71ST CONGRESS 3d Session } HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES { REPORT No. 2432 TO CLARIFY MEANING AND INTENTION OF ACT TO REGULATE THE PRACTICE OF THE HEALING ART JANUARY 30, 1931.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed Mr. ZIHLMAN, from the Committee on the District of Columbia, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 121691 The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 12169) to amend the meaning and intention of an act of Congress entitled "An act to regulate the practice of the healing art to protect the public health of the District of Columbia," approved February 27, 1929, having considered the same, report back to the House with the recommendation that the legislation do pass. The purpose of this bill is to clarify the definition of naturopathy. The Commissioners of the District, in defining the type of work that might be performed by the naturopaths under the act of February 27, 1929, excluded from their definition the right of the naturopaths to diagnose a case or to administer drugs, medicines, or perform surgical operations. The naturopaths are not concerned with the use of drugs, and do not desire to perform surgical operations, because naturopathy does not contemplate drugs or surgical operations, nor is it within the scope of their science of practice. They have advised the committee that never, as part of any such treatment, have they used drugs, or ever performed or attempted to perform any surgical operation. Naturopaths practice and teach that the living body is a vital machine, and that retention of waste products in the body, and the nonelimination of drugs are considered the most important underlying causes of disease, so that they could not consistently prescribe them. Naturopathy, they aver, is a system of natural methods comprising the use of air, earth, sunshine, water, heat and cold, harmonized food, and the use of dehydrated vegetables, herbs, fruits, and any natural modalities, and it is their belief, and the belief of this committee, that they should not be excluded the use of vegetables and herbs, fruits, or any other natural modalities, in their practice. The committee therefore recommends the early passage of this measure, so that the type of service to be performed by those in the naturopathy profession may be clearly defined. AMEND THE NATIONAL DEFENSE ACT- BANDMASTERS JANUARY 30, 1931.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. REECE, from the Committee on Military Affairs, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 2756] The Committee on Military Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 2756) to amend the act entitled "An act for making further and more effectual provision for the national defense, and for other purposes," approved June 3, 1916, as amended, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report thereon with the recommendation that it do pass. A measure to accomplish the same purpose as this bill was favorably reported and passed by Congress in the Seventieth Congress. The report of the committee at that time was, in part, as follows: Your committee are of the opinion that legislation should be enacted which will assist in building up the efficiency of the Army bands. Hearings have been held on similar measures in previous Congresses which brought out that the Army bands stand in need of strengthening. It is impossible under present conditions to recruit a sufficient number of enlisted men for the bands. Through the enactment of this legislation, your committee feel that the quality of music in the Army bands will be improved, and a higher grade of musicians will be attracted to the bands if the leaders are appointed and commissioned as band masters who shall be entitled to the same benefits in regard to pay, allowances, and retirements as are applicable to other commissioned officers. The outstanding features of the bill are as follows: The creation of a new Army rank of bandmaster, and the appointment and commissioning of bandmasters by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, such appointees to take the places of the present warrant officer band leaders; the investment of bandmasters with the same benefits in respect to pay, allowances, and retirements as are applicable to commissioned officers of the various grades to which they are assimilated with, to take rank with second lieutenants, first lieutenants, and captains contingent upon length of service, and one bandmaster to be at the head of each authorized band of the Army; the selection by the Secretary of War of a chief bandmaster, who shall have the assimilated rank, pay, and allowances of a major. The report of the War Department on this measure is as follows: Hon. JOHN M. MORIN, Chairman Committee on Military Affairs, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. MORIN: In compliance with the request in your letter of January 18, 1928, I am pleased to submit the following report in duplicate on H. R. 9373: While differing in some minor particulars, the provisions of this bill are substantially the same as those of H. R. 481 and S. 750, having for its purpose the commissioning of band leaders of the Army. The War Department has committed itself as not favoring the commissioning of band leaders. The reasons for this attitude were set forth in my report to you on H. R. 481, January 19, 1928, and apply to the present bill. They were substantially as follows: The applicable provisions of existing law on the subject are in the national defense act of June 3, 1916, which this bill proposes to amend. The changes that will be brought about in existing law by the proposed legislation and their effect, are, briefly, as follows: It will change the present designation of band leaders in the Army to that of bandmaster and give to bandmasters who are appointed as such commissions as first or second lieutenants, or captains, depending upon certain conditions to be fulfilled as provided for in the bill. The proposed legislation should not be enacted into law for the following reasons: There is considerable ambiguity due to the loose wording of the bill in the use of the terms "bandmaster" and "band leaders. It appears that the sole purpose of the proposed legislation is to provide that the warrant officer band leaders in the Army shall be commissioned officers. The War Department has consistently opposed such legislation on the following grounds: (a) Army band leaders in the grade of warrant officers find themselves in a congenial social status at present, due to the fact that their associates are the noncommissioned officers in the higher grades, men of a high class, who are of about the same age and length of service as the band leaders themselves. Were band leaders given commissions in the junior grades, their associates would be other officers in the junior grades, men much younger generally than they themselves, with little or nothing in common. This would not be conducive to the general contentment of either the band leaders or their families, nor could it lead to the close association and comradeship which exists where men of the same rank are of about the same age and length of service. (b) The expenses incident to holding a commission in a junior grade will more than offset the slight increase in pay they would receive. (c) Army band leaders have never had administrative control of bands. During the World War, when they held commissions, they had no administrative or disciplinary control over their bands, but were responsible only for the musical efficiency of the bands. To compare the efficiency of bands during the World War with that of bands at the present time is unsound for the reason that the material for bands supplied by the selective service law was not only much larger, but was, naturally, superior to that acquired through voluntary enlistment. The commissioned band leaders had little or nothing to do with procuring bandsmen. It is therefore incorrect to claim that the reason bands were more efficient during the World War than at present is because band leaders held commissions. Experience in the Army has shown that musicians, as a class, are not accustomed to exercise the functions of command. The fact that they are accomplished musicians, which they must be in order to become band leaders, is evidence that they have not had the time to devote to the acquirement of the military knowledge necessary to the efficient exercise of administrative and disciplinary control over an organization. Should they be given such control over the bands, in addition to the musical instruction of them, one or the other of these duties would have to suffer, with a consequent decrease in the efficiency of the organization. The War Department believes it would be an anomaly to commission band leaders when they are to exercise neither the function of command nor administration after being commissioned. One of the factors upon which commissioned rank is predicated is that the field of activity in which the holder of the commission functions is of sufficient scope and variation to demand an ever-increasing experience to fit him for the higher demands of that field. Promotion and rank follow as one becomes able to take over more and more of the duties and responsibilities of this work. Such is not the case where band leaders are concerned. Here there is no field of activity extending beyond that of leading the band. It is a circumscribed and definite duty such as that of a warrant officer who is master of an Army mine planter. To place one who performs this definite and specific character in the category of commissioned personnel is to put him in an illogical and unfortunate position unless it is intended to promote him along with other commissioned personnel. If this were done, we might expect to have a colonel leading a regimental band who was senior to the colonel commanding the regiment of which the band is but one of the integral parts. The annual increased cost involved in this proposed legislation is estimated to be approximately $86,400. If any additional information from the War Department is desired, I shall be pleased to furnish it. If the Committee on Military Affairs wishes to have hearings upon the proposed legislation, the following-named officers are designated to appear before the committee: Brig. Gen. Campbell King, Assistant Chief of Staff, G-1, and Col. J. P. Wade, General Staff. Sincerely yours, DWIGHT F. DAVIS, Secretary of War. During the present Congress many leaders in the musical world have indorsed the legislation and urged enactment of the present measure. These include James F. Cooke, editor of Etude; John Philip Sousa; Rudy Vallee; Mr. William W. Norton, Community Music Association of Flint, Mich.; William C. Hammer, general manager Philadelphia Grand Opera Co.; J. W. Weber, president American Federation of Musicians. A report was requested from the War Department on the present bill and that report is made a part of this report, as follows: Hon. W. FRANK JAMES, WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington, D. C., January 2, 1930. Chairman Committee on Military Affairs, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. JAMES: Careful consideration has been given to the bill (H. R. 2756) proposing to amend the national defense act so as to provide for the commissioning of band leaders of the Army, which you transmitted to the War Department under date of December 3, 1929, with a request for a report on the measure. The applicable provisions of existing law on the subject are sections 4a and 6 of the national defense act, as amended; sections 9, 10, 11, and 17, pay readjustment act of June 10, 1922, as amended; and the acts of June 30, 1922, and September 14, 1922, which fix the authorized commissioned strength of the Army. The changes that will be brought about in existing law by the proposed legislation and the effect of such changes, briefly, are as follows: It will change the present designation of band leader in the Army to that of bandmaster and give to bandmasters what is in effect a commission as major-chief bandmaster only-captain, first or second lieutenant, depending upon conditions to be fulfilled as provided in the bill. The War Department is fully cognizant of the importance of Army bands and of the necessity for maintaining their high standard. It does not believe, however, that the enactment of H. R. 2756 would contribute materially thereto. The principal disadvantages of the bill are: There is no real requirement in the military service for leaders of bands to be given a commissioned status, thereby adding about 90 commissioned officers to the Army at a cost of about $86,400 per year. Army band leaders have never had administrative control of bands. Experience in the Army has shown that musicians, as a class, are not accustomed to exercise the functions of command. The fact that they are accomplished musicians, for this they must be to become band leaders, is evidence that they have had little or no time to devote to the acquirement of the military knowledge necessary to the exercise of administrative and disciplinary control over an HR-71-3-VOL 1- -69 organization. Should they be given administrative and disciplinary control over the band, in addition to the musical instruction of it, then must one or another of these duties suffer with a consequent decrease in the efficiency of the organization. The proposed centralized control over administration of Army bands and over all matters relating to musical organizations of the Army would constitute an unwarranted interference with the functions of various territorial and tactical commanders, who are fully competent to administer, according to local needs, the bands pertaining to their commands. In view of the foregoing, the War Department adheres to its formerly expressed views on bills of this nature and recommends that H. R. 2756 be not enacted. Sincerely yours, PATRICK J. HURLEY, 1 |