Iroquois fire went to the hearts of all women, and we simply, in Chicago, are afraid of fire.

Senator HARDWICK. What I want to know particularly, so far as you know or knew, no party back of any particular hospital project in the city of Chicago was responsible for the action of the women? Mrs. SEVERIN. Not any.

Senator HARDWICK. They were devoted to a principle? They wanted safe fireproof hospitals for these boys?

Mrs. SEVERIN. Yes. No matter where they are located. We do not care where they are located. If it takes more money, we are perfectly willing to go out and sell more bonds. It has been my privilege to speak in the industrial plants, and I have been speaking on Americanization, and during the war on account of my relation with the women and these organizations in the city of Chicago it was my privilege to sell bonds.

Senator HARDWICK. I think we understand, now. Gentlemen, are there any further questions?

Mr. ADCOCK. I wanted to inquire, there have been so many innuendos. I take it there is no charge that my client had anything to do with the investigations of the Department of Justice or the War Department?

Senator HARDWICK. No; the reason this was done was on account of the newspaper publications.

Mrs. SEVERIN. No. I have had the most courteous treatment in Washington; but I admit, Mr. Chairman, that I was annoyed when this man persistently called up. I made no note, but I know that the attitude was not as pleasant as that which I had a right to expect. I am simply interested in fireproof hospitals for the boys, and I do not think that the Fort Sheridan hospital is the kind that should house the boys at the present time.

I took a delegation of women out with me, Mr. Chairman, women who went out there uninstructed, uninformed. If you would like their depositions, I would be very glad to furnish them. They were women who are mothers, and who are civic workers, and professional women.

Senator HARDWICK. If we decide we want their testimony, we will call for it. We thank you very much for your statement before the committee, and we excuse you with our thanks.

Mrs. FISHER. Senator Hardwick, may I be pardoned

Senator HARDWICK. Yes.

Mrs. FISHER. Will not this committee go on record as clearing our members of any imputation against them? We would like to go home as having a clean bill of health.

Senator HARDWICK. So far as you ladies are concerned?

Mrs. FISHER. Yes.

Senator HARDWICK. So far as I personally am concerned, and I am sure so far as the other members of the committee are concerned, I have no doubt that the ladies who are interested in this matter are interested in it from entirely proper motives, and there is no improper motive in any respect.

Mrs. FISHER. We would like to have an official statement from the committee.

Senator HARDWICK. I do not think there is any question on that subject. I have none, and I am sure my colleagues have none.

Mrs. FISHER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator HARDWICK. Now, have you another witness?

Mr. BOUVIER. I want to recall Col. Wright for a few questions. Senator HARDWICK. I do not know that we want to call Col. Wright over here. We certainly do not want Col. Wright to go over all his testimony again.

Mr. BOUVIER. No; but there are specific details that have not been developed at all in the line of the materiality of the testimony. He is here.

Senator HARDWICK. Well, I guess we will hear Col. Wright on any new matters, but we will not recall him for any reexamination.

Mr. BOUVIER. I do not want to recall him for any reexamination. Senator HARDWICK. If we do that we will never get through. Is it to develop new facts that have not heretofore been developed?

Mr. BOUVIER. Yes, sir; it is to develop those facts specifically of warning and the imputation of assumption of their own responsibility. That has only been gone into slightly in respect of one witness, and that invited the criticism of Senator France. It is to supply the details as distinguished from generalities that I wish to recall Col. Wright and interrogate him.

Senator HARDWICK. Have you read Col. Wright's testimony?
Mr. BOUVIER. Yes, sir.

Senator HARDWICK. I think it was specific on that matter.

Mr. BOUVIER. No; it was not specific; and I do not think it will take over 10 minutes.

Senator HARDWICK. We will hear him.

TESTIMONY OF COL. C. C. WRIGHT-Resumed.

Mr. BOUVIER. I will try to be just as direct as I can. Col. Wright, as I understand it, your contact personally with any of these gentlemen representing the Maywood proposition was on or about the 14th day of August. Is that correct?

Col. WRIGHT. That is correct.

Mr. BOUVIER. Who were the three that met in Col. Gunby's office or, if there were more than three, who were they?

Col. WRIGHT. There were Mr. Erskine, and Col. Dickinson, from the General Staff, and then an appointment was made that afternoon in my office.

Mr. BOUVIER. Who were present in the afternoon in your office at the appointment?

Col. WRIGHT. In my office-Mr. Erskine, Mr. Shank, and Mr. Wheelock.

Mr. BOUVIER. Did you have any further interviews with these same gentlemen, Shank or Erskine, during the course of your conference with them? Did the personnel vary? Was Mr. Erskine alone or was it Mr. Erskine and Mr. Shank on the succeeding days?

Col. WRIGHT. My interviews were almost altogether with Mr. Erskine.

Mr. BOUVIER. That is, after he first came in with Mr. Shank?
Col. WRIGHT. Yes.

Mr. BOUVIER. Now, just briefly state in a few words, giving the dates for them, as briefly as you can, exactly what admonition you

gave to either Erskine or Shank with respect to going ahead on their own responsibility. Give the dates and the places as near as your recollection serves.

Senator HARDWICK. Have you not been over that before?

Col. WRIGHT. I do not recollect. I made a general statement, but whether it covered these facts or not I do not know.

Mr. BOUVIER. It did not cover those details.

Col. WRIGHT. I have not looked over this record, and I can not recollect.

Senator HARDWICK. I think you did; but if there is any doubt about it, go ahead.

Col. WRIGHT. On the first date, August 14 or 15, at the appointment in my office, I stated specifically to Mr. Shank and Mr. Erskine that the construction division had absolutely no authority in itself, and that before any work could proceed it must be approved by the Secretary of War, and my desire in clearing this up was so that they could take such steps as were right, so that I could present it for approval to the Secretary. They had nothing to present.

Then on Saturday, August 18, Mr. Erskine came into my office with Mr. Jacob Newman and said that he understood this contract would have to be made and approved by the Secretary, and asked if it would not be possible for Mr. Newman to sit in with our contract department and go over it; and then I took Mr. Newman in and introduced him to Col. Shelby.

Mr. BOUVIER. That was on the 18th?

Col. WRIGHT. On the 18th of August. Between the 18th and the 31st I had conferences almost every day with Mr. Erskine.

On the morning of the 31st of August he called up my office and was very much perturbed because the papers had not yet been prepared for the Secretary's approval and asked if I would not go with him personally to the War Department and see Secretary Baker and submit to him the analysis made, and explain what the construction division had done, and determine whether or not this was a feasible project or not. We went up there and were unable to get Secretary Baker, and we did talk to Dr. Keppel, the Third Assistant Secretary of War, and he asked me what we had done, and I told him frankly that the proposition had come in in very crude form and required a lot of analysis; and Dr. Keppel said to Erskine, "We simply can not do a thing with this until those papers are formally presented for approval." Then Erskine came out to me and said, "I am going to get into Mr. Baker's office, somehow, and I think I will go over to the White House and see if I can not arrange for a hearing," and he went across the street to the White House, and after a little while he came back, and he said: "I guess I will not see the Secretary, because he left for Europe last night." office.

I returned to my

Then that afternoon was the time when this contract was signed by Mr. Shank, and they were told then that this report had to go to the Secretary for his approval. That was Saturday.

Monday was Labor Day, and either Tuesday or Wednesday Mr. Erskine came in again, also very much perturbed because we had not gotten these papers to the Secretary; and finally, on about the 4th, he came in and told me that Mr. Shank was going ahead with the work.

I told him that he was taking a long chance, because no authority had been obtained. Mr. Erskine said: "Well, we have arranged that. They are going ahead, and if this is not approved, we will split the expense just the same. ." Those were his exact words.

Then it was on the 10th or 11th of September that I got the wirefrom the Shank Co. saying that they were going ahead "as ordered." Well, I had no authority to stop them, any more than I had authority to start them, so that I simply wired back that no work had been ordered in the Chicago district.

Mr. BOUVIER. Those two telegrams have already been referred to? Col. WRIGHT. Yes, sir.

Senator FRANCE. I think Col. Wright's testimony is quite clear on this.

Mr. BOUVIER. Well, I knew that was repetition; only, it was explanatory of the phraseology that he used in his reply telegram, why he did not say to stop the work, because he regarded that as possible of the intrepretation that they had ordered the work begun.

Senator FRANCE. Yes. The legal aspects of it are quite clear. Col. WRIGHT. The next date is September 18, when Mr. Erskine came and got me, and the papers were in Gen. Marshall's office ready for signature, and the General was not in his office. He took me up to the Mills Building and back to the Surgeon General for his indorsement, and then back to the General Staff, and turned the papers in there, and he was very much perturbed then again, because it was not approved. I think he fully understood the importance of the approval. I might just say that that is the last time I saw Mr. Erskine until I saw him in this room.

Senator HARDWICK. The 18th of September?

Col. WRIGHT. Yes.

Mr. BOUVIER. It has been stated here, I think, it is my recollection, by Mr. Hines in the afternoon that he, Mr. Hines, and, I think, Mr. Erskine, were present at Mr. Hare's office, and the two were present and Maj. O'Brien-two Government witnesses, as he expressed it-and that Mr. Hare stated in your presence and in the presence of Maj. O'Brien, to Mr. Hines, that he, Hare, would notify Mr. Hines personally and give him an opportunity to come back to his office for further conference before any decision was made in relation to the approval or disapproval of the contract.

Mr. BENNET. I protest against that on the part of Mr. Hines. Mr. BOUVIER. It is most definitely stated.

Mr. BENNET. That Mr. Hines stated that?

Mr. HINES. Never.

Mr. BOUVIER. Mr. Hines was present, and arose and said

Senator HARDWICK. Ask him if any such statement was made?

Mr. BOUVIER. Was any such statement made by Mr. Hare, directly or to the effect of what I have in substance stated?

Senator HARDWICK. In your presence?

Mr. BOUVIER (continuing). In your presence?

Col. WRIGHT. No, sir.

Mr. BENNET. And he never claimed that there was.

Mr. BOUVIER. That is the statement

Senator HARDWICK. No matter; if it is not true you have contradicted it.

Mr. BENNET. We never claimed that, and there is nothing like that in the record. That is the meeting at which Col. Wright was present? Senator HARDWICK. Yes.

Mr. BENNET. Never.

Mr. BOUVIER. Now, in respect of the statement that was supposed to have been made by Gen. Marshall that the building could be completed within 45 days, were you present when any such statement was made, and if so, by whom was it made?

Col. WRIGHT. A statement by Gen. Marshall that the building

Mr. BOUVIER. It was averred that Gen. Marshall said at the time the committee went out there, and I understood you were there, too, that the building could be completed in 45 days. Did Gen. Marshall make any such statement as that, or did Mr. Shank make the statement?

Col. WRIGHT. Mr. Shank made such a statement as to the hospital, that it could be completed in 45 days.

Mr. BOUVIER. And not Gen. Marshall, then?

Col. WRIGHT. Yes.

Senator FRANCE. Have you that date?
Col. WRIGHT. Yes.

Senator FRANCE. When was it?

Col. WRIGHT. The 23d of December, I think.

Mr. BOUVIER. What was the date?

Col. WRIGHT. About the 22d or 23d of December.

Mr. BOUVIER. I think that is all.

Senator HARDWICK. Now, Mr. Bennet, please confine your examination as much as you can.

Mr. BENNET. I will confine it to two questions. You signed the socalled Chamberlain report?

Col. WRIGHT. Yes.

Mr. BENNET. And so did Gen. Marshall?

Col. WRIGHT. Yes.

Mr. BENNET. And that report, which is found on page 212-d of the typewritten record, provides as follows:

Inasmuch as it is the belief of the board that Fort Sheridan will provide the necessary facilities until such time as the Speedway Hospital can be completed ready for occupancy in 45 working days.

Col. WRIGHT. I did not get that.

Mr. BENNET. Read it. [Handing testimony to the witness.]

Col. WRIGHT (after examining testimony). I think that is the word

ing of the report.

Senator HARDWICK. You signed that report?

Col. WRIGHT. Yes.

Mr. BENNET. And Gen. Marshall signed it?

Col. WRIGHT. Yes, sir.

Mr. BENNET. There was a meeting at your office on OctoberCol. WRIGHT. I will say that we never discussed it after this statement by Mr. Shank that it could be completed. We never discussed it. Mr. BENNET. You do not think that Gen. Marshall would sign a statement like that unless he believed it?

Mr. BOUVIER. I submit that that calls for the processes of somebody else's mind.

Senator HARDWICK. Anyhow, they both signed it. Whether they made the statement to anyone in the beginning, they both signed that