Mr. KENNEDY. The law provides when the Communist Party did not register within 10 days the officers had to register for the party. Mr. MAGNUSON. Did they?

Mr. KENNEDY. They did not. We have a grand jury in Washington, D.C., looking into the matter at the present time.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Does that apply only to the national officers of the Communist Party?

Mr. KENNEDY. Yes. I might say that when the national officers did not register for the party, the Communist Party members themselves were required to register 20 days later. None of them registered either.

Mr. MAGNUSON. This is obviously a concerted plan on their part not to register?

Mr. KENNEDY. Yes. I might say the proof of who the officers are on a particular date and the amount and kind of evidence we can use in a suit makes it more difficult to prosecute a suit against the officers than a suit against the Communist Party itself.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Are not these officers pretty well known?

Mr. KENNEDY. After the Supreme Court decision they reorganized the whole party. They had 10 or 11 officers and came down to 3 offi

cers.

Could I go off the record for a moment?

Mr. ROONEY. Surely.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. MAGNUSON. What is the penalty for failure to register?

Mr. KENNEDY. For the party it is $10,000 a day. The party did not register and we indicated it after 12 days, which is why there are 12 counts and it would be $120,000. For the officers it is $10,000 and up to 5 years.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Not $10,000 a day?

Mr. KENNEDY. Yes; it is $10,000 a day.

Mr. MAGNUSON. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Marshall?

SANDSTONE, MINN., INSTITUTION

Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Attorney General, I had the privilege of visiting the institution at Sandstone, Minn., last fall and I want to compliment you on the fine personnel you have there.

Mr. KENNEDY. We appreciate your visit and your interest, Mr. Congressman. I was talking to Mr. Bennett about it.

Mr. MARSHALL. Two years ago I also visited the institution. You have a situation there that seems to me is rather bad. When visitors come to the prison and there are people in the corridor, the corridor is so narrow if you were to walk through you would have to step over

their feet.

Also, the chapel facilities there are rather inadequate.

I wonder if you have anything in mind to improve the situation? Mr. KENNEDY. That had not been brought to my attention, Congressman. I shall be glad to make a study and report to you in the next few weeks. Are those the two problems as you see them?

Mr. MARSHALL. I think those are the two biggest problems.

Mr. KENNEDY. I will make a report to you in 2 weeks as to what we think we can do.

Mr. MARSHALL. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. MARSHALL. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Bow?

COMMENDATION OF RAYMOND FARRELL

Mr. Bow. Mr. Attorney General, first I would like to compliment you and the President for the appointment of Ray Farrell as Chief of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. He is an excellent man and it is fine to see a career man promoted to a position of this kind. I know he will do an excellent job.

Mr. KENNEDY. He has made a great contribution already.

INCREASE IN APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST

Mr. Bow. What was the amount of increase in your appropriations in fiscal year 1962 over fiscal year 1961?

Mr. KENNEDY. The actual?

Mr. Bow. Well, you would have to take your actual for 1961, and I suppose estimated for 1962.

Mr. ROONEY. Is this the overall Department of Justice?

Mr. Bow. Yes.

Mr. ANDRETTA. The actual expenditure for 1961 was $298,894,000. Mr. Bow. What is your estimate for 1962?

Mr. ANDRETTA. $297,598,000.

Mr. Bow. And what is your estimate for 1963?

Mr. ANDRETTA. $311,721,000. That is the overall figure. The estimate for total appropriated funds is $309,300,000.

INCREASE IN NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES

Mr. Bow. What was your number of employees actual at the end of fiscal year 1961?

Mr. BROWN. 31,244 positions.

Mr. Bow. On page 1-1, number of employees as the end of the year, the grand total is 30,803.

Mr. BROWN. For what year?

Mr. Bow. 1961.

Mr. BROWN. That is actual employment. The figure I gave was the number of positions.

Mr. ROONEY. The number of positions was 31,785 for 1962. Do you have this sheet?

Mr. Bow. Yes; but I asked for the number of employees at the end of fiscal year 1961.

Mr. ANDRETTA. 31,262.

Mr. Bow. What is this figure of 30,803 that appears at page 1-1? Mr. ANDRETTA. That is probably actual employment.

Mr. Bow. That is what I asked for.

Mr. ANDRETTA. Is that 1961?

Mr. Bow. That is what it says here, 1961.

Mr. BROWN. 30,597 is the actual number of employees at the end of 1961 that were paid from appropriated funds. I am not including special funds. The grand total is 30,803.

Mr. Bow. What is the same figure for 1962, the grand total?

Mr. BROWN. 31,518.

Mr. Bow. And what is your estimate of the number of employees at the end of 1963 ?

Mr. BROWN. 32,234.

Mr. Bow. That is a very substantial difference.

REPRESENTATION ALLOWANCE

Mr. Bow. I also note in these justifications this year something new, a $2,000 representation allowance. I do not find any justification of that in the estimates. Who will handle that?

Mr. ANDRETTA. At the end of the hearings when we take up the language changes we will discuss that.

Mr. Bow. This is something new, is it not?

Mr. ANDRETTA. Yes.

Mr. KENNEDY. I will be glad to discuss that because I am behind that.

Mr. Bow. Let me tell you something I tried to sell the last administration. I never got anywhere with it. Instead of individual appropriations to the various departments for representation. I should like some day to see the total overall appropriated to the President and then let the President's office allot to the departments and let them take the responsibility for these representation allowances. I never got anywhere with the idea, but I think that is where it belongs. If you want to discuss it you may do so.

Mr. KENNEDY. I would say we have this past year had quite a number of delegations that have come in on the youth problem; in connection with the problems of appointing these judges we have had a special committee that has been established to determine what should be done for the poorer individual who is charged with a crime, and they have had meetings in Washington. We have had foreign groups frequently come to the Department of Justice. What we have done is kicked in among ourselves to have these people for lunch. The assistants and myself have kicked in to pay for that. We would like to have some assistance.

Mr. Bow. Of course this has been going on over the years. We have heard the same story for years and years, that the money has to come out of the pockets of various individuals. Of course Members of Congress have somewhat the same situation. People come in and expect to have their lunches paid for by the Members and we pay for that out of our pockets. There is no representation allowance for Members of Congress. I should like to see the matter handled in some other way. In lieu of appropriations to the individual departments I should like to see the total appropriated to the President and allotted to the departments by the President's office.

Mr. KENNEDY. That would make sense. There are about 15 agencies and departments who have something along this line and what we are asking for is less than anybody else is asking for.

Mr. Bow. It has developed that more and more agencies are asking for it and some agencies are trying to outdo another. I think if it went into one appropriation, the President's fund, and was handled from there, there could be no question.

Mr. KENNEDY. I understand your position.

COMMUNIST PARTY PROSECUTION

Mr. Bow. Would you explain, on the record, what you intend to do with this Communist Party prosecution?

Mr. KENNEDY. We are going ahead. As I said, the Communist Party has been indicted on these 12 counts and we will move ahead to have that tried. That litigation will probably take some time. It will be appealed and probably go back to the Supreme Court.

Mr. Bow. But it is your intention to follow through vigorously on the prosecution under the law?

Mr. KENNEDY. That is right. We have the top attorneys from the internal security section working on it and we have the grand jury meeting now in Washington. On the officers that presents a more difficult factual and legal case, but we will do as much as we possibly can to move against the officers as well as the party.

The grand jury was supposed to meet last week but it is starting tomorrow, in order that the record may be straight.

TRAVEL OF ATTORNEY GENERAL

Mr. Bow. There has been in the press and over the air a good deal about your travel, Mr. Attorney General. Does that come from this appropriation? If you take a trip around the world, will it come from this appropriation?

Mr. KENNEDY. No, sir; it does not.

Mr. Bow. Or if you take a trip to Moscow?

Mr. KENNEDY. No, it does not. I am making the trip at the request of the State Department and State is paying for it.

Mr. Bow. It does increase the appropriation somewhat because of your absence?

Mr. KENNEDY. Not ours.

Mr. Bow. So it is reflected in this appropriation to a certain extent if you are away and traveling?

Mr. KENNEDY. I do not think so.

Mr. Bow. Let me read this from the justifications under the Office of the Deputy Attorney General:

In addition this office is handling much of the regular business of the Attorney General's Office while the Attorney General is undertaking a number of important assignments for the President.

Does not this mean that there will be a requested increase in the budget for the Office of the Deputy Attorney General because of your absence as Attorney General?

Mr. KENNEDY. I do not think so. I have had a number of other assignments, Congressman. This past year I was here the whole year. I did not go away except on business for the Department of Justice and for a 3-day trip to the Ivory Coast where I represented the President at that nation's observance of the first anniversary of independence. I was involved in making a study of the Cuban operations which took some period of time. I will be absent now for a month but I believe that the Deputy Attorney General can handle that without any increase in appropriations.

Mr. Bow. I think you have a very fine Deputy Attorney General, but I raise the question that this justification indicates to me there is an additional load put on him by reason of extracurricular activities of the Attorney General, by his not being here.

Mr. KENNEDY. The Deputy Attorney General is taking it all with a smile and I am getting my job done.

Mr. WHITE. I might also say that the job of Attorney General and the Department of Justice within the framework of the Government will be one thing one year and another thing another year. I think this year the Department of Justice and the Attorney General have participated a good deal in many of the legislative and legal problems that arise in the administration, more so than before. I think the workload in working with the other departments and agencies of the Government has been somewhat increased.

Mr. Bow. I agree with that but I do not believe that goes to the extent of traveling around the world.

Mr. WHITE. I do not think the language indicates that.

Mr. Bow. I think the Attorney General can do a better job here. We have a precedent for this kind of thing. In the last administration there was somebody traveling who was related to the President, but it seems to me where he occupies a Cabinet position the responsibility of the Attorney General is at his desk in Washington.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Congressman, I will be glad not to go, I assure you.

Mr. Bow. I know these are not always pleasant trips; they are difficult.

Mr. ROONEY. It would appear from page 4-3 of these justifications that the total increase requested for the Office of the Deputy Attorney General is $25,000. Is that correct, Mr. Andretta?

Mr. ANDRETTA. That is correct.

Mr. ROONEY. Of which amount $5,700 is for within-grade promotions required by the Ramspeck Act; $3,500 is for increased travel requirements; $12,900 is for the salaries of two GS-9 attorneys; $900 is for personnel benefits, retirement and health; and $2,000 is for rent to be transferred to the General Services Administration. So that the only increased personnel included in the $25,000 request is the amount for salaries of two GS-9 attorneys costing $12,900. Is that correct? Mr. ANDRETTA. That is correct.

Mr. Bow. That is all.

Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Cederberg?

ADDITIONAL POSITIONS REQUESTED

Mr. CEDERBERG. Last year there was a request for an additional 428 positions and this year there is a request for an additional 767 positions, and as I read your statement, the second sentence, it says:

There are more crimes, more legal problems, and more cases. The cost of finding and punishing criminals has gone up. There are more Federal judges, and the need for prosecutors and marshals for their courts has increased proportionately.

Is this going to be the pattern for the years ahead because of the increased workload you anticipate will come up?

Mr. KENNEDY. Generally I would say as the population increases and as there are more cars and more money around that crime will increase. That has been the pattern. There has been a definite and startling increase in the last 2 years. The passage of five new criminal statutes last fall will greatly increase the number of cases in the Criminal Division. I might also point out that except for the increase