space in the rent paid for certain floors over others. When you get up to the top floor you usually get a hot floor again, and a little lower rental.

Mr. WOOD. Has the commission taken into consideration this fact: That in this building mania here, in these apartments, at least half of the space is unoccupied?

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. The Public Buildings Commission has not had any case that has brought them into contact with the apartment situation. I know that that is a fact, as you say. I think about 25 to 30 per cent of the living apartments are vacant; but they are in locations that are not very convenient for office purposes.

Mr. Wood. Oh, that does not make a bit of difference. Right down in the center of the city that is true, just as it is in these apartments out in the Wardman Park section. I suppose they are somewhat better apartments there, but the rents remain just as high as ever. I did not know but what that might have some influence on the office properties down town.

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. The Public Buildings Commission has, within my knowledge, cut down the rents that have been asked an enormous amount-25 or 30 cents a foot almost every time.

RENTAL RATES IN OTHER CITIES

Mr. Wood. Does the Public Buildings Commission make any investigation to see how our rentals are here as compared with rentals for similar buildings and sites in other cities?

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. Not since I have been on the commission has that been investigated, and I do not remember any figures on it in the old reports of the commission; but I think it probably was done.

Mr. WOOD. I saw a statement the other day-I do not know how true it is that the rentals of both apartments and offices in this city are higher than in any other city of comparable size in the United States. If that is true, the profiteer is still getting in his work.

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. I think that is possibly true of residence rentals, but I am quite sure it is not so of the business. But I will look that up, sir, and let you know.

Mr. Wood. It is a pretty good thing to investigate, anyhow.

List of buildings in various cities rented by the Government
[Furnished by Federal Real Estate Board, December 27, 1926]

List of buildings in various cities rented by the Government-Continued

List of buildings leased by Post Office Department in various cities

[From Hon. Daniel A. Reed's speech in the House, Tuesday, Dec. 21, 1926]

Rented office buildings operated and maintained by the Office of Public Buildings and Public Parks, fiscal year 1926

Mr. SUMMERS. Can you give us, Colonel, the total amount of rents that are paid in the District of Columbia for office buildings for Federal use?

It

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. It approximates $2,000,000 a year. was not quite $2,000,000 the last time it was figured up, and of course there are slight changes, due to the fact that as leases are renewed there has been a slight increase in cost in some cases; but it approximates $2,000,000 a year, as I remember it.

Mr. SUMMERS. And the floor space is charged at rates running from about 21 cents to about $2.50?

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. I do not know of any case where it is as high as $2.50. The Public Buildings Commission, since I have been on it, has not approved any case at more than $1.90, I think.

Mr. SUMMERS. We had one case at $1.95 the other day. Did I understand you, Mr. Chairman, to say that there were some as high as $2.50?

Mr. WOOD. I think you have some in the Investment Building at $2.40. That is the figure as nearly as I can recall.

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. I have no doubt that the figure has come definitely to your attention, but it has not to mine. remember any over $1.90 since I have been on the commission.

Mr. WOOD. We are paying over $2 in some of those places. Do you take into consideration, when these rentals are fixed, the original cost of construction, interest on the investment, etc.?

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. Those are things that the owners always put in to support their pleas the differences in rates of interest, and things of that sort. But I think the Public Buildings Commission has usually approached it from the standpoint of what adequate space could be gotten for somewhere else, or equally good

space.

Mr. SUMMERS. I would like to inquire why, as a business proposition, the United States Government should be haggling with business concerns in the National Capital in regard to space in which to transact Government business. We have come to stay; we are not going to grow any less; and certainly we are paying rentals that in all probability run from 6 to 10 per cent on the investment, whereas Government money is worth 32 or 4 per cent. It looks to me as though Congress is very shortsighted in permitting this thing or making it necessary that it continue. It takes a lot of time of Government officials to negotiate these leases; it takes time for the department to fit up buildings that are unsuited for their purposes and to change from time to time; and, for one, I should like to see us embark on a proper building program to house our whole permanent activities.

Mr. WOOD. I think that we are commencing that now. The theory for a long time was-and I imagine it has hindered the development of public buildings here-that it was cheaper to rent than it was to build. But that time has passed. But that time has passed. As Doctor Summers has said, the money that we are paying out for rentals amounts to 10 per cent yes, and it goes as high as 20 and 30 per cent-on the investment, as compared with the 32 per cent and 4 per cent that we are getting.

Mr. SANDLIN. That condition prevails to a great extent throughout the country. It is not alone in Washington. But the Government could do that throughout the country. I know of many instances where they are paying rent on post offices that amounts to a large percentage of the cost to the Government to build a suitable building; not an extravagant building, but a practical building, you might say; one that would take care of the activity.

ADDITIONAL

BUILDINGS TRANSFERRED TO OFFICE OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND
PUBLIC PARKS

Before you get away from this item I see that your estimate for 1928 is $18,500 more than for 1927. How did you say that was accounted for? I am referring to the item on page 105.

Mr. WOOD. That transfer has something to do with it.

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. It is largely due to the fact that we will be undertaking the management of two additional buildings and giving up the management of only one. I can go into the details of the way that was handled, as to exactly the positions.

Mr. SANDLIN. I do not know whether that is necessary.

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. But that is the general statement; and it results in our former regular cost actually being cut down somewhat.

VAULT FOR NAVY BUILDING

Mr. WOOD. On page 107, Colonel, you have some new language: Including the installation of a vault in the Navy Building, not to exceed $20,000.

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. That is a new item, sir, that is added in. This is to provide a more permanent and better built reinforcedconcrete vault, with fireproof doors.

HURLEY-WRIGHT BUILDING

Mr. WOOD. I understand that in the Hurley-Wright Building you are going to have two or three different activities, and that there is some question about the parceling out of the rent.

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. The Hurley-Wright Building was originally rented by the Railroad Administration. The Railroad Administration business is being closed out, and the Treasury Department, the Department of Commerce, the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Inter-American High Commission, and the Department of Justice share the occupation of that building.

Mr. WOOD. That is the building just above the Interstate Commerce Building?

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. Yes, sir; the Director of the Budget thought it would be advisable to put the entire rental of that building into the appropriation for my office, as my office is maintaining the building and taking care of it under this arrangement, and there was no one department to whom that rent could properly be allotted. Mr. WOOD. You would have to have some new language in order to do that, would you not?

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. The item is in the appropriation. It is shown here as $75,000 for the rent; but the appropriation act has to provide a definite statement to include the rent of buildings.

Mr. Woop. Why would it not be a good idea to insert in this item "rent of buildings in the District of Columbia"?

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. That is what is asked for, sir. It was put in our original estimate, and it was lost, I think probably by mistake in the printing. It simply was not printed in. It was in our original estimate as submitted to the Budget.

OPEN-MARKET PURCHASES

Mr. WOOD. You have some more new language at the bottom of page 107:

Provided, That the purchase of supplies and procurement of services for the Office of Public Buildings and Public Parks of the National Capital may be made in the open market, without reference to section 3709, Revised Statutes, when the amount does not exceed $50.

What is the necessity for that?

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. That is to permit us to make very small purchases without the expense and delay of advertising. It will often happen that a man is working on a job of repairing a door, for example, and he needs some screws of a certain size to fit the latch of the door, or something of that kind, and if those are not in stock there may be a purchase of five or six cents and we have to advertise for bids for it. In that case we would spend perhaps five or six dollars in wages for time of clerks, opening bids, and so on, in order to make a purchase of a few cents, which is not good economy, and which I do not believe you intend us to do.

Mr. WOOD. I imagine that that condition will exist from year to year, and if this is to be done it ought to be made permanent.

Lieutenant Colonel GRANT. I put the word "hereafter" in the estimate submitted to the Budget, but the Director of the Budget took it out because he is proposing to introduce general legislation which will