material. Specimen bars of not less than 0.5 square inch sectional area must show an ultimate strength of not less than 48,000 pounds per square inch, an elongation of not less than 26 per cent, a contraction in area of not less than 43 per cent, and an elastic limit not less than one-half the ultimate strength. For sectional areas above square inches a reduction of 1 per cent in elongation and contraction, and a reduction of 500 pounds in tensile strength, will be allowed for each additional 2 square inches of section or fraction thereof, provided the ultimate strength shall not fall below 45,000 pounds nor the elongation below 22 per cent in any specimen. A decrease of not more than 1 per cent in the elongation and contraction will also be allowed for each 1,000 pounds in tensile strength above 50,000 pounds, provided the elongation shall never fall below 22 per cent nor the tensile strength exceed 54,000 pounds in any specimens. (This allowance will be additional to that provided for sectional areas above 5 square inches, as far as elongation and contraction are concerned, within the limits named.)

3. Cold bending.-(a) A bar nicked approximately 20 per cent of its thickness and bent back at this point through an angle of 180° must show a long, clean, silky fiber, free from slag or dirt, or any coarse, crystalline spots. A few fine crystalline spots may be tolerated, provided they do not in the aggregate exceed 10 per cent of the sectional area of the bar.

(b) A bar not more than 1 inch in thickness, after being doubled and closed on itself, without hammering at the bend, must show no cracks or flaws.

4. Hot test. (c) A bar not more than 1 inch in thickness heated to a yellow heat (about 1,700° F.) and suddenly quenched in water to between 78° and 82° F. must stand closing 180° to once the diameter of test specimen without showing flaws.

(d) A similar bar must be capable of being worked and welded in the ordinary manner without showing signs of red shortness.

(e) A rod or bar will be split at the end and each part bent back through an angle of 180°. It will also be punched and expanded by drifts until a round hole is formed whose diameter is not less than nine-tenths of the diameter of the rod or width of the bar. Any extension of the original split or indications of fracture, cracks, or flaws, developed by the above tests, will be sufficient cause for the rejection of the lot represented by that rod or bar.

5. Inspection to be made at place of manufacture. To avoid delay in making inspection, the contractor shall, when order is placed, notify the Bureau of Supplies and Accounts, Navy Department, where the material is to be manufactured.

6. All handling of material necessary for purposes of inspection shall be done, and all test specimens necessary for the determination of qualities of material used shall be prepared and tested at the expense of the contractor.

Copies of the above specifications can be obtained upon application to the various navy pay offices or to the Bureau of Supplies and Accounts, Navy Department, Washington, D. C.

References: Specifications for inspection of steel and iron material (C. and R.) May 25, 1906.

21-1-2

SPECIFICATIONS FOR IRON USED IN THE MANUFACTURE OF CHAIN CABLES ISSUED BY THE NAVY DEPARTMENT, OCTOBER 3, 1905.

[Reprint of specifications No. 48, issued by the Bureau of Equipment, Jan. 10, 1905.] The bars must be of homogeneous iron and must not contain more than ten onehundredths nor less than three one-hundredths of 1 per cent of carbon nor more than ten one-hundredths nor less than four one-hundredths of 1 per cent of phosphorus. Nor shall the sum of the carbon and phosphorus be more than fifteen one-hundredths of 1 per cent. The iron must not contain more than one one-hundredth of 1 per cent of sulphur nor more than ten one-hundredths of 1 per cent of either silicon or manga

2. The bars must be of such length that they may be cut into bolts, of which 24 shall make a pile weighing 300 pounds, and 1 inch shall be added to the length of each bar over and above the foregoing requirements.

3. The bars shall be in cross section, about 13 inches square, and shall be free from fag ends.

4. This iron, as received, must have a tensile strength of not less than 49,000 pounds per square inch nor more than 53,000 pounds per square inch, an elastic limit of about 60 per cent of the breaking strain, an elongation of at least 30 per cent in a length of 8 inches, and a contraction of area of at least 40 per cent.

5. Bolts cut from 1 per cent of the bars rolled from this iron to 24-inch round iron for cable making must stand bending cold until the sides are brought parallel, and separated from each other not more than one-half inch without showing signs of rupture. Such bolts must also have a tensile strength of not less than 48,000 pounds when rolled direct from 13-inch square bar into a 24-inch round bar. Bolts similarly rolled must also stand bending at red heat until the sides are close together without any signs of fracture. Such bolts as may be nicked and broken cold by slow bending must show fibrous.

6. One per cent of the bolts rolled from this iron to chain sizes will be made into test specimens of three links, and this "triplet" must stand a pull of at least 37,500 pounds to the square inch of the sectional area of the link in a 24-inch chain and 41,000 pounds to the square inch of sectional area of the link in a 14-inch chain; in other sizes the breaking strain to be proportioned between these limits.

7. No bars showing evidence of cold rolling will be accepted.

8. Physical tests to be made at the navy-yard, Boston, Mass., and all material before acceptance to be subject to inspection and the right to reject any or all of the same that does not, in the opinion of the inspector, fulfill all the requirements.

Copies of the above specifications can be obtained upon application to the various navy pay offices or to the Bureau of Supplies and Accounts, Navy Department, Washington, D. C.

Reference: E. O., Boston, No. 357, September 12, 1904, and Equipment No. 98614,

1904.

Mr. PAYSON. In the Army practically every character of articles contracted for by the War Department for army use is provided for by detailed specifications in the same way. The first one upon which I will lay my hand are the specifications for a con.mon saddle. Now, I will say, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, that of course there are saddles and saddles, and one would think you could go into the market and buy a saddle for a soldier of the Army to ride on; but I am authorized to say by the purchasing agent of the War Department that a saddle can not be found in the markets of the United States, made for sale in the markets, that the Government would accept for use in its service. I hold in my hand a specification for a saddle, which is not very long, and which I will ask to have inserted in the record, barring the illustration, unless you deem it advisable otherwise, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not want to usurp the functions of the other members of the committee, but it seems to me the reasons given are vital to those who construe the bill either way. If some gentleman wants to hold that they are excepted, it is important, it seems to me, to have in the record the statement of the Department for the purpose of controverting it, if it may be controverted. If others are inclined to hold that they do not come within the exception, it is essential to have the facts straight in the record.

Mr. PAYSON. I think perhaps this could be duplicated. Perhaps my notions of economy may be somewhat strained.

The CHAIRMAN. When it comes to putting the cuts into the record, that is a different thing. The statement may be put into the record, with the explanation that it is illustrated by cuts.

Mr. PAYSON. Very well. The most casual examination of those specifications as to saddles will show anyone at all familiar with the subject that they are specific creations, and therefore, in the judgment of those of us who oppose the bill, they would not come within the exceptions in the bill. The same thing applies as to specifications for harness, for station wagons, and so on, used in the Army,

specification No. 2; and the same thing as to specifications for fourmule ambulance or wagon harness, specification No. 4.

An article of very common use out on the plains and on the frontier country is the pack saddle. These are very generally used in the Army, as we all know. Specification No. 8 shows the requirements for all pack saddles used in the Army, and, as I am authorized to say by the purchasing agent of the War Department, nothing approaching them can be found in the open market. They are specific creations; and while there are pack saddles and pack saddles that can be obtained, nothing would fill the army requirements except as it came under this specification No. 8.

During the hearings, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, the manufacturers of textile goods have come both before this committee and the ⚫ committee of the Senate. It has been insisted that they did not come under the operation of the bill because their products were made in factories, in a way, and were sold in the open market; but I offer specification No. 10 for woolen blankets used in the Army, and I am authorized to say by the purchasing agent of the War Department that this is a specimen of everything they require in that kind of goods in the Army and is illustrative of the exactness of the requirements on the part of the Government upon every contractor. It is accompanied by a cut showing exactly how the material has to be colored and woven and in and out. The "U. S.," indicating Government property, is woven into the center of the blanket, and every detail is given. Specification No. 10 shows that.

In the matter of clothing for the Army, everything that is made, not only as to pattern, material, seams, and stitching in every part, the waistband linings, the different loops, forms and shapes of pockets, straps, reenforcement of cloth, buttons, the kind of thread used, the workmanship and finish-all those things are provided for in detailed specifications, shown by specification No. 11, which applies as well to all other kinds of clothing which the Army requires.

The CHAIRMAN. The contention is that the purchasing agent would hold that they are not within the exception? Is that right?

Mr. PAYSON. Yes. That is exactly what I understand as fo every one of these that I file.

The CHAIRMAN. Is not that the exact truth as to every pair of pants that is made to be put on the market and sold as clothing, made for every clothing house in the country?

Mr. PAYSON. No, sir. It is true as to none of them. You can not find in any clothing house in the country, as I will show you later on, such articles. They can not be found in any clothing house in the Union.

The CHAIRMAN. That is not the point. The Government sends out this specification, and tells how they are to be sewn, how the pockets are to be cut, and

Mr. PAYSON. Yes; and the kind of thread to be used; some cotton and some linen.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; and does not every clothing house that contracts or orders clothing to be made, to be put upon the market ready-made, make precisely those specifications? I do not mean a specification just like the War Department makes, but specifications of their own.

Mr. PAYSON. I am unable to answer that.

The CHAIRMAN. The bearing of the suggestion that I make is that in the course of trade, if those things were not within the exception, that construction means that there is not anything that can be bought in the market, in the open market, that could be contemplated by legislation. A statute can not contemplate the shape of a pocket in a pair of trousers to be sold over the counter. It can not contemplate the width of the binding that goes on the vest, that goes with the pants. It can not contemplate the width of the hem at the bottom, and if that specification as to the shape of a pocket and the width of the belt takes them out of the exception, then, as I see it, that construction carried on would simply arrive at the point that there is nothing that could be bought in the open market under the bill. Mr. PAYSON. That is our contention, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not see how we can abolish the open market for everything except raw material, in its primary sense, like grown cotton. I suppose that the merchant, ordering things for sale, makes specifications as to the whole of them, except in those rare instances where he is willing to accept some brand of the firm. Probably the stationer, in ordering pencils from the Dixon Graphite Company, would order "Dixon's No. 12;" but if he wanted something unusually soft, or the lead a little under the average size, he would so say in 'his letter, and that letter itself would amount to a specification. But I do not see how it could be held that the statute contemplated the precise manner in which anything is to be made.

To revert again to articles of clothing, the statute could not contemplate that they should be cut away 7 inches in the front, or only 2 inches, or that the bindings should be an inch and a half and not an inch, or that the hem at the bottom should be an inch and not an inch and a half; and if the man ordering them wanted them made that way and specified it, I confess I do not see how that takes them out of the list of things that can usually be bought in the open market. That is all I wanted to say.

Mr. PAYSON. You must keep in mind exactly what we are trying to do now. Here you have a bill which at the outset is intended to bring about an eight-hour day in every field of human endeavor where the Government is interested as a contracting party. That is the avowed object of the bill. Now you eliminate from that broad field a number of exceptions, as to which you and the friends of the bill have frequently said the bill would not apply; and as to the precise matter now in hand you say in the bill that "this bill shall not apply to such materials or articles as may be usually bought in the open market," whether made to conform to particular specifications or not. Now, the construction of that clause, as you will bear me witness, has been a matter of frequent discussion between the friends and opponents of this bill before this committee. The friends of the bill have had one view of it, and the opponents have had another view. The friends of the bill are pleased to say that whenever anything can be usually bought in the open market, as, for example, clothing, then that clothing does not come within the operation of the bill, but is excepted by this provision. The opponents of the bill, the manufacturers who have to deal in these things, say that when they are called upon to tender a contract for clothing, and harness, and saddles, and all that sort of thing, instead of there being such things as are usually bought in the open market, every one of them is a specific

manufacture required by the War Department, and that they have to comply with that, and therefore it does not come within the operation of the exception under the operation of the law, and they would therefore be obliged to work eight hours a day in the manufacture of that thing, and while they could buy clothing in the market, yet the particular kind of clothing required would have to be a specific creation, made expressly for this purpose, and therefore that it would not fall within the exception.

The other day there was an animated discussion between you and some gentleman occupying a seat at the end of the table as to whether or not a dress coat, made expressly for him according to his directions, might come within the exceptions of the bill. Your idea was that it would not come within the exception. Now I hold in my hand an exhibit for the purpose of illustrating what I say some cuts that I will show the members of the committee here-illustrating what is required as to all these articles of clothing; illustrations of every one of them. For instance, there is a khaki coat to be furnished to the private soldier. It must be made exactly in accordance with that cut, and directions are given how the goods shall be made, and how many threads shall be made to the inch, and how the patches shall be put on. You can not buy that coat if you go into any clothing store in the United States of America. That coat is not usually sold in the market, although other coats may be sold, other coats of yellow cotton cloth. It is the same way as to the trousers. illustrations of those. They look rather ridiculous to me.

I have

I exhibit for purposes of illustration to the committee the kind of trousers, woolen service breeches, specifications as to how they shall be cut and fastened below the knee, all about the thread to be used, such a number of silk threads, and such a number of linen threads; and here is a patch on the seat, to go on so many inches from the top, and every possible detail must be complied with strictly or the Army will not receive it.

Here is an illustration as to the khaki cloth they wear, for foot soldiers and mounted soldiers, and they have to conform to every specific detail of these illustrations or the Army will not receive them.

Our contention is that everything of that kind comes within the operations of this bill, notwithstanding the exceptions in it. If we' are right in our contention, then every one of us are subject to the provisions of the bill every time we attempt to make a contract with the Government for the production of these things. Of course this is not the place or the time to determine which of us is right authoritatively, but I simply put this in the record as the basis of argument hereafter, that this bill is vastly broader than is claimed. for it or than it is conceded to be.

The CHAIRMAN. It seems to me, in order to get it right in the record, and in a perfectly fair light-because the truth is always fair—I do not know how often or just where it has been averred that the object of the bill, as averred by all its friends, has been to establish an eighthour day. My own conviction has been for at least six years that the effect of the legislation, especially in its original form, would be not to affect materially the hours of employment in private business, but that it would of necessity lead to the Government becoming its own manufacturer. That has been my view of it.