increased 13 percent, from 220,699 

to 249,655. Probation officers were called upon to conduct a greater number of 

investigations and received a greater number of persons for supervision. A 

detailed account of the judicial business of b oth the circuit and district courts is 

contained in the general justificatio ns of the appropriation estimate for “Salaries 

of supporting personnel, the judiciary.”

Detailed justification

It is estim ated th at an appropriation of $4,550,000 will be required in 1964, 

which is $50,000 less than the sum available for th e fiscal year 1963. Anticipated 

increases in budgeta ry requirements have been more tha n offset by a deduction 

for the nonrecurring expenses authorized for the fiscal year 1963 for new judges 

appointed pur suant to the act of May 19, 1961, Public 87-36.

Deduction for nonrecurring expenses authorized for fiscal year 1963

The following expenses which were a uthorized for fiscal year 1963 for new judges 

and their staffs were of a nonrecurring n atu re and, accordingly, have been deducted 

in establishing the budgeta ry requirem ents for fiscal year 1964:

Nature of expense

Installation of telephone e quipment______________________________ $1, 000

General office equipment________________________________________ 45, 000

Lawbooks, accessions___________________________ ____ __________ 284, 000

To tal .................................................................. . ................................. 330,000
Modernization and expansion of telephone facilities

It is requested th at an additional $42,000 be provided for the modernization 

of telephone equipment and services and for the installation of telephone facilities 

in new court quarters:

Several years ago a program of improving and expanding th e telephone facilities 

in the offices of the U.S. circuit and district judges, the clerks’ offices, and the 

probation offices was commenced. Considerable progress has been made in this 

area; however, the program is not quite complete. In addition to th e continuation 

of this program which embraces existing facilities, ad ditional telephone equipment 

and services will be required incident to the occupancy of new buildings. 

Increased cost of printing records in forma pauperis for the Supreme Court

By reason of changes in the basic concepts for allowances of proceedings in 

forma pauperis resulting from the decisions in Johnson v. U.S., 352 US 565; 

Farley v. U.S., 354 US 521; FAlis v. U.S., 356 US 674; an d more recently, Coppedge

v. U.S., 369 US 438, a marked increase has occurred in the number of appeals 

where th e defendant is permitted to proceed in forma pauperis, receive tran script, 

and have a record or joint appendix printed at Government expense. The 

following table shows the amount available and the actual cost of printing records 

in forma pauperis for the Supreme Cou rt since prior to the Johnson decision:

Fis ca l ye ar A m o u n t

av ai la bl e

A m o u n t

obligat ed

Fis ca l yea r A m o u n t

av ailab le

A m ount

ob ligat ed

1956. $2,0 00 $5,5 35 1960_________ ______ ____ $18,000 $14,743

1957 2,0 00 1 5 .27 5 1961_____________________ 18.000 21,405

1958 2 ,000 17,929 1962____ 18,000 22,3 93

1959 ..______ _____________ 10,000 13,369

i J ohnso n o pin io n o f M ar. 4,1 957.

In view of the Coppedge decision of April 30, 1962, it is anticipated that a 

greater number of defen dants will be allowed to appeal in forma pauperis and th at 

the total cost of records or joint appendixes provided at Government expense will 

approximate $28,000. A contributing factor is an increase in the cost of printing 

at the Government Printing Office. The Public Prin ter, under date of Febru ary 

14, 1962, announced th at there would be an overall increase in charges to dep artments of approximately 3 percent. However, the actual increase in the cost of 

printing records has been 14 percent or, from $7 to $8 a page.

Increase in the volume of photocopying supplies

The consum ption of photocopying supplies by the courts continues to increase. 

During 1962, 40 additional photocopying machines were installed in judges’ 

chambers, clerks’ offices and in probation offices. By reason of the installatio n 

of such equipm ent, the demand for photocopying paper, chemicals, etc. has 

increased and it is estimated th at an additional $30,000 will be required for this 

purpose in 1964. Fees paid by parties requesting copies of any record or paper 

to some extent offset the cost of reproduction, however, such fees are not available inasmuch as they are covered into the general fund of the Treasury as miscellaneous earnings.

Increased volume of transcripts in forma pauperis

In Coppedge v. U.S. the Supreme Court held “If from the face of the papers 

field in a Federal court of appeals by a defendant convicted of crime in a Federal 

district court who seeks leave to appeal from his conviction in forma pauperis, 

following the denial of such relief by the district court, which certified th at the 

appeal was n ot take n in good faith, it is apparent th at the applicant will present 

issues for review not clearly frivolous, the court of appeals should grant leave to 

appeal in forma pauperis, appoint counsel to represent the appellant, and proceed 

to consideration of the appeal on the merits in th e same manner th at it considers 

paid appeals; but if th e claims made or th e issues sought to be raised by th e a pplicant are such th at their substance cannot adequately be ascertained from the 

face of the defendant’s application, the court of appeals m ust provide the applicant 

with the assistance of counsel and a record of sufficient completeness to enable 

him to att em pt to make a showing th at the district court’s certificate of lack of 

good faith is in error and that leave to proceed with the appeal in forma pauperis 

if the applicant, with the aid afforded him, presents for the court’s determ ination
79

*

any issue th at is not clearly frivolous. Unless the issues raised by an indigent 

seeking leave to appeal in forma pauperis are so frivolous th at the appeal would 

be dismissed in the case of a nonindigent litigan t under tule 39(a) of the Federal 

Rules of Criminal Procedure, the requ est of an indigent for leave to appeal in 

forma pauperis must be allowed, in order to assure equality of consideration for 

all litigan ts.”

The effect of this decision has been to increase greatly allowances by the courts 

of appeals to indigents to receive transcripts at the expense of th e Governm ent. 

Obligations during the first 3 months of fiscal year 1963 were 160 percent greater 

tha n for th e comparable period in 1962. If this tren d were to continue, based on 

the obligations incurred prior to the Coppedge decision, the annual cost could 

conceivably exceed $300,000. However, 3 months’ experience would not be considered a basis for establishing a firm estimate of budgeta ry requirements and 

for th at reason, it is requested th at the allotment at this time be increased only 

$90,000, from $110,000 to $200,000, pending further experience as to the effect 

of the Coppedge decision.

Continuation material for court libraries

It is estim ated th at in 1964 an additional $78,000 will be required for court 

libraries as follows:

1. For the procurement of a new edition of AMJUR to be known as American 

Jurisprudence, 2d, $22,000.

2. To cover price increases effective July 1, 1962, under contracts entered into 

by the General Services Administration and the Administrative Office of the 

U.S. C ourts, $26,000, and

3. For additional continuation material required to maintain newly acquired 

sets of lawbooks, and to cover a general increase in the volume of material required 

due to the expanding body of th e law, $30,000.

The Lawyer’s Cooperative Publishing Co. recently announced the publication 

of AM JUR 2d. This work is to be published and issued at the rate of 7 or 8 

volumes a year. This is an entirely new and additional expense not provided 

for in prior years. The amount heretofore required for pocket parts for th e first 

edition will gradually decline, however, the saving will be offset by increases in 

the cost of furnishing pocket par ts for the new volumes. It will take from 6 to 7 

years to completely replace the first edition of AM JUR at a cost of approximately 

$22,000 a year.

A review of the contracts entered into by the General Services Administration 

and by the Administrative Office revealed a 5-percent increase in the cost of 

subscriptions. On this basis an ad ditiona l $26,000 will be required in 1964 for th e 

procurement of pocket parts and other continuation materia l required to keep 

court libraries u p to date.

In addition to price increases, it is estim ated th at $30,000 will be required to 

cover an increase in the volume of continuation mate rial required for court 

libraries. This increase is due primarily to the expansion of existing libraries 

and the establish ment of new libraries for judges other than those appointed 

pursuant to the omnibus judgeship legislation. The increase in the volume of 

continuation material also is due, obviously, to the increasing body of the law.

»

Increased postal rates

The budget estimate for 1964 includes an additional $30,000 to cover higher 

postal rate s authorized by Public Law 87-793, approved October 11, 1962. This 

represents an increase of approximately 25 percent in postage and fees (penalty 

mail) to be paid to the Post Office Departm ent.

*

Mr. R ooney. These pages in dicate t ha t the req uest is in the am ount 

$4,550,000, a decrease of $50,000 below the appro priat ion for these 

purp oses in the current fiscal year.

This is due, is it not, to nonre cur ring expenses in fiscal 1963?

Mr. Airh art. Yes, sir.

98777— 03------ 6
80

IN CR E A SES REQ U EST ED

Mr. R ooney. It might be well if we turn to page 112 of these ju stifications, which indicates the alleged incre ased req uir em ents for 

fiscal year 1964.

Ha ve all nonre cur ring expenses been deducted from the base?

Mr. Airhart. Yes, sir.

E FFO R TS TO RED U CE TRA V EL

Mr. R ooney. It would appear from page 110 of these justifi cation s 

th at the am ount req uested for travel expenses in the coming fiscal 

year, to wit, $1,890,000, is the same as the am ount allowed for travel 

expenses in fiscal y ear 1963.

Judge Campbell, wh at is the pre sen t sit ua tio n with regard to *

travel ?

Cou ld you give us a summ ary of wh at if an ything has been done 

to tig hte n up on travel?

Judg e Campbell. Yes, sir. Th e Bu dg et Comm ittee, Mr. Chair- »

man, of th e Ju dic ial Conference , has t aken u nto itself with the permi ssion of the C onference a very careful scrutin y of these items, pa rti cu ­

larly in view of the situati on w ith reference to i nte rcirc uit assi gnm ents 

and also the situ ati on w ith reference to senior judges o r retired ju dges 

working.

We have exh austed t he subje ct, I thin k, at an e xpenditure of a great 

deal of time by the mem bers of the com mittee , parti cu larly with 

referenc e to senior judges and interc irc uit assignm ents . We hav e 

gone into this very care fully. Th e Chief Justi ce has only rec ently 

sto pped all inter cir cuit assignm ents of active judges until we can see 

wh at the effect of the new judges in their pa rti cu lar distr icts will be 

in pick ing up the need of add itio nal judicia l man pow er.

Mr. R ooney. I believe th at was Mr. Bow ’s suggestion.

Judg e Camp bell. Yes, it was.

Mr. R ooney. It sounds like a pr et ty s ensib le one to me.

Judg e Campbell. Yes.

Mr. R ooney. Where we have add ed 73 judges and the ir staffs 

it migh t be well to find ou t wh eth er or no t we need tra vel to any 

ex tent at all.

Judg e Campbell. Mr. Bow expressed th at suggestio n to me as 

cha irm an of the budget com mittee and I can say th at we have gone 

into it v ery carefully, fully app rov ed of i t, subm itted our suggestions, 

or ra th er the Congressman’s suggestion ther eon to the Chief Justice, >t

who has tak en the action th at I hav e ju st ind icated. I believe his 

lette r was for a period of 1 or 2 years to try it ou t because a shorter 

period would no t give us the info rma tion th at we needed. M y discussion abou t it was to the effect th at i t pro bably would tak e 2 ye ars «

to find out. We are ind ebt ed to Congressman Bow for his suggestion, 

and we readily adopt it. As to the oth er m atter on senior judges, we 

have very care fully gone into th at . We are at the po int where we 

have seen to it th at both as to the ir staffs and as to their travel the 

Go vernme nt is g etting a great deal more than it is expending and if I 

ma y be pardon ed at this point, Mr. Chairma n, one obs ervatio n off 

the re cord, I would like to make it to the m embers.

Mr. R ooney. Very well.

(Discussion off t he record.)
81

TRAVEL OF JUDGES ON ASSIGNMENT TO OTHER DISTRICTS

Mr. Rooney. Do you have the usual table with regard to travel of 

judges on assignment to other districts?

Judge C ampbell. Yes, sir.

Mr. Rooney. May we have it, please?

It would appear from these sheets that the amount of travel has 

been cut down considerably.

We shall insert a t this point in the record the three sheets.

(The chart follows:)

*

*
Service by senior judg es in circuit courts or district courts within circuits, Ju ly 1, 1961, to J un e 30, 1962

Circ uit or dis tric t Nam e of judge Place of service

Service Cost of travel

Circuit

courts,

cases

heard

Dis tric t courts

Judg e Law clerk Secre­ tary Re­ porter Crier Tota l Numb er of trials Numb er of trial 

days

COURTS OF APPEALS

1st circuit__ Mag ruder, Calvert 1st circuit_____ ___________ 4 }$1,162 

199

$937

121

• $2, 099 

446

Do___ do _ Puerto Rico_______________ 4 5 $126 2d circu it.__ Hincks, Carroll C 1st ci rcu it................. . ............... 3048

26

19

111

21

12

72

D o. ... Medina, Harold R . . . do..___ ___________ . ... Do . Swan, Thomas W .d o ........................ ............. 23756

1,491

470 

210 

1,082 42 

726

7 68 312

56

3,902 1,215 440

1,082

42

726

3d ci rcuit___ Forma n, Phillip 3d circuit...... . ......... ................ 4th circuit Soper Morris H 4th circ uit_________________ 1,181 304 1,230 441 

230 6th circui t__ Simons, Charles C._ 6th c ircuit............. .................... 7th circui t__ . Major, J. Earl ...................... 7th c ircuit.................. ............... 8th circuit. Sanborn, John 11 8th circuit............. .................... D o... . Woodrough, Joseph W____ ___ do......... ............................... 9th ci rc ui t.. Bone, Homer T __________ 9tli circ uit .................................. 39

36

Do Math ews, Clifton __ do. .....

Do ... Orr, William E __ (lo_______ _____ ______ 131

(’) 3 574 

532 

438 323 

38

} 1,862

139

515

480436

270515

2,314 968

438323

38

♦ 1,862

Do...... .. .d o .. ................................. Ne vada____________ ______ Do Pope, Walter L 9th circ uit____ ____________ 3016

27

22

1,260 Do .. Stephens, Albert L ___ do________ _____ _____ 10th circuit Bratton, Sam Q........ . .......... 10th circuit.............. ................

Do... Huxm ari, Walter A .............. ___ do .................... . ........ . ........Do. .. . do ... Kan sas............ . .............-.......... 18 8

Do Phillips, Orie L . 10th cir cuit... _____________ 38 Do . ___do.. .. . . Colorado__________________ 1

66

18

9

65

32

14

1

69

2

3

6644

2625

1712

76

10

25

6

121

25

DISTRICT COURTS

1st circuit: Ma ssachusetts____ 2d circuit: McCarthy, William T Massachuse tts_____________

Byers, Mortim er W.®__ New York (eastern)____ ____ Clancy, Joh n W New York (sou thern)_______ Do Conger, Edw ard A ___ do____________________ 158 158 Do . . Dimock, Edw ard J.® ___ do____________________ Do Knox, John C . ___ do____________ ____ ___ 3d circuit:

Delaware Leahy, Paul C Pennsylvania (e as te rn )___ _ 1,204 91 1,295 Do Rodne y, Richard S _ Delaware ____ _________ Pennsylvania (eastern).__ Do Orim, Allan K. 7 _______ Pennsylvania (eastern).......... 1,044 1,329 1,044 2,556 Kirkpatrick, William II. .. . ___ do____________________ 711 516 4th circuit:

Maryla nd Che snut, W. Calvin _ Ma ryland_____ .. ________ North Carolina (m idd le) ...

*

TT aves. J o h n s o n J North Carolina (middle) 823 823

-w
Virgini a (e as te rn )................. Virginia (w es tern )..........

Do.....................................

Do.....................................

Do.....................................

5th circuit:

Flor ida (n ort he rn ).............

Do .....................................

Do.....................................

F lo rid a (n o r th e r n an d 

so ut he rn ). Flo rida (s ou th er n) ................ Georgia (m id d le ).. ....... —. Miss iss ipp i (n or th er n) ____

6th c irc uit:

M ich igan (e as te rn ).............. Mich igan (w es tern ).............

Do .............. ......................

Ohio (s ou th er n) .................... Te nness ee (e as te rn )............. Do ................ ....................

7th circuit:

Illino is (n o rth e rn ).. ............ Illino is (e as te rn )...................

8th circuit:

Iow a (n ort her n)....................

Do .....................................

Do .....................................

N eb ra sk a................................

Do .....................................

9th cir cu it:

Ca liforn ia (n o rt h ern ).......... Ca lifornia (s ou th er n) ........... N ev ad a....................................

Do .....................................

Do.....................................

W ashing ton (w es te rn )........

Do.....................................

Do .....................................

Do _______ _____ _____ Do.....................................

Do ................ ....................

D is tric t of C olum bia circuit: 

Distric t of C olu m bia --------

OTH ER COURTS

Cou rt of Cus toms an d P ate nt 

Ap peals .

To tal

Hutch eson , Ste rl in g.... Ba rksdale, Alfred D .. .

___ do ............................... Pa ul, J o h n .. ................. .

___ do________ ______ _

DeV ane, Dozier A____ ___ do ............. ................. ___ do............................... W hi te hu rst, George W

Ba rker, William A___ Da vis, T . H oyt______ Cox, A ll e n .. .................

Pica rd, Fr an k A ............

St arr, Ra ym on d W .»... ___ do ............................... DrutT el.Jo hn II .’..........

Dar r, Leslie R ...............

___ do ...............................

La Buy , W al ter J ......... . W ha m, Fr ed L..............

Gr av en , H en ry N.>°.._. ___ do ............................... ___ do ............................... Deleh an t, Jo hn W ------

___ do ...............................

Roche, Mich ael J ........ .

Wein berger, J ac ob------ Foley , Roger T . .......... ........do ...............................

........do..............................

Bowen , J ohn C ............

___ do .............................. ........do ..............................

........do .................. ...........

____do.......................... . ........d o.............................

Sc hw einh au t, H en ry ..

Jack so n, J osep h R

V ir g in ia (ea ste rn ) 9 11 332 332

4th Circ uit 12 256 263 519

V ir g in ia (w e ste rn ) 8 7 89 112 201

Virgi nia (ea stern) 1 2 173 173

V ir g in ia (w e ste rn ) 32 36 68

5tl i C ir c u it 30 297 297

Florida (northern) 7 4 117 $132 $88 337

F lo rid a (s o u th e rn ) 15 19 1,177 1,177

do 17 27 1,565 531 330 2,426

do 1 1 16 27 43

G e o rg ia (m id d le ) 316 161 477

M is s is s ip p i (n o rth e rn ) 1 1

Mich iga n (ea stern) 24 75 562 220 320 300 1,402

fith c ir c u it 27 363 346 709

Michi gan (western) 1 3 O h io (so u th e rn ) 5 9

fith cir cuit 53 769 575 1,344

T e n n e s se e (e a s te rn ) 3 3 130 88 218

Illino is (n or thern) 4 12 do 6 17 1,067 1,067

8th cir cuit 33 515 225 740

Io w a (s o u th e rn ) 39 61 36 136

N o rth D a k o ta 1 19 623 615 1,238

To wa (n o rth e rn ) 11 42 2,032 1,038 3,070

Neb rask a 2 8 17 17

C a li fo rn ia (n o rth e rn ) 31 44

C a li fo rn ia (so u th e rn ) 20 63

Qt h circuit 2 214 214

C a li fo rn ia (n o rth e rn ) 3 7 760 760

Nev ad a 1 17

Ariz ona ____________ 4 9 Ca liforn ia (s ou th er n) ________ 5 10

N ev ad a____________________ 3 10

O re g o n ________ W ashing ton (e as te rn )............... 4 8 W ashin gto n (west ern ) ............. 17 27

D is tr ic t o f C o lu m b ia 58 134

C o u rt o f C u s to m s a n d P a te n t n 1,2

Ap peals .

693 426 1,058 27,794 4,496 9,760 583 1,913 44,546

See foo tno tes a t en d of tab le, p. 84.
Service by senior judg es in circuit courts or district courts within circuits, Ju ly 1, 1961, to Ju ne SO, 1962—Co ntinued

SU M M A R Y

C ircu it or distric t N um be r of jud ges Pla ce of ser vice

Serv ice Co st o f trav el

Circ uit

co urt

cases

he ard

Distric t co urt

Judge Law

clerk

Secreta ry Re po rte r Crier To tal Num be r of trials Num be r of tr ia l 

da ys

Senio r c irc uit ju dges 18

4

Ci rcuit c o u rts .. ......................... 524 $8,373 

1,200

$2,673

515 $3,350 937 $14,396 2,652 D o.................... ........... Distric t co ur ts........................ 23 16 T ota l.......... . ................ 22 524 23 16 9,573 3,188 4,287 17,048

Senio r d is tric t jud ge s.............. ............. Ci rcuit co ur ts_______ _____ _ 633 157 2,414 15,807 225 1,083 1,184 4,289 -------------- 3,823 23,675 Do......... ................. ............................ . D is tric t court s 403 1,042 583 1,913

T ota l........ . ................................... 39

1 157 li 12 403 1,042 18,221 1,308 5,473 583 1,913 27,498 Senio r ju dges, o th er _________________ Special c ou rts..............................

Grand to ta l....................................... 62 693 426 1,058 27,794 4,496 9,760 583 1,913 44,546

QO

i Inc lu de d in su m m ar y un de r “ Pla ce of service as di st rict c ou rt. ” « Retire d Ju ly 28,1961. * N o tra ve l or subsistence ex pen ses claime d. ? R etire d No v 1,1961 ’ Includ es cost of tra ve l (1 way) Mi sso ula , M on t., to San Fra ncisco. Going po rti on ’ R etire d Aug.’ 15,1961. of trip in prior year. No c laim for subsistence w hile in Misso ula . » Re tir ed Sept. 30,1961. ‘ i n s u m m a r y un de r "P la ce of service as circuit co ur t.” m Retire d Aug. 31,,1961. Die d Mar. 5,1962. n Cases he ard on U.S . Cou rt of Cu sto ms an d P ate nt Appea ls.

■ •»
4k *

Assig nm ents of senior judg es for service in special courts and circuit courts or district courts of other circuits, Ju ly 1, 1961, to J un e SO, 1962

C o n tr ib u ti n g c o u rt N am e of ju dge C o u rt vis it ed

COURTS OF APPEAL S

1st ci rc uit - 

D o -—

3d cir cu it . 

D o .—

7t h c ir c u it .. 

D o ..........

9t h c irc u it .. 

10th cir cu it .

DISTRICT COURTS

3d cir cu it : P en n sy lv an ia 

(e as te rn ).

5t h cir cu it :

F lo ri d a (s o u th ern )........

D o ...............................

6t h cir cu it : T en nes se e (e as tern ).7th ci rc uit :

Illi nois (e aste rn )______

D o ...............................

8th ci rc uit :

M is so u ri (w este rn )........

D o ................................

N e b ra sk a..........................

9th cir cu it : W ash in gto n 

(w es te rn ).

other courts

C o u rt of C u sto m s an d 

P a te n t A ppe al s.

T o ta l.

C alv ert M ag ru d er. ____d o ........ ............... .

A lb ert B . M ari s. ____d o ....................

J. E arl M a jo r.. . ____d o ..................

W alt er L. P o p e. Orie L. P h il li p s.

W illiam H . 

K ir k p atr ic k .

Jo h n W . H o ll a n d . ____d o .......................

Le slie R . D a r r . . . .

F re d L. W h am . ____d o .............. ..

A lb ert L . R ee ves.........

........ d o ...............................

Jo h n W. D e le h a n t.. .. Jo h n C . B ow en ______ Jo se ph R . Ja c k s o n ..

6t h cir cu it .....................

E m er gen cy C o u rt of 

A pp ea ls .

Illinoi s ( n o rth e rn ).. . 

E m er gen cy C o u rt of

A pp ea ls . 

L ouis ia na (e a ste rn ).. . 

F lo ri d a (s o u th e rn ).. .

5t h c ir cu it ......................

D is tr ic t of C olu m bia 

ci rc uit.

C o u rt o f C ust om s 

an d P a te n t A pp ea ls.

O re go n...... ............... .

C al ifor ni a (s o u th ern ). C o u rt o f C la im s..........

C olo ra do .................. ..N ew Y ork (s outh er n).

F lo ri d a ( s o u th e r n ) .. ..

........d o ...............................

C al if orn ia (s o u th ern ). . N ew Y ork (s outh er n).D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia ..

P er io d o f d es ig nation

F ro m — T o -

Oct. 2,1961 D ec . 16,1961

(’)

J u ly 1,1961 J u n e 30,1962

(’)

Oct. 9,1961 N o v . 24,1961F eb . 15,1962 A pr. 15,1962

D ec . 4,1961 D ec . 16,1961

Jan . 1,1962 M ay 15,1962

O ct. 1,1961 J u n e 30,1962

Aug . 1,1961 O ct. 7,1961Oct. 9,1961 N ov. 8,1961O ct . 30,1961 N ov. 4,1961

J u ly 10,1961 A ug . 31,1961

A pr. 30,1962 M ay 25,1962

Jan . 8,19 62 F eb . 5,1962

A pr. 1,1962 Ju n e 30,1962

O ct. 2,1961 N ov. 2,1961

Sep t. 24,1961 O ct. 31,1961

J u ly 1,1961 D ec . 31,1961

A ct ual 

d ay s 1

as si gn ­

m e n t

»10 

2

(‘)

4

102

5

160

629

Se rv ice

C ir ­

cu it

co urt s

cas es

h ea rd

D is tr ic t 

co urt s— 

N u m b e r of 

tr ia ls

T ri als D ay s

20

109181 62

40

193

Ju d g e

Lawcler k

C ost of tr av el

Se cre ­

ta ry

R eport er C rier T o ta l

$295

9045

791

1,577

434

568

1,058

►2,606

348

700

976

2,537 

244 

» 513

12,782

$17

197

$115

567

1,031

377

1,504

3,608

$410

9076

1,358

2,608

811568

1,238

2,606

348700976

4,041

244

513

16,587

OO

Cn
Assignmen ts of senior judges fo r service i n special courts and circuit courts or district courts of other circuits, Ju ly 1, 1931, to Ju ne 30,

1963— Co nti nued 

SUMMARY

C o n tr ib u ti n g c ourt s N u m b er 

of jud ges

C o u rt s vis it ed

A ct ual 

day s on 

as si gn ­

m e n t

Se rv ic e C os t of tr av el

C ir cu it

co urt s—

Cas es

h eard

D is tr ic t court s— 

N u m b e r o f tri als

Ju d g e

Law

cl er k Sec re ta ry R ep ort er C rier T ota l

T ri als D ay s

C ir c u it c o u rt s. 3

22

C ir cu it c o u rt s. . . __________ 35

80

4

47 $1,297

2,368

135

$492

1,698

14

$1,7 89

3,966

166

D o ........... D is tr ic t c o u rt s_________ . . 16 41 D o ........... Sp ec ia l c o u rts ______ $17

S u b to ta l_____ _____ 7 119 47 16 41 3,8 00 17 2,104 5,921

D is tr ic t c o u r ts .. D is tr ic t c o u rt s_____ ______ 5

2

291

59

32 112 7, 576

1,406

1,604 9,0 80

1,586 D o ____ Spe ci al c o u rts . ____ 134 180

S u b to ta l.......... . 7

1

350

160

134 32

14

112

40

8,9 82 180 1,604 10,666 Sp ec ial c o u r ts .. . D is tr ic t c o u rt s____ ______

G ra n d to ta l______ 15 629 181 62 193 12,782 197 3,6 08 16,587

> A ct ual d ay s on as si gnm ent ba se d on d ate s of arr iv al an d d ep art u re . N u m b er of 

d ay s li st ed for assi gnm ents a t D is tr ic t court s ar e of re co rd , w her ea s n u m b e r of d ay s in 

att en d an ce a t cir cu it court s w as c on st ru cte d from tr av el ex pe ns e vou ch er s.

1 D ays on w hic h e xp en se s w er e cl ai m ed .

0 0

0 3

’ P e rm a n en t des ig nati on.

4 Ser vi ng as s pe ci al m ast er in Lak e M ic hig an w ate r div ers io n cases.

5 N o c la im re ce iv ed for tr av el to N ew Y ork .

«
Assignm ents of judges fo r service in special courts and circuit courts or district courts of other circuits, Ju ly 1, 1961, to J un e 30, 1962

P eri od o f d esig nation Se rv ices C ost of tr av el

C o n tr ib u ti n g c o u rt N am e o f ju dge

COURT OF APP EAL S

A ld ri ch, B ail ey ______

Do W oodberr y, P e te r___

3d c i r c u i t ................................ G an ey , J. C u ll en ........ ..

D o ..................................... S m it h , W il li am F ........

6th c ir c u it ................................ M a rti n , Jo h n D S r.......

D o ...................................... ........ d o ................................

9th c ir c u it ................................. M cA ll is te r, T h o m as

F .

D is tr ic t of C olu m bia cir - W ri g h t, J . S k ell y ..........

cu it .

D o .................................... F ah y , C h arl es................

DISTRICT COURTS

1st ci rc uit : M a in e ..................

4th cir cu it : N o rth C ar oli n a (w es te rn ).

5th ci rc uit :

A la bam a (s o u th e rn ).. .

T ex as (e aste rn )...............

6th cir cu it : M ic hig an 

(e aste rn ).

OTH ER COURTS

C u sto m s c o u rt..............

T o ta l................... .

C o u rt vis it ed

F ro m — T o —

A ct ual 

d ay s 1

as si gn ­

m e n t

C ir ­

cu it

co urt s

Cas esh ea rd

D is tr ic t 

court s— 

N u m b er of 

tr ia ls

T ri als D ays

Ju d g e

Law

clerk

Sec re

ta ry

R epo rt er C rier T o ta l

O ig no ux , E d w ard T ._ C ra v en J am es B J r .......T h o m as, D anie l I I . .S h eeh y ,J o e W ...........

K ae ss , F re d ri ck W ._R ao , P a u l P .

Se e fo ot not es a t en d o f t ab le , p. 88.

3d cir cu it (V irgin Is ­

la n d s) .

........ d o ...........................

J a n . 29,1962 

........ d o ..............

F eb . 2,1962 

____d o .............

1st cir cu it (P u ert o 

R ic o) .

___ d o ...... ................... ..

F eb . 5,19 62

.........d o . . . .........

F eb. 10,1962

.........d o _______

D is tr ic t of C olu m bia N o v . 7,1961 N o v . 24,1961

(d is tr ic t c o u rt) .

Flo ri da ( s o u th e r n ) .. .. 

Em er gen cy C o u rt of

F eb . 5,19 62 M ar. 16,1962 

(•) A pp ea ls .

L ouis ia na ( e a s te rn ).. .. M ay 14,1962 J u n e 30,1 962«

C o u rt o f C la im s______ O ct . 4,1961 O ct . 4,1961

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia .. F eb . 2,1962 M ar. 9,1962

N ew Y or k (s o u th ern ). F eb . 26,1962 M ar. 16,1962

____do............................... J u ly 17,1961 J u ly 29,1961

___ d o ....................... ........ J a n . 29,1962 Feb . 9,1962

N ew Y ork (w e ste rn ).. J u n e 11,1962 Ju n e 29,1962

F lo ri da (s o u th ern ). (’)

‘ 40

2

172 26

(’)

55

2 $203

2 200 

s 135

’ 159 

430

1,091

149

237

1,098

627458438262

622

6,109

2 200

340

1,028

$340

953

$695

115

347

2,671

76

1,369

$203

too

135

159

3,0 72

1,110

149

237

2,434 

627458438

453

969

10,844
Assignmen t of judge s for service in special courts and circuit courts or district courts of other circuits, Ju ly 1, 1961, to J un e SO, 1962— C o n . 

SU M M A R Y

C on trib uting co urt N um be r 

of jud ge s

Cou rts v isited

Actu al 

da ys on assignm en t

Services Co st o f tra ve l

Ci rcuit 

co urt s— 

Cases 

he ard

D istri ct courts— 

N um be r of trials

Ju dg e

Law

clerk Secre tary Rep orter Crier To tal

Tr ials Day s

C ircu it cou rts........ . ........................ 4

2

2

C ircu it c o u rt s.. .......... 23

61

3

21 $697

1,758

149

$200

1,368

$897

4,419

149

Su bt ot al ............................

D is tri ct c ou rts......................... 3 14 $1,293 Special co urts_______ _____ 5

8 87 26 3 14 2,604 1,568 1,293 6,465

D is tric t c ourt s________ ____ _ Distric t c ou rts 5

1

77

8

12 41 2,883

622

756

347

76 $695 4,410

969 Special co urt s___ ____ . _______ ____do _______

Grand t o ta l______ ______ 14 172 26 15 55 6.109 2,671 1,369 695 10,844

0000

1 Ac tual da ys on assig nm en t based on da te s of arriv al an d de pa rtur e. N um be r of da ys lis ted for assig nm ents at di st rict courts are of rec ord , wh ere as nu m be r of da ys in at te nda nce at spe cial courts an d/or circuit courts was co nstru cted from tra ve l expense vo uchers.

3 Ju dg e also he ld co ur t i n Pu er to Rico; the refore , on ly cost of tr an sp or ta tio n, San Ju an to Virgin Island s an d re tu rn , inc lude d.

* J ud ge also h eld co ur t in Virgin Island s; the refore , no ad de d tran sp or ta tio n expense s Incu rre d.

4 Ju dg e M ar tin ho spitalized in M iam i from Fe b. 21, 1962, to M ar. 28, 1962. 8 S erved un de r pe rm an en t de sig nation. The Em ergency Cou rt of A ppeals comp leted its busin ess on Dec. 6, 1961, an d on Ap r. 19, 1962, the do ck ets an d ot he r rec ord s were for ma lly closed. 8 T o con clude m at te rs p en ding on e leva tio n to ap pe lla te court . 7 No t ria ls or t rial d ay s—sen ten cin g cri mi na ls on p leas of guilty . 8 T o comp lete un fin ish ed m at te rs from prior y ea r desig nation.

■ j»
89

Judge Campbell. I should like to say apropos of the chairm an’s 

question tha t this is the direct result of the work of our budget committee in carrying out what we correctly, I am sure, assumed as the 

mandate of your committee in this regard.

We are asking for the same travel appropriation this year, not with 

the idea of lessening our alertness to the problem but with the idea of 

giving it a fair test for 1 year further.

We can assure you th at any money no t expended, if your committee 

sees fit to grant us what we have asked for, will, of course, be returned 

and the same vigilance will be exercised this year.

V IE W S OF C H IE F JU S T IC E ON IN T E R C IR C U IT A SSIG N M EN TS

Might I also ask the chairman at this point, on the subject of 

stopping intercircuit assignments, if he would care to have the letter 

of the Chief Justice to the various chief judges, supplementing Congressman Bow’s recommendation and perhaps care to insert it in the 

record at this point as evidence of our attempt to comply with the 

recommendations of your committee.

Mr. Rooney. Very well. We shall insert this letter of the Chief 

Justice at this point in the record.

(The letter follows:)

December 4, 1962.

Hon. Peter Woodbury,

Chie f Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals,

Manchester, N.H.

My Dear J udge: On Monday, November 26, 1962, the Advisory Committee 

on Intercircu it Assignments met here in Washington and we reviewed together 

the requests so far received for intercircuit assignments to be served during the 

calendar y ear 1963.

It was evident to us all th at the ena ctm ent of the omnibus judgeship bill 

followed by the filling of most of the new positions, as well as most of the older 

vacancies, has materially altered the basis upon which, up to now, we have been 

authorizing intercircuit assignments.

Heretofore and because there was a chronic shortage of judgepower in nearly 

all circuits, it has been generally assumed that, when the chief judge of a circuit 

certified as to the need for an outside judge to sit in a district or on the circuit 

court and consent was given by the chief judge of some other circuit to the 

acceptance of the assignment by an active district or circuit judge of his circuit, 

auth orization of the assignment was desirable a nd should follow. The possibility 

of meeting th e need by an assignm ent from within the circuit was rarely explored 

because the shortage of judges in all circuits was so constan t that it could be 

safely assumed th at an intracircuit assignment was impractical. The creation 

of 73 new judgeships and appointments, which have increased the total of Federal 

judges on duty by nearly one-fourth, have changed all this. It is eviden t th at 

from now on, before an intercircu it assignment is authorized, more atten tion must 

be given to the possibility of meeting th e situatio n by an intracircuit assignment.

At the time of the committee meeting requests had been received in writing for 

service of judges on intercircu it assignment during the first few' months of 1963 

in 16 instances, with a 17th request made orally on the Friday before the committee meeting with appropriate lette rs to follow. Of this number, 10 were 

requests for the assignment of a regular active judge and 7 for the assignment of 

a senior judge. In none of these instances has anything been submitted to the 

committee or to me indicating the impracticality of meeting the situatio n with 

an intra circuit assignment.

Furthermore, it was apparen t th at the relative cost to the Governm ent had 

not been considered in connection with these requests. For example, requests 

have been received to send judges to sit in New York for only a mon th apiece 

from such distan t points as Honolulu, Hawaii, Portland, Oreg., Carson City 

and Las Vegas, Nev., when it can certa inly be assumed that available judges 

could be found much closer to the Southern District of New York.
I have become convinced tha t under these circumstances it would be a serious 

mistake to authorize all the intercircuit assignments th at are being requested, 

even though the certificates of need and the consent of the chief judges are in 

proper form and meet all the criteria we have been using heretofore.

The Congress has been very generous in the creation of additional judgeships 

and the administration has been most active in filling the positions to meet the 

needs of the judicial system. Congress has the right to expect that we will use 

the services of all Federal judges as economically as possible and that no intercircuit assignment will be authorized if th e needs of th e administration of justice 

can be met without that expense.

In view of the criticism that would be bound to arise should all these requests 

for intercircuit assignment be authorized as submitted, I have decided th at I 

should decline to execute any of them at this time, with the following exceptions:

I intend to authorize all of the intercircuit assignments of senior judges recommended to me by the Advisory Committee on Inte rcircuit Assignments because 

the same considerations do not apply to senior judges. A senior judge has no 

obligation to perform any judicial service at all, and if he is willing to serve in 

any court anywhere it is a clear gain to the Government and I see no reason for 

not authorizing such an assignment when it is recommended by the advisory 

committee.

I also intend to authorize the necessary assignments to continue the practice 

of the first and third circuits to combine forces on the annual visitation of the 

Court of Appeals of the First Circuit to Puerto Rico and the similar annual 

visitation of the C ourt of Appeals of the Third Circuit to the Viroin Islands, since 

this arrangement clearly conserves judgepower and reduces expense to the 

Government.

It may well be that some emergeny or other extraordinary circumstance may 

arise which adequately justifies an intercircu it assignment, and, of course, in 

any such case a uthorization will be given.

When the Judicial Conference meets in March the matter of intercircu it 

assignments will be on the agenda and I expect we will have a report from the 

advisory committee.

The whole matter of intercircuit assignments under the new conditions th at 

now exist in the judiciary can be fully discussed. In the meantime I thought 

you would want to know my views on the requests for intercircuit assignment 

received up to the present.

Sincerely,

E ar l W a r r e n .

Judge Campbell. May I say for the record tha t each chief judge 

of each circuit received a letter identical to this. This happens to be 

the one for the first circuit.

L IM IT A TIO N ON AM OUNT FO R REPA Y M EN T OF E X P E N S E S OF SU B SIS T E N C E

Mr. Rooney. What is the situation with regard to the limitation on 

the amount that can he used for payment of expenses of subsistence?

Judge Campbell. The recommendation, sir, of our Budget Committee is that the limitation is no longer necessary, due to the vigilance 

of our Committee and of the Administrative Office under our supervision. I think that if the limitation were removed and the statuto ry 

limit permitted in the cases where it might be necessary—we certainly 

need to ask for no more money and certainly I think that the psychological effect of that on the judges would be in the interest of economy 

rather than against it.

Mr. Airhart. In tha t connection, sir, you might like to have our 

analysis. We go through several hundreds of travel days to find out 

averages and find out who is using what. The figure where judges 

use subsistence is $19.70 a day, which does not indicate abuses.

Judge Campbell. We have every reason to be sure that this will be 

followed in the future. T think the psychological effect of not having 

the limitation in the stat ute might at this time in our Budget Com-
91

mittee’s work in furtherance of the work of your committee be helpful 

rather than hurtful in maintaining the economies tha t we have already 

put in, sir.

Mr. Rooney. I want to understand this correctly. I note that 

in this comparative analysis of payments for subsistence of judges 

incident to the performance of official travel that there were 108 days 

of actual expenses where the amount was from $25.01 to $30.

Judge Campbell. Yes, sir.

Mr. Airhart. Tha t was during the period before the limitation 

when the $30 was the maximum, Mr. Chairman; the period between 

the passage of the amendment to the Travel Act and the passage of 

the appropriations act with the limitation in it.

Mr. Rooney. Maybe we saved a bit of money with the limitation.

Judge Campbell. You might have. I really think tha t the overall 

effect on permitting judges to themselves, with our assistance and 

watchfulness, to observe economy rather than imposing upon them 

a limitation which is not imposed on other similar officers of the 

Government would be more helpful than hurtful.

Mr. Rooney. When was this decision of the Budget Committee 

arrived at? I ask tha t because in the committee print before me 

we have no suggestion of the deletion of this language at page 346 

of the committee print.

Judge Campbell. Our committee I think met after the print was 

prepared, sir, and it is our recommendation to you.

N O N R E C U R R IN G IT E M S IN R E Q U E ST

Mr. Rooney. How much of this request for $4,550,000 is nonrecurring?

Judge Campbell. Mr. Airhart?

Mr. Garabedian. I believe I can answer that, sir. None of it is. 

It is all recurring expenses. All of the nonrecurring expenses with 

respect to new judgeship legislation have been deducted.

Mr. Rooney. Are you saying tha t this item of $42,000 a t page 112 

of the justifications, “to provide for modernization and expansion 

of telephone facilities,” will not be recurring?

Mr. Garabedian. Sir, tha t is an annual cost. Once you improve 

the facilities you have a monthly rental which will be a recurring 

expense. In other words, if you spend $50 to increase or expand on 

your telephone facilities this year you will have tha t $50 expense 

again next year.

Mr. Rooney. You have already figured tha t the $10,000 second 

item to cover increases in the annual cost of printing records in forma 

pauperis for the Supreme Court will not be recurring? It should be 

recurring. I do not want to mislead you.

Mr. Garabedian. It will be recurring, to the best of our information.

Judge Campbell. That is a recurring expense, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Rooney. You have already figured before you even get to 

fiscal year 1965 tha t you are going to need $90,000 to cover increased 

buying of transcripts in the forma pauperis?

Judge McGuire. Tha t is as a consequence of the Coppedge case. 

The Coppedge case was a District of Columbia case and the Supreme 

Court indicated the individuals should be given the right to file.
Mr. R ooney. We un derst and th at , Judge McGui re, bu t we are 

tal kin g ab ou t thes e item s being pu t in the bu dg et to rem ain forever, 

whe reas it would seem on the face of it th at the y are nonre cur ring 

item s, non rec urring insofar as justification for fiscal year 1965 is 

concerned.

Judg e M cGuir e. Tha t may be true, bu t I would think this item of 

$90,000, the way we see appeals now in our cou rt, would be larger 

next year.

Judg e Campbell. I thi nk t her e has been a g eneral extension by t he 

Sup rem e Co urt of the rig ht—and this of course we have no con trol 

over—the rig ht to appeal in form a pau peri s. I must say as a rep resenta tiv e of the distr ict judges th at we are n ot in com plete concurr ence 

with this , bu t of course also as distr ict judges we have to obey the 

manda tes of the Supreme Co urt.

Judg e Weinm an. That is explained on pages 117 a nd 118.

M O DER NIZ ATI ON AN D E X PA N SIO N OF T E L E P H O N E FA C IL IT IE S

Mr. R ooney. On page 116 you refer to the pro gram of mo dernization and expansion of tele pho ne facilities.

How m uch is the re in thi s bu dget for th at purp ose?

Judg e Campbell. Mr. Anderson?

Mr. Anderson. Mr. Ch airma n, the re is $42,000 being req uested 

for 1964 for this purpose.

Mr. R ooney. Tha t is 42 add itio nal to wh at?

Mr. Anderson. Fo rty -tw o add itio nal to an exp enditure in fiscal 

year 1962 of $374,000 for fixed telephone charges. Our commun ication servic es are made up of fixed charges, long distan ce calls, telegrap h 

and pos tage expense. Th e fixed charges are the items we are talk ing 

ab ou t here and the m ode rnization of t he tele pho ne service mea ns th at 

when you pu t in an imp roved tele phone service, it is a continu ing 

expense and would be in 1964.

The actua l situatio n for 6 months this year is t hat we hav e paid out 

$129,000 for fixed charges as com pared with $119,000 the year before 

so it is a con tinuing growing item.

Mr. R ooney. Durin g the p ast 6 months th at you refer to when you 

had all the new judges b eing add ed the increase was pu t—how much?

Mr. Anderson. Ab out $10,000 for 6 months.

Mr. R ooney. About $10,000, how do you accou nt for an increase 

such as the one pre sen tly req uested of $42,000?

Mr. Anderson. Th e exp enditure figures, sir, run a l ittle b it beh ind. 

Tha t is, we are talkin g here exp end itures only and they are ab ou t 2 

mo nth s behind.

Mr. R ooney. You were the one th at brou gh t up the word “expe nd itu res.”

Mr. Anderson. Yes, sir, I am. I say the expen diture s for 6 mo nth s 

are no t 6 mo nth s tele pho ne service.

Mr. R ooney. Le t me try this anoth er way. You say th at this 

money is for the ins tallction of telephone facilities in new court 

qu arters. Aren’t all the new judges in the ir qu arters by now?

Mr. Anderson. This is no t only new judges, Mr. Ch air ma n; it is 

every tim e the re is a mov e w ithin a p res ent bu ilding and t he telephone 

service is rein stalled . It is always improve d.

Mr. R ooney. Bu t this w ould n ot p roceed at the ra te th at yo u hav e 

been going within the pa st ye ar or there abou ts, with all these new
93

4

judges. There are 73 of them. This would not be a normal thing; 

would it?

Mr. Anderson. Yes, sir. This is a normal thing.

Mr. Rooney. That you would have these moves?

Mr. Anderson. This is quite a normal move, to continue to improve 

telephone service.

PROCEDURE FOR OBTAINING COURTROOMS

Mr. Rooney. This brings me to this question: With whom does a 

chief judge of a district do business in order to get new or additional 

courtrooms in a courthouse?

Judge Campbell. The GSA ordinarily.

Mr. Rooney. What, if anything, does he have to do with the budget committee of the Judicial Conference?

Judge Campbell. He has to submit his request for additional 

facilities tha t we are responsible for through the Administrative 

Office and have them passed upon both by the Administrative Office 

and by our budget committee, sir.

PARKING FEES

Mr. Rooney. What parking fees, if any, have been allowed to date 

out of the travel money?

Mr. Airhart. It is running at this point, Mr. Chairman, at about 

$4,000 a year.

Mr. Rooney.

Mr. Airhart

Rooney.

*

What do you expect it to be in the coming year? 

About the same.

Mr. Slack?

Mr. Slack. Are we discussing all of these items now?

Mr. Rooney. Yes.

Mr.

INCREASE FOR PHOTOCOPYING SUPPLIES

Mr. Slack. Justification No. 3 for $30,000 on photocopy supplies, 

in the justification on page 119, you state,

By reason of th e ins tal lat ion of such eq uipm ent the dema nd for photocopy 

paper, chemicals, et cetera, has increas ed an d it is es tim ated th at an addition al 

$30,000 will be req uired for thi s purpose in 1964.

How much did this increase?

Mr. Anderson. I can give you an indication of the increase, 

Mr. Congressman, by saying tha t the obligation is for 6 months for 

the current year, $62,700, as compared with $49,000 the previous 

year. This has become a way of life, as you may appreciate, using 

photocopy machines.

* DISPOSITION OF FEES FOR COPIES OF RECORDS

In the courts, in the clerk’s office, where a copy goes out over the 

counter, for which a fee is charged, those fees go into the Treasury. 

They do not come into our appropriations, but they go into the 

Treasury so there is some income through this process.

Mr. Slack. But you cannot pinpoint the amount of the fees tha t 

go into the Treasury?
94

Mr. Anderson. They go in among many items of fees. We cannot 

pinpoint that.

Mr. Slack. Thank you.

Mr. Rooney. Mr. Bow?

R ED U CTIO N IN TRAVEL

Mr. Bow. I have no questions. I just want to say for the record I 

am happy to see this travel cut down. I think they are making some 

progress in it. I would like to have seen the figure cut some.

Mr. R ooney. I think this is an invitation, is it not, to cut the figure?

Judge Campbell. Certainly, but we hope you will give us 1 more 

year to continue the work that we have started and we can assure 

you it will continue.

Mr. Bow. I have had a chance to glance at your second report of the 

districts. I am glad to see that one circuit at least has amplified 

considerably what they had written to you before when they said 

they were satisfied and thought that was worthwhile, without giving 

us any evidence.

Judge Weinman. I can give you a specific illustration.

Judge Kaess was to go to New York in January and 1 needed him 

in Columbus and they canceled the New York affair. He could not 

come to Columbus because of the sickness of one of the other judges 

but at least this rule was invoked.

Mr. Bow. That is all I have now, Mr. Chairman.

appropriations granted for new judgships

Judge Campbell. May I make one observation on the record, 

Mr. Chairman, before you pass to the next item which is in respect 

to money for new judgeships.

I should like to say-----

Mr. Rooney. $330,000.

Judge Campbell. On page 112, for the new judges, $330,000. My 

committee is most indebted, particularly to the chairman of this 

committee, for—and indeed on behalf of the whole judiciary I should 

like to state our thanks for the foresight that prompted you as chairman and your committee to allow not only this sum of money but the 

entire amount for this purpose. We anticipated before any appointments were made tha t some 50 would be made within this period. 

Actually, there were 52. By having given us this amount of money 

the Government gained the immediate use of the services of these 

judges at the time of their appointment and it was a great contribution 

to the disposal of a backlog of cases in several districts and to the 

improvement of the dispatch of business in several circuit courts of 

appeal. We feel tha t the foresight which prompted you to include 

this and to give it to us in advance, so to speak, has resulted in a 

greatly increased amount of service tha t the judiciary was enabled 

thereby to render.

We would like to state on the record our thanks, particularly to the 

chairman and also to the members of this committee for their understanding and foresight in this regard.
95

A dmin is tr ati ve O ffic e of t h e U.S, C ou rt s

Object classification

[In th ou sa nd s of dollars]

Person nel compen sation:

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

Pos itio ns oth er t ha n pe rm an en t.................

Otherpe rso nnel co mp ensat ion ...................

To tal, per son nel co mp en satio n...............

Di rect obligations:

11 Person nel co mpe ns atio n. .....................

12 Person nel benefits.............. ...................

21 Tr av el and t ra ns po rta tio n of persons.

22 Tr an sp or ta tio n of th in gs ......................

23 Ren t, comm unica tions, an d ut ili tie s.

24 Print in g an d re pro duct io n.................

25 Othe r serv ic es.......................................

26 Supplies a nd m aterials..........................

31 Equip m en t........ ............... ........ . ..........

Tot al, direct o bligations. ................

Re im bu rsab le obligations:

11 Person nel co mpe nsation.................

21 Tr av el a nd tra ns po rtat io n of persons. 

To tal, rei mbu rsab le o bligat io ns. ... 

To tal, obl ig at io ns. ..____________

1962 actu al 1963 esti mate 1964estimate

1,078 1,163 1,238

57 62 63

4 10 21

1,140 1,235 1,322

1,139 1,235 1,322

82 88 94

36 70 70

1 1 1

80 87 90

21 23 23

10 14 14

23 20 20

47 8 6

1,439 1,546 1,640

1

1

2

1,441 1,546 1,640

Personnel summary

1962 ac tua l 1963 esti mate 1964 esti ma te

To tal nu mbe r of perman en t position s........... ......................... 165 165 167 Fu ll- tim e eq uiva lent of oth er positio ns......................... ............... 9 7 7

Average nu mbe r of all em plo yees.......... . . ......... ............ ............ 162 167 169 N um be r of em ployees a t en d of year........ ...................................... 163 174 176

Program and financing

[In t ho us an ds of dollars]

1962 actual 1963estim ate 1964estim ate

Pro gra m by activities:

Di rect pro gram:

1. Gener al ad m in istrat io n_______________

2. Stu dy of rule s of pra ctice and p rocedure.

To tal, di re ct prog ram ob ligations____

Reim bursa ble pr og ram______ ____ __________

To ta l o bli gatio ns_______________________ ____ _______

Fin ancin g:

Advance s a nd reim bu rsem en ts from othe r a cco unts (—) ... 

Un obligate d balanc e lapsing_____________________ ____ _

1,358

81

1,439

2

1,441

- 2

3

1,436

110

1,546

1,546

1,530

110

1,640

1,640

Ne w obligational au th or ity. 1,442 1,546 1,640

New obliga tion al au th or ity :

App ro pr iatio n_____ ______________________

Propose d su pp lem en tal d ue to pa y increa ses. 1,442 1,500

46

1,640

5)8777— 63------ 7
96

Mr. Rooney. The next item is titled “Administrative Office of the 

U.S. Courts.” It appears at page 349 of the committee print and 

beginning at page 124 of the justifications.

We shall insert at this point in the record pages 124 through 133 of 

these justifications.

(The justifications follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation

Salarie s a nd expenses, Ad mi nistr ative Office of th e U.S. Co urt s: Judiciary

1963 ap prop ria tio n in an nu al ac t___________________________________________________ $1,500,000

1963 propo sed s upple mental due to pa y increases-------------------------------------------------------- 46,000

Base for 1964........................................................................................................................................ 1,546,000

N et difference , 1964 over 1963:

Re qu iie men ts Difference, increase (+ )

or d ecrease (—)

3963

ad justed

5964

estim ate

$1,546,000 $1,610,400 +$94,400

To ta l e stima te for 1964........................................................................................................................ 1,640,400

Statement showing analysis by object

Object

1963

es tim ate

1964

es tim ate

Increase (+ ) 

or

decrease (—)

11

12 

21 

22

23

24

25

26 

31

Perso nnel co mpe nsation...... ..........

Perso nnel be ne fit s________________

Tr av el an d tran sp or ta tio n of persons.

Tr anspoi ta tio n of th ings ............... .......

Ren t, comm unica tio ns, an d ut ilitie s.

Print in g an d repr od uc tio n_________

Other servi ces ___________ ________

Supplies a nd m aterials.........................

E qu ip m en t______________________

Tot al obli gatio ns__________________________________

$1,235,000

88,000

70,000

1,200

86,800

22.500

14.500 

20,000

8,000

$1,322,000 

94,400 

70,000 

1,200 

89,800

22.500

14.500 

20,000

6,000

+$87,000 

+6, 400

+3,000

-2 ,0 00

1 1,546,000 1,640,400 +94,400

»Includ es $46,000 prop ose d sup plem ental d ue to pay increases.

Summary of increased requirements for 196/+

Nature of expense (or savings):

DED UCTIO N S

Amount

Deductions for nonrecurring expense of providing e quipment for

new personnel authorized for 1963________________________ —$2,000 t

IN C R E A SE S R EQ U ESTED

1. Additional amount required under the Federal Salary Reform

Act of 1962.____ ______________________ ____ ________ 44,000

2. Provision for within-grade salary advancem ents_____________ 21, 650 *

3. Cost of two extra compensable days in 1964________________ 10, 750

4. Two additional positions required to administer Judiciary

salary plan; Personnel Officer, GS-13, at $11,150 and a clerkstenographer, GS-5 at $4,565 per ann um________________ 17, 000

5. To cover higher postal rate s provided by Public Law 87-793,

approved October 11, 1962____________________________ 3,000

Net increase, 1964 over 1963_________________________ 94, 400
Language changes

None.

Objectives

This appro priation provides for 

and oth er personnel of the Admini

sary operating expenses of the office, including travel, communication services, 

supplies, equipment, etc. The D irector, under the supervision and direction of the 

Judicial Conference of the United States, has adm inistrative jurisdiction over the 

Courts of Appeals and Dis trict Courts of the United States, the District Courts 

of the Canal Zone, Guam and the Virgin Islands and a lesser adm inistrative ju ris ­

diction over the Cou rt of Claims, the Court of Customs and Pa tent Appeals and 

the Customs Court. The Director also has adm inistrative jurisdiction over th e 

Federal prob ation and ban kruptcy systems.

For data as to the specific duties and responsibilities of t he Director and the 

basic sta tutory auth orities, 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 th e Congress.

General j uslification

The estimate for 1964 includes a requ est for two additional positions, a personnel officer and a clerk-stenographer, who are to be assigned to the task of

• administering the judiciary salary plan which plan was approved by the Judicial 

Conference at its meeting in September 1961. The plan provides new classification standa rds for de puty clerks in the U.S. d istr ict courts, officers a nd employees 

in the prob ation system and clerks to referees in bankruptcy . Funds for implementation of the plan are included under th e appropriations “Salaries of s upp orting personnel” and “Expenses of referees.”

Provision also has been made for increases in salary under the Federal Salary 

Reform Act of 1962; within-grade salary advancem ents to be granted under the 

Classification Act of 1949, as amended; the cost of 2 extra compensable days in 

1964; and higher postal rates.

Detailed justification

The appropriation estimate for fiscal year 1964 is $1,640,400, a net increase 

of $94,400 over the appropriation for 1963, adjusted to include a proposed supplemental of $46,000 for pay costs under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962 

(Public Law 87-793, approved October 11, 1962). The requested increases, as 

well as deductions, are explained below:

Deduction for nonrecurring expenses

The appropriation for 1963 included the sum of $2,000 for the procurem ent of 

equipment for new personnel. Inasmuch as this is a nonrecurring expense, it 

has been deducted in establishing the budgetary requirements for 1964. 

Requirements under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

An additional $44,000 will be required in fiscal ye ar 1964 to cover the full-year 

cost of pay increases granted employees of the Administrative Office effective 

October 15, 1962, and approximately one-half of the annu al cost of increases in 

8alarv including related benefits, which are scheduled to tak e effect on Jan uary 6, 

1964. The following is a breakdown by fiscal year of the to tal cost of pay increases 

under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962:

1963 pr op os ed 

su pple ­

m en ta l

1964 b u d g etary r equir em ents

1965 b u d g etary r eq u ir em en ts

T o ta l co st

1st ph as e (effec tiv e Oct. 15,196 2):

C o m p en sa ti o n ______ ___________ . $43,0 00

3,0 00

$18,500

1,500

$61,500

4,5 00

B en ef its.............................. .............

T o ta l.............................................. 46,0 00 20,0 00 66,0 00

2d p has e (effec tiv e Jan . 6,1 96 4) :

C o m p en sa ti o n _____________ ________ _ 22,5 00

1,500

$23,500

1,500

46,0 00

3,0 00

B en efi ts ................. .............

T o ta l.................................................. 24,000 25,000 49,000

G ra nd t o ta l................................................ 46,0 00 44,0 00 25,000 115,000
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—Government retireme nt 

contributions, employer FICA taxes, and Government contributions to employee 

life insurance premiums. Pay costs in the fiscal year 1963 will be absorbed to the maximum extent possible. However, any savings to be realized in 1963 

would be the result of an abnorm ally high level of vacancies and would not oe 

of a recurring nature. Pay costs in 1964 cannot be absorbed without seriously 

alfecting the execution of essential functions and services being rendered to the 

courts.

Provision for within-grade salary advancements

This appropriation 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 $21,650, of which $20,250 represents increases in compensation and 

$1,400 related personnel benefits—Government contributions to the civil service 

retirement fund and for group life insurance. The estimate is net of anticipated 

savings due to turnover and represents approximately 85 percent of the full 

potential cost of within-grade salary advancements.

Cost of two extra compensable days in 1964

The sum of $10,750 ($10,000 for personnel compensation and $750 for related 

benefits) has been included to cover regular pay in excess of 52 weeks. Employees 

of the Administrative Office will be compensated, on a biweekly basis, for 262 days 

in the fiscal year 1964 as compared with only 260 compensable days in 1963. 

Additional personnel

It is requested th at the sum of $17,000 ($15,750 for compensation and $1,250 

for related benefits) be provided in 1964 for the employment of a personnel officer in grade GS-13 and a clerk-stenographer in grade GS-5 who are to be assigned 

to the task of administering the judiciary salary plan. The plan which was 

approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1961 

provides new classification standar ds for deputy clerks in the U.S. district courts, 

clerks to referees, and officers and employees in the probation system. Funds for the implementation of th e plan and justifications are included under the appropriation headings "Salaries of supporting personnel” and "Expenses of 

referees.” The conversion from the old standards to the new stand ards would in itself be 

a tremendous task, but, moreover, if the plan is to serve the purpose for which 

it was intended, the Administrative Office, on a continuing basis, must conduct 

field surveys of the courts and their component offices. All requests for the 

regra ding of positions must be thoroughly examined to assure the proper application of the stan dards. The staff of the Administrative Office must be augmented if it is to undertake and be expected to effectively administer the judiciary 

salary plan.

Higher postal rates

The estimate for 1964 includes an additional $3,000 to cover higher postal rates 

authorized by Public Law 87-793, approved October 11, 1962. This represents 

an overall increase of approximately 25 percent in postage and fees (penalty 

mail) to be paid to the Post Office Depa rtment.

Mr. Rooney. They indicate tha t the request is in the amount of 

$1,640,400, an increase of $140,400 over the amounts appropriated to 

date for the current fiscal year.

These increases may be found in the table at page 126 of the justifications.

It would appear from a hasty glance at this page tha t two additional 

positions are requested to administer the judiciary salary plan, a personnel officer in GS-13 and a clerk-stenographer, GS-5.

Judge Campbell. Those are requested, sir, only in the event tha t 

your committee approved the judiciary salary plan request tha t we 

spoke of this morning.

Mr. Rooney. Suppose the committee were to approve the plan. 

Could not the present personnel of the office carry on?
99

Judge Campbell. From a careful review of it by the budget committee, which we went into, concerning reassignment of functions 

within the Administrative Office, I think if this plan were approved 

tha t the present staff is not sufficient to properly carry it out and I 

think someone, such as the man we had in the group tha t made the 

survey which reports we are sending to you pursuant to your direction 

this morning will be needed properly to carry it out with the greatest 

economy.

Mr. Rooney. Who is paying for those reports?

Judge Campbell. They have already been paid for out of the funds 

which your committee appropriated for the use of the various committees of the Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office.

The reports were paid for at the time these people were attached 

to the staff of the Administrative Office. They are no longer on it.

Mr. Rooney. How many people are presently employed in the 

Administrative Office?

Judge Campbell. I might say tha t our budget committee would 

like an officer such as is described in this request, who would be 

responsible to us as well as to the Director for the proper carrying 

out of these reclassifications so that they are not made where they are 

not needed and are made where they are needed. We feel tha t one 

such person with sufficient jurisdiction is necessary for the accomplishment of tha t purpose.

Mr. Airhart. If I may suggest one thing, Mr. Chairman, this is 

like any other salary plan. If it is not carefully and equitably applied, 

we are going to create problems, not solve them. It is of major 

interest tha t it be done right.

We currently have 152 people employed in the office.

employees engaged in personnel work

How many of those 152 people are doing personnel 

Nine.

What are their grades and titles?

I do not have tha t here. I can give it to you for

Mr. Rooney. 

work?

Mr. Airhart

Mr. Rooney.

Mr. Airhart

the record.

Mr. Rooney. Please insert that at this point in the record, together 

with the amount of salary, as well as the title and the grade.

(The information supplied follows:)

« Employees assigned to the Personnel Section of the Adm inistrative Office o f the U.S.

Courts

Position title and grade Salary

Personnel officer (GS-14)___________ ____ ________________ ____ $12, 845

Personnel officer (GS-11)_______________________________________ 8, 045

Personnel clerk (GS-7)_________________________________________ 6, 095

D o .------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ 6,09 5

Do_____________________ ______ _________________ ________ 5,72 5

Personnel clerk (GS -6)_________________________________________ 5, 375

Clerk-stenographer (GS -5)______________________________________ 4, 565

Do________________________________________________ ______ 4,56 5

Clerk-stenographer (GS -4)_______________ _____ _________ _____ _ 4, 110

Total (9 positions)________________ ____________ ________ _ 57,420
11

12

100

Sala rie s of R efer ees

Object classification

[In th ousands of dollars]

Personnel compensation:

Perman ent positions.............. . ...

Positions other than pe rmanent..

Total, personnel compensation.

Personnel benefits_______________

Total obligations............. . ......... ...

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

1,820 2,092 2,092

375 330 330

2,195 2,422 2,422

162 178 178

2,357 2,600 2,600

Personnel summary

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

Total num ber of permanent positions____________________ 129 142 142

Full-time equivalent of other positions________________ ... 32 27 27

Average num ber of all employees . _____________________ 136 168 168

Num ber of employees at end of year_____________________ 190 195 195

Program and financing

[In thousands of dollars]

1962 actual 1963 estimate 1964 estimate

Program by activities: Salaries and benefits (obligations)____

Financing: Unobligated balance lapsing__________________

2,357

13

2,600 2,600

Now obligational authority (appropriation)__________ 2,370 2,600 2,600

Mr. R ooney. Th e ne xt item is titl ed “Salaries of Referee s.” It 

appears a t page 352 of the c ommittee p rin t and begin ning at page 135 

of the justifications. We shall insert at this point in the record th at 

page tog eth er with pages 136 through 141.

(The justific atio n pages follow:)

Sa la r ie s of R e f e r e e s (S pe c ia l F und)

Statem ent showing analysis by object

Object

1963

estim ate

1964

estim ate

Increase (+) 

or

decrease (—)

*

11 Personnel compensation________ _________ _________ $2,422,000 $2,422,000

12 Personnel benefits______ ____-............. . ........... .............. - 178,000 178,000

To tal obligations________________________________ 2,600,000 2,600,000 •
101

Summary of increased requirements for 1964

No increase requested.

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

Language changes

None.

Objectives

The district courts of the United States are constituted courts of bankruptcy, 

vested with original jurisdiction at law and in equ ity in proceedings broug ht under 

the bankruptcy statutes. This jurisdiction p rimarily is exercised thro ugh referees 

appointed by the several district courts. Their compensation and benefits are 

paid from this a ppropriation, which is derived from a special fund in the Treasury 

to which are deposited payments of fees and charges by parties to th e proceedings. 

No appropriation from the general fund of th e Trea sury is required.

Reference to basic sta tutory authorities are contained in section “P ” of the 

Digest of Appropriations, The Judiciary, on file with the Bureau of the Budget 

n and the Appropriations Committees of th e Congress.

General justifications

The number of bankruptcy cases filed in fiscal year 1961 reached another alltime high of 147,780. However, it represents an increase of only 1,137 cases over 

w

the 146,643 cases filed during the previous year, which is the smallest increase in

any year since 1952. The number of cases filed, t he numerical increase and the 

percentage increase in filings since 1952 follows:

Fis ca l ye ar Cas es filed N um er ic al

incr ea se

P er ce nta ge

inc reas e

1952....................................... . ........................................................................ 34,873

1953........................... ...................................................................................... 40,087 5,214 15.0

1954........................... ......... .............................. ........... ................................. 53,136 13,049 32 .6

1955......... ............... ....................... ............................................................ . . 59,404 6,268 11.8

1956............................... . ............. . ................................................................ 62^086 2^082 4. 5

1957........................... ...................................................................................... 73’ 761 11,675 18.8

1958................... ....... ........................... . ...................... ............. . ................. 91,668 17, 907 24 .3

195 9 .. .. ................................................. ...................................................... 100i 672 9,004 9. 8

1960....................... ................. ...................................... ............................. 110,034 9,362 9. 3

1961......... ..................... ............................................ ................... ............... 146,643 36,6 09 33 .3

1 9 62.................................. .......................................................................... 147, 780 1,137 .8

On July 1, 1961, there were 123,690 cases pending. During the year 137,709 

cases were closed as compared with 147,780 cases filed, resu lting in an increase in 

the pending caseload of 19,766 cases or 16.8 percent. This compares with an 

increase in the pending caseload in 1961 of 28,700 cases or 30.2 percent. The 

number pending on Jun e 30, 1962, was 133,761, a new alltime high. The number closed in 1962 (137,709) also was a new high. Exhibits C and D show the 

number of bankruptcy cases filed and pending, fiscal year 1905-62 and the number and rati o of business to nonbusiness bankruptcies commended, fiscal year 

1940-62.

Of the total cases filed in 1962, 89.5 percent were nonbusiness bankruptcies 

(wage earners) and 10.5 percent were business bank ruptcies (which includes mer- 

* chants, manufactu rers, others in business, farmers and the professional groups).

The following table shows the volume and ratio (percentages) of business to nonbusiness filings for the past 10 years:

Fis ca l ye ar N onbu si nes s

Per ce nt ag e 

of to ta l

B us in es s Per ce nt ag e 

of tota l

T o ta l

filing s

1953........... 33,31 5 

44,24 8 

50,21 9 

52,60 8 

63,617 

80,264 

88,9 43 

97,75 0 

131,402

83.1 

83 3

6,772 

8,88 8 

9,18 5 

9,47 8 

10,144 

11,404 

11,729 

12 284

16.9

16.7 

15.5

15.2

13.7

12.4

11.7

11.2

10.4

10.5

40,087 

53,136 

59,404 

62,086 

73,761 

91,6 68 

100,672 

110,034 

146,643 

147,780

1954_____

1955........... 84 .5

1956_____ 84.8

1957........... 86 .3

19.58........... 87 6

1959........... 88 3

1960_____ 88 8

1961........... 89 .6 15,241 

15,655 1962_____ 132,135 89 .5
102

It is estimated that the number of bankruptcy cases to be filed in 1963 and in 

1964 will be under 150,000, or at relatively the same level as in 1961 and 1962.

At the beginning of fiscal year 1963 the balance of the “Referees’ salary and 

expense fund” was approxim ately $9,161,000. It is estim ated th at receipts to be 

deposited into th e fund during fiscal year 1963 will aggregate $7,340,000, bringing 

the total available for appropriation to $16,501,000. Deducting the appropriations of $2,600,000 for “Salaries of referees,” $4,850,000 for “ Expenses of referees,” 

and the proposed supplemental of $105,000 to cover pay increases for clerks to 

referees under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962, a balance of $8,946,000 

would remain in the fund as of June 30, 1963. It is estimated th at during fiscal 

year 1964 receipts to be deposited into the fund will aggregate $7,340,000. Deducting the appropriation estimates for fiscal year 1964 of $2,600,000 for salaries 

of referees and $5,456,000 for expenses of referees there would be a net deficiency 

in 1964 of over $700,000 and the balance in th e fund at th e en d of the year will be 

approximately $S,230,000.

Detailed justification

The appropriation request for 1964 for “Salaries of referees” is $2,600,000. It *

is sufficient to pay the salaries of 142 full-time referees and 54 pa rt-time referees.

No increase has been requested.

Mr. Rooney. They indicate tha t the request is in the amount of 

$2.6 million for referees’ salaries, the same as the amount appropriated »

for this purpose in the current fiscal year.

Who thought up page 137?

You must have too many personnel over there. How can you 

waste time with a thing like tha t—“Summary of increased requirement 

for 1964,” and then, “Item, nature of expense (or savings),” “Reference to justifications” and “Amount” and then in caps, “No increase 

requested.”

Judge Campbell. I think possibly our committee may have been 

bragging a little bit, Mr. Chairman. We have tried for years to get 

to the point where we could say to you we are not asking for any 

increase in positions, and I am afraid possibly we have wasted a page 

in bragging about it.

Judge McGuire. You mean that is a shadow of things to come, too.

Judge Campbell. I am not making a further statement. I have 

answered the chairman.

N U M B E R OF BAN KRUPT CY CASE S FIL E D

Mr. Rooney. It might be noted tha t the number of bankruptcy 

cases filed for fiscal years 1952 to 1962, inclusive, is to be found at 

page 139 of these justifications and tha t the estimate for 1963 and in 

1964 will be under 150,000 cases, or at relatively the same level as 

in 1961 and 1962. r

ST ATU S OF refer ee’s SA LA RY AN D E X P E N S E FUND

It looks as though good times are going, not coming, if I read this 

paragraph at page 141 correctly:

At the beginning of fiscal year 1963, the balance of the referees’ salary and expense fund was approximately $9,161,000. It is estim ated that receipts to be 

deposited into the fund during fiscal year 1963 will aggregate $7,340,000, bringing 

the total available for appropriation to $16,501,000. Deducting the appropriations of $2,600,000 for “Salaries of referees,” $4,850,000 for “ Expenses of referees,” 

and the proposed supplemental of $105,000 to cover pay increases for clerks to 

referees under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962, a balance of $8,946,000 

would remain in the fund as of June 30, 1963. It is estimated that during fiscal 

year 1964 receipts to be deposited into the fund will aggregate $7,340,000.

Deducting the appropriation estimates for fiscal year 1964 of $2,600,000 for
103

“Salaries of referees” and $5,456,000 for “Expenses of referees” there would be a 

net deficiency in 1964 of over $700,000 and the balance in the fund at the end of 

the year will be approximately $8,230,000.

Gentlemen, this is very disturbing. What have you to say about it?

Judge Campbell. 1 think the difference is accounted for by the 

increase in the salaries that was approved by the Congress.

Mr. Rooney. You are increasing the salaries to the extent we are 

going into the hole on this fund and have to dip into the taxpayers’ 

pocket for it?

Judge Campbell. No. We still will have a balance of $8,230,000.

Mr. Rooney. But you will have a deficit of $700,000 if I read this 

correctly, in 1964.

Judge Campbell. Mr. Jackson?

Mr. J ackson. Mr. Chairman, tha t indicates tha t the amount paid 

into the fund during tha t year will not equal the amount we will 

take out by tha t much.

Mr. Rooney. We are headed for bankruptcy then. Isn’t tha t 

right?

* Mr. J ackson. No, sir. There will still be in the fund-----

Mr. Rooney. Won’t you be $700,000 short according to your 

estimate in 1964?

Mr. J ackson. There will be $700,000 less.

Mr. Rooney. At the end of 1964 fiscal year.

Mr. J ackson. Yes, sir.

Mr. Rooney. There will be $700,000 less. You will be in bankruptcy then, won’t you?

Mr. J ackson. No, sir.

Mr. Rooney. Not at the end of 1964?

Mr. J ackson. There will still be available the $8,230,000 balance 

which cannot be used for any other purpose than to support bankruptcy courts.

Judge Campbell. In other words, we dip slightly into our fund 

in order to pay the increased salaries.

Mr. Rooney. That is right.

Judge Campbell. It has got to come from somewhere.

Mr. Rooney. And of course over all the years since we started this 

special fund—and I can well remember when it was done—we made 

money so to speak. Isn’t th at right?

Mr. J ackson. Yes, sir.

Mr. Rooney. Now we are headed toward the end of the road.

* Mr. J ackson. No, Mr. Chairman.

R E V IS IO N OF CH A RG ES A G A IN ST A SSET S OF B A N K R U PT EST A T ES

* There is a provision in the Bankruptcy Act, in this act which 

created the salary system, which authorizes the Judicial Conference 

to adjust the charges to bring this into balance and I presume tha t 

the Judicial Conference sooner or later will consider a revision of the 

charges against assets of bankrupt estates.

Judge Campbell. They certainly will. We will have to raise 

charges to meet increased salaries.

Mr. Rooney. Why haven’t you done it before now, when you have 

the startling story I read from page 141. Why hasn’t something 

already been done in this regard?
104

Judge Campbell. Th ey do no t mee t until Ma rch , M r. Chairma n.

Mr. J ackson. M y thought would be this isn ’t the a pprop ria te tim e 

to do it because to do so would be to ask the Judic ial Conference to 

an tic ipate som ething which has not act ually occurre d. I know they 

would no t wa nt to increase the cost of ba nk ruptcy to any one if they 

did no t hav e to.

Mr. R ooney. Are we to understand th at you would like to have 

the am ou nt r equ ested to which we a re now addressing ourselves, plus 

an increased salary plan for personnel in the Ban kr up tcy Division, 

wi tho ut some assu rance th at the fees are going to be increased?

Mr. J ackson. We are asking for this appro priat ion and at the 

ap prop ria te time we will ask the Jud icia l Conference to reco nsid er 

the charges.

Mr. R ooney. What reco mm end atio n will you have with reg ard to 

the charges?

Mr. J ackson. The re are several sources of incom e which sup port 

this fund. Filing fees go in to it, the special charges fo r filing p etitions 

for review, rec lam atio n petitio ns, the percen tage charges, so-called, 

again st the assets the ba nk ru pt estate s can be adjus ted . Th ey now 

run one and one-half per cent and they can be adjus ted upw ard by a 

very slight frac tion . It would hav e a grea t effect on this amount.

Mr. R ooney. What would be the income from that?

Jud ge Campbell. If they were adjus ted upward wha t would you 

make?

Mr. R ooney. I mea n in dollars.

Mr. J ackson. It would d epe nd on how much a djus tm en t was made.

Judge Campbell. W ha t do you have in mind?

Mr. J ackson. Pe rhaps raising it to 2 perce nt. We have the 

charges again st the ba nk ru pt estat es------

Mr. R ooney. W ha t would the increase to 2 perce nt provide 

mon ey wise?

Mr. J ackson. I do no t believe I could give you th at .

Judg e Campbell. You r best estimate?

Mr. J ackson. Probably a million dollars. It would more than 

offset this increase.

Ju dg e Campbell. If 2 perce nt would yield a million dollars, it 

would equ al this $700,000.

Mr. J ackson. More than equ al it. We have ha d the charge at 

th at ra te in the past. We reduce d it when this fund came up to 

appro xim ate ly the level it is now.

Ju dg e Campbell. This might be the tim e to rais e it again in view 

of the increased salaries. Ce rtainl y we are going to bring it to the 

at te nt io n of the J udicial Conference when it me ets in Ma rch .

Mr. R ooney. Do you think th at now at a time when y ou are faced 

with a defic it in this fun d it is a good tim e to go throug h with the 

salar y increase pla n inso far as ba nk ruptcy employe es are concerned?

Ju dg e Campbell. M ay I spe ak to th at , sir?

Mr. R ooney. Yes.

Judg e Campbell. I do, because I think the ad justm en t of sala ries 

is necessary to pro mo te efficiency and fair trea tm en t to all of the 

employees and the deficit of $700,000 th at will be occasioned in the 

ba nk ruptcy fund in 1 ye ar ’s ope ration s, if we find aft er a ye ar ’s 

opera tions for exam ple th at th at is going to con tinue, it can be met 

ju st as we me t a surplu s a few yea rs ago by reducing the charges;
105

it c an be met now by increasing the c harg es but I think th at the tim e 

is now to take care of the u njust differential in sala ries of the em ployees.

We redu ced the m a few yea rs ago whe n the surplu s became too 

much. There is no reas on the y cannot be increased again.

Mr. R ooney. We shou ld have grabbe d th at mo ney when we had 

it a few yea rs ago and pu t it in the Treas ury .

Jud ge Campbell. You have still $8 million of i t.

Mr. Cede rbe rg. That is n ot enough.

Jud ge Campbell. As again st $700,000? You run a busines s 

be tter than th at , will you?

E xpe nses of R efer ee s

Object classification

[In th ou sand s of dollars]

1962 actual 1963 es tim ate 1964 es tim ate

11 Person nel c ompen sation:

Pe rm an en t position s_____ _____ . . ____ _ . ______ 2,807

310

3,077 

320

3,477

Pos itio ns oth er t ha n perm anent... ............. .................... 335

Ot her person nel co mp ensat ion ____________ ________ 1 202 256

To tal personnelc o m pe ns ation............. . .......... .......... . 3,119

221

3,598

262

4,068

294

120

12 Person nel boneflts_______2........ ..................... .......... ............ .

21 Tr av el and tra ns po rta tio n of persons_____ _____ ________ 102 120

22 Tr an sp or tatio n of things _____________ _______ . _____ 16 10 10

23 Ren t, com munic ations , an d utili tie s....................................... 373 577 577

24 Pr in tin g and reprod uc tio n______ ______ _____ _________ 60 72 72

25 Ot her services ....................................................... ..................... 21 19 19

26 Supplies and m aterials............. ...................... .......... ... ............ 112 78 112

31 E quip m en t.. . ................................. ............ ................................ 227 219 184

To tal obligations____________ ______________________ 4,251 4,955 5,456

Per sonnel summ ary

1962 actu al 1963 es tim ate 1964 esti ma te

Tot al n um be r of perman en t po sitio ns ........................................... 640 633 633

Fu ll- tim e e qu ivalen t of oth er position s_____________________ 75 60 60

Avera ge nu mbe r o f all em ployee s............................................ .. 670 737 737

N um ber of employ ees a t end of y e a r.. ........................................ 704 715 715

Program and fin anc ing

[In th ou sand s of dollars]

1962 actua l 1963

est im ate

1964

est im ate

e

Pr og ra m by activ ities: Cle rk hir e an d miscellaneous expenses 

of referees (obligati on s)........................ . ...................................... 4,251

59

4,955 5,456

Fina nc ing: Un obligate d balanc e lap sin g..................... .................. *

New ob ligational a uth ori ty ................................................. 4,310

4,310

4,955

4,850 

105

5,456

5,456

New ob liga tionsl au th or ity :

App ro pr iatio n_____ _________________________________

Prop osed su pp lem en tal d ue to pa y inc reases....................
106

Mr. R ooney. The last item is the one entitled “E xpenses of 

referees,” and is to be found at page 354 of the com mittee print.

Th is is a req uest in the am ount of $5,456,000, which would be an 

increase of $606,000 over the app rop riation to da te in the cu rre nt 

fiscal year.

We shall at this point insert pages 142 thr ough 152 of the justifi cation book.

(The justification pages follow:)

Statement relating appropriation estimates to current appropriation

Expen ses of referees, U.S . co urt s (special fund ): Judiciary

1963 ap pr op ria tio n in an nu al a ct____ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _____ _________ ____ ____________ . . . $4,850,000

1963 proposed supplem en tal d ue to p ay in cr ea se s.......... ................................................ .......... . 105, 000

Base for 1964---------------

N et d iffer ence , 1964 over 1963:

4,955,000

Clerk hi re co mp ensat ion an d ben efits

Miscellan eou s expe nses_____ _______

T ota l..............................................

Re qu ire men ts Difference, i ncrease (+ )

or decrease (—)

1963

ad juste d

1964

es tim ate

$3,860,000

1,095,000

$4,361, 500 

1,094, 500

+$501, 500 

-500

4,955,000 5,456,000 +501,000

To tal est im ate for 1964__________________ __________________ _________ ___________ 5, 456,000

State ment showing analysis by object

Object

11 Perso nnel co mpe ns ation......................

12 Perso nnel benef its. ...............................

21 Tr av el a nd tra ns po rta tio n of persons.

22 Tra ns po rta tio n of th in gs ____ ______

23 Re nt , co mm unica tions, an d ut ilitie s.

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

25 Othe r services.........................................

26 Supplies an d ma teria ls.........................

31 Equ ip m en t................... ......................

To ta l obligations................................

1963

es tim ate

1964

es tim ate

Increase (+ ) 

or

decrease (—)

$3,598,500

261.500

119.500 

10,000

577,000 

72,000 

19,000 

78,500

219,000

$4,068,000

293.500

119.500 

10,000

577,000

72,000

19,000

112.500

184.500

+$469, 500 

+32,000

+34,000

-34,50 0

4,955,000 5,456,000 +501,000

Summ ary of increased requirements for 1964

Nature of expense (or savings):

D ED UCTIO N S

Am ou nt »

Nonrecurring expenses authorized for 1963___________________ — $69, 000

IN C R EA SE S R EQ U ESTED

1. Additional amount required under the Federal Salary Reform *

Act of 1962________________________________________ 123, 000

2. Provisions for within-grade salary advancemen ts___________ 72, 000

3. For implem entation of judiciary salary plan as approved by

the Judicial Conference of the United State s____________ 275, 000

4. Cost of 2 extra compensable days in 1964_________________ 31, 500

5. Furn iture and furnishings required incident to the occupancy

of new buildings scheduled to be completed during fiscal

year 1964 or 90 days the rea fter__________________ _____ 34, 500

6. Increase in the volume of supplies being consumed in the

offices of referees____________________________________ 34, 000

Net increase, 1964 over 1963________________________ 501, 000
107

JU ST IF IC A T IO N

Language changes

None.

Objectives

Office and other expenses of referees, including compensation and benefits of 

clerical employees, are payable upon authorization of th e Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. This appropriation is derived from a special 

fund in the Trea sury to which are deposited paym ents of fees and charges by 

parties to the proceedings. No appropriation from the general fund of the 

Treasury is required. Reference to basic sta tutory auth orities is contained in 

section Q of the “Digest of Appropriations, The Jud icia ry,” on file with the Bureau 

of the Budget and the Appropri. tions Comm ittees of the Congress.

General justification

It is estimated th at in 1963 an d in 1964 filings will be under 150,000 or at relatively th e same level as in the past 2 years. Caseload data appe ar in the account 

for “Salaries of referees.”

The estimate for 1964 includes provisions for increases in compensation and 

related benefits under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962; within-grade salary 

advancem ents; the regrading of employees consistent with standa rds approved 

by the Judicial Conference; furn iture and furnishings required incident to the 

occupancy of new buildings; and an increase in the volume of supplies being 

consumed in the offices of referees. In view of the appar ent leveling off of 

ban kruptcy filings, no new positions have been requested.

Detailed justifications

The appropriation request for 1964 is $5,456,000, or $501,000 in excess of the 

obligational autho rity gran ted for 1963 adjusted to include a proposed supplemental of $105,000 for pay costs under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962 

(Public Law 87-793, approved October 11, 1962). The increases requested as 

well as the deductions are explained below:

Deduction for nonrecurring expenses

The following nonrecurring expenses authorize d for fiscal year 1963, have been

deducte d in establishing the budgetary requirements for 1964:

.Amount

Na tur e of expense deducted

Equipment and furn iture for new referees__________________________ $35, 000

Fur niture and equipment for new clerks to referees___________________ 16, 500

Furniture and furnishings required incid ent to the occupancy of new

buildings--------------------------------------------- -------------------------------- 17, 500

Tota l deductions_________________________________________ 69, 000

Requirements under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962

In addition to the proposed supplemental of $105,000 for the fiscal year 1963,

$123,000 will be required in 1964 to cover the full-year cost of pay increases 

effective October 15, 1962, and approximately one-half of the annual cost of 

increases in salary, including related benefits, which are scheduled to take effect on 

Jan uar y 6, 1964. The following is a breakdown by fiscal year of the total cost of 

pay increases under the Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962:

1963 prop os ed 

su pple ­

m en ta l

1964 bu d g etar y re quir em ents

1965 b u d g etary re quir em en ts

T o ta l co st

1st ph as e (effec tiv e O ct. 15, 1962):

C om p en sa ti o n.................... ................... ............... $98,500

6,50 0

$41,500

3,000

$140,000

B e n e fit s.. .________ _______________ _______ 9,500

T o ta l...................................... . ......... . ................. 105,000 44,500 149,500

2d p ha se (ef fective Jan . 6, 1964):

C o m pensa ti on_______________ _____ ______ 73,500

5,00 0

$76,500 

5,500

150,000 B en efi ts .. ..................................................... . . 10,500

T o ta l..................................................................... 78,500 82,0 00 160,500

G ra nd t o ta l.........................................................

____________

105,000 123,000 82,0 00 310,000
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 p ercent to cover the cost of related benefits—Government retir eme nt contributions, employer FICA taxes, and Government contributions to employee life 

insurance premiums.

Pay costs in the fiscal year 1963 will be absorbed to the maximum extent possible. 

Any savings would, however, be the result of a delay in the appointment of new 

personnel authorized for 1963 and would not be of a recurring natu re. Pay costs 

in 1964 cannot be absorbed without seriously affecting the execution of essential 

functions.

Provision for within-grade salary advancements

All of th e clerks to referees are subject to the promotional plan for judicial 

personnel and will be granted step increases corresponding with those provided 

for by t itle VII of the Classification Act of 1949, as amended.

It is estimated th at these within-grade salary advancements will cost $72,000, 

of which $67,500 represents increases in compensation and $4,500 related benefits— 

Government contributions to the civil service retirement fund and for group life 

insurance. The estimate, which represents approximately 80 p ercent of the full 

potential cost of step increases, is net of anticipa ted savings due to turnover of 

personnel and the filling of vacancies at lower rates of pay.

Jitdtcta Z salary plan

The sum of $275,000 ($257,500 for personnel compensation and $17,500 for 

related benefits) will be required for the regrading of clerks to referees consistent 

with the standards prescribed in the judiciary salary plan as approved by the 

Judicial Conference in September 1961. For a description of the plan, its purpose 

and objectives, reference is made to page 95 of this document which contains the 

justifications in support of a similar request for funds under the heading “Salaries 

of Supporting Personnel.”

Cost of 2 extra compensable days in 196 4

The sum of $31,500 ($29,500 for compensation and $2,000 for related benefits) 

has been included to cover regular pay in excess of 52 weeks. Clerks to referees 

will be compensated, on a biweekly basis, for 262 days in fiscal year 1964 as compare d with only 260 compensable days in 1963.

Furniture requirements incident to the occupancy of new buildings

The General Services Administration in fiscal year 1963 assumed budgeting for 

all of the furniture requirements of the courts. An exception was made with 

respect to the requirements of referees in bankruptcy in view of the fact t ha t the 

bankruptcy system is financed out of a special fund in the Treasury.

Furnitu re and furnishings required by referees in ban kruptcy incident to the 

occupancy of new buildings scheduled for completion during fiscal year 1964 or 

within 90 days thereafter are as follows:

Location Sched uled comp letion d ate Am ount

De nver, Colo___________________________________ Marc h 1964__________________________ $16,974

M arian na , F la __________________________________ ........d o______________________________ ' 545

Clark sda le, M iss ________________________________ ___do______________________________ 545 Nor th Pl at te , Neb r______________________________ April 1964___________________________ 2,500 New Orle ans, L a_______________________________ Ju ne 1964___________________________ 10,000 Bism arc k, N. D ak ______________________________ Ju ly 1964 __________________ _______ 3,500

Gaine svi lle, F la . ______________________________ ____d p_________________________ _____ 545

Tot al _____________________________________ *34,609

i Rou nd ed $34,500.

The estim ates were furnished by the General Services Administration in accordance with an agreement between the Director of th e Administrative Office of 

the U.S. Courts and the Adm inistrator of the General Services Administration. 

The estim ates were prepared by the General Services Adm inistration’s regional 

offices su bjec t to review and summarization by the central office of the General 

Services Administration.

Increased consumption of supplies

It is estimated th at an additional $34,000 will be required in fiscal year 1964 to 

cover the cost of supplies and materials to be consumed in the offices of the
109

referees in bankruptcy. This increase in large measure is due to the installatio n 

and use of photocopy equipment in the offices of referees for the reproduction of

i

jetitions, schedules, lists of creditors, etc., to be furnished parties on request. 

Fees paid by parties requesting copies of such docum ents are deposited in the 

referees’ salary and expense fund.

FURNITURE AND FURNISHINGS

Mr. Rooney. What is the total you have in here for furniture and 

furnishings as expenses of referees in the current year?

Mr. Jackson. It is $184,500.

Mr. Rooney. And you want to make t hat-----

Judge Campbell. It was $219,000. We are reducing it to $184,000.

Mr. Rooney. This looks to me like a request for an increase.

Judge Campbell. Tha t is in supplies and materials.

• Mr. Rooney. Furniture and furnishings, I am referring to. It

looks like an increase of $34,500 in the coming year.

Judge Campbell. I am sorry. I am looking at the wrong page. 

Mr. Jackson, what is th at for?

• Mr. Rooney. Tha t would make your total for furniture and

furnishings in the coming year how much?

Mr. Garabedian. I believe I can answer that. At the present 

time we have $50,000 in the appropriation for recurring furniture 

requirements of referees. In addition we have asked for $34,500 

which represents a nonrecurring expense of providing furniture for 

new court quarters being furnished by the General Services Administration, being constructed at the present time or to be constructed 

and completed in fiscal 1964.

BREAKDOWN OF REQUEST FOR FURNISHINGS IN NEW BUILDINGS

Mr. R ooney. Do you have a breakdown of this request for $34,500? 

Mr. Garabedian. The General Services Administration, at my 

request several days ago, had addressed a wire to each of its regional 

offices in an attempt to secure the details in regard to these estimates. 

I did not receive these details prior to the hearing. However, I 

believe they will be available and can be submitted.

Mr. Rooney. Be sure the breakdown is detailed and submitted at 

this point in the record.

Judge Campbell. Very well.

(The information requested follows:)

Summ ary statement o f fund s required for the procurement of fur nit ure and furnish ing s

for referees in bankruptcy incident to the occupancy of new buildings, fiscal year

GSA estimate

Ap pro ved by 

the Ad mi nistrat iv e Office, 

U.S. Co urts

De nver, Co lo________ ________ ______ _________ $16,974 $10,000 M arian na , F la _____________ ____ ___ _____ 545 Clark sda le, Miss ___ _____ ____________ ____ ______ 545 300 Nor th Pl atte, N eb r___ ________ ____ ______________ _____ 2,500 1,400 New Orle ans, L a........ .............................................................. 10,000 7,000 Bism arc k, N. D ak.......... .............................. . .............. 3' 500 1 400 Gainsville, Fla ___________ ___________________________ 545 300

Tota l.................................................... ............................. 34,609 20,400
Item

R e fe r e e i n b a n k r u p tc y

B U IL D IN G : D E N V E R , CO LO .

Desk, jud ge s, e xecutive wal nu t_______________

Desk, ty pe w rite r, se cre tarial, steel____ _______

Cha irs , ro ta ry , with arm s, jud ges, up ho lst ered ,

executive w aln u t. . . ............. . ...............................

Cha irs , s trai gh t, wi th arms , upholst ered , ex ecutiv e w aln ut.............................................- .......... .

Ch airs, ju ro rs, fixed b ase, ex ecutive w al nu t_____

Ch airs, ste no, padded, s teel__________________

Cha irs , s trai gh t, with arm s, ste el...... .....................

Ch airs, s trai gh t, with ou t arm s, ste el___________

Cha irs , rota ry , with ar ms , stee l_____ _________

Ta bl e, office, ste el...................... ........ .......................

Cab in et, te lep hone, ex ecutive w al nu t....................

Co stu mer, wearin g a pparel, steel............................

Rack, wearing ap pa rre l, steel, 6-h at ca pa ci ty ___

Rack, w earing a ppa rel, steel, 12-hat c ap acity.__

Ca binet, file, u pright, 4/5 drawe r, legal, w aln ut. .

Ca binet, file, up rig ht, 4/5 drawe r, legal, grey .......

Ca binet, file, up rig ht, 2 -drawe r, legal, gr ey --------

Ca binet, file, c ard file, 3- by 5-inch size, 8 do ubledra we r, g re y .. ____________________________

Ca binet, file, card file, 3 -by 5-inch size, 10 do ubledraw er, grey ____________________ ________

Ca binet, file, card file, 3- by 5-inch size, 2-draw ergrey............... ..............................................................

Stan d, t yp ew rit er, with ou t casters, st eel. .............

Stool, ste p, with casters, Kik -S tep____ _____ _

Stool, filing, str aigh t, 14 inches hig h, w ith cas ters.

Bookcase, c ab inet type , executiv e w aln ut______

Lecte rn, wood, w al nut...............................................

M at, floor, com position _________ _______ ______

W as teba sk ets-------------------- --------------------------

Safe, co m bi na tion ................................................... . .

Shelving, sectiona l___ ____ __________________

Ca rpet, pa dd ing, installatio n...................................

Dra pe ry ..........................................................................

Tot al, furn itu re an d fur nis hing s_________

Ad d 5 percen t for possible price r ise___________

Tra ns po rtat io n (es tim ate d co st) ______________

Unc ratin g an d pla ceme nt (es tim ate d co st)_____

T ota l...................................................................

Unit

cost

GSA e sti mate

Ap pro ved by th e 

Adm inist rativ e Office, 

U.S . Co urt s

Num be r 

of units

To ta l

cost

N um be r 

of units

To tal

cost

$280.00 3 $840.00 2 $560. 00

74.00 14 1,036.00 11 798.00

123.00 5 615.00 4 564.00

46.00 12 552.00 12 552.00

62.00 2 124.00 2 124.00

28.00 13 365.00 11 308.00

36.00 16 576. 00 10 360.00

30.00 10 300.00 4 120.00

47.00 3 141.00

43.00 10 430.00 10 430.00

53.00 3 159.00 2 106.00

11.00 1 11.00 1 11.00

11.00 1 11.00 1 11.00

20.00 3 60.00 3 60.00

60.00 9 540. 00 9 540. 00

58.00 19 1,102.00 19 1,102.00

32.00 2 64.00 2 64.00

100.00 2 200.00 2 200.00

110.00 2 220.00 2 220.00

2.00 2 10.00 2 10.00

26.00 2 52.00 2 52.00

10.00 1 10.00 1 10.00

6.00 1 6.00 1 6.00

146.00 3 438.00 2 292.00

300.00 1 300.00 1 300. 00

3.00 3 9.00 3 9.00

3.00 17 51.00 12 36.00

200.00 1 200.00

84.20 13 1,095.00 10 842.00

616.00 616.00

2,040.00 l 300.00

12,173.00 8,603.00

635.00 1

3,991.00 > 1,397.00

175.00

16,974.00 10,000.00

B U IL D IN G : N O R T H P L A T T E , N E B R .

He aring room :

Ju dg es ch air_________________ ___________ $141.00 1 $141. 00 1 $141.00

T ab le s.. ............ ................. ............ ................... 72.50 2 145.00 2 145 00 Cha irs__________ ______ ________ _ ........ 57.50 8 460.00 8 460.00 Ge neral office:

D esk .............. . ................... ............ .......... . ......... 280.00 1 280.00 1 180. 00

Rot ar y ch air.......... .............................. ................ 60.00 1 60.00

Table ................... ................................ . ........ 72.00 1 72.00 1 72.00

Cha irs..... ................. ................................ 30.00 2 60, 00 2 60.00 Sec retarial de sk ................ ................................. 180.00 1 180.00

Steno c h a ir ........... .......... . .......... ................. . 50.00 1 50.00

File c ab in ets.......... ............................................... 50.00 3 150.00

Steel shelv ing............................................. 100.00 2 200.00

Misc ellaneou s............. .......................................... 562.00 100.00 Tr an sp or ta tio n, c rating, pla ceme nt, e tc____ 200.00 182.00

T ota l....... . ............ . .......... ................................ 2.500.00 1,400.00

i 2 wi ndow s at $150 each.
I l l

Referee in bankruptcy— Continued

B U IL D IN G : B IS M A RC K , N. DAK .

Ite m

U ni t

cost

GSA e sti mate

App roved by th e 

Adm inistra tiv e Office, 

U.S . Co urts

Num be r 

of un its

To tal

cost

Num be r 

of un its

To tal

cost

Ilc aring room:

Jud ges c h a ir .. .. .________________________ $141.00 1 $141.00 1 $141.00

Reporte rs ch air__________________________ 60.00 1 60.00 1 60.00

Side chairs __________ _________________ - 60.00 8 480.00 8 480.00

Table s ____________ ___ _________ - __ 72.00 2 144.00 2 144.00

Ge neral office:

Fla tto p des k _______________ -_______- __ 280.00 1 280.00 1 97.00

Se cr et ar ial de sk 180.00 1 180.00

Ta ble .........................................-.................... 53.00 1 53.00 1 53.00

Rotary chair __________________________ 60.00 1 60.00 1 60.00

Ste no c ha ir _______________________ 50.00 1 50.00

Side chairs ___ _______ __________________ 276.00 2 at $30 60.00

File c abinets _ _____________________ 50.00 3 150.00

Steel shelving ______________________ 100.00 2 200.00

M isc cll aneous.____ ______________________ 726.00 100.00

Tr an sp or tatio n, un cra tin g, an d ha nd lin g___ 700.00 205.00

T ota l . _______ 3,500.00 1,400.00

B U IL D IN G : M A R IA N N A ,1 FL A.

Ta ble, 60 by 34 inches________________________

Ra ck , wearing ap pa rel, gray ste el............................

Fil e cabinet, 5-draw er, wi th/loc k legal, gra y

ste el----------- ---------- -----------------------------------

De sk, f latto p, double pedest al. ..............................

Ch air, swivel, up ho lst ered _________________ —-

Ch air, leg typ e, w ith /arm s........................................

Ch air, ty p is t. ..................................... .........................

De sk, left p ed estal-------- -------------- -----------------

St an d, sm oking ............................................................

Do............... ............................................................

$43.00 1 $43.00

10.95 1 10.95

59.00 1 59.00

97.00 1 97.00

42. 50 1 42.50

28.00 2 56. 00

30.50 i 30.50

106.00 l 106.00

5. 77 2 11.54

4.26 2 8.52

465.01

50.00

30.00

Tot al fu rn itu re and furnish ing s....................................-.....................

Tra ns po rta tio n (es tim ate d co st) _______________________________ _

Unc ratin g an d pla ceme nt (es tim ate d cost) _________________________

Tota l__________ ________—. .............................- ............- .................. 545.01

B U IL D IN G : C LA R K SD A LE, MISS.

t

Ta ble, 60 b y 34 inch es................................................

Ra ck, wearin g a pparel, gray stee l............................

Fil e cabinet. 6 -drawer, w ith lock legal, gray s te el ..

De sk, fla t top , double pedes ta l...............................

Ch air , s wiv el, up ho lstered______ ____ ________

Ch air , leg t yp e, w ith a rm s........................................

Ch air , ty pis t______ _____ ____ ________________

De sk, left p ed es tal......................................................

Stan d, sm ok ing______________________ ____ . . .

Do.................................. . .................................

$43.00 

10.95 

59.00 

97.00

42.50 

28.00

30.50

106.00

5.77 

4.26

1 $43.00

1 10.95

1 59.00

1 97.00

1 42.50

2 56.00

1 30.50

1 106.00

2 11.54

2 8.52

To tal f ur ni tu re and furnishings ____

Tr an sp or tatio n (estima ted c os t)____ _____

Unc ratin g an d pla ceme nt (es tim ate d cost)

Total.

465.01

50.00

30.00

545.01

1

1

$43.00

10.95

1

1

2

97.00

42.50

56.00

249. 45 

} 50.55

300.00

> M aria nna Is not designated as a pla^e of holding ban kru ptc y court and, therefore, no facilities will be 

requ ired.

98777— 6: •8
Item

112

Re fer ee in bankr uptc y— C o n ti n u ed 

BUIL DING: NEW ORLEANS, LA.

Hea rin g room:

Ta ble, 144 by 48 inches................................. .

Ch air, ro ta ry , arm........................................ ..

Ch air, ro ta ry , jud ge s........................................

Flag, U.8., ny lon, a nd s ta nd........ ....................

Rack, wearing ap pa rel..... ............. ............ .......

Table , 48 by 30 inc hes................ .....................

Ch air, ty pis t, po stur e_______________ ____

Ref eree’s cham bers:

Desk, ex ecu tive, flat-top, 76 by 48 inc he s___

Ch air, ro ta ry , ju dg es................................. .........

Credenza , w al nut........ ................. ...................

D av en po rt.................... . ......................................

Ch air, e as y.......... ....................................... .........

Ch air, s tra ight, with a rm s .. .............................

Ca bine t, telephone................. .............................

Co stume r, wal nu t........... ................................

Flag, U.S., n ylo n, an d s ta n d ............................

Recep tion room (general office):

De sk, t y p is t................ . ................... . .................

Ch air, t y p is t___________________ _______

Co stu me r, wal nu t........ ................................. .

Crede nza , w al nut____ __________ ________

Ta ble, 72 b y 36 inch es.........................................

Ch air , s tra ig ht , with a rm s............. ............ .

Cab inet, file_____________________ _____ _

Cab inet, st ora ge_________ ______________ _

D av en po rt________ _____________________

Miscellan eou s i tems............................................

Ca rpeti ng, inc lud ing un derlay an d ins talla tio n 

cost (referee’s office an d rec ept ion room)

square yar ds..

Draperies, inc lud ing mate rial fab rication an d 

ins talla tio n cost (referee's office, hearing room 

an d rec ept ion ro om )............................w in do ws..

Sub to ta l________ ________________ _____

Tr an sp or ta tio n, un cra tin g, pla ceme nt, etc.

(esti mate)...............................................................

Tota l....................................................................

Un it

cost

GSA estim ate

App roved b y th e 

Adm inistra tiv e Office, 

U.S . Co urts

Num be r 

of un its

To tal

cost

N um be r 

of uni ts

To tal

cost

$399. 36 2 $798. 72 2 $798. 72 97. 70 15 1,465.50 15 1.465.50

140. 83 1 140.83 1 140.83 43. 75 1 43. 75 1 43. 75

20. 05 1 20. 05 1 20.05

69. 68 1 69 68 1 69. 68

30.50 1 30. 50 1 30.50

304 72 1 304. 72 1 304 72 140 83 1 140.83 1 140.83

255. 84 1 255. 84

280.28 1 280 28

133.90 1 133. 90

53.26 4 213. 04 4 213.04

86.32 1 86.32 1 86. 32

38. 34 1 38. 34 1 38. 34 43.75 1 43. 75

246. 48 1 246. 48 1 106.00

30. 50 1 30. 50 1 30.50

38. 34 1 38.34 1 38.34 255. 84 1 255. 84

87.36 1 87.36 1 87.36

53.26 8 426. 08 8 426.08

72.50 4 290.00 4 290.00

41.40 1 41.40 1 41.40

280. 28 1 280. 28

97.67 97.67

10.00 155 1. 5.50.00 155 at $8 1.240.00

360.00 2. 590.00 3 at $150 4.50.00

10,000.00 6,159.63

840.37

10,000.00 7,000.00

BU IL D IN G : G A IN ESV IL LE, FL A.

Ta ble, 60 b y 34 inches . . ______ _____________ $43.00 

10.95

59.00

97.00

42.50 

28.00

30.50 

106.00

5.77

4.26

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

2

$43.00 

10.95

59.00

97.00

42.50 

56.00

30.50 

106.00

11.54

8.52

1

1

$43.00 

10.95 Ra ck ,W ea rin g appar el, grey steel ......................

File, cabinet, 5-draw er, with lock, legal, grey 

steel____________________ ____ ___________ _

De sk, flat top, d oub le pede sta l________________ 1

1

2

97.00

42.50

56.00

Ch air, swivel, u ph ol st er ed .________ __________

Ch air , leg typ e, w ith a rm s......... ..............................

Ch air , tv pis t _____ _____ ________ _________

De sk, left pe desta l....... ............ ..................................

St an d, smo kin g____ ____ ___________ ______

D o ......... .................................................................

To tal furn itu re a nd fu rnish ing s__________ 465.01

50.00

30.00

249.45 

} 50.55 Tra ns po rta tio n (estim ated cost) . . .. _____

Unc ratin g an d pla cem ent (es tim ate d co st) ...........

Tota l...................................................... ............ 545.01 300.00
113

DE VE LO PM EN T OF ES TIMAT ES BY GE NE RA L SE RV IC ES AD MIN ISTR AT IO N

Mr. Bow. If the chairman will yield, you say the General Services 

Administration will furnish that. I notice, on page 150 of your 

justifications, you say:

The General Services Administration in fiscal year 1963 assumed budgeting for 

all of the furnitu re requirements of the courts. An exception was made with 

respect to the requirements of referees in ban kruptcy in view of the fact t ha t the 

bankruptcy system is financed out of a special fund in the Treasury.

Do you not know how much you will spend on tha t since you are 

handling it direct?

Mr. Garabedian. These estimates are developed by the General 

Services Administration in the field just as they do for the courts of 

appeals and district courts.

c Kir. Bow. It says here:

An exception was made with respect to the requirements of referees in 

x

 bankruptcy .

Mr. Garabedian. Only in terms of financing. We reimburse them

* for what they buy.

Mr. Bow. Do you authorize it or do they authorize it?

Mr. Garabedian. They authorize it.

CONTR OL O VER E ST IM A T E S OF GSA

Mr. Bow. Do you not have control over it?

Mr. Olney. We have control over it.

Mr. Rooney. Of course you have control over it.

Mr. Olney. They authorize it and it comes out of our money b ut 

we do not atte mpt to duplicate their organization.

Mr. Bow. When the General Services Administration comes to you 

with their list, do you go ahead and do what they suggest or recommend or do you review it?

Mr. Olney. We review it.

Mr. Bow. You seem to be doing the same thing regardless of the 

exception.

Mr. Garabedian. I could answer your question as to whether we 

have control over it in this way: We did enter into an agreement 

with the General Services Administration, whereby they would develop the estimates and submit the estimates to us for budgetary 

purposes. However, prior to reimbursing GSA for any furnishings or

* furniture, they must submit a detailed list for approval and for 

certification tha t the funds are available.

v Mr. Bow. How often have you cut the GSA recommendation?

Mr. Garabedian. This is the first time we have worked under

* tha t agreement.

Mr. Rooney. It seems to me it would be better, since this is a 

special fund, to expend money from this fund for the referees.

Mr. Bow. I think so too, but I think somebody should take a look 

at it.

Mr. Rooney. I never had an idea tha t somebody here would give 

up and say, “GSA knows all about it” when the responsibility rests 

with the Administrative Office, with your office.
Mr. Olney. Tha t is true, and it is a responsibility we exercise, 

particularly when it comes to the purchases. But when it comes to 

the estimates of what it will cost, we do have to rely on the General 

Services Administration.

(Discussion off the record.)

Judge Campbell. The result will not be that what we have asked 

for will actually be spent without any review of the situation.

Mr. Rooney. Let us go back to the answer of Mr. Garabedian. 

When you got the figure with regard to Denver of $16,974, you just 

got a bare figure without any detail?

Mr. Garabedian. Yes, sir. I regret the timing of the budget 

estimates is such th at when these things are submitted to the Bureau 

of the Budget we do not have the details.

Mr. Rooney. When did you get the figure of $16,974?

Mr. Garabedian. Approximately 60 days ago.

Mr. Rooney. When were you down at the Bureau of the Budget?

Mr. Garabedian. We submitted the budget on November 1.

Mr. Rooney. That is approximately 90 days ago, and in 90 days 

you do not have any further information than the figure $16,974?

Mr. Garabedian. As I said, before we came to the hearings I 

asked the General Services Administration to obtain the details.

Mr. Rooney. Perhaps we can go back further than 90 days. 

When did you prepare this budget down in your shop?

Mr. Garabedian. Late in September, in time to submit it to the 

Judicial Conference.

Mr. Rooney. And tha t figure was submitted to the Judicial 

Conference?

Mr. Garabedian. We used a preliminary figure tha t was subsequently revised after obtaining an estimate from the General Services 

Administration.

Mr. Rooney. What was the first figure?

Mr. Garabedian. I do not know exactly. It was verv close to 

$34,500.

Mr. Bow. This next paragraph is interesting, on page 151:

The estimates were furnished by the General Services Administration in 

accordance with an agreem ent between the Director of the Administrative Office 

of the U.S. Courts and the Administrator of th e General Services Administration. 

The estim ates were prepared by the General Services Administration’s regional 

offices, subject to review and summarization by the Central Office of the General 

Services Administration.

It looks to me as if this has been delegated over to General Services 

Administration and you have lost control.

(Discussion off the record.)

Judge Campbell. These are only the estimates. This does not 

mean we have to spend this money to buy this furniture.

Mr. Rooney. No, but you have to ask for the money. This is 

your budget.

Judge Campbell. Tha t is right, and we have no intention of spending anything tha t is not needed. This will be reviewed before any 

expenditures are made, but for the purpose of asking for the money 

we need for this year, we have to take the estimates of the General 

Services Administration of what the furniture will cost. We have no 

way of getting that ourselves.

Mr. Airhart. You may recall, a year or 2 ago, when we turned up 

with $30 wastebaskets on General Services Administration lists, it was
115

firmly suggested by the committee that we get our heads together on 

such items. I think it might be well to file the agreement we have 

with the General Services Administration.

Mr. Rooney. You mean you have an agreement?

Yes.

What does the agreement provide?

That we use their facilities-----

This is an overall agreement. Is that what vou are

Mr. Airhart. 

Mr. Rooney. 

Mr. Airhart. 

Mr. Rooney. 

talking about? 

Mr. Airhart. 

Mr. Rooney.

Yes.

I am talking about an agreement with regard to 

$16,974. Is there such an agreement?

Mr. Airhart. The agreement covers this.

LA CK OF IN FO R M A TIO N ON FU N D S R E Q U E ST E D

Mr. Rooney. It is incredible th at this could have been pending as 

far back as September, and the Administrative Office not have the 

details of w hat they will get for the $16,974 of whose money? Of 

money to be handled through the Administrative Office.

Mr. Cederberg. Will the chairman yield? There has been a 

change in general policy in regard to the General Services Administration in budgeting for furniture requirements of the courts. This is 

an exception. But when this furniture is ultimately purchased, you 

will issue a check to General Services Administration, and they will 

do it the same as for everybody else?

Judge Campbell. In effect; yes.

Mr. Rooney. But who will decide what the spittoon will cost and 

what the draperies will look like?

Judge Campbell. The Administrative Office.

Mr. Rooney. But you are asking for $17,000 and there are no 

details. There is nothing wrong with the exception, which would 

come out of fees in the bankruptcy fund. That is a proper exception 

if administered by the Administrative Office.

Mr. Cederberg. Otherwise you have no control over what this 

expenditure would be for. J agree with the chairman this $16,974 for 

Denver, I would hope, came in here on some firm prices for furniture.

Mr. Olney. Mr. Chairman, under our agreement with the General 

Services Administration on these items we do review them and we 

have to approve every purchase before it is made. That is where our 

control is.

Mr. Rooney. Do you think it is unfair to the taxpayer to suggest 

when you come in for an odd amount such as $16,974 that you have 

the details as to what the taxpayer will get for that $16,974?

Judge Campbell. I do not think tha t is unreasonable at all.

Mr. Olney. There is no possibility of our doing anything else. We 

do not have the manpower capable of making these estimates. We 

have to get them from General Services Administration and if they 

cannot give more than a general estimate, that is the best we can do.

Mr. Rooney. You have a GSA estimate of $16,974. Can you not 

say how many desks and how many partitions and the extent of the 

partitions and all this detail included in the figure of $16,974? It 

seems incredible you would take a figure of $16,974 without any 

details.
116

Mr. Olney. Th e Gen eral Services Ad mi nis tration do no t get an 

estim ate of wh at they need from the Ad mi nis tra tiv e Office. Th ey 

get it from the field.

Mr. R ooney. Is it no t your job to know wh at is going on? Suppose we hav e a judge who wants gold-plate d gaboons. Who will 

det erm ine th at? I thou gh t th at was a du ty of the Ad mi nis trative 

Office.

M r. Olne y. That is true, and no gold-plate d gaboons can be pu rchased witho ut the app rov al of the Ad mi nis trative Office.

Mr. R ooney. How do you k now they will no t be purcha sed ?

Mr. Olney. We review the item s and have to appro ve eve ry 

purch ase b efore it is made.

Mr. R ooney. Do you think we should waive our responsibilities 

as rep res entative s of the tax payer and app rov e th at $16, 974 wi thou t 

any knowledge as to wh at it is for? You wou ld no t agree to th at , 

would you?

Mr. Olney. I think I would.

Mr. R ooney. You would?

Mr. Olney. As long as there are some satisfac tor y controls on the 

exp end iture of the m oney .

Mr. R ooney. Would you no t expect this com mittee, as would this 

com mittee expect you, to go into details as to wh at mak es up the 

$16,974? I am pu tti ng the answ er in your mo uth .

Judg e Campbell. Ce rtainly.

Mr. R ooney. Of course.

Ju dg e Campbell. And, as I understand, th at is wh at you will do 

when you get the det ails from the Gen eral Services Administration.

Mr. R ooney. Now y ou are bailin g him out.

Judge Campbell. I wa tch him and I have to get my oar in here.

Mr. R ooney. Th is is pr et ty hard to understand. All the time it 

took to set this budget up, it seems th at some GS -4 would ask wh at 

you would get for th at $16,974.

Judg e Campbell. We will g et it.

Mr. R ooney. It could be very intere stin g. If you looked at it you 

mi gh t find it intere sting, and if we looked at it we might find it interesting , bu t otherwise we will not write a bla nk check for $16,974.

Any questions?

TRA V EL AN D TRA N SPO R T A TIO N OF PER SO N S

M r. Bow . You hav e the sam e am ount for 1964 as for the curre nt 

fiscal year for “T ravel and tra ns po rta tio n of perso ns.” Is this the 

tra vel of referees to various places to hold cou rt?

Mr. Olney. Yes.

Mr. Bow . Has a careful stud y been ma de of th at to determ ine if 

the referees are going to areas where it is n ot justified, where litigants 

could come to the referees and save some money?

Mr. J ackson. Th e referees and the ir clerks have to hav e prior 

autho riz ati on from our office each qu arter before they go. Th ey 

have designated places where the y are supposed to go. Vouchers 

the n come in and we au dit them, so we k now where they go.

Mr. Bow. I un derst and th at , bu t perhap s the re are some au thorizations th at ta ke them from the ir home bases and tak e them elsewhere 

th at mig ht be consolidate d to some extent.
117

■>

(

*

Mr. Jackson. They have been asked all the 15 years we have had 

this system to consolidate their hearings and to have a calendar tha t 

would require as few trips as possible, and I believe most referees 

follow this.

Judge Campbell. Is it regularly followed up by your office to 

see that they do?

Mr. J ackson. Yes.

Mr. Bow. I know in my district the referee—and he has said 

nothing to me about it—travels to three or four places and most of 

them are pretty close together and I wondered if the litigants could 

not come to a place only a short distance away and save time and 

money.

Mr. Jackson. There might be cases in which they have to hold 

hearings in certain places in emergencies. I know a full-time referee 

does not want to be out of his office more than he has to be, and a 

part-time referee does not want to be out of his office because he is 

a practicing lawyer and he would lose money if he had to be out of 

his office very much.

IN CR EA SE D CO NS UM PT ION OF SU PP LI ES

Mr. Bow. Is this item of $34,000 for increased consumption of 

supplies a nonrecurring item?

Mr. Anderson. It is a recurring item.

Mr. Bow. By putting in this photocopy machine we are getting 

in a position where we will have to pay more money for supplies?

Mr. Anderson. The use of the photocopy machine leads to increased expense for photocopy paper, but there is a fee charged for 

copies.

Mr. Bow. This $34,000 increase in consumption of supplies will be 

repaid by fees charged for copies?

Mr. Anderson. There will be an offset there.

Mr. Bow. Tha t is all.

Mr. Rooney. Thank you, gentlemen and judges.

Judge Campbell. May I say a word in conclusion. I want to 

thank you for the help you have given our committee in the past, 

particularly in regard to our efforts, which I can assure you are sincere, (1) to plug any loopholes we can, and (2) to economize wherever 

possible. I would like to express my appreciation and the appreciation 

of my committee for the cooperation you have given the judiciary in 

the past.

One personal note: I would like particularly to thank you and members of the committee last January for the personal consideration you 

extended to me in last ye ar’s hearings in regard to my absence due to 

the unfortunate illness of my wife. I am very appreciative of the 

consideration you gave me personally at tha t time and I would like 

to thank you on the record for it.

Mr. Rooney. Judge Campbell, I feel, and I know I express the 

opinion of all members of this committee, tha t from what we know of 

you and what the new members have heard today, you make sense. 

You are trying to do a good job and you are fully appreciated. We 

know that the judges are all human, but you and Judge McGuire do 

a good job.

Judge C ampbell. Thank you. We appreciate it.

LIST OP WITNESSES

Pai?H

Airhart, J. C____________________________________________________ 41

Anderson, D. I I _________________________________________________ 41

Campbell, Hon. W. J ____________________________________________ 41

Campioli, M. E _________________________________________________ 3

Carey, E. J _____________________________________________________ 29

Clark, Hon. Tom________________________________________________ 3

Davis, J. F _____________________________________________________ 3

Garabedian, E. V________________________________________________ 41

Goldberg, Hon. A. J ____________ 3

Henlock, C. A___________________________________________________ 3

Hutchinson, G. E ________________________________________________ 24

Jackson, R. E___________________________________________________ 41

Jones, Hon. Marvin ______________________________________________ 33

Lippitt, T. P____________________________________________________ 3

Martin, Hon. I. J ________________________________________________ 24

McGuire, Hon. M. F_____________________________________________ 41

Olney, Warren II I _______________________________________________ 41

Richardson, Scovel______________________________ 29

Rubel, W. L_________________ 3

Weinman, Hon. C. A_____________________________________________ 41

Worley, Hon. Eug ene____________________________________________ 24

(i)

IN D E X

A

Page

Appropriations and estimates, 1963-64, summary of. .Z Z __ — __ _____ 2

C

Claims, Court of________________________________________________ 33

Repairs and improvements____________________________________ 39

*• Salaries and expenses_________________________________________ 33

Court of appeals, district courts, and other judicial services____________ 41

Administrative Office of the U.S. Cou rts________________________ 95 W Bankruptcy courts, decrease of work of_________________________ 46

' Jurors and commissioners, fees of_______________________________ 70

f Machinery in n orthern district of Illinois, use of funds for__________ 51

Passport applicatio ns_________________________________________ 69

Personnel:

Judiciary salary plan_______________________________ 47, 55, 65, 68

Suppo rting personnel, salaries of___________________________ 56

Turnover o f_____________________________________________ 50

Referees:

Expenses___________________________________ 105

Furn iture and furnishings_____________________________ 109

Supplies, increased consum ption of_____________________ 117

Travel and transp ortation of persons___________________ 116

Salaries________________________________________________ 100

Salaries of judges________________________________ 52

Travel and miscellaneous expenses_____________________________ 75

Judges on assignment to other districts, trav el of_____________ 81

New judges.......... ................ 91,94

Nonrecurring item s______________________________________ 91

Photocopying supplies____________________________________ 93

Subsistence expenses, limita tion on __________ 90

Telephone facilities, modernization and expansion of__________ 92

Customs and Paten t Appeals, Court of______________________________ 24

Customs Co urt__________________________________________________ 29

S

Supreme Court of the United Sta tes ________________________________ 3

Automobile for the Chief Just ice _______________________________ 12

Books______________________________________________________ 14

Care of buildings and grounds_________________________________ 15

Miscellaneous expenses_______________________________________ 9

4 Printing and binding repo rts__________________________________ 8

Salaries____________________________________________________ 4

(in)

o