Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1920-04-12
MAJORITY REPORT
ALLEGES WASTE IN
CAMP CONTRACTS
House Committee Findings
on Cantonment Construction
Develop Conflicting Opinion.
By the Associated Press.

By the Associated Press
Two opposing reports on the long
congressional investigation Of the
construction of thirty-two Army
camps and cantonments were submit
ted today to. the House by q war ex-
penditures committee and debated for
several hours. The majority: report.
presented by republican cshmittee-
mon. criticised government agencies
and officials in charge Of the war build
ing programs Rhilee Ahs 1tnesitS ss-
port of the democrats Aefendsd ths
administration. II :.
Cites GevernmeIt Lesses..
:. The government lotf '7s,ssi.Ssl on
jority report. whicb Asserted this was
due to 'weste. tneSacisncy and graft"
resulting from ebst plus contracts.
which were said TO be wide open"
No estimate OF loss on the National
Guard camps As made by the ma
Dissenting from the majority ind
ings. the mihority declared that tho
constructioR work was equivalent to
building thyrty-two cities. each with
$4,000 to $4,000 population. and added: !:
ms tremendous task WAS pEAc.
ticaliy completed In three months. and
stands out as one Of the great
achieveplents of the war"
Repre- rSsentatives Mckenzie. Illinois.
and MECulloch. Ohio. republicans, and
Dorerhus. Michigan. democrat. were
| the committeeman who conducted the
investigation. and their divergent re-
poGes were accepted respectively by
thf, ten republicans and i've democrats
composing the full committee on war
expenditures.
Majority Recommendations.
The majority submitted six recon-
mendAtions for legislation by Con-
gress, including the submission to the
states Of a constitutional amendment
making '.profiteering in war time
| treason" 1t also urged that the De-
partment Of Justice be asked to in
| vestigate work at every camp. ito the
end Of bringing to book those re-
| sponsible for losses to the govern
ment. and frauds through which they
| occurred, both by recoveries and
merited penalties"
No recommendations were made in
| the minority report, and 1t listed two
conclusions. one condemn1ng the ma
jority report and the other defending
Secretary Baker. who. the matority
sponsibility." The majority conclu-
| sion as to the Secretary's respon-
sibility was but one. of It's more than
| fourscore conclusions. Along with
these, the majority cited several
items. amounting to many thousands
of dollars, which 1t was argued could
legally be recovered by the govern
| ment from contractors.
The majority declared Secretary
Baker should not have permitted q
departure from the old method Of
competitive bids, declaring that with
him must rest the final responsibility
for the entire situation. Including
violations Of law. defrauding. waste,
losses and delay"
Minority Upholds Secretary.
In turn. the minority said the Sec
rotary was amply justified in aban-
doning 'the usual piece-time method Of
awarding contracts upon competitive
bidding and in substituting for 1t the
so-called cost plus system
''The minority is of the opinion"
added its report, that IL the Views
I Of the majority had been adopted at
the beginning Of the war. the whole
building program would have been in
| a state of chaos. many Of our troops
| would have perished with cold or
! died of disease in the winter Of 1917.
and the German army. would have
been in Paris before our soldiers could
have entered the battle lines"
Besides the Secretary, the majority
report held Col. w. A. Starrett. an
architect Of New York. primarily" re-
sponsible for adoption of the cost plus
contract, and it was intimated that he
used his position on the emergency con-
struction committee to obtain contracts
for the George A. Fuller Company, Of
which his brother was president.
The minority said this charge" Of
use Of position to get contracts for the
Fuller company rests wholly upon in
ferences" and pointed out that Starrett
was not examined by the committee.
The minority added that the committee
record did not show the slightest re-
flection upon the manner In which the
company's constractural relations with
the government were carried out"
On the other hand, the majority as
serted that favored contractors and
architects generally had hand in
framing the cost plus contract, which
1T was claimed. though denied by the
minority, did not safeguard the gov
ernment's interests.
Alleges Delay In work.
The majority asserted that there was
(Continued on Page 2. Column s.
~