HaU aiallege of Kgvimltxxtt 
 
 At Qfotnell InincrattH 
 
Cornell University Library 
 S 21.C9W3 
 The United States Department of agrjcu^^ 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of tiiis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924000003339 
 
THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 
 AGRICULTURE 
 
Series xxxviii No. i 
 
 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDIES 
 
 IN 
 
 Historical and Political Science 
 
 Under the Direction of the 
 
 Departments of History, Political Economy, and 
 Political Science 
 
 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT 
 OF AGRICULTURE ^:J!;'^/^ 
 
 A STUDY IN ADMINISTRATION 
 
 BY 
 
 V.!V/})OEMVl'^'. 
 
 WILLIAM L. WANLASS, PH.D. 
 Assistant Professor of Economics and Politics in Union College 
 
 BALTIMORE 
 
 THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 
 
 1920 
 
Copyright 1920 by 
 THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Page 
 
 Preface vii 
 
 Chapter I. Introductory : A Brief History of Fed- 
 eral Agricultural Legislation in the 
 
 United States 9 
 
 Chapter j[I. Present Organization of the United 
 
 States Department of Agriculture. . 33 
 Chapter III. Cooperative Relations of the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture with other Fed- 
 eral Services and with State Insti- 
 tutions 49 
 
 Chapter IV. Administration of Important Regula- 
 tory Laws 68 
 
 Chapter V. Financial Administration 93 
 
 Chapter VI. Conclusions 109 
 
 Appendices 115 
 
 Bibliography 125 
 
PREFACE 
 
 While employed in the United States Department of Agri- 
 culture during the years 1912-1917, the writer first became 
 interested in the growing importance of this relatively new 
 executive unit, and particularly in its purely administrative 
 or regulatory work, as distinct from its research and educa- 
 tional activities. The aim of this study, as the title and 
 table of contents indicate, is to describe, examine, and criti- 
 cise the conduct of this administrative work. It is believed 
 that such studies will be conducive to a better understand- 
 ing of the actual operations of our. government — a subject 
 to which too little attention has been given. 
 
 No attempt has been made to examine the constitutional 
 basis of the various statutes affecting the Department of 
 Agriculture. This is an interesting subject, but its con- 
 sideration lies outside the scope of the present study. 
 
 Likewise no account has been taken of the important 
 " war legislation " committed to the Department of Agricul- 
 ture for administration during 1917 and 1918. While some 
 permanent changes in organization and function may result 
 from these extraordinary activities, it is probable that most 
 of the work thus undertaken will prove to be of a tempor- 
 ary character. 
 
 Both in the inception of this study and in bringing it to 
 completion valuable assistance has been received from Pro- 
 fessor W. W. Willoughby, Dr. A. C. Millspaugh, and Presi- 
 dent Frank J. Goodnow. I am also greatly indebted to 
 many officials of the Department of Agriculture for in- 
 formation and assistance. 
 
 W. L. W. 
 
THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 
 AGRICULTURE 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 Introductory: A Brief History of Federal Agricul- 
 tural Legislation in the United States 
 
 When one contemplates that immense organization known 
 as the United State Department of Agriculture, with its 
 thousands of ofificers and employees scattered over the entire 
 United States and its insular possessions, and, in peace times, 
 exploring the remotest regions of the earth, it seems almost 
 incredible that it has existed as an executive department of 
 the first rank hardly three decades. It is true that an in- 
 stitution called the Department of Agriculture, under direc- 
 tion of an officer styled " Commissioner of Agriculture," 
 was established by Act of May 15, 1862.^ However, it was 
 not until February 9, 1889,* almost exactly a century after 
 the establishment of the Government under the Constitu- 
 tion, that this greatest of all American industries was given 
 the recognition of a seat in the President's Cabinet Council. 
 
 This delay in granting such recognition to so large and 
 important a part of our industrial and social structure was 
 not due to a lack of demand on the part of those directly 
 interested, but rather to certain feelings or traditions in the 
 minds of many of our legislators and other men of influence. 
 First, there was a very prevalent opinion that the activities 
 of the general government should be limited to what might 
 be termed political affairs as distinct from those which had 
 to do with domestic industry and commerce. It is note- 
 
 1 12 Stat L. 387 ; Rev. Stat., Sees. 520, 521. 
 2 25 Stat. L, 659. 
 
 9 
 
lO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 worthy that Hamilton, the greatest champion of the powers 
 of the federal government, should have been almost the first 
 to declare that agriculture could never become one of the 
 "desirable cares of a general jurisdiction."' It is also 
 worthy of note that up until the establishment of the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture in 1889, all of the then existing execu- 
 tive departments — State, Treasury, War, Navy, Post Office, 
 Interior and Justice — with the possible exception of the 
 Department of the Interior, performed functions generally 
 considered as political in character and essential to the con- 
 duct of a central government. Moreover, there existed a 
 very wide-spread opinion that the individual States were 
 fully competent to take care of "their own agricultural 
 interests : and since agricultural conditions were so diverse, 
 each state would be better fitted to cope with its own diffi- 
 culties than any central organization could possibly be." It 
 hardly need be said that while this feeling may still exist in 
 the minds of some men, it is no longer a factor which needs 
 to be seriously considered. 
 
 While Hamilton does not seem to have rested his objec- 
 tions to the general government's concerning itself with the 
 encouragement of agriculture on constitutional grounds, 
 there were not lacking those who did believe that the as- 
 sumption of a function so obviously of local concern was 
 clearly outside the authority and powers granted in the 
 Constitution. Even Washington, who was undoubtedly the 
 most consistent and influential of the earlier advocates of 
 federal encouragement of agriculture, never seemed to be 
 entirely certain as to his constitutional position, particularly 
 as to the expenditure of funds- for this purpose. 
 
 In a letter to Hamilton in October 1791, he wrote: 
 
 How far in addition to the several matters mentioned in that letter 
 would there be propriety, do you think, in suggesting the policy of 
 encouraging the growth of cotton and hemp in such parts of the 
 United States as are adapted to the culture of them? The advan- 
 tages, which would result to this country from the encouragement 
 of these articles for home manufacture, I have no doubt of ; but how 
 
 »The Federalist (ed. Ford), no. 17, p. 93. Later Hamilton seems 
 to have changed his opinions to some extent. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 1 1 
 
 far would bounties on them come within the powers of the general 
 government, or it might comport with the temper of the times to 
 expend money for such purposes, is necessary to be considered, and 
 without a bounty, I know of no means by which they can be effec- 
 tually encouraged.* 
 
 If Washington had doubts as to the authority of Congress 
 to appropriate money for the promotion of agriculture,.there 
 was no such doubt in the mind of Jefferson. In a letter to 
 Livingston in February, 1801, he wrote: 
 
 I have on several occasions been led to think on some means of 
 uniting the state agricultural societies into a central society: and 
 lately it has been pressed from England with a view to cooperation 
 with their board of agriculture. You know some have proposed to 
 Congress to incorporate such a society. I am against that, because 
 I think Congress cannot find in all the enumerated powers any one 
 which authorizes the act, much less the giving of public money to 
 that use. I beUeve too if they had the power, it would soon be used 
 for no other purpose than to buy with sinecures useful partisans. 
 I believe it will thrive best if left to itself as the Philosophical 
 societies are.^ 
 
 It is not the intention to enter upon a discussion of the 
 general question of the constitutionality of agricuhural legis- 
 lation, except to point out briefly the influence of this factor 
 in determining the progress of such legislation. It is 
 perhaps sufficient to say that from the earliest history of 
 our government up to the present time,^ legislators and 
 students have questioned the constitutional right of Con- 
 gress to authorize investigative and experimental work re- 
 lating to agriculture. Such authority as exists is to be 
 found in article i, section 8, clause i.'^ This particular 
 point does not appear to have been adjudicated by the 
 courts ; but it seems safe to assume that, should the matter 
 be seriously questioned, the practice of Congress in making 
 appropriations for this purpose for the past eighty years 
 would be given great weight by the courts.' 
 
 * Writings of George Washington (ed. W. C. Ford), vol. xii, p. 84. 
 >> Writings of Thomas Jefferson (ed. P. L. Ford), vol. vii, p. 492. 
 
 ' For a recent discussion, see Am. Law Rev., vol. xxx, pp. 787-790. 
 
 ^ " Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, im- 
 posts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common de- 
 fense and general welfare of the United States." 
 
 * Stuart V. Laird ; Cranch 299 ; Marshall Field Co. v. Clark ; 43 
 U. S. 649, 683. 
 
12 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 Most of the regulatory laws administered by the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture are based on the power of Congress, 
 under article 8, section 8, generally known as the "com- 
 merce clause." Several of these acts have been passed 
 upon by the courts, and, for the most part, they have been 
 upheld. The validity of the food and drugs act has been 
 specifically recognized by the Supreme Court.® 
 
 Another factor which seems to have been of considerable 
 importance in retarding the granting of full recognition to 
 agriculture was the feeling, or perhaps, the fear, that when 
 this step was once taken, there was no definable limit beyond 
 which this new type of governmental activity might not go. 
 If the farming interests of the country were to be per- 
 mitted to have a representative in the President's Cabinet, 
 would it be possible to deny such recognition to commerce, 
 to mining, to manufacture, or to labor? And if all these 
 were to be given seats at the President's Council table, would 
 not that body become so large and unwieldy as to render 
 it inefficient as an aid to the President ? That this fear was 
 not wholly unfounded is shown by the subsequent establish- 
 ment of the Departments of Commerce and of Labor. 
 
 There was, moreover, a rather general feeling, particu- 
 larly among those not directly interested in agriculture, that 
 the very favorable natural conditions with which that in- 
 dustry was surrounded in this country, made government 
 aid or other artificial stimulus entirely unnecessary, if not 
 undesirable. 
 
 Early Agricultural Legislation 
 
 In the eighteenth century, the ideal colony was the one 
 whose products did not in any way compete with those of 
 the mother country. In their economic pursuits, mother 
 country and colony were to be mutually complementary. 
 " The aim was to create a self-sufiScient commercial empire, 
 which, while independent of competing European powers, 
 would be able to make them dependent on it."^" 
 
 9 Hipolite Egg Co. v. United States, 220 U. S. 45. 
 
 ^0 G. L. Beer, British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, p. 134. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 1 3 
 
 While the continental colonies of Britain were a good 
 market for British manufacturers, they also produced agri- 
 cultural products which duplicated those of England. So 
 long, then, as England remained primarily an agricultural 
 country, and the older idea of empire persisted, it could 
 hardly be expected that Parliament would do very much for 
 the encouragement of that industry in America. Despite 
 this condition, however, both the home government and 
 several of the colonial legislatures granted small sums of 
 money from time to time for the promotion of various agri- 
 cultural projects. For the most part, these were not likely 
 to compete with home products. As early as 1622, the Gov- 
 ernment of James I tried to encourage the growing of mul- 
 berry trees and the breeding of silkworms in Virginia; in 
 1642, the general court of Massachusetts authorized the 
 payment of premiums for the best types of sheep produced 
 in the colony. From 1633 to 1643 Parliament granted six 
 hundred thousand dollars to promote the growing of indigo 
 and other crops in Georgia. By the time of the Revolution, 
 England had become primarily a manufacturing country and 
 the more modern view that the colonies were to furnish a 
 market for home manufacture had become the dominant 
 one. Had not this political change occurred, it is more than 
 probable that agriculture would have received much greater 
 governmental aid, not only to supplement the mother 
 country's declining agricultural production, but to keep the 
 colonists diverted from manufacturing. 
 
 During the ten years immediately following the establish- 
 ment of the Government under the Constitution, Washing- 
 ton was undoubtedly the most ardent and influential advo- 
 cate of governmental aid for the promotion of agriculture. 
 Even when the affairs of state seemed to be most pressing, 
 he found time to speak and write about it, both in an official 
 and a private capacity. In the course of his first annual 
 message to Congress, he referred to agriculture as a pursuit 
 which should be encouraged along with commerce and 
 manufactures.^^ At this time, Washington seems to have 
 
 11 Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vol. i, p. 66. 
 
14 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 had no very clear notion as to what form such encourage- 
 ment might take. 
 
 In 1793, the British government, through the earnest 
 efforts of Sir John Sinclair, at that time a member of Parlia- 
 ment, rather reluctantly consented to the establishment of a 
 central board of agriculture. Sir John was made president 
 of this board, and under his guidance, it seems to have been 
 successful until 1817 when, through failure of appropria- 
 tions, it went out of existence. 
 
 It was due to the example of this board and the subse- 
 quent correspondence between himself and Sinclair that 
 Washington, in his last annual message to Congress in 1796, 
 was able to make a much more urgent and definite appeal in 
 behalf of agriculture. In this message he said: 
 
 It will not be doubted that with reference either to individual or 
 national welfare agriculture is of primary importance. In propor- 
 tion as nations advance in population and other circumstances of 
 maturity this truth becomes more apparent, and renders the cultiva- 
 tion of the soil more and more an object of public patronage. In- 
 stitutions for promoting it grow up, supported by the public purse ; 
 and to what object can it be dedicated with greater propriety? 
 Among the means which have been employed to this end none have 
 been attended with greater success than the establishment of boards 
 (composed of proper characters) charged with collecting and dif- 
 fusing information, enabled by premiums and small pecuniary aids 
 to encourage and assist a soirit of discovery and improvement by 
 stimulating to enterprise and experiment, and by drawing to a 
 common center the results everywhere of individual skill and ob- 
 servation and spreading them thence over the whole nation. Experi- 
 ence accordingly has shown that they are very cheap instruments of 
 immense national benefits.i^ 
 
 This part of Washington's message was favorably re- 
 ceived in both branches of Congress. In the House of 
 Representatives, it was referred to a committee which re- 
 ported, recommending a plan, the principal parts of which 
 were, that an agricultural society consisting of congressmen, 
 federal judges, heads of departments, and such other 
 persons as might be eligible be established dt the seat of 
 government. Annual meetings were to be held at which a 
 President and secretary and a board of not more than thirty 
 persons — to be called a "Board of Agriculture" — were to 
 
 12 Ibid., vol. i, p. 202. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 1 5 
 
 be chosen. Only the secretary's salary and expenses were 
 to be paid out of the public treasury, and if the state of the 
 treasury was such as to make this seem inadvisable, not even 
 these were to be paid by the Government. 
 
 The report of the committee was referred to a committee 
 of the whole to be brought up the next Monday, but it be- 
 came confused with a discussion of direct taxes and was 
 never brought up.^' 
 
 During the next twenty years, there seems to have been 
 no more definite proposals in Congress for extending the 
 aid of the government to agriculture; but in 1817, Repre- 
 sentative Hulbert presented a petition of the Berkshire As- 
 sociation for the promotion of agriculture and manufactur- 
 ing in Massachusetts, praying " that the aid of the National 
 Government may be extended to the promotion of the in- 
 terests of agriculture and manufacturing either by the estab- 
 lishment of a national board or by such other means as in 
 the wisdom of Congress may seem meet and proper." This 
 petition was referred to a select committee and was never 
 again revived.^* For the next twenty years, the activity of 
 Congress with respect to agriculture was practically limited 
 to the appointment of a committee on agriculture in the 
 House in 1820,^^ and the appointment of a similar committee 
 in the Senate in 1825.^° Both of these still exist and are 
 now very important committees ; but at the time they were 
 created they seem to have been little more than convenient 
 repositories for such petitions, memorials or other docu- 
 ments relating to agriculture as might come before Congress. 
 
 There was enacted, however, during this period, such 
 legislation as was necessary in the development of our public 
 lands policy. While this legislation affected the develop- 
 ment of agriculture, as indeed it did the entire history of 
 the nation ; it cannot be said that the public lands policy of 
 Congress had as its aim the promotion of the interests of 
 
 13 Annals of Cong., 4th Cong., 2d sess., p. 1835. 
 
 1* Ibid., 14th Cong., 2d sess., pt. i, p. 769. 
 
 i" Ibid., i6th Cong., ist sess., pt. 2, p. 2179. 
 
 18 Register of Debates in Congress, 19th Cong., ist sess., cols. S, 7. 
 
1 6 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 that part of the population which was engaged in farming. 
 The public land laws formed then, as they do now, a body 
 of legislation quite distinct from that which has later been 
 enacted directly in the interest of the agricultural class. 
 
 The almost complete apathy of Congress, during the first 
 sixty years of our history, toward lending the aid of the 
 Government to the promotion of agriculture stands out in 
 marked contrast to the attitude of that body today. Such 
 an attitude is explainable only by the absence of any wide- 
 spread or organized demand for such legislation; for no 
 doubt the congressman then, as now, had 'an ear to the 
 ground.' With a liberal public land policy, with an abun- 
 dance of virgin soil and with the raw products of agricul- 
 ture comparatively unimportant in domestic commerce, the 
 life of the man who desired to till the soil was a relatively 
 free and independent one during the first half of the nine- 
 teenth century. The period of 'scientific agriculture' had 
 not yet begun. 
 
 However, if Congress was content during these early 
 years to let the business of the farmer follow its natural 
 course, or receive such aid as it might from the various 
 states aad localities, there was another branch of the 
 federal government whose activities in this field were 
 destined to have a marked influence on the future course of 
 events. Following the example set by Franklin while he 
 was a representative of Pennsylvania in England, American 
 consuls, after the Revolution, adopted the practice of send- 
 ing home specimens of foreign seeds, plants and domestic 
 animals which might be used to enrich and diversify the 
 agricultural production of the United States. At first this 
 practice was largely extra-official, but later it was made a 
 part of the duty of these officers. For several years, there 
 does not appear to have been any regular agency designated 
 to receive and dispense these contributions. 
 
 In 1836, Henry L. Ellsworth, then Commissioner of 
 Patents (at this time the Patent Office was in the Depart- 
 ment of State), assumed the responsibility, independent of 
 
INTRODUCTORY 1 7 
 
 his office, of receiving and distributing to farmers through- 
 out the country such seeds, plants and animals as were re- 
 ceived from consular officers or other sources. In his re- 
 port the following year, he strongly urged upon Congress 
 the desirability of creating a suitable depository to care for 
 this increasing business.^^ Two years later, and largely as 
 a result of Mr. Ellsworth's efforts. Congress appropriated 
 one thousand dollars for "the collection of agricultural 
 statistics, and for other agricultural purposes."^* This ap- 
 propriation, small as it was, marks the real beginning of 
 what has since become a great national enterprise. 
 
 Fifty Years of Development, 1839-1889 
 
 This meager appropriation made in 1839 was repeated in 
 1842, the amount was doubled in 1844, and, since the latter 
 year, the item, "Collecting Agricultural Statistics," has 
 formed a part of the annual appropriations of Congress. 
 While the collection and distribution of seeds and plants was 
 not specifically provided for in the appropriation, that func- 
 tion and the collection and publication of agricultural statis- 
 tics constituted the chief activities carried on in the interest 
 of agriculture by the federal government for the succeeding 
 twenty years. From 1852, the purchase and distribution of 
 seeds was specifically provided for. 
 
 During the latter part of this period, small additional 
 appropriations were made from time to time for the in- 
 vestigation of special subjects. Such were the appropria- 
 tions of one thousand dollars in 1850 for chemical analyses 
 of vegetable substances,^' and three thousand five hundred 
 dollars in 1858 for the collection and publication of informa- 
 tion relating to the consumption of cotton in the various 
 countries of the world.^" The expenditure of these various 
 funds as well as that of the regular annual appropriations 
 
 "2Sth Cong., 2d sess., H. Doc. no. 112. 
 " Stat. L., pp. 353-354. 
 " g Stat. L., p. 364. 
 20 II Stat. L., p. 226. 
 
1 8 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 continued under the direction of the Commissioner of 
 Patents until 1862. 
 
 Even after Congress had definitely committed itself, in 
 this small way, to a policy of utilizing public funds for the 
 aid and encouragement of agriculture, there was no immedi- 
 ate and popular demand for an extension of this activity. 
 >>^However, there were not lacking progressive farmers and 
 business men who looked to the future and saw the need of 
 a better and more scientific system of farming than that 
 generally practiced in this country. Several years prior to 
 the period about which we are now speaking, such men, 
 many of whom were what might be called, 'gentlemen 
 farmers,' whose leisure gave them opportunity for thought 
 and reflection, and whose social positions gave their efiforts 
 added weight, were instrumental in promoting and organiz- 
 ing local and state agricultural societies and associations. 
 Such were the Philadelphia Society for Promoting Agricul- 
 ture, organized in 1785 and incorporated in 1809; the 
 Charleston (S. C.) Society for the Promotion of Agricul- 
 ture ; the Pennsylvania Society of Agriculture, organized in 
 1808; and the Berkshire Agricultural Society in western 
 Massachusetts, organized in 1810, chiefly through the efforts 
 of Elkanah Watson.^^ It was the last of these, as we have 
 seen, which succeeded in focusing the attention of Congress 
 in 181 7, at least momentarily, upon the need of some kind 
 of national agricultural institution. 
 
 These societies grew rapidly both in number and member- 
 ship. In 1852, it was estimated that there were approxi- 
 mately three hundred such organizations scattered over all 
 the settled portions of the country .^^ By 1861, the number 
 had reached almost a thousand.^^ The first of these to 
 reach more than state-wide importance was the Columbian 
 Agricultural Society with headquarters at Washington. 
 While its existence was very brief (1809-18x5), it enlisted' 
 
 21 Bailey, Cyclopedia of American Agriculture, vol. iv, p. 291 ff. 
 
 22 Journal of the U. S. Agricultural Society, vol. i, p. 3. 
 
 23 The Quarterly Journal of Agriculture (Washington), vol. viii, 
 p. 26. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 1 9 
 
 the patronage of many influential men and was successful in 
 making available a great deal of valuable information.^* 
 
 For forty years after the War of 1812 had terminated 
 the brief existence of the Columbian Society, there does not 
 appear to have been any central organization which was 
 really representative of any very considerable part of the 
 interests of the agricultural class of the country. During 
 this period, agriculture, no less than other American indus- 
 tries, had been profoundly afifected by the great changes 
 that had taken place. The unprecedented westward expan- 
 sion called by some the most significant fact in American 
 history ; the wonderful development of transportation facili- 
 ties ; the enormous influx of immigration ; the invention and 
 use of machinery ; the extensive entry of farm products into 
 commerce both domestic and foreign; — these and other 
 factors were destined to bring about a new era for agricul- 
 ture in the United States and to bring the rural element in 
 our society directly into contact with the political life and 
 thought of the nation. 
 
 It is not surprising, then, that when a call was sent out 
 in 1852 for a national convention of agriculturalists to meet 
 in Washington, for the purpose of forming a national agri- 
 cultural society, it should have met with a general and ready 
 response. One hundred and fifty delegates representing 
 numerous societies met in June of the same year and formed 
 the proposed national organization. The Hon. Marshall P. 
 Wilder of Boston was elected as the first president. 
 
 A somewhat similar attempt had been made in 1841 to 
 form a national society. The principal immediate objective 
 in view was the securing of all, or part, of the Smithson 
 bequest, recently received from England; but when this 
 failed the organization which had been formed quietly went 
 out of existence, after holding only one annual meeting. 
 
 ■From the first, the United States Agricultural Society, 
 organized in 1852, numbered among its membership many 
 men of national prominence. Many others of equal promi- 
 
 24 Ibid., vol. vii, p. 105 ff. 
 
20 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 nence, including the President and Ex-Presidents of the 
 United States, were interested enough in its work to read 
 and contribute to its publications, and to address its meet- 
 ings. During the ten years of its existence (1852-1862), 
 this society was without doubt by far the most potent factor 
 in directing attention, both official and private, to the agri- 
 cultural needs of the time. The society recorded itself, time 
 after time, as favoring the establishment of a national de- 
 partment of agriculture to be equal in every respect to the 
 other great executive departments. Presidents, in their 
 messages to Congress, had frequently renewed the request 
 of Washington, that some governmental machinery should 
 be established to care for and promote the interests of agri- 
 culture ;^' but it is to the work and influence of the United 
 States Agricultural Society, more than anything else, that we 
 vJ are indebted for the passage on May 15, 1862, of an Act 
 establishing an independent organization called the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture. 
 
 This measure, like so many others passed by Congress, 
 was a compromise between two contending forces. While 
 the new establishment was called a department and was 
 independent of any of the existing administrative units, it 
 was to be under the direction of a Commissioner, appointed 
 by the President. It did not rank with the so-called execu- 
 tive departments, and its principal officer was not entitled 
 to a place in the President's • Cabinet Council. To this 
 extent it fell considerably short of the expectations of the 
 most enthusiastic proponents of the scheme. Nevertheless, 
 all were agreed that the action taken was a long step toward 
 the proper recognition of the great agricultural interests of 
 the country, and marked the beginning of a new era for this 
 industry. 
 
 It is remarkable that such legislation could have been 
 exacted from Congress during what was, perhaps, the most 
 
 25 President Taylor in 1849, Messages and Papers, vol. v, p. 18, 
 President Fillmore in 1851, Ibid., vol. v, p. 127, and President Lin- 
 coln, Ibid., vol. V, p. 398. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 2 1 
 
 critical period of the Civil War. That the new Republican 
 party, which had just come into full power, was in close 
 alliance with the farming interests of the North is further 
 attested by the passage, in this same year, of two other 
 far-reaching acts in the interests of agriculture: that of 
 June, 1862, called the 'Morrill Act,' after its principal 
 sponsor in the Senate, granting large tracts of public lands 
 for the establishment of an agricultural college in each of 
 the States ; and the homestead law, which provided for giv- 
 ing public land to the individual who had occupied and im- 
 proved it, instead of paying a purchase price. 
 
 The act of May 15, 1862,^° generally known as the 'or- 
 ganic act,' states, after the usual introduction and provision 
 for the establishment of a Department of Agriculture, as 
 already indicated, that the general designs and duties of such 
 department " shall be to acquire and to dififuse among the 
 people of the United States useful information on subjects 
 connected with agriculture in the most general and compre- 
 hensive sense of that word, and to procure, propagate, and 
 distribute among the people new and valuable seeds and 
 plants." The act further provides for the appointment of a 
 Commissioner of Agriculture at a salary of three thousand 
 dollars and a chief clerk at two thousand dollars, and briefly 
 outlines the duties and procedure of these ofificers. 
 
 The new department was established and began its opera- 
 tions at once. The agricultural appropriation act for the 
 fiscal year 1863 carried eighty thousand dollars, and the 
 entire amount was expended. 
 
 That the work of the department found favor with the 
 people and Congress from the beginning is shown by the 
 fact that its appropriations were increased from year to 
 year even while the war continued. When peace was estab- 
 lished, the department's activities soon began to expand to 
 cover new fields and to include new subjects, some of which 
 were probably never contemplated by those who had sanc- 
 tioned the organic act, broad and general as were some of 
 
 28 12 Stat. L. 387. 
 
22 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 the terms of that measure. Chief among these new activi- 
 ties were the study of diseases and insects injurious to 
 plants and domestic animals, and the best means of eradicat- 
 ing or suppressing such diseases and insect pests f investi- 
 gating the culture and manufacture of tea, silk, cotton, 
 tobacco, and sugar ;^' introducing new forage plants and 
 grasses to improve grazing conditions in arid sections;"' 
 studying the effects of the adulteration of various foods ;'" 
 collecting statistics relating to the manufacture and food 
 value of margarine, butterine, and other butter substitutes f^ 
 and experimenting in the field of argicultural chemistry.^* 
 
 By 1884, the work of the Department relating to the pro- 
 tection and improvement of the live stock industry of the 
 country had become so extensive that Congress deemed it 
 advisable to create a n6w bureau, called the Bureau of 
 Animal Industry, to have special charge of this work. This 
 bureau was to be placed under the immediate direction of 
 a veterinary surgeon, appointed by the Commissioner of 
 Agriculture.'^ It is noteworthy that this law was the first 
 to confer upon the Department power to regulate the con- 
 duct of citizens, a power which is very important in the per- 
 formance of its present functions. 
 
 The first appropriation for the investigation of subjects 
 relating to forestry was made in 1876.^* Ten years later, a 
 division was established in the Department to further these 
 investigations. 
 
 One writer^' has said that the year 1887 marks the begin- 
 ning of a new stage in the development of American agricul- 
 
 2' 15 Stat. 283, 298; 20 Stat. L. 206, 240; 24 Stat. L. 100. 
 
 *8 2i Stat. L. 292, 294; 22 Stat. L. 408, 410; 12 Stat. L. 682, 691; 
 13 Stat. L. 22, 23 ; 21 Stat. L. 292, 295. 
 
 29 24 Stat. L. 683. 
 
 8«24 Stat. L. 100. 
 
 «i22 Stat. L. 89, 90. 
 
 *2 12 Stat. L. 683. For these and other acts see, " Laws applicable 
 to the Department of Agriculture," compiled by Otis H. Gates, under 
 the direction of the Solicitor of the Department. 
 
 S3 23 Stat. L. 31. 
 
 "19 Stat. L. 143. 
 
 *s T. N. Carver, Bailey's Cyclopedia of American Agriculture, 
 vol. iv, p. 68. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 23 
 
 ture, primarily because it was in this year that the so-called 
 Hatch Act, providing for the establishment of agricultural 
 experiment stations, was passed by Congress. This was the 
 beginning of a much more comprehensive application of ex- 
 perimental science in the field of agriculture than had been 
 heretofore attempted. 
 
 Although the work of the Department thus continued to 
 grow and expand, and correspondingly increased amounts 
 of public funds were appropriated from year to year, the 
 more ardent and enthusiastic leaders and representatives of 
 agricultural associations and interests were not satisfied. 
 At least as early as 1881,'" agitation was renewed in Con- 
 gress for the placing of the Department of Agriculture on 
 a plane of equality with the other executive departments, 
 with a secretary entitled to a place in the President's 
 Cabinet. 
 
 Numerous petitions and memorials poured into Congress. 
 The agitation was greatly accentuated by the granger and 
 populist movements of this period. Much hope seemed to 
 center in having a representative of the farming class in the 
 immediate council of the President. 
 
 Attention has already been directed to the apprehension 
 on the part of some members of Congress of the danger of 
 establishing the precedent of giving to any special interest 
 a place in the President's Cabinet. " Class legislation " the 
 proposal was called by some. This argument was re- 
 peatedly brought forward during the years 1881 to 1889. 
 Despite this and other objections. Congress finally yielded, 
 and a bill raising the Department of Agriculture to the grade 
 of an executive department with a Secretary of cabinet rank 
 was passed, and approved by the President, February 9, 
 1889. All existing laws pertaining to the Department re- 
 mained substantially as before. Two days later President 
 Cleveland nominated Norman J. Colman, the Commissioner 
 of Agriculture, as the first Secretary of Agriculture. The 
 nomination was confirmed by the Senate on February 13. 
 
 ^8 Congressional Record, vol. xix, 4479. 
 
24 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTUEE 
 
 Thus another victory had been won by the persistent and, 
 for the most part, intelligent expression of public opinion. 
 
 Period of Expansion, 1889 to 191 7 
 
 Agriculture has been defined as "the art or science of 
 cultivating the ground, especially in fields or in large quanti- 
 ties, including the preservation of the soil, the planting of 
 seeds, the raising and harvesting of crops, and the rearing, 
 feeding, and management of live-stock."^^ The organic act 
 of 1862, which is still in effect, authorizes the Department 
 " to acquire and diffuse . . . useful information on subjects 
 connected with agriculture in the most general and compre- 
 hensive sense of the word . . . ." 
 
 Even with this broad scope of activity, it is difficult to see 
 how some of the many laws which are now administered 
 by the Department of Agriculture can logically be classed 
 as agricultural legislation. On the other hand, it is asserted 
 by an eminent authority,^^ that extensive and far-reaching 
 as the operations of the Department now are, they do not 
 yet in all respects cover the field marked out for it in its 
 charter. 
 
 The period which we are now considering, more than any 
 previous one jn American history, is characterized by the 
 wide-spread assertion, on the part of the federal govern- 
 ment, of what has been called its police power; that is, its 
 power to regulate and supervise the conduct of individuals 
 in the interest of the general welfare of society. Much of 
 this type of legislation fills the modem statute books of the 
 lesser units of government as well. Why there should have 
 been such a great demand for legislation of this character 
 we shall not stop to consider in detail. The great number 
 of health and safety laws in recent years, according to Pro- 
 fessor Freund, "represents less a change of legislative 
 policy than a change of conditions that had to be met by 
 
 *^ Webster's Unabridged Dictionary, quoted in Dillard v. Webb, 
 Ala. 474. 
 
 *8 A. C. True in Annals of American Academy of Political and 
 Social Sciences, vol. xi, p. 10. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 25 
 
 an extension of state control ";°* or, as Professor Turner 
 says, it was the voice of the insurgent West "demanding 
 increase of federal authority to curb the special interests, 
 the powerful industrial organizations, and the monopolies, 
 for the sake of the conservation of our natural resources 
 and the preservation of American democracy."*" 
 
 It is not surprising, then, to find that of the very con- 
 siderable number of recent laws, with whose administration 
 the Department of Agriculture has been charged, a very 
 large proportion of them should be of the regulatory type, 
 or at least concerned with general social welfare. While 
 the work of the Department has been and still is, primarily 
 educational and investigational, there can be no doubt that 
 the more recent expansion of its activities has been on the 
 side of the regulation of the conduct of citizens. May we 
 not say, then, that instead of this Department being an 
 anomaly among the so-called political departments, as was 
 feared by many at the time of its establishment, it is itself 
 rapidly becoming one of them? 
 
 As already indicated, the regulatory work of the Depart- 
 ment was inaugurated with the establishment of the Bureau 
 of Animal Industry by special act of Congress in 1884. 
 The primary intent of this act was to prevent the foreign 
 exportation or interstate shipments of live stock affected 
 with contagious, infectious, or communicable diseases. For 
 a number of years this law was administered jointly by the 
 Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Agriculture. 
 By act of February 2, 1903," this authority was conferred 
 exclusively on the latter of these officers, and his powers to 
 prevent the spread of contagious diseases of animals were 
 considerably extended. Authority was granted the Secre- 
 tary of Agriculture in 1890*^ to inspect live stock imported 
 into this country and prohibit the landing of any found to 
 
 *9 Ernst Fretmd, Standards of American Legislation, p. 20. 
 **F. J. Turner, "Social Forces in American History," in Amer- 
 ican Historical Review, vol. xvi, no. 2, p. 223. 
 *i32 Stat. L. 791. 
 <2 26 Stat. L. 414. 
 
26 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 be infected with dangerous diseases or of any which had 
 recently been exposed to such diseases. The so-called cattle 
 quarantine act/^ which authorizes the Secretary of Agri- 
 culture to establish a quarantine in any state or district 
 found to be infected with contagious diseases of animals, 
 has the same general object, that is, the protection of the 
 live stock industry. 
 
 One very potent force in bringing about this legislation 
 was the prohibitions that had been established by foreign 
 countries against American live stock and animal products 
 and the consequent injury to the live stock business. 
 
 That the measures taken were effective is attested by 
 President Harrison who said in his message to Congress in 
 December, 1891 : 
 
 If the establishment of the Department of Agriculture was re- 
 garded by any one as a mere concession to the unenlightened demand 
 of a worthy class of people, that impression has been most effectually 
 removed by the great results already obtained. . . . The inspection 
 by this Department of cattle and pork products intended for ship- 
 ment abroad has been the basis of the success which has attended 
 our efforts to secure the removal of the restrictions maintained by 
 European governments.** 
 
 Two other measures which relate directly to the live stock 
 industry are the so-called twenty-eight hour law,*'* and the 
 virus act.*' The former of these is not so much intended 
 to foster the live stock industry as to protect the animals 
 themselves. Its enactment was brought about largely as a 
 result of the work of humane societies. Briefly, it pro- 
 hibits the confinement in railroad cars and boats of all 
 animals in course of interstate transit for a period longer 
 than twenty-eight hours without being unloaded for feed, 
 water, and rest for at least five hours, except that, upon 
 written request in advance, the period may be extended to 
 thirty-six hours. Carriers may relieve themselves from the 
 operation of this law by supplying the required facilities for 
 
 *3 Act of March 3, 1905, 33 Stat. L. 1264. 
 ** Messages and Papers, vol. ix, p. 206. 
 *" Act of June 29, 1906, 34 Stat. L. 607. 
 
 *8 Act of July I, 1902, 32 Stat. L. 728; Act of Mar. 4, 1913, 37 Stat. 
 L. 828. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 27 
 
 feeding and watering on board. The virus act regulates 
 the importation and interstate shipment of viruses and simi- 
 lar remedies for the treatment of animal diseases. While 
 most of these laws were enacted primarily to promote the 
 raising of live stock, to the extent that they are effective in 
 increasing the consumable products from this source and 
 improving the quality, they are of general benefit. 
 
 By no means all of the recent regulatory measures relate 
 directly to the animal industry. The insecticide act,*'' the 
 plant quarantine act,** and the seed importation act,*' have 
 for their purpose the encouraging and protection of the 
 business of growing plants and crops. The insecticide act 
 is intended to prohibit the misbranding or adulteration of 
 insecticides and fungicides manufactured in territory imme- 
 diately subject to the United States or which moves in inter- 
 state commerce. The plant quarantine act is designed to 
 prevent the spread of plant diseases by authorizing the 
 regulation of importations of plants and the establishment of 
 quarantines in infected districts. The seed importation act 
 is intended, as the title suggests, to prohibit the importation 
 of seeds which are adulterated or which are for any other 
 "reason unfit for use. 
 
 The so-called Lacey Act,'" and the migratory bird act^^ 
 are primarily intended to assist the States in conserving the 
 game supply, to protect insectivorous and other birds which 
 are beneficial to agriculture, and to prevent the introduction 
 of foreign animals or birds that would be injurious to plant 
 life. 
 
 Two other regulatory laws, which have been committed to 
 the Department of Agriculture for administrative purposes, 
 are the meat inspection act^^ and the well known food and 
 drugs act of June 30, 1906.°* It need hardly be said that 
 
 *'' Act of April 26, 1910, 36 Stat. L. 331. 
 *s Act of Aug. 20, 1912, 37 Stat L. 315. 
 *9 Act of Aug. 24, 1912, 37 Stat. L. 506. 
 
 so Act of May 25, 1900, 31 Stat. L. 187 ; Act of March 4, 1909, 35 
 Stat. L. 1088, 1 137 
 SI Act of March 4, 1913, 37 Stat. L. 828, 847. 
 "2 Act of June 30, 1906, 34 Stat. L. 669, 674. 
 63 34 Stat. L. 768. 
 
28 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 both of these are primarily designed as health measures and 
 as such relate no more to the agricultural class than to any 
 other. These measures form an important part of that 
 body of restrictive legislation which marks the second ad- 
 ministration of President Roosevelt as a period of moral 
 awakening. They are administered by the Department of 
 Agriculture simply because that department, by reason of its 
 facilities, was better prepared for the task than any other. 
 A summary of these laws will be given in another chapter."* 
 
 The cotton futures act, which was enacted in 191 4 and 
 re-enacted with amendments in 1917, is a regulatory meas- 
 ure of a somewhat different character from those which 
 have previously been mentioned. Its object is to regulate 
 and supervise trading in cotton, particularly future trading ; 
 but instead of fixing penalties, it levies a tax which must 
 be paid under certain conditions. Thus it is incidentally a 
 revenue measure, and, as such, finds its constitutional basis 
 in the taxing power of Congress. More will be said later 
 of its content and enforcement.^" 
 
 Not all of the laws which have been committed for ad- 
 ministrative purposes to the Department of Agriculture, 
 during the period now under consideration, have been of the 
 regulatory or police type. Several very important educa- 
 tional and constructive measures have been enacted by Con- 
 gress and added to the work of the Department. Some of 
 these, particularly those that have been enacted in very re- 
 cent years, involve varying degrees of cooperation on the 
 part of the respective States. 
 
 The work of the agricultural colleges established under 
 the land grant act of 1862 was so favorably received that a 
 further endowment of public funds amounting to $25,000 a 
 year for each college was made in 1890. Both of these acts 
 are under the administration of the Department of the 
 Interior, but they represent very important agricultural 
 legislation."' 
 
 "* Chapter iv. 
 
 B5 Ibid. 
 
 8626 Stat. L. 419. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 29 
 
 The Hatch Act of 1887, which did so much to place agri- 
 culture on a higher basis by providing for the establishment 
 of experiment stations throughout the States, was supple- 
 mented in 1906 by what is known as the Adams Act, after 
 its chief sponsor, Henry C. Adams. Under this act the 
 amount of money to be granted to each State was doubled 
 so that it now aggregates $30,000 per annum for each State.®' 
 
 As early as 1876, the Department had begun the study 
 of problems relating to forestry. Under an act of Con- 
 gress, approved February i, 1905,®* the administration of 
 the vast forest reserves in the United States was transferred 
 from the Department of the Interior to the Department of 
 Agriculture. This work has continued to grow, both in 
 scope and importance, as the area of forest reserves has been 
 increased and the need for conserving and enlarging our 
 timber resources has been more clearly discerned. 
 
 Perhaps the most significant and far-reaching piece of 
 agricultural legislation in recent years is that of May 8, 
 1914, commonly, known as the Smith-Lever Act.°° By the 
 year 1923, there will be appropriated under this law an 
 annual sum exceeding five million dollars, to be expended in 
 cooperation with state institutions, for practical instruction 
 and demonstration in agriculture and home economics. 
 Under the terms of the act, this large sum must be supple- 
 mented by at least an equal amount appropriated by or on 
 behalf of the States. Wisely expended, siich. a sum of 
 money should make this measure, "the greatest piece of 
 agricultural legislation ever enacted by any country." 
 
 Another cooperative law of first rate importance is that 
 known as the Federal Aid Road Act, approved July 11, 
 1916.°" The administration of these and other measures 
 involving cooperation between the Department of Agricul- 
 ture and other governmental agencies will be treated in 
 another chapter.^^ 
 
 5'^ 34 Stat. L. 63. 
 5833 Stat. L. 628. 
 6938 Stat. L. 372. 
 
 80 39 Stat. L. 355. 
 
 81 Chapter iii. 
 
30 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 The United States Grain Standards Act,''^ authorizing 
 and directing the Secretary of Agriculture to determine and 
 establish official standards to be used in interstate and for- 
 eign commerce in grains, and the United States Warehouse 
 Act,«» authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to issue 
 licenses to, and require bonds from, owners or managers of 
 warehouses used for the storage of agricultural products, 
 who desire to conduct their business under federal control, 
 furnish striking evidence of the ever increasing scope of the 
 central government in general, and of the Department of 
 Agriculture in particular. 
 
 When Congress, as a part of the legislative policy it has 
 adopted, specifically authorizes and instructs an executive 
 department or officer to perform certain functions, it is, of 
 course, incumbent upon that body to appropriate the neces- 
 sary funds as the need therefor arises. Such is the case 
 with most of the statutes which have been enumerated 
 above. Very much, in fact, the major part of the work of 
 the Department of Agriculture derives its legal authority, 
 not from the enactment of permanent laws, but from the 
 appropriations that are made by Congress from year to 
 year. This is particularly true of the experimental, investi- 
 gational, and educational activities. Many divisions, and, 
 indeed, entire bureaus owe their existence to the annual 
 appropriation acts; and would cease to exist by the mere 
 failure of Congress to appropriate the necessary funds, 
 without the repeal of any existing law. 
 
 It would be outside the scope of the present study to 
 attempt to give anything like an adequate idea of the present 
 work of the Department of Agriculture when viewed as a 
 whole. Much less would it be possible to give any depend- 
 able estimate of the value of this work to the people of the 
 country. From its beginning in 1839 up to April, 1917, the 
 Department of Agriculture cost the people of the United 
 
 6239 Stat. L. 482. 
 63 39 Stat. L. 486. 
 
INTRODUCTORY 3 1 
 
 States approximately two hundred and eighty-five million 
 dollars. Various attempts have been made to show that 
 this sum is a mere bagatelle when compared with the huge 
 increase in agricultural production directly attributable to 
 better and more scientific methods of farming. That farm- 
 ing is now generally conducted on a better basis no one will 
 deny. To what extent this improvement may be credited 
 directly to the work of the Department of Agriculture is 
 more problematical. There seems to be no question, how- 
 ever, but what it has been the chief and most valuable single 
 agency. That this is the belief of those whom we elect to 
 represent us in Congress is abundantly evidenced by the 
 ever increasing number of activities with which it is charged, 
 and the ever mounting sums of public funds placed at its 
 disposal. Small as these sums may be when compared with 
 those necessary for the conduct of some of the other de- 
 partments of the Government, the rate of increase is most 
 significant.^* 
 
 Beginning with a single clerkship in the patent office in 
 1843, it now numbers its officers and employees by the thou- 
 sands. In 1917 not less than eighteen thousand seven hun- 
 dred and fifty men and women, most of them specially 
 trained for their respective tasks, were devoting their time 
 to the multitudinous duties of the Department of Agricul- 
 ture. As previously indicated, not all of the work of this 
 department is directly in the interest of agriculture and the 
 agricultural class. However, the welfare of the farming 
 industry and of those who carry it on is still, and probably 
 will continue to be, the goal and raison d'etre of this im- 
 portant agency of government. 
 
 Having briefly traced some of the forces that have been 
 
 6* In his report for 1891, Secretary Rusk said : " In concluding the 
 review of the work done under the several divisions of this Depart- 
 ment since the date of my last annual report, it gives me pleasure 
 to state, and I say this advisedly, that each one of more than a dozen 
 divisions whose work I have reviewed has returned in actual value 
 to the country during the past year far more than the entire annual 
 appropriation accorded to this Department." 
 
32 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 active in shaping what might be termed the policy of the 
 federal government toward the agricultural interests of the 
 country, and having seen how at least a part of that policy 
 has been translated by Congress into concrete laws, let us 
 now examine the kind of institution that has been de- 
 veloped and organized in order that the will of the people 
 thus translated and expressed may actually be carried into 
 effect. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 The Present Organization of the United States 
 Department of Agriculture^ 
 
 Administration has been called the " function of execu- 
 tion."^ In other words, it is the carrying out or the execu- 
 tion of the expressed will of that organ of government 
 which is authorized to say what the law shall be. For the 
 most part, it consists of applying general rules or laws to 
 individual cases, as need therefor arises. How satisfactor- 
 ily and effectively this shall be done depends, in large 
 measure, upon the character of the organization or ma- 
 chinery that has been developed for the performance of this 
 function. 
 
 The executive branch of the federal government, as is 
 well known, consists of one great hierarchy with the Presi- 
 dent of the United States at its head. While he does not 
 have the power, as we shall see later, of determining the 
 nature of the machinery that shall be instituted for making 
 effective the expressed will of the legislative body, he is held 
 responsible for its proper and efficient operation. To this 
 end he has been given an important voice in the selection 
 of those piersons upon whom he must rely, and a practically 
 unqualified power to remove from office any of these persons 
 whom he may deem unfitted for the place.^ 
 
 The Department of Agriculture, like the other federal 
 
 1 For an outline of the organization according to subdivisions and 
 functions, see Appendix I. 
 
 2 Goodnow, Comparative Administrative Law, vol. i, p. 5. 
 
 8 " Within itself the federal administration is a single administra- 
 tion. All of its subdivisions are internal ones as in the case with any 
 centralized administration; while in any decentralized administra- 
 tion, like that of the states, the organization is based upon external 
 division." (Wyman, Administrative Law, p. 187. See also Team vs. 
 Davis, 100 U. S. 257; in re Neagle, 135 U. S. i.) 
 
 3 33 
 
34 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 executive departments, and unlike the corresponding institu- 
 tions in the various States, is a smaller hierarchy within a 
 larger one, with the Secretary of Agriculture at its head. 
 It is true that there are a few of the subordinates of the 
 Secretary in whose appointment he does not share, and who 
 are therefore not subject to his power of removal. He is, 
 however, responsible to the President for the work of all of 
 his subordinates and of the department as a whole. 
 
 All of the officials of the Department of Agriculture,"" 
 except the Secretary, the Assistant Secretary, the Chief of 
 the Weather Bureau, and the Solicitor are in the classified 
 civil service. Perhaps no other department of the Govern- 
 ment is so nearly free from the evils of political appoint- 
 ments. The expert scientific and technical knowledge which 
 bureau chiefs and other important officials must have for 
 the proper performance of their duties, and the added value 
 which long and certain tenure of office gives to their serv- 
 ices, have operated to remove these positions almost entirely 
 from the domain of politics. Both Congress and the suc- 
 cessive Secretaries have very wisely allowed these men to 
 remain undisturbed irrespective of party allegiance. The 
 great majority of the appointments to office are regularly 
 made from the registers of the Civil Service Commission. 
 Even the relatively large number of technical and scientific 
 experts who, in accordance with special legislation, might 
 have been appointed outside the classified civil service, have 
 been almost invariably selected with reference to their quali- 
 fications for the work expected of them, after an examina- 
 tion prepared by representatives of the Department and 
 conducted by the Civil Service Commission. 
 
 That the elevation of the Department to the first rank of 
 governmental establishments, and its consequently close re- 
 lationship with the presidential office and with practical 
 politics, have not resulted in a departure from non-partisan 
 and scientific ideals in its work should be encouraging to all 
 who are interested in the improvement of the civil service. 
 
 The President's Cabinet, and the great executive depart- 
 
THE PRESENT ORGANIZATION 35 
 
 merits of the federal government are political and admin- 
 istrative devices which have grown up almost wholly out- 
 side of the written Constitution. It is true that in the 
 enumeration of the powers and duties of the executive 
 branch of the government, reference is made to " executive 
 departments" and to the principal officers thereof;* but 
 there is only the slightest indication as to how these depart- 
 ments are to be brought into existence and organized. In 
 speaking of the President's power of appointment the Con- 
 stitution enumerates certain officers, "and all other officers 
 of the United States whose appointnients are not herein 
 otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by 
 law." Goodnow thinks we may assumie from these clauses 
 that the men who framed the Constitution intended that 
 there should be executive departments and that the power to 
 organize them was to be vested in Congress." 
 
 The President's Cabinet, says Dr. Learned, "came into 
 being as one result of the discretionary power with which 
 the makers of the Constitution intended to endow the chief 
 magistrate. It was created by President Washington in the 
 opening years of our Government under the Constitution in 
 response to a demand of the President for a board of quali- 
 fied assistants and confidential advisers, a demand so fun- 
 damental and natural as to be felt, but not anywhere at that 
 time definitely formulated or at all clearly expressed."* 
 
 If we grant that the formation of a small advisory coun- 
 cil grew out of the immediate needs of the President for 
 such assistance when the Government was first established 
 under the Constitution, the same cannot be said of the crea- 
 tion of the executive departments of which these first 
 officers, and others of similar rank, have become the heads. 
 The power to create and organize all of the machinery of 
 government, except that which is specifically provided for 
 in the Constitution itself has from the first been assumed 
 and exercised by Congress. To what extent Congress shall 
 
 * Art. 2, sec. 2. 
 
 " Goodnow, Principles of Administrative Law of the U. S., p. 122. 
 
 « H. B. Learned, The President's Cabinet, p. 369. 
 
36 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 go in fixing and regulating the details of organization within 
 the various units of government created, is a matter which 
 lies wholly within the discretion of that body. In practice, 
 however, there seems to have been no uniform policy. In 
 some instances great care has been taken to provide, in ad- 
 vance, the exact type of organization, and to fix not only 
 the duties and powers of the head of the department, but 
 also those of his subordinates as well. In other cases, the 
 department head has merely been intrusted with certain 
 powers or charged with certain duties and the organization 
 of the machinery necessary for carrying these into effect has 
 been left almost entirely to him. However, when a per- 
 manent organization is formed as a result of administrative 
 action it generally receives legislative sanction, either ex- 
 pressed or implied, by the subsequent appropriation of 
 money for its continuance.'^ 
 
 In the law of 1862, providing for the establishment of the 
 Department of Agriculture, very little was said about the 
 kind of organization that was to be effected. Only two 
 officers were mentioned — a Commissioner of Agriculture 
 and a chief clerk. One duty of the latter was to appoint, as 
 Congress from time to time made provision therefor, chem- 1 
 ists, botanists, entomologists and other persons skilled in the 
 sciences pertaining to agriculture. As the work of the De- 
 partment expanded such persons were appointed. Gener- 
 ally, the only congressional approval obtained for such ap- 
 pointments was the appropriation of funds for the payment 
 of additional salaries and expenses upon the recommenda- 
 tion of the department head. In a similar manner, divisions, 
 and later, bureaus, were organized to carry on the principal 
 lines of work. This has not always been the case, however. 
 In some instances bureaus have been added or transferred 
 by specific legislation, as was the case in the establishment 
 of the Bureau of Animal Industry in 1884, and the transfer 
 of the Weather Bureau from the War Department to the 
 Department of Agriculture in 1891.* 
 
 "^ Goodnow, Principles of Administrative Law of the U. S., p. 7S. 
 8 26 Stat. L. 653. 
 
THE PRESENT ORGANIZATION 3/ 
 
 Prior to 191 3, by far the greater part of the work of the 
 Department, aside from its regulatory activities, was con- 
 cerned primarily with the improvement, both in quality and 
 quantity, of crop and animal production. As the result of 
 years of careful experimentation, many notable improve- 
 ments were made in the agricultural flora and fauna of the 
 country. While a great deal of money and effort had been 
 expended in trying to raise the standard of agricultural 
 science and to better the farm products, and while, ad- 
 mittedly, very much had been accomplished in this direc- 
 tion, it was the belief of the present Secretary of Agri- 
 culture, who came into office in March, 191 3, that the greater 
 part of this vast fund of accumulated information was not 
 readily available, and consequently not utilized, largely be- 
 cause of defective methods for its proper dissemination 
 among the farmers. The betterment of methods for the 
 more effective education of those engaged directly in agri- 
 culture has been, and still is, an important part of the policy 
 of the present administration. 
 
 Until very recent years, very little attention has been 
 given, either by federal or state institutions, to that phase of 
 agriculture which might be summed up under the head of 
 agricultural economics, or more specifically, the marketing 
 of farm products, rural credits and finance, and the organi- 
 zation of farmers and rural communities. There were many 
 persons who agreed with the present Secretary of Agricul- 
 ture that these problems had been neglected to the great 
 detriment of the agricultural interests of the country, and 
 that special attention should at once be given to their 
 solution." 
 
 Very largely as a result of this new attitude, and at his 
 own request, the agricultural appropriation act for the fiscal 
 year 1915 authorized and directed the Secretary of Agri- 
 culture "to prepare a plan for reorganizing, redirecting, 
 and systematizing the work of the department as the inter- 
 
 » Report of the Secretary of Agriculture, 1916, p. 9. See also 
 article on " Agricultural Organizations " in Bailey's Cyclopedia of 
 American Agriculture. 
 
38 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 ests of economical and efficient administration may re- 
 quire."" 
 
 Complying with these instructions, a plan of reorganiza- 
 tion was submitted in the Book of Estimates of appropria- 
 tions for the fiscal year 1916, the estimates for the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture for that year being based upon the pro- 
 posed plan. The recommendations were accepted by Con- 
 gress practically as submitted, and were approved by the 
 act of March 4, 191 5." 
 
 As already indicated, the object of this latest reorganiza- 
 tion was not to change radically the normal functions of the 
 department, but rather to make possible a change of empha- 
 sis among these functions. It is true that as a result of this 
 and other legislation of the last few years, new functions 
 have been added, and many older ones have been greatly 
 stimulated and enlarged; but with a few minor exceptions 
 the previously existing organization, with its bureaus, offices, 
 divisions and sections, was not changed. In a few instances 
 new designations were adopted which were intended to indi- 
 cate more clearly the principal functions of the various 
 units. The important changes that were made had to do 
 with the re-grouping and the reapportionment of the activi- 
 ties of the department. 
 
 In making these changes, four fairly distinct objects were 
 kept in view : first, the avoidance of all unnecessary duplica- 
 tion of effort ; second, the assignment of each activity to that 
 subdivision which was best adapted to the proper handling 
 of it; third, the provision of more and better facilities for 
 performing those functions which it was desired to empha- 
 size ; and fourth, the division of the activities of each bureau 
 into three distinct groups comprising, respectively, its regu- 
 latory, its research, and its educational functions. 
 
 At first glance, it might appear that a more logical group- 
 ing would have been secured by giving to certain bureaus 
 all of the regulatory work, to others all of the research work, 
 
 10 38 Stat. L. 415. 
 
 11 38 Stat. L. 1086. 
 
THE PRESENT ORGANIZATION 39 
 
 and to still others all of the educational work; but, aa we 
 shall see later, such a division would have been very unde- 
 sirable, if not impossible. 
 
 The primary subdivision in the Department of Agricul- 
 ture, as in the other federal departments, is the bureau. Not 
 all of the units of this rank are called bureaus, because of 
 the selection in some instances of designations that are in- 
 tended to indicate more clearly the functions performed. 
 For instance, the bureau which is charged with the admin- 
 istration of most of the acts of Congress involving coopera- 
 tion with the various States, is called the States Relations 
 Service. The difference, however, is merely in the name, 
 and not in its relation to the head of the department or to 
 the units of the same rank. Each bureau is under the 
 supervision of a bureau chief who is directly responsible to 
 the Secretary. In the larger bureaus, much of the admin- 
 istrative work is under the immediate direction of an assist- 
 ant chief of bureau, who, in the absence of the chief, be- 
 comes the acting head. The principal administrative units 
 within the bureau are generally known as divisions. These 
 vary in number according to the number of distinct activi- 
 ties which have been assigned to the bureau. Where the 
 work of the division is very large or diverse, this unit is in 
 turn subdivided into lesser units called sections. In some 
 instances, where the work of the section is unified, not vol- 
 uminous, and not related to the work of any division, the 
 head of the section is associated administratively directly 
 with the chief of bureau, for purposes of centering respon- 
 sibility and giving definiteness to the work, divisions and 
 sections are sometimes still further divided into^ projects. 
 These projects are immediately supervised by a project 
 leader who reports to the section or division head. 
 
 Not all of the activities of the department are grouped 
 into bureaus for administrative purposes. Those functions 
 which relate to the department as a whole have been as- 
 signed to units which although not forming a part of any 
 bureau, are ranked as divisions, whose principal officers are 
 
40 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 directly responsible to the department head. Examples of 
 this are the Division of Publications and the Division of Ac- 
 counts and Disbursements. Other activitiesi have, by law, 
 been assigned to boards composed of representatives from 
 various bureaus. Such units as this constitute anomalies in 
 the general scheme of organization. Still other activities 
 are, for various reasons, carried on by units which form in- 
 tegral parts of the Secretary's office. These subdivisions 
 are designated as offices, with appropriate names to indi- 
 cate their principal functions. 
 
 This general plan of organization, with its rather nu- 
 merous divisions and subdivisions has been criticised as con- 
 stituting too wide a gap between those officers who are di- 
 rectly engaged in doing the actual work of the department 
 and those who are responsible for the success or failure of 
 that work. Such a condition, it is asserted, is conducive to 
 what is called government "red-tape" and the consequent 
 loss of energy and proper understanding. It is true that 
 many of the principal administrative officers have a very in- 
 adequate appreciation of some of the work which they are 
 directing. 
 
 In an organization whose activities are fairly unified, or 
 which are sufficiently simple that they mig'ht be grasped in 
 some detail by one or a few men, such a criticism as the 
 above would be valid. But in an institution such as the De- 
 partment of Agriculture, with its extensive field of opera- 
 tion and its multiplicity of diverse activities, it is impossible 
 for one man to obtain a comprehensive grasp of the .whole. 
 The same is largely true even in some of the larger bureaus. 
 Chiefs of bureaus are not always sufficiently familiar with 
 the details of their respective functions to give them the 
 most effective direction and coordination. Furthermore, 
 these men are for the most part trained scientists and not 
 trained administrators. Frequently, their special scientific 
 interests claim their time and attention to the detriment of 
 other equally important administrative problems. 
 
 Perhaps the only effective way to remove this administra- 
 
THE PRESENT ORGANIZATION 4 1 
 
 tive difficulty would be to create additional bureaus. In the 
 opinion of those responsible for the present plan of organi- 
 zation, the creation of more bureaus, and the consequent in- 
 crease in overhead expenditures, the splitting up of func- 
 tions that are naturally similar in character and the re- 
 sultant duplication of equipment and effort would more than 
 offset any possible advantages to be gained by a more inti- 
 mate relationship between administrator and worker. 
 
 The organization, as effected under the act of March 4, 
 1915,^" and as at present recognized by Congress, consists 
 of eighteen fairly distinct administrative units, comprising 
 eleven bureaus, two offices, two divisions, two boards, and 
 a library. In order to indicate how the entire work of the 
 department has been distributed for administrative purposes, 
 it is believed advisable to give a very brief summary of the 
 principal functions of each of these units. Changes in the 
 assignment of minor duties, are, of course, made from time 
 to time; but it is very unlikely that any important cbangtes 
 will occur except as a result of a complete reorganization.^' 
 
 Office of the Secretary 
 
 The office of the Secretary exercises general administra- 
 tive or supervisory authority over the entire personnel and 
 activities of the department. The Assistant Secretary is re- 
 quired to perform such duties as may be assigned to him 
 by the Secretary.^* In case of the absence or disability of 
 the Secretary, the Assistant Secretary may act as Secre- 
 tary. If both of these be absent or disabled, the Chief of 
 the Weather Bureau, the only other officer whose appoint- 
 ment is subject to confirmation by the Senate, acts as 
 Secretary. 
 
 "38 Stat. 1086. 
 
 1* In summarizing the work of the various units, the " Program 
 of Work of the U. S. Dept. of Agriculture for the fiscal year 1917 " 
 has been used. No account has been taken here or elsewhere of the 
 numerous and important war activities undertaken by the Depart- 
 ment since April, 1917. While these may result in some permanent 
 changes both in the organization and duties of the Department, their 
 temporary character makes it seem inadvisable to include them here. 
 
 1* 34 Stat. L. 1256. 
 
42 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 Rather peculiarly, the principal subdivisions of the Secre- 
 tary's office are also called offices. These are : the Office of 
 the Chief Clerk, the Office of Information, the Office of In- 
 spection, the Office of Exhibits, the Office of Forest Ap- 
 peals, and the Office of the Solicitor. 
 
 The Chief Clerk is charged by law with the general 
 supervision of the duties of the clerical workers of the De- 
 partment^^ and the superintendence of the buildings occu- 
 pied by the department.^" He also makes provision for the 
 securing of supplies and miscellaneous services. In the 
 performance of his duties the Chief Clerk cooperates very 
 closely with the chief clerks of the principal units of the 
 departments ; whose duties, within their respective spheres, 
 are similar to his own. As an aid in the enforcement of the 
 general administrative regulations of the department, the 
 regulations have been conveniently arranged in a small 
 manual, which is supplemented by the issuance of general 
 orders, either by the Secretary or the Chief Clerk, as the 
 need therefor arises. 
 
 The primary function of the Chief of Information is to 
 prepare and issue to the press current information regard- 
 ing the work of the department in general. It also issues a 
 weekly news letter containing seasonal and other informa- 
 tion in popular form. 
 
 The Office of Inspection assists the Secretary in adjust- 
 ing financial claims made against the department or units 
 thereof, and in matters pertaining to personnel inspection, v 
 
 The Office of Exhibits has direct charge of all matters 
 relating to agricultural exhibits made by the department at 
 fairs and expositions. 
 
 The Office of Forest Appeals was created to assist the 
 Secretary in reaching final decisions on appeals made from 
 the decisions of the Forest Service in matters relating to the 
 administration of the national forests. 
 
 As the name implies, the Office of the Solicitor is con- 
 is Rev. Stat. sees. 173, 174. 
 
 "36 Stat. L. 417. 
 
THE PRESENT ORGANIZATION 43 
 
 cerned with the supervision and direction of the legal work 
 of the department,^'' including that connected with the en- 
 forcement of the various regulatory laws. 
 
 The Office of Farm Management is another unit of the 
 department which is administratively closely associated with 
 the Secretary's office, but is not integrally a part of it. Its 
 primary function is the investigation of various types of 
 farm organization and management, including studies of the 
 cost of production of various agricultural products, and farm 
 accounting. 
 
 The Weather Bureau 
 
 The Weather Bureau was transferred to the Department 
 of Agriculture in 1891.*^ Its principal duties are the fore- 
 casting of the weather ; the issue and display of weather and 
 storm warnings for the benefit of agriculture, commerce, 
 and navigation; and the study and observation of various 
 climatic conditions in order that dependable records may 
 be kept. Numerous stations and substations have been 
 established throughout the country. This bureau has no 
 regulatory duties. 
 
 Bureau of Animal Industry 
 
 As previously indicated, this bureau was established by 
 special act of Congress for the purpose of encouraging and 
 protecting the live stock and meat industries of the United 
 States. Besides conducting scientific investigations relating 
 to the production and care of domestic animals, and the 
 causes and prevention of animal diseases, this bureau is 
 charged with the administration of all the regulatory laws 
 relating to the live stock industry. In this latter function, 
 as we shall see in a later chapter, this bureau cooperates 
 very closely with the Solicitor's office. 
 
 Bureau of Plant Industry 
 
 This bureau is charged with the investigation of those 
 
 problems which have to do with agricultural production. It 
 
 1' 36 Stat. L. 417. 
 18 26 Stat. L. 653. 
 
44 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 conducts Studies in the causes and prevention of plant dis- 
 eases ; of methods of improving soil fertility, of plant breed- 
 ing, of the introduction of foreign seeds and plants, and of 
 many other phases of crop production. It has charge of 
 the administration of the seed-importation act. 
 
 Forest Service 
 
 The Forest Service was estabished as a bureau in 1902.^' 
 For many years prior to this time, investigations relating 
 to forestry had been carried on by a division in the depart- 
 ment. Such investigations are still continued; but since 
 1905, the chief work of this bureau has been the administra- 
 tion of the numerous laws and regulations relating to the 
 vast national forests of the country. 
 
 Bureau of Chemistry 
 
 The work of the present Bureau of Chemistry is the out- 
 growth of a small appropriation made in 1848 for the chem- 
 ical analyses of vegetable stibstances. Since then its in- 
 vestigations have been extended to cover a wide range of 
 food products including eggs, poultry, and fish. It also 
 engages in chemical investigations for other departments of 
 the Government. In addition to its investigative work, this 
 bureau, because of its excellent laboratory facilities, has 
 been charged with the administration of the food and drugs 
 act of 1906 and the amendments thereto. This involves the 
 analysis of numerous samples of foods and drugs, which 
 are collected and sent in by agents of the bureau who are 
 scattered throughout the country. This law and its admin- 
 istration will be treated in detail in a later chapter.^" 
 
 Bureau of Soils 
 
 As the name implies, this bureau is primarily concerned 
 with the chemical and physical analyses of soils. It has 
 
 18 32 Stat. L. 295. 
 2" Chapter iv. 
 
THE PRESENT ORGANIZATION 45 
 
 made numerous and extensive soil surveys in various parts 
 of the country. Because of the recently increased demand 
 for natural fertilizers, this bureau has begun extensive in- 
 vestigations of the fertilizer resources of the United States. 
 It also assists in the classification of agricultural lands on 
 the reclamation projects and in the national forest reserves. 
 
 Bureau of Entomology 
 
 The Bureau of Entomology conducts extensive investiga- 
 tions relating to insects, particularly those which are injuri- 
 ous or beneficial to plant or animal life and the best means 
 of destroying those found to be injurious. It assists in 
 supervising and enforcing such quarantines as are estab- 
 lished by the Secretary for the prevention of the spread of 
 insect pests. 
 
 Bureau of Biological Survey 
 
 This bureau is charged with the maintenance and super- 
 vision of the various game bird reservations that have been 
 established in recent years. It conducts investigations re- 
 garding the food habits of birds and wild animals ; makes 
 surveys relating to the supply, migrations, and geographic 
 distribution of such birds and animals; carries on experi- 
 ments and demonstrations in the control or eradication of 
 birds and animals which are injurious to agriculture and 
 animal husbandry; and cooperates with state agencies in 
 the protection of game. This bureau is also in charge of 
 the administration of the two federal laws which have been 
 passed for the protection of wild game. 
 
 Bureau of Crop Estimates 
 
 The principal function of this bureau is the securing, and 
 compiling of data regarding crop and animal production and 
 the making and publishing of periodical estimates based 
 thereon. Most of its information is derived from reports 
 received from thousands of voluntary crop reporters. 
 These reports are checked and compared with more general 
 
46 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGMCULTURE 
 
 reports received from county reporters, and with informa- 
 tion received from a salaried agent in each state whose duty 
 it is to inspect and supervise the work of the voluntary 
 reporters. This bureau also collects numerous agricultural 
 statistics relating to foreign and domestic agriculture. This 
 latter was the principal object contemplated under the ori- 
 ginal federal appropriation for agriculture in 1839. 
 
 States Relation Service 
 
 Prior to the reorganization of the department in 1915, this 
 unit was known as the Office of Experiment Stations, be- 
 cause it had been established primarily for the purpose of 
 supervising and coordinating the work of these State institu- 
 tions. As a result of the more logical re-grouping of the 
 department's activities, its scope was enlarged to include the 
 supervision of practically all of the work involving direct 
 cooperation with state agricultural institutions, including the 
 very extensive work contemplated under the Smith-Lever 
 Act of May, 1914. The functions of this bureau are thus 
 almost entirely regulatory and educational. It does, how- 
 ever, carry on important research work in the field of home 
 economics and methods of agricultural education. An ex- 
 amination of its cooperation with state institutions will form 
 an important part of the following chapter. 
 
 Office of Public Roads and Rural Engineering 
 
 While this unit is not officially designated as a bureau, it 
 does have very nearly the same administrative status. It is 
 one of those units which has no independent statutory basis, 
 but exists solely by virtue of the annual appropriations 
 made by Congress. 
 
 Its chief function is the investigation of methods of road 
 construction, maintenance and management; experimenting 
 with various kinds of road materials; and giving expert 
 advice relating to these subjects. Since the reorganization 
 in 191 5j it also investigates and advises upon questions con- 
 
THE PRESENT ORGANIZATION 47 
 
 nected with irrigation, farm drainage, and other rural and 
 agricultural engineering problems. It also supervises the 
 administration of the recently enacted Federal Aid Road 
 Act." 
 
 Bureau of Markets 
 
 The Bureau of Markets, although the newest of the prin- 
 cipal subdivisions of the department, has grown to be almost 
 the largest from the standpoint of amount of money ex- 
 pended and the number of people employed. This is one 
 noteworthy result of the great emphasis that has been placed 
 upon agricultural economics during the last four or five 
 years. 
 
 The investigational work of this new bureau centers 
 around the transportation, marketing and distribution of 
 farm products, and the improvement and encouragement 
 of cooperative efforts, both economical and social, among 
 farmers. It also does important investigational work in 
 the testing of cotton and in the estabhshment and demon- 
 stration of market grades and standards. In addition to its 
 investigative functions, this bureau is charged with the 
 administration of three very important regulatory measures : 
 the United States cotton futures act, the United States 
 warehouse act, and the United States grain-standards act. 
 This important work will receive further consideration.^^ 
 
 Miscellaneous 
 
 Other subdivisions of the department are: The Division 
 of Accounts and Disbursements, which exercises general 
 supervision over the fiscal affairs of the department; The 
 Division of Publications, which supervises the printing and 
 publication work of the entire department; The Insecticide 
 and Fungicide Board, already mentioned, which supervises 
 the enforcement of the insecticide act ; The Federal Horti- 
 cultural Board, created by the Secretary by direction of 
 
 21 See chapter iii. 
 
 22 See chapter iv. 
 
48 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 Congress, to assist in the administration of the plant quar- 
 antine act ; and the Library, which is considered to be one of 
 the largest and most valuable collections of scientific books 
 and materials bearing upon agriculture in the world. 
 
 From this very brief summary of the principal lines of 
 work of the Department of Agriculture, some conception 
 may be gained of the multiplicity of activities of this — one 
 of the most recently created — federal executive department. 
 It is only by such detailed study that we are enabled 
 adequately to appreciate the tremendous work of the Gov- 
 ernment, and the administrative machinery required for its 
 proper execution. 
 
 The revelations are all the more impressive when it is 
 remembered that we are living under a political system 
 founded on the theory that the great majority of the sub- 
 jects about which we have been speaking are matters 
 originally considered to be primarily of local concern and 
 hence not within the domain or sphere of the central govern- 
 ment. 
 
 In what has been written thus far, frequent reference has 
 been made to the cooperation of the Department of Agri- 
 culture with other governmental agencies in the perform- 
 ance of its duties. It will be our purpose in the following 
 chapter to consider in some detail the administrative organ- 
 ization and methods involved in this cooperation. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 Cooperative Relations of the Department of Agricul- 
 ture WITH Other Federal Services and with 
 State Institutions 
 
 As indicated in the preceding chapters, one objective in the 
 development of the organization of the Department of Agri- 
 culture, and particularly in the reorganization effected in 
 191 5, has been the bringing together into one bureau or other 
 subdivision of those activities which are, by their nature, 
 closely related. In general, this has been accomplished with 
 marked success. However, there are certain to be here, as 
 in other administrative organs whose activities are numer- 
 ous and varied, many functions which are difficult properly 
 to classify and to assign. Should the investigation of soil 
 fertilizers and fertilization be made a part of the general 
 study of soils, or is it more closely related to the subject of 
 crop production ? Should the work of eradication of insect 
 pests which are alike harmful to fruit trees, shade trees, and 
 forest trees be assigned to the Forest Service or to the 
 Bureau of Plant Industry? These and similar questions 
 are constantly being presented for solution. Indeed, the 
 proper distribution of functions so that they will be most 
 effectively performed, with a minimum waste of energy and 
 the least duplication of effort, is here, as elsewhere, a pri- 
 mary concern of the general administrator. Generally, 
 careful attention to all of the factors involved will make a 
 logical and satisfactory assignment possible. In rare in- 
 stances, an arbitrary decision may be necessary. 
 
 Where the grouping of functions has not been prede- 
 termined by legislative enactment,^ it is the general adminis- 
 
 ^ Discussion of the fundamental problems here suggested, viz., 
 should administrative functions be assigned by legislative or by ad- 
 ministrative agencies? — has been purposely avoided as not properly 
 
 4 49 
 
so THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 trative policy of the Department of Agriculture to assign 
 each activity to that subdivision which, all things considered, 
 seems best fitted to perform it effectively. When the ac- 
 tivity in question is related to the work of two or more 
 administrative units, effort is made to avoid friction and 
 duplication by close cooperation between the subdivisions 
 involved. 
 
 No attempt will be made to trace the numerous forms 
 which such cooperation may take. It may be very formal, 
 based upon a written agreement which stipulates the duties 
 to be performed and the expenditures to be made by each 
 unit ; it may be informal, based upon a verbal agreement or 
 understanding ; or it may be merely the common use of cer- 
 tain facilities or materials. In the main, these internal co- 
 operative efforts have accomplished the desired ends. 
 
 When Congress assumes the task, as it commonly does in 
 larger matters, and frequently does even in detail, of not 
 only creating the administrative machinery, but also assign- 
 ing the tasks which each unit shall perform; that body is 
 confronted with essentially the same problems as confront 
 the administrator when these questions are not prede- 
 termined for him. That Congress has not always fully 
 appreciated the nature of its task is shown by the incongrui- 
 ties which have existed, and which to some extent still exist, 
 in the work of the executive departments. The existence 
 of these anomalies is largely attributable to the more rapid 
 growth of governmental activities than of governmental 
 machinery or organization. The reluctance of Congress to 
 create additional executive departments has resulted not 
 only in the overtaxing of department heads, but also in the 
 bringing together, in some instances, of many totally un- 
 related functions. In recent years an outlet has been found 
 in the creation of numerous independent boards and com- 
 missions. 
 
 Another constantly recurring problem for the National 
 
 forming a part of the present study. For a discussion of this ques- 
 tion, see Goodnow, Principles of Administrative Law of the United 
 States, p. 90, and Freund, Standards of American Legislation, p. 143. 
 
COOPERATIVE RELATIONS $1 
 
 Legislature is the assigning of those activities which are 
 essentially related to the work already being done by two or 
 more departments. Suppose it is decided that all importa- 
 tions of food shall be rigidly examined before they are per- 
 mitted to enter the channels of domestic trade. Should the 
 administration of a law, designed to accomplish this end, be 
 assigned to the Treasury Department, which already has 
 inspectors situated at the ports of entry, but has no facilities 
 for the analyzing of foods ; should it be assigned to the De- 
 partment of Agriculture, which has splendid facilities for the 
 testing of foods, but has no agents at the ports ; or should an 
 entirely new organization be created? Generally, the solu- 
 tion in such a situation has been to charge one department 
 with the enforcement of the law in question, and to impose 
 upon other departments or officials the duty of giving such 
 information or assistance as their facilities or position espe- 
 cially qualify them to give. The proper administration of 
 this type of laws requires various kinds of cooperative ar- 
 rangements between the departments or other units con- 
 cerned. The form which this cooperation shall take is 
 largely determined by the nature of the task to be performed 
 under the law. It will be the purpose of the next few para- 
 graphs to show, by giving some typical examples, how the 
 expert knowledge and facilities of the Department of Agri- 
 culture are utilized in the administration of these coopera- 
 tive measures. 
 
 In order to encourage the introduction of improved breeds 
 of domestic animals into this country, paragraph three hun- 
 dred and ninety-seven of the tariff of October 13, 191 3, pro- 
 vides for the free entry of certain animals imported for 
 breeding purposes. Under the further provisions of this 
 paragraph, customs officials must obtain for the free entry 
 of such animals, certificates issued by the Department of 
 Agriculture stating that the animals are pure bred, of a 
 recognized breed, and duly registered in the foreign book of 
 record established for that breed. Upon the arrival of the 
 animals at the port of entry, notice is sent to the Secretary 
 
52 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 of Agriculture. They are then examined by a representa- 
 tive of the Department of Agriculture, who reports to the 
 Washington office the breed, sex, age, color, and markings. 
 In case the data on the foreign certificate does not agree 
 with the animal imported, the certificate of pure breeding 
 will not be issued. Where all papers are found to be satis- 
 factory, the certificate of pure breeding is sent to the col- 
 lector of customs, and the foreign certificate is authenticated 
 and returned to the importer." 
 
 The enforcement of the various laws which have been en- 
 acted to prevent the importation and the exportation of dis- 
 eased animals, animal products, and plants requires the 
 closest cooperation between the officials of the Department 
 of Agriculture and those of the Treasury Department. As 
 the Department of Agriculture has no regular corps of port 
 inspectors, it must rely very largely upon Treasury officials 
 for primary information regarding shipments. 
 
 The prevalence of dangerous animal diseases in countries 
 from which the United States obtains hides, and other ani- 
 mal by-products, was the occasion for the recent issue of 
 what is known as Treasury Department and Department of 
 Agriculture Joint Order No. i, entitled, "Regulations gov- 
 erning the certification and disinfection of hides, fleshings, 
 hide cuttings, parings, and glue stock, sheep-skins and goat- 
 skins and parts thereof, hair, wool, and other animal by- 
 products, hay, straw, forage or similar material offered for 
 entry into the United States."^ It provides for the careful 
 handling of the various products mentioned and their disin- 
 fection under official supervision, either at the port of entry 
 or at the point of destination. 
 
 Such regulations as these are binding upon the officials of 
 both departments issuing them; and have, of course, the 
 same force as the law upon which they are predicated. 
 
 The work of collecting and introducing into the United 
 States specimens of foreign plants and animals, which was 
 
 2 Act of Aug. 5, 1909, 36 Stat. L. 11. 
 
 3 This Joint Order is dated Oct. 21, 1916, effective Jan. i, 1917. 
 
COOPERATIVE RELATIONS 53 
 
 assumed by Franklin and other early American representa- 
 tives in foreign countries, has now been made a part of the 
 regular duties of diplomatic and consular agents. The in- 
 structions issued by the Department of State now require 
 that these officials cooperate with the Department of Agri- 
 culture, either by actually collecting and transmitting spec- 
 imens believed to be of value, or by making* arrangementsj 
 for scientific exploration parties.* Diplonmtic and consular 
 officers are also required by law to procure and transmit, for 
 the use of the Department of Agriculture " monthly reports 
 relative to the character, condition, and prospective yields of 
 the agricultural and horticultural industries and other f ruit- 
 eries of the coimtry in which they are respectively sta- 
 tioned."= 
 
 The work of the Department of the Interior and that of 
 the Department of Agriculture touches and overlaps at so 
 many points that it is sometimes difficult for Congress and 
 the department heads properly to determine their respective 
 spheres. Indeed, it may truthfully be said that the newer 
 department is largely an outgrowth or overflow from the 
 older. Despite the many shiftings of functions from one 
 department to the other, there are still many activities in 
 which there must be close cooperation and definite under- 
 standing. The administration of the national forests is 
 under the control of the Department of Agriculture ; but the 
 national parks, which for the most part are situated within 
 and form a part of the national forest reserves, are admiin- 
 istered by the Department of the Interior. The installation 
 and management of the great irrigation reclamation projects 
 form ah important part of the work of the Department of 
 the Interior ; but the investigation of methods of irrigation, 
 canal construction, the determination of the amount of 
 water required for the growing of various crops, and the 
 demonstration of the use of irrigation water upon the land 
 
 * Program of Work, pp. 199-200. 
 
 6 Rev. Stat. sec. 1712, as amended by Act of June 18, 1888, 25 Stat. 
 L. 186. 
 
54 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 reclaimed under the projects have all been assigned to the 
 Department of Agriculture. 
 
 Here, as elsewhere, the degree and form of cooperation 
 are determined by the nature of the task to be accomplished 
 in each case. 
 
 Numerous additional examples might be given to show at 
 least some of the difficulties in organizing and distributing 
 the multiplicity of functions which are performed by the 
 modern government. No matter how finely the division 
 lines may be drawn, there are certain to be many points of 
 contact and overlapping. As previously indicated, the im- 
 portant task of the organizer, whether it be Congress or de- 
 partment head, is to secure the desired ends with the least 
 duplication and expenditure of effort. 
 
 Cooperation with State Institutions 
 
 Years before the first appropriation of federal funds for 
 the encouragement of agriculture was made in 1839, sev- 
 eral of the States had made important progress in this direc- 
 tion. As early as 1791 New York had begun to issue annual 
 reports on agriculture; and in 1820 had made provision for 
 a state board of agriculture, including appropriations for its 
 farming interests.® It was largely because of the work 
 already being done by state institutions that many Congress- 
 men failed to see the need of federal aid, when the matter 
 was first urged upon them. The results of the efforts of the 
 states, thus early begun, had reached considerable propor- 
 tions when the Department of Agriculture was established 
 in 1862. Much of the work done was, of course, purely of 
 local interest and value, and of a non-scientific character. 
 However, this and the achievements of private societies and 
 associations constituted the principal sources for the early 
 federal agricultural publications prior to 1862. 
 
 These state agricultural institutions continued to grow, 
 
 6 Elkanah Watson, History of . . . the Rise, Progress, and Existing 
 State of Modern Agricultural Societies, on the Bershire System, p. 
 152, Albany, 1820. 
 
COOPERATIVE RELATIONS $5 
 
 both in number and importance ; but it was not until the ex- 
 tension of federal aid under what is known as the Hatch 
 Act of 1887, that their research work was placed upon a 
 sound scientific basisJ 
 
 This act^ provided for the establishment of experiment 
 stations in the land-grant colleges created under the Act of 
 1862. It also provided for a permanent annual appropria- 
 tion of fifteen thousand dollars for each State or Territory. 
 This sum was doubled by the passage of the so-called Adams 
 Act of 1906.® This fund is to be expended exclusively for 
 agricultural research. Since 1887 one important function 
 of the Department of Agriculture has been the supervision 
 and coordination of the work of these experiment stations. 
 This is accomplished in various ways ; but primarily through 
 periodical inspections by department representatives, and the 
 publication of what is known as " The Experiment Station 
 Record." This scientific journal, which is perhaps the oldest 
 and best known of all the Department of Agriculture's' 
 periodical publications, briefly describes the research work 
 that has been completed or is in process in each -of the ex- 
 periment stations. It also indicates the investigational work 
 that is being done in agriculture by other agencies, both 
 domestic and foreign.^" By this means it is possible to 
 make known to the widely separated workers what has al- 
 ready been done, and thus avoid much needless duplication. 
 
 The general policy of the department respecting state 
 agricultural research institutions, is to urge upon them the 
 need of giving special attention to those problems which are 
 of local importance, or for which their facilities or environ- 
 ment peculiarly fit them; and to leave to federal agencies 
 the solution of those problems which are of more general 
 concern. There is, .however, in most of the investigational 
 work of the department, extensive cooperation with state 
 
 ' T. N. Carver, " History of American Agriculture," in Bailey's 
 Cyclopedia of American Agriculture, vol. iv, p. 155. 
 
 824 Stat. L. 440. 
 
 934 Stat. L. 63. 
 
 i^See Annual Reports of the Department of Agriculture, 1916, 
 p. 303. 
 
56 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 institutions and workers. Thus, in the eradication of plant 
 and animal diseases,^^ in the investigation of dairying and 
 milk sanitation/^ in the development of marketing and 
 marketing facilities,^' in the promotion of boy's and girl's 
 clubs,^* and in the study of problems of forestry,^" exten- 
 sive use is made of the work that has been done by local 
 agencies and of the facilities afforded by them. Because 
 of the special interest of Wisconsin in the study of forestry, 
 and the exceptional equipment that has been provided there, 
 very much of the work of the department in this field is 
 done in closest cooperation with the agricultural college and 
 experiment station of that State. 
 
 In the relationships of the Department of Agriculture 
 with state institutions, as in those with other federal serv- 
 ices, the particular form of agreement or working program 
 is determined by the nature of each case. Generally, if a 
 specific object is to be accomplished, if a definite sum is to 
 be expended by each party, or if all or a certain portion of 
 the time of workprs is to be utilized in a joint undertaking, 
 the project is reduced to the form of a written agreement. 
 A copy of such an agreement is shown in Appendix II. 
 Similar project arrangements are also made for much of 
 the purely research work. 
 
 Most of the cooperative relationships between the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture and state institutions to which attention 
 has been directed, except the general supervision of experi- 
 ment stations, are such as have naturally grown out of the 
 circumstances; and are not enjoined upon either party by 
 specific legislation. In recent years, however, a number of 
 laws have been enacted by Congress which have as their 
 basic principle direct cooperation with state institutions. 
 Besides the laws providing for the establishment and aid of 
 
 ^1 Program of Work, pp. 33-40, 96, 104, 107. 
 
 12 Ibid., p. 41 ff. 
 
 13 Ibid., p. 459- 
 i*Ibid., pp. 65-70. 
 15 Ibid., pp. 248-249. 
 
COOPERATIVE RELATIONS $7 
 
 agricultural colleges^* and experiment stations, to which 
 reference has already been made, the Smith-Lever Act of 
 May, 1914,^' and the Federal Aid Road Act of July, 1916," 
 both require extensive cooperative relations with state 
 agencies.^^ It is to the consideration of the administration 
 of these measures that the remainder of this chapter will be 
 devoted. 
 
 The Act of 1862, providing for the establishment of state 
 agricultural colleges, made no provision for the exercise of 
 federal supervision or control over the expenditures made 
 by the states of funds derived from the federal treasury. 
 All that was required was that reports should be made 
 annually of the progress of each college, the sales of land 
 script, and the use made of the proceeds therefrom. The 
 Act of 1887, creating the agricultural experiment stations, 
 likewise made no adequate provision for effective control, 
 by the federal government, of the funds appropriated by 
 Congress. In addition to the usual annual reports, it re- 
 quired the experiment station to publish bulletins periodic- 
 ally showing the results accomplished, and made it the duty 
 of the Commissioner (now Secretary) of Agriculture to 
 furnish certain forms, to indicate lines of inquiry which 
 might be most profitably followed, and to give advice and 
 assistance. Somewhat more adequate control was reserved 
 to the federal government in the act of 1906, (supplement- 
 ary to the act of 1887) which, in addition to requiring the 
 annual reports of expenditures, made the payment of the 
 
 18 The laws appropriating federal funds for the aid of agricultural 
 colleges, the so-called Morrill Act of 1862 and amendments thereto, 
 are administered by the Department of the Interior. Only those re- 
 lating to the experiment stations are administered by the Department 
 of Agriculture. The law of 1890, supplementing the Morrill Act, 
 requires that copies of financial reports be sent to the Secretary of 
 Ag^riculture as well as the Secretary of the Interior. 
 
 IT 38 Stat L. 372. 
 
 "39 Stat. L. 355. 
 
 ^9 The so-called Smith-Hughes vocational education act is not ad- 
 ministered by the Department of Agriculture, but by a vocational 
 education board, of which the Commissioner of Education is chair- 
 man. The Secretary of Agriculture is a member of this Board. 
 This is also a cooperative measure. 
 
58 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 yearly sums appropriated for each State and Territory con- 
 ditional upon the ascertainment by the Secretary of Agricul- 
 ture that it had complied with the provisions of the act and 
 was entitled to receive its share of the appropriations for 
 agricultural experiment stations. 
 
 The Smith-Lever Act of 1914, however, in addition to re- 
 quirements and conditions similar to those imposed by the 
 acts of 1887 and 1906, as a prerequisite to sharing in appro- 
 priations of federal funds, provides a detailed and compre- 
 hensive scheme of administration and control of expendi- 
 tures. It not only requires annual reports to be made of 
 receipts from all sources, and expenditures for carrying out 
 the objects of the act; but expressly limits the scope of 
 activities of the state institutions under the act to coopera- 
 tive work of such a character as shall be mutually agreed 
 upon by representatives of each college and the Secretary 
 of Agriculture. It also makes prior approval by the Secre- 
 tary, of plans for the work to be carried on during each 
 year, an indispensable condition precedent to the payment of 
 any of the funds appropriated by Congress. 
 
 The purpose and scope of the Smith-Lever Act, as stated 
 in its first two sections, are as follows: 
 
 Section i. That in order to aid in diflfusing among the people of 
 the United States useful and practical information on subjects relat- 
 ing to agriculture and home economics, and to encourage the appli- 
 cation of the same, there may be inaugurated in connection with 
 the college or colleges in eacli State now receiving, or which may 
 hereafter receive, the benefits of the Act of Congress approved July 
 second, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, entitled 'An Act donating 
 public lands to the several States and Territories which may provide 
 colleges for the benefit of agriculture and the mechanic arts,' . . . 
 agricultural extension work which shall be carried on in cooperation 
 with the United States Department of Agriculture. . . . 
 
 Section 2. That cooperative agricultural extension work shall 
 consist of the giving of instruction and practical demonstrations in 
 agriculture and home economics to persons not attending or resi- 
 dent in said colleges in the several communities and imparting to 
 such persons information on said subjects through field demonstra- 
 tions, publications, and otherwise; and this work shall be carried on 
 in such manner as may be mutually agreed upon by the Secretary of 
 Agriculture and the State agricultural college or colleges receiving 
 the benefits of this Act. 
 
COOPERATIVE RELATIONS 59 
 
 The initial appropriation under this law for the fiscal year 
 1915 was four hundred and eighty thousand dollars — ten 
 thousand dollars to each of the forty-eight States. This 
 sum was to be increased by six hundred thousand dollars 
 for the next fiscal year until the total sum should be four 
 milUon five hundred and eighty thousand dollars. There- 
 after a permanent annual appropriation of this latter amount 
 is to be made. No payment is to be made to any State 
 except by the assent of its legislature, or Governor, if the 
 legislature is not in session, to the terms of the act. The 
 amounts appropriated in excess of the original ten thousand 
 dollars to each State is to be prorated among the States in 
 the proportion which the rural population of each bears to 
 the total rural population of all the states, as determined by 
 the next preceding federal census.^" It is further provided 
 that no part of this latter amount shall be paid to any State 
 until an amount of money at least equal to the prorata share 
 of that State shall have been appropriated for the year by 
 the legislature or other agencies within the State, to be ex- 
 pended for the purposes contemplated under this act. 
 
 If, for any reason, the Secretary of Agriculture refuses 
 to certify that any State is entitled to its portion of the ap- 
 propriation, provisions are made for an appeal by such State 
 to Congress. 
 
 Immediately after the approval of this act, the Secretary 
 of Agriculture appointed four of his subordinates as a com- 
 mittee, pending the reorganization of the department, to 
 make arrangements to carry it into effect. A memorandum 
 agreement between the Secretary of Agriculture and the 
 presidents or deans of the agricultural colleges was drawn 
 up and adopted by practically all of the state representa- 
 tives. The assent of all the States to the provisions of the 
 act was obtained, and an organization for the administra- 
 tion of funds granted to the colleges under this act, as well 
 as the funds appropriated for extension work by state 
 
 2" In determining the rural population, the policy of the Bureau of 
 the Census has been to count as rural all persons who live in com- 
 munities of less than 2500 inhabitants. 
 
60 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 agencies, was formed in each of the state colleges. These 
 organizations resemble and are coordinate with the agri- 
 cultural experiment stations. They have at their head 
 directors of extension work corresponding to the directors 
 of experiment stations. 
 
 Through the extension divisions of the colleges a large 
 number of projects for cooperative extension work in a 
 great variety 'of lines have been formulated and agreed upon 
 under the general memorandum of agreement." 
 
 In the reorganization of the department in 1915, a new 
 administrative unit was created, in which has been brought 
 together practically all of the administrative and advisory 
 work of the department in its relations with state agricul- 
 tural institutions. This bureau is called the States Rela- 
 tions Service. Under a regulation issued by the Secretary, 
 all business of the department with these state institutions 
 must be transacted through the States Relations Service. 
 
 The supervision of the work of the experiment stations 
 is conducted by a subdivision of this bureau called the Office 
 of Experiment Stations. This has already been described. 
 Administration of the cooperative work is accomplished 
 through two other subdivisions called, respectively, The 
 Office of Extension Work in the South, and The Office of 
 Extension Work in the North and West. As the names 
 indicate, the division of work is territorial. This arrange- 
 ment is due in part to the existence of very dissimilar prob- 
 lems and conditions in the respective fields, and in part to the 
 previous existence of similar administrative units. There 
 is, of course, the closest relationships between these sub- 
 divisions and the extension divisions of the various colleges ; 
 but always following the general procedure previously 
 indicated. 
 
 Perhaps the most distinctive feature or development under 
 the Smith-Lever Act is the official generally called the county 
 agent. The field of these workers, as the designation im- 
 plies, is usually limited to one county. Although they work 
 
 21 Reports of the Department of Agriculture, 1915, p. 299. 
 
COOPERATIVE RELATIONS 6 1 
 
 under the immediate direction either of the state director 
 of extension or the state county agent leader, they are in 
 reality officials of the federal and state governments. They 
 are paid from the joint cooperative funds. Such agricul- 
 tural agents or teachers may now be found in more than 
 half of the counties in the United States.^" 
 
 The county agents are greatly aided in their work by 
 what are known as county farm bureaus. These are organ- 
 izations of farmers and others interested in agriculture 
 formed largely for the purpose of cooperating with the 
 county agent. They also assist in the providing of funds 
 in those states which depend in part upon voluntary con- 
 tributions. 
 
 In a constantly increasing number of counties, particu- 
 larly in the South, the work of the county agent is supple- 
 mented by the work of a woman home economics demon- 
 strator, whose duty it is to assist in the education of rural 
 women by conducting demonstrations in homes or in rural 
 community gatherings. The ultimate plan is to supply each 
 rural county with at least one county agent and a home eco- 
 nomics demonstrator. 
 
 This system of county agents, when fully developed, 
 should constitute a most efficient administrative device for 
 the effective and rapid promulgation of any general agricul- 
 tural policy. While the appointment of these workers is 
 left almost entirely to the States, with the consequent lack, 
 in most cases, of civil service tests, the appointments thus 
 far seem to have been based upon merit, and have been 
 made with little or no regard to political affiliation. The 
 great majority of them are chosen from the graduates of the 
 agricultural colleges. Politicians will probably not fail to 
 see the strategic political advantages which men working in 
 this capacity have. The value of the service, therefore, will 
 depend in large measure on the extent to which it is sub- 
 verted to the accomplishment of political ends. 
 
 In the great majority of instances the cooperative rela- 
 ys There are approximately 3500 counties in the United States. 
 
62 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 tionships between federal and state agencies under the 
 Smith-Lever act have been harmonious. The only serious 
 disagreement of which the writer is aware, arose in Illinois 
 shortly after the act became effective. In this State very- 
 large appropriations are made for the advancement of agri- 
 culture. It was the belief of some of those concerned with 
 the administration of this fund, including the Dean of the 
 Agriculture College, that the federal funds were not of 
 sufficient importance, relatively, to justify the State in sub- 
 mitting to the regulations imposed by the federal govern- 
 ment.^* After considerable discussion, a somewhat tenta- 
 tive agreement was concluded, but not without the pressure 
 incident to the war and the necessity for speeding up all 
 agricultural processes. It is the opinion of the Director of 
 the States Relations Service, however, that the difficulties 
 can be amicably settled when more complete understanding 
 is reached. 
 
 Another measure which contemplates less fortuitous and 
 more deliberate cooperative relations with state institutions 
 than the earlier and more general laws committed to the 
 Department of Agriculture is the Federal aid road act, 
 approved July ii, 191 6.''* 
 
 The enactment of this law marks a very considerable ad- 
 vance in federal policy concerning the improvement of the 
 public highways. For more than twenty years, prior to 
 this time, the efforts of the federal government had been 
 limited to research and education for the purpose of de- 
 veloping improved methods of road construction and main- 
 tenance and imparting such information to local road 
 builders. 
 
 The wide-spread interest in improved highways, due 
 largely to the rapidly increasing use of motor vehicles, has 
 led to the introduction at each recent session of Congress 
 of many measures calling for federal aid to supplement the 
 efforts of the States and counties. In 1912 a joint com- 
 
 23 A copy of these regulations is included in appendix ii. 
 2* 39 Stat. L. 3SS. 
 
COOPERATIVE RELATIONS 6$ 
 
 mittee of both houses of Congress was created for the pur- 
 pose of investigating the subject of federal participation in 
 highway construction. This committee made an exhaustive 
 report in the following year, and a standing committee on 
 roads was appointed in the House of Representatives. 
 
 The Federal aid road act, which marks the culmination of 
 this agitation, carries an appropriation of seventy-five mil- 
 lion dollars to aid the States in the construction of rural 
 post roads, and ten million dollars to be expended for the 
 construction and maintenance of forest roads and trails. 
 The appropriation for rural post roads was mad^ available 
 at the rate of five million dollars for the fiscal year ending 
 June 30, 1 91 7, ten million dollars for the next fiscal year, 
 fifteen million dollars for the third, and so on for five years, 
 ending June 30, 1921. 
 
 The appropriation for forest roads and trails was made 
 available at the rate of one million dollars per fiscal year 
 beginning July i, 1916. A sum not to exceed three per 
 cent of the post road appropriation may be used by the 
 Secretary of Agriculture for administering the act. The 
 apportionment of this fund among the States, after deduct- 
 ing the amount allowed for administration, is based upon 
 the relative areas, population, and mileage of rural delivery 
 and star routes in each State, each of these factors having 
 a weight of one-third. Any unexpended balance of an 
 allotment to a State remaining unexpended at the close of 
 the fiscal year for which it is made may be carried over to 
 the next fiscal year. If such balance is not expended by the 
 close of the second year, the amount is re-allotted among 
 the States on the basis of the original apportionment. 
 
 The federal appropriation for post roads may be expended 
 only for construction, must not exceed fifty per cent of the 
 total estimated cost of the road, and in no case be more 
 than ten thousand dollars per mile, exclusive of bridges of 
 more than twenty feet clear span. 
 
 In order that a State may receive the benefits of the post 
 road provisions of the federal act, it must have a state 
 
64 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 highway department, and the construction on which federal 
 funds are expended must be done under the direct super- 
 vision of that department. The act requires, as conditions 
 precedent to participation by any State, that the legislature 
 or governor shall formally assent to the terms of the act, 
 that an amount of money at least equal to the federal funds 
 shall be made available by or on behalf of the State, and 
 that the plans, specifications, and estimates for all projects 
 shall be submitted to and approved by the Secretary of 
 Agriculture. 
 
 The sum appropriated for the construction and mainten- 
 ance of forest roads and trails is to be derived from the 
 sale of forest products. The amount which may be ex- 
 pended under this section of the act in any. one State, Terri- 
 tory or county shall not exceed ten per cent of the value of 
 the timber and forage resources which are or will be avail- 
 able for income from the national forest lands within the 
 respective county or counties wherein the roads or trails are 
 constructed. The State, Territory or county is required to 
 enter into a cooperative agreement with the Secretary of 
 Agriculture for the survey, construction, and maintenance 
 of such roads and trails upon an equitable basis. 
 
 The cooperative requirement is the only new feature in 
 this section of the Federal Aid Road Act. At least three 
 other measures^^ had been previously passed by Congress 
 providing for the sharing of the receipts from national 
 forests between the federal government on the one hand and 
 the state and county governments on the other. In so far 
 as the funds secured under the operation of these acts are 
 expended for construction and maintenance of roads and 
 trails, the Department of Agriculture is represented by both 
 the Forest Service and the Office of Public Roads and Rural 
 Engineering. Otherwise they are administered by the 
 Forest Service alone. 
 
 The administration of that part of the Federal Aid Road 
 
 2= Act of May 23, 1908, 35 Stat. L. 251; Act of March i, ipii, 36 
 Stat. L. 963 ; Act of March 4, 1913, 37 Stat. L. 828. 
 
COOPERATIVE RELATIONS 65 
 
 Act relating to post roads has been assigned by the Secre- 
 tary of Agriculture to a previously existing administrative 
 unit known as the Office of Public Roads and Rural Engi- 
 neering. Prior to this time the work of this office had been 
 almost wholly devoted to research and the giving of expert 
 advice to road builders. The administration of this new 
 measure necessitated a complete reorganization. To meet 
 the new demands, the work of the office was grouped in 
 two branches, known, respectively, as the engineering di- 
 vision and the management and economics division. At the 
 head of these divisions were placed a chief engineer and a 
 chief of management, respectively, who are under the im- 
 mediate supervision of the director of the office. There are 
 also two general inspectors who operate independently of 
 the two branches and report immediately to the director. 
 For administrative purposes the country has been divided 
 into ten districts, with a supervisory engineer in charge of 
 the construction work in each district. These engineers 
 report directly to the chief engineer.^® 
 
 Immediately after the passage of the act, and under the 
 authority contained therein to make rules and regulations 
 for carrying into effect its provisions,^^ the Secretary of 
 Agriculture called a conference of the heads of the various 
 state highway departments, to whom was submitted a tenta- 
 tive draft of rules and regulations. Most of the sug- 
 gestions of the state officials were incorporated in the final 
 draft. 
 
 The procedure adopted provides for the submission of 
 an application, known as a project agreement, by the state 
 highway department to the district engineer, who examines 
 the road that it is proposed to improve or construct, and 
 
 26 Reports of the Department of Agriculture, 1917, p. 359. 
 
 2'' This and a number of other recent acts specifically confer upon 
 the oflBcer or department charged with the administration power to 
 make necessary rules and regulations. Under our system of gov- 
 ernment this power would exist irrespective of any specific grant. 
 Such rules and regulations must, however, conform strictly to the 
 law upon which they are predicated. 
 
 S 
 
66 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 transmits the project statement with his recommendations 
 to the Washington ofHce. 
 
 If the project statement is approved, the plans, specifica- 
 tions and estimates are then submitted by the state highway 
 department to the district engineer, who in turn sends them 
 to the central office with his recommendations. If they are 
 found to be suitable, a formal certificate to that efifect is 
 issued by the Secretary of Agriculture to the Secretary of 
 the Treasury and to the state highway department, and a 
 formal project agreement is signed. As the work pro- 
 gresses, or upon its completion, payment of federal funds 
 is made to the depository named in the agreement. 
 
 Thus it will be seen that the procedure required is some- 
 what elaborate. However, it does not seem to be more 
 than is necessary properly to safeguard the expenditure of 
 so large a sum of money and the interests of those officials 
 who are made responsible. The actual procedure has been 
 greatly simplified by the adoption of standardized forms, 
 arrangements of plans, estimates, and specifications. 
 
 It is perhaps too early to form any estimate of the success 
 of this measure. The most notable result thus far has been 
 the efifect upon the highway laws and institutions of the 
 States. At the time of the passage of the act, fully one- 
 fourth of the States could not avail themselves of its 
 provisions because of inadequate organization. At the 
 present time, all of the States have highway departments; 
 and most of them have passed such legislation as to cen- 
 tralize the construction and maintenance of roads in these 
 departments. This should greatly facilitate the cooperative 
 administration contemplated under the act. 
 
 Whether the appHcation of the cooperative principle to 
 the vast enterprise of building the highways of the nation 
 will produce the largest measure of benefit to the people 
 remains to be seen. If the administrative difficulties can be 
 amicably and properly solved, there would seem to be little 
 doubt as to the practical benefits. The two cooperative 
 measures described in this chapter should furnish ample 
 
COOPERATIVE RELATIONS 67 
 
 opportunity for testing this comparatively new principle in 
 the relations between the two branches of our federal form 
 of government. 
 
 In one of his recent books, Professor Laski in the course 
 of a rather severe criticism of our governmental practices 
 says: 
 
 No kind of working compromise has been reached between the 
 States on the one hand, and the Federal Government on the other. 
 Each has gone its way often almost wilfully, duplicating the work 
 of the other. . . . The possibility of cooperation is not considered. 
 The lines of demarcation are never made plain.^s 
 
 Had Professor Laski been aware of the progress already 
 made in the directions he indicates, it is probably that his 
 criticism might have been turned to commendation. 
 
 28 H. J. Laski, The Problems of Sovereignty, March, 1917. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 Administration of Important Regulatory Laws 
 
 Thus far in our consideration of the administration of 
 law, we have been primarily concerned with that type of 
 legislation which, while controlling the actions of adminis- 
 trative officers, leaves the citizen, in whose interest the laws 
 have been enacted, practically free to avail himself of any 
 benefits which may be derived, or to disregard them alto- 
 gether. Such is that very considerable body of legislation 
 upon which the purely educational activities of the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture are based. 
 
 There are, however, as has been previously pointed out, 
 other laws, whose administration has been committed to this 
 department, which have as their primary and immediate 
 object the regulation and control of the conduct of the 
 citizens themselves. Of course, the ultimate object is the 
 same in both cases, that is, the advancement of the welfare 
 of those for whom the government acts. The difference is 
 mainly in the means and the methods employed. This dif- 
 ference in procedure gives rise to several important admin- 
 istrative consequences in the latter type of legislation which 
 are not present in the former. It is to the consideration of 
 some of these that the present chapter will be devoted. 
 
 Professor Learned says : 
 
 The fabric and the administrative machinery rest on the written 
 laws. But the laws, as Burke very well understood, reach but a 
 very little way. Administration, to be effective, must often depend 
 on practices of which the written law takes little or no account. 
 Behind the law there are assumptions which give room for the exer- 
 cise of individual judgment and discretion essential to their proper 
 execution.! 
 
 It is in these federal laws which are intended to govern 
 the conduct of individuals that the truth of this statement 
 
 1 Learned, p. 368. 
 
 68 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT REGULATORY LAWS 69 
 
 is most clearly seen. Generally, they are what may be 
 termed conditional statutes. Such statutes, says Goodnow, 
 " lay down the conditions and circumstances in which it will 
 be lawful for the administration to act, and the act of the 
 administration in enforcing them does not consist merely in 
 seeing that the laws as passed by the legislature are ex- 
 ecuted; but rather in elaborating the details as to points 
 which the legislature is unable to see, or which, if it can 
 foresee, it is unable to regulate. While the absolute uncon- 
 ditional statutes are, as a general thing, addressed to the 
 persons subject to the obedience of the state, these condi- 
 tional stautes are rather addressed to the administrative 
 authorities and are in the nature of instructions to them 
 how to act in the general classes of cases for which provision 
 has been made. The action of the administration in the 
 case of the unconditional statute is confined simply to the 
 execution of the state will. In the case of the conditional 
 statute, the administration has not merely to execute the 
 state will ; but has as well to participate in its expression as 
 to the details which have not been regulated by the legis- 
 lature."^ 
 
 The legislative ideal of the United States, contrary to that 
 which prevails in most European countries, has been to 
 furnish minute and detailed instructions and directions to 
 the executive. The laws have been, so drawn as to leave 
 the administrative officials little or no discretion. Jealously 
 guarding their powers and prerogatives, legislators have at- 
 tempted to foresee and to provide in the wording of the 
 bills for all possible contingencies. 
 
 So far as the national legislature is concerned, there seems 
 to be a different tendency in recent years. This tendency 
 is particularly noticeable in the exercise of what has been 
 termed the 'police power.' Either because of the tremen- 
 dous expansion of the activities of the central govemttierit in 
 this field, which has made it impossible for the legislative 
 
 2 Goodnow, Principles of the Administrative Law of the United 
 States, p. 325. 
 
70 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 body to keep pace ; or because of the greater complexity of 
 this type of legislation, which has made congressmen recog- 
 nize their inability to provide for all contingencies which 
 may arise, more latitude is being given to the executive 
 authorities. All of the measures which we shall consider 
 in this chapter specifically authorize the Secretary of Agri- 
 culture to promulgate such rules and regulations as may be 
 necessary for making them effective. 
 
 It is this provision which gives elasticity to otherwise 
 rigid laws. To what extent it may be necessary or desirable 
 thus to supplement the statutory law, depends in part upon 
 the provisions of the law itself and, in part, upon the nature 
 of the subject or relationships to which the law is applicable. 
 Even administrative officers find that they must rely largely 
 on experience in formulating such regulations as will most 
 effectually carry out the intent of the legislative body. The 
 result is that the regulations are either issued serially as the 
 need arises, or must undergo periodical revision. 
 
 The power to issue these regulations, as previously indi- 
 cated, is purely a delegated one. Under the American sys- 
 tem of government, administrative officers have no general 
 ordinance power. Such regulations as are issued, then, 
 derive their legal force from the law upon which they are 
 predicated, and which they are intended to supplement.* 
 To the extent that they represent a reasonable interpreta- 
 tion of the statutory provisions, they have the same legal 
 force as the law itself. 
 
 In determining what is the real intent of the law, or of the 
 legislative body, administrative officers are frequently con- 
 fronted with problems which are not unlike those that are 
 presented to the courts in their interpretation of the law. 
 Generally, and unless otherwise specifically provided, the 
 question as to the conformity of an administrative regula- 
 tion with the law must, where appeal is made, be answered 
 by the courts. In determining whether the regulations are 
 consistent with the law, there must be applied the same rule 
 
 s Ibid., p. 143- 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT REGULATORY LAWS 7 1 
 
 of decision which controls when an act of Congress is as- 
 sailed as being unconstitutional ; that is, a regulation should 
 not be annulled unless in the judgment of the court it is 
 plainly inconsistent with the law.* 
 
 Within the scope of its jurisdiction, the adjudications of 
 the administrative authorities is generally final, unless there 
 is legislative provision to the contrary.^ This is particularly 
 true in those rules which are of general application. 
 
 Acting under the authority which has been delegated to 
 him by Congress, the Secretary of Agriculture has issued 
 numerous rules and regulations for the guidance of his sub- 
 ordinates and others affected by the operation of the various 
 regulatory laws. Sometimes these are called circulars of 
 the ofifice of the Secretary ; sometimes they are issued as gen- 
 eral orders of the bureau immediately concerned. In either 
 case they must, of course, be authorized by the Secretary. 
 
 In the enforcement of those regulatory laws which pro- 
 vide penalties for their violation, the Department of Agri- 
 culture, like the other executive units, must cooperate very 
 extensively with the Department of Justice. Indeed, it may 
 be said that the Solicitor of the Department of Agriculture, 
 in this work, is very much like an assistant to the Attorney 
 General. 
 
 Under an agreement with the Department of Justice, ar- 
 rangements have been made for the more expeditious and 
 economical prosecution of criminal cases and highly tech- 
 nical cases arising under the food and drugs act and other 
 regulatory measures. By this arrangement the Solicitor of 
 the Department of Agriculture reports criminal cases to the 
 Department of Justice in the form of criminal informations, 
 which, if approved by the United States attorneys, may be 
 immediately filed in court. 
 
 In the trial of the cases arising under these acts the points 
 at issue frequently call for a thorough understanding on the 
 part of the legal representative of the Government of highly 
 
 * Bruce Wyman, Administrative Law, p. ago. 
 5 Litchfield v. Register and Receiver, 9 Wall 575. 
 
72 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 technical questions of chemistry or other science. In cases 
 where such questions are involved, arrangements have been 
 made whereby the Solicitor and his assistants will assist the 
 United States attorneys in the actual trials. In this way 
 there will be placed at the disposal of the Departmejit of 
 Justice the more intimate knowledge which must necessarily 
 be obtained by the law officers of the Department of Agri- 
 culture in the preparation of the cases than can be acquired 
 by the United States attorneys through correspondence or 
 in the brief time at their command. 
 
 With this brief introduction, let us now turn to a consid- 
 eration of the actual administration of a few of the most 
 important of those regulatory measures whose enforcement 
 has been committed to the Department of Agriculture. 
 
 Meat Inspection Act 
 
 Since the establishment of the Bureau of Animal Industry 
 in May, 1884, numerous laws relating to the live stock in- 
 dustry and its products have been passed by Congress. At 
 first, the primary, if not the sole object of this legislation, 
 was the giving of encouragement and and protection to the 
 industry itself. Generally, the object was to be attained 
 either through the suppression or eradication of animal dis- 
 eases ; or by extending and protecting the foreign market 
 through a rigid inspection of animals and animal products 
 intended for export. 
 
 However, as early as 1891, the Secretary of Agriculture 
 was instructed to inspect, prior to their slaughter, " all cattle, 
 sheep, and hogs which are subjects of interstate commerce 
 and which are about to be slaughtered . . . the carcasses or 
 products of which are to be transported and sold for human 
 consumption in any other state or territory. . . ."^ 
 
 The making of post-mortem examinations, which now 
 constitutes the most important feature of meat inspection, 
 was left entirely within the discretion of the Secretary of 
 Agriculture. The law of 1891 was supplemented by subse- 
 
 626 Stat. L. logo. 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT REGULATORY LAWS 73 
 
 quent enactments; but it was not until 1906 that an adequate 
 statute, providing for a thorough inspection of meats and 
 meat products, and having as its primary object the safe- 
 guarding of the health of the people, was passed by Congress. 
 This latter measure was slightly amended and reenacted in 
 its present form March 4, 1907J 
 
 Under the present law emphasis is placed upon the post- 
 mortem examination. The inspection of animals prior to 
 their slaughter is left within the discretion of the Secretary 
 of Agriculture. In general, the act provides for the main- 
 tenance by the Department of Agriculture of a system of 
 inspection in packing houses and other establishments in 
 which cattle, sheep, swine and goats are slaughtered, or the 
 carcasses or meat products of which are prepared for inter- 
 state or foreign commerce; and prohibits the shipment or 
 transportation of such articles in interstate or foreign com- 
 merce unless they bear the mark of federal inspection and 
 approval as required by the act. 
 
 The provisions of the meat inspection law requiring in- 
 spection do not apply to animals slaughtered by farmers on 
 the farm nor to retail butchers and dealers. However, the 
 regulations of the department require that such butchers and 
 dealers, in order to ship meat or meat food products in in- 
 terstate or foreign commerce, shall first obtain certificates of 
 exemption; but no such requirement is made of farmers. 
 These certificates are issued only after an examination of 
 the premises of the applicant, and after certain sanitation 
 requirements have been met. They may be summarily re- 
 voked for any violation of the regulations. 
 
 The requirements as to sanitation in the establishments 
 that operate under federal inspection form a very important 
 part of the meat-inspection regulations.^ Ample authority 
 on this subject is granted in the act. The requirements are 
 of ,two kinds : those relating to the cleanliness of rooms and 
 equipment, and conduct of operations in plants already in 
 
 T34 Stat. L. 1256. 
 
 8 Bureau of Animal Industry Order no. 211, Issued July 30, 1914. 
 
74 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 existence ; and those fixing rules for the construction of new 
 plants and the installation of new equipment. Prior to the 
 inauguration of inspection, an examination of the establish- 
 ment and premises must be made by an employee of the Dei- 
 partment of Agriculture and the requirements for sanitation 
 and the necessary facilities for inspection specified. 
 
 Some idea of the scope of these sanitary regulations may 
 be gained from the following : There must be sufficient light 
 to insure sanitary conditions in all rooms and compartments ; 
 there must be adequate drainage and plumbing systems ; the 
 water supply must be clean and ample and subjected to lab- 
 oratory tests to insure its purity; sanitary and adequate 
 dressing rooms, toilets and lavatories must be installed; 
 floors, walls, ceilings and other structural parts must be of 
 such materials as to make them susceptible of being readily 
 and thoroughly cleaned; and all rooms and equipment used 
 for edible products must be kept separated from those used 
 for inedible products. Many other regulations have been 
 prescribed to prevent the introduction or spread of com- 
 mimicable diseases. Inspection is not inaugurated until a 
 satisfactory compliance with the sanitary requirements is 
 shown and proper facilities for the conduct of the inspection 
 are provided. 
 
 The proprietor or operator of an establishment which is 
 subject to the provisions of the meat inspection law must file 
 an application and submit triplicate copies of the plans and 
 specifications of the plant. The plans are referred to the 
 architect of the Bureau of Animal Industry to determine 
 whether the structure and arrangements conform to the 
 regulations. Each establishment to which inspection is 
 granted is assigned an official number. This number iden- 
 tifies the plant, and must appear in every instance as a part 
 of the mark of inspection. 
 
 When inspection is granted and an official number as- 
 signed, a force of inspectors is detailed to the establishment 
 to perform the inspection and enforce the regulations under 
 the direction of an inspector in charge. 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT REGULATORY LAWS 75 
 
 Under the federal system of inspection, at least two ex- 
 aminations are made in all cases. While the ante-mortem 
 examination is not now a requirement of the law, it is made 
 in practically every instance primarily as an aid to a more 
 effective post-mortem examination. Generally, the ante- 
 mortem inspection is performed in the pens or yards just 
 before the animals enter the plant. If any of a lot of animals 
 show symptoms of disease, the entire lot is subjected to 
 further and individual inspection. When the appearance of 
 any animal is such as to cause the inspector to suspect that 
 it is affected with disease that may warrant its condemna- 
 tion in whole or in part on the post-mortem inspection, it is 
 marked for identification by means of a numbered metal 
 tag marked " U. S. Suspect." A record of the tag number 
 and any other pertinent information is sent to the inspector 
 in charge of the post-mortem examination. This informa- 
 tion is given due weight by him in determining the final 
 disposition of the animal. " Suspects " are slaughtered sep- 
 arately from those which are passed on the ante-mortem ex- 
 amination. Animals which are found in such condition as 
 to be unfit for food are marked " U. S. Condemned," and 
 must be destroyed or disposed of in such manner as to pre- 
 vent their use for food. 
 
 The post-mortem inspection really consists of a series of 
 examinations. These include an examination of the entire 
 carcass immediately after slaughter, and later an examina- 
 tion of each of the parts. Where the output is small one 
 inspector performs all the inspections. In large institutions 
 the work is so arranged that each inspector gives his entire 
 attention to some particular part. In this way each becomes 
 a specialist, with the result that a high degree of individual 
 and collective proficiency is attained. 
 
 Animals or parts thereof found to be free from disease or 
 any doubtful condition are marked "Inspected and Passed"; 
 those in which any disease or doubtful condition is foimd 
 are retained for final examination. 
 
 An important requirement in the conduct of the post- 
 
76 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 mortem Inspection is that the identity of the carcass and each 
 of its parts be carefully maintained until the inspection is 
 completed, so that if there is disease in any one organ or 
 part all of the other parts of the carcass may be brought to- 
 gether for final examination. This is accomplished through 
 a system of numbered tags marked "U. S. Retained." 
 
 The carcasses retained on the regular inspection are sent 
 to a room equipped with special facilities where they are sub- 
 jected to a searching examination by men of special skill 
 and thorough training and experience. The findings of 
 these experts are final, except that appeal may be made to 
 the Chief of the Bureau of Animal Industry or to the Sec- 
 retary of Agriculture. A detailed record of each final ex- 
 amination and the disposition made is prepared and retained. 
 When the several examinations have been completed, each 
 carcass or part thereof is plainly marked to indicate the dis- 
 position that is to be made of it. 
 
 The meat inspection regulations governing the disposal of 
 condemned articles emphasizes three important require- 
 ments. First, that every article condemned shall be plainly 
 marked to show that it is condemned ; second, that all con- 
 demned articles shall remain in the custody of the inspector 
 until they are properly disposed of ; and, third, that the re- 
 quired destruction or denaturing of condemned articles shall 
 be done by the establishment in the presence of the inspector, 
 who must render a report of the proceedings. 
 
 On account of the fact that meat which was entirely sound 
 and wholesome at the time of slaughter may become un- 
 sound and contaminated through improper care or handling, 
 and because healthful products may be rendered unwhole- 
 some through adulteration or the addition of deleterious sub- 
 stances, and for the purpose of protecting the consumer 
 against false or misleading labels, inspection of the various 
 processes of preparing and labeling meat products becomes 
 necessary. This is an important part of the general system 
 of federal inspection. Persons are selected for this work 
 because of their practical knowledge and experience in the 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT REGULATORY LAWS "JJ 
 
 handling of meats and meat food products. District lab- 
 oratories are maintained at convenient points for the mak- 
 ing of chemical analyses or other technical examinations. It 
 is the duty of the lay inspectors to see that the requirements 
 of the regulations as to sanitation are observed. 
 
 The meat inspection act provides that when meat or meat 
 products which have been inspected and passed are packed, 
 the establishment shall cause a label to be affixed to the con- 
 tainer or covering stating that the contents have been in- 
 spected and passed. The act also provides that no meat or 
 meat product shall be sold, offered for sale, or shipped in 
 interstate commerce under any false or deceptive name. 
 The regulations define at length what may or may not ap- 
 pear upon any label. Copies of all labels intended for use 
 in plants under inspection must be approved in advance. 
 
 The penalties prescribed for violation of the meat-inspec- 
 tion act are applicable both to persons selling or offering for 
 sale goods which have been prepared in violation of the law, 
 and to persons or companies accepting such goods for trans- 
 portation in interstate or foreign commerce. Unusually 
 severe penalties are prescribed for the offer or acceptance of 
 any bribe with the intent to influence any inspector or other 
 officer in the performance of his duty. 
 
 Because of the general approval of the law and the co- 
 operation of those engaged in the industry to which it re- 
 lates, there are very few violations upon which action must 
 be taken — less in fact than under any other of the important 
 regulatory laws administered by the Department of Agri- 
 culture.* 
 
 Approximately twenty-six hundred persons are directly 
 engaged in the federal inspection of meats and meat products, 
 distributed in approximately eight hundred and fifty estab- 
 lishments. All are under the general direction of the Chief 
 of the Bureau of Animal Industry. They are divided into 
 two general classes — ^professional and non-professional. 
 
 9 Annual Reports of the Solicitor of the Department of Agricul- 
 ture. 
 
78 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 The professional class consists primarily of veterinary in- 
 pectors and laboratory inspectors. The non-professional 
 class is composed of the so-called lay inspectors and admin- 
 istrative or clerical employees. All are required to pass civil 
 service examinations before appointment. 
 
 Certain veterinary inspectors, selected because of their ex- 
 perience and general qualifications, are known as traveling 
 veterinary inspectors. Each is assigned a district in which 
 he makes special inspection of establishments and reports 
 directly to the Chief of the Bureau of Animal Industry as 
 to whether the law is being properly enforced and the regu- 
 lations are being observed. These visits and reports are 
 helpful in raising the general standards of the administration 
 of the law. 
 
 Upward of three and a quarter millions of dollars is spent 
 annually for federal meat inspection. 
 
 The regulations which have been issued under the author- 
 ity of the meat inspection law seem to be very broad and 
 comprehensive. The original set was prepared by repre- 
 sentatives of the Department of Agriculture in cooperation 
 with a board of seven eminent outside scientists, of which 
 Dr. William H. Welch of Johns Hopkins University was 
 chairman. These have been supplemented and changed 
 from time te time, but the general principles remain the 
 same. 
 
 Perhaps the chief criticism of the federal meat inspection 
 grows out of a misunderstanding as to the limitations under 
 which the officers charged with its administration are re- 
 quired to work. While some form of inspection is main- 
 tained over the entire product of all establishments which 
 sell any of their goods in interestate or foreign commerce, 
 this does not include more than sixty or sixty-five per cent 
 of the entire output of the country. Thus it is possible 
 that much of the laxity of the state and local inspection is 
 erroneously ascribed to the federal system. 
 
 Effort is being made by federal authorities to secure a 
 higher degree of cooperation with local health officials in 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT REGULATORY LAWS 79 
 
 raising the standards in the preparation of meat and meat 
 products. Until this is accomplished the object of the law 
 cannot be fully realized. 
 
 Another criticism which has been urged against the meat 
 inspection law is that it tends to defeat the purpose of the 
 earlier legislation passed to promote the live stock industry. 
 The validity of this criticism rests upon the degree of fair- 
 ness used in the administration of the law. Necessarily, 
 there must be something of a compromise between the pro- 
 tection of the health of the people and the protection of the 
 live stock industry. The loss which live stock producers 
 suffer in the rejection of animals considered unfit for food 
 is perhaps more than offset by the advantages such a system 
 of inspection affords in detecting, localizing and eradicat- 
 ing animal diseases. 
 
 The Food and Drugs Act 
 
 As has already been indicated, it is only within compara- 
 tively recent years that the federal government has con- 
 cerned itself directly with the protection and conservation of 
 health. For many years this was thought to be the province 
 and business of the States. However, in the tremendous 
 increase in the activities of the central government in other 
 matters directly and immediately affecting the lives and wel- 
 fare of individuals, a very considerable body of federal 
 health legislation has been gradually developed. At the 
 present time, each of the ten executive departments is en- 
 gaged directly or indirectly in the administration of one or 
 more acts of Congress designed primarily to safeguard the 
 health of the people.^" ' 
 
 The food and drugs act,^^ commonly called the "pure 
 food law," was approved the same day as the meat inspec- 
 tion act, June 30, 1906. Both were the outgrowth of previ- 
 ous statutes which had proved inadequate or ineffective. 
 
 Briefly stated, the food and drugs act forbids the im- 
 
 1* Report of the Solicitor of the Department of Agriculture, 1914. 
 "34 Stat. L. 768. 
 
80 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 portation into the United States, the exportation from the 
 United States, the introduction into interstate commerce, 
 and the manufacture and sale in the District of Columbia 
 and the Territories of misbranded and adulterated foods and 
 drugs. In 1912, the so-called Shirley amendment^^ to the 
 act was passed prohibiting false and misleading statements 
 as to the curative or therapeutic effects of medicines. On 
 March 3, 1913, the act was further amended so as to require 
 articles of food in package form to bear a statement or label 
 showing the quantity of the contents in terms of weight, 
 measure or numerical count.^^ 
 
 Prior to June, 191 3, domestic meats and meat products 
 which had been prepared under federal inspection were 
 specifically exempted from the operation of the food and 
 drugs act by the rules and regulations for the enforcement 
 of that act. Since this date, however, these articles have 
 been subjected to the same treatment as other food irrespec- 
 tive of any prior inspection. 
 
 Section nine provides that no dealer shall be prosecuted 
 for violations of the act if he can establish a guaranty signed 
 by the wholesaler, jobber, manufacturer, or other party re- 
 siding in the United States, from whom he purchased the 
 articles in question, to the effect that the same are not 
 adulterated or misbranded within the meaning of the act, 
 designating it. In such cases the party or parties making 
 the guaranty shall be amenable to the prosecutions, fines, and 
 other penalties which would otherwise attach to the dealer." 
 
 1237 Stat. L. 416. 
 
 IS 37 Stat. L. 732. 
 
 ^* Regulation 9 of the Rules and Regulations for the enforcement 
 of the food and drugs act, June 30, 1906, 34 Stat. 768, is hereby- 
 amended, effective May i, 191S, so as to read as follows : 
 
 " (a) It having been determined that the legends ' Guaranteed 
 under the Food and Drugs Act, June 30, 1906,' and ' Guaranteed by 
 (name of guarantor), under the Food and Drugs Act, June 30, 
 1906,' borne on the labels or packages of food and drugs, accom- 
 panied by serial numbers given by the Secretary of Agriculture, are 
 each misleading and deceptive, in that the public is induced by such 
 legends and serial numbers to believe that the articles to which they 
 relate have been examined and approved by the Government and 
 that the Government guarantees that they comply with the law, the 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT REGULATORY LAWS 8 1 
 
 Penalties for the violation of the act may consist of the 
 seizure and condemnation of the goods, or fine and im- 
 prisonment. Goods transported in interstate commerce are 
 subject to seizure only if remaining unloaded, unsold, or in 
 original, unbroken packages.^" 
 
 While the food and drugs act is properly called a health 
 measure, it is only in a somewhat indirect manner that the 
 object is to be attained. In other words, it is primarily 
 a measure intended to enforce honest labeling of foods and 
 drugs, and only secondarily does it directly prohibit harm- 
 ful adulteration. Thus the benefits to be derived are largely 
 dependent upon the degree of education of the consumers. 
 
 Each of the terms " food," " driig," " misbranded," and 
 " adulterated " is specifically defined in the act. When used 
 in the enforcement of the law, it must be in the statutory 
 sense. Thus " drug " as used in the act, includes " all medi- 
 cines and preparations recognized in the United States 
 Pharmacopoeia or National Formulary for internal or ex- 
 ternal use, and any substance or mixture of substances in- 
 tended to be used for the cure, mitigation, or prevention 
 of disease of either man or other animals." 
 
 All misbranding and much statutory " adulteration " may 
 be corrected by the use of appropriate names and labels. 
 The statute recognizes two classes of adulterated foods. In 
 one class adulteration of an article is dependent upon the 
 
 use of either legend, or any similar legend, on labels or packages 
 should be discontinued. Inasmuch as the acceptance by the Secre- 
 tary of Agriculture for filing of the guaranties of manufacturers 
 and dealers and the giving by him of serial numbers thereto con- 
 tribute to the deceptive character of legends on labels and packages, 
 no guaranty in any form shall hereafter be filed with and no serial 
 number shall hereafter be given to any guaranty by the Secretary of 
 Agriculture. All guaranties now on file with the Secretary of Agri- 
 culture shall be stricken from the files, and the serial numbers as- 
 signed to such guaranties shall be canceled." 
 
 15 " Regulation 2. — The term ' Original unbroken package ' as 
 used in this act is the original package, carton, case, can, box, barrel, 
 bottle, phial, or other receptacle_ put up by the manufacturer, to 
 which the label is attached, or which may be suitable for the attach- 
 ment of a label, making one complete package of food or drug 
 article. The original package contemplated includes both the whole- 
 sale and the retail package." 
 
82 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 name or label under which it is sold. Change of name or 
 label so as correctly to describe the product will relieve it 
 from the charge of adulteration, which could otherwise be 
 maintained against it, because of false or misleading state- 
 ments or representations as to its identity, quality or 
 strength. 
 
 Adulteration of the second class of articles is inherent in 
 the articles themselves, irrespective of names or labels, and 
 cannot be corrected by renaming or relabeling. The more 
 important provisions of the act affecting products of this 
 class declare those foods adulterated which " consist, in 
 whole or in part, of a filthy, decomposed, or putrid sub- 
 stance, or any portion of an animal unfit for food," or con- 
 taining any added poisonous or deleterious ingredient which 
 may render the article injurious to health. 
 
 The food and drugs act contains no provision as to the 
 adulteration of drugs in any popular sense of the word. 
 Whether a drug is adulterated or not depends solely upon 
 the labeling of the container. The various kinds of 
 "adulteration" of drugs which are prohibited may all be 
 cured by correct or honest labeling. 
 
 The limitations and restrictions within the statute itself 
 coupled with serious omissions, such as the absence of 
 authority to inspect establishments where foods and drugs 
 are manufactured, prepared, or stored, the lack of legal 
 standards for foods, and the failure to take cognizance of 
 fraudulent statements covering foods and drugs which are 
 not in or upon the food or drug package; these and othei^ 
 limitations have made this law exceptionally difficult to 
 administer effectively. It was to call attention to this fact 
 that these shortcomings of the law have been dwelt upon 
 somewhat at length. The so-called Shirley amendment, 
 already mentioned, is one step in the direction of strength- 
 ening the original act. 
 
 The food and drugs act is administered, under the Secre- 
 tary of Agriculture, by the Bureau of Chemistry. This 
 work constitutes the principal, but by no means, the only 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT REGULATORY LAWS 83 
 
 function of this bureau. That part of the organization 
 which is directly engaged in the enforcement of the act 
 includes: (i) Field inspectors who procure samples for 
 analysis and information regarding the manufacture and 
 sale of drugs; (2) chemists and clerks in the laboratories 
 in Washington and branch laboratories in a few other large 
 cities; and (3) the Board of Food and Drug Inspection, 
 whose duties are to consider all questions arising in the 
 enforcement of the act upon which the decision of the Sec- 
 retary of Agriculture is necessary, and to conduct all hear- 
 ings biased upon alleged violations of the law. 
 
 At first there were about twenty branch laboratories. 
 This number has recently been reduced to four, experience 
 having shown that the work can be done more effectively 
 and economically where specialization can be introduced. 
 
 Each of these laboratories is the center or central office 
 of a district. All of the workers within a district are under 
 the immediate direction of a district supervisor, who is in 
 turn under the direction of the Chief of the Bureau of 
 Chemistry. 
 
 Information secured by inspectors or from analyses is 
 reported to the Chief of the Bureau of Chemistry, who 
 places it before the Board of Food and Drug Inspection. 
 If the information indicates a violation of the law, the' 
 Board makes recommendations to the Secretary of Agricul- 
 ture regarding the exclusion of adulterated or misbranded 
 imported articles, or prosecutions for the shipment or sale 
 of domestic goods in violation of the law. All persons 
 charged with any violation of the statute are afforded a 
 hearing at which testimony may be offered, before prosecu- 
 tion is commenced in the courts or before any other action 
 is taken. 
 
 In the case of imported foods and drugs no prosecutions 
 are made. The efforts of government officials are confined 
 to preventing the importation of illegal goods, and causing' 
 their reshipment or destruction. The Secretary of the 
 Treasury is instructed to deliver to the Secretary of Agri- 
 
84 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 culture, upon his request, samples of foods and drugs which 
 are being imported into the United States or offered for 
 import. 
 
 If it appears from the examination of such samples that 
 the goods are misbranded or adulterated within the meaning 
 of the act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall refuse de- 
 livery to the consignee, and shall cause the destruction of 
 any goods which are not exported within three months from 
 the date of such refusal. 
 
 ' Notice of the arrival at ports of entry of shipments of 
 food or drugs is given by the transmission of a copy of the 
 invoice to the representative of the Department of Agri- 
 culture. Upon the basis of this invoice it is determined 
 whether samples should be required or not. In all of this 
 work there must be close cooperation between the repre- 
 sentatives of the Department of Agriculture and those of 
 the Treasury Department. 
 
 The methods of procedure in enforcing those provisions 
 of the law which relate to domestic goods differ consider- 
 ably from those concerning imports. In the case of do- 
 mestic goods, the efficient and effective enforcement of the 
 law depends in large measure upon the work of the in- 
 spectors. In order to protect the public against imposters, 
 the inspectors are provided with an identification card 
 signed by the Secretary of Agriculure and enclosed in a case 
 opposite a photograph of the inspector, on which is im- 
 printed the seal of the Department of Agriculture. 
 
 Samples secured by inspectors are forwarded to the 
 laboratory in the district in which they are working. The 
 samples are there examined and if found to be in violation 
 of the law, the dealer or shipper is summoned for a hear- 
 ing. The purpose of these hearings is to afford an oppor- 
 tunity for the presentation of evidence to show that an 
 error has been made in either the collection or analysis of 
 the sample, or to show that a guaranty has been received 
 from the person from whom the goods were obtained. 
 
 After such a hearing the information secured is con- 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT REGULATORY LAWS 85 
 
 sidered in connection with the data presented by the in- 
 spectors and chemists relating to the sample. If the hear- 
 ings are held at a branch laboratory, the findings are 
 subsequently reviewed by the Board of Food and Drug 
 Inspection in Washington. If it appears that the law has 
 been violated the Board makes the appropriate recommenda- 
 tion to the Secretary of Agriculture, who certifies this fact 
 to the proper United States Attorney, through the Depart- 
 ment of Justice, together with the necessary information 
 regarding the case. It is then the duty of the United States 
 Attorney to prosecute the case "promptly" in the United 
 States district courts. 
 
 State authorities, charged with the enforcement of health, 
 food, or drug laws, may, when authorized by the Secretary 
 of Agriculture, institute proceedings in federal courts for 
 the violation of the food and drugs act. 
 
 Although the enforcement of this law has been com- 
 mitted to the Secretary of Agriculture, the rules and regula- 
 tions for carrying out its provisions must be made by a 
 board, consisting of the Secretary of the Treasury, the 
 Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Commerce. 
 
 In the drafting of the original set of regulations, ample 
 opportunity was given to all persons who would be affected 
 by the operation of the law to present such information as 
 they thought proper. In addition, a board called the 
 " Referee Board of Consulting Scientific Experts," of which 
 President Ira Remsen was chairman, was appointed to pass 
 upon the larger questions of policy. Extensive experiments 
 were conducted and voluminous reports were rendered. 
 
 Experience has made numerous changes and additions 
 necessary, but before any new regulation or decision is 
 issued, effort is made to secure adequate information.^* 
 
 The law requires that all judicial decisions in cases aris- 
 ing under it shall be published not more than thirty days 
 after they are rendered. Since these are printed in con- 
 
 1* Rules and Regulations for the Enforcement of the Food and 
 Drugs Act, Office of the Secretary, Circular no. 21, Seventh Revision. 
 
86 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 venient form for distribution and give the complete in- 
 formation upon which the case is decided, they furnish a 
 valuable supplement to the rules and regulations. These 
 decisions and those of the Board of Food and Drug Inspec- 
 tion are published under the caption, " Service and Regula- 
 tory Announcements." 
 
 No information relative to any case is given out until the 
 judgment of the court has been given. If, therefore, an 
 error is made no injustice is done to the reputation of any 
 manufacturer or dealer or to any brand of goods. No in- 
 formation regarding any class or brand of goods is pub- 
 lished, except such as is found in the judgment of the court. 
 
 The authorities charged with the administration of this 
 statute have been criticized for failing to publish lists of 
 articles of food and drugs which comply with the provisions 
 of the law. It is felt that the publication of such a list 
 would be a disadvantage rather than an advantage because 
 it has been found, in the enforcement of similar laws, that 
 some firms having secured the publication of the names of 
 their goods on such a list, and have subsequently altered the 
 character of their products though they still used the list 
 for advertising purposes. 
 
 The chief criticisms of the administration of the law have 
 grown out of and are attributable to the weaknesses of the 
 act itself, to which attention has already been called. These 
 weaknesses have been accentuated by various court de- 
 cisions. It is hoped that some of these defects may be 
 overcome by a greater degree of cooperation with state 
 authorities. With this object in view, a division of state 
 cooperation has recently been established in the Bureau of 
 Chemistry, from which notable results have already been 
 achieved. At the same time effort is being made to secure 
 more adequate legislation by Congress. 
 
administration of important regulatory laws 8/ 
 
 The United States Cotton Futures Act 
 
 By act of May 23, 1908," the Secretary of Agriculture 
 was authorized to establish standards for the various grades 
 of cotton which are handled in the cotton markets. This 
 was the first of a series of such acts establishing grades or 
 standards for the more important agricultural products.^* 
 At first their use was permissive or optional; recently the 
 use of most of them has been made obligatory in those trans- 
 actions which involve interstate commerce. 
 
 It was believed by those persons who were instrumental 
 in securing the establishment of cotton standards that even 
 their voluntary use would prove helpful in eradicating some 
 of the evil and harmful practices in the marketing of cotton, 
 particularly those relating to future exchanges which had 
 proved most detrimental to cotton producers. This expec- 
 tation was not very fully realized. Accordingly, on August 
 18, 1914, Congress passed an act, "to tax the privilege of 
 dealing on exchanges, boards of trade, and similar places in 
 contracts of sale of cotton for future delivery, and for other 
 purposes."^* This measure, with some amendments, was 
 re-enacted August 11, 1916.^° 
 
 While the compulsory use of the official cotton standards 
 extends only to contracts on future exchanges made under 
 the provisions of the act, they have now been accepted and 
 are used voltmtarily in practically all of the important 
 " spot " cotton markets of the country. Through the county 
 agents, demonstrations as to the value of these standards 
 have been made among the farmers themselves. 
 
 Ostensibly, the present cotton futures act is a revenue or 
 taxation measure. Its primary purpose, however, is to reg- 
 ulate the business of cotton exchanges with the object of 
 eliminating some of the evil features of future dealing in 
 cotton, and to stabilize cotton marketing generally. 
 
 " 35 Stat. L. 251. 
 
 18 The most important of these is the U. S. Grain Standards Act 
 to which reference has already been made. 
 1938 Stat. L. 693- 
 20 39 Stat. L. 446. 
 
88 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 The act imposes on all contracts of sale of cotton for 
 future delivery, made at, or on, any exchange or similar in- 
 stitution or place of business an excise tax of two cents on 
 each pound of cotton involved in such contracts. It then 
 provides for exemption from this tax of such contracts as 
 comply with the provisions of the act. 
 
 Most of these conditions which relieve transactions from 
 the tax have to do with the form and terms of the contracts. 
 The principal requirements are : ( i ) all contracts must con- 
 form to rules and regulations made pursuant to the act; (2) 
 they must specify the basis grade for the cotton involved in 
 the transaction, which must be one of the grades for which 
 standards have been established by the Secretary of Agri- 
 culture and none other; (3) if cotton other than the basis 
 grade be tendered or delivered in settlement of a contract, 
 the difiference above or below the contract price which the 
 receiver shall pay shall be the actual commercial difference 
 as determined by the Secretary of Agriculture ; (4) the total 
 weight involved in a contract must be tendered and the per- 
 son making the tender shall furnish to the person receiving 
 the same a written notice or certificate stating the grade of 
 each individual bale to be delivered and, by means of marks 
 or numbers, identify each bale with its grade; (5) in case a 
 dispute arises between the parties to the contract, as to the 
 grade of any cotton tendered either party may refer the 
 question for determination by the Secretary of Agriculture, 
 his findings to be accepted in all courts of the United States 
 as prima facie evidence of the true classification of the cot- 
 ton involved ; and, (6) that the delivery of cotton under the 
 contract shall not be effected by means of a "set-off" or 
 "ring" settlement, but only by the actual transfer of the 
 specified cotton mentioned in the contract. 
 
 The administration of that part of the cotton futures act 
 which relates to what might be termed the technique of cot- 
 ton handling, marketing, and grading, and the settlement of 
 disputes between the parties to contracts, has been com- 
 mitted, by Congress, to the Secretary of Agriculture. That 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT REGULATORY LAWS 89 
 
 part which has to do with the imposition and collection of 
 the tax is administered by the Secretary of the Treasury. 
 Each of these officers is authorized and instructed to make 
 and promulgate such rules and regulations as may be deemed 
 necessary for the enforcement of the various provisions of 
 the act. In this, as in so many other instances, cooperation 
 between the two departments is essential to the effective ad- 
 ministration of the law. 
 
 The enforcement of that part of the act which was as- 
 signed to the Secretary of Agriculture has been delegated by 
 him to the Chief of the Bureau of Markets. This work con- 
 stitutes one of the principal functions of this newly created 
 bureau. Rather logically, it falls under four main heads : 
 (i) general admiinistration or supervision; (2) the deter- 
 mination of disputes; (3) the establishment and promulga- 
 tion of official cotton standards, and the preparation and 
 distribution of practical forms thereof; and (4), the investi- 
 gation of future and " spot " cotton markets, primarily to see 
 that the provisions of the law are being observed in the first, 
 and to secure reliable information regarding cotton market- 
 ing and prices in the second. This information is supple- 
 mented by daily market quotations from all of the principal 
 markets and exchanges. 
 
 The general supervision of the enforcement of the cotton 
 futures act is under the immediate direction of the Chief of 
 the Bureau of Markets. In this work, he is assisted by a 
 board of examiners and by a committee on final inspection. 
 Their principal function is to formulate and enforce the 
 rules and regulations which are promulgated by the Secre- 
 tary. They also pass upon general questions of policy and 
 method. The personnel of these committees is very nearly 
 the same as that of the other administrative units in this 
 division. They are merely required to act in a somewhat 
 different capacity. 
 
 Practically all of the men who are made responsible for 
 the technical work involved in the administration of this law 
 have had extensive experience, either in the production or 
 the handling and marketing of cotton. 
 
90 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 When a dispute arises between the parties to a future con- 
 tract as to the grade, quality, or length of staple of cotton 
 tendered, either party may appeal to the Secretary of Agri- 
 culture for a determination of the question. In such cases, 
 a fair sample of each bale of cotton involved in the dispute 
 is forwarded to Washington or other designated point, by 
 the complainant, together with the suitable marks of identi- 
 fication, a statement of the question at issue in 'the case of 
 each bale, and other detailed information regarding the 
 transaction.^^ An answer may be filed by the respondent 
 within three days after the filing of the complaint. This 
 time may be extended by the Secretary where good cause is 
 shown. A copy of each complaint, answer, certificate or 
 affidavit must be served upon the adverse party. Either 
 party may request an oral hearing or other inquiry. The 
 answer signed by the respondent or agent must admit or 
 deny each allegation of the complaint, and must give full 
 information regarding the disputed points. Both the com- 
 plaint and the answer must state whether the parties have 
 agreed upon samples to be submitted to the Secretary of 
 Agriculture, and if some have and some have not been 
 agreed upon, the marks identifying each bale in dispute, the 
 sample of which has been agreed upoii. Either party may 
 submit samples. If the examiners are not satisfied with sam- 
 ples submitted they may demand others drawn from any or 
 all of the bales involved in the transaction by some disinter- 
 ested party. When all hearings have been held and the sam- 
 ples finally graded and classified, a copy of the findings upon 
 any dispute is promptly served upon each party, either per- 
 sonally or by mail. 
 
 The costs for the determination of any dispute are based 
 on a minimum charge of thirty cents per bale, with a total 
 minimum cost of five dollars for each dispute. The costs 
 so fixed may be assessed against either party, or apportioned 
 against both, as the Secretary of Agriculture may find to be 
 
 21 Rules and Regulations under the U. S. Cotton Futures Act of 
 Aug. II, 1916, Office of the Secretary, Circular no. 64, pp. 6-16. 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT REGULATORY LAWS 9 1 
 
 just in each case and set forth in his findings. Generally, 
 they are prorated on the basis of the errors in the claims of 
 each party. 
 
 In the establishment of official standards for the various 
 grades of cotton, bales representing the characteristic qual- 
 ities of the cotton of each state are purchased throughout the 
 cotton belt, and used for the preparation of copies of the 
 official standards. These are placed in boxes especially con- 
 structed for the purpose, certified under the seal of the De- 
 partment of Agriculture, and are accompanied by photo- 
 graphs made of the contents of each box at the time of 
 certification. Sets of the official standards or fractional 
 parts thereof are sold to those desiring them at cost of 
 preparation. Purchasers of official standards, however, hold 
 them subject to examination by representatives of the De- 
 partment of Agriculture, and if for any reason they are 
 found to have deteriorated since their preparation or to 
 misrepresent the official cotton standards in any way, the 
 certificate of grade may be cancelled or removed. Such in- 
 spections are made without charge and official standards are 
 renewed at a nominal cost. Each set contains standards for 
 nine grades. Each box contains twelve samples showing 
 the degree of variation which may be allowed within each 
 grade. These standards are used in most of the leading 
 European cotton exchanges, as well as in all important 
 American cotton markets. 
 
 The price quotations of future contracts on cotton ex- 
 changes have a commanding influence upon the prices paid 
 for spot cotton. Prior to the enactment of the law, it was 
 believed that these quotations were not true barometers of 
 spot-cotton prices, but usually were unwarrantably low, and 
 at times fluctuated unduly in response to manipulation. 
 This condition was attributed largely to certain evil features 
 which had crept into the practices on future exchanges as 
 embodied in the form of contract used. One primary object 
 of the act, as already indicated, was to correct these practices 
 by inducing exchanges to adopt a form of contract free from 
 these objectionable features. 
 
92 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 To secure a better observance of the requirements of the 
 law, and to enable the Secretary to determine equitable com- 
 mercial values in those cases where cotton other than the 
 specified grade is tendered, a system of periodical investi- 
 gations of, and daily reports from, both future and spot 
 markets is maintained.^'' The act requires that only the quo- 
 tations from " bona fide " or approved spot markets shall be 
 used in the determination of commercial values. Such 
 markets must be designated by the Secretary of Agriculture 
 after inspection. 
 
 No adequate criticism of the operation or administration 
 of the cotton futures act is available. According to those 
 officials who are engaged in the enforcement of the statute, 
 it has accomplished the chief economic objects anticipated 
 by its framers. Future quotations now represent spot values 
 more accurately ; sharp and sudden fluctuations have become 
 less common, and prices have been increasingly stabilized. 
 Generally, these changes help the producer to obtain more 
 equitable prices. They also benefit the cotton dealer or 
 manufacturer by giving him a' truer index of the advance 
 value of raw material. Furthermore, they secure to all con- 
 cerned in the financing of the cotton crop a safer hedge. It 
 has also operated to remove some of the suspicion which 
 formerly attached to exchanges that transactions were not 
 always fairly conducted.^' 
 
 That conditions are improving is shown by a marked de- 
 crease in the number of disputes submitted in the fiscal year 
 1 91 7 as compared with previous years. 
 
 The act is interesting as a historic step in the movement 
 for governmental supervision and cooperation in the trans- 
 action of business.^* 
 
 ^^ Program of Work, Fiscal Year, 1917, pp. 461-462. 
 
 23 Report of Secretary of Agriculture, 1915, p. 45. 
 
 2* For an analysis of the Cotton Futures Law and of the circum- 
 stances leading to its enactment, see Journal of Political Economy, 
 vol. xxiii, p. 46s; and American Economic Review, March, 191S, 
 vol. V, p. I. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 Financial Administration 
 
 The law of the United States relating to the preparation 
 of estimates, the submission of financial reports, and the 
 expenditure of appropriations is very meager and frag- 
 mentary. Indeed, it may be said that there is no general or 
 comprehensive statute designed to regulate the financial 
 affairs of the executive departments or of the other units of 
 government. Such financial legislation as there is, then, 
 consists almost wholly of small excerpts or sections from 
 general laws or appropriation acts. Some of the earlier of 
 these have been incorporated into the Revised Statutes; 
 most of them are to be found only by searching the volumes 
 containing the Statutes at Large. Many of these legislative 
 fragments give evidence of hasty and ill-considered action 
 intended to correct some undesirable practice or abuse on 
 the part of administrative officers : few, if any, of them show 
 that their framers had any grasp of the whole situation.^ 
 
 Speaking generally, the financial affairs of the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture are subject to the same law and the 
 same methods and procedure as those of the other govern- 
 ment services. There are, however, some notable differ- 
 ences. These will be noted and emphasized in the proper 
 place in this chapter. 
 
 The federal law governing the preparation of estimates 
 of appropriations and their submission to Congress deals 
 almost exclusively with the form which the estimates shall 
 take, the channels through which they shall be transmitted, 
 and the time when they must be furnished to Congress. 
 
 ^ For a good discussion of federal laws relating to government 
 finances see the Report of the President's Commission on Economy 
 and Efficiency, " The Need for a National Budget," part i, pp. 15-126. 
 
 93 
 
94 THE UNITED STATES DEPAKTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 By act of July 7, 1884,^ Congress imposed upon the Sec- 
 retary of the Treasury the duty of classifying, compiling, 
 indexing, and printing what is known as the " Book of Esti- 
 mates." The centering of this function in one place resulted 
 in greater uniformity than had been possible previously, but 
 each year there were numerous changes in substance as well 
 as in the sequence of items. In order to secure greater con- 
 tinuity in the form of the estimates. Congress, by act of 
 June 22, 1906,' required that thereafter the estimates for 
 the expenses of the Government, except those for sundry 
 civil expenses, should be prepared and submitted each year 
 according to the order and arrangement of the appropria- 
 tions acts for the year preceding. Any changes in such order 
 and arrangement, and any transfer of salaries from one 
 ofifice or bureau, and any consolidation of offices or bureaus, 
 desired by the head of any executive department were re- 
 quired to be submitted by note in the estimates. 
 
 Section three thousand six hundred and sixty-nine of the 
 Revised Statutes says : " All annual estimates for the public 
 service shall be submitted to Congress through the Secretary 
 of the Treasury." This section was subsequently modified 
 so as to require that " hereafter all estimates of appropria- 
 tions and estimates of deficiencies in appropriations intended 
 for the consideration and seeking the action of any of the 
 Committees of Congress shall be transmitted to Congress 
 through the Secretary of the Treasury, and in no other 
 manner."* 
 
 By act of March 3, 1901,^ officers authorized to make esti- 
 mates are required to furnish them to the Secretary of the 
 Treasury on or before the fifteenth day of October of each 
 year. If they fail to do this as required, it is the duty of the 
 Secretary of the Treasury to cause to be prepared, on or 
 before the first day of November, estimates for such appro- 
 priations as in his judgment shall be requisite. 
 
 223 Stat. L. 254. 
 334 Stat. L. 448. 
 *23 Stat. L. 254. 
 "31 Stat. L. 960. 
 
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION QS 
 
 Aside from these legal requirements, and several others 
 having similar intent or purpose, the actual preparation of 
 the estimates rests very largely with the heads of the ex- 
 ecutive departments and the principal officers of the various 
 independent administrative imits. The only exception is 
 that found in the sundry civil appropriation act of June 23, 
 1913. which provides that hereafter the head of each ex- 
 ecutive department or other Government establishment, shall 
 designate from among the officials employed therein one per- 
 son whose duty it shall be to supervise the classification and 
 compilation of all estimates of appropriations to be sub- 
 mitted by such department or establishment. 
 
 This decentralization in the preparation and submission of 
 estimates is in accord with the expressed attitude of Con- 
 gress, which has thus far resisted all attempts to secure 
 greater centralization or executive control. 
 
 With the exception of the proviso just noted, nothing is 
 contained in the statutes which indicates the method to be 
 pursued by heads of the departments and other offidersi 
 either in making up their estimates or in the consideration of 
 estimates before they are submitted. Various methods are 
 employed. Briefly stated, the usual procedure in the De- 
 partment of Agriculture is as follows : Shortly after the be- 
 ginning of the fiscal year the Secretary of Agriculture ad- 
 dresses a letter to each chief of bureau or other primary 
 subdivision, requesting that estimates for the next fiscal 
 year be prepared and submitted to his office on or before a 
 certain date. This letter also calls attention to the form 
 which the estimates must take and to any general policy or 
 policies which may have been adopted with reference to this 
 matter by the administrative head of the department. 
 
 Upon receipt of this letter, the bureau chief causes copies 
 of it to be made and sends one copy, together with his own 
 instructions that estimates be prepared in accordance with it, 
 to each of the division heads or similar officers. These latter 
 officials, in the case of the larger divisions, pass the task on, 
 in somewhat less formal manner, to their own subordinates. 
 
gt THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 Ordinarily, then, it is the section head or project leader 
 who actually begins the preparation of the estimates, partic- 
 ularly with respect to the amounts of money to be requested. 
 In this task, he must of course be governed by a number of 
 considerations : ( i ) due regard must be had for any special 
 instructions contained in the letters from the Secretary and 
 the Chief of Bureau ; (2) there are many rules, based either 
 upon statutes pr administrative orders, governing changes in 
 salaries both on lump sum and statutory rolls; and, (3) if 
 any increased amount is requested either for additional 
 workers or for the prosecution of new work, a comprehen- 
 sive statement justifying the request must be submitted. 
 
 If no change, either in amount or content, is requested, the 
 work of preparing estimates is a comparatively easy task, 
 and the ascent of the administrative ladder will probably be 
 made without much friction. It is only where there is de- 
 parture from the estimates of the previous year that any 
 serious difficulties are likely to be encountered. This fact 
 constitutes the chief defect of the entire procedure. A line 
 of work, once established, may be continued long after the 
 original objects have been attained, while new projects of 
 equal or greater importance may receive recognition only 
 with the greatest effort, or not at all. 
 
 It is true, as we shall see, that Congress has attempted 
 to correct this defect by imposing upon the Secretary of 
 Agriculture the duty of reporting, from time to time, the 
 status of the work under each project. So far as the writer 
 is aware, however, there is no systematic attempt to corre- 
 late this report with the estimates themselves. This tend- 
 ency to perpetuate work once begun is accentuated by the 
 desire of each executive officer to magnify his own position. 
 He is always willing to essay a new task, but never willing to 
 forego the old. 
 
 Since the passage of the law, in 1913, requiring each de- 
 partment head to designate some official to supervise the 
 preparation of estimates, each bureau in the Department of 
 Agriculture designates one of its officers to cooperate with 
 
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 97 
 
 him during the period when estimates are being prepared. It 
 is the duty of this bureau ofEicial to assemble the estimates 
 and arrange them for inspection by the chief of bureau. 
 This done, they are then revised and put in form for trans- 
 mission to the supervisor of estimates. After examination 
 by the Secretary and his assistants, they are put in final form 
 and transmitted to the Treasury Department to be incor- 
 porated in the book of estimates. It is in this form that 
 they are transmitted to Congress. 
 
 Section seven of an act of March 4, 1909, provides that : 
 
 If the estimates for appropriations, . . . shall exceed the estimated 
 revenues the Secretary of the Ti'easury shall transmit the estimates 
 to Congress as heretofore required by law, and at once transmit a 
 detailed statement of all of said estimates to the President, to the 
 end that he may," in giving Congress information of the state of the 
 Union and in recommending to their consideration such measures 
 as he may judge necessary, advise the Congress how, in his judg- 
 ment, the estimated appropriations could with least injury to the 
 public service be reduced so as to bring the appropriations within 
 the estimated revenues ; or, if such reduction be not in his judgment 
 practicable without undue injury to the public service, that he may 
 recommend to Congress such loans or new taxes as may be neces- 
 sary to cover the deficiency.^ 
 
 This is the only statutory provision requiring or author- 
 izing the executive branch to exercise any supervision over 
 the estimates as a whole. Even this is merely an advisory 
 power and is exercised, if at all, after the original esti- 
 mates have been transmitted to Congress. It was, however, 
 used with notable effect during the period of declining rev- 
 enues following the outbreak of war in Europe in 1914. 
 
 As head of the administrative department of the govern- 
 ment, the President may, of course, exercise a very salutary 
 influence over his subordinates in the general policies to be 
 followed in the preparation of estimates. No doubt this has 
 often been done. 
 
 Of the fifteen regular or usual appropriation bills which 
 are annually submitted to the House of Representatives, 
 only six are prepared by the Committee on Appropriations. 
 The remainder are prepared and submitted by various other 
 
 635 Stat. L-. 1027. 
 7 
 
98 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 committees in accordance with well established rules and 
 customs of the House. Thus, when the book of estimates is 
 received by the Speaker of the House, to whom it is sent by 
 the Secretary of the Treasury, he merely refers the various 
 estimates to the appropriate committees, without any formal 
 action on the part of the House itself. 
 
 The Committee on Agriculture in the House of Represen- 
 tatives, to which are referred the estimates for the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture, was established as a standing com- 
 mittee. May 3, 1820. At first it was hardly more than a 
 convenient repository for the petitions and memorials re- 
 lating to agriculture which from' this time began to reach 
 the House in increasing volume. Unimportant at first, it 
 has gradually grown to a place of importance among the 
 many committees of the House of Representatives. 
 
 Section ten of Rule eleven of that body gives to the 
 Committee on Agriculture jurisdiction of all subjects re- 
 lating to agriculture and forestry and the appropriations for 
 the Department of Agriculture.'' In practice the scope of 
 this jurisdiction has been construed very liberally. 
 
 From the personnel of the committee it would appear that 
 effort has been made to make its eighteen members fairly 
 representative of the principal agricultural sections of the 
 country. Its present chairman, Mr. Asbury Lever of South 
 Carolina, is a strong advocate of public aid and encourage- 
 ment to agriculture. He has done very much to secure con- 
 gressional support of the relatively large number of meas- 
 ures passed in the interest of agriculture during the past 
 few years. 
 
 Unlike the estimates for most of the departments and 
 services, those for the usual appropriations of the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture are considered by only one committee, 
 and when presented constitute only one bill. This obviates 
 the necessity for cooperation with any other committee. 
 
 In keeping with the general practice of congressional com- 
 
 ^ Hind's Precedents of the House of Representatives, vol. iv, 
 sec. 4149. 
 
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 99 
 
 mittees, a bill is first prepared on the basis of the estimates 
 as submitted. This serves as a working paper for the mem- 
 bers of the committee and others who are interested. The 
 next step is the calling of department officials to make state- 
 ments or to answer questions with respect to the needs of 
 the various bureaus or divisions. This examination may be 
 limited to include only the principal officers, or it may be 
 extended to include even project leaders. Both procedures 
 are followed. These "hearings," with some interruptions, 
 generally spread over a period of several weeks. Much is 
 said, both relevant and irrelevant, to the various matters 
 under discussion. One feature of the procedure which im- 
 presses the onlooker is the narrow sectionalism manifested 
 by the members of the committee, and the failure to view the 
 various problems presented from the larger national view- 
 point. Collateral discussions arising out of this narrowness 
 often result in a failure to give adequate consideration to 
 the actual matter in hand. From a somewhat limited ob- 
 servation, it has seemed to the writer that the actual con- 
 tents of the ordinary estimates receive only the most meager 
 consideration. 
 
 Besides the information contained in the book of esti- 
 mates and such as may be adduced from the ^' hearings," 
 the committee has at its disposal the detailed statement of 
 expenditures for the entire department for the last and 
 previous fiscal years. This is supplemented by several 
 special statements or reports relating to certain phases of 
 the work of the department. To what extent these are 
 used by the committee in the preparation of its final report, 
 it is difficult to say. 
 
 Apart from the riders and extraordinary proposals which 
 it frequently carries, the report of the Committee on Agri- 
 culture, or the agricultural appropriation bill, does not elicit 
 very much discussion on the floor of the House. Such as 
 there is, like that within the committee, is often character- 
 ized by sectionalism. In the bill for the fiscal year 1916, an 
 item of one hundred thousand dollars was doubled by the 
 
lOO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 'committee of the whole/ without reference to the needs 
 of the service, but simply to " equalize " expenditures in the 
 North and the South. 
 
 In the Senate, the agricultural bill is referred to the Com- 
 mittee on Agriculture and Forestry. This committee could, 
 of course, conduct hearings also. In practice, however, it 
 relies largely upon the published reports of the hearings of 
 the House committee, supplemented by such additional in- 
 formation as may be furnished at its request by the de- 
 partment. Generally, its report to the Senate is not very 
 different from that made to the House. The conference 
 committee of the two Houses is thus seldom confronted 
 with many conflicts relating to the agricultural bill proper. 
 
 Beginning in 1839, one thousand dollars was set aside by 
 Congress from the receipts of the Patent Office for the pur- 
 pose of collecting and distributing seeds and procuring agri- 
 cultural statistics. By 1849, the appropriation had been 
 increased to three thousand five hundred dollars, and by 
 1859, to sixty thousand dollars. In 1869, seven years after 
 the department had become an independent establishment, 
 the appropriation amounted to one hundred and seventy-two 
 thousand five hundred and ninety-three dollars, and in 1879, 
 to two hundred and six thousand four hundred dollars. 
 When the department was raised to the first rank in 1889, 
 the appropriation was one million and thirty-four thousand 
 four hundred and eighty dollars. By this time the adminis- 
 tration of the financial affairs of the department had 
 developed to such importance that a separate division of ac- 
 counts and disbursements was created to insure proper dis- 
 bursement of the funds. In 1899, the amount appropriated 
 had been further increased to two million eight hundred and 
 twenty-nine thousand seven hundred and two dollars; and 
 by 1909, had been very considerably increased to fifteen 
 million three hundred and eighty-five thousand, eight hun- 
 dred and six dollars. At the present time (1918) the 
 amount annually appropriated is approximately double this 
 last sum, or thirty million dollars. The recent rapid in- 
 
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION lOI 
 
 crease in the agricultural appropriation is merely another 
 indication of the growing importance of the work of the 
 Department of Agriculture in our governmental system.' 
 
 The Division of Accounts and Disbursements, created in 
 1889, is still the central accounting office. Its chief is the 
 principal fiscal officer and is also the disbursing clerk of the 
 department. He is charged by the Secretary of Agricul- 
 ture with the duty of preparing all requisitions for tHe 
 advance of public funds from the Treasury Department to 
 the Department of Agriculture or its disbursing clerks, the 
 keeping of general appropriations ledgers, and the payment 
 of all vouchers and accounts properly submitted by the 
 various offices, bureaus and services of the department. He 
 must furnish bond in an amount acceptable to the Secretary ; 
 and is, of course, subject to the various laws and comp- 
 troller's decisions governing public disbursing officers and 
 the application of public funds. 
 
 Section three thousand six hundred and seventy-nine of 
 the Revised Statutes, as amended, requires that " all appro- 
 priations made for contingent expenses or other general 
 purposes, . . . shall, on or before the beginning of each 
 fiscal year, be so apportioned by monthly or other allot- 
 ments as to prevent expenditures in one portion of the year 
 which may necessitate deficiency or additional appropria- 
 tions to complete the service of the fiscal year for which said 
 appropriations are made."® This allotment, when once 
 made, may not be changed, except by specific authority of 
 the department head. 
 
 The agricultural appropriations are allotted each year on 
 the quarterly basis. For many years the intent of the law 
 just quoted was evaded by allotting to the first quarter the 
 major portion of the appropriation, with progressively de- 
 creasing amounts for each of the other quarters. In very 
 recent years this practice has been corrected by allotting the 
 
 8 For a more nearly complete statement of appropriations for the 
 Department of Agriculture, see appendix iv. 
 » 33 Stat. L. I2S7 ; 34 Stat. L. 48. 
 
102 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 same amount or proportion to each quarter. While this 
 latter practice undoubtedly conforms more nearly to the 
 law, it greatly increases the financial administrative work 
 by requiring such close scrutiny of unencumbered balances. 
 It also tends to enhance the evil, which is found throughout 
 the government services, of postponing the expenditure of 
 a large part of the appropriation until late in the fiscal year, 
 with consequent hasty and ill-considered expenditures at the 
 end of the fiscal year to avoid having any considerable part 
 of the funds revert to the Treasury. 
 
 At the beginning of each fiscal year, after the allotments 
 have been completed, a ' letter of authorization ' is issued by 
 the Secretary of Agriculture to the head of each bureau 
 or other primary unit giving him authority to incur ex- 
 penses, in accordance with law, to the amount of the funds 
 appropriated for the use of the particular administrative 
 unit. This letter then constitutes the basis of authority for 
 the chief of bureau when conferring authority to incur ex- 
 penses upon his own subordinates. Only in a few pre- 
 scribed instances is further authorization required from the 
 Secretary. 
 
 All of the detailed financial records of appropriations and 
 expenditures are kept in the various bureaus or other pri- 
 mary administrative units to which they relate. By act of 
 July 31, 1894,^" all accounting forms must be either pre- 
 scribed or approved by the Comptroller of the Treasury. 
 This requirement together with the constant general super- 
 vision exercised by the Office of the Secretary has resulted 
 in a fair degree of uniformity both as to forms and pro- 
 cedure, in the various bureau accounting offices. The work 
 of these offices is further systematized and coordinated by 
 the publication and periodical revision of an authoritative 
 manual of fiscal regulations of the department. This 
 manual also serves as a convenient guide in fiscal matters 
 to all officers of the department.^^ 
 
 10 28 Stat. L. 162. 
 
 11 Such regulations are required by law. 28 Stat. L. 207. 
 
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION I03 
 
 For several years prior to the fiscal year 191 3, the admin- 
 istrative examination or audit of all vouchers submitted for 
 payment was made in the Division of Accounts and Dis- 
 bursements. By act of August 23, 1912,^^ the task of 
 making the administrative examination of all public ac- 
 counts, preliminary to their audit by the accounting officers 
 of the Treasury, was specifically committed to the admin- 
 istrative heads of the bureaus or divisions in the executive 
 departments. Aside from a very cursory examination made 
 under the direction of the disbursing clerk for his own 
 protection and to see that they represent legal claims, the 
 only audit to which vouchers are subjected, prior to their 
 payment, is that made in the various bureaus. In the case 
 of doubt as to any claim, the disbursing clerk is authorized 
 to secure a decision from the Comptroller of the Treasury. 
 
 In common with all public vouchers, those of the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture are examined, subsequent to their pay- 
 ment, by the auditors of the Treasury Department. At the 
 end of each quarter a statement of exceptions is submitted 
 to the disbursing clerk. As the bonded financial officer, he 
 is primarily responsible for any unauthorized or improper 
 payments made by him. Usually, however, he can recoup 
 by appeahng through the bureau accounting officers to the 
 persons to whom the erroneous payments were made. 
 
 As an aid to the administrative head of the department in 
 securing general supervision over the fiscal affairs, and as 
 a means of checking and verifying all financial records, the 
 disbursing clerk is required to list or schedule the payments 
 charged against each bureau. 
 
 At the end of each quarter, and before the vouchers are 
 sent to the Treasury Department, these lists are transmitted 
 to the various bureaus for comparison with the bureau 
 financial records. When the differences, if any, have been 
 adjusted the lists are approved by the chief of bureau, and 
 the accounts are assumed to be correct. The vouchers are 
 
 1237 Stat. L. 360. 
 
104 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 then transmitted to the Treasury Department for final 
 settlement, as required by law.^^ 
 
 Not all of the funds appropriated for and expended by 
 the Department of Agriculture are disbursed by the Chief 
 of the Division of Accounts and Disbursements. In those 
 outlying places where the delay or expense incident to send- 
 ing accounts to Washington for payment would hamper the 
 conduct of government business, special disbursing agents, 
 having very Hmited jurisdiction, are appointed by the Secre- 
 tary of Agriculture to make disbursements. Funds for the 
 purpose are warranted to these officers, on requisition 
 signed by the Secretary, just as in the case of disbursing 
 clerks. These special agents are thus not only authorized 
 to incur expenses, as are other officers to whom the usual 
 letter of authorization is issued, but may also disburse public 
 funds to meet these. expenses. While this special authority 
 is conferred directly by the Secretary, the agents are subor- 
 dinate officers of the bureau or bureaus to which their work 
 is administratively related. Paid accounts are transmitted 
 to the bureau for reexamination and record, and are then 
 forwarded to the Treasury through the usual channels. An 
 acceptable surety bond is required from each specif dis- 
 bursing agent. 
 
 Federal funds appropriated for expenditure in coopera- 
 tion with state agencies are paid by the Treasury Depart- 
 ment, upon requisition or warrant of the Secretary of 
 Agriculture, to the state treasurer, or to such other officer 
 as may be designated by state law under each cooperative 
 act, to receive such funds. This officer is required to 
 render to the Secretary of Agriculture a detailed statement 
 of the funds received and of their disbursement on forms 
 prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture.^* These state- 
 ments constitute the basis for special reports to Congress 
 as required by the various, acts to which they may relate. 
 
 There is a general provision of law^° requiring that each 
 
 "26 Stat. L. 371. 
 
 1* 34 Stat. L. 63 ; 37 Stat. L. 297. 
 
 i' Rev. Stat. sec. 193 ; 19 Stat. L. 306. 
 
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION lOS 
 
 department head submit a very detailed report of all ex- 
 penditures from contingent funds. Each secretary or other 
 administrative head also submits, as a part of his regular 
 annual report to Congress, a detailed statement of expendi- 
 tures for all appropriations applicable to his department or 
 service. Besides these, the reports referred to in the pre- 
 ceding paragraph, and a number of special reports required 
 from all department heads, the Secretary of Agriculture is 
 required to render special and detailed reports regarding 
 the suppression of animal diseases,^^ and the purchase and 
 distribution of seeds.^^ 
 
 So far as these reports relate to expenditures, they are 
 referred to the House Committee on Expenditures in the 
 Department of Agriculture and to a similar committee in 
 the Senate. As previously stated, there appears to be no 
 systematic attempt to utilize any of these reports when the 
 estimates for the department are under consideration. 
 Even if the attempt were made, the information contained 
 in most of these reports, except those where detailed in- 
 formation is specifically required, is too meager to be of 
 very great value. 
 
 Rule Eleven, paragraph forty-two, of the House of 
 Representatives provides as follows: 
 
 The examination of the accounts and expenditures of the several 
 departments of the Government and the manner of keeping the 
 sanie; the economy, justness and correctness of such expenditures; 
 their conformity with appropriation laws ; the proper application of 
 public moneys ; the security of the Government against unjust and 
 ■ extravagant demands ; retrenchment ; the enforcement of the pay- 
 ment of the money due to the United States ; the economy and ac- 
 countability of public officers ; the abolishment of useless offices ; 
 the reduction or increase of the pay of officers, shall all be subjects 
 within the jurisdiction of the nine (now ten) standing committees 
 on the public expenditure in the several departments, as follows : . . . 
 
 SO. In the Department of Agriculture — to the Committee on Ex- 
 penditures in the Department of Agriculture. 
 
 Despite the elaborate and comprehensive authority thus 
 conferred, it is well known that these committees on ex- 
 penditures, in both the House and the Senate, are very 
 
 "23 Stat. L. 33. 
 "37 Stat. L. 278. 
 
I06 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 largely only nominal bodies and seldom meet for the con- 
 sideration of business. When they have acted, they have 
 usually been looked upon as agents of the Congress for 
 ferreting out some suspected maladministration rather than 
 for systematic consideration of expenditures, or for ren- 
 dering assistance to the various appropriation committees.^' 
 Section five of an act of June 30, 1906, provides as 
 follows : 
 
 Hereafter the Secretary of the Treasury shall require and it shall 
 be the duty of the head of each executive department or other gov- 
 ernment establishment to furnish him, within thirty days after the 
 close of each fiscal year, a statement of all money arising from pro- 
 ceeds of public property of any kind or from any source, other than 
 the postal service, received by said head of department or other 
 government establishment during the previous fiscal year for or on 
 account of the public service, or in any other manner in the dis- 
 charge of his official duties, other than as salary or compensation, 
 which was not paid into the General Treasury of the United States, 
 together with a detailed account of all payments, if any, made from 
 such funds during each year. All such statements, . . . shall be 
 transmitted by the Secretary of the Treasury to Congress at the 
 beginning of each regular session.^^ 
 
 The principal sources of revenue of the Department of 
 Agriculture, other than the sale of discarded furniture, 
 equipment or other miscellaneous property, are: (i) the 
 sale of cotton standards, the sale of loose cotton, and the 
 costs of cotton futures disputes ; (2) the sale of photo prints, 
 lantern slides, and card indexes ; (3) the sale of agricultural 
 products from the four insular experiment stations of 
 Alaska, Hawaii, Porto Rico, and Guam ; and (4) the sale of 
 forest products from grazing privileges on the national 
 forests. 
 
 Of the revenues thus received the only portion which has 
 been, until very recently, available for expenditure by the 
 Department of Agriculture was that received from^ the sale 
 of products at the insular experiment stations, seldom 
 amounting to more than three or four thousand dollars an- 
 nually. Even this must now be covered into the Treasury 
 
 18 President's Commission on Economy and Efficiency, " The Need 
 for a National Budget," part 2. 
 1934 Stat. L. 763. 
 
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION I07 
 
 as miscellaneous receipts. The act of February i, 1905,^° 
 transferring the administration of the forest reserves from 
 the Department of the Interior to the Department of Agri- 
 culture, provided that all money received from these re- 
 serves for a period of five years should be covered into the 
 Treasury as a special fund, available, until expended, as the 
 Secretary of Agriculture might direct, for the administra- 
 tion and improvement of the forest reserves. At first, pro- 
 posed expenditures from this source were not even included 
 in the book of estimates. This apparent oversight was soon 
 rectified, but before the five year period had expired a law'''- 
 was passed requiring that all funds received from forest 
 reserves be covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous re- 
 ceipts. Thereafter only so much of these funds was made 
 available as was necessary to make refunds for payments 
 erroneously received. 
 
 As previously noted,^^ a very considerable part of the 
 receipts from the forest reserves are available, by various 
 acts of Congress, for the construction and maintenance of 
 schools and roads in the States and counties in which the 
 forests are located. All of these receipts, however, are cov- 
 ered into the Treasury in the usual manner and the amount 
 is merely used as a basis in determining the sums which the 
 various States and counties are entitled to receive. The 
 seven district fiscal agents, whose duty it is to supervise the 
 financial affairs of the forest reserves, transmit their col- 
 lections directly to the Treasury and merely send copies of 
 their reports to the Department of Agriculture. 
 
 The privilege of expending the receipts from the sale of 
 products at the insular experiment stations was retained for 
 several years only by a most urgent annual appeal to the 
 House Committee on Agriculture. 
 
 If the experiences of the Department of Agriculture may 
 be taken as typical, and there is reason to believe that they 
 
 2»33 Stat. L. 628. 
 21 34 Stat. L. 1256. 
 22 Chapter iii. 
 
I08 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 are, it would seem that it is the present policy of Congress 
 to depart entirely from the practice of granting " appropria- 
 tions in aid,"^^ which is still an important factor in the 
 British financial scheme, and which has heretofore charac- 
 terized the American system as well. 
 
 23 For a discussion and criticism of the subject of "Appropriations 
 in Aid," see Willoughby, Willoughby, and Lindsay, Financial Ad- 
 ministration of Great Britain, chap. v. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 Conclusions 
 
 From the time of its establishment as an administrative 
 unit of the first rank in 1889 to the fiscal year 191 7, the 
 Department of Agriculture enjoyed a more rapid com- 
 parative growth, both in the amount of its appropriations 
 and in the number of its personnel, than any other of the 
 executive departments. Some effort has been made in the 
 foregoing chapters to give an idea of the scope and mul- 
 tiplicity of its present activities. During the past few years, 
 the writer has been frequently surprised to find how little 
 is popularly known concerning the work of this great insti- 
 tution, which by the very nature of its duties and functions, 
 should be the most popular of all the governmental depart- 
 ments. Contrary to the prevalent opinion, the activities of 
 the Department of Agriculture are by no means limited to 
 the protection or promotion of the interests of any one class 
 or of any one industry. 
 
 The primary purpose of this study, however, has been to 
 describe in some detail and to examine the organization, and 
 administrative methods of this institution of government 
 as an instrument or machine for making effective the ex- 
 pressed will of the representatives of the people. The value 
 of the various measures, with whose enforcement it is 
 charged, is a question not here considered. 
 
 Numerous and diverse as are the functions of the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture, they are still more nearly homogeneous 
 in character than are those of most of the executive depart- 
 ments. As previously indicated, this has made possible a 
 relatively simple organization. The reorganization effected 
 in 1915, while disturbing only slightly the previous structure, 
 secured a much more logical and effective grouping of the 
 
 109 
 
no THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 various functions to be performed. In perfecting the pres- 
 ent organization, the department head was given a degree 
 of freedom by Congress not usually enjoyed by adminis- 
 trative officers. If it is not effective, the responsibility can 
 be definitely placed. After making reasonable allowance 
 for that administrative indirectness, which seems to be 
 almost inherent in governmental institutions, the present 
 plan, with its functional basis and its deliberate attempt 
 to minimize duplication of effort, gives promise of meeting 
 the expectations of those responsible for it. What might 
 be called the "cross-sectional" grouping of functions ac- 
 cording as they are primarily investigative, educative, or 
 regulative, has greatly clarified the work of the various sub- 
 divisions. 
 
 In committing measures for administration or enforce- 
 ment to the various executive departments. Congress is fre- 
 quently confronted with many difficulties. Many factors 
 must be, or at least should be, considered. The wisdom of 
 that body in committing certain measures to the Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture has frequently been questioned. This 
 is particularly true of those laws whose primary purpose is 
 the safeguarding of the public health. Since we already 
 have a federal public health service, it is argued, why should 
 it not be charged with the administration of all public health 
 laws? Serioifs attempts have been made in Congress and 
 elsewhere to secure this change.^ 
 
 Undoubtedly, the chief consideration which determined 
 Congress to charge the Department of Agriculture with the 
 administration of such measures as the food and drugs act 
 was the very superior laboratory facilities which this de- 
 partment had, and the fact that it already had a consid- 
 erable staff of chemists and bacteriologists. These facilities 
 and the scientific personnel have, of course, been greatly en- 
 larged since the assumption of the added duties, and as a 
 result of the general expansion of the work of the depart- 
 ment. Since it must have extensive laboratory facilities and 
 
 1 Report of the Secretary of Agriculture, 1910. 
 
CONCLUSIONS 1 1 I 
 
 a large stafi of chemists, bacteriologists and veterinarians 
 for the conduct of its normal or ordinary duties ; and since 
 these can be used to a large extent in the enforcement of 
 these health laws without proportionate increase in expense ; 
 the Department of Agriculture would seem to be better fitted 
 to perform this work than is any of the other departments. 
 Aside from the matter of equipment and facilities, the ef- 
 fective administration of these or any other laws is depend- 
 ent upon the character of the responsible administrative 
 officers. Such requisites are quite as likely to be found in 
 the Department of Agriculture as in any other department 
 or service. 
 
 The administration of public health law seems to be the 
 most striking anomaly in the fvmctions of the Department 
 of Agriculture. There are other functions, however, where 
 the difficulty is not in harmonizing them with the( pritmiary 
 work of this department, but in delimiting them from the 
 functions of the other departments. This is particularly 
 true, as we have seen, with respect to the work of the De- 
 partment of the Interior. Where Congress, either because 
 of ignorance of the situation or through sheer inability log- 
 ically to divide so many governmental functions among so 
 few departments and independent services, has not clearly 
 defined their respective fields, friction may be eliminated 
 and duplication of effort minimized by proper cooperative 
 relationships between the departments concerned. It has 
 already been shown, too, how extensively this same plan has 
 been followed in the legal and voluntary relationships of the 
 Department of Agriculture with State agencies. This co- 
 operative system of action seems to offer a possible solu- 
 tion for many of the difficujlties growing out of our federal 
 form of government. 
 
 The policy of the Department of Agriculture in the dis- 
 semination of the results of its researches has frequently 
 been the object of criticism. Both the character of the 
 various publications and the manner of their distribution 
 have been assailed as ineffective in securing the desired re- 
 
112 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 suits. Many expensive bulletins have been prepared which, 
 either because of their content or the method of presenting 
 the subject, proved to be of little value in the promotion of 
 agriculture. Long mailing lists of names have been built 
 up to which many thousands of bulletins have been sent 
 largely irrespective of the needs or desires of the recipients. 
 To these were added a large number of indiscriminate lists 
 and requests from members of Congress. It is difficult, if 
 not impossible, to form any estimate of the value of these 
 publications on the one hand, and the needless waste on the 
 other. 
 
 There seems to be no question, however, but that there 
 has been, and to a less extent, still is, opportunity for im- 
 provement in this matter. To the extent that Congress 
 interferes directly in the distribution of publications, the 
 department is, of course, powerless. 
 
 It may be recalled, from what has previously been said, 
 that one of the first steps of the present administration was 
 to improve the methods of the department in making avail- 
 able the results of its work. The Smith-Lever extension 
 and demonstration act was largely a result of this general 
 policy. The various publications, though not lessened in 
 number,^ have been simplified and made more practical. A 
 much wider and more systematic use is now made of the 
 public press to popularize the work that is being done. To 
 this end an office of information has been created. This 
 office also issues a widely circulated weekly news-letter. 
 Provision is made for a continuing revision of mailing lists. 
 Fewer publications are distributed freely ; more are offered 
 for sale at cost by the document section of the Government 
 Printing Office.^ 
 
 By these means and others, notable improvements have 
 been made in the methods of making the work of this insti- 
 tution available and effective. Here again, however, one 
 can do no more than form an estimate on general principles. 
 
 2 See appendix iv. 
 
 8 Reports of the Department of Agriculture, 1917, p. 271. 
 
CONCLUSIONS 1 1 3 
 
 The value of this type of governmental activity is, by its 
 nature, largely immeasurable. 
 
 With the present facilities for immediate personal contact 
 with fanners through the County Agent system, the de- 
 partment has an ever ready means of direct commimication ; 
 but it has in it, also, certain inherent dangers. Already 
 there are evidences that the farmers do not welcome too 
 much direct interference in the conduct of their business. 
 
 The organic relationship of the Department of Agricul- 
 ture to Congress is peculiarly fortunate. Through the Com- 
 mittee on Agriculture in the House of Representatives, to 
 which are referred practically all proposed measures in 
 which the Department "of Agriculture is interested, it is pos- 
 sible to have a very close articulation between these two 
 agencies of government. This, of course, presupposes fa- 
 vorable political and personal relationships. This unusually 
 fortunate situation, though the result of fortuitous circum- 
 stances rather than deliberation, has proved very beneficial 
 to the department. A very similar arrangement has been 
 proposed by one eminent authority as the basis of a plan to 
 secure a more workable correlation between the legislative 
 and administrative branches of our government as a whole.* 
 This would, of course, involve almost a complete reorgani- 
 zation of the committee system of Congress. 
 
 Despite this favorable and unique relationship of the De- 
 partment of Agriculture to Congress, which has frequently 
 facilitated the passage of legislation, there is no evidence 
 that Congress exercises any more adequate control or super- 
 vision over the work of this department than over that of 
 any other. This, as we have seen, is not due to the absence 
 of reports and other information, but rather to the failure 
 of Congress to secure a proper coordination of reports, esti- 
 mates, and other data in such a way that they might be used 
 as a basis for control and supervision of the administration. 
 Or, as Professor Willoughby says, it is due to the failure of 
 
 *W. F. Willoughby, The Problem of a National Budget, 1918, 
 p. 104 ff. 
 8 
 
114 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 Congress to conceive of itself as a board of directors super- 
 vising and controlling a great enterprise." 
 
 In concluding an administrative study of one of the great 
 departments of government, perhaps the strongest impres- 
 sion one receives is that, while a given department may 
 make, or fail to make, many minor improvements which, if 
 made, would go far toward more effective administration, 
 there can be nothing like an adequate solution of our admin- 
 istrative problems short of a complete reorganization and 
 revivifying of the system as a whole. There are ever in- 
 creasing evidences that important changes will be made in 
 the not distant future. 
 
 5 Ibid., p. 96 ff. 
 
APPENDIX I 
 
 Outline of the Organization of the Department of 
 
 Agriculture as it was during the Fiscal Year 
 
 1917. (Prior to April 6, 1917) 
 
 United States Department of Agriculture. 
 
 A. Institutional Units. 
 
 I. Office of the Secretary. 
 
 a. Secretary's Office proper. 
 
 b. Assistant SecretatVs Office. 
 
 c. Solicitor's Office. 
 
 d. Disbursing Office. 
 
 e. Library. 
 
 f. Office of Information. 
 
 g. Office of Inspection, 
 h. Office of Exhibits. 
 
 i. Office of Forest Appeals. 
 
 j. Chief Clerk's Office. 
 
 ic. Mechanical Superintendent's Office. 
 
 B. Functional Units and Functions. 
 
 1. Office of Farm Management. 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Investigations in Farm Economics-. 
 
 c. Application of Farm Economics to Farm Practice. 
 
 d. Clearing and Utilization of Logged-Oflf Lands. 
 
 2. Weather Bureau. 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Collection of Meteorological Data. 
 
 c. Forecasts and Warnings. 
 
 d. General Investigation and Research. 
 
 e. General Educational Work. 
 
 3. Bureau of Animal Industry. 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Eradication and Control of Animal Diseases. 
 
 c. Inspection and Quarantine of Imported Animals, and 
 
 Inspection of Animal Exports. 
 
 d. Eradication of Cattle Ticks. 
 
 e. Live Stock Demonstrations. 
 
 f. Dairy Investigations. 
 
 g. Animal Husbandry Investigations, 
 h. Investigation of Animal Diseases. 
 
 i. Control of Manufacture and Shipment of Viruses, 
 
 Serums, etc. 
 j. Control of Meat and Meat Food Products. 
 
 4. Bureau of Plant Industry. 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Plant Pathology. 
 
 "5 
 
Il6 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 c. Fruit Disease Investigations and Control. 
 
 d. Investigation of Forest Pathology. 
 
 e. Cotton, Truck, and Forage Crop Disease Investiga- 
 
 tions. 
 
 f. Crop Physiology and Breeding Investigations. 
 
 g. Soil Bacteriology Investigations, 
 h. Plant Nutrition Investigations. 
 i. Soil Fertility Investigations. 
 
 j. Crop- Acclimatization Investigations, 
 k. Poisonous and Drug Plant Investigations. 
 1. Agricultural Technology Investigations, 
 m. Fiber Plant Investigations, 
 n. Biophysical Investigations. 
 o. Seed Testing, 
 p. Cereal Investigations. 
 q. Tobacco Investigations, 
 r. Paper Plant Investigations, 
 s. Sugar Plants. 
 
 t. Economic and Systematic Botany Investigations, 
 u. Dry Land Plant Investigations. 
 V. Pomological Investigations. 
 w. Horticultural Investigations. 
 X. Foreign Seed and Plant Introduction, 
 y. Seed Distribution. 
 z. Demonstrations on Reclamation Projects. 
 
 5. Forest Service. 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. National Forest Administration. 
 
 c. Agricultural Settlement. 
 
 d. Forest Fire Suppression. 
 
 e. Forest Products Investigations. 
 
 f. Range Investigations. 
 
 g. Planting National Forests, 
 h. Sylvicultural Investigations. 
 
 i. Surveys of Forest Resources. 
 
 j. Construction of Roads and Trails. 
 
 k. Exchange of Forest Lands. 
 
 6. Bureau of Chemistry. 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Investigations in Agricultural Chemistry. 
 
 c. Chemical Investigations for other Departments. 
 
 d. Testing Export Food Products. 
 
 e. Poultry and Egg Investigations. 
 
 f. Fish Investigations. 
 
 g. Investigation of Colorings. 
 
 h. Enforcement of the Food and Drugs Act. 
 i. Food and Pharmacological Investigations. 
 j. Investigation of Naval Stores and Methods of Pro- 
 duction. 
 
 7. Bureau of Soils. 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Soil, Chemical Investigations. 
 
 c. Soil, Physical Investigations. 
 
 d. Investigations of Fertilizer Resources. 
 
 e. Soil Surveys. 
 
OUTLINE OF ORGANIZATION II7 
 
 f. Classification of Agricultural Lands in Forest Re- 
 serves. 
 
 8. Bureau of Entomology. 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Deciduous-Fruit Insect Investigations. 
 
 c. Cereal and Forage Insect Investigations. 
 
 d. Southern Field Crop Insect Investigations. 
 
 e. Forest and Shade-Tree Insect Investigations. 
 
 f. Truck-Crop and Stored Product Insect Investiga- 
 
 tions. 
 
 g. Bee Culture Investigations. 
 
 h. Tropical Fruit Insect Investigations. 
 i. Motili Investigations. 
 j. Miscellaneous Insect Investigations. 
 
 9. Bureau of Biological Survey. 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Game Preservation. 
 
 c. Economic Investigations. 
 
 d. Biological Investigations. 
 
 c. Enforcement of Migratory Bird Law. 
 
 10. Division of Publications. 
 
 a. Publication Work of the Department of Agriculture. 
 
 b. Distribution of Documents. 
 
 11. Bureau of Crop Estimates. 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Crop Reporting and Estimating. 
 
 c. Crop Recording and Abstracting. 
 
 12. States Relations Service.^ 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Relations with Experiment Stations. 
 
 c. Relations with Extension Divisions of State Agri- 
 
 cultural Colleges. 
 
 d. Farmers' Cooperative Demonstrations in the South- 
 
 ern States. 
 
 e. Farmers' Cooperative Demonstrations in the North- 
 
 ern and Western States. 
 
 f . Farmers' Institutes and Agricultural Schools Demon- 
 
 strations. 
 
 g. Home Economics Investigations. 
 
 13. Office of Public Roads and Rural Engineering. 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Road Management Investigations. 
 
 c. Road Building and Maintenance Investigations. 
 
 d. Road Material Investigations. 
 
 e. Field Experiments. 
 
 f. Administration of Federal Aid Road Act. 
 
 g. Farm Irrigation Investigations, 
 h. Farm Drainage Investigations. 
 i. Rural Engineering. 
 
 14. Bureau of Markets.^ 
 
 a. General Administration. 
 
 b. Marketing and Distribution Investigations. 
 
 c. Collecting and Distributing Market Information. 
 
 d. Preparation of Market Reports on Live Stock and 
 
 Meats. 
 
Il8 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 e. Investigations and Demonstrations of Cotton Stand- 
 
 ards. 
 
 f. Rural Organization Investigations. 
 
 g. State Cooperation in Marketing Work. 
 
 h. Extension and Demonstration Work in Marketing 
 and Distribution and in Rural Organization. 
 
 i. Enforcement of the U. S. Cotton Futures Act. 
 
 j. Administration of the U. S. Warehouse Act. 
 
 k. Administration of the U. S. Grain Standards Act. 
 IS. Insecticide and Fungicide Board. 
 
 a. Enforcement of the Insecticide and Fungicide Act. 
 i6. Federal Horticultural Board. 
 
 a. Enforcement of the Plant Quarantine Act. 
 
APPENDIX II 
 
 United States Department of Agriculture 
 Office of Markets and Rural Organization 
 
 Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics in the State of 
 Wisconsin by Cooperation between the United States Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture and the Wisconsin Agriculture College 
 under the Terms of the General Memorandum of 
 Understanding, Dated 
 
 This project agreement has been entered into between the Office 
 of Markets and Rural Organization, United States Department of 
 Agriculture, and the Wisconsin Agricultural College, Madison, Wis., 
 for extension work in supplying local communities in the State of 
 Wisconsin with suggested programs on social and economic topics 
 for community interests. 
 
 Name of Project: 
 Location : 
 Headquarters : 
 
 Date Effective: 
 Legal Authority: 
 
 Object : 
 
 Method of Procedure: 
 
 Organization : 
 
 Community Program, Wisconsin. 
 Wisconsin. 
 
 Wisconsin Agricultural College, Madi- 
 son, Wis. 
 
 " General Expenses, Office of Markets 
 and Rural Organization, 1917," the Smith- 
 Lever Act of May 8, 1914 
 
 To provide plans and programs for com- 
 munity meetings and to render assist- 
 ance in the promotion of community dis- 
 cussion along lines of rural organization 
 work for general social and economic 
 improvement. 
 
 By cooperation between the Extension 
 Service of . the Wisconsin Agricultural 
 College and the Office of Markets and 
 Rural Organization, U. S. Department 
 of Agriculture, programs of meeting 
 will be made out and sent to committees 
 in selected communities, who will be 
 further assisted by correspondence and 
 occasionally by personal visits. In this 
 work County Agents will be requested 
 to suggest neighborhoods and local lead- 
 ers and to take such part in this work as 
 their other duties as Agent will permit. 
 The Specialist in Rural Organization of 
 the Office of Markets and Rural Or- 
 ganization in cooperation with the rep- 
 resentative of the Director of the 
 119 
 
120 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 Cooperation : 
 
 Assignment : 
 
 Source of Maintenance: 
 
 Publications : 
 
 Estimated Ultimate Cost : 
 Results Expected: 
 Date 
 
 Extension Service of the Wisconsin 
 Agricultural College, shall arrange for 
 the preparation, compilation, and distri- 
 bution of the community programs, and 
 receive reports thereon. 
 It is understood that the program mate- 
 rial shall be jointly prepared by the 
 Wisconsin Agricultural College and the 
 Office of Markets and Rural Organiza- 
 tion, while the field work shall be car- 
 ried on under the direction of the Di- 
 rector of Extension of the Wisconsin 
 Agricultural College. 
 The subject matter taught shall be ac- 
 ceptable to both cooperating parties; no 
 change of policy shall be made without 
 the consent of the parties to this agree- 
 ment, which may be abrogated by either 
 party upon giving thirty days' notice in 
 writing to the other party. 
 The Office of Markets and Rural Organi- 
 zation agrees to furnish the desired 
 number of multigraph copies of such 
 program material as may be jointly ap- 
 proved by the Wisconsin Agricultural 
 College and the Office of Markets and 
 Rural Organization. The Wisconsin 
 Agricultural College _ agrees to supply 
 such program material to rural com- 
 munity clubs in the State of Wisconsin, 
 to make field trips in the interest of com- 
 munity club development, and to furnish 
 the Office of Markets and Rural Organi- 
 zation with copies of reports received 
 from community clubs. 
 Mr. C. W. Thompson, of the Office of 
 Markets and Rural Organization, U. S. 
 Department of Agriculture, and Profes- 
 sor C. J. Galpin, of the Wisconsin Agri- 
 cultural College, University of Wis- 
 consin. 
 
 Appropriation, 1917, " General Expenses, 
 Office of Markets and Rural Organiza- 
 tion," and the Smith-Lever Act of May 
 8, 1914. 
 
 Publication of the results of this work 
 shall not be made unless mutually ac- 
 ceptable to all the parties to this agree- 
 ment and shall show on the title page 
 thereof the cooperative arrangement 
 under which it was done. 
 
 Chief, Office of Markets and Rural Or- 
 ganization. 
 
OFFICE OF MARKETS AND RURAL ORGANIZATION 121 
 
 Date 
 
 Dean of Agricultural College and Di- 
 rector of Extension Service. 
 
 Date 
 
 Chief of Cooperative Demonstrations 
 Work, North and West. 
 
 Date 
 
 Director States Relations Service. 
 
 Date 
 
 Secretary of Agriculture. 
 
APPENDIX III 
 
 Memorandum of Understanding 
 
 Whereas, has or may have, under its 
 
 control Federal and State funds for extension work in agri- 
 culture and home economics, which are and may be supple- 
 mented by funds contributed for similar purposes by counties 
 and other organizations and by individuals within said State, 
 and the United States Department of Agriculture has or may 
 hereafter have, funds appropriated directly to it by Congress 
 which can be spent for demonstration and other forms of ex- 
 tension work in the State of , 
 
 Thehefore, with a view to securing economy and efficiency in the 
 conduct of extension work in the State of , the Presi- 
 dent of , acting subject to the approval of the Board 
 
 of said and the Secretary of Agriculture of the United 
 
 States, hereby make the following memorandum of understand- 
 ing with reference to cooperative relations between said 
 
 and the United States Department of Agriculture for the or- 
 ganization and conduct of extension work in agriculture and 
 
 home economics in the State of . 
 
 I. (a) To organize and maintain a definite and dis- 
 tinct administrative division for the management and conduct 
 of extension work in agriculture and home economics, with a 
 
 responsible leader selected by the and satisfactory to the 
 
 Department of Agriculture : 
 
 (b) To administer through such Extension Division thus or- 
 ganized any and all funds it has or may hereafter receive for 
 such work from appropriations made by Congress or the State 
 
 Legislature, by allotment from its Board of or from 
 
 any other source: 
 
 (c) To cooperate with the United States Department of 
 Agriculture in all extension work in agriculture and home eco- 
 nomics which said Department is or shall be authorized by Con- 
 gress to conduct in the state of . 
 
 II. The United States Department of Agriculture agrees : 
 
 (a) To establish and maintain in the Department of Agri- 
 culture a States Relations Committee, pending the authoriza- 
 tion by Congress of a States Relations Service, which shall 
 represent the Department in the general supervision of all co- 
 operative extension work in agriculture and home economics in 
 
 which the Department shall participate in the State of 
 
 and shall have charge of the Department's business connected 
 with the administration of all funds provided to the States 
 under the Smith-Lever Act 
 
 (b) To conduct in cooperation with all demonstra- 
 tion and other forms of extension work in agriculture and 
 home economics which the Department is authorized by Con- 
 gress to conduct in the State of 
 
 122 
 
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 1 23 
 
 III. And the United States Department of Agriculture mutually 
 agrees : 
 
 (a) That, subject to the approval of the President of 
 
 and the Secretary of Agriculture, or their duty appointed repre- 
 sentatives, the cooperative' extension work in agriculture and 
 home economics in the State of involving the use of di- 
 rect Congressional appropriations to the Department of Agricul- 
 ture shall be planned under the joint supervision of the Director 
 
 of Extension work of and the agriculturist in charge of 
 
 Demonstration work of the United States Department of Agri- 
 culture in the North and West; and that the approved plans 
 
 for such cooperative extension work in the State of 
 
 shall be executed through the Extension Division of 
 
 in accordance with the terms of the individual project agree- 
 ments : 
 
 (b) That all agents appointed for cooperative extension work 
 
 in agriculture and home economics in the State of 
 
 under this memorandum and subsequent project agreements, 
 involving the use of direct Congressional appropriations to the 
 Department of Agriculture, shall be joint representatives of 
 and the United States Department of Agriculture, un- 
 less otherwise expressly provided in the project agreements; 
 and the cooperation shall be plainly set forth in all publications 
 or other printed matter issued and used in connection with said 
 
 cooperative extension work by either or the United 
 
 States Department of Agriculture: 
 
 (c) That the plans for the use of the Smith-Lever fund, 
 except so far as this fund is employed in cooperative projects 
 involving the use of Department funds, shall be made by the 
 
 Extension Division of the but shall be subject to the 
 
 approval of the Secretary of Agriculture in accordance with 
 the terms of the Smith-Lever Act, and when so approved shall 
 be executed by the Extension Division of said . 
 
 (d) That the headquarters of the state organization contem- 
 plated in this memorandum shall be at . 
 
 IV. This memorandum shall take effect when it is approved by the 
 
 President of and the Secretary of Agriculture of the 
 
 United States and shall remain in force until it is expressly 
 abrogated in writing by either one of the signers or his suc- 
 cessor in office. 
 
 Date 
 
 Secretary of Agriculture. 
 Date 
 
APPENDIX IV 
 
 Statistical Data Regarding the United States 
 Department of Agriculture 
 
 Fiscal 
 
 Amount 
 
 Amount 
 
 Fiscal 
 
 No. of 
 Officers and 
 
 Copies of Publica- 
 tions of all Kinds 
 
 Year 
 
 Appropriated! 
 
 Expended! 
 
 Year 
 
 Employ ees3 
 
 (New and Reprints)' 
 
 1839 
 
 jSl.OOO.OO 
 
 Jl, 000.00 
 
 1839 
 
 "-^^^— ^— 
 
 
 1849 
 
 3,500.00 
 
 3,500.00 
 
 1849 
 
 I 
 
 
 1859 
 
 60,000.00 
 
 60,000.00 
 
 1859 
 
 20 
 
 
 1869 
 
 172,593-00 
 
 172,593-00 
 
 1869 
 
 90 
 
 
 1879 
 
 206,400.00 
 
 206,360.00 
 
 1879 
 
 93 
 
 
 1889 
 
 1,134,480.80 
 
 1,033,590.22 
 
 1889 
 
 479 
 
 1,200,000" 
 
 1899 
 
 2,829,702.00 
 
 2,827,795-65 
 
 1899 
 
 2,949 
 
 7,075,975 
 
 1909 
 
 16,153,534-74 
 
 15,595,502.25 
 
 1909 
 
 11,140 
 
 17,190,345 
 
 I9IO 
 
 17,115,410.35 
 
 16,704,470.48 
 
 1910 
 
 12,200 
 
 25,190,465 
 
 I9II 
 
 20,888,449.28 
 
 20,424,767.92 
 
 I9II 
 
 12,704 
 
 27.594,857 
 
 I9I2 
 
 22,402,301.11 
 
 20,985,299-39 
 
 I912 
 
 13,800 
 
 34.678,557 
 
 I913 
 
 25,177,164-68 
 
 24,486,776.90 
 
 I913 
 
 14,468 
 
 33,356,366 
 
 I9I4 
 
 24,449,824.37 
 
 23,690,994-40 
 
 I9I4 
 
 16,060 
 
 38,186,392 
 
 I915 
 
 26,840,434.55 
 
 26,046,032.17 
 
 I9I5 
 
 16,223 
 
 36,075,561 
 
 I916 
 
 29,019,703.98 
 
 22,320,158.85 
 
 I916 
 
 17,227 
 
 39,098,239 
 
 I917 
 
 37,188,852.00 
 
 28,056,272.03 
 
 I917 
 
 18,751 
 
 47.023,635 
 
 1 Annual Reports of the Department of Agriculture, 1917, p. 268-269. 
 
 * Letter from Appointment Clerk, Dated 3/1/19. 
 
 * Reports of the Department of Agriculture, 1917, p. 278. 
 " Estimated. 
 
 1^4 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Allen, Edwin W. Some ways in which the Department of Agricul- 
 j. ture and the experiment stations supplement each other. (In 
 U. S. Department of Agriculture Yearbook, 1905, pp. 167-^2. 
 Washington, 1906). 
 
 Annual Reports of the Department of Agriculture. (Reports of the 
 Secretary of Agriculture and Bureau Chiefs, 1913-17). 
 
 Bear, William E. Departments of Agriculture. Fortnightly Review, 
 April I, 1883, n. s. v. 36 : S00-13. 
 
 (An account of the departments of Agriculture in various 
 countries including the United States.) 
 
 Brief Statutory History of the U. S. Department of Agriculture. 
 Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, 754-65. 
 
 CaflFey, Francis G. A brief statutory history of the United States 
 Department of Agriculture. Case and comment. Feb. and 
 March, 1916, v. 723-33, 850-6. 
 
 Carver, T. N. Historical Sketch of American Agriculture, in L. H. 
 Bailey's Cyclopedia of American Agriculture, vol. iv, p. 155. 
 
 Cooperative Agricultural Extension Work, Organization and Finan- 
 ces, States Relation Service, Doc. 40. 
 
 Crosby, Dick J. Cooperation between the United States Department 
 of Agriculture and state school authorities in promoting agri- 
 cultural education. (In National Education Association of the 
 United States. Journal of proceedings and addresses, 1908, pp. 
 
 303-7.) 
 Dean, W. H. What's the matter with the Department of Agricul- 
 ture? Country Gentlemen, March 3-31, 1917, v. 82: 415-6, 483- 
 
 3. 532-3, 589, 641. „ . , , 
 
 Federal Legislation, Regulations, and Rulings Affecting Agricultural 
 
 Colleges and Experiment Stations. Issued Aug. 25, 1917. 
 Freund, Ernest. Standards of American Legislation. 
 . American Administrative Law. Pol. Science Quart., vol. ix, 
 
 P- 415. 
 
 Flower, B. O. Work of the agricultural department and the experi- 
 ment stations. Are;na, Dec, 1901, v. 26: 650-6. 
 
 Galloway, Beverly T. R.elation of the United States Department of 
 Agriculture to the agricultural colleges and experiment stations, 
 by B. T. Galloway, assistant secretary of the United States De- 
 partment of Agriculture. Washington (Govt, print, off.), 1913. 
 An address delivered at the meeting of the Association of 
 American Agricultural Colleges and Experiment Stations, Nov. 
 14, 1913. 
 
 . Work of the U. S. Department of Agriculture in its relation 
 
 to the development of the Middle West. ... (n. p., 1903), pp. 
 49-61. \ 
 
 From Report of the Kansas state board of agriculture for the 
 quarter ending March, 1903. 
 
 Goodnow, F. J. Comparative Administrative Law. 
 
 . Politics and Administration. 
 
 125 
 
126 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 . Principles of the Administrative Law of the United States. 
 
 Greathouse, Charles H. Historical sketch of the U. S. Department 
 of Agriculture ; its objects and present organization. 2d revision. 
 Washington, Govt, print, off., 1907, 97 p., iii pL 
 
 . Index to the Yearbooks of the United States Department of 
 
 Agriculture, 1901-1905. Prepared by Charles H. Greathouse. . . . 
 Washington, Govt, print, off., 1908, 166 p. (U. S. Dept. of 
 Agriculture, Division of publications. Bulletin No. 9.) 
 
 . Index to the Yearbooks of the United States Department of 
 
 Agriculture, 1906-1910. Prepared by Charles H. Greathouse. . . . 
 Washington, Govt, print, off., 1913, 146 p. (U. S. Dept. of 
 Agriculture. Division of publications. Bulletin No. 10.) 
 
 Regulations Governing the Meat Inspection of the United States De- 
 partment of Agriculture. B. A. I. Order 211. Issued July 30, 
 
 1914- 
 
 Reports of the Secretary of Agriculture, . . . 1862-93. Washington, 
 Govt, print, off., 1863-94. 
 
 1849-61 pub. in the Report of the commissioner of patents, . . . 
 Part II. Agriculture. 1862-88 have title : Report of the com- 
 missioner of agriculture. ' 
 
 The annual report on agriculture began in 1837 with a two- 
 page statement in the Report of the commissioner of patents, 
 and formed part of his report (making a separate volume after 
 1849) until 1862, when the Department of Agriculture was estab- 
 lished. The head of the department became a cabinet officer in 
 1889. No report on agriculture was issued for 1846. 
 
 The reports appear in the set of Congressional documents, 
 with the exception of those for 1872-73, 1875-79. 
 
 Beginning with 1894, the report has been issued in two parts ; 
 the Yearbook, and the Annual reports of the Department of 
 Agriculture. 
 
 Rules and Regulations of the Secretary of Agriculture under the U. 
 S. Cotton Futures Act. Issued Aug. 12, 1916. 
 
 Rules and Regulations of the Secretary of Agriculture under the U. 
 S. Grain Standards Act. Office of the Secretary. Cir. No. 70. 
 Issued Nov. 6, 1916. 
 
 Rules and Regulations for the Enforcement of the Food and Drugs 
 Act. Office of the Secretary. Cir. No. 21. Issued April 10, 
 1913. Service and Regulatory Announcements of various Bu- 
 reaus. 
 
 Swank, James M. The Department of Agriculture : its history and 
 objects. Washington, Govt, print, off., 1872, 64 p. (U. S. Dept. 
 of Agriculture. Report No. 7.) 
 
 Thompson, Carl W. How the Department of Agriculture promotes 
 organization in rural life. {In U. S. Dept. of Agriculture 
 Yearbook, 1915, pp. 272A-272P. Washington, 1916.) 
 
 Contribution from the Office of Markets and Rural Organi- 
 zation. 
 
 True, A. C. United States Department of Agriculture. American 
 academy of political and social science. Annals, March, 1912, 
 v. 40 : 100-9. 
 
 Haskin, Frederic J. Department of Agriculture. (In his American 
 Government. New York, 1911, pp. 117-29.) 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 1 27 
 
 Hays, W. M. United States Department of Agriculture. Outlook, 
 Aug. 5, 190S, V. 80: 863-7. 
 
 Hinds. Precedents in the House of Representatives. Sees. 4149-61. 
 
 Historical sketch of the United States Department of Agriculture. 
 Compiled in part from Bulletin No. 3 of the Division of Publi- 
 cations. Quarterly bulletin of Alpha Zeta, April, 1915, v. 13, 
 No. S, 89 p., illus. 
 
 Houston, David F. (Address on U. S. Department of Agriculture.) 
 (/n New York Farmers. Proceedings, Season 1916-1917.) New 
 York, 1917, pp. 7-17. 
 
 Jefferson, Thomas J. Writings (P. L. Ford, editor). See index. 
 
 Laws Applicable to the United States Department of Agriculture. 
 Compiled by Otis H. Gates, under the direction of the Solicitor, 
 including ist, 2d, 3rd, and 4th supplements. 
 
 Learned, Henry B. The President's Cabinet. Chapter on the Secre- 
 taryship of Agriculture. 
 
 Messages and papers of the Presidents. 
 
 Newton, Eben. Agricultural Bureau. Speech of Hon. Eben New- 
 ton, of Ohio, in the House of Representatives, April 20, 1852, in 
 favor of establishment of an agricultural bureau. (Washington, 
 printed at the Congressional Globe office, 1852) , 8 p. 
 
 Program of work of the United States Department of Agriculture 
 for the fiscal year 1917. . . . Washington, Govt, print, off., 1916, 
 502 p. 
 
 (The program of work is an outline of the projects of each 
 bureau and office, with an indication of the object, and co- 
 operative relationship of such projects. Its purpose is to inform 
 the workers as to what is expected of them, reduce useless dupli- 
 cation, and assist in correlating the work.) 
 
 Turner, F. J. " Social Forces in American History," in Am. Hist. 
 Review, vol. xvi, p. 223. 
 
 . Significance of the Frontier in American History. Annual 
 
 Report, Am. Hist. Ass'n., 1893. 
 
 United States Dept. of Agriculture. Index to Service and Regula- 
 tory Announcements. Issued Oct. 17, 1918. 
 
 . Congress. House. Committee on Agriculture. Agri- 
 culture appropriation bill. . . . Report. Washington, Govt, print, 
 off., 1916-date. . 
 
 . Hearings ... on the estimates of appropriations 
 
 for the Department of Agriculture for the fiscal year ending 
 Tune 30, i90S-date. Washington, Govt, print, off., igo4-date. 
 
 . Committee on appropriations. Agriculture appropriation 
 
 bill. Hearings . . . (and Report) for the fiscal year ending June 
 30, 191S- Washington, Govt, print, off., 1914-date. _ 
 
 . Committee on expenditures in Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 Hearings . . . (and Reports). Washington, Govt, print, off., 
 
 Congress, Senate. Committee on Agriculture and For- 
 estry ' Agricultural appropriation bill. Hearings (and Reports) 
 ... the fiscal year ending June 30, i90S-date. Washington. 
 Govt, print, off., 1904-date. /r tt c n „+ 
 
 Vrooman, Carl S. Meeting the Farmer Halfway, (/n U. S. Dept. 
 of Agriculture Yearbook, 1916, pp. 63-73. Washington, 1917.) 
 
128 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 . Work of the U. S. Department of Agriculture. (In Am. as- 
 sociation of farmers institute workers. Proceedings, 1916. 
 (n. p., 1917), pp. 27-30. 
 
 . Agricultural Revolution. Century, Nov., 1916, v. 93: 111-23. 
 
 Washington, George. Writings (ed. W. C. Ford). See index. 
 
 Wilson, Woodrow. The Study of Administration. Pol. Science 
 Quart., vol. ii, p. 207. 
 
 Wyman, Bruce. Principles of Administrative Law. 
 
 Yearbooks of the Dept. of Agriculture, 1913-17. (Various articles.) 
 
INDEX 
 
 Accounts, in Division of Ac- 
 counts, loi ; in bureaus, 102 ; 
 audit of, in department, 103; 
 in Treasury, 103. 
 
 Accounts and Disbursements, Di- 
 vision of, 47; functions, loi. 
 
 Adams Act, passage of, 29; ad- 
 ministration of, 55. 
 
 Administration, definition of, 33. 
 
 Administrative regulations, use 
 of, 70; interpretation of, 71. 
 
 Agricultural Economics, 37. 
 
 Agriculture, Board of, British, 
 14; American, 14. 
 
 Agriculture, Department of, 
 raised to first rank, 23; cost 
 of, 31 ; growth of, 31 ; relation 
 to other departments, 34; or- 
 ganization, 36; reorganization, 
 37; growth of, 100, 109; ad- 
 ministration of health laws, 
 no; criticism of, in; outline 
 of organization, 115. 
 
 Agriculture, definition of, 24. 
 
 Animal Industry, Bureau of, es- 
 tablished, 22; powers of, 25; 
 functions of, 43; administra- 
 tion of Meat Inspection Act, 
 76; outline of organization. 
 
 Appropriations, estimates of, 93 ; 
 preparation of, 93 ; criticism of 
 method of, 96; submission to 
 Congress, 97; amount of, 100, 
 124; allotment of, loi. 
 
 Authorization, Letters of, 102. 
 
 Berkshire Association for Pro- 
 motion of Agriculture, peti- 
 tion to Congress, 15; organ- 
 ized, 18. 
 
 Biological Survey, Bureau of, 
 functions, 45; outline of or- 
 ganization, 117. 
 
 Bureaus, organization of, 39. 40 ; 
 cooperation between, 49; as- 
 signing functions to, 50. 
 
 Cattle Quarantine Act, passage 
 of, 26. 
 
 Charleston Society for Promo- 
 tion of Agriculture, organized, 
 18. 
 
 Chemistry, Bureau of, func- 
 tions, 44; administration of 
 food and drugs act, 82; out- 
 line of organization, 116. 
 
 Civil Service, in the Department 
 of Agriculture, 34. 
 
 Colonial Policy of Great Britain, 
 12, 13- 
 
 Columbian Agricultural Society, 
 18. 
 
 Commissioner of Agriculture, 
 office created, 9. 
 
 Committee on Agriculture, 
 House, creation of, 14; han- 
 dling of estimates, 98; criti- 
 cism of, 99 ; relation to depart- 
 ment, 113. 
 
 Committee on Agriculture and 
 Forestry, Senate, creation of, 
 14; handling of estimates of 
 appropriations, 100. 
 
 Constitutionality of agricultural 
 legislation, 11. 
 
 Cooperation, between bureaus, 
 49; between executive depart- 
 ments, 51 ; with State institu- 
 tions, 54 ; receipt and expendi- 
 ture of funds under coopera- 
 tive acts, 104; form of agree- 
 ment, 119. 
 
 Cotton Futures Act, passage of, 
 28; provisions of, 87; admin- 
 istration of, 88; settlement of 
 disputes, 90; criticism of, 92. 
 
 Cotton Standards, establishment 
 of, 91- 
 
 County Agent, 60, 113. 
 
 Crop Estimates, Bureau of, 
 functions, 45 ; outline of or- 
 ganization, 117. 
 
 129 
 
I30 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Department of Agriculture, date 
 established, g; raised to first 
 rank, 23; cost of, 31; growth 
 of, 31, 100, 109; relation to 
 other departments, 34 ; organi- 
 zation 36; reorganization, n; 
 administration of health laws, 
 no; critcism of, in; outline 
 of organization, 115. 
 
 Disbursing Agents, Special, work 
 of, 104. 
 
 Division of Publications, work 
 of, 47, 112; outline of organi- 
 zation, 117. 
 
 Early Agricultural Legislation, 
 12. 
 
 Ellsworth, Henry L., distribut- 
 ing foreign seeds and plants, 
 16. 
 
 Entomology, Bureau of, func- 
 tions, 45 ; outline of organiza- 
 tion, 117. 
 
 Estimates of Appropriations, le- 
 gal basis, 93 ; preparation of, 
 94; in Department of Agricul- 
 ture, 95 ; criticism of method, 
 96; submission to Congress, 
 97. 
 
 Executive Departments, consti- 
 tutional basis, 35 ; establish- 
 ment of, 35; organization, 36; 
 cooperation between, 51. 
 
 Expenditures, accounting for, 
 loi ; cooperative funds, 104; 
 reports of, 105 ; total amount 
 of, 124. 
 
 Experiment Stations, Office of, 
 60. 
 
 Federal Aid Road Act, 29; ad- 
 ministration of, 62, 65 ; provi- 
 sions of, 63. 
 
 Federal Horticultural Board, 47. 
 
 Food and Drugs Act, constitu- 
 tionality upheld, 12; passage 
 of, 27; provisions of, 80; lim- 
 itations of, 82; administration 
 of, 82; administrative regula- 
 tions, 85 ; criticisms, 86. 
 
 Forest Service, functions of, 44; 
 outline of organization, 116. 
 
 Franklin, Benjamin, first to add 
 foreign plants and animals, 16. 
 
 Freund, Ernst, on the extension 
 of police power, 24. 
 
 Goodnow, Frank J., 33, 6g. 
 
 Hamilton, Alexander, on gov- 
 ernment aid to agriculture, 10. 
 
 Harrison, President, on work of 
 Department of Agriculture, 26. 
 
 Hatch Act, passed by Congress, 
 23; administration of, 54. 
 
 Insecticide Act, passage of, 27. 
 
 Insecticide and Fungicide Board, 
 functions, 47. 
 
 Interior, Department of, trans- 
 fers forestry work to Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture, 29; co- 
 operation with Department of 
 Agriculture, 53. 
 
 Jefferson, Thomas, on govern- 
 ment aid to agriculture, 11. 
 
 Lacey Act, passage of, 27. 
 
 Legislation, early agricultural, 
 12. 
 
 Library, of Department of Agri- 
 culture, 48. 
 
 Markets, Bureau of, functions, 
 47; administration of Cotton 
 Futures Act, 89 ; outline of or- 
 ganization, 117. 
 
 Marshall Field Co. v. Clark, 11 
 (note). 
 
 Meat Inspection Act, passage of,^ 
 27 ; provisions of, 73 ; admin- 
 istration of, 75; cost of, 78; 
 limitations, 78. 
 
 Morrill Act, passage of, 21. 
 
 Organic Act, provisions of, 21. 
 
 Pennsylvania Society of Agri- 
 culture, organized, 18. 
 
 Plant Industry, Bureau of, func- 
 tions, 43; outline of organiza- 
 tion, 115. 
 
 Plant Quarantine Act, 2j. 
 
 Philadelphia Society for Pro- 
 moting Agriculture, organized, 
 18. 
 
 Publications, Division of, func- 
 tions, 47. 
 
 Regulatory Laws, administration 
 
 of, 68. 
 Reports, of Secretary, 105. 
 
INDEX 
 
 131 
 
 Revenues, sources of, 106; dis- 
 position of, 106. 
 
 Roads and Rural Engineering, 
 Office of Public, functions, 46; 
 administration of Federal Aid 
 Road Act, 65 ; outline of or- 
 ganization, 117. 
 
 Secretary of Agriculture, be- 
 comes member of Cabinet, 23 ; 
 office of, 41 ; outline of organ- 
 ization of office, 115. 
 
 Sinclair, Sir John, 14. 
 
 Smith-Lever Act, 29; adminis- 
 tration of, 57; provisions of, 
 58. 
 
 Soils, Bureau of, functions, 44; 
 outline of organization, 116. 
 
 Solicitor, Office of, functions, 
 71. 
 
 State Institutions, cooperation 
 with, 54, 56; meat inspection, 
 
 85 ; expenditure of cooperative 
 funds, 104. 
 
 States Relation Service, func- 
 tions, 46, 60; outline of organ- 
 ization, 117. 
 
 Stuart v. Laird, 11 (note). 
 
 Turner, F. J., 25. 
 Twenty-eight Hour Law, 26. 
 
 United States Agricultural So- 
 ciety, organized, 19; influence 
 of, 20. 
 
 United States Grain Standards 
 Act, 30. 
 
 Virus Act, 26. 
 
 Washington, on government aid 
 to agriculture, 10, 11, 13, 14. 
 
 Weather Bureau, functions of, 
 43 ; outline of organization, 
 IIS. 
 
Johns Hopkins University Studies 
 
 in Historical and Political Science 
 
 The University Studies will continue to publish, as heretofore, 
 the results of recent investigations in History, Political Economy, 
 and Political Science. 
 
 The titles given below are now announced ; other numbers will 
 follow from time to time. 
 
 The United States Department of Agriculture. By William L. 
 
 Wanlass. 
 
 The Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers. By 
 Jesse S. Robinson. 
 
 The Capitalization of Industrial Good Will. By Kemper Simpson,. 
 
 The Virginia Frontier, 1 754-1 763. By Louis K. Koontz. 
 
 The Employment of the Plebiscite in the Determination of Sover- 
 eignty. By J. Mattern. 
 
 The cost of subscription for the regular annual series, comprising 
 about 600 pages, is $3.50. Single numbers, or special monographs, 
 at special prices. Complete contents of previous volumes are given 
 on pages ii-vi. 
 
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDIES 
 
 IN 
 
 Historical and Political Science 
 
 Edited bj; HERBERT B. ADAMS, 1882-1901 
 
 *irot sold separately, 
 
 FIRST SERIES.— 1S83.— $4.00. 
 
 (Tolume sold only with complete set.) 
 
 X. An Introdnotlon to American Institutional History. By E. A. Fbbbiman. 25 cents. 
 
 II. Xh* Oermanlo Oiiffin of New England Towns, By H. B. Asams. 60 cents. 
 
 m. Iiooal Government in Illinois. By Albbbt Shaw. — Looal Government in Fennarl- 
 
 vania. By E. R. L. Gould. 30 cents. 
 lY. Saxon Tithingmen in America. By H. B. Adams. 60 cents. 
 T. Local Government in UicUean and the Xortliwest. By E. W. Bums. 26 cents. 
 VI. Parlsli Institntlons of Maryland. By Edwabd Inqlei. 40 cents. 
 •Til. Old Haryland Manors, By John Hemsley Johnson. 
 
 VIII. Korman Constables in America. By H. B. Adams. 50 cents. 
 
 nC-Z. Village Communities of Cape Ann and Salem. By H. B. Adamb. 60 cents. 
 
 XI. The Genesis of a New England State. By A. Johnston. 80 cents. 
 *XII. Local Government and Schools In South Carolina. By B. J. Bamaob. 
 
 SECOND SERIES.— 1884. 
 (Volume sold only with complete sets.) 
 *I-II. Methods of Historical Study. By H. B. Adams. 
 
 III. The Fast and Present of Political Economy. By B. T. El;. 35 cents. 
 
 IV. Samuel Adams, the Man of the Town Meeting. By Jambs K. Hosmbb. 35 cents. 
 V-VI. Taxation in the United States. By Heinby Cabtob Adams. 50 cents. 
 
 Vn. Institutional Beginnings In a Westem State. By Jhssb Macy. 25 cents. 
 Vm-IX. Indian Money in New England, etc. By William B. Wbkdek. 50 cents. 
 *Z. Town and County Government in the Colonies. By E. Channikq. 
 *XI. Budlmentary Soclsty among Boys. By J. Hbmslby Johnson. 
 ZII. Land Laws of Mining Districts. By C. H. Shinn. SO cents. 
 
 THIRD SERIES.— 1885.— $4.00. 
 
 I. Maryland's Influence upon Land Cessions to the XT. S. By H. B. Adams. T6 cents. 
 
 II-III. Virginia Looal Institutions. By B. Inglb. 75 cents. 
 
 rV. Secent American Socialism, By Hichabd T. Ely. 50 cents. 
 
 V-VI-VII. Maryland Local Institutions, By Lbwis W. WnjHBLM. |1.00. 
 
 ▼ni. Influence of the Proprietors In Founding New Jersey. By A. Scott. 25 cents. 
 
 IX'X, American Constitutions, By Hobacb Davis. 50 cents. 
 
 ~ZI-ZII, The City of Washington, By J. A. Pobtbb. 50 cents. 
 
 FOURTH SERIES.— 1886.— $4.00. 
 
 "•I. Dutch Village Communities on the Hudson Hlver. By I. Eltino. 
 EZ-III. Town Government in Bhcde Island, By W. E. Fostbb. — The Harragansett Plant- 
 ers. By Edwabd Channing. 50 cents. 
 
 IV. Pennsylvania Boroughs, By William P. Holcomb. 50 cents. 
 
 V. Introduction to Constitutional Kistcry of the States. By J. F. Jameson. 50 cents. 
 
 VI. The Puritan Colony at Annapolis, Maryland. By D. B. Bandalu 50 cents. 
 VII-VIII-IX, The Land Question In the United States. By S. Sato. Sl.OO. 
 
 Z. Town and City Government of New Haven. By C. H. Lbvbbmohb. 50 cents. 
 ZI-XII. Land System of the New England Colonies, By M. Eqlbston. 60 cents. 
 
 FIFTH SERIES.— 1887.— $4.00. 
 
 I-II. City Government of Philadelphia. By E. P. Allinson and B. Fbnbosb. 60 cents. 
 
 III. City Government of Boston. By Jambs M. Bugbbb. 25 cents. 
 
 •rV. City Government of St. Louis. By Maeshall S. Snow. 
 
 V-VI. Local Government in Canada. By John Gbobqe Boubinot. 50 cents. 
 
 VII. Effect of the War of 1812 upon the American Union. By N. M. Butleb. 25 cents. 
 VIU, Notes on the Literature of Charities, By Hebbebt B. Adams. 25 cents. 
 
 IX, Predictions of Hamilton and Da Tocqueville. By Jambs Bbycb. 25 cents. 
 Z. The Study of History In England and Scotland. By P. Fbbdbbicq. 25 cents. 
 XI. Seminary Llhrarles and University Extension. By H. B. Adams. 25 cents. 
 •XIl. European Schools of History and Politics. By A. D. White. 
 
 SIXTH SERIES.— 1888.— $4.00. 
 The History of Co-operation in the United States. 
 
 ii 
 
SEVENTH SERIES.— 1889. 
 
 (Volume sold only with complete set.) 
 
 I. Arnold Toynbee. By F. C. Montagttb. 60 cents. 
 
 H-IIIi Uonlolpal Goveniment in San FranclBco. By Bbrnabd Mqsbs. 60 cent*. 
 
 17. Unnlolpal Hlitory of New Orleani. By Wh. W. Howb. 26 centa. 
 
 ♦Y-VI. EngUah Caltnre in Virginia. By William P. Thbnt. 
 
 ▼H-Vm-IZ. The Blver Towns of Conneotlcat, By Ceabuis M. Amdbbwb. |1.00. 
 
 *Z-ZI-XII. Federal Government in Canada. By John 6. Boubikot. 
 
 EIGHTH SERIES.— i8go. 
 
 (Volume sold only with complete set.) 
 
 I-H. The BeEinnln^;] of American Nationality. By A. W. Suali.. $1.00. 
 
 III. Looal Government In VTisoonsin. By D. E. Sfbncbb. 25 cents. 
 
 *IV. Spanish Colonization in the Southwest. By F. W. Blackmab. 
 
 V-Y I. The Stndy of History in Germany and France. By P. Fbbdbbicq. $1.00. 
 
 Tn-IX, Progress of the Colored People of Uaryland. By J. K. Bbackxit. $1.00. 
 
 *X. The Study of History in Belgium and Holland. By P. Fbbdsbicq. 
 
 ZI-ZII, Seminary Notes on Historical Literature. By H. B. A0AM8 and others. 60 eeotl. 
 
 NINTH SERIES.— i8gt. 
 
 (Volume sold only with complete set.) 
 *I-II. Government of the TTnited States, By W. W. Willoughby and W. F. Willodohbx. 
 ni-rv. University Education in Maryland, By B. C. Stbinbb. The Johns HopUas 
 
 Univorslty (1876-1891), By D. C. Gilman. 60 cents. 
 *T-VI. Uunlclpal TTnity in the Lombard Communes. By W. K. Williams. 
 Tll-Vin. Pnbllo Lands of the Soman Republic. By A. Stephenson. 75 centa. 
 
 IX. Constitutional Development of Japan. By T. Itbnaga. 50 cents. 
 *X. A History of Liberia. By J. H. T. McPhebson. 
 
 XI-XII. The Indian Trade in Wisconsin, By F. 3. Tubnbb. 60 cents. 
 
 TENTH SERIES.— 1892.— $4.00. 
 
 I. The Bishop Hill Colony. By Miceabl A. Mickblsbn. 60 centa. 
 
 Il-in. Church and State in New England, By Padl B. Laubr. 60 cents. 
 
 17. Church and Stats in Uaryland. By Geobge Petbie. 50 cents. 
 
 V-T I. Beligtons Development of North Carolina. By S. B. Weeks. 60 centa. 
 
 711. Maryland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada, By J. W. Black. 60 centa. 
 
 7III-IX, The Quakers in Pennsylvania. By A. C. Applbqabth. 76 cents. 
 
 X-XI. Columbus and his Discovery of America. By H. B. Adams and H. WooB. 60 cent!. 
 
 XU, Causes of the American Bevolutlon, By 3. A. Woodbubn. 60 craits. 
 
 ELEVENTH SERIES.— 1893.— $4.00. 
 
 I, The Soolal Condition of Labor, By B. R. L. Godld. 60 cents. 
 
 II. The World's Representative Assemblies of To-Day. By B. E. Alobn. 60 centa. 
 ni-IV. The Negro £1 the District of Columbia. By Edwabd Ingle. $1.00. 
 
 7-7 1. Ch urch and State in North Carolina, By Stephen B. Weeks. 60 cents. 
 7II-7III. The Condition of the Western Farmer, eto. By A. F. Bbntlby. $1.00. 
 IX-X. History of Slavery In Connecticut. By Bbrnard C. Stbineb. 76 cents. 
 XI-XH, Looal Government In the South, By B. W. Bsmis and others. $1.00. 
 
 TWELFTH SERIES.— 1894.— $4.00. 
 
 I-n, The Cincinnati Southern Railway. By 3. H. Hollandeb. $1.00. 
 
 m. Constltntlonal Beginnings of North Carolina, By J. S. Babsbtt. 60 cents. 
 
 17, Struggle of Dissenters for Toleration in Virginia, By H. R. McIlwainh. 60 cent* 
 
 7-7I -7II. The Carolina Pirates and Colonial Commerce. By S. C. HnGHSON. $1.00. 
 
 7III-IX, Representation end Suffrage In Massachusetts, By G. H. Hatnbs. 60 centa. 
 
 X, English Institutions and the American Indian, By J. A. JAMES. 25 cents. 
 XI-XII. International Beginnings of the Congo Free State. By J. 3. Reeves. 60 cents. 
 
 THIRTEENTH SERIES.— 1895.— $4.00. 
 
 I-II. Government of the Colony of South Carolina. By E). 1j. Whithbz. 75 cents. 
 ni-I7, Early Relations of Maryland and 71rginla. By J. H. LatanS. 50 cents. 
 7. The Rise of the Bicameral System in America. By T. F. Moban. 50 cents. 
 7T-7II. White Servitude in the Colony of Virginia. By J. C. Ballaoh. 60 centa. 
 TUI. The Genesis of California's First Constitution. By B. D. Hunt. 60 cents. 
 tX, Benjamin Franklin as an Economist, By W. A. Wbtzei. 60 cents. 
 X. The Provisional Government of Uaryland. By J. A. SiLVEB. 56 cents. 
 'XI-XH. Government and Religion of the 71rglnia Indians, By S. B. Hbndbbn. 60 cents 
 
 FOURTEENTH SERIES.— 1896.— $4.00. 
 
 I, Constitatlonal History of Hawaii, By Henez B. Chambbbs. 26 cents. 
 n. City Government of Baltimore. By Thasdbcs P. Thomas. 25 centa. 
 ni. Colonial Origins of New England Senates. By F. L. Rilet. 50 cents. 
 17-7. Servitude in the Colony of North Carolina, By J. S. Bassbit. 50 cents. 
 TI-7II. Representation in 7irginla. By J. A. C. Chandleb. 50 cents. 
 7III. History of Taxation in Connecticut (ieSS-1776), By F, R. JOHBS. 60 cents. 
 IX-X. A Study of Slavery in New Jersey, By Hbnbt B. Coolby. 60 cents. 
 XI-XII. Causes of the Maryland Revolution of 1689, By F. B. Spabks. 50 cents. 
 
FIFTEENTH SERIES.— 1897.— $4.00. 
 I-II. The To1)aeco Industry In Ylrglnla glnce 1860. By B. W. Abnolo. 60 cents. 
 ni-T. Street Hallway System of Philadelphia. By F. W. SpaiBS. 75 centa. 
 VI, Daniel Baymond. By C. P. Nbiij.. 50 centa. 
 VII-YIII, Eeonomlo History of B. & 0. R. B. By M. Rbizbnstbin. 60 cent!. 
 
 IX. The South American Trade of Baltimore. By F. R. Ruttbb. 60 centa. 
 X-XI. State lax Commissions in the ITnlted States, By J. W. Chapuan. 60 cent!. 
 ZII. Tendeneles in American Eeonomlo Thought. By S. Shsbwood. 26 centa. 
 
 SIXTEENTH SERIES.— 1898.— $4.00. 
 
 I-T7, The Neutrality of the American Lakes, etc. By J. M. Calt.ahah. $1.26. Cloth, f 1.60. 
 
 T. West Florida. By H. K. Chaiibbbs. 25 cents. 
 
 VI. Anti-Slavery Leaders of North Carolina. By J. S. Bassett. 50 cents. 
 
 VII-IZ. Life and Administration of Sir Robert Eden. By B. C. Stbinidb. $1.00. 
 
 X-ZI. The Transition of North Carolina from a Colony, By B. W. SlEUB. 60 cent*. 
 
 ZII. Jaxed Sparks and Alexia Do TocguevlUe. By H. B. Adaus. 25 centa. 
 
 SEVENTEENTH SERIES.— 1899.— $4.00. 
 
 I-II-HI. History of State Banking in Uaryland. By A. C. Bbian. fl.OO. 
 IV-T. The Enow-Nothing Party in Maryland. By L. F. Schubckbbiiib. 75 centa. 
 YI. The Labadist Colony in Maryland. By B. B. Jaubb. 60 cents. 
 Tn-YIII. History of Slavery in North Carolina. By J. 8. Basbbtt. 75 cents. 
 IX-Z-XI, Development of the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal. By G. W. Wabd. 76 centa. 
 XII. Fublio Educational Work in Baltimore. By Hzbbbbt B. Adaus. 25 cents. 
 
 EIGHTEENTH SERIES.— igoo.— $4.00. 
 
 I-IT. Studies In State Taxation. Bdlted by 3. H. Hollandbb. Paper, $1.00 ; clotb, $1.25. 
 T-T I. The Colonial Executive Prior to the Restoration. By P. L. Kltk. 60 centa. 
 Vn. Constitution and Admission of Iowa into the TTnion. By J. A. Jauos. 80 cents. 
 YIII-IX. The Churoh and Popular Education. By H. B. Adams. 60 centa. 
 X-Xn. Bellglous Freedom in Virginia: The Bapttsts, By W. T. Thou. 76 centa. 
 
 NINETEENTH SERIES.— igoi.— $4.00. 
 
 I-III. America In the Pacific and the Far East. By J. U. Cauaean. 75 centa. 
 IT-V. State Activities In Belatlon to Labor. By W. F. WiLLonOHBZ. 60 centa. 
 TI-TII. History of Suffrage in Virginia. By J. A. C. Chandlbb. 60 centa. 
 Tm-IX. The Maryland Constitution of 1861. By W. S. Mybbs. 50 centa. 
 
 X. Life of Commissary James Blair. By D. E. Motlby. 25 cents. 
 
 XI-XII. Gov. Hicks of Maryland and the ClvU War. By G. L. RADCLlVFa. 60 cents. 
 
 TWENTIETH SERIES.— 1902.— $4.00, 
 
 I. Western Maryland In the Revolution, By B. C. Stbinbb. 30 cents. 
 
 Il-in, State Banks sines the National Bank Act. By 6. K. Babndii. 60 cents. 
 
 IT. Early History of Internal Improvements In Alabama, By W. E. Mabtin. 80 cents. 
 
 •V-VI. Trust Companies in the United States. By Gkobgb Catob. 
 
 TH-VIII. The Maryland Constitution of 18B1. By J. W. Hahby. 60 centa. 
 
 IX-X. Political Activities of Philip Frensau, By S. E. Fobman. 50 cents. 
 
 XI.-XII, Continental Opinion on a Middle European Tariff TTnion. By O. M. FiSK. SO eta. 
 
 TWENTY-FIRST SERIES.— 1903.— $4.00. 
 
 *I-II, The Wabash Trade Route. By E. J. Bbnton. 
 
 UI-IV. Internal Improvements in North Carolina. By C. C. Wbatib. 60 centa. 
 
 V. History of Japanese Paper Currency. By M. T4KAKI. 80 cents. 
 
 VI-VII. Economics and Politics in Maryland, 1720-1750, and tha Fnblla Servioss of 
 
 Daniel Dulany the Elder. By St. 6. L. Sioubsat. 50 cents. 
 •TIII-IX-X, Beginnings of Maryland, 1631-1639. By B. C. Stbinbb. 
 XI-XH. The English Statutes in Maryland. By St. 6. L. Sioubsat. 50 cents. 
 
 TWENTY-SECOND SERIES.— 1904.— ^4.00. 
 
 I-II. A Trial Bibliography of American Trade-TTnion Publications. 50 cents. 
 
 Ill-rv. White Servitude in Maryland, 1631-1820. By E. I. McCobmac. 50 cents. 
 
 ▼, Sirltzerland at the Beginning of the Sixteenth Century. By J. M. YmCBNT. 30 cents. 
 
 TT-YII-VIII. The History of Reconstruction In Virginia. By H. 3. Bckenbodd. 50 centa. 
 
 IX-X. The Foreign Commerce of Japan since the Restoration, By T. Hattobi. 60 cent*. 
 
 XI-XII. Descriptions of Maryland. By B. C. Stbinbb. 60 cents. 
 
 TWENTY-THIRD SERIES.— 1905.— $4-oo. 
 
 I-II. Reconstruction in South Carolina. By J. P. HOUJS. 50 cents. 
 
 III-IV. State Government in Maryland, 1777-1781. By B. W. Bond, Jb. 60 cents. 
 
 V-VI. Colonial Administration under Lord Clarendon, 1660-1667. By P. L. Eayb. 50 eta, 
 
 Vll-Vni. Justice In Colonial Virginia. By O. P. Chitwood. 60 cents. 
 
 IX-X. The Napoleonic Exiles in America, 1816-1S19. By J. S. Rbbvbs. 60 cents. 
 
 XI-XII. Municipal Problems in Mediaeval Switzerland. By !. M. Vincbnt. 60 cents. 
 
TWENTY-FOURTH SERIES.— 1906.— $4.00. 
 
 I-n. Bpanlsh-Amarloan Diplomatle Salatloni before 1898, By H. H. Flack. 60 centa. 
 Ul-rV, The Finances of American Trade Unions. By A. M. Sasolski. 75 cents. 
 T-yi. Dlplomatlo KecrotiatlanB ef the TTnlted States with Sussla. By 3. C. Hiuw. 60 eti. 
 TH-TIU. State Biffbts and Parties in North Carolina, 1776-1831. By H. M. Waostavf. SOe. 
 IX-X. National Labor Federations in the United States. By William Kibe. 76 cents. 
 ZI-ZII, Karyland During the English Civil Wars, Fart I. By B. C. SmiNilB. 60 cents. 
 
 TWENTY-FIFTH SERIES.— 1907.— $4.00. 
 
 I. Internal Taxation In the Philippines. By John S. Hobd. 30 cents. 
 n-UI. The Honroe Uission to France, 1794-1796. By B. W. Bond, Jr. SO cents. 
 IT-Y. Karyland Daring the English Civil Wars, Part II. By Bbbnabd C. Stbimbb. 60e. 
 VI-T n. The State in Constitutional and International Lav. By R. T. Cbanb. 60 cents. 
 Tm-IX-X. Financial History of Maryland, 1789-1848, By Hugh 9. Hanna. 76 centa. 
 *ZI-ZII. Apprenticeship In American Trade Unions, By J. M. Motlbt. 
 
 TWENTY-SIXTH SERIES.— 1908.— $4.00. 
 
 I-III. British Committees, Commissions, and Councils of Trade and Plantations, 1823- 
 
 1676. By C. M. Andbhws. 75 cents. 
 lY-YI. Neutral Bights and Obligations in the Anglo-Boer War. By B. 6. Caupbblu 
 
 75 centa. 
 
 TII-VIII. The Elizabethan Parish in its Ecclesiastical and Financial Aspects. By S. L. 
 
 Wabe. 50 cents. 
 IZ-Z. A Study of the Topography and Municipal History of Praeneste, By B. V. D. 
 
 Magoffin. 60 cents. 
 ZI-ZII, Beneficiary Featnres of American Trade Unions, By J. B. Ebnnedt, 60 ceots. 
 
 TWENTY-SEVENTH SERIES.— 1909.— $4.00. 
 
 I-II. The Belf-Beoonstruotlon of Maryland, 1864-1867, By W. S. Mtbbs. 60 cents. 
 m-IT-T, The Development of the English Lav of Conspiracy. By 3. W. Bbtax. 
 
 76 cents. 
 
 TI-TII, Legislative and Judicial History of the Fifteenth Amendment. By 3, M. 
 
 M athbwb. 76 cents ; cloth $1. 
 Vm-ZU. England and the French Bevolutlan, 1789-1797. By W. T. Lapbaob. (1. 
 
 TWENTY-EIGHTH SERIES.— igto.— $4.00. 
 (Complete In four numbers.) 
 
 I, History of Beconstructlon In Louisiana (Through 1868), By J. B. Fickudn. $1.00: 
 
 cloth $1.26. 
 n. The Trade Union Label. By E. B. Sfedden. SO cents : cloth 76 cents. 
 m. The Dootrins of Non-Suability of the State In the United States. B)' K, SinoB- 
 
 WALD. 50 cents; cloth 75 cents. 
 IT. David Bloardo: A Centenary Estimate. By J. H. Hollandbb. fl.OO; cloth $1.25. 
 
 TWENTY-NINTH SERIES.— 1911.— $4.00. 
 (Complete In three numbers.) 
 
 I, Maryland Under the Commonwealth: A Chronicle of the years 1649-1668. By B. C 
 
 Stbinbb. $1 ; cloth $1.26. 
 n. The Dntoh Bepnblle and the American Bevolutlon. By Fbibdbich Bduob. $1.B0} 
 
 cloth $1.75. 
 •III. The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. By P. T. Stockton. 
 
 THIRTIETH SERIES.- 1912.— $4.00. 
 
 (Complete In three numbers.) 
 
 I. Becent Administration In Tlrglnla, By F. A. Maqbudbb. $1.25; cloth $1.60. 
 
 n. The Standard Bats in America Trade Unions. By D. A. McCabb. $1.26; dotk 
 
 $1.60. 
 m. Admission to American Trade Unions. By F. B. Wolfb. $1.00 ; cloth $1.26. 
 
THIRTY-FIRST SERIES.— i9i3.-$4.oo. 
 
 (Completa In four numben.) 
 
 L The I«nd Byitcm In Huyland, 17:0-1766. By Ci:.abbncb P. Qonu). 76 cent*; clotll 
 " ,00. 
 
 I SoTtnunant of Xmsrioan Trade UnlonB, By T. W. Qlocebb. fl.OO ; clotll I 
 
 fl.OO. 
 ZZ. Xb* SoTtnunant of Xmsrioan Trade Unlona, By T. W. Qlocebb. fl.OO ; clotll f 1.9 
 in. The Free Necro In Virginia, 1619-1866. By 3. H. Rcsasu.. $1.00 : clotll fl.M. 
 
 XY. Tlie Qninqnennalu : An Eiatorloal Study, By B. T. D. Mi.aorriN. 60 canta; dstb 
 76 centi. 
 
 THIRTY-SECOND SERIES.— 1914.-^4.00. 
 
 (Complete In three numbers.) 
 
 I. Turlsdlotlon In American Building-Tradei TTnlona, By N. B. Whitnbt. $1.00 ( 
 
 cloth $1.26. 
 
 II. Slavery U Klaionrl, 1804-1S6S. By H. A. Tbexlub. $1.26: cloth $1.60. 
 m. Oolonial Trada of Maryland. By M. S. Mobbibs. $1.00 ; cloth $1.26. 
 
 THIRTY-THIRD SERIES.— 1915.— «4.oo. 
 (Complete in foar numbers.) 
 
 X. Kanay and Transportation In Maryland, 1720-1765. By Clabbhcb F. Qodld. 76 
 
 cents: cloth $1.00. 
 IZ. The Vmuiolal Administration of the Colony of Virginia. By Pbbcy Bcott Flippim. 
 
 fiO cents; cloth 76 cents. 
 
 III. The Helper and American Trade Unions. By Joem H. Asbwobth. 76 cents; 
 cloth $1.00. 
 
 IV. The Constitutional Doctrines of Justloa Harlan. By Flotd Babzilia Claik. $1.00 ; 
 cloth $1.25. 
 
 THIRTY-FOURTH SERIES.— 1916.— $4.00. 
 (Complete In four numbers.) 
 
 I. The Boyoott in American Trade Unions. By Lno Wolhak. $1.00 ; cloth, $1.26. 
 
 II. The Postal Power of Congress. By Lindsay Rogers. $1.00; cloth, $1.25. 
 
 III. The Control of Strikes in American Trade TTnlons, By 6. M. Jakbs. 75 cents; 
 
 cloth, $1.00. 
 rv. state Administration In Maryland, By John L. Donaij)80n. $1.00; cloth $1.26. 
 
 THIRTY-FIFTH SERIES.— 1917.— $4.00. 
 (Complete in three numbers.) 
 
 I, The Virginia Committee System and the American Sevolution. By J. M. LxAKB. 
 
 $1.00; cloth $1.25. 
 n. The Organizability of Labor. By W. O. Weyfobth. $1.60; cloth $1.75. 
 m. Party Organization and Machinery In Michigan since 1890, By A. C. MlLLSPACOR. 
 
 $1.00 ; cloth $1.25. 
 
 THIRTY-SIXTH SERIES.— 1918.— $4.00. 
 (Complete in four numbers.) 
 
 I. The Standard of Living In Japan. By K. Mobimoto. $1.25 ; cloth $1.50. 
 
 II. Sumptuary Law in mtmoerg. By K. B. Ghbenfibld. $1.25; cloth $1.50. 
 
 III. The Privileges and Immunities of State Citizenship. By B. HowuLU $1.00; 
 cloth $1.25. 
 
 IV. French Protestantism, 1S69-1562. By C. G. Kejlly. $1.25 ; cloth $1.50. 
 
 THIRTY-SEVENTH SERIES.— 1919.— $4.00. 
 
 I. TTnemployment and American Trade Unions. By D. P. Smblseib, Jb. $1.25 ; cloth 
 
 $1.50. 
 
 II. The Labor Law of Maryland. By M. H. LAncHBiMEB. $1.25 ; cloth $1.50. 
 HI. The American Colonization Society 1817-1840. E. L. Fox. $3.00; cloth $2.25. 
 
 IV. The Obligation of Contracts Clause of the United States Constitution, By W. B. 
 Hdnting. $1.00; doth $1.25. 
 
 The set of thirty-seven series of Studies is offered, uniformly bound in cloth, for library 
 
 use for $148.00 net. The separate volumes may also he had bound; in 
 
 cloth at the prices stated. 
 
Extra Volumes of Studies 
 
 IN 
 
 Historical and Political Science 
 
 Those marked with an asterisk (*) are out of print. 
 *I, The Eepublic of New Haven, By Ceables H. Letebmose. 342 pages. 
 11. Fbiladelphia, 1681-1887. By Edward P. Allison, A.M., and Boies Pen- 
 BOSB, A.B. 444 pages. 8to. Cloth. $3.00. 
 *III. Baltimore and the Xfineteenth of April, 1861> By Geobge Wiixiam 
 Bkown. 176 pages. 
 IV. Local Constitutional History of the United States. By Gbobgo E. Howabd, 
 Ph.D. — Volume I — Development of the Township, Hundred and Shire. 
 542 pages. 8vo. Cloth. $3.00. 
 VI. The TSegzo in Uaryland. By Jbitfbet R. Bbackeit, Ph.D. 270 pages. 
 
 8vo. Cloth. $2.00. 
 VII, The Supreme Court of the United States. By W. W. WlLLonOHBT, Ph.D. 
 
 124 pages. 8vo. Cloth. $1.25. 
 VIII. The Intercourse between the U. S. and Japan. By Inazo (Ota) Nitobe, 
 
 Ph.D. 198 pages. 8vo. Cloth. $1.25. 
 •IX, State and Federal Government in Switzerland. By John Maetin Vincent. 
 250 pages. 
 X. Spanish Institutions of the Southwest. By Fbank W. Blacemab, Ph.D. 
 
 380 pages. 8vo. Cloth. $2.00. 
 XI. An Introduction to the Study of the Constitution. By Mobbis M. Cohn. 
 
 250 pages. 8to. Cloth. $1.50. 
 XII. The Old English Uanor, By C. M. Andeews, Ph.D. 280 pages. 8vo. 
 Cloth, $1.50. 
 *XIII, America: Its Geographical History, 1493-1892, By Walteb B. Scaifb. 
 
 176 pages. 
 •XrV. Florentine Life During the Eenalssance. By Waltee B. Scaife. 
 XV. The Southern Quakers and Slavery. By Stephen B. Weeks, Ph.D. 414 
 
 pages. 8to. Cloth. $2.00. 
 XVI. Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution. By C. D. 
 
 Hazen, Ph.D. 325 pages. Svo. Cloth. $2.00. 
 XVII. Industrial Experiments In the British Colonies of ITorth America. By 
 
 Bleanob Xj. Loed. 164 pages. 8vo. Cloth. $1.25. 
 XVIII. State Aid to Higher Education: A Series of Addresses at the Johns Hop- 
 kins University. 100 pages. Svo. Cloth. $1.00. 
 XIX. Irrigation in Utah. By C. H. Beough. 228 pages. 
 XX. Financial History of Baltimore. By J. H: Hollandbe, Ph.D. 400 pages. 
 
 Svo. Cloth. $2.00. 
 XXI, Cuba and International Relations, By J. M. Callahan. 603 pages. Svo. 
 
 Cloth. $3.00. 
 XXII, The American Workman, By E. Levassecb (translation). 540 pages. 
 Svo. Cloth. $3.00. 
 
 XXIII, Herbert B, Adams, A Memorial Volume. 232 pages. Svo. Cloth. .1' 
 
 XXIV, A History of Slavery in Virginia, By J. C. Ballagh. 160 pages. Svo. 
 
 Cloth. $1.50. * 
 
 XXV. The Finances and Administration of Providence, 1636-1901. By HowABS 
 
 K. Stokes. 474 pages. Svo. Cloth. $3.50. 
 XXVI. The Adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. By Hoeace E. Flack. 
 286 pages. Svo. Cloth. $2.00. 
 
 NEW SERIES. 
 I. The Revision and Amendment of State Constitutions. W. F. DODR 
 368 pages. Svo. Cloth. $2.00. 
 
ALBERT SHAW LECTURES ON DIP- 
 LOMATIC HISTORY 
 
 1899. John H. Latan^i. The Diplomatic Relations'of 
 the United States and Spanish America. 1900. 
 (Out of print.) 
 
 1900. James Morton Callahan. The Diplomatic 
 History of the Southern Confederacy. 1901. 
 (Out of print.) 
 
 1906. Jesse Siddall Reeves. American Diplomacy 
 under Tyler and Polk. 1907. $1.50. 
 
 1907. Elbert Jay Benton. International Law and 
 Diplomacy of the Spanish-American War. 1908. 
 $1.50. 
 
 1909. Ephraim Douglas Adams. British Interests 
 and Activities in Texas, 1838-1846. 1910. $1.50. 
 
 1911. Charles Oscar Paullin. Diplomatic Nego- 
 tiations of American Naval OflELcers, 1778-1883. 
 1912. $2.00. 
 
 1912. Isaac J. Cox. The West Florida Controversy, 
 1798-1813. 1918. $3.00. 
 
 1913. William R. Manning. Early Diplomatic Re- 
 lations between the United States and Mexico. 
 
 1916. $2.25. 
 
 1914. Frank A. Updike. The Diplomacy of the War 
 of 1812. 1915. $2.50. 
 
 1917. Payson J. Treat. Early Diplomatic Relations 
 between the United States and Japan, 1853-1865. 
 
 1917. $2.50. 
 
 THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 
 
 BALTIMORE, MARYLAND