ALBERT R. MANN LIBRARY New York State Colleges of Agriculture and Home Economics at Cornell University Cornell University Library S 21.Z3 Hearings [December 16, 1903-February 24, 3 1924 001 127 459 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924001127459 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U. S. HEARINGS BEFOHE THE COHI'iTEE ON AGRICULTURE BILLS HAVING FOR THEIR OBJECT THE ERADICATION OF THE COTTON-BOLL WEEVIL, AND OTHER INSECTS AND DISEASES INJURIOUS TO COTTON, AND ALSO HEARINGS OF THE HON. SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE AND CHIEFS OF BUREAUS AND DIVISIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRI- CULTURE ON .THE ESTIMATES OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1905. WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1904. CONTENTS. Cotton-boll weevil: Statements of — Page. Hon. George F. Burgess,- Representative from Texas 3, 41 Beverly T. Galloway, chief of Bureau of Plant Industry 15 L. O. Howard, chief of Division of Entomology 29 Hon. Scott Field, Representative from Texas 36 Agricultural appropriation bill: Statements of — Daniel E. Salmon, chief of Bureau of Animal Industry 46 Milton Whitney, chief of Bureau of Soils 66 Beverly T. Galloway, chief of Bureau of Plant Industry; and Alfred F. Woods, pathologist and physiologist; William J. Spellman, agros- tologist; William A. Taylor, pomologist, and Frederick D. Coville, botanist, chiefs of divisions in Bureau of Plant Industry 97 Willis L. Moore, chief of Weather Bureau 197 H. W. Wiley, chief of Bureau of Chemistry 228 L. 0. Howard, chief of Division of Entomology 266 C. Hart Merriam, chief of Division of Biology 283 George W. Hill, chief of Division of Publications 300 Frank L. Evans, chief of Division of Accounts 318 Martin Dodge, Director of Public Road Inquiries 330 Hon. William R. Smith, Representative from Texas, and Elwood Mead, of Department of Agriculture, on Irrigation 349, 353 A. C. True, Director, Office of Experiment Stations 372 S. R. Burch, Chief Clerk, Department of Agriculture 383 E. S. Holmes, associate statistician, Bureau of Statistics 394 Overton W. Price, assistant forester, Bureau of Forestry 404 Hon. James Wilson, Secretary of Agriculture - 423 C A 1 1 HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE REGARD- ING THE COTTON-BOLL WEEVIL AND APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. BOLL WEEVIL. Committee on Agriculture, House op Representatives, Wednesday, December 16, 1903. The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. J. W. Wadsworth in the chair, for the consideration of the following bills: H. R. 4477, H. R. 5496, H. R. 7300, H. R. 7304, and H. R. 7646. The Chairman. Gentlemen, the business before the committee this morning is the cotton-boll weevil question. I think Mr. Burgess, of Texas, wishes to address the committee. Mr. Burleson. Yes; Mr. Burgess desires to make a brief prelim- inary statement. STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE F. BURGESS, REPRESENTATIVE FROM TEXAS. Mr. Burgess. Gentlemen of the committee, I shall endeavor to make a brief statement of my understanding of this whole situation and in support of the bills introduced and now pending; and I will thank the committee if they will permit me to make the statement without interruption, assuring them that when I have concluded I will gladly answer any inquiry that the chairman or any other member of the committee may desire to make with reference to any matter. The bill which I shall advocate immediate prompt action upon by the committee, and early report and a prompt action of Congress, the number of which is 5496, is not a hasty nor ill-advised one, and per- haps the strongest argument I can make in support of it would be to five a brief statement of the steps which successfully led to its intro- uction by myself, by request of the whole Texas and Louisiana dele- gations in Congress, unanimously. You will notice that the bill states that it was introduced by me by request. Early in the session the Secretary of Agriculture and sev- eral of his subordinates having inspected the boll-weevil district in Texas and attended the boll-weevil convention at Dallas, Tex., upon their return we had a conference with the Secretary. As the result of that conference we prepared and signed a statement made to him in the form of a petition, which the committee will find printed in the Congressional Record of the 24th of November, on page 329. That petition is signed by all the members of the Texas and Louisiana dele- gations and gives a statement of the magnitude of the cotton indus- tries of the United States, of the nature and extent of the peril that 3 4 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. threatens them by the Mexican boll weevil, and of the methods we suggest for relief, and which we ask the Secretary of Agriculture to recommend to Congress. I will not read all of that, although I would be very much pleased if each member of the committee would take the trouble to read the whole statement, because he will find some very interesting and instructive data therein. Mr. Scott. Will you give that reference again? Mr. Burgess. Yes, sir; it is in the Congressional Record of Novem- ber 24, on page 329. The petition is as follows: The statement is as follows: To the Secretary of Agriculture: We, the undersigned Representatives of the States of Texas and Louisiana in the Fffty-eighth Congress, respectfully present to the Secretary of Agriculture that the supremacy of the cotton industries of the United States is imperiled by the ravages of the boll weevil in Texas, which State produces about one-third of the total annual cotton crop of the United States; and we respectfully represent that the magnitude of the interests involved and the threatened spread of the pests through all of the cotton-growing States makes the question one proper to be legislated upon by the Federal Congress. The present distinguished Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, in a speech delivered in Boston on the 29th of last October, stated: "We grow three- fourths of the cotton fiber of the world. We export two-thirds of what we grow. That leaves for consumption one-fourth of all the cotton of the world. From this we export a little over $30,000,000 worth and import about $40,000,000 worth of man- ufactured cotton." An average cotton crop of the United States is about 10,000,000 bales, which at 10 cents a pound (which is less than the present price) amounts to $500,000,000, two-thirds of which, as we export that amount, brings from Europe and pours into the channel of American commerce $333,000,000 annually. From the Abstract of the Twelfth Census it appears that in 1900 there was invested in cotton compressing, cotton ginning, and the manufacture of cotton goods, $498,000,000. There were $88,000,000 paid out by these industries in wages to employees, and the value of the products produced was $356,000,000. In addition, there was invested, in 1900, in the cotton-seed oil and cotton-seed cake industries $34,000,000, paying three and one-quarter million in wages, and paying $45,000,000 for material, and producing products to the value of $58,000,000. This is a marvelous growth since 1880, when only $7,000,000 worth of cotton-seed products were pro- duced in the United States. This cotton-seed industry is of the greatest importance, because it aids us in maintaining our cotton supremacy in that it adds to the value of the farmers' products from 1 to 2 cents per pound in the price of the lint cotton — that is to say, that a bale of cotton, now sold for 8 cents, would bring the farmer as much money as the same bale would have brought at 9£ or 10 cents per pound prior to the present disposition of the seed, and this is one of the distinct advantages which we possess over the European countries now attempting competitive cotton growing. All of this is intensified in value by a future prospect in the markets in the Orient, superinduced by an increased prospect of an early construction of the isthmian canal. The manufacture of cotton goods is about equally divided between the South and the East, while the cotton-seed oil and the cotton-seed cake industries are almost entirely with the South. The foregoing facts give a fair view of the magnitude of the interests involved. Now Texas produces, as we have said, about one-third of the cotton upon which all of these great industries rest. The boll weevil first appeared in the southwestern part of the State of Texas, coming from Mexico, and in a few years has spread in a northeasterly direction practically to the Louisiana line, a dis- tance of perhaps 700 miles. If this advance of the weevil continueSj but a few years will suffice to carry it across the States of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia and into the most northeasterly cotton-producing States of the Union. It is quite difficult to estimate the exact extent of the injury or the financial loss sustained in Texas this year by the cotton growers. The expert of the Agricultural Depart- ment, Mr. Hunter, some time since very conservatively estimated that it would not be less than $15,000,000. The judgment of those of us whose names are signed hereto, and who reside in the infected districts in Texas, is that this year's loss will amount to not less than $35,000,000, and may possibly be as much as $50,000,000. This involves not only a HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 5 direct loss to the cotton planters of the State for this year, but under possible condi- tions it may be much greater next year, for the weevil are spreading somewhat northwesterly and southeasterly along the direction in which they have been going, and a much larger infected district is certain to appear in the State. In addition to this direct loss is the decreased land value, the decreased retail trade, the decreased bank deposits, and the narrowing of the channels of business, and the entire loss of the gold brought from Europe by reason of the cotton export trade, and, worse than all, the poverty of those who are poor, black and white, engaged so largely in cotton cultivation. All this easily suggests to the mind that if this pest spreads into the other cotton States what the effect must be upon all of the other industries depend- ing upon it, and what must become of the cotton supremacy of America in the short space of a few years. It is clear that the most unfortunate thing that could happen to the cotton planters of the South, is that reduced production by reason of the boll weevil would augment the price of cotton so as to give an impetus to foreign govern- ments to enter upon cotton production on a large scale, and in addition to manufac- turing cotton, as they now do, they would enter upon the cotton-seed oil and the cotton-seed cake industries. The Department of Agriculture has been doing the best possible with the means in hand to deal with this difficult and troublesome matter, proceeding at first largely upon the theory that it was solely an entomological proposition. First, $10,000, then $20,000, and then $30,000 was appropriated for investigation and experiment stations, and for the discovery of methods to meet the difficulty. The investigations of the Entomological Division of the Department of Agriculture by the chief, Doctor Howard, have been far-reaching and thorough. The life history of the insect has been studied in a way that reflects credit upon that Department's work. All known methods of combating it have received attention. Owing to the habits of the insect the futility of poisons, sprays, and all such methods has been conceded. Up to this date no parasite has been discovered that would war upon this insect, nor has any disease been discovered that would be communicable and thus exterminate them. This insect seems to be the healthiest bug that Doctor Howard has met in his many researches. While these methods can and ought to be pursued further, and doubt- less will be, yet by force of conditions other methods must be immediately resorted to involving cultural methods, the diversification of crops, the destruction of all infected materials, the planting of early maturing varieties of cotton, the creation and propagation of the best resistant varieties, etc. It is now demonstrated beyond all question that the diversification of crops is highly essential. All this would be much more true of the regions east of the Mis- sissippi River, where cotton has been the sole dependence for so many years. All of this work will entail a considerable expenditure of money and will necessitate a thorough organization in the infected districts; and while we gratefully return our thanks to the Department of Agriculture and to the Congress for what has been done in the past, we respectfully urge that much more must be immediately done if the alarming condition now obtaining in Texas is to be successfully met and the spread of like conditions in other cotton-growing States is successfully prevented. The State of Texas has enacted some legislation on the subject and is doing what it can; and the State of Louisiana has become aroused on the anticipated invasion of the weevil and will possibly shortly have a call session of the State legislature to deal with the boll weevil. The magnitude of the interests involved and the peril that threatens the cotton-growing regions and the actual conditions that exist as we know them causes us to suggest to the Congress the adoption of the following plan, which meets with the unanimous indorsement of the signers hereto, and which we briefly state, and the reasons therefor: First. We suggest that a cotton commission be created, to consist of five members, one from the Bureau of Plant Industry, one from the Division of Entomology, and three practical farmers, two resident in the infected dis.rict of Texas and one in the State of Louisiana; that this commission be located at some accessible point within the infected territory. This plan is virtually made necessary in order to bring about any organized adequate relief. The Texas cotton convention, which recently met at Dallas, passed the following resolution: " Recognizing the great danger confronting the cotton industry of Texas and other cotton-growing States, we earnestly appeal to the Federal Government through its Department of Agriculture to continue its liberal appropriations and to vigorously continue its efforts for the suppression and extermination of the boll weevil, boll worm, and other cotton pests." This convention created an executive committee, which committee has unani- mously requested the Texas Representatives in Congress to secure legislation provid- ing for cotton experiment farms in every county where the county will cooperate 6 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OK AGRICULTURE. with the Department of Agriculture in its efforts that the pests may be thoroughly and rapidly met and remedies generally applied. It also recommended that two- thirds of the cotton seed, consisting of the quick-maturing varieties now being bought by the Government, be planted upon these experiment farms in each county, so that a large volume of the improved seed be provided for Texas planting in 1905. These suggestions are wise, we think, and could best be carried out under the plan we have outlined. The value of having Texas and Louisiana farmers on the com- mission is that they will bring to the work of the commission a practical knowledge of the people, climate, and crops involved, and will induce confidence in its recom- mendations and aid organization and uniformity of methods and cooperation by cot- ton planters. We further suggest that a fund, to be called "the cotton-investigation fund," of $500,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, be set aside to be expended by the Secretary of Agriculture in furthering all the purposes contem- plated herein; and in this connection we suggest that possibly the remainder of the fund of a similar amount appropriated to stamp out "the foot-and-mouth disease" might be utilized for the fund jointly, so as not to greatly increase the appropria- tions for the Congress. It may be possible that the named amount may not be expended in one year, but the conditions are such that it is almost impossible to e-timate in advance and in detail what the expenditures ought to be and will be, and by far the better method is to grant this commission a sufficient sum to cover all possible phases of its work and to inspire confidence and cooperation on the part of the cotton planters. The commission properly organized could so Jay out the work as to expedite it in all its phases and bring immediate returns to trie fullest possible extent, and would not be hampered in the matter of specific requirements, as would be the case in one of the appropriations for the Department proper. A detailed statement as to how this money ought to be expended so as to bring practical results is difficult, but we suggest the following problems: . First. Demonstration of improved cultural methods. Second. The location and supervision of experiment stations in counties or in districts organized in one or more counties. Third. Work, having for its objects the production and distribution of early weevil- resisting varieties of cotton. Fourth. Studies of cotton diseases. Fifth. Studies of cotton insects. Sixth. Introduction of new crops. Seventh. Studies and experiments in connection with methods for destruction of the boll weevil and other cotton insects. Eighth. Studies of the enemies of the insects. Ninth. General propaganda. Tenth. Cooperation between the States of Texas and Louisiana in methods to be devised to check and confine the ravages of the cotton-boll weevil to Texas and pre- vent its spread in Texas and into other cotton States. In our judgment,, possibly, the sum we have mentioned may be economically con- sumed in one year. It may be deemed advisable to cooperate with Louisiana in stamping out the first appearance of the boll weevil in the cotton fields of western Louisiana, and if this be deemed feasible twice the sum named could be sensibly expended annually for that purpose alone. We therefore pray the Secretary to rec- ommend to Congress the adoption of these suggestions. S. M. Robertson, R. C. Davey, R. F. Broussard, Phanor Breazeale,' Jos. E. Bansdell, A. P. Pujo, Adolph Meyer, members from Louisiana; S. B. Cooper, chairman Texas delegation, Scott Field, Geo. F. Burgess, Mor- ris Sheppard, O. W. Gillespie, C. B. Randell, Jno. N. Garner, Jack Beall, Jas. L. Slayden, R. L. Henry, A. W. Gregg, A. S. Burleson, W. R. Smith, Gordon Russell, John H. Stephens, members from Texas. It will appear from that statement that we recommended unani- mously — for this is signed, as you will see, by all the members of the Texas and Louisiana delegation — a plan having two points, practically. First, the creation of a $500,000 fund ; second, the organization of a commission of five members under the direction and supreme absolute control, of course, of the Secretary of Agriculture, both with reference to organization of the commission, the plans, rules, and regulations which control it, and the expenditure of the fund which supports it. Acting upon that statement, you will find in the last report of the Secretary of Agriculture a very full discussion of this matter, a very HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 7 concise business discussion of the whole proposition involved, and I wish to call brief attention to some portions of that report: Crisis in Cotton Production. The invasion of the cotton-boll weevil has been a special menace to our cotton crop, and has done more than anything else to awaken widespread apprehension as to the future of this most important crop. The boll weevil first appeared in the State of Texas in 1894, and from that time on has been under observation and investigation by the Department through its Division of Entomology. It was not until 1902, how- ever, that this branch of the Department was able to undertake anything like thor- ough and systematic work in the matter of studying this very destructive enemy of cotton. In 1903 the scope of the work was further enlarged, an appropriation of $20,000 being made in the Division of Entomology for the investigations. Aside from this work the Bureau of Plant Industry has, during the past year, been carry- ing on considerable work with a view to securing, if possible, early and resistant varie- ties by breeding and selection; and has been conducting some more or less general experiments in the matter of crop diversification at special points in Texas. It has also been engaged in distributing a considerable quantity of cotton seed of early maturing and promising sorts. ' The work of the Division of Entomology has shown conclusively the value of good cultural methods, the planting of early maturing varieties, and the destruction of weevil-infested material, this conclusion having been reached only through the care- ful and detailed studies of the life history and habits of the insect. The demonstra- tion work along these lines, which the Division carried on the past year, has been exceedingly promising, as it has been shown that cotton can be grown in remunera- tive quantity, despite the presence of the weevil. Notwithstanding what has- been accomplished by the Department, however, the fact remains that the boll weevil is constantly spreading north and east, and it is probably only a question of time when it will reach all of the cotton-growing States. Thus the country is confronted with a very grave problem, as the invasion of this insect must necessarily mean a com- plete revolution in present agricultural methods. During a recent visit to some of the Southern States considerable time was spent in the weevil-infested district, and from the facts gathered in this way I am convinced that energetic measures must be adopted to meet the present emergency. After thoroughly canvassing the situa- tion with representative men in Congress and with others, I am of the opinion that a cotton investigation fund should be appropriated and set aside for immediate use in connection with this most serious problem. In order to make the work compre- hensive and thoroughly effective, I am of the opinion that a sum not less than $500,000 should be made immediately available for this purpose, the same to be expended under the direction of the Secretary of Agriculture, in such manner as will give the most immediate practical results. As to the problems which might be handled by the Department with such a sum available, I would respectfully call attention to the following: RECOMMENDATIONS. 1. Checking sporadic outbreaks of the weevil. — It would seem highly important that some action be taken looking to the checking, if practicable, of sporadic outbreaks of the weevil in the territory immediately adjacent to that now infested. This could best be accomplished by the organization of a corps of competent entomologists and could be carried on in cooperation with the State authorities. In order to make this work thoroughly effective it will be necessary for the States interested to enact proper legislation. This is a matter that could be handled and guided by those in authority, working under the direction of the Secretary of Agriculture. 2. Demonstration work to show the value of improved cultural methods by which farm- ers can produce fair crops in spite of the weevil. — This is the most promising field for im- mediate relief, and owing to the fact that the weevil is so far confined to Texas, the work here outlined would necessarily be limited more or less to this State, although regions in adjacent territory should also have such investigations carried on in them in order that the people may become enlightened in advance of the insect's ravages. The object and scope of the work would be to show by actual demonstration exper- iments the value of better cultural methods, the value of early maturing varieties, and the value of and necessity for complete and thorough destruction of all infested mate- rial. To carry out this work thoroughly and effectively would require a corps of men familar with cultural conditions, and who have the knowledge and ability to direct the necessary specific work that might be ordered by the Secretary of Agricul- ture. Legislation would be required in this case, also, to enforce the destruction of infested material; but, under proper organization, this could be brought about. 8 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 3. Work having for its object the production of new, early, and improved varieties of cotton. — The value of early varieties, has been demonstrated, but most of them have serious drawbacks in that they are poor yielders and the lint drops out easily during storms. These matters may be corrected by proper breeding and selection, and one of the important problems would have for its object the taking up of this work on a systematic scale, to the end of securing sorts which would not only be early, but would be storm proof and resistant. 4. Studies of cotton diseases. — While the boll weevil is mainly in the public eye at present, the fact remains that other serious pests of cotton cause great losses annually. It is natural to attribute all losses at the present time to the insect in question, whether these losses be from other insects, diseases, floods, droughts, or whatever source. Reliable studies indicate that the loss in Texas alone from the so-called root-rot disease will, in all probability, aggregate several millions of dollars annually. This and other diseases should be thoroughly studied, and corrective measures should be adopted. 5. Cotton insects. — What is said of cotton diseases is also true of cotton insects (especially of the boll worm) other than the boll weevil. These should all receive careful attention, and practical experiments should be carried on with a view to lessening the injury caused by them. 6. Introduction of new crops. — The urgent necessity for the introduction of other crops which will take the place of cotton can not be too strongly emphasized. Cotton, of course, should be grown, but the time is evidently at hand when a concerted effort should be made to bring about a change in southern agricultural conditions in the direction of greater diversification. This is recognized now as a vital question in the South. In many sections already the yield of cotton is barely profitable, so that, when the reduction due to the boll weevil and other pests is taken into account, it will be necessary to abandon cotton growing* altogether; while the decreased yield in the best districts of the cotton-growing sections renders it more important that other crops should be grown. Such crops as alfalfa, sorghum, Kafir corn,.and cereals, of various sorts should all receive attention, not only for silage, pastures, and winter for- age generally, but for green manures as well. 7. Studies and experiments in connection with methods for the destruction and control oj the boll weevil and other cotton insects. — It would seem highly important that the Gov- ernment should take cognizance of the many devices which are being placed on the market for combating the weevil and other insects. This is necessary as much for positive as negative results. Hundreds of devices and nostrums are offered to the public, and people are led to spend money for them. The Government should be in position to determine, once for all, the value or nonvalue of such devices, and thus be able to definitely and positively advise on all matters of this kind. Aside from this, the Government should take the matter of mechanical devices under thorough consideration, and should encourage, by the utilization of mechanical experts, the construction and use of everything which gives promise of practical value. 8. Studies of enemies of the insect. — While the studies of the enemies of the insect have had, so far, no practical result, there is no doubt that this work should be con- tinued, and everything in the nature of enemies, whether they be predaceous or parasitic insects, birds, fungus parasites, or others, should receive careful attention. 9. Securing and distributing seed of cotton known to have special value for earliness and ability to resiit the weevil. — Systematic action should be taken in the matter of securing from every source available seed of promising varieties and thoroughly testing them in the weevil-infested district. In addition to this there should be a systematic endeavor to bring together desirable varieties from all available sources for advance trials in the sections where the insect is likely soon to make an invasion. 10: General propaganda. — Under this head there should be organized a competent corps of efficient workers, who could, with the cooperation of the agricultural col- leges, farmers' institutes, State boards of agriculture, and all such organized bodies, bring to the attention of planters everywhere the latest results as to methods of meet- ing the present emergency. To carry out the foregoing work effectually it is believed that the best results will be secured by a separate organization. It will be seen that the two branches of the Department primarily interested in this matter are the Bureau of Plant Industry and the Division of Entomology, and their officers and men would be in a position to effect the proper organization and to direct the main features of the work. I would, therefore, respectfully recommend that if the amount already mentioned be set aside as a cotton investigation fund the Secretary of Agriculture be authorized to take such steps in the perfecting of a proper organization for handling the work as in his judg- ment may be best. Owing to the very nature of the investigations and the fact that they will involve most thorough and far-reaching scientific work, the management of the general plans must necessarily rest with the Department. It is believed that HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OK AGRICULTURE. 9 the work can be strengthened by securing the advice and cooperation of one or two thoroughly practical men in the States most directly interested, viz, Louisiana and Texas. The Secretary of Agriculture, however, should have full authority to organize the work for the sole object of securing, as already indicated, the most immediate practical results. In order to more effectually handle the problems which must necessarily fall to the work of the Division of Entomology, I have already recommended in my esti- mates that this important branch of the Department be made a bureau. The work that it has done in the past, especially in the field in question, certainly justifies this action; and I most earnestly recommend that this matter be given primary consid- eration in connection with the entire problem. It is very desirable, furthermore, ' that the fullest cooperation be effected by the Department with the experiment sta- tions in the respective States where the more important work will be conducted. This is. especially true of Texas, where the Agricultural College is doing everything in its power to aid in the matter, but where it is more or less handicapped by lack of proper facilities and funds. The fund recommended to be set aside for the purposes mentioned, and used in accordance with the plans outlined, will give the Department such liberty of action as the exigencies of the case demand. An industry which brings to. the country an annual income of something over $500,000,000 is threatened, and the time is at hand for energetic action. I again, therefore, most earnestly renew my recommendations for the means and authority to carry out the plans as herein set forth. Eespectfully submitted. James Wilson, Secretary. Washington, D. C, November 28, 1903. I take it that is a complete support of the unanimous proposition submitted to the Secretary by the Louisiana and Texas delegations, which, of itself, was not a hurried matter, but a matter that we have been thinking about for months and for years, and trying to evolve some prac- tical business way of getting at this evil that is growing, and growing, and growing, and that threatens, if not checked, to ruin the cotton States in the South. In passing, I say, with regret, that in the home county in which I live, a great historic old county in Texas, where the first gun was fired in the war of the Texas revolution, and where the early settlers organ- ized the town in which I live under the Mexican colonization laws, the loss this year, I know, of my own personal knowledge, will be not less than $1,000,000 in that one county alone. That is easily told by the receipts of the bales of cotton in former years and this year in the different towns where the cotton is marketed. When we reached this stage we had a meeting of the cotton growers of the other States, together with the Texas and Louisiana delegation. They all indorsed this plan, and a large delegation from the different States, practically all the cotton States in the Union, was raised to call upon the President of the United States, to call his attention to this matter and to suggest to him our desire that some general mention of the important matter be made in his message to Congress. That was done. The delegation waited upon the President, who received us very courteously, and discussed the matter very fully, and finally took action in the matter, the detail of which is unnecessary, and in his annual message you will find these significant words, on page 22: The cotton-growing States have recently been invaded by an evil that has done much damage and threatens the entire cotton industry. I suggest to the Congress the prompt enactment of such remedial legislation as its judgment may approve. The bill was drawn by a subcommittee of the Texas and Louisiana delegation, in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture, and follows closely the lines of the statement which I have read, and the report and recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture. It is in line with the suggestion of the President as well, and in line with all 10 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE Otf AGRICULTURE. anterior legislation of the Congress with reference to similar matters, as closely as this legislation could follow that. For instance, a thorough investigation was made of the different acts with reference to the Bureau of Animal Industry, with reference to the foot-and-mouth disease bill that was passed at the last Congress, and to the extent that this subject admitted of the phraseology of those acts it was followed in this bill. Several sections of the bill are verbatim copies of the sections in the act creating the Bureau of Animal Industry — the last one and part of the third one — and I wish now briefly to discuss the bill by sections. It is composed of four sections. The first section " reads as follows: That the Secretary of Agriculture shall organize in his Department a cotton com- mission, to consist of the chief of the Bureau of Want Industry, the chief of the Bureau of Entomology, and three practical men familiar with cotton growing, two residents of the State of Texas and one of the State of Louisiana. The duties of said commission shall be to prepare and execute, under the direction of the Secretary of Agriculture, such plans for lessening the damage caused by, and controlling the spread of, the Mexican cotton-boll weevil and other insects and diseases injurious to cotton as the Secretary of Agriculture may deem best. You will note that that section creates and defines the powers of the commission, all being subject to the absolute control and direction of the Secretary of Agriculture, as his best judgment may dictate. The number of avenues by which possible good may be brought to the people suffering from this pest are such that we conceive no way except passing legislation to invest extreme — absolute, if you will — power in the Cabinet officer of our nation who has these matters in charge, as you would with reference to quarantine; as we did with reference to the foot-and-mouth disease; as we did with reference to infectious diseases of the Bureau of Animal Industry. To do less than that would only be to possibly hamper practical and sensible business results, and we deemed it better to go the full length in the matter and trust the Secretary of Agriculture absolutely with reference to the work to be done and the money to be expended than to attempt, by any matter of detail, to put any limitations upon his power which we deemed "would be injurious to practical, beneficial results. Section 2 provides: That in furtherance of the purposes of this act there shall be appropriated out of the Treasury of the United States from any money not otherwise appropriated the sum of five hundred thousand dollars, two hundred and fifty thousand dollars of which shall be immediately available, which shall be denominated the "Cotton fund," and which shall be exclusively applied to the purposes of this act and in the expenditure of which the Secretary of Agriculture shall have plenary and exclusive powers, as he may deem best, to accomplish the purposes of this act. You will note that that practically gives the same unlimited power with reference to the expenditure of this fund by the Secretary of Agriculture as the first section gives with reference to the creation and management of the temporary commission; because we have no idea, frankly, gentlemen, of creating any permanent cotton commis- sion — none on earth. We never expect to urge any such idea as that, but we urge it simply to meet the impending and threatening and ter- rible danger that afflicts us, and when the purpose of it shall be accom- plished of course the thing will fall to the ground, as was the case in the foot-and-mouth disease bill. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 11 Section 3 provides: That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of Agriculture to prepare such rules and regulations as he may deem advisable in furtherance of this act, and to certify them to the executive authority of each State and Territory in the threatened region, and invite cooperation in the execution of the purposes of this act. That is practically a copy of a section of the bill creating the Bureau of Animal Industry, having largely a similar purpose. For instance, we can not know, and human foresight can not determine, just how or to what extent the boll weevil may cross the Louisiana line and appear in the cotton fields of western Louisiana. If, when it does cross, as the Secretary and everybody else believes it will, it should appear at the time practical and feasible for the Secretary of Agriculture to coop- erate with the State of Louisiana — which has now, by the way, I will pause and digress to say, a special session of the legislature going on, called by Governor Heard some ten days ago to take action on this matter, so as to create there a commission and invest them with power to condemn and to stamp out any sporadic appearance of the weevil — or with the State of Arkansas, or with the Indian Territory, or with the State, even, of Mississippi subsequently, in an effort to prevent the spread of this weevil into adjacent States and Territories, he ought, to have power in the bill to act in that matter as in the other matter; and this section is necessary for that purpose and involves the same phrase- ology and the same purpose as the act that created the Bureau of Ani- mal Industry, which provided, as this does, that he could adopt rules and regulations and certify them to the authorities in the State or Ter- ritory, so as to invite and induce cooperation to meet completely, in the best and most practical, feasible way, whatever might arise in the future. There seems to be no doubt on the part of any of the thoughtful men who have looked into the matter that the danger for the future is not only to Texas by an increased spreading and an increased devasta- tion, but the danger is that they will rapidly spread across Louisiana and Mississippi and into Arkansas and the rest of the cotton States, and that will mean ruin to us, not only temporarily, but while it may appear far-fetched to some gentlemen, the most potent thing to my mind in this whole matter is that already the increased price of cotton by the biggest bull that has ever operated in the cotton field, the boll weevil, has given an impetus never before given to competitive cotton growing by European nations, and if high prices continue by reason of the further spread and devastation of the boll weevil, we will be seriously threatened by such increased competition in the Indies and Africa and other countries under the care and guidance of European nations, as that our present cotton supremacy may be absolutely ruined. The great advantage we now have grows out of the fact not only of geographic position and cultivation and favorable climate and all that, but in addition to that we have a monopoly. If you will pardon the recent controversial expression, which will fasten the idea into your minds, we have, so to speak, a preferential of 2 cents a pound on cotton by reason of our having a monopoly of the by- products of cotton seed, cotton-seed oil, and cotton-seed cake, which absolutely control in the United States. We made last year more than $60,000,000 worth of products from the cotton seed, and paid to the planters 145,000,000 for the seed. 12 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. If much more cotton should be raised in Europe and they go into the cotton-seed industry of oil and cake, they will destroy our differ- ential, get 2 cents a pound off the price of our cotton, competitively speaking, and get an increased impetus, so that really the matter is of vast concern; for when we consider that annually, at the present I'ate of bales of cotton raised and the price, $330,000,000 in gold are brought from European markets and poured out into the channels of American commerce by the fiber alone, and that $30,000,000 is brought from various South American countries and the Orient in cotton prod- ucts, and about $23,000,000 from the by-products of cotton seed, and all of it is poured out in the channels of trade in America annually, we see what is threatened and what is at stake. This constitutes one of the chief imports that make the great balance of trade in our favor. The last section is a verbatim copy of a section in the bill which created the Bureau of Animal Industry. Section 4 is as follows: That the Secretary of Agriculture shall report annually to Congress, at the com- mencement of each session, a list of the names of all persons employed, an itemized statement of all expenditures under this act, and full particulars of the means adopted and carried into effect in furtherance of the purposes of this act. So that if mistakes are made — and it is human to err — the matter can be annually fully looked into by the Committee on Agriculture and by the Congress, and whatever amendments are necessar}' or whatever enactment is necessary, in the way of the extension of the fund, or anything else, it can be done intelligently and in a business way under this bill. I do not wish to detain the committee, and 1 thank all of you for the close attention you have given me in the matter. If any gentle- man desires to interrogate me, I will be very glad to answer him. Mr. Haskins. How long has this boll weevil been devastating your crops in Texas? Mr. Burgess. Something less than eight years. Its first appearance was in what we call the Rio Grande counties in Texas, in the extreme southwestern part of the State, and undoubtedly it came from Mexico. That has been determined by Doctor Howard's investigation in the Bureau of Entomology of the Department of Agriculture. They have chased the bug down and they know all about it. The only trouble is they find he is the most marvelously healthy bug and the most difficult scoundrel to kill that they have ever run up against in their researches. He does not feed on the leaves of the plant. If he did, this legislation never would have been sought. We worked on him long ago on that theory, but He does not feed on the leaves. He does not feed, even, on the leaves of the square; but those of you who are familiar with cotton growing will understand when I tell you that this bug comes out and he goes in the butt of the square, in under the leaves, and bores into the embryo boll, deposits his seed, and then on and attacks another square. The effect of that is that the square, which is the first process of development of fruit with cotton — the square going into the bloom and the bloom into the full-grown boll, something after the fashion of other fruits — the effect of that is that the square withers, dries up, and falls to the ground in a few days. I believe it is fourteen days, is it not, Doctor Howard? Doctor Howard. Yes. Mr. Burgess. That is the estimate. From the deposit that larva hatches out into another boll weevil. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 13 Mr. Haskins. Has the State of Texas heretofore taken any action in this matter, toward eradicating it? Mr. Burgess. Oh, yes, sir. We have had several acts of the legis- lature, and we have an agricultural and mechanical college actively at work. We have some experiment stations. We offered a $50,000 reward, and organized a commission to visit different farmers and receive applications for the award and make different experiments and test different methods for the extermination of the boll weevil. Without going into the detail of it, I will just say that it panned out nothing. We found out nothing that would kill the bug, and the most that has been done, in my judgment, is due to the Department of Agri- culture, and especially to the two subdivisions, the Bureau of Ento- mology and the Bureau of Plant Industry (and primarily to the Bureau of Entomology), in the different experiments wnich have demonstrated that it will be possible to lessen very greatly the ravages of the weevil by breeding resistant sorts of cotton, and peculiar kinds of cotton, and early varieties of cotton. For instance, it is pretty well established and pretty generally accepted — and I am a rather good boll-weevil authority myself, as I have been for eight years right where they are under my nose in every field, and it is a large agricultural county I live in — that the less leaves, the less foliage, the cotton has the better; that the more rapidly and earlier the squares form and the bigger the fruit at the first bounce, so to speak, the better, the reason being that this bug comes out in the winter in not very great numbers. The first crop, as we call it, of the boll weevil does not very seriously injure the cotton crop, but they reproduce so rapidly and so enormously that the second stage' of them, when they shoot in the squares and the squares fall and their young come out of these fallen squares in boll weevils, and practically devas- tate the fields wherever they go in, so that the earlier the foliage, the less the foliage, and the greater the cultivation the more you can make, for in addition to the facts that I have stated about them coming out in not so great numbers, it seems to be true that you can not kill the full-grown bug with heat or cold. We have frozen some of the scoun- drels in a bar of ice and kept them two days and then broken the bar of ice and put them in the sun and they thawed out and flew off. That sounds like a dream, but it is a fact; and heat seem not to affect the full-grown bug, but it does affect the larvse. For instance, if there is less foliage on the cotton and these squares fall down to the ground, and the rows have been planted wide apart and broadside with the sun's rays so that the sun falls down hot upon them, a very great many of them never hatch out. In other words, the intense heat of the sun wilL destroy the larva? in the square, although it will not destroy the full-grown bug. So that these cultural methods are now apparently the main reliance. Of course we do not want the further investigation abandoned. I understand Doctor Howard contemplates further investigation, and, I think, very wisely. He has heard of some appearance of a bug like this down' in Central or South America, and he wants to keep chasing* the matter down to see if we can not find there a disease that can be communicated to the boll weevil, or a parasite that will prey upon him, so that, after the manner of the Department in the scale matter in California, they can rid us of the pest in that way. We want pursued all the different avenues that offer any practical relief. That is one of 14 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. the main reasons why we regard a general bill of this sort as abso- lutely essential. If you attempt to make specific appropriations, you only limit the power and practical business effect of the organized effort or plan. Mr. Scott. Do these weevils prey upon any other plant? Mr. Burgess. No; 1 think not. Mr. Scott. Where do they harbor during winter? Mr. Burgess. In the stalks, under the bark of the cotton stalks, in some instances, under the bark of logs in the fields and places of that sort where they get shelter. Mr. Scott. Have any experiments ever been made looking to destroy- ing the weevil during that period of its life? Mr. Burgess. I think Doctor Howard and his assistants have devoted a good deal of attention to that, and are still doing it. Mr. Burleson. Unquestionably. There have been repeated experi- ments. Mr. Burgess. A great many experiments have been made, and a great deal of study and thought has been given to it, but I am not advised that any method has yet been discovered of striking them in that stage. I think* that is a wise suggestion, and that method of procedure ought to be closely and scientifically pursued, because if these fellows can be wiped out in the winter that ends the proposition. Mr. Burleson. In large numbers they leave the fields in the winter aud hibernate in the woods. The Chairman. What percentage of the crop do they destroy on the average? The entire crop? Mr. Burgess. Take my county, Mr. Wadsworth. That is a pretty fair illustration. I think they have destroyed 50 per cent of the crop, easily. Mr. Graff. Take it in a field where they appear, do they clean out the whole field? Mr. Burgess. In the field they run as high as from 10 to 60, 70, or 80 per cent. To illustrate: One of the largest planters in my county plants 2,200 acres in cotton and has made as high as 1,700 bales. In that field he will make this year 103 bales. Mr. Adams. Is spraying possible practically, or is it too expensive? Mr. Burgess. If you could catch him and spray him, that would solve the difficulty; but the trouble is he gets in under the square, Mr. Adams. Did j'ou ever see a cotton square? Mr. Adams. No. Mr. Burgess. Suppose this [illustrating] is the embryo boll and suppose four pretty nice leaves meet in this way. Over this embryo bloom or boll this fellow gets in under these leaves and goes on ithis boll. Mr. Adams. He has to be somewhere else before he gets in there. Mr. Burgess. That is true; but he gets in there with lightning rapidity. We have tried a great many experiments on the line of spray- ing him. We have tried it with sulphur fumes and arsenic and Paris •green and almost everything you can think of. It undoubtedly does kill some of them. Mr. Haugen. About how many bales of cotton do you produce in Texas ? Mr. Burgess. It is estimated that in Texas and in the Indian Terri- tory together we produce ordinarily something over a three million bale crop, about a third of the total production of the United States. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 15 The Chairman. What is the estimated loss ? Mr. Burgess. My judgment is, Mr. Chairman, that the loss will run more than $30,000,000. It is rather hard yet to get at it accurately. Mr. Haugen. What is the cotton selling at? Mr. Burgess. A bale of cotton now will bring about $60. I believe, undoubtedly, that all the cotton planters will agree it would be better for the country and for all concerned if cotton never was above 10 cents a pound; 9 cents would be better. Mr. Bowie. Is it not a fact, Mr. Burgess, that if the cotton of the South is destroyed or cut half in two, it practically destroys the mill- ing industry not only of the South, but of the East as well, or at least destroys any power of making money in that line? Mr. Burgess. I want to say this in connection with that matter. That was one of the reasons why I called particular attention to the state- ment that is printed in the record, because I took the trouble, being one of the committee that prepared that statement, to collect from the census the absolute figures with reference to all these cotton indus- tries. They show that about half of the manufacturing cotton industry is divided between the South and the East, and they produce nearly $400,000,000 worth of cotton products in the whole United States. Of course to decrease the raw material upon which these industries rest and to increase its price is to check and arrest their growth and development. I see Professor Howard has a magnified model of the boll weevil on the table. Professor Howard. Yes. The Chairman.. Mr. Burleson, this matter at the last meeting was left somewhat in your charge, with regard to the cotton interests you represent. What arrangements have you made as to the order of speaking? Mr. Burleson. I suggest now that Doctor Galloway or Doctor Howard, either one of them, be heard. The Chairman. Very well. STATEMENT OF PROF. BEVERLY T. GALLOWAY, CHIEF, BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. Mr. Galloway. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I shall not take any time in going over the same ground that Mr. Burgess has gone over. He has covered that subject pretty thoroughly. 1 would also refer you again to the Secretary's report, on page 88, where he dis- cusses the general proposition. My object shall be wholly to take up the lines of work which are suggested in the Secretary's report and to explain somewhat in detail the investigation that the Department believes should be put in operation in order to bring about the results that are desired. In the first place, I want to emphasize that this is a matter that concerns not only the State of Texas, but the entire South. Any- thing that has anything to do with the cotton crop affects every indus- trial operation in the South, so that it is, considered' from that point, a question for all the cotton-growing States, and especially in view of the fact that sooner or later this evil will invade the adjacent territory. There is one other matter that I wish to emphasize at this time. That is, that like all similar invasions of this nature, pretty nearly 16 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. everything that happens to cotton now is attributed to the weevil. There are a great many other things that are destructive. Of course the cotton-boll weevil is the thing that is now in the public eye, but there are such things as storms, and floods, and similar things, and any injury, any damage, is generally attributed to this particular thing. Taking up, therefore, the lines of work that are enumerated by the Secretary in his report, there is reference on page 88 to the first line of work, "checking sporadic outbreaks of the weevil." Dr. Howard will talk on this subject, and I only wish to say a few words in passing. In the matter of the expenditure of money in this field alone, the en- tire amount could probably be used, but it is a grave question whether the Department should take any action to that end. It is a question whether the States themselves can not, if it is deemed wise to do so, act in the matter, and it is merely a question of detail whether or not the Department should spend $10,000, $20,000, or half a million dollars in attempting to check sporadic outbreaks. I do not by that mean that efforts should not be made to check sporadic outbreaks, because I think efforts in that direction could be well put into operation. The Chairman. Have any sporadic outbreaks occurred? Mr. Galloway. Yes, sporadic outbreaks have occurred and are oc- curring on what is called the wave of the evil. The Chairman. It is absolutely by contact from the diseased or affected portion of the country, is it not? Mr. Galloway. Sporadic outbreaks, of course, would come in that way ; but the point I had in mind was where a sporadic outbreak would be of such a nature that to stamp it out would not require a great expenditure of money. The question of the expenditure of money that I wish to speak about is whether or not the General Government should take action with reference to reimbursing cotton growers for crops that are destroyed. That is where the expenditure of money might be run to any limit. That method, of course, was followed in the case of the foot-and-mouth disease, where the Government actu- ally reimbursed, to a certain extent, owners of cattle who had such cattle destroyed. But those things Doctor Howard will discuss more fully, and -I shall leave them in that shape. Mr. Scott. You have alluded to a sporadic outbreak. If it would not interrupt you to ask the question now, I would like to inquire whether this boll weevil has inflicted anything like as much damage in other cotton-growing countries as it is now inflicting upon our country. Mr. Galloway. I think not. We have suffered more than any other country. Mr. Scott. And whether some other countries have had a visitation from it, and it has then, after a period, passed away. Mr. Galloway. I think not. The thing is existing in Mexico and and doing as much damage there as it ever did. The Chairman. Do they continue to raise cotton there ? Mr. Galloway. They raise cotton in certain sections where the weevil does not exist or can not exist owing to climatic conditions. There are certain elevated portions of Mexico where I understand they can grow cotton, but we do not have any such climatic conditions in this country. Mr. Burleson. They were forced to abandon the culture of cotton in the infested districts of Mexico. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 17 i Mr. Scott. Dp you know whether, after the culture has been abandoned in a certain district for a number of years, it can then be resumed? Mr. Burleson. They attempted to resume it after a lapse of ten or twelve years, and the weevil destroyed the first crop, just as it had destroyed the last. The Chairman. The wheat weevil attacked our wheat in 1857 and we had to abandon the raising of certain kinds of wheat; but we intro- duced what was called the red Mediterranean bearded wheat, which was a resistant, and we got rid of the weevil in that way. Mr. Burleson. 1 would be glad if Doctor Galloway would direct attention to one sporadic outbreak or manifestation of the weevil in Louisiana and the steps that were thought necessary to take in order to destroy it. Mr. Galloway. In company with the Secretary, when we visited the Louisiana Experiment Station, we were informed by Doctor Stubbs, the director, that there had been an outbreak of the weevil, or the weevil itself found, in the cotton growing on an experiment farm. It was pretty generally shown, I believe, that this was an artificial introduction brought over for probably speculative purposes. There was some argu- ment between Doctor Stubbs and a gentleman living in New Orleans about certain matters pertaining to cotton. Doctor Stubbs made the statement that the weevil did not exist in Louisiana. This gentleman asserted that it existed right under the nose of the director, and that he did not know it. He made the statement that it was there, and Doc- tor Stubbs made the statement that it was not. This other gentleman went out and found the weevil right in the place. Then Doctor Stubbs took radical measures for eradication. He destroyed every stalk of cotton he had on the place. He had the roots dug up, and all the stalks and roots piled together and burned, after being covered with oil. Then he treated all the ground with crude petroleum or oil. Then he let in the Mississippi River and flooded the whole thing for a couple of feet and let it stand for a week or ten days. He said that if there were any weevils there, he wanted to be sure they were destroyed, and he abandoned cotton growing on that particular plot of ground. Mr. Lever. How far east has the boll weevil gone? Mr. Galloway. It is still confined to Texas, but it is within 25 to 40 miles of the Louisiana line, as I understand it. I will simply say a word in regard to the second line of work pro- posed. That is, "demonstration work to show the value of improved cultural methods by which farmers can produce fair crops, in spite of the weevil." This is the line of work that gives the best promise of good results. It has been put into operation by Doctor Howard, especially the last year, and has for its object, first, the demonstration of the fact that by planting early maturing varieties, by good cultural methods, by the destruction of all infested material, cotton crops can be grown regardless of the weevil; and just in that connection I wish to emphasize what seems to rne to be the necessity for establishing quite a number of these demonstration farms. That is, it is not so much a question of the relation of these farms to certain types of dis- trict, or certain geological formations, as it is to make actual object lessons so that the farmers themselves, who are conservative and who will not act unless the matter is brought strictly to their attention, C A 2 18 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. may have an actual demonstration. For this reason I think the demon- stration work could be considerably extended, not only in the region where the weevil exists, but in the region outside of that, so as to be working in advance always of the work of the insect. The question has been raised, and recommendations have been made by the Dallas convention, that one of these demonstration farms might very well be put in every county in the infected districts. About 100 counties are affected now. There are two hundred and some counties in Texas. This is perhaps more than would be required, but 1 believe the work should be so organized as to have demonstrative experiments of this kind, and it would be economy to have a considerable number at the start, because the results that are wanted can be secured quicker in that way than by having a few and having the effects of the work spread gradually over the State. So that, as an estimate, $50,000 could very well be spent, probably, in this work,, but that is a matter Doctor Howard will more fully dis- cuss, and the experience of this law will show what he has accomplished in that direction. But at the same time it seems to me that the size of the area devoted to this sort of work might be considerably limited so that we would not have too large tracts of territory to cover and look after, and, furthermore, that a considerable portion of this work will not necessarily cost the Government anything except the mere super- vision. Mr. Graff. I notice you stated that 140,000 or $50,000 would be necessary to operate 100 of these stations located in the different coun- ties. That would only be about $400 or $500 a station. Mr. Galloway. The main expense in connection with that work will be supervision and necessary demonstration of the fact that cotton not handled by the methods advocated by the Department would not give a crop. You have got to have "before taking" and "after taking" right together, and the arrangements can be made so that the crops can be made remunerative by following the Department's directions, but you will have to have a portion of the ground in cotton that will be nearly an absolute loss; and to meet that you will have to in some way reimburse the owner. Mr. Graff. Then you think it will only cost $400 or $500 for each station? Mr. Galloway. That altogether depends on the number of stations, but I do not think it would necessarily cost more than that if you limit the area to 25 or 30 acres, which seems to me all that is required. 1 shall pass now to the next line of work, "work having for its object the production of new, early, and improved varieties of cotton and the general improvement of the seed." This is work that would come properly under the Bureau of Plant Industry, and is based on the fact that these early maturing varieties are valuable, but they all have objections, from the fact that they are not as good yielders as other sorts that are nOt early. They have objections furthermore from the fact that they are easily blown out, as the expression goes, by storms — that is, the cotton is blown out, and in many cases the foliage is of a type that is undesirable. So that in the matter of breeding resistant or storm resistant sorts and early types an impor- tant line of work is possible. This would necessitate the careful investigation of cottons growing in other sections, the bringing together HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 19 of desirable strains that would be required for securing the necessary hybrids, and in fact all that line of work which has to do with bring- ing the necessary forces together to make or create exactly what is wanted in the way of early maturing sorts and good yielding sorts. The Chairman. And that, of necessity, would be a slow process. Mr. Galloway. Necessarily a slow process. In addition to that line of work, one of the most important I think in the entire field would have to do with a better method of securing by selection and develop- ment stock seed for planting. It is a well-known fact that the cotton seed that is used for planting is more or less constantly deteriorating, owing to the demand for cotton seed in the production of oil and for other purposes. I believe that, taking the matter of seed selection alone, the cotton crop of the country within a reasonable time, with seed selection and good cultivation, could be doubled. I do not think that is an exaggerated statement. I believe that if attention should be given to the breeding up of what might be called stock seed — and I do not think it is a function of the Government to continue that work any longer than simply to demonstrate the fact that it can be done — that we could secure results which would develop the output of cotton fully one-half; that is, instead of having 10,000,000 bales we would have 15,000,000 bales. The Chairman. That would reduce the price, would it not? Mr. Galloway. I do not think it would. I think the demand for cotton is increasing. Mr. Bowie. Three years ago we thought it would be a calamity to have as many as 10,000,000 bales. Now it is regarded as a calamity not to have that many. That is the way the conditions have changed. Mr. Galloway. There seems to be a world-wide demand for more cotton. The Chairman. You think the use of the seed for meal and cake has resulted in the deterioration of the seed used by the planters, do you, Doctor? Mr. Galloway. I think it has. The Chairman. That is natural. Mr. Galloway. Because there is a constant demand. The seed is rushed right to the mills, and you can hardly find a farmer who is giving the attention to the selection of his stock seed that he ought to give; and the evidence that we have as to results procured in the matter of breeding, by selection, high-yielding types of corn is valuable in that connection. That work is now being carried on by private firms in Illinois and other places; but the feasibility of it was demonstrated by experiment-station workers and others. It has shown an increase in production in many cases of 25, 30, and 40 per cent. That is true, things being equal. So that in the matter of securing these high-grade or high-yielding types of cotton, the average yield this year of cotton lint is about 174 pounds to the acre. We find many instances in the South where they get 600 and 700 pounds in individual cases. There is no reason why you could not develop the average yield by the selection of seed, because it is largely a question not so much of soil and surrounding conditions as it is badly selected and impovished seed. The Chairman. Has it been the custom for the planters to use a seed raised by themselves continually on the same land? 20 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Galloway. A great many do that. Many go outside and bring in seed. A great many go to the gins and take it just as it comes from the gins. We have estimated for this breeding work the expenditure of $25,000. That includes the hybridization work, the breeding of the early and prolific types, and this matter of demonstrating the value of improved seed. That is, our idea is that that work could be carried on just as the sugar beet study work has been conducted. The Chairman. That would be under your Bureau ? Mr. Galloway. That would be under the Bureau of Plant Industry. We have made out the plan in detail, and I think that would be a rea- sonable expenditure for the year. The idea of this whole scheme is ■ The Chairman. Have you taken some steps along these lines already, Doctor, under your general appropriation. Mr. Galloway. We have some work going on in that direction now, but it has been limited owing to lack of funds. Now the next point: " Studies of cotton diseases." The Chairman. You do not need any new legislation to enable you to continue those? Mr. Galloway. No. The Chairman. It is covered by the general act? Mr. Galloway. It is covered by the general act, and it would be covered by this act here because under that general clause of limiting the damage caused by the cotton-boll weevil and other infective dis- oases, we could take it up under this bill. That was considered in connection with the bill. The Chairman. This Burgess bill? Mr. Galloway. Yes, sir; the matter of diseases is an important one. One thing particularly that I wish to mention is the so-called root rot, which in many cases in Texas this year will destroy, I am sure, one-fourth of the crop. There are other diseases, such as the anthracnose, root- knot, and similar maladies, all of which could be taken up, thoroughly investigated, and relief from them secured either by direct applica- tion of remedial measures or bj r securing of resistant types, just as we have done in the case of the sea island cottons along the Atlantic coast. Five years ago we entered into that field where the sea-island cotton industry was practically at a standstill on account of diseases, and in five years we have been able to secure, by breeding and selection, a resistant type, and the whole industry has been established. We are now distributing that seed to other sections, where this same form of disease exists. We have estimated for this work $25,000. The studies of cotton insects Doctor Howard will discuss. The next point is " Introduction of new crops." • This we consider one of the most vital of the points at stake, because what the cotton grower needs now is not only information and instiuction that will enable him to secure cotton crops if he can, but if he can not, to grow something that will take its place. This means the taking up of the general question of diversification of crops in the South. The Chairman. Would not this more particularly come under the hearing which we will give you on your items of the appropriation bill ? Mr. Galloway. No, sir; it belongs right in here it seems to me, because all these matters will have to be considered in connection with this work. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 21 Mr. Bowie. This extra appropriation ? Mr. Galloway. This extra appropriation. ' We had contemplated using part of the funds for the introduction of diversification of crops, the rotation of crops as a means and method for meeting the injuries and damage caused by this weevil. Mr. Bowie. In the infected districts? Mr. Galloway. In the infected districts, and to a certain extent outside the infected districts, because if we confine ourselves to the infected districts, as soon as the infection would spread we would have to go right over the same ground there, whereas if we take it up in advance the people would be familiar with methods of rotation, methods of diversification, and other such methods which would be of value. Mr. Lever. Do you think, unless it is prevented, the boll weevit is bound to spread? Mr. Galloway. I think it is bound to spread anyway. I think it is going to spread, and we might as well make up our minds that it is going to be with us, and make up our minds to meet it in every way we can, either in showing how cotton can be grown despite it, or in enabling cotton growers to grow something else in place of cotton. .The Chairman. -That was practically done with the wheat weevil. Mr. Galloway. Yes, sir. Mr. Lamb. The cotton growers will pretty soon find that out, will they not, about diversified crops?' Mr. Galloway. They will hang to cotton as long as they can. I will cite you one or two examples of this diversification in Texas. Some of the Texas farmers are going extensively into alfalfa. They find that they can grow alfalfa and make just as much money as they can by growing cotton, and the cost of handling the crop is not more than half the cost of handling cotton. One of the gentlemen in north Texas has put 800 acres in alfalfa, and this year he made about three tons to the acre, and when we were at his place he was getting $15 a ton for his crop. He had abandoned cotton entirely. Mr. Lamb. But we must kill the boll weevil in order to take care of New England. Mr. Haugen. Doctor, are we to understand that part of this money is to be used to pay for the crop destroyed by the cotton-boll weevil ? Mr. Galloway. That is a matter I discussed at the outset. Mr. Haugen. I was out at the moment and I did not catch what you said. Mr. Burgess. Not to pay for any part of the crop that is destroyed. Mr. Galloway. Not to pay for anybody's crop that is destroyed; but if, in cases of sporadic outbreak, it is found necessary or desirable to stamp out comparatively few acres of cotton, it might be proper for the Department to Mr. Burgess. In order to prevent the spread. Mr. Galloway. To consider the question of reimbursing the grower for his cotton in order to prevent the spread of the weevil. Mr. Bowie. What you mean by that is, when a particular field is destroyed, such as you refer to in Louisiana? Mr. Galloway. Yes. There are precedents for that. For example, in the State of Michigan, where they have a peach yellows law, the trees are taken out and destroyed, and where it is necessary to destroy trees that do not show infection the owner is frequently partially reimbursed on the recommendation of a board that acts on the matter 22 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OK AGRICULTURE. and determines the value; but that is done entirely by the State. In the case of the foot-and-mouth disease, I think something like one-third of the assessed value of the animals was paid by the General Govern- ment. The Chairman. I think the report of the Secretary of Agriculture shows 70 per cent. Mr. Galloway. Perhaps it was 70 per cent. Mr. Adams. Let me ask you right there. Is cotton an exhaustive crop? Mr. Galloway. Very. Mr. Adams. In the fertility of the soil ? Mr. Galloway. In the fertility of the soil. It is one of the robbers of -the soil, and the whole agricultural practice of the South has been a species of land robbery. That is one of the things that is now causing this crisis in cotton production. There has been little attention paid to rotation of crops, little attention paid to bringing in green manures and things of that kind; but more attention has been paid to them in recent years than in former years. Mr. Adams. Is it exhaustive, as far as the cotton crop is concerned, or does it exhaust the general fertility of the soil? Mr. Galloway. It exhausts the general fertility of the soil, because the soils of the South, generally speaking, are of such a nature that a crop grown like cotton and then taken off and left standing, as is gen- erally the case in the South, leaches the land very severely; and while other crops can be put back and brought up quite readily with green manures, the general fertility is exhausted. We have estimated as a conservative figure here $25,000 for this matter of the introductidn of new crops, diversification of crops, rota- tion of crops; but that could be extended if it were desirable to do so, and we could spend $50,000; that is, by going into other sections. Mr. Bowie. Let me ask you a question right there, if it does not interrupt you. Mr. Galloway. Certainly. Mr. Bowie. You are separating the different expenditures that could be made. This bill proposes to consolidate the entire fund in the hands of the Secretary of Agriculture, and'to let him make the separation as he sees fit. For instance, if you are too low there in some places and too high in others, he will make the adjustment. Mr. Galloway. I am just giving a tentative outline of a plan, and Droctor Howard will give a tentative outline of apian, and then the two will be combined, and it will show you how much can be expended in one year of this $500,000. Mr. Bowie. That is not intended to be a separate appropriation for each of these things? Mr. Galloway. No, sir. This is simply a tentative estimate for the work that could be done under this bill and the amount of money that would be required to do it in one year. We have limited our- selves to one year. Mr. Bowie. I understand. Mr. Galloway. The next two points, "Introduction of new crops" and " Studies and experiments in connection with methods for the destruction and control of the boll weevil and other cotton insects," will be discussed by Doctor Howard. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 23 The next point, " Studies of enemies of the insect," will also be dis- cussed by Doctor Howard. " Securing and distributing seed of cotton known to have special value for earliness and productiveness and ability to resist the weevil." On this particular item the views of the Secretary are very pronounced. He believes that the Department should not undertake the mere dis- tribution of seed, so far as replanting of infested areas is concerned, but he does think it would be wise to distribute such seed as might be developed by these breeding and selection experiments, in so far as it would result in demonstrating that particular kind of seed, and then stop. The Chairman. Of course you can not produce any seed now from your experiments, can you? Mr. Galloway. We can not produce any seed, but we can find through the South high-grade types of cotton which might be very valuable for experimental purposes. The Chairman. I see. Mr. Galloway. And the idea of this plan was to use about $10,000 in the purchase and distribution of such things as might prove promising in thes.e particular regions. Then the last item, " General propaganda," which is explained quite enough, probably, by the statement which the Secretary has made himself, that the idea would be to bring into cooperation the agricul- tural colleges, the State boards of agriculture, and all organized bodies where it is practicable to do so, to the end of giving a better under- standing to the people of what is being done and what is being accom- plished in this general work of meeting the emergencies of the case by lectures, by combining with farmers' institutes, by the distribution of pamphlets, and in every other way bringing to the attention of the people the necessity for a diversification, the necessity for destroying infested material, the necessity for planting early maturing sorts, and the other questions that have been outlined. Taking that as an entire proposition, the money involved amounts to about $90,000, and adding the $50,000 that was suggested there merely as a tentative suggestion in the matter of demonstrating the value of early maturing sorts and varieties, would make $140,000 for these separate lines of work. Of course I offer that simpty as a suggestion, because Dr. Howard, who is more familiar with that line of work than I am, and who has already made up his tentative estimate, will discuss that when the time comes. If there are any questions that I have not touched upon, any points that you wish made plain, I would be very glad indeed to explain them to the best of my ability. Mr. Adams. Mr. Chairman, I would like to recur to the question 1 asked, and follow it up a little. You propose to investigate the sub- ject of this weevil, and in connection with that you gather and spread information in reference to other crops that can take the place of cot- ton, which is given up because of the existence of this weevil. Is it not likely to be true that you can make a demonstration so complete that a man who is successfully growing cotton will be inclined to change his business because of the exhaustion of the soil and the inferior crops? Mr. Galloway. That is very true; and, if it is accomplished, it 24 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. would be one of the best things the Department has ever done for the South, because it will bring about a complete change in the agriculture in the South. Mr. Burleson. If you will permit me, I think I can answer Mr. Adams to his complete satisfaction. For a period of six years the most influential newspaper in our State — a paper that is most widely read — has been most earnestly advocating diversification, and it has made comparatively little progress in that direction. Texas is essen- tially a one-crop State, and it has been from the very beginning of its occupation by Americans. That crop is cotton, and it is going to be the most difficult matter to induce the farmer to abandon the cul- ture of cotton, notwithstanding the small profits that will arise on account of the boll weevil. I will say, in connection with the statement with reference to the exhaustion of the soil, that Texas is a peculiar State, as far as soil is concerned. I know farms in Texas that have cultivated cotton con- tinuously for forty years, and the last year before the manifestation of the boll weevil they made one bale of cotton per acre — the aver- age amount of cotton produced when the farm was in a virgin state. Mr. Adams. Without manure? Mr. Burleson. Without manure. Such a thing "as fertilization as an incident to general farming in Texas is unknown; and, owing to the fertility of the soil, I do not believe it ever will be generally practiced in Texas. Mr. Galloway. I would like to emphasize this matter of demon- stration work. This year we had three or four demonstration farms in Texas, and they were conducted at very little expense to the Depart- ment because in most instances the citizens of the respective places themselves guaranteed the funds that were necessary; but the only guaranty that was required was that in case of a yield below the aver- age crop the farmer who undertook the demonstration work under a plan of management that was submitted by the Department would be reimbursed. We had one such place at Terrell, Tex. The farmer there put in 100 acres of cotton, and the entire question at issue was one of properly fertilizing the soil. A dozen citizens of Terrell raised sufficient funds to guarantee him an average crop, but he raised and sold $700 more than an average crop; and as a result of that work there will be there this year 15 or 20 men right around him who will take up the same line of work, and who have already ordered several car- loads of fertilizer to make the plan complete in its detail as it was out- lined in its first year. That is the general line of demonstration work that has been carried on — of course, in a very small way. In other cases we have brought in the question of diversification — alfalfa and other crops, such as Kaffir corn — and endeavored to secure results which would appeal to those in the immediate vicinity ; and in all such instances it is much easier to secure results — much quicker than sending out by publications, preaching and lecturing, and things of that nature. It is an actual eye- opener, so to speak, and it has effect. In most cases it would prove more economical to make the demonstration work than to spread it out many years and bring about results in other ways. The Chairman. You remember that last year we passed a bill mak- ing an appropriation of f 500,000 for the purpose of stamping out the foot-and-mouth disease. How would it do to make an appropriation this year, giving the Secretary such a lump sum of money for the pur- HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OK AGRICULTURE. 25 pose of stamping out the cotton-boll weevil as in his judgment might seem best? Mr. Galloway. That is the object of this bill, as I understand it. The Chairman. Why not pass a little bill, just as we did last year in regard to the foot-and-mouth disease, without going into any detail or without hampering him in the least, leaving it entirely with the Secretary and his corps of assistants in the Department? Mr. Galloway. Of course I can not speak for the Secretary, but I do not see that there would be anj" objection to that. The Chairman. And provide, as we did in that case, that the money shall be used for this purpose and no other. You remember we put that language in the bill which was passed for the purpose of stamping out the foot-and-mouth disease. Mr. Galloway It is not so much a question of stamping it out The Chairman. The language applying to the entomological inves- tigation reads in this way: Including the investigation into the ravages of the codling moth and of the cotton- boll weevil and boll worm, with a view of ascertaining the best methods of their extermination. Is not that language, " the best methods of their extermination," broad enough? Mr. Galloway. No; I do not think it would be, because under that clause the diversification of crops, the rotation of crops, and the sub- stituting of other crops would not be considered at all, and that is vital. You might appropriate $10,000,000 for the stamping out of the thing, but I do not believe it would do any good. Mr. Bowie. You mean you do not believe it would be absolute. Mr. Galloway. Yes. You can not handle it like you can the mat- ter of the foot-and-mouth disease. The Chairman. Do you think this Burgess bill, so called, covers your point? Mr. Galloway. I think it does. The Chairman. In what clause? Mr. Galloway. Section 2, I think. The Chairman. The first section reads, in part: The duties of said commission shall be to prepare and execute, under the direction of the Secretary of Agriculture, such plans for lessening the damage caused by and controlling the spread of the Mexican cotton-boll weevil and other insects and dis- eases injurious to cotton, as the Secretary of Agriculture may deem best. Section 2: That in furtherance of the purposes of this act there shall be appropriated out of the Treasury of the United States, from any money not otherwise appropriated, the sum of five hundred thousand dollars, two hundred and fifty thousand dollars of which shall be immediately available, which shall be denominated the "Cotton fund," and which shall be exclusively applied to the purposes of this act, and in the expenditure of which the Secretary of Agriculture shall have plenary and exclusive powers, as he may deem best, to accomplish the purposes of this act. Mr. Burleson. Right on that point, Mr. Chairman, I have a com- munication from the Secretary of Agriculture, wherein he uses this language: It would seem to me that line 6 might be made stronger by taking out the words 1 ' practical men " and substituting ' ' advisory members. ' ' Line 9 might also be made stronger by adding, after the word "direction," the words "and approval." # * * * * * * In reference to the clause defining the duties of the commission, it seems to me its wording is broad enough to enable me to do whatever is best in my judgment. The 26 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. question of diversification of crops, the production of new varieties of cottons by breeding and selection, the improvement of cultural methods, and such other lines of work, will be covered by the plans which will be prepared and executed under authority given in the bill. If the committee should reach the conclusion that the authority given in the bill is not broad enough, 1 am satisfied we will find some member here who is sufficiently adept in the use of the English Ian* guage to make it broad enough to cover anything the Secretary might want to do along the line suggested by the chairman. The Chairman. I have always found that a brief bill, giving the Secretary plenary powers in these matters, is most efficient in the end. Mr. Bowie. The Secretary seems to think he would be the man to construe it, and he construes that it gives him all the power he wants. Mr. Haugen. What is the special object of this commission ? You are creating a commission here. Mr. Burleson. It is an advisory board, a board to give the Secre- tary the benefit of any suggestions that it might see fit to make. As a matter of fact, if you look at the wording of the bill, authority and full power to act is finally lodged exclusively in the Secretary. Mr. Haugen. Then I see no reason for the condition. Mr. Burleson. That is a mere matter of detail. The Chairman. Perhaps we have not yet reached the point where we ought to discuss that. Mr. Haugen. Perhaps not. Mr. Galloway. I have completed the details, Mr. Chairman. If there are any other questions I shall be glad to answer them. Mr. Burleson. If the Chairman pleases, I should like for you to hear Doctor Howard this morning, because I know he has engagements which will prevent his attendance to-morrow. Then Colonel Field, another representative from Texas, who is a practical farmer on an extensive scale, would like to make a few suggestions to the com- mittee, and I should be glad if you would give him an opportunity to do so at the conclusion of Doctor Howard's statement. The Chairman. Certainly, we will do that. Mr. Calloway. I have prepared some remarks which I submit. The paper referred to is as follows: A statement relative to H. R. 5496, entitled "A bill to lessen the damage caused by and control the spread of the cotton boll weevil and other insects and diseases injurious to cotton." The honorable Secretary of Agriculture in his report to the President, just issued, page 88, has given the essential facts in reference to the necessities for work' in the direction of improving agricultural conditions in the South, particularly with refer- ence to cotton production. He has pointed out that owing to the recent invasion of the cotton boll weevil a grave menace has been presented, involving not only ques- tions relative to cotton and cotton production, but other agricultural crops as well. It is unnecessary, therefore, to dwell on this phase of the subject in the light of the statements which have been made by the honorable Mr. Burgess, who introduced the bill and who is familiar with all of the important statistical matters pertaining to the subject. My object is especially to outline a plan of work which could be carried on by the Department under authority given by such a bill as the one Mr. Burgess has introduced, dwelling particularly on those subjects which would properly come within the scope of the Bureau of Plant Industry. Before taking up the lines of work themselves, I wish again to particularly empha- size the fact that this subject is one which concerns the entire South. While Texas is more especially directly interested at the present time, it seems, from all the evidence at hand, that it will only be a question of time when the cotton-boll weevil will extend into other States, and that to meet this grave emergency immediate action HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 27 must be taken. With the constantly increasing demand for cotton and cotton prod- ucts, grave industrial conditions are likely to be brought about unless some means can be devised for meeting the emergency. The cotton-boll weevil, of course, is not the only factor to consider in this matter. It is a grave menace, it is true, but, omit- ting it from the proposition entirely, the fact would remain that, owing to lack of proper agricultural practices in the South, the supply of cotton has not been keeping pace with the demand. The work, therefore, on this subject will have to be viewed from the standpoint of the entire South where cotton is grown, but at the same time special effort will have to be devoted to the territory which has been invaded by the boll weevil. The honorable Secretary, in his report already referred to, gives brief reference to ten lines of work that might be carried on in connection with this subject. I shall now briefly refer to them, dwelling only incidentally on those which relate more strictly to another branch of the Department, and which will be discussed by Doctor Howard. In outlining this work I shall, of course, have to omit a considerable por- tion of the detail, but will endeavor to present the matter in such a way as to show in what manner it is proposed to use the money authorized by the bill. 1. Checking sporadic outbreaks of the weevil. — This subject will be discussed more fully by Doctor Howard. I only wish to remark, in passing, that it would seem practicable to at least restrict the spread of the insect by properly organizing a corps of entomologists and taking radical steps to stamp out sporadic outbreaks of the weevil outside of the general wave of infection. This is a matter which would have to be worked through the cooperation of the State authorities, and brings up the question of proper State legislation which will enable the National Goverment to aid in the work. The Texas legislature is soon to meet, and the Louisiana legislature will probably be called in extra session at an early day. The Mississippi legislature also meets at an early date. A uniform pest law in these three States would do much to aid in this work outlined, and it would be proper for the Department to aid in bringing about this legislative action, If it was considered advisable for the Depart- ment to act in this matter along lines pursued in combating the "foot-and- mouth disease," for example — that is, the reimbursement of cotton growers where their crops were destroyed — a great deal of money could be used. It is a question, however, whether the National Government should go extensively into this work. Probably $50,000 could be expended to good advantage in work of this kind, but this is a matter that Doctor Howard is more able to speak upon definitely than I am. The sum, as already indicated, practically would have no limit, for if the Govern- ment entered upon the work with the expectation of reimbursing cotton growers wherever their crops were destroyed, half a million dollars would soon be required. 2. Demonstration work to shoiu the value of improved cultural methods by which farmers can produce fair crops in spite of the weevil. — The Department, through the Division of Entomology, has already pointed out the great value of this work. Demonstra- tion farms have this year been conducted in several parts of Texas and, in most cases, the results secured have been very satisfactory. There is, in my judgment, an urgent necessity for more of these demonstration experiments. The question is not, I believe, one which should be considered from the standpoint of showing the value of the work with particular reference to certain types of soil, certain geological forma- tions, etc. It appeals to me in a very much different way. Cotton growers are especially conservative. They are slow to take hold of any new propositions and no amount of argument or literature has the effect of an actual demonstration experi- ment conducted in such a way that the evidence of success is apparent to anyone who wishes to use his eyes. For these reasons it would seem to me highly important and necessary to increase the number of actual demonstration experiments in such a way that a direct impression would be made upon a large number of cotton growers extending over a large area of country. I do not believe there is any necessity for having these demonstration farms as large as they have been in the past. Twenty- five or 50 acres is ample and, if the work is properly conducted, the main expense will be in the matter of expert advisers and assistants to look after the investigations in general. The object and scope of the work would be to show by actual demon- stration experiments the value of better cultural methods, the value of early matur- ing varieties, and the value and necessity for a complete and thorough destruction of the infested material. The work should not only be carried on in the region where the weevil at present exists, but should be inaugurated elsewhere, so as to bring to the attention of practical farmers the value of the work in advance of the threatened invasion of the insect. To carry out this work in a thoroughly practical manner, over an extensive territory commensurate with the importance of the subject, would require the first year an expenditure of $50,000. This line of work has already been pretty fully developed by the Division of Entomology, and Doctor Howard will dwell 28 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. more in detail upon it. I simply wish to point out some of the important phases of the subject as viewed from the standpoint of the plant culturist. 3. Work having for its object the production of new, early, and improved varieties of cotton and the general improvement of the seed. — The value of early maturing cottons has been already pretty thoroughly demonstrated by Mr. Hunter in his work in Texas. The King cotton and the Parker cotton have proved exceedingly valuable, chiefly on account of their earliness. There is much left yet to do, however, in the matter of securing more vigorous, more productive, and better storm -resisting types. This is a work which involves the question of breeding and selection, in order to secure and fix the types desired. It is well understood that cotton seed brought from the north is earlier, but that this earliness begins to disappear after the first season. The work would involve careful selection and breeding, carried on over a considerable extent of territory, in order to get the best results. In other words, the entire object of this work would be to secure varieties of early and more prolific cottons than those now in existence, better able to resist storms, and adapted to the climatic conditions to which they would be subjected. Plants of open foliage are less subject to injury than ordinary ones and standard early sorts having the habit of open foliage should be produced. Varieties of all sorts should be tested as to their possi- bility of resistance and used in breeding where desirable. One of the most important lines of work in this connection would be the inaugura- tion of thoroughly systematic work in the matter of selection of high-grade seed. The average yield of cotton in the United States is only about 190 pounds of lint per acre, while on many large tracts it is not uncommon to secure a yield of from 500 to 800 pounds per acre. Unquestionably a great deal of the deterioration in cotton production is due to the fact that little attention has been paid to a systematic selection of stock seed. Probably the two factors which to-day have more to do with the present con- dition of cotton production in the South are the improvement of the stock seed and an improvement in tillage and fertilization of the soil. It is believed that with proper attention to these two lines of work the cotton crop could be doubled on the same acreage as now grown. To conduct this work properly, to inaugurate lines of investigation which would demonstrate the value and point out the methods for improving stock seed, carrying on the breeding work, etc. , would require an annual expenditure of $25,000. 4. Studies of cotton diseases. — It is pointed out in the Secretary's report that, while the boll weevil is mainly in the public eye at the present time, the fact remains that there are serious pests of cotton which cause great losses annually. One of the most serious of these diseases is the so-called root rot, which occurs over a large extent of territory in the South and is particularly destructive in Texas. It is not uncommon to find, throughout the entire cotton-growing area of Texas, fanners who have lost from one-eighth to one-half of their crop through this trouble. There are other dis- eases, such as cotton wilt, anthracnose, root knot, almost equally destructive. These diseases should be thoroughly investigated and efforts made to remedy them, either through the direct application of remedial measures or through the securing of resist- ant types by breeding and selection. Already very promising results have been obtained in this field in other sections of the country, especially in the Sea Island region, where the crop has been brought back to its original standard by securing resistant types. It is estimated that $20,000 would be required for this general work on cotton diseases. 5. Cotton insects. — These will be spoken of by Doctor Howard. 6. Introduction of new crops. — Throughout the entire South the urgent necessity for the introduction of other crops which will take the place of cotton is recognized. Cotton will, of necessity, have to be grown, but the time is at hand when an urgent effort should be made in the matter of the rotation and diversification of crops. In many sections the yield of cotton is now barely at the margin of profit, so that when the reduction due to the boll weevil and other pests is taken into account it will be necessary to abandon cotton growing altogether and secure something in its place which will give immediate returns. These new crops will be alfalfa for hay purposes, sorghum and Kaffir corn for silage, and fodder crops for hay; rape as a winter-soiling crop, and crimson clover, hairy vetch, bur clover, winter barley, etc., for winter pas- tures and green manures. Tobacco, furthermore, is a promising crop for certain sec- tions of the South, as has been demonstrated by the work in connection with the soil surveys. For the securing of seed, the necessity for the demonstration work, the establishment of suitable demonstration farms, and the general propaganda work in this direction, it is estimated that $50,000 could be expended annually. More could be spent if the area to be covered were extended. This work would also cover demon- strations in the matter of crop rotations, and, in short, would have for its object the bringing about of such changes in agricultural practices as would make the Southern farmer more independent than he is at present. HEARINGS BEJbORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 29 7. Studies and experiments in connection with methods for the destruction and control oj the boll weevil and other cotton insects. — This is a subject that will be fully discussed by Doctor Howard. 8. Studies of enemies of the insect. — This subject will be fully discussed by Doctor Howard. 9. Oeneral propaganda. — It is believed that the work of the Department can be made effective not only throughout the region infected by the boll weevil, but in adjacent sections as well by a thoroughly organized effort m the matter of bringing before the public the results of work accomplished. This can be done through cooperation with the agricultural colleges and experiment stations in the respective States, the State boards of agriculture, farmers' institutes, and other similar associa- tions. General efforts should be made to distribute quickly the results of any important discoveries by means of leaflets, small bulletins, and in other ways. It is believed that $10,000 annually could be well expended in this work. 10. Securing and distributing seed of cotton known to have special value for earliness and productireness. — It is not believed that the Department should go into any exten- sive distribution of seed. The seed secured as a result of breeding and selection should be handled by the Department purely in an experimental way. No effort should be made by the Department to simply furnish seed for replanting plantations. Whatever seed is distributed should be sent out with the object of demonstrating its value, either for earliness or some other desirable characteristic. In other words, the distribution should be purely for experimental purposes. Ten thousand dollars, it is believed, would be sufficient to conduct this work generally through the regions most directly interested. The work here outlined involves an expenditure of $215,000, not including the problems which will be referred to more fully by Doctor Howard. Some of these items will, undoubtedly, in actual field practice run larger and some may run smaller. It is difficult in laying out plans of this kind to always foresee emergencies that may arise. An exceedingly unpromising proposition may, as the work develops, prove the contrary, and would then warrant the expenditure of more money in this direc- tion. The Chairman. We will now hear Doctor Howard. STATEMENT OF PROF. L. 0. HOWARD, CHIEF OF THE BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. Mr. Howaed. Mr. Chairman, I really do not know what there is for me to say. The Chairman. I will say to the new members of the committee that last year we made an appropriation of $30,000 for Doctor Howard, and the language is this: Including the investigation into the ravages of the coddling moth and of the cot- ton boll weevil and boll worm, with a view of ascertaining the best methods of their extermination. You might talk to us along those lines, Doctor, and tell the com- mittee what you have done under the appropriation, the condition of things in Texas, what experiments you have made, and what success and what failure you have had. Mr. Howard. Very good. As you have learned already from Mr. Burgess, this is absolutely the most difficult problem in economic entomology that the whole world has ever had to handle. The boll weevil is an insect which is very prolific; which has many generations in the course of a year; which lives during the critical part of its life entirely enclosed in the boll, where it can not be reached by any insecti- cide, and it can not be reached by any natural enemy insect which we have been able to discover: We have studied the subject for several years, ever since the weevil came into Texas, with the greatest care. We know absolutely every stage in its life history, every possible chance for every variation in 30 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. the course of its life. We know exactly how it lives all the year round and under exactly what conditions. We have experimented with every suggested remedy and everything that our own experience in fighting other insects has suggested. The Chairman. What does it live on in the winter? Mr. Howard. It does not feed in the winter. It hibernates, stowed away in old corn stalks left standing on the field and in the old cotton stalks which are also left in the field, under the bark of trees, under logs, at the roots of tufts of grasses, and particularly along the edges of woods where cotton fields approach them, as they do in a great many places throughout Texas and other Southern States. The Chairman. Can they be carried in bales ? Mr Howard. They are carried in bales of cotton to the gins. They are carried from the country gins in the bales which go to the com- press! After the cotton has gone through the compress the weevils are utterly destroyed, but the carriage of bales which have not been compressed is a source of danger and infestation of the crop. On account of this great diversity of places of hibernation there seems to be nothing very practical which can be done toward destroy- ing the insect during the winter. It is possible, of course, to cut down and burn the cotton and corn stalks. In that way a great many of them would be killed, but there would be still enough surviving along the edges of woods and along the roots of old grasses to infest the cotton crop the following spring. We have tried the application of insecticides. We have tried sprays of all possible kinds. We have tried poisonous sprays. Of course those are expensive, to begin with, and they are not efficacious. The weevil itself feeds very little. It lays its egg in the boll, penetrating it with that beak you see in front of its head, and the grub works inward and not outward, so that no poison can reach the grub. It was supposed that at one time in the early spring, before the cotton bloomed, it would gnaw holes in the leaves and stems and in that way would dig up some of the poison, but in our experiments, extending over two years, we have shown that it is peculiarly resistant to all poison. It can eat a leaf which is immersed in paris green solution, and it will not be killed by that dose. It is as bad as the gypsy moth in Massa- chusetts. Then we have tested all sorts of machinery, not only for the appli- cation of dry poison, but for the collection of the cotton squares as they fall to the ground, collecting them by suction. Several machines have been invented and tried, but it seems to be an impracticable remedy. As I say, everything that could possibly be conceived of has been tested. We have made a thorough study in the way of search for natural enemies. We have gone to the original home of the insect in Mexico and studied it carefully there. We have gone as far down as Yucatan, and have searched also in Cuba, where the insect also lives, and we have as yet found no natuaal enemy which could be introduced to advantage. The Chairman. The insect is in Cuba, is it? Mr. Howard. It is in Cuba. Mr. Bowie. Does it affect anything but cotton. Mr. Howard. Nothing but cotton. We have found nothing that it feeds upon but cotton. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 31 Mr. Burleson. As a matter of fact, it hats been conclusively demon- strated that it will starve before it will eat anything but cotton. Mr. Howard. You are quite right. A question was asked in regard to the existence of the insect in Mexico. In certain parts of Mexico it has caused the utter abandon- ment of the culture of cotton. When, however, after a lapse of years, they began to cultivate cotton again, the weevil again appeared, and they had to abandon it again. That would not occur in Texas. If cotton were abandoned in Texas, the probability is these insects would starve out and there would not be a new introduction except from Mexico; but in Mexico the cotton grows wild, and the result is that the insect is always there. Mr. Bowie. Let me ask you there, on that point, this question. Suppose this year a field is attacked with the boll weevil and next year it is planted in corn or in hay, and there are two or three crops of corn or hay. Then could cotton be safely planted the third or fourth year? Mr. Howard. It depends on the proximity of other cotton very largely. The weevil will live for many months without food. It will continue to live until it gets an opportunity to live on cotton. It might possibly go through a whole year in that way; but, you see, the weevil flies. It has spread every year since its introduc- tion to Texas to the north and east at the rate of from 50 to 75 miles a year. Its principal spread is in the month of October, when it has become very numerous through the constant reproduction in geomet- rical increase. At that time of the year there is a prevailing southerly breeze, and it is thus spread from 50 to 75 miles a year. Mr. Lamb. "How does it travel? Mr. Howard. It travels by flight from one field to another. It is carried in the cotton to the gins, and it is carried in many ways from the places of hibernation. It might crawl into a freight car which is sidetracked alongside a cotton field. That freight car might the next year be in Georgia and alongside a cotton field; in which case the insect would be introduced in that way. Mr. Haugen. If a cotton field is abandoned for a year, the weevil is practically starved out, is it not? Mr. Howard. I think so. That is practically what 1 advised when it was restricted to a very small area in southeastern Texas, but the State did not see it in that way, and they would not even go. to the point of cutting down the cotton in October, which would have destroyed . the great majority of them. They could not afford the slight money loss. As 1 say, we have tried the application of insecticides. We have found that wanting. We have tried the use of machinery. We have found that wanting up to date. Some machine may yet be found which will have some practical effect. The Chairman. A machine along what line ? Mr. Howard. A machine for taking up the square. The insect first attacks the square. The square, when it is attacked, falls to the ground, and in the square on the ground the weevil still develops if the ground is shaded. They have invented a machine for drawing these squares up by suction. Other machines have been invented for crushing them, and so on. Then we have tried the introduction of natural enemies. That, so far, has not succeeded, but we have, through the intimate knowledge of the natural history of the insect, developed this system of culture changes, which has, in a measure, saved the situation. 32 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Let me describe the whole process. We take northern seed, the plant of which matures much more rapidly than the Texas seed. We plant it as early as possible. We plant the rows wide apart, because the weevil prefers shade. The Chairman. How far apart? Mr. Howard. Three or four feet, because the weevil prefers shade and breeds most abundantly in shaded conditions. Then we cultivate it if we can. If we can not we let it alone, and thus get an early maturing crop from which we can pick a fair remunerative crop by the middle of October. Then we cut down every stalk of cotton in the. field, let it dry and burn it up, thus destroying all weevils that remain in that particular patch of cotton. The following year the number of hibernating weevils is very greatly lessened. This year we have conducted demonstration farms at seven localities in Texas. Those farms have from 50 to 250 acres of land under our supervision. By following out this particular cultural method, which depends, as 1 say, only upon an intimate knowledge of the fact that the insect breeds in a certain way, and develops with a certain degree of rapidity, we have upon one of those demonstration farms of 100 acres raised 103 bales of cotton, an average of a little over a bale to an acre; whereas in surrounding territory the crop was from one- eighth to one-fifth of a bale per acre, which showed that it can be cultivated in spite of the weevil. But we want to do something further. We want to be able to call upon a certain sum of money f or the checking of sporadic outbreaks, by which I mean outbreaks far away from the immediate danger of natural spread. The Chairman. Have those occurred? Mr. Howard. The one at New Orleans is the only one. The Chairman. At the experimental station ? Mr. Howard. At the experimental station. We have heard of one in north Louisiana in the last few daj-s, and one of our men is now investigating it. Those things are liable to occur. The weevil is already within 25 miles of the Louisiana boundary, at several points. It may be carried across in ginned cotton, or it may be carried in cotton seed. It may be carried in baled cotton which has not gone through the compress. It may be carried in hay for bedding for cattle in cattle cars. It may be carried in a freight car, as I have said. The Department ought to be in a position to stamp that out. That is what I mean by checking sporadic outbreaks. We want money enough to do that in case it becomes necessary. We wish to continue our demonstration of the cultural methods because they have been of great value to the citizens of Texas. Many of the most intelligent planters have gone and done likewise this past year, and the result is that some men have raised good crops in spite of the weevil. Mr. Haugen. How much money will you need for that? Mr. Howard. For that particular item I have estimated it would be well to have in reserve for this question of checking sporadic out- breaks $25,000. I have not estimated for the demonstration experi- ments any amount. It depends on how many it is thought desirable to have, not only in Louisiana, but in Texas. We have had seven this year. The Chairman. That is, under your $30,000 appropriation? Mr. Howard, Under our $30,000 appropriation. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 33 Mr. Henry. That has been ample for the work so far, has it? Mr. Howard. That has been ample for the work, so far. Mr. Henry. You answered, as I understood, that $25,000 would be sufficient for the checking of the sporadic outbreaks? Mr. Howard. I think that would be sufficient for that purpose, yes. Mr. Henry. In your opinion do you need this whole $500,000 ? Mr. Howard. Oh, no. Mr. Henry. How much is your estimate? Mr. Howard. I think the amount I could expend the first year to advantage, barring something very unusual, would be from say $90,000 to $120,000. I think that would answer admirably all we could expend to advantage on the entomological side of the thing. Of course Doctor Galloway has told you about these other matters. Mr. Haugen. Is that what you estimated?' Mr. Galloway. Just about the same as Doctor Howard. Mr. Bowie. This bill provides for only $250,000 to be immediately available. Your estimate was $125,000 for the things you estimated for, and Doctor Galloway's $125,000 would make $250,000. Is that what I understand? Mr. Howard. That is about right. Mr. Galloway. Emergencies might arise which would necessitate drawing on the $500,000. Mr. Burleson. Some unforeseen emergency might arise, and evi- dently the Secretary feels that he ought to have the money accessible if he wanted to utilize it. Mr. Henry. Right there, what do you regard as an unforeseen emergency? Mr. Galloway. This matter of sporadic outbreaks. Mr. Howard. That is the only one. There might be twenty of those this year. Mr. Haugen. That is included in his estimate of $125,000. Mr. Burleson. With Doctor Howard's permission, I will say on that point that never in the history of cotton has there been as much excite- ment over the fluctuation of the price of cotton as there has been this year on the cotton exchange among the speculators in that staple. Mr. Bowie. Nor among the cotton mill men. Mr. Burleson. One of the present factors which was used to bull the price of cotton was the sporadic outbreak of the weevil in Louisiana mentioned by Doctor Galloway and Doctor Howard; and if it became necessary in the future, unscrupulous speculators could, by the dis- tribution of this weevil in four or five different places in Louisiana and Mississippi, bull the price of cotton from 60 to 100 points; and knowing the speculator from the farmers' standpoint as I know him, he would not hesitate a minute to resort to that expedient if he thought he could accomplish his purpose. The Chairman. That is true, but how can you legislate against him ? Mr. Burleson. In the event this amount is allowed and the Secre- tary of Agriculture feels that to save this great industry by stamping out a sporadic outbreak of the weevil in Louisiana or Mississippi he could act at once. The mere fact that he has this money will tend to deter the speculators from attempting the practice I refer to. The probabilities are it would not be used, but if it is needed he would want the money in hand for prompt action. Mr. Haugen. Why should we not be armed, then, with the same c A 3 34 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. weapons against speculation in wheat? We have the chinch bug and the grasshopper in the West. Mr. Burleson. Because it is not so devastating. Mr. Haugen. At times it has been. Only a few years ago we were threatened with grasshoppers. The Chairman. The weevil destroyed the wheat crop of the Gene- see Valley, but we found a resistant wheat. Mr. Burleson. Permit me to suggest that there are other places where wheat could be grown, but if the agriculturist is driven out of the cotton business in the South, it will have just as injurious an effect upon the commercial interests of this entire country as it will upon the South, especially the cotton manufacturing interest of New England. Mr. Henry. There is'no doubt about that. The Chairman. I do not think there is any disposition on the part of the committee to cheesepare on this thing at all. I would advocate giving the Department what it can judiciously expend. There is an emergency it will have to meet, and it is a question for the committee to decide what is the best way to meet it. Mr. Bowie. I simply made my interruption there for the purpose of calling attention to the fact that while the bill appropriates nomi- nally $500,000, only $250,000 of it is immediately available, and I was endeavoring to bring out from Doctor Howard the fact that when you add together his recommendation and that covered by Doctor Galloway it makes $250,000, or approximately the sum that this bill fixes to be immediately available. The other $250,000,which is recommended by the Secretary of Agriculture, is simply money that he can use if he sees fit. Mr. Graff. I understand that simply $250,000 is available on the passage of the bill, but the whole $500,000 would be available during the whole fiscal year. Is that right, Mr. Chairman ? The Chairman. Yes; that is right. Mr. Graff. There is a marked difference between this bill and the provision which we passed in the foot-and-mouth disease bill. There we appropriated a definite sum, but we added " so much thereof as is necessary." Here the whole $500,000 is separated. It is made a cot- ton fund, and it can not be utilized and is not available for any other purpose. Mr. Bowie. Does it not say " so much thereof as may be necessary ?" Mr. Graff. No; it does not. Mr. Burleson. I will say to the gentleman from Illinois that that is also a mere matter of detail. The Chairman. We have not yet reached that point. We will let Doctor Howard finish his remarks. Mr. Howard. I have very little more to say except that the ques- tion of the continued work on the possibility of a remedy is a very important one, and we should be able to use a very considerable sum of money in that work the coming season, just as we have in the past. We want to experiment with every new idea that comes up. We want to make still further search for natural enemies. I have a man in Cuba engaged in that line. I want to send a man to South America in the spring to look up a reported enemy in some of the barrens in the lower Andes, where cotton is growing and where they say the weevil exists, but is not very injurious. That means, obviously, the presence of HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 35 something that keeps it in check. 1 want to send a man down there to see what it is. Investigation of this character we should be able to carry on. The Chairman. You continue to do that now under your present appropriation ? Mr. Howard. Yes. The Chairman. You will not stop your investigation at all? Mr. Howard. No, I think not. I think we have enough to carry us through until the close of the fiscal year, unless we go into this extension of the cultural demonstrations, and that would be in the spring. The Chairman. So you would not need that money until April? Mr. Howard. We ought to have it about the 1st of April, I should think. But these are the general headings, and the sum total is the one which I expressed to you a few moments ago, that I think we could at the outset use to advantage from $100,000 to $125,000 this coming fiscal year, with the proviso that we shall have this emergency fund in reserve. The Chairman. You would want that right there in excess of your regular appropriation? Mr. Howard. I would very much like that regular appropriation just as it is. Mr. Burleson. Doctor, if through your employees you have received any estimate of the damage which has been wrought in Texas during the current cotton year I would be glad if you would give it for the benefit of the committee. Mr. Howard. Mr. Hunter, my chief man down there, who has gained in his three years' work on this subject very intimate knowl- edge not only of the cotton-boll weevil, but of the cotton crop and conditions generally down there, estimates the shrinkage of the crop at 600,000 bales, of which he places 300,000 to the credit of the cotton- boll weevil, and the others as due to late planting, early frosts in north Texas, and the root-rot disease, which comes under Doctor Galloway's scope. He therefore estimates the actual loss in cotton by the cotton- boll weevil at $15,000,000. The Chairman. That is, 300,000 bales? Mr. Howard. Three hundred thousand bales. The Chairman. In the one State of Texas ? Mr. Howard. In the State of Texas. That is the only State in which it exists. Mr. Burleson. I will ask you, also, whether it is not a fact Mr. Hunter is a cautious, conservative man? Mr. Howard. Most conservative. The Chairman. I think it is estimated that Iowa loses $15,000,000 a year in hog cholera alone. Mr. Bowie. In the case of hog cholera you have means with which to treat it. There seems to be absolutely no known method of hand- ling this question. Mr. Howard. Fifteen million dollars in actual loss of course means a great many hundred thousand dollars' damage to other industries dependent on this one. The Chairman. How do you figure that loss; on the value of the cotton bales or the money expended in cultivation? Mr. Howard. The actual loss on a bale of cotton. 36 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. The worth of the cotton after being baled ? Mr. Howard. Exactly. Mr. Burleson. Mr. Chairman, Col. Scott Field, who represents in Congress one of the rich agricultural districts of our State, is here, and I hope you will hear him. The Chairman. "We shall be glad to hear Colonel Field. STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT FIELD, REPRESENTATIVE FROM TEXAS. Mr. Field. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, the time was when a southern member would hesitate to go to the Government asking relief, even though the damage was exceedingly great. I believe it was stated by Bob Toombs that he represented Georgia twenty years and he never drew a dollar out of the National Treasury. Times have changed, and we have modified our views. We do not come to the National Government as petitioners, but we come looking for aid that will be cheerfully extended, when it will be beneficial to a very large number of the citizens of the country. When you consider the calamity that threatens this great industry of the South, a crop which brings into the Government more than a million dollars for every working day, and supplies employment to so large a number of our people, North and South, when a great industry of this sort is threatened, I believe the representatives of this great Government will respond liberally if we can show that benefits will result. It is difficult to conceive of the damage that is being done or the danger that threatens by asking the question, What percentage of the cotton crop of Texas, or the South, has been destroyed? Texas, with her immense domain, with the little aid she receives from the Indian Territory, produces one-third of the cotton crop of this country. The damage from the boll weevil has not extended itself all over the cotton-growing section of Texas, although it has invaded 101 counties of the 200 organized counties of the State; but it is very much worse in some sections than in others. When it strikes the river bottoms, the Brazos, the Colorado, the Trinity, and all those rivers there, it is almost total destruction. Far out on the prairie lands where the droughts prevail to some extent the injury is much less, and so when you come to the percentage, it is not so very great, not sufficient to excite the alarm of people looking at it as the amount that is destroyed in the State of Texas or in the South at large; but I want to call atten- tion to the very great damage which has resulted in the particular localities. 1 take my little town and the county in which 1 live upon the Brazos River, and I am appalled at the results that this destructive agent has produced there. Not only that, but I know that it will extend itself, because that is the experience of practical men and scientists, and I look to the very grave damage that will result to all the southern country, taking these particular places along the rivers as an index of what it will do. The town in which I live is accustomed to ship from" 20, 000 to 24,000 bales of cotton. This year we will not receive 5,000 bales. In con- nection with my brother we plant 800 acres, certainly expecting a a return of 600 bales. We will not get 100 bales. When you think HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 37 •of that, a partial destruction of a crop does not bring ruin. Men sur- vive partial losses, but when it comes so that every man looks into the face of his neighbor and is alarmed at his own condition, and knows full well that he can not discharge the obligations which the law has created, when the bank is locked like a frozen river, when no man is able to discharge the obligation that is incurred to his neighbor, when business is suspended, when land values are such that you can not get money to make another crop and the moneyed men of the east stand in fear to invest a single dollar upon as fine real estate as there is in Texas, you begin to realize the gravity of the situation. That is the condition of things where this destructive agent is at its worst. I was talking but a few days ago to a gentleman from Con- necticut, known to members of this committee, who has been accus- tomed to loan money in my State, with a view of seeing whether money could be had in this section of country, and they fear it like a man would fear a house when the yellow flag of the smallpox hospital is displayed. No man will invest a dollar even upon real-estate securities while this curse has come upon the land, as terrible as the afflictions in the days of Pharaoh. This is not only the case there, but it is increasing year by year. • Starting upon the Mexican border, it has extended itself more than 300 miles, and stands now separated from Louisiana and the great Mississippi Valley only by the "Father of Waters." The home of the weevil will be in the valley of the Mississippi. Wherever the cotton grows rank, there it flourishes, and now is the time, it seems to me, for the nation to make a supreme effort to protect the people against this threatened injury. We are not Mexicans. The inventive genius of this country is not to be thwarted by an insect, with all the science turned upon it. My experience is that already great benefit has been done by the Government, by object lessons in cultural methods all over the land, by the scientist applying himself to the study of the evil, by every man using this means and that, some with partial results, some with failure; but the mind of the people is aroused, and I firmly believe that they will be able to meet the emergency that has arisen. Now, what amount should be appropriated ? I know not, nor do the nembers of this committee, I take it. We do not want to waste the money. When the Representatives from our State consulted together, in deference to a very great demand in the State of Texas, there was, of course, a diversity of opinion as to the character of legislation to be agreed upon; but this bill which we present for the consideration of the committee was the consensus of the best judgment of the mem- bers of the Texas delegation and of the Louisiana delegation, and more than that, we went to the Secretary of Agriculture. These were the suggestions which he made. This bill is outlined after careful consideration with the Secretary of Agriculture and with the heads of the different Departments. We went to the President, and he viewed and understood the matter just as we did, and suggested that appro- priate legislation be granted in this instance. • Gentlemen of the committee, we do not care, of course, to have an amount beyond what may be necessary ; but we do think, in view of the character of this injury, the danger, and the unknown fields that ought to be trodden, that the Department ought not to be hampered for the use of means. 38 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The stamping out of sporadic cases has already been touched upon. It would not only be necessary, of course, while the flames are destroying one place, that you should go and endeavor to stamp them out at once, but if in a great conflagration a spark should fall miles away, common prudence would require that you rush there at once, and stop another fire, and it would be folly not to do so. If the weevil appears in Louisiana in sporadic instances, stamp it out, even though it costs the Government considerable money. It saves in the long run. So as to the experimental stations. I tell you a great benefit would result. Our people would be guided by the demonstrations that would be made there. Already we are sending off for cotton seed. One man will tell us the King seed is the best, another that the Truitt seed is the best, another that the Shiner seed is the best, another that the big-boll Russell is the best. The result is there is confusion among the people, all seeking to better their condition. The Government could come in with its experimental farms, and in a little while dem- onstrate that this cotton would be adapted to the particular section, and another cotton to another section, and thus the Government would be teaching people and leading them out of the confusion that now prevails. Gentlemen of the committee, the matter has already been presented from the technical standpoint of Doctor Howard and his associate. It has been referred to by Mr. Burgess, and I believe it is unnecessary to do more than touch upon this one point. Occasionally inquiry is made about diversification and changing our crop. That is not prac- ticable. Could the people of Dakota abandon the growing of wheats Could the great Middle West cease growing corn? Could southern Louisiana and Texas abandon the rice and the sugar culture? No more could we in Texas cease the cultivation of cotton. The only thing that has promised anything in the way of rotation is, as sug- gested by Doctor Galloway, alfalfa. We are all growing a little alfalfa, increasing it as we can; but here is the reason that no change in methods can be adopted. Cotton is a money crop. Men have got to get advances to make a crop on. Alfalfa is an uncertain crop. The rains come and destroy it. They are not prepared to put it under the houses, and it is a little crop. But they advance money upon a cotton crop, and when the poor man comes in to give a mortgage it is put down 50 acres in cotton and 10 acres in corn," and a little alfalfa or pea vines or something is included in the security on which he is able to get the advances to make his crop. There can be no change as long as the rays of the sun come as they do and as long as the seasons of Texas remain as they are. There may be small changes, but that is the crop that nature's God provided for Texas, and I think the efforts of man ought to be made to maintain it as the great crop of the South, because it is the crop that is profitable to us and bene- ficial to the nation at large. Mr. Haugen. Colonel, what has the State done for your experi- ment stations ? Mr. Field. The State has done nothing more than a small work at the agricultural college. It has offered a reward of $50,000 for the discovery of some remedy for the total destruction of the weevil. The Chairman. Then, naturally, there are a good many people at work on it. Mr. Field. They are at work on it; but I tell you a great thing this Department could do. This large reward has developed all the HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 39 cranks thei-e are in Texas, and there arc a good many there. Every fellow who knows how to put two pieces of paper together is tiying to get up some plan to destroy the boll weevil and get the $50,000. If we had intelligent supervision there, a man could come and say, "This is not good," and discard it. There are lots of idle people going over the country thinking they have discovered a remedy for the boll weevil. But there is some advantage resulting. I know from my own use of it and practical experience that this blower that is referred to by Doctor Howard is a good thing. The Chairman. A blower? Mr. Burgess. It is a machine that sucks up the square. Mr. Field. It sucks up the square. It is recommended by the Department that squares in which the egg is deposited be picked up and destroyed, but it is a very tedious process, going around and picking up squares that have fallen to the ground. This man comes in with what we call a blower, a suction machine The Chairman. Something like a carpet sweeper? Mr. Field. Yes; on the same principle. It passes between the rows, and it knocks the stalks on their sides, which causes the squares to fall that are not quite ready, and then this suction just takes up all those in the middle of the road, and it saves a great deal of labor in the picking up of squares. It is a very good thing. Somebody else will find something still better, and I think in time we will be able to accomplish something on that line in the destruction of the weevil; but I know that very great good will be accomplished by collateral methods. Mr. Bowie. Judge, I want to ask you a question. Is it not true that in your country, as well as in other sections, the common people, the general run of people, have a great deal of confidence in the work that is conducted by the General Government? Mr. Field. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. When the work is done by the General Government, they give it more weight and pay more attention to it than they would otherwise ? Mr. Field. I think so; and there is another feature of this com- mission. The chairman suggested, why not commit the whole matter to the Secretary of Agriculture ? His idea was that he could work in that way better than in any other form. The Chairman. That is, the Secretary of Agriculture? Mr. Field. The Secretary of Agriculture. He suggested that idea of the commission, and we acted upon it, and there is this advantage about it: You take two good practical men in Texas and one in Louisi- ana, well-known men, practical farmers, men who are known through- out the States, and I believe there will be some advantage in their suggestions and advice to the Department of the Government. The scientist often, if you will excuse the expression, looks through a goose quill. He is very intense, like the sunglass, but sometimes you are not able to concentrate the rays right on the subject, and the practical man of affairs, reaching put, seeing it every day, looking at it, some- times from the outside, is able to furnish very good suggestions to the scientist. For that reason I think it well to have associated with them men practical in affairs. Mr. Haugen. It is evident your State does not fully appreciate the importance of studying this boll weevil. Mr. Field. Let me tell you about that. We have an iron-bound 40 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. constitution in Texas. W e just simply can not appropriate money for that purpose. Mr. Haugen. But you can appropriate money for your experiment station there. How much money are you appropriating each year ? Mr. Field. I really am not able to inform you of the amount that is appropriated, but the agricultural college is provided for under the constitution. We have, however, never been able to appropriate one dollar. An effort was made for the relief of the Galveston sufferers in the great calamity, but it could not be done. An effort was made to aid in the St. Louis Exposition, but the constitution stands in the way. Whether good or bad, it was passed at a time that we speak of as "the Alliance days" in Texas, when the farmer left his plow and went into the legislative halls, and the grip of that constitution, whether for good or evil, binds us close in the expenditure of money. Mr. Hogan. But is not this of enough importance to amend your constitution? Mr. Field. It is a big thing to call a constitutional convention; and then we are afraid of one thing in Texas. The argument there against a constitutional convention is this: We have got the corporations gripped, and whenever you talk about calling a constitutional conven- tion in Texas they say it is the corporations that are struggling, and if you ever loosen the bonds you never will get them bound again. Mr. Graff. You can not quite trust yourselves on that. Mr. Field. We can not trust ourselves on that; no, sir; but some of us have been advocating the calling of a constitutional convention in Texas for years. Mr. Lorimer. Can you not amend your constitution in any other way? Mr. Field. No, sir; it must be done by a constitutional convention, and just as soon as they raise the cry that the corporations are trying to get out of their swaddling clothes the convention dies. That is the trouble in Texas. Mr. Henry. Is it not possible to change your constitution by amendment? Mr. Field. Oh, of course, we could adopt an amendment to the constitution. Mr. Haskins. What is the authority for the offering of the reward you have spoken of? Mr. Field. I suppose it was not challenged. Perhaps it is within the present powers of the government. We can unquestionably amend our constitution. We have time and again offered amendments. Mr. Haugen. If you have authority under the constitution to check this boll weevil by offering a reward, have you not also the authority to appropriate money for the same purpose ? Mr. Field. I rather think not. I know they have held we could not appropriate money. Mr. Adams. The constitution of Texas is not peculiar in that re- spect. There are a number of State constitutions with the same pro- vision, and they usually whip the devil around the stump in order to arrive at such a purpose as you are aiming at there. Mr. Field. But we feel that way. We are poor people, and Uncle Sam is very rich. We do not feel that we are begging it. We feel that here perhaps is a time when some of the money that has been going in might very properly come back to us. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 41 ADDITIONAL STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE F. BURGESS, REPRE- SENTATIVE FROM TEXAS. Mr. Burgess. Mr. Chairman, I want to make a suggestion with reference to my friend Haugen's questions to my colleague, Mr. Field. I saggest that the aspect of the matter presents not a State, but a Federal, question as a matter of law and duty that the Government owes to the people, and that this bill is not grounded upon precisely the same position unanimously subscribed to by this committee when it introduced and passed without objection in the House the foot-and- mouth disease bill. The idea of that bill was not to remunerate the citizens of a particular State by condemning their cattle and paying for them, but to prevent the spread of that disease into the sister States, as a Federal question and a Federal duty. So here we are not suppliants at anybody's table. If it were a mere question of taking care of our own, I am proud to say that the Lone Star State will be able to do it to the limit that any other State is; but it is a national duty to take hold of this question and prevent this threatened destruc- tion of an interstate industry. Mr. Lamb. That is the point. Mr. Burgess. There is no need of any discussion about what this or that State ought to do, or has done, with reference to the foot-and- mouth disease, or any other question. Mr. Henry. We are all agreed on that point. Mr. Burgess. The question here is that it is the duty, as I see it, of the Federal Government to take hold of this matter and to prevent, if possible, by the expenditure of quite a considerable sum of money — if necessary $10, 000,000 — the spread of this destructive agency. Ten million dollars would be a modest sum to spend if you could prevent for twenty years the spread of this boll weevil into the other cotton States, even if it destroyed the industry in Texas. Undoubtedly that is true, and an effort ought to be made to do it. My idea personally, so far as my own defense goes, for clamoring for an appropriation of $500,000 is that to create a larger fund does not mean that a cabinet officer of our Government, if he is not of my party, will fool the money away, or spend it foolishly, or squander it in any way, any more than he did in the matter of the foot-and-mouth disease. But we do not know what contingencies may arise. We do not know what the extent of expendi- tures may be necessary in a week or in two weeks during the cotton season when these boll weevils may spread and threaten not only Louisiana but Arkansas and the Indian Territory. They may appear in Mississippi, whether from speculative evil purposes or by possible conveyance from the methods of commerce, and certainly it is undoubt- edly not only the privilege of the National Government but it is its solemn duty to protect these others States against this injury, and an abundant fund ought to be provided with which to do it. To have a large fund will create confidence, inspire cooperation, and produce beneficial results, even if all of it is not expended. I thank the committee. Mr. Haugen. Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to be placed in the atti- tude of opposing any appropriation that can be judiciously expended. I voted most cheerfully for this appropriation last year. Mr. Burgess. I hope the gentleman will vote for it this year. 42 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. What do you think of the diversification of cotton in the South, as Doctor Galloway proposes ? Do you think that would be kindred to the foot-and-mouth disease case? Mr. Burgess. Yes; for this reason, Mr. Chairman: We can not determine now whether the opinion of the Secretary, and of practically every scientist who has touched this problem, will be ultimately vindi- cated — that these weevils will spread in spite of everything that can be done in these other States. Assuming that may happen, that the expected and scientifically predicted may occur, it would be of impor- tance as a Federal question that experiments may be made now, and all these methods of diversification may be in order so that they may be applied as Federal exigencies arise. I trust I make myself clear. If we should know that the weevil would not spread out of Texas, and if it were a mere internal State matter, then I would oppose much of what would be sought to be done under this bill, not only as a Demo- crat, but as a believer in all proper theory of government. But we can not determine what will occur, and we ought now to take the initial step to protect not only Texas but the Indian Territory and- Arkansas and Louisiana and Mississippi, if that does happen which is anticipated and predicted by every scientist who has touched the problem and all those who have addressed you to-day. The Secretary of Agriculture says straight out in his report that he believes that, in spite, perhaps, of all that can be done, the weevil will spread all over the Southern States, and work a revolution in agri- cultural matters. That is the opinion of Doctor Galloway, the opinion of Doctor Howard, the opinion of Mr. Hunter, the opinion of the State entomologist in my State, the opinion of the State entomologist in Louisiana; and they are making strenuous efforts now to quarantine against cotton seed and against cotton, and to do everything they can to prevent the invasion of the boll weevil into Louisiana. If it spreads, these different problems that will have been worked out under this appropriation in Texas will inure to the benefit of all the States thus affected, and upon that ground alone can be justified, in my opinion. Mr. Haugen. I did not quite finish my statement, Mr. Chairman. I said 1 did not oppose the appropriation. My position is this: That the State should cooperate with the Federal Government, and should at least pay a part of the expense. It appears here from the state- ments made before the committee that the State of Texas has done nothing except to offer a reward of $50,000. If this is of the impor- tance which has been pictured by the gentleman here, and he has cer- ' tainly drawn a very splendid picture, it seems to me the State of Texas should do something toward paying a part of this expense. Mr. Burgess. Did the States cooperate where the animals were destroyed in the foot-and-mouth disease extermination ? Mr. Haugen. I think so. Mr. Haskins. Our New England States all cooperated. Mr. Haugen. I understand they cooperated. Mr. Henry. But the cattle were partially paid for by the United States Government. Mr. Burgess. That is it exactly. We anticipate that we will coop- erate. The resolutions of the Cotton Boll Weevil Convention at Dallas, which you will find incorporated in this statement, specially required that the Federal Government be authorized to locate experi- HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 43 ment stations in every county in the infected district where the county authority would cooperate with the National Government, and we anticipate under this hill that the land will neither have to be pur- chased nor leased by the National Government to conduct a single one of these different experiment stations; and we hope to have a great many of them, because it is just like educating the nation. The more schools you have and the more equipment, the more widespread the knowledge. The Chairman. Is there anything further, Mr. Burleson? Mr. Burleson. Mr. Chairman, I would like to suggest this: That the State of Texas make an appropriation each year of a given sum of money, $5,000 I think, to be expended in connection with the $15,000 appropriated by the General Government, which is denomi- nated the Hatch fund, at the State experiment stations. I will fur- thermore state that a reward of $50,000 has been offered by our State, and further, that the ingenuity of every man in Texas who is interested in the growth and culture of cotton has been taxed to the utmost to discover some means of relieving the distressful conditions which have resulted from this pest. We come here in order to enlist the continued services of scientists beyond the limits of our State. That is one of the objects and purposes of this measure. The State authorities, through the agricultural college, stands ready arid will cooperate to the limit of their ability with any efforts that the Sec- retary of Agriculture may make looking to the discovering of a means of destroying this pest or lessening the damage which the pest has wrought in the State. I desire now to make this motion: A number of bills relating to this subject have been introduced and will be referred to this com- mittee. I move that all bills relating to the cotton-boll weevil and cotton diseases and demonstration farms for Texas which have been introduced be referred to a subcommittee, of which the chairman of this committee shall be the chairman, and that this subcommittee report back to the full committee next Saturday at half past 10 o'clock the result of its deliberations. The Chairman. Do you mean this coming Saturday? Mr. Burleson. This coming Saturday. My purpose in that is this, that if we can determine upon a line of action now, I am confident that we can secure the time on the first day of the session after the holiday recess, which will be January 4, for the consideration of the measure. If we determine on Saturday the action we are to take, then in the meantime the necessary report can be prepared, and the chairman of the committee can bring the matter to the attention of the House immediately upon the reassembling of Congress after the holidays. Mr. Chairman, before you put this motion I have made, I would be glad to have the benefit of any suggestions from any member of the committee. The Chairman. A committee of how many, did you say; three? Mr. Burleson. I will say three or five. The smaller number can work more expeditiously. Mr. Adams. Mr. Chairman, I am in sympathy with this bill, and I wish to say that there is no hesitation so far as I am concerned to let it go up now with certain modifications; but the purpose of this com- mission is defined here: " The duties of said commission shall be to prepare and execute, 44 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. under the direction of the Secretary of Agriculture, such plans for lessening the damage caused by, and controlling the spread of, the Mexican cotton boll weevil." The only authority given under this act for what you might call agricultural education, touching the people in Texas and the other States, to diversify their industries, is given under this clause, if it is given at all — a plan for lessening the damage caused by this weevil. The Chairman. That is the clause under which Dr. Galloway claims he could operate. Mr. Burgess. That has a further clause, you will notice. Mr. Adams. Yes — And controlling the spread of the Mexican cotton-boll weevil and other insects and diseases injurious to cotton, as the Secretary of Agriculture may deem best. Mr. Burgess. That leaves it in his absolute judgment. Mr. Adams. It gives him absolute authority to do what he can to stop the ravages of this weevil. Mr. Galloway. Lessening the damage is a different thing from stopping the ravages. Mr. Adams. There is one thing the committee and Congress should consider, that if the Secretary of Agriculture finds, upon the expendi- ture of $50,000 or $100,000 or $125,000, that all work in that direction is ineffective, he would be empowered under this construction to spend the remainder in the cause of agricultural education. We do not want to overlook that. Understand, I look it squarely in the face, and am rather in sympathy with it; but The Chairman. I think that interpretation would be a little too broad. It specifies "lessening the damage caused by, and controlling the spread of, the Mexican cotton-boll weevil." Mr. Adams. It can be so construed. It is capable of a double con- struction. A close construction of that language would not permit the interpretation which I have placed upon it, but the gentlemen here defending this bill seem to place that interpretation upon it. Mr. Burleson. And so does the Secretary of Agriculture. Mr. Graff. It seems to me the committee ought to broaden that language, if they intend it to have that scope, so that there may not be any question about it. I think it is very decidedly doubtful whether the Comptroller of the Treasury would hold that money, used for the diversification of crops, would be for the lessening of the damage done by the boll weevil. I think it is too remote. Mr. Galloway. It has been submitted, not to the Comptroller, but to our attorney, who put the exact interpretation upon it that has been put on it by the Secretary — that under that authority he would be empowered to diversify crops if he deemed it best. Mr. Lorimer. I am quite sure he would not. Mr. Galloway. The point raised by the Secretary is that it gives the Secretary larger discretion if the language is ambiguous than if it is specific. Mr. Adams. Here is a law directed at a certain specific thing, to stop the ravages caused by the boll weevil, and an appropriation, and these words lessening the damage " are supposed to apply to the action of the boll weevil upon the cotton plant. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 45 Mr. Galloway. It has been suggested that after the word " cotton " on line 12 of the bill, cutting out the word " such" in line 10, it be made to read in this way : Such as the diversification of crops, the improvement of cultural conditions, and such other lines of work as the Secretary of Agriculture may deem best. Mr. Adams. That would remove all question. Mr. Lamb. I second the motibn of Mr. Burgess. The Chairman. I suggest that a subcommittee of three would be better than five, as the smaller the subcommittee the better the chance of getting together. Mr. Burleson. ,Yery well, sir; I accept that suggestion. The Chairman. Gentlemen, you hear the motion of the gentleman from Texas, that a subcommittee of three be appointed to take this matter up and report to the full committee on Saturday next at 10.30 o'clock. The motion was carried. Mr. Burleson. Mr. Chairman, I should be glad to hear any other suggestions along the lines made by Mr. Adams or Mr. Graff. Mr. Lorimes. JVlr. Chairman, I have only this suggestion to make. I have had a good deal of trouble with the Comptroller. We passed an appropriation bill about six years ago for the improvement of the Chicago River, and it was ambiguous, and when we came to collect the money — that is to say, when the contractors came to collect the money — the Comptroller would not pay them, and it was carried over for a year and a half until Congress amended the bill. Now, if we are going to make an appropriation here for diversification of crops, we ought to say so. Then there will be no doubt about it. It is not necessary that we should call on the Comptroller to construe this law. Let us fix it so that he will have simply to pay on it. The Chairman. So that it construes itself? Mr. Lorimer. Yes. The committee thereupon adjourned until Friday, December 18, 1903, at 11 o'clock a. m. AGRICULTURAL APPROPRIATION BILL. subcommittee on appropriations of the Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. \ January 6, 1904- The subcommittee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. J. W. Wads- worth in the chair. BUREAU OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY. The Chairman. Gentlemen, we have met according to agreement this morning to commence hearings of the Bureau chiefs of the Depart- ment of Agriculture; and Doctor Salmon, of the Bureau of Animal Industry, is here. STATEMENT OF DANIEL E. SALMON, CHIEF BUBEATJ OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY. The Chairman. Doctor Salmon, we notice in your appropriation you have asked for an increase over last year of $150,000, and we would like you, in your own way, to tell the committee the needs of this increase, and in what particular direction your work has increased so as to demand it, and to give us any other information which you think will be valuable and will enable the committee to form an opinion on the matter. Mr. Salmon. Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the committee, the reason we have asked for the increase in expenditures is because the work has been growing in all directions. There is not very much that is special that we anticipate doing different from what we have been doing; but the number of animals in this country is increasing, the commerce of the country is increasing, the demands for meat inspec- tion are increasing all the time, and there has been a general growth of the work, which requires larger appropriations in order to do it properly. The Chairman. Have you some figures with you showing the increase in the exports? Mr. Salmon. No; I have not made any figures showing the increase, but I drew off some figures showing what we had been doing with the money. For instance, the Bureau has inspected during the year 1903, 292,888 imported animals. That requires an inspection service along the Canadian frontier and along the Mexican frontier and along the seacoast. The Chairman. Has that increased any over last year or the year before ? Mr. Salmon. I have not the figures for last year. I did not have time to look them up. In fact, it did not occur to me that I should 46 BEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 47 put the figures of last year in connection with these. The exported animals which are inspected reached 494,000, very nearly 500,000, and it is necessary that they should be inspected in the stock yards. We think they should be inspected when they are loaded, and that the vessels should be inspected, and that we should see that they have proper room on board for them, the proper ventilation, the proper amount of feed, and the proper number of men to take care of them. _ Mr. Scott. Is it necessary, Doctor, to have a certificate of inspec- tion from your Department go with every cargo of animals ? Mr. Salmon. "With every cargo of animals. Mr. Scott. In order to have them received in the country to which they are consigned? Mr. Salmon. Yes; and we have inspected and cleared 634 ships during the last year. That means, of course, that we saw that the fittings were right. . The Chairman. You do not know offhand, I suppose, whether the export cattle last year increased over the cattle imported? Mr. Salmon. The export cattle did not increase, no; they decreased slightly, but not enough to make any difference in the inspection. The Chairman. Was there an increase in hogs, do you know, or of meat products generally ? Mr. Salmon. I could not tell you about that. The hog inspection — that is, the microscopic inspection — has been very low for two or three years. For instance, last year we inspected about half a million car- casses by microscopic inspection. The general export trade does not make very much difference to our work, in fact no difference, because we inspect all the animals that are killed in the large abattoirs, whether they go into interstate commerce or for export. Then our inspection for contagious diseases has been pretty heavy. We inspected of cattle going out of the Texas-fever district under supervision last year 1,620,000. Of course, it is necessary that those animals should be put in cars which have bills on them to show that they carry infected cattle. It is necessary when they are unloaded that they should be inspected by our men and put in the pens that are set apart for them. Then it is necessary that we should see that the cars are disinfected. This made it necessary that we should safeguard and disinfect 66,000 cars. I mention this to show you the extent to which the work has gone. The Chairman. The Government does not do the disinfecting? Mr. Salmon. We supervise it. We have to have men to see that it is done, otherwise it is not done. Then there is a large district along the Texas quarantine line, above the line, but which is more or less infected, that we put in a temporary quarantine, but let animals out on inspection, and it was necessary to inspect out of that district last year 389,000 cattle. Then we have been endeavoring to lessen the amount of sheep scab in the country. It got to be such a destructive disease that it almost ruined the sheep industry in some of the western States. We began by making regulations prohibiting the shipment of diseased sheep from one State to another. We thought that would lead the States to clean it up, but it did not have much effect. The infected sheep were still shipped. They went into our stock yards and infected the sheep for export. This led to the prohibition of our sheep going into Great Britain, 48 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON_ AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. Why could j r ou not stop them just as much as you could stop the cattle ? You stopped infected cattle. Mr. Salmon. The only way we stop infected cattle is to keep super- vision over them to see that they do not go out. The Chairman. Can you not say to the inspectors that they must watch the sheep trade too? Mr. Salmon . It would take a tremendous force of inspectors to watch the sheep trade, because they are all over the western States, the range States, the Rocky Mountain regions, and clear to California. In order to have enough inspectors there to stop diseased sheep going from one State to another it would take twice as many inspectors as we have. Mr. Gkaff. There is a wider area of sheep raising than there is of cattle raising. Mr. Salmon. There is a wider area of disease amongst the sheep. The sheep scab is all over the range country. The Chairman. There is practically no inspection of cattle above the quarantine line ? Mr. Salmon. Practically no inspection at present. Mr. Scott. Why could you not stop them at the seaboard, as you would infected cattle? Mr. Salmon. "We could when they showed the disease, but they would be infected in the stock yards. As long as the stock yards are infected and these sheep must go through them and come in infected cars, they carry the infection, and our inspectors are unable to detect the disease at that stage when they get to the seaboard, but when they reach the other side they show plain cases of scab. But our work during the last two or three years has reduced the amount of scab in exported sheep very materially. The Chairman. Was your work in that direction crippled for lack of means? Mr. Salmon. It has not been nearly as extensive as it ought to have been, partly because of lack of means and partly because we were not able to build up our force fast enough. Of course we are trying to keep the force growing to meet the demands of the country as nearly as we can. For this sheep scab last year we inspected sixteen and a half million sheep in the stock yards and over the range country, and we had dipped under our supervision 2,167,000, and 394,000 of these were dipped twice. I will say that the disease, sheep scab, increased to such an extent that we made arrangements with some of the western States, Wyoming and Utah in particular, to go in there and help them supervise dipping the sheep to cure the sheep, and get it cleaned up. There did not seem to be any hope of stopping the shipment of dis- eased sheep in any other way. That accounts for the large number that were dipped. Wyoming was pretty well cleared of sheep scab last year. I think another year's work will practically clean it out of the State. The Chairman. Are you using that same dip you sent up to me ? Mr. Salmon. Yes, we use two dips. We use a lime and sulphur dip and a tobacco and sulphur dip. The Chairman. Which do you find the better? Mr. Salmon. There is not much difference. It is a matter of which is more convenient. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 49 The Chairman. Do you not find that lime is a little injurious to the wool ? Mr. Salmon. Lime does injure the wool somewhat. It depends upon whether it is used properly or not. Then it also depends on the length of the wool at the time the sheep are dipped. If they are dipped soon after shearing, I do not think the effect of the lime is sufficient to take into account. Mr. Scott. What is the cause of scab in sheep? The Chairman. Scab is a microscopic parasite. It is large enough so that you can see it with the naked eye, but it is rather hard work. Mr. Scott. If you get it cleaned out of a State, what assurance have you that it will stay out? Mr. Salmon. Some countries have cleaned it out entirely, and it never has reappeared. Australia, for instance, cleaned it out some forty years ago. Mr. Henry. Do I understand there is no sheep scab in Australia at the present time ? Mr. Salmon. That is what they claim, and have claimed for thirty or forty years. The Chairman. I think that is a most wonderful result, driving it out of Australia, where there are those immense flocks. Mr. Bowie. I suppose it is understood generally what you mean by dipping, but I do not understand the process. Of course, I have an idea from the use of the word; but would you mind explaining what your method of dipping is ? Mr. Salmon. A large dipping vat is constructed, which is suffi- ciently wide and perhaps 100 feet long, and deep enough so that a sheep can be put entirely under the liquid. Mr. Bowie. Head and all? • Mr. Salmon. Head and all. They are driven in one end of it and allowed to swim through it, and somewhere, during the course of the swim, the head is put under. They come out at the other end of the vat. Mr. Bowie. They are required to go through the whole 100 feet? Mr. Salmon. They are required to go the whole length of the vat. The Chairman. They remain in about a minute, do they? Mr. Salmon. About two minutes. Mr. Bowie. It takes two minutes to go from one end of the vat to the other? Mr. Salmon. Yes; and, of course, there is a string of them in all the time. The Chairman . They dip cattle the same way ? Mr. Salmon. The same way. Mr. Bowie. Except, of course, that cattle require much larger vats, I imagine. Mr. Salmon. A larger vat, but it is the same principle. That is one direction in which we will have to increase our force somewhat for the handling of cattle scab, which was introduced two or three years ago, and is spreading all over the range country and also getting into the farming States. Mr. Henry. Is that conveyed from sheep to cattle ? Mr. Salmon. No. Mr. Henry. It is a different disease, is it? o a ± 50 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Salmon. It is about the same disease. The Chairman. It is a parasite. Mr. Salmon. It is a parasite which belongs to the same species, but it is not transferred from cattle to sheep. It is a different variety, but it produces the same sort of disease in cattle. It pulls them down so in their flesh that in the western country when bad weather comes on in the winter they lose a great many. The Chairman. When did this cattle scab make its appearance? I never heard of it until this year. Mr. Salmon. It made its appearance in northern Dakota. That is the first I heard of it. The Chairman. When % Mr. Salmon. Three or four years ago. The Chairman. As long ago as that? Mr. Salmon. That was the first time they had any outbreak there that has been at all serious. Mr. Scott. Where is it supposed to come from? Where is it gen- erated from in the first place ? Mr. Salmon. I do not know where it is generated in the first place, but it came in from Canada, probably. Where they got it I do not know. The Chairman. I suppose Canada says it came in from the United States. Mr. Salmon. Very likely. It is a more virulent form of cattle mange or cattle scab than we have ever had in this country before. It seems to spread more rapidly and affect cattle more seriously than any other. Really, in some of the States out there it is an extremely seri- ous matter. They say in North Dakota that if we shut in the diseased cattle they will not be able to market any another year, and we must go up there and cooperate with them in some way in the treatment of these cattle in order to get them out to market. Mr. Bowie. Is this mange you speak of something like the dog mange? Mr. Salmon. It is something of the same nature, and while when it first starts it does not seem to be very serious, it progresses until it almost ruins the cattle. The Chairman. Can you dip them in winter ? ■ Mr. Salmon. We can not dip them in that country in winter. It is too cold up there; but we will probably introduce toward spring a treatment of spraying or brushing material over them so as to treat those that are not very severely affected, and then later we will have to dip the ones where the disease has spread. The Chairman. Does it occur all over the body. Mr. Salmon. It starts along the back and in the root of the tail, and it spreads; and after they have had it awhile it goes all oyer the body. The Chairman. It starts generally in the root of the tail? Mr. Salmon. In the root of the tail or along the spine. Mr. Henry. Is the disease fatal? Mr. Salmon. It is not usually fatal of itself, but it weakens the cattle so that in the winter time the loss is very much increased; and then really a badly infected animal is not fit for market. They look bad and they are in bad health. The Chairman. Naturally they would carry no flesh. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 51 Mr. Salmon. No; we have had urgent requests from the Dakotas and some of the other Western States to come and help them, and unless we do it looks as though their marketing of cattle will be stopped. The Chairman. When you go on a man's range for the purpose of treating this infection, what share does the Government propose to bear? Mr. Salmon. We will probably only bear the expense of supervis- ing — putting in inspectors to tell them what to do and how to do it. The Chairman. After a man is once shown how to do it, he can take care of it himself ? Mr. Salmon. Yes; then we will have to increase, our inspection force a little to keep the disease from spreading out. Of course we have regulations that a man shall not ship a diseased steer or dis- eased sheep from one State to another, but they are doing it all the time; and when we get a lot of sheep the man says he did not know it. The law says if he ships them knowingly, he is guilty of a viola- tion of the law and subject to penalties. If he does not ship them knowingly, he is not subject to penalty. Mr. Henry. He never does it knowingly. Mr. Salmon. It is very seldom indeed they know it. The only time they know it is when some inspector has seen the animals and told the owner the animals had the disease; but it is very seldom you get a man it that situation. So that really the only way to keep the disease from spreading is to have inspectors enough there. The Chairman. Were you not rather deterred from taking hold of this thing with the energy you desired on account of the foot-and- mouth disease ? If you are relieved of that, can you not take hold of it? Mr. Salmon. We have got that force scattered over the country now, but we have not inspectors enough for this purpose. The Chairman. What did that force do before it went to eradicate the foot-and-mouth disease? Mr. Salmon. Some of them were on meat inspection, some were on sheep scab inspection, and some were on Texas cattle inspection. The Chairman. Therefore I say you had to temporarily divert that force to the foot-and-mouth disease ? Mr. Salmon. Yes. The Chairman. That being gone, will you not be able, to put these men back there/ Mr. Salmon. They are back now. The Chairman. Will not that give you force enough? Mr. Salmon. No; because- we just had enough force to carry on that work comfortably before. Of course, when this emergency arose we took off men, we made some men do double duty, and we neglected the work in some places because we could not do it. The Chairman. You have to do those things in the management of any business. Mr. Salmon. Of course, when an emergency arises in that way, like the foot-and-mouth disease, we would put the force in the field even if we were obliged to stop these other things. Mr. Henry. Right there, Doctor, it is said that the foot-and-mouth disease in New England has been stamped out. That is true, is it? You have succeeded ? 52 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Salmon. We have not had any cases there since last May, except the one which occurred where they vaccinated a herd of cattle this summer. Mr. Henry. In that case it was thought it might be foot-and-mouth disease. Mr. Salmon. It was thought so. Mr. Scott. Do you know how much of the $500,000 appropriated by Congress was used for that specific purpose ? Mr. Salmon. About 1300,000. The Chairman. Then it did not cost you very much, considering the work done and the danger. Mr. Salmon. No; we always do our work economically. That is what we pride ourselves on doing. Really it did not cost as much as 1 supposed it would. The Chairman. I think that was done more economically than the average work of the Bureau. Mr. Salmon. I do not think so. The Chairman. I mean according to the results. Mr. Bowie. Is it not a fact that the Department of Agriculture work is more economical than anything else? Mr. Salmon. I can speak for the Bureau of Animal Industry. I am satisfied that is conducted as economically as if I were running it out of my own private funds, but I always look to that side of it, and when I spend money I like to see it go where it will accomplish some- thing. We inspected in the meat inspection last year in the slaughter houses at the time of slaughter 37,183,000 carcasses. That, you know, is a tremendous number, and it is necessary for a man to be there and see all those carcasses and see the internal organs and look at them and see whether they are healthy or not. As the result of that inspection there were 114,198 carcasses condemned and taken out and destroyed. The Chairman. Cattle and sheep together? Mr. Salmon. Cattle, hogs, and sheep; yes. The Chairman. Mostly nogs? Mr. Salmon. Mostly hogs — more than half of them hogs. The total inspections which we are obliged to make in the stock yards amounted to over 59,000,000 — that is, of live animals. Of course those are large figures, and I go over them because I want the committee to realize as nearly as it can how much work is necessary to be done in order to supervise the animal trade of this country now. Of course it is a big country, and we are doing a lot of business. The internal commerce of the country is greater than it has ever been before, and is growing all the time. No one realizes how large a country it is until he has tried to cover it with an inspection force and keep his men moving around to answer the demands of people who want animals inspected for a market where the regulations require inspection. Mr. Bowie. Did I understand you to say 59,000,000? Mr. Salmon. 59,000,000 were inspected in the stock yards. Mr. Bowie. In one year? Mr. Salmon. In one 3 T ear. The Chairman. Sheep, cattle, and hogs. Mr. Haugen. How are these inspectors paid; by the month? Mr. Salmon. When the inspectors are first put on they get $1,200 a year. They must all be veterinarians and they must all, in addition HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 53 to passing their examination at their veterinary colleges, pass a veter- inary examination of the Civil Service Commission. They are put on at $1,200 a year and at the end of three years they are promoted to $1,400. Mr. Wright. Are they deterred from doing other work as veterinarians? Mr. Salmon. Yes, sir. Mr. Haugen. Are they appointed from the locality where the inspections are being conducted? Mr. Salmon. No; the register for our veterinarians is a general register for the whole country. They pass the examination and go on a general eligible list, and we take them according to their standing on that list. They must go wherever we happen to need them. Mr. Lamb. You get them through the Civil Service Commission ? Mr. Salmon. Yes. Mr. Henry. Some time ago you spoke of difficulty found in secur- ing expert help. Mr. Salmon. We have found difficulty in getting men fast enough. The Civil Service Commission has not been able to get men through the examinations fast enough. Mr. Henry. Has it not been your habit, as in other bureaus, to take young men from agricultural colleges and train them up in your work? Mr. Salmon. They all have to be veterinarians. The Chairman. They have to take that post-graduate course — the veterinary course? Mr. Salmon. Yes. Mr. Haugen. Is this inspection free of charge to the packing houses ? Mr. Salmon, Yes, sir. Mr. Graff. How many of these inspectors are there ? Mr. Salmon. We have about 400 now. The Chairman. Now, Doctor, to establish a quarantine line, is it absolutely necessary to have a veterinarian ? Mr. Salmon. Well, it is necessary to have a veterinarian to inspect the stock to see whether they are diseased or not. The Chairman. Take the case of sheep. Any farmer knows scab when it is in its active stage, of course; but when it first begins to break out and they begin to lose the wool, few would immediately recognize it. Mr. Salmon. Of course if the scab is very far advanced anyone can tell it, but then that is not the usual order of things. The Chairman. You could not tell it unless the wool had loops in it? Mr. Salmon. When an inspector sees a lot of sheep in the stock- yards with the wool loosening in spots and the sheep biting themselves, that is an indication that they may have scab. He has got to go and determine whether that is scab or not. He has got to take his micro- scope and scrape off the skin and know how to examine it and find the scab mite and then he must know the scab mite when he finds it. It does not do to guess about those things. A man must be absolutely certain in his diagnosis of the disease. You may have an eruption from sheep being out in a cold rain. That will sometimes cause an eruption of the skin. Sometimes irritants of various kinds start up an irritation which a superficial examination would perhaps make one think was scab; but it would be an injustice to the owner of those sheep if it was not scab to hold them up and make him dip them, and 54 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. so on. So our men have to know the insect and have to know how to find it. Then those same sorts of questions come up with every disease. It is the same way with the Texas fever. There is a whole lot of ticks on the cattle in that quarantine district. We generally diagnose the infected cattle by the tick which carries Texas fever. . Mr. Lamb. Doctor, have you had any of these inspectors in south- ern Virginia and eastern North Carolina, where that tick predominates ? Mr. Salmon. We keep a man in Eichmond and a man in Norfolk, and we have two men in North Carolina on the transportation routes. Mr. Lamb. Right in that connection, is that tick trouble abating there since you have been operating in that neighborhood? Mr. Salmon. In some places it is. Mr. Lamb. I want to keep that quarantine line from coming north. Mr. Salmon. So far our quarantine line has gone southward. That is, a great deal of the district which was infected at the time we started has been freed from it. Mr. Lamb. I know. I saw you about that once. Mr. Salmon. Just there I would like to say this. Of course we have been investigating the disease from a scientific point of view. In fact, when we began work with Texas fever there was nothing known about it except that cattle from somewhere in the Southern States coming north would spread a disease that would kill the cattle they came in contact with, but they did not know what districts they came from. They did not know how they spread it or how to prevent its spreading. We took up the disease, made a scientific investigation of it, and found a parasite in the blood which caused the disease. We found that parasite was carried from animal to animal by this tick, and we worked out the habits and natural history of the tick, so we knew what kind of regulations to make to control the disease. We have been trying for ten years to find something to kill the ticks. The Chairman. Will not that dipping process kill these ticks? Mr. Salmon. It was a long time before we could get anything that would kill the ticks. We thought two or three times we had some- thing that would do it, and that would mean a good deal, because if we could dip the cattle in that quarantine district and kill all the ticks before they went out, then they could go anywhere without restric- tion. It would relieve our work a good deal and it would relieve the people who raised the cattle. The Chairman. I have heard of an oil that was put on them to kill these ticks. Mr. Salmon. During the last year we have found a crude petroleum which comes from the Beaumont district in Texas that has a very large proportion of sulphur in it, and it actually lulls the tick without dam- aging the cattle. It is the only thing we "have discovered that will do it. That will be used very largely this year. , Mr. Lamb. What is the technical name for that? Mr. Salmon. It is the Beaumont crude petroleum. Mr. Henry. The properties of that petroleum are different from the Pennsylvania petroleum, are they? Mr. Salmon. Yes; it has a very large proportion of sulphur dis- solved in it. When we began dipping we used a petroleum product and tried to dissolve sulphur in it, but we were not able to dissolve any to amount to anything, and the Standard Oil people (who are sup- HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 55 posed to know all about petroleum) told us they could not dissolve sulphur in petroleum; but we have found since that this natural crude petroleum from Texas has a large quantity of sulphur already dis- solved in it, owing to some peculiar properties of the oil. Mr. Henrt. A process you have not been able to discover? Mr. Salmon. A process we are not able to duplicate; but it is already there, and it is very cheap. The oil can be bought for about 3 cents a gallon. The Chairman. That kills the ticks, does it? Mr. Salmon. Yes; we experimented with it at our experiment sta- tion at Bethesda. The Chairman. Will one dipping kill them ? Mr. Salmon. One dipping; yes, sir. Then late in the season we experimented in Texas with it, and in both places it killed all the ticks and did not damage the cattle. The Chairman. How much did it cost to dip a steer? Have you any figures on that? Mr. Salmon. With that oil it did not cost very much. The Chairman. About how much ? Mr. Salmon. It costs 3 cents a gallon, and about a gallon of oil is taken out of the dip with the steer. Then, it is necessary to count the interest on the plant, and so on, but if they are dipping a large number it will not amount to much. The Chairman. About 5 cents apiece? Mr. Salmon. About 5 cents apiece. When we started in it was costing from 50 to 75 cents an animal, and they were very anxious to have them dipped at that price; but with this oil it will certainly be inside of 10 cents and possibly inside of 5. Mr. Scott. You killed a good many animals in the beginning of these experiments, did you not? Mr. Salmon. Well, some, and some were damaged more or less. Mr. Scott. And the owners suffered the loss? Mr. Salmon. Yes; they were willing to take the chances, you know. They were so anxious to get their cattle out. Mr. Lamb. Have you any bulletins on this, Doctor? Mr. Salmon. I have not written up the dippings yet; no. Mr. Lamb. When you do I wish you would send me some. Mr. Salmon. I will be very glad to do so. Mr. Wright. In these various experiments do you send the inspect- ors wherever there is an infected flock? Mr. Salmon. Now we are sending inspectors to central shipping points to inspect the sheep that are to be shipped. Mr. Wright. Seaboard and shipping points? Mr. Salmon. And in the interior also. For instance, in Wyoming we have certain places where our inspectors are stationed on the rail- roads. Mr. Wright. Suppose a man had a large herd -of dairy cows; you would not send an inspector to look them over? Mr. Salmon. No; we do not do anything with dairy cows. Mr. Scott. Doctor, with regard to this inspection in Wyoming that you have spoken of, is not that State doing anything along that line? Mr. Salmon. Yes, sir; they are cooperating with us. They have a sheep sanitary board, and they have made the regulations and helped to enforce them. 56 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Scott. Ought the} 1- not to be more and more able to do the whole business? Mr. Salmon. They will, of course, as soon as the great burden of stamping out the disease in the first place is through with. They will be able to control it, because all they will have to do then will be to keep out scabby sheep, and we will do that by our supervision over interstate traffic. . Mr. Scott. I know I have been called upon several times by farmers near my home to know what they should do on account of certain dis- eases that have appeared among their stock, and I have always simply called upon the State veterinarian board, and they have sent a veteri- narian there and attended to the business. It never occurred to me to call on the United States. Mr. Salmon. States always attend to those things that have no special bearing on interstate trade, but where it comes to a widespread contagious disease like sheep scab, it is more than the State can handle. In the first place, there are very few of the State authorities that have the nerve and backbone to enforce the regulations with sufficient stringency to accomplish anything. Mr. Bowie. Then they have not the trained men either, have they ? Mr. Salmon. They do not usually put trained men on those boards. They do sometimes, but oftener they do not, and the men they do put on seem to lack the nerve to enforce the regulations. In fact, they are too well acquainted with the people, and the influence of the peo- ple who own the sheep can be brought to bear upon them too strongly. The Chairman. I see your increases have been as follows: In 1897-98 you had an increase of $26,000. 1 am giving these in round numbers. In 1898-99 you had $227,800 increase; in 1899-1900, $60,590 increase; in 1900-1901, $84,000 increase; in 1901-2, $25,000 increase; in 1902-3, $93,000 increase; in 1903-4, $40,000: That, of course, does not include the $500,000 emergency fund for the foot and mouth disease; but in that bill of last year you were authorized, I think, to buy some real estate for quarantine stations. That has been accomplished, has it not? Mr. Salmon. No, we have not bought that. The Chairman. You bought the one back of Jersey City? Mr. Salmon. Well, that was bought three years ago, I think. Yes; there was a small addition there. The Chairman. There was f 20,000 for enlarging Bethesda out here. Mr. Salmon. That has been done. The one I was speaking of was $10,000 for a quarantine station in Baltimore. That we have not expended. I do not know whether we will be able to get that or not. The work naturally grows every year. I suppose there ought to be, to keep the work on a good basis, an increase of something like 10 per cent a year. I think that is the natural growth. The Chairman. The export, the interstate commerce, you might say, in meats does not grow 10 per cent a year, does it? Mr. Salmon. It does not; but the meat inspection grows more than 10 per cent a year. The Chairman. I notice in your reasons for asking an increase you mention the increased demand for inspection. What does that come from? Mr. Salmon. We have four or five places at Kansas City now ask- ing for inspection. The Chairman. What places are they? What are they? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 57 Mr. Salmon. They are place* over across the line in Kansas. They claim they are unable to sell meat. They want to sell their meat in Missouri, and under the law they are not allowed to ship meats across from Kansas to Missouri unless they are inspected. We have pend- ing now 38 applications for meat inspections that we are unable to grant. Mr. Haugen. What arrangements are made for the inspections at these smaller packing houses? Mr. Salmon. There is no special arrangement unless they are kill- ing from 50 to 75 head of cattle and 200 or 300 hogs a day. We do not give them inspection because we think it is not worth it. Mr. Haugen. They are, then, at a disadvantage, are they not? Mr. Salmon. They are at a disadvantage. Mr. Graff. Do you keep any inspectors at the distilleries in Illi- nois where they raise fattened cattle? Mr. Salmon. No; only at the slaughterhouses and stockyards. I went over our expense account yesterday, and I want to say I had not looked at the estimates and did not know how much the Secretary had asked for. I requested him to ask for somewhat more than he did, but I just took our monthly expense account and averaged it up, and I find that during the last few months our expenses for meat inspection had been about $75,000 a month. The export cattle inspection has run about $5,000. The inspection of imported animals runs about $4,000; then the sheep scab inspection about $10,000, the Texas fever inspection about $5,000; our dairy products inspection runs about $3,000, and miscellaneous expenses about $3,000. It makes altogether $112,500 a month, and that comes to just $1,350,000 a year. I reached that conclusion before I looked at this, and went to see what the Secretary has asked for. He has asked for just exactly the amount that I arrived at by going over the monthly expense accounts yesterday. Mr. Bowie. Right in that connection, I understood you to say yes- terday you have about 400 inspectors now. Mr. Salmon. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. How many will you expect to have if you get this increase of $100,000? Mr. Salmon. Well, I do not know, of course. Mr. Bowie. Would it all go to inspectors or would it be partly applied to something else? Mr. Salmon. It would go for inspectors and the expenses of inspect- ors and miscellaneous expenses which naturally come up in connection with such a matter. Mr. Graff. These inspectors are allowed their traveling expenses, of course? Mr. Salmon. Yes. Mr. Graff. But not their maintenance while there ? Mr. Salmon. Except in special cases where they are sent to a place for just a, few days. Every man must have a home station. Mr. Graff. Where the most of his work is done ? Mr. Salmon. Where the most of his work is done, and when he is there he must maintain himself. Mr. Bowie. Doctor, could you give me an estimate approximately of the number of additional inspectors you think it would be wise to put on ? Mr. Salmon. I could not, very well. 58 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OK AGRICULTURE. Mr. Bowie. Or is it on a deficiency basis now ''. Mr. Salmon. I could not tell until we actually put them in the field to see how many it takes to cover the territory. For instance, this cattle scab is going to require an increase of expenses. Our expenses now are about $500 a month. The Chairman. Five hundred dollars or $5,000? Mr. Salmon. Five hundred dollars, and the expenses of the sheep scab are $10,000. I have no doubt this cattle scab will take $8,000 or $10,000 a month this summer to control it. Mr. Bowie. That is, the Texas cattle. Mr. Salmon. No, not the Texas cattle. The Texas cattle inspection will be about the same as it has been, but the cattle scab will require considerably more expense. Mr. Burleson. Where is that disease prevalent? Mr. Salmon. All over the range country, but probably most in the Dakotas and Wyoming. Mr. Burleson. In the colder country ? Mr. Salmon. It was worse there because it was introduced from the north. I do not think cold has so much to do with it. Mr. Bowie. How much has the Texas inspection cost for the Texas fever? Mr. Salmon. The Texas fever inspection is costing $5,000 a month. Mr. Bowie. And it would be about the same ? Mr. Salmon. It would be about the same. That will not vary. The Chairman. Doctor, in view of the fact that you can not get a suitable station on the water at Baltimore, 1 presume you will keep the old station and do your work there? Mr. Salmon. We will keep the old station; yes, sir. We may be able to get a few acres below Baltimore on the river. I am in hopes so, because we are having cases of animals coming in from countries where they have more or less disease, and we have not a quarantine station now that is safe. They are all inland. We are obliged to take the stock over the railroads. At Baltimore it is 12 or 14 miles, at New York it is 25 miles, and at Boston it is 25 or 30 miles. The Chairman. Inland? Mr. Salmon. Inland. We do not feel safe in letting animals in from a country where they have any dangerous disease, so we shut them out. There are people now who want to bring in Angora goats from South Africa. The Secretary thinks it is not safe, and I doubt mj'self if it is safe; but if we had a quarantine station on the water front where we could take the animals from the ship on a lighter and put them into the quarantine station, we could handle them safely. Mr. Henry. You made an effort in New York to secure a quaran- tine station on the water front? Mr. Salmon. Yes; we tried very hard. Mr. Henry. And you found it impracticable? Mr. Salmon. Absolutely impossible to get land for a quarantine station around New York within a reasonable distance. Mr. Henry. And you went back to New Jersey ? The Chairman. It would be better to have these stations on the water, but j r ou haAe never had an outbreak from animals after they have left quarantine. Mr. Salmon. We have not, but the Canadians have. They brought over pleuro-pneumonia. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 59 Mr. Burleson. At what points do you conduct this inspection of meats intended for export trade '4 Mr. Salmon. At all the large packing centers. There are fifty or sixty different centers where we have them. Mr. Burleson. The bulk of the money expended for meat inspec- tion is for the inspection of dressed meats, is it not? Mr. Salmon. Yes; the inspection at the time of slaughter. Mr. Burleson. What percentage of it is for the inspection of dressed meats '( Mr. Salmon. About $75,000 a month is for the meat inspection. Mr. Burleson. That is all for dressed meats ? Mr. Salmon. Yes, sir. The Chairman. I think the doctor does not understand you, Mr. Burleson. Not dressed meats, but canned meats and everything. Mr. Salmon. Of course we inspect all the animals slaughtered, no matter what the meat goes for. Mr. Haugen. It is inspected for interstate commerce, too. . Mr. Salmon. Yes. I believe you were going to ask me a question, Mr. Wright? Mr. Wright. I was asking where your quarantine for the port of New York is; at Garfield? Mr. Salmon. At Athenia, N. J. It used to be at Garfield, but we had to give up that station and we went to Athenia, 2 or 3 miles from Garfield. The Chairman. Are you going to have a deficiency this year. Mr. Salmon. No, sir; we are not going to have a deficiency; but we have got to put some work on contagious diseases — sheep scab, and so on — on that $500,000 which j'ou appropriated last year for contagious diseases. The Chairman. For the foot-and-mouth disease? Mr. Salmon. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. It would be a deficiency as against the $1,200,000? Mr. Salmon. It would be a deficiency against that; yes, sir. Mr. Burleson. There would be $250,000 of that diverted for the cotton-boll weevil. You have considered, that, have you ? Mr. Salmon. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. That was really a million-dollar appropriation. We called it a $500,000 appropriation, but it was really a million dollars. Mr. Salmon. Two $500,000 appropriations; yes. The dairy inspec- tion will cost a little more than it has cost, but not very much. The inspection of renovated butter, you remember, was put under the Bureau of Animal Industry, and last year, which was the first year, there were 82 factories inspected and put under supervision, and the total output of renovated butter was 50,000,000 pounds. Out of this we inspected for export 1,312,000 pounds. Mr. Bowie. I would like to know something about the result of that renovated-butter inspection. You probably found the renovated- butter people were guilty of some things they were accusing the oleomargarine people of. Mr. Scott. That is res adjudicata. Mr. Salmon. We found some pretty bad lots of renovated butter. 1 admit that. Mr. Burleson. It was a very wise action on the part of Congress to require an inspection of renovated butter, was it not, Doctor? 60 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Salmon. I should hate to intimate that Congress ever does anything that is not wise. Mr. Henry. I might say the internal-revenue officials claim that the receipts, of a quarter of a cent a pound tax, pay the expenses. Mr. Bowie. Yes; it goes into the general treasury and we have to make an appropriation. Mr. Henky. I understand; but it pays. There is no loss to the Government in that supervision. Mr. Bowie. Of the renovated butter? Mr. Henky. Of the renovated butter. Mr. Burleson. What amount of money is asked for this year for the distribution of blackleg? Mr. Salmon. Nothing special. All our work comes out of this one appropriation. Mr. Burleson. It is a lump sum, is it? Mr. Salmon. Yes. The only thing 1 have to say in addition, Mr. Chairman, is that I believe $1,350,000 is needed to do our work properly and economically. Of course, if the committee in its wisdom thinks that is too much money to spend for this purpose we will get along with less. It does not make any difference to me personally. I will do the best I can with the money you give me, but these things are urgent matters. Neglect of the service causes a great deal of loss to the stock raisers of the country ; and to allow these diseases, like cattle scab and sheep scab and glanders, and so on, to spread all over the country means a very heavy loss. The Chairman. You see you still have that $500,000 of last year intact, or $450,000 of it. You used $300,000 for the foot-and-mouth disease, leaving $200,000. Now we have appropriated $250,000 for the cotton-boll weevil. That leaves $450,000 still available. Mr. Salmon. That is all right for the current year. This appro- priation you are talking about is for another year, beyond that. The Chairman. When does that emergency appropriation die by law? Mr. Salmon. That dies the 1st of next July. The Chairman. Was it treated exactly like all other appropriations? Was it not made exceptional ? Mr. Salmon. No, sir. The Chairman. Available until used? Mr. Salmon. No, sir; I think not. It has always been held over in our Department that the first appropriation of $500,000 expired the 1st of last July and the second appropriation of $500,000 expires the 1st of next July, out of which I expect to take the deficiency for the present year by paying for this part of the sheep-scab work. The Chairman. Then you contend there is only $250,000 left of that appropriation after the cotton-boll weevil is taken from it? Mr. Salmon. We will not have to take as much as $100,000 out of it. I do not know how much it will amount to; probably $60,000 or $70,000. Mr. Graff. For what purpose ? Mr. Salmon. For this contagious disease, sheep scab and cattle scab, and so on. So that so far as this year goes, we will get through by using that, but it is a question about the next fiscal year. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 61 Mr, Bowie. Doctor, you ask for $150,000 more, and you say on the cattle scab you are now spending $ 500 a month, and you ought to spend several thousand dollars. How many thousand dollars did you state? Mr. Salmon. I said 1 thought it would cost $5,000 or $6,000 a month. Mr. Bowie. That would be an increase there of approximately $50,000 for that single purpose that you regard as necessary? Mr. Salmon. Yes; but we are running behind this year some $60,000. Mr. Bowie. 1 say that accounts for $60,000 of the increase that you ask for right there ? Mr. Salmon. Sixty thousand dollars of the deficiency this year, and $65,000 or $70,000 deficiency on the cattle scab next year, makes about $125,000 or $130,000. Mr. Bowie. And there is pretty nearly all of your increase right in those two items ? Mr. Salmon. Pretty nearly all, yes, sir; and of course the expenses naturally increase from year to year more or less. The Chairman. Do you think you can get along with your work without the $150,000? Mr. Salmon. I do not think we could, unless there is some other .fund we can draw from. The Chairman. It is as broad as it is long as far as the Government is concerned. You would have to cut out some of your work if you did not get an increase? Mr. Salmon. Certainly. The Chairman. Or else go to the deficiency bill ? Mr. Salmon. Yes. The Chairman. 1 can not understand where this increase of inspec- tion comes from, in view of the fact that we are not exporting much. Mr. Salmon. The expenses in the inspection of export animals is really a small part of the expense, you see. It is only $5,000 a month now. The Chairman. That is $60,000. Mr. Salmon. Sixty thousand dollars a year. Still, it is only $5,000 out of $112,000 a month. Of course, when we started in a few years ago we had all small-salary men — $1,200 men — and it is necessary after they are on three years to increase their salaries a little. You can not always keep a force of the lowest grade of men and keep up your force; and with the salaries we are paying we are not able to get men as fast as we need them. The Chairman. Our country is just flooded with poor veterina- rians. Mr. Salmon. We are trying not to get that kind. The Chairman. Half of them do not know their business. Mr. Salmon. Of course there is not more than one in three of the men who take the civil-service examination who pass, although they graduate from a veterinary school. Mr. Burleson-. Mr. Chairman, this emergency appropriation of last year is even broader than we thought it was. It is to cover "foot- and-mouth disease and other contagious diseases of animals." Mr. Bowie. Is that the new deficiency bill ? Mr. Burleson. Yes; that is what is going into the deficiency bill. Mr. Bowie. To cover the boll weevil? Mr. Burleson. Yes. 62 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. It reads this way: Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That so much of the act entitled "An act making appropria- tions for the Department of Agriculture for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and four," approved March third, nineteen hundred and three, as relates to the emergency appropriation to enable the Secretary of Agriculture to stamp out and eradicate the foot-and-mouth disease and other contagious diseases of animals, to be used for no other purpose, be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as follows: "Emergency appropriation: To enable the Secretary of Agriculture to stamp out and eradicate the foot-and-mouth disease and other contagious diseases of animals, and to meet the emergency caused by the ravages of the Mexican cotton-boll weevil and other insects and diseases affecting cotton, and for no other purposes, five hundred thousand dollars: Provided, That of this sum not to exceed two hundred and fifty thousand dollars may be expended by the Secretary of Agriculture in such manner as he shall deem, best in cooperation with State experiment stations and practical cotton growers, if the Secretary of Agriculture shall deem it advisable, to meet the emergency caused by the ravages of the Mexican cotton-boll weevil and other insects and diseases affecting cotton, and the remainder of the five hundred thousand dollars herein appropriated (not less than two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, however) shall be used exclusively to stamp out and eradicate foot-and-mouth disease and other contagious diseases of animals." Mr. Burleson. That just takes the place of the old law — "to be amended so as to read as follows:" The old law carried $500,000, and it simply diverts $250,000 of it to be used for the Mexican boll weevil, but says the other $250,000 shall be expended for stamping out the foot-and-mouth disease, and then it broadens the scope and says "and other contagious diseases." Mr. Graff. Will that be available after the 30th of June? The Chairman. I think we can get the Committee on Approprfe* tions to put in there "and this appropriation shall be available i,me and when it should come. The question with the import- er , ~~all we introduce testimony at the time the inspection is made, betore the analysis has been made at all ? If so it might be useless, HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 229 because the inspection might show that there was nothing contraband in the goods. In the second place, shall it be before the Secretary of the Treasury or the Secretary of Agriculture ? And in order .that there might not be any misunderstanding as to where the testimony was to be given or when it should be offered, this wording was put in. While not necessary, it seems very convenient in the interpretation of the act that that information should be given to the importers. If I may be allowed a word, Mr. Chairman, if we inspect an invoice and if it is found all right, then they do not need any testimony of any kind; and it is not necessary to give testimony until an invoice has been found wrong. This specifies that point. The Chairman. The next point, I think, for you to explain is the language here Provided, That the importer of said foods, condiments, drags, and beverages may remove under bond any invoice held for inspection in accordance with regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury, in which he shall agree to return the shipment to the custody of the Secretary of the Treasury, in case it shall be found unsuitable for entry. Mr. Wiley. 1 think I can explain that, Mr. Chairman, in a few words. It came up in the actual process The Chairman. That is to avoid holding the goods on the dock pending examination. Mr. Wiley. The goods either had to be held on the dock pending examination or had to be stored in a Government bonded warehouse at the expense of the importer. They object to paying this charge and also to having it exposed in the warehouses. They can not have con- trol of their goods in the warehouses, under the conditions under which it is kept there, because sometimes there is such a high temperature in the warehouse and sometimes such a low temperature in the warehouse that the extremes are injurious to those products. So they wanted an opportunity to take the goods immediately when they are landed, as tney are allowed to do now in the payment of customs. A person bringing goods into this country is allowed to remove them under bond before the liquidation of the entry, giving bond to double the value of the goods. He pays a certain part of the duty, which is estimated, and when the duty is finally adjusted if there is any additional duty to pay he pays it, too, and the bond is canceled; and in the meantime he has possession of his goods and can use them, if necessary, because he only agrees to pay double their value in case there is objection to their going through the custom-house. Mr. Adams. It would seriously hamper trade if this provision was not in here. Mr. Wiley. It did hamper trade very seriously until the Secretary of the Treasury allowed them to take the goods under the regular bond temporarily until some more ample provision should be given. The Chairman. What goods did you run across that could not be stored in bonded warehouses? Mr. Wiley. In winter weather if the temperature is below freezing there are many goods that are injured. That is the case wit!-, olive oil, although olive oil will melt out afterwards. It is the ca,' j with almost every fruit product, unless it is fruit which is intended to be kept in cold storage. The Chairman. Is the temperature in these bonded warehouses below freezing? 230 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Wiley. Sometimes it is below freezing and sometimes it is not. The Chairman. Do they not have a special division in the bonded warehouse in which they put perishable goods ? Mr. Wiley. Yes; they have those divisions. Mr. Adams. But does not the greatest necessity for this provision lie in this fact: There are often merchants that want to get their goods on the market by a given time, and without some such provision as this they can not do that? The Chairman. But they can not sell these goods; the merchant simply gives a bond for their safe-keeping, and if the Dnited States Government finds anything deleterious in their composition he agrees to return the identical bonded-warehouse goods to the Treasury? Mr. Adams. Is that the bond — to return the identical goods? Mr. Wiley. Yes. The old bond required to give an indemnity, which we do not care for. Mr. Adams. I think the best policy would be to make them store them at the United States bonded warehouse and not let them take them in their possession. Mr. Scott. I was going to inquire whether that means pending the inspection of the goods that may be taken and introduced into the market. The Chairman. No; they agree to return the identical goods in case the United States Government finds they contain something injurious. Mr. Graff. There is a penalty in the bond, and if they do not return the goods all they can do is to collect on the bond, and the only penalty would be paying double; but it would not pay for the busi- ness house to engage in that business right straight along. The Chairman. Do you seriously think there is any situation that might arise when the United States bonded warehouse would not meet this case ? My point is that they remain in the hands of the United States Government; you do not have this detail about the bonds to be gone into, and the bonds are very necessary, as you know, and the goods are treated exactly like other things being imported to this country and put in the United States bonded warehouses. Mr. Wiley. The law now allows the goods to go directly into trade, and when you consider that the great majority of the inspected invoices are within the limits of the law, it would entail the additional expense of a double moving of the goods, and also the storage during the time of the inspection, also storage during the time duties were to be entered and liquidated. It requires usually about ten days to liquidate an ordi- nary entry at the custom-house. Mr. Haugen. This would save considerable expense then ? Mr. Wiley. This would save considerable expense and annoyance to the importer to allow him to take his goods under bond. Mr. Scott. Does this same bond cover the duty also? Mr. Wiley. It provides for full payment of duty and in double the value of the goods. Mr. Scott. Or are there two bonds made, one to the Treasurer and one to^'cover the inspection ? Mr. Wiley. One is to the Treasury and one is to return these goods if they are found to be contraband goods. The Chairman. Most bonds are made to the Treasury. Mr. Wiley. Both are made to the Treasury; yes. Mr. Scott. They are two separate bonds? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 231 Mr. Wiley. Yes, I think so; but I may be mistaken. I will say, since this has been suggested, that this arrangement has been made, which has worked satisfactorily, and it might be well to let it stand. That the Secretary of the Treasury has decided that this bond can cover both the duty and the goods, because he takes this view: That no dealer would undertake to sell goods that we had found contraband anyway, because it would ruin his trade, and allowing him to take the goods, if he should dispose of some of them innocently or without thinking that they were contraband, he would pay double their price, and he would not likely repeat the offense; ana the result is that they are keeping the goods intact until the entry is liquidated. Mr. Graff. That is under existing law? Mr. Wiley. Yes; that is under existing law. Mr. Haugen. He would have to pay three times the price, then, would he not? Mr. Wiley. Two prices to the Government and one price to the person who brought them there — yes, three times the price. Mr. Scott. He would only pay double the price to the Government in case the duty was not paid? Mr. Wiley. He would only pay double the price then; or, if the goods were found contrary to law, double the price to the Government. The Chairman. If found to be contrary to law, they would be returned to the Treasury Department and given back to the country from which they came? Mr. Wiley. If you will allow me to say a word, I think I can clear the matter up. I will make this additional statement: That the Secre- tary of the Treasury has instructed the collector and appraiser not to liquidate any entry at all until inspections are completed; so that the bond holds perfectly good, and we have had no trouble at all since this form of bond was allowed to cover the goods during inspection, and in only one case have we required the return of the goods, and they were found to be intact. The Chairman. In all your examinations you have only found one case Mr. Wiley. No, I mean under this particular procedure, which has just gone into effect. Goods were all stored in bonded warehouses at the expense of cartage and storage to the importer until the inspections were completed. We have only lately made this new arrangement, and under the new arrangement, which is perf ectly satisfactory to the importers, there has been only one case where there has been a return of the goods. Mr. Scott. Why not strike this out, then ? Mr. Wiley. That was what I was about to propose. If I had known of the adoption of this method that has been adopted then the language in this bill would not have been proposed. Mr. Graff. What are the conditions of this bond they have to give now? Mr. Wiley. It is arranged by the Secretary of the Treasury. I do not understand it very well, but they give a bond in double the value of the goods that they will pay the full duties. They make an esti- mate of what the duties are at once and pay a certain amount and take the goods away, and then they give a bond that they will pay all duties assessed on the goods on liquidation, and upon that bond they take their goods away. 232 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Adams. Is not this an explicit authority for the Secretary of the Treasury to do what he is doing? Mr. Wiley. Exactly, but for a little different purpose. Mr. Graff. But they have to pay their duties if they take their goods out and keep them. This bond has simply to do with the duties and nothing to do with anything else ? Mr. Wiley. It is construed now to cover both duties and inspection. Mr. Graff. Then, supposing a party concluded that he would sell the goods and pay the duty, that is^ what he would have to do in any case, whether they were pronounced contraband or not. Well, they would not have to pay any duty if they were contrary to the provi- sions of this law; but he would sell them, and if he sold them he would have to pay the duty Mr. Wiley. Then this would happen. If we should ask the return of the goods under this bond, and a part had been disposed of, he would have to return what was left and pay double the full value of those that he had disposed of. Mr. Haugen. And the duty besides ? Mr. Wiley. And the duty besides. The Chairman. I believe in making this severe, so as to stop it right off. The moment they find that there are going to be severe measures adopted by us to prevent the disposing of this kind of goods — goods injurious to health — they are going to stop it; they can not continue to send those goods over here. Their agents over here will write back and say to them "Don't send any more of that stuff; we can not do any- thing with it," and it will not pay them to send any more over. Mr. Wiley. You will understand that what we are trying to get at are the parties that are offending, and we can not tell until we inspect ; we do not want to put a penalty on the parties who are entirely inno- cent. That is what we are doing when we send these goods to the bonded warehouses under the old provision. The Chairman. Eight there, if I may interrupt you, perhaps it would be proper to tell the committee something about these goods ; the idea was to prevent the importation of goods which were contra- band in their own country where they were manufactured and goods that were injurious to health, was it not? Mr. Wiley. And in addition to that, Mr. Chairman, goods that are falsely labeled in any respect. The Chairman. Yes; goods that are falsely labeled also? Mr. Wiley. Yes. The Chairman. What have you done in that line? Mr. Wiley. I have some interesting statistics which I will present first. The average daily number of invoices which have reached us since this act went into effect, July 1, have been 114 — that is, there have been that many separate shipments of food products coming into the United States every day from all countries, from all quarters, of the world. We found at the beginning, and now with a diminishing percentage, that about 10 per cent of the inspected cargoes were con- trary to law in respect to adulteration of a chemical nature, which we could detect in the laboratory. The Chairman. Those things being contrary to the law in the countries from which they came? Mr. Wiley. Contrary to our law, and in most cases contrary to the HEARINGS BEFOKE COMMITTEE ON AGEIOULTDKE. 233 laws in the countries from which they came. In some cases the country from which they came had no laws on the subject. That shows about the percentage of actual chemical adulteration which you can detect in a laboratory. We have not gone at all into that other question of false branding when not revealed by chemical examination, because that is so big a question we could not undertake it at present; we had all we could manage with the small force we had to inspect 6 per cent of the invoices which came in a chemical way. Mr. Scott. You inspected all of them, did you not? Mr. Wiley. No; we only inspected those that we had suspicion about or that might be subject to suspicion. Mr. Scott. How were you guided in that? Mr. Wiley. By previous experience. We know where to look; we may not always find cases of adulteration or violation of the law, but we have an idea where they are most likely to be found. Mr. Scott. Then of these 114 daily shipments you inspected but 6 per cent? Mr. Wiley. Six or 7 per cent. Mr. Scott. Was it 10 per cent of the 6 per cent that you found to be adulterated? Mr. Wiley. Ten per cent of the 6 per cent we found to be adul- terated. The Chairman. That is a pretty small percentage, is it not? Mr. Wiley. It is a much larger percentage than we expected to find. The Chairman. It is? Mr. Wiley. Yes, because you must remember that there is a certain percentage of articles that we never expect to find adulterated at all, such things as rice and nuts and unbroken foods of all kinds. The Chairman. You can not adulterate a nut. Mr. Wiley. No; and as 1 have said we do not expect to find adul- terations in such things, but they are counted in the invoices. Then, we have not made any inspection of fish, either fresh fish or preserved fish. The Chairman. I do not think that 10 per cent of the 6 per cent is very high, considering what some people call adulteration — and some people do not. Mr. Wiley. It is a little higher than we anticipated from our previous work. We had inspected before under the old law. The Chairman. I believe there is a good deal of difference of opinion as to what constitutes an adulteration, even among the chemists. Mr. Wiley. Yes; and among other people as well as chemists. I will tell you the lines we took up. We took up the easier things first in order to get our hand in, we might say. We did not want to attempt any very difficult problems until we learned something of the working of the law. One of the first things was olive oil, because we had been led to believe that there is a good deal of adulteration in olive oil coming into this country. That being so, we have held up, maybe, 25 per cent of all the shipments of olive oil that have been sent to us since the 1st of July. In olive oils we have found, proba- bly, more adulterations than in any other one thing. That adulteration consists chiefly in the admixture of other vegetable oils which, although we believe them wholesome, and we do not object to them on that 234 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. ground at all, are sold at the high prices which olive oil should com- mand. Mr. Adams. Cotton-seed oil % Mr. Wiley. Cotton-seed oil is one. We have no objection to that as a salad oil. We believe in it as a salad oil, and will do what we can to promote its use under its proper name. The same is true of peanut oil; and sesame oil is another oil used in the same way. Those are the three that we have found coming in under the name of olive oil and sold as olive oil. The Chairman. They are not injurious to health? Mr. Wiley. No sir; we do not exclude them on the ground that they are injurious to health but on the ground that they are adulterations. The Chairman. They are not sold for what they really are ? Mr. Wiley. They are not what they pretend to be. The Chairman. The same as the oleomargarine and butter case over again. Mr. Wiley. Yes. The Chairman. That is it exactly. Mr. Wiley. Yes. In the goods from some firms we have found adulterations quite frequently, and in the case of other firms we have found no adulterations. It seems to be a habit of some firms. I do not want to mention any names invidiously in this connection, but there was one firm especially, from which every single invoice that we inspected at first was found to be mixed. Mr. Scott. What did you do in a case of that kind ? Mr. Wiley. Under the instruction of the Secretary the practice was when a misbranded article was found which was not injurious to health to admit it, provided they would change the labels under the control of the Treasury Department, and in such way that they could not be taken off — that is, to have the same position on the packages that the original labels had. The Chairman. On each bottle ? Mr. Wiley. Yes. Mr. Scott. How would you brand oil which was mixed in that way? Mr. Wiley. If it was mixed with cotton-seed oil, we made the label say so; if it was mixed with peanut oil, we made the label say so, and if it was pure peanut oil or cotton-seed oil it would have to be so marked. The Chairman. How did they take to that? Mr. Wiley. They took to it all right, but the people did not take to it afterwards. The people would not buy them. The Chairman. I did not suppose so. Mr. Wiley. Only yesterday an attache" of the Italian embassy came down to ask if we would not permit those people to take those new labels off, because, he said, they could not sell those oils with those labels. Mr. Burleson. As a matter of fact cotton-seed oil is as wholesome as olive oil, is it not? Mr. Wiley. As a matter of fact it is, in my opinion. Mr. Burleson. It is quite as palatable, too, is it not ? Mr. Wiley. I think so; but that is a matter of taste. I am a great believer in cotton-seed oil. Mr. Burleson. So am I. Mr. Scott. Do you know whether they try to sell those oils at the price of olive oil or at a cheaper price? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 235 Mr. Wiley. They sold them at the high prices of the pure olive oil, but not of the highest grades. That bears out the contention that our California friends have made all along, that they can not afford to make pure olive oil and compete with these oils which we get from abroad; but they say if we will secure the importation of olive oil as olive oil only, and not allow the importation of these other cheaper oils as olive oils, that then they will be able to compete. The Chairman. Is the test for discovering cotton-seed oil or peanut oil an expensive test? Mr. Wiley. Not very expensive. The Chairman. Do you have to make a regular analysis ? Mr. Wiley. Yes, sir; we have our work so organized that when a sample comes in in the morning, say, from New York, we will have that sample, as a rule, ready to report on by 2 o'clock that afternoon, so that we can send word to the Treasury that night whether to release that sample or hold it, because the sample that is to be released we want to have released as soon as possible; and all those that show by the preliminary tests that they are to be released we are able to report favorably on by 2 o'clock and let them be released; and then, if we find a sample that is suspicious — that is, if we find anything wrong with it — we go ahead and make a complete analysis of it. Mr. Scott. Do you investigate as to domestic oils? Mr. Wiley. No; we do not do that under the law. Mr. Burleson. Suppose there is peanut oil or cotton-seed oil pro- duced in California and sold as olive oil; there is no Federal law that would control that adulteration ? Mr. Wiley. No, sir; not if sold in the State. The Chairman. When you examined specimens of oils and found they were not adulterated and said so; and the invoices were released, did you find any disposition on the part of the importers to advertise that fact? Mr. Wiley. They would have done so if we permitted it. The Chairman. How did you stop it ? Mr. Wiley. We did not inform them about our examination; we simply released their goods. The Chairman. If they wanted to advertise the fact that their goods were Government proof they could do so I Mr. Wiley. They could advertise that particular cargo as Govern- ment proof, but that would not apply to any other cargo. Mr. Scott. After these oils have passed your inspection do you have any assurance that they will not be adulterated before they are put on sale ? Mr. Wiley. The only supervision, then, is the supervision of the State itself. After we pass them our jurisdiction ceases. But this very case, where the attache came to ask our permission to take those labels off, shows that they had not been taken off, and they promised that they shall not be taken off. They are put on under the super- vision of the Treasury ; an official stands by and sees it done. Mr. Burleson. Have you any knowledge of the fact whether domes- tic oils are sold under the correct label? Mr. Wiley. We have bought a good many California oils, and we have found a few adulterated. Mr. Burleson. And some sold under French labels ? Mr. Wiley. No; I think not. They are sold under California labels. 236 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. We could not tell by the analysis whether an oil is a California oil or. an Italian oil. Our own people have been practicing some of these same tricks in regard to selling the cheaper oils for olive oil, but to a very limited extent. Mr. Haugen. These firms that are held up continue to make those inferior goods? Mr. Wiley. No; that is the point. When we find a cargo that is wrong we give the man time to introduce evidence; we condemn no man without a hearing. We inform him officially that his cargo has been inspected and found to contain so and so contrary to the law, and we give him reasonable time to introduce evidence, cither in person or by attorney or by letter, and we say to him, if you do not answer by such and such a date the case will be decided without taking any further evidence; and if we do not hear from him we decide it without any further hearing, or' going into the matter further. The Chairman. Then you insist on the goods being returned to Europe? Mr. Wiley. Yes; to Europe or somewhere else. Our instructions require them to be shipped beyond the jurisdiction of the United States; we do not say where they shall go. Mr. Scott. Have you ever had a case where the man presented his evidence and secured a different verdict from the one you have rendered ? Mr. Wiley. We have had a great many cases where men have pre- sented evidence and a few in which they have secured different ver- dicts or modifications. The evidence is usually this: "Our firm has been established for 150 years and has never before been charged with selling an adulterated article." We do not accept that evidence against our own analysis. Then when we insist upon our position and finally convince them that our analysis of their goods is correct they write that they have found that our analysis is correct and that their own chemist has found it so, but that it was adulterated accidentally. The Chairman. I dare say that a lot of them do not really know that their goods are adulterated, for they must get them in different ways. Mr. Wiley. Yes; they buy them in different lots. The second time an offense occurs we require the return of the goods, and we do not permit a man to import twice under the concession which has been made. The result is that this one firm which we speak of, in which every one of the invoices was found to be wrong, has in the last month sent the genuine articles. Every one of the invoices from that firm during that time has been found to be all right. The Chairman. How many ports have you applied this work to? Mr. Wiley. The following: Mostly New York, of course, because perhaps 85 per cent of all the imports are made at the port of New York; Boston, Philadelphia, Charleston, New Orleans, San Francisco, Chicago, Cleveland, Minneapolis,, St. Louis, and Denver. The Chairman. The bulk of the oil comes in through New Orleans, does it not? Mr. Wiley. A great deal of olive oil comes to New Orleans, and a large quantity of the wines imported, but most of them come in at New York. Even when they go to those other ports eventually they often pass through New York, Philadelphia, or Boston in the first instance, and then are consigned under bond to those other ports. Now, while on this subject— because it seems to me this is the most HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 237 important one before this committee to-day, because this is one we are asking additional money for — another thing which we have examined very carefully is wine. That is another class of imports in which adulteration is very largely practiced. There are two kinds of adultera- tion of wine. One we have not touched at all and the other is the chemical adulteration. That is, the addition of preservatives, etc. Now, the old Latins were accustomed to hang up before every wine house a green bush to show that there was wine for sale. Hence the origin of the term, "A good wine needs no bush," because when you find where good wine is sold people go there anyway. So the advertising of the purity of a wine is a stock in trade which should be safe-guarded by the persons who are entitled to use it, and a good wine does not only need no bush but it needs no preservative. So we are perfectly confident by actual experience that the preserv- atives are added to the wines which are so poor in quality that they will not bear transportation without such preservatives. Hence the presence of a preservative in wine, aside from the fact that it is injuri- ous to health in itself, is an indication that the wine itself is of inferior quality. Therefore, especially in countries where the laws forbid it — that is France and Germany, and those are the great wine coun- tries — preservatives are not used, and we do not allow any wines to come into this country that have a preservative in them, except in one case. There is one case where we do allow a preservative to be used in wines, and that is the case of white wines, where the universal treatment has been for years to burn sulphur in the cask before the wines are put in. That is the universal practice in the case of certain white wines of the Sauterne type and others, not only in Italy but in France and in Spain, and also in California. We have determined by analysis just how much sulphurous acid is introduced in the wine by that process, and then we have fixed a standard, under authority of Congress that allows the Secretary of Agriculture to do so, above the maximum which we have found, so that we certainly include all genuine cases of wines that are made in this way. We admit that much sulphurous acid as a cor- rect trade practice. Mr. Adams. Do you find preservatives in any beer imported into this country from Germany ? Mr. Wiley. We have not taken up that subject at all. The Chairman. I will say, Mr. Adams, that this law has been operative only since the 1st day of July, only six months. Mr. Wiley. We find only 6 or 7 milligrams — to use an expres- sion we are familiar with, and which is allowed by act of Congress now, of sulphurous acid or dioxide — the fumes of burning sulphur; that is what it is — in 100 cubic centimeters. That is about an ordinary glass of wine, such a drink as would ordinarily be taken by a man, in a small wine glass; that is the maximum found when wines are treated this way. But we have fixed our standard, following the Swiss and Austrian and German standards, at 20 milligrams, which allows a wide latitude. Now, if white wines come in with more than 20 milli- grams to 100 cc. we exclude them, because it is evident that the sulphur has been put in there in a different way from the legitimate treatment — put in there for the purpose of preserving a poor stuff. We have found 60 or 70 or 80 milligrams in 100 cc. ; that is we have found the wine almost saturated with the sulphurous dioxide; you can smell and taste sulphur in it, and it is unfit for use. 238 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. Where does that go in the trade ? Mr. Wiley. Almost anywhere. You buy that kind of wine almost anywhere — in Washington or elsewhere. The Chairman. In the cheaper places? Mr. Wiley. Almost every place; in the best places. If you order a bottle of sauterne wine in almost any restaurant, as a rule you can smell the sulphur in it. They have sent those wines over here because they will not use them in other countries. That is causing fric- tion because it strikes a good many importations of France and Ger- many and Italy. But now they are having their wines analyzed before they send them over here, and we are getting certificates along with the invoice saying that the wines have been inspected and do not con- tain more than so much sulphur. The Chairman. A government inspection ? Mr. Wiley. Usually some municipal or government analyst. The Chairman. Do you accept that certificate? Mr. Wiley. No; we do not accept it as final, but we take it .as prima facie evidence. The Chairman. Do not we ask them to accept our certificates ? Mr. Wiley. I think not; they are simply prima facie evidence over there. The Chairman. I think they accept them; that the certificates as to our beef and pork, and so on, are accepted over there. Mr. Wiley. They may do so; I do not know. If we have an invoice of fifty wines and we find ten of those wines with government certificates, as a matter of fact we will not inspect those. We have a right to inspect them but we pass those as a rule, although we might inspect them once or twice to be sure that they are all right. We take those wines that come without certificates, and try those. All wines that contain salicylic acid we exclude anyway, because all the governments where the wines are made exclude those wines them- selves. Mr. Scott. What are the wines that are most commonly adulterated with that? Mr. Wiley. There are a very few of those coming in here now. The red wines are the ones that usually contain salicylic acid. Mr. Scott. I see Colorado wines advertised at a dollar a gallon. Mr. Wiley. I wish our California iriends could get half that for theirs; they could make a good big profit. Mr. Haugen. Are sparkling wines generally adulterated? Mr. Wiley. We have not examined them yet; we have not gone into them at all. Mr. Lamb. What is California wine worth ? Mr. Wiley. You mean red wines ? Mr. Lamb. Yes. Mr. Wiley. Common red wines there command now from 20 to 40 cents a gallon. They were much lower than that a few years ago. The Chairman. What is the adulteration of champaign? Mr. Wiley. We have not undertaken that inspection, but I think there is very little adulteration in sparkling wines. They are the poorest wines made; they have no chance to ripen at all, they are fer- mented in the bottle, and the higher alcohols have no chance to oxidize. On the score of health they are the poorest wines made, by far; they HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 239 have nothing to commend them like good red wines that have remained in the cask and the bottle for some time. Another thing which we have examined particularly is manufactured meat or meats that are so chopped up that we can not distinguish their origin. For instance, pat^ de foie gras, which perhaps may be inno- cent of a single goose liver and made of some other kind of liver. I see but one. way in which that evil can be remedied, aside from having an inspector at the place where they are made — as is done by many reputable firms in England now in order to get their own goods — and that is to require the old-fashioned method of boxing and tinning this meat, requiring that the livers shall be in pieces large enough to iden- tify. These packages of goose livers sell for high prices; they are very expensive. If finely ground, of course we can not tell them from other livers. It requires either a microscopic or chemical exam- ination to determine it. The Chairman. A few years ago a representative of one of the packing houses in Chicago appeared before this committee, and he stated that hogs' livers were exported abroad and sent back to us in the form of pate de foie gras; that a certain portion of the goose's liver was mixed with the hog's liver, and sent back as pate de foie gras. Could you discover that fraud? Mr. Wiley. We could if the fragments were sufficiently large for the examination. The Chairman. You know pate de foie gras is usually in the form of paste? Mr. Wiley. Yes, usually; but formerly it was not so; the livers were only cut into small pieces. Then there are sausages; that is another instance where we have found a lot of adulterations. In the first place, we can not inspect the carcass. The Chairman. You refer to bologna sausage? Mr. Wiley. To any kind of sausage. The Chairman. Do we import sausages ? Mr. Wiley. Not fresh sausages, but preserved sausages. The Chairman. Smoked ? Mr. Wiley. Yes; and imported in brine, great quantities of sau- sages. We can not, of course, inspect the carcass from which they come, and to try to inspect the thing itself after it has been mixed in this way is practically impossible, because you would have to inspect every part. For instance, you do not know where the trichina is likely to be found, but you would in a fresh carcass. So we have to rely on the certificates furnished with these invoices that they have been prop- erly inspected, and we insist on that and accept that because we can not gainsay it. But sometimes they contain preservatives which we believe to be injurious, and so we have excluded a great many cargoes of sau- sages, and they are now trying to find a haven of rest somewhere, because at least one of the countries will not allow them to reenter. It is against their laws that any of these cargoes should be reentered, and hence, like the Flying Dutchman, they are somewhere on the ocean seeking a place of rest. This curious thing happened. If a cargo of sausages comes from Germany preserved, say, with an injurious pre- servative, contrary to the German law, and as we believe injurious to health Mr. Burleson. Boracic acid ? Mr. Wiley. Yes, or salicylic acid; and is excluded on that ground 240 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. we require its reshipment, and they can not take it back, because the law prevents its reentrjr. No mince meat can be reentered in Ger^ many cut up into pieces less than 8 pounds in weight; none less than that can enter the ports under any circumstances, on the ground that they can not inspect it. I do not question their law; I think it is all right. But the fact appears that these sausages they send us can not go back to where they were made under any pretext whatever. The Chairman. One example of that would settle that business, would it not? Mr. Wiley. Yes, it probably will. Mr. Adams. You do not refuse all those? Mr. Wiley. No; we admit a great many. Mr. Adams. Are they preserved with salicylic acid? Mr. Wiley. Not always; usually with boracic acid and nitrate of potash, and, by the way, a new preservative has sprung up they call " viandol." The first shipment of viandol we refused, because we did not know what it was, and we were justified in believing that it might be injurious to health. We required them to state what its chemical composition is, and we find it is the acetate of alumina, which is about as bad a form of alumina as you can get into the human system. We excluded it because we decided it to be injurious to health. Mr. Scott. We do not export sausages to Germany, then ? Mr. Wiley. No; it is contrary to the German law. Mr. Scott. Or to any other country ? Mr. Wiley. Very little, I think. Mr. Scott. Not to amount to anything? Mr. Wiley. No; I believe not. Mr. Rodey. We can not send canned meats to Germany? Mr. Wiley. Nothing that is less than 8 pounds in size — & kilo- grams. Just one other item, and I shall not take up any more time of the committee on this, although I want you to understand what we are doing and why we want the money we have asked for next year. The canned vegetables and fruits we get we find largely adulterated; we get a great deal of that kind of food from Europe. We find that the use of glucose is quite common in those fruits, and artificial colors are used almost universally. As far as glucose is concerned, we do not intend to raise the question that it is injurious to health, provided it is made in accordance with the provisions imposed in the country where it is manufactured. But when it is not manufactured in the right way there is likely to be some such result as happened in England several years ago where they poisoned 8,000 people, 600 of whom died and a great many were injured permanently for life, by reason of the arse- nic which the glucose contained. This glucose being used in the manu- facture of food products, I should insist rigidly always on the exami- nation of these articles for arsenic before they were allowed to come into the country. But unless they are named on the label they are misbranded and could not come in under the law. Then, as I have said, they are almost universally artificially colored. The use of artificial colors is a matter of taste, and we reserve our decision in regard to injury to health in all these cases for future consideration, but unless the label specifies that they are artificially colored, and says what they are colored by, we exclude them on the ground that they are mislabeled; because the law says " in any respect HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OJST AGRICULTURE. 241 as regards the contents of the package," and that covers that point, I think, without question. At least no one has seen fit to apply to the courts to require the issuance of a mandamus compelling the Secretary of Agriculture to permit the entry of these goods; they take them away without any such proceedings in every instance. Mr. Scott. When you get a cargo of these vegetables do you make any effort to inspect every package ? Mr. Wiley. No, sir. Under the rule laid down they take packages at random. We have nothing to do with taking the samples at all ; that is done by the Treasury Department while under their control, and then these are labeled by the Secretary of the Treasury under forms which we furnish, giving necessary information on each one, and then they are sent to us by express. Those are the principal things. Now, Mr. Chairman, what we want is this. We want money enough to put some chemists and a laboratory at these various ports; the Sec- retary of the Treasury has very kindly said that he would give us the laboratory rooms and everything he could free of charge, because every port has its laboratory for the appraisers' use. I have consulted with Assistant Secretary Armstrong in regard to the laboratory in New York, and the room has been selected; we have everything ready except the means to move these laboratories. The Chairman. How would you do in the other ports ? Mr. Wiley. We have already appointed a chemist at San Francisco, because it is impracticable for us to send things back and forth across the continent. We want to establish The Chairman. How about New Orleans ? Mr. Wiley. We want to establish a laboratory in New York first, with force enough to handle the bulk of the work, because there is where nearly all of it comes, and in order to release everything promptly that has to be released, and send to us at Washington all the samples that are to be held, and we want one man at least at Bos- ton and one at Philadelphia and about four or five in New York. The Chairman. Right there, Professor, has the United States labora- tories at all those places now? Mr. Wiley. Yes, it has; it has one in every port. I have charge of those laboratories to a certain extent under a commission of the Secretary of the Interior. The Chairman. Why could not they do these preliminary Mr. Wiley. They are worked full on Treasury business even to the extra half hour, Mr. Chairman, in the classification of goods for duties. All the goods that come into this country which are judged by chemical composition are examined by the chemists before the duties are assessed. They can not classify them without doing that. Mr. Rodey. You could do both things at once if you had the laboratory ? Mr. Wiley. We do not have anything to do with the classification for dutiable purposes; we simply have to do with an examination or analysis with the subject of adulteration in mind; that is in an entirely different line. And then in the California laboratory we want a man all the time. We have one man part of the time there now. And we want enough money to take up this other part of the work, to secure immunity from false labeling where the constitution of the matter is not at stake. That is most important, and the only way we can do that o A 16 242 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. is to have an agent, say at Bordeaux, a man well skilled and one who would be a man to whom we would have to pay a good salary, but it is just as important to us, and more so, to have such a man as it is to have the special agents of the Treasury that are over there. We want one at Mayence, in Germany, and may be at Hamburg, which is one of the great ports, and probably one in Italy. I do not think it would be necessary to have one in Spain, because our imports from there are not sufficiently great. But it is important, if we are going to enforce this law and protect our people against misbranding, that this should be done. Now, you may not know that the Secretary, at my suggestion, three years ago sent a special agent for this very purpose over to Europe to see if it were necessary that such an inspection should be made, and he went to France, and the testimony which we collected is something surprising. The Secretary, very wisely, 1 think, never published this, because it was confidential; but it is the universal practice, as it was learned from this agent, to misbrand and mislabel, and I have brought with me some illustrations of it. You take the wines of these coun- tries — of the Rhine and the Moselle and the Gironde, the great wine-producing region of the world. In France there are about 38 vineyards that have the right under the Government to bear a special name. They are called classed vineyards or classed wines, and have the right to bear certain names. Every wine almost that we get in this country bears one of those names. The same is true of the Rhine and of the Moselle. There are certain vineyards which, under the authority of the Government, have a right to bear particular names. As I have said, nearly all the wines we get bear those names. We know very well that most of the wines are not entitled to bear those names, do not come from those vineyards; but we can not prove it. If we undertook to say that these were violations of the law, we would have to have evidence; we would have to prove it. The Chairman. How are you going to get the proof by your agent? Mr. Wiley. We would put an agent there who is an expert, and every invoice that came over here would have to bear his vise\ They would make what you might call a studbook. When you import a fine stallion or bull, you require that he shall bring his pedigree with him, or he will not be admitted free of duty for breeding purposes. The Chairman. That is their Government certificate. Mr. Wiley. So it is The Chairman. Not an agent of our Government. It is their own Government that gives us that certificate, and we abide by it. Mr. Wiley. They have their regular herdbooks, as we have, of course. What we want is this certificate, and we want a competent expert who will be able to pass upon that and say whether these warrants are what they pretend to be. The Chairman. How is your agent going to get that information? Mr. Wiley. That is the simplest thing in the world. In the first place, these vineyards are well known. They make a vintage every year; they have a sale at auction, and they sell nearly all the wine at the end of the vintage, or the next vintage, perhaps, because they keep it a year or two; but they sell their vintages at auction. These are bought by great houses at Bordeaux and other places, and so it is known where all that wine goes. A tun of wine goes to a certain place, and that is known. There is where the trouble begins. The HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 243 way they do that is this: They take a tun of wine and they draw off all of it, except maybe 10 gallons. Then they fill it up with a cheaper wine, although a similar one, and they draw that off and call that the original wine. That is what they call stretching. Sometimes they stretch a second time, until, finally, they may adulterate the wine so that almost none of the original wine is there. They make no bones about selling that as the original wine, under the name of the original wine, when not even a fraction of the original wine is present. Mr. Burleson. Have you any idea how the people on the British Isles are protected against these misnomers, this false labeling of goods ? Mr. Wiley. Yes; I have quite a good idea, because I have investi- gated that on two or three different occasions. I have had the good fortune to study these things in Europe for several years. I have done that at my own expense, because it was the only way I could do it, and 1 did not like to ask the Secretary of Agriculture to pay my bills. I have been over there and studied this problem in all those countries, and especially in England, for the past two years. I have been over there in consultation with the great merchants, who have their own agents at all these places, just as I hope we may be able to have one from our country. They have a merchandise mark act in England which makes it a penal offense to put a false brand on any article of merchandise. But at the same time no one is specially charged with seeing that the law is enforced. The great houses, how- ever, take it up and see that it is enforced; there are no Government officers charged with the enforcement of the act. There are some of the great firms, especially the army and navy stores, which have a great reputation to hold up, and their trade all over the world is due to the fact that they use every precaution to guarantee to the pur- chaser that he gets exactly what he purchases when he buys from them. They trace every one of these wines The Chairman. How can they do that? Mr. Wiley. It is the simplest thing in the world. The Chairman. It sticks me how an agent could follow these different shipments, and keep track of them, and advise this Government? Mr. Wilet. Of course the people there would aid him in every possible way. The Chairman. Do you think they would? Mr. Wiley. Every man that sells the genuine wine wants this done; but he can only certify as to his own wines; he can not prevent another man from misbranding. The Chairman. I think if a man would come over here from France or Germany and go around to our merchants trying to find out about their business and prying on their methods, you might say that he would not receive a very warm welcome. Mr. Wiley. This is what is done. The merchant who trades in these articles certifies every wine direct from the vintage to the pur- chaser. Mr. Rodey. Does it not sometimes occur that they put just as good wine in those casks as the genuine wine, that they simply want the reputation of the name? Mr. Wiley. No; that is not so, because these wines are of especially fine character; but they are similar wines which they put in. 244 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Rodey. Would it increase the sale of those government pro- tected wines; and if so, would that be any benefit to our people? Mr. Wiley. It would result this way: We would not be compelled to pay the prices of fine wine and get poor wine. The Chairman. Do not the poor wines go into certain lines of trade, to certain grocers, and the better wines go to a better class of trade? Mr. Wiley. You will be surprised to find how few of those best wines are to be had. The Chairman. For instance, there are some stores that would only sell the best wines if they guaranteed them as such. There are Park & Tilford in New York; they would not sell a customer a wine under a false brand, just as your army and navy stores in London would not do it. Mr. Wiley. I do not know about that; but I do know this: Every one is sent out branded with one of those names— Pontet Canet, Chateau Lafitte or Chateau Yquem, or some other such brand — and I know we sent our own man to a large importing firm in New York and he asked for a dozen cases of red wine. He tried some of the casks around there and finally found one he liked, and said, "That suits me and 1 think that will suit my customers." So he ordered some of that. "Now," he said, "some of my customers want some- thing like this and some want something different." The man from whom he was purchasing replied, "Here are these thirty-eight kinds of labels; help yourself." So he chose the labels and took them away with him. That wine did not come, perhaps, from within a hundred miles of the vineyard it was represented to come from. Mr. Scott. Reverting to the question asked by. the chairman a moment ago, can not you tell the committee just what you would do if you were sent over there as the agent of this Government to trace up these wines? Mr. Wiley. I could not do much, because I am not an expert in that kind of work. Mr. Scott. Assuming you are an expert? Mr. Wiley. I would not do anything in secret. I would simply go openly to the merchants and say: "If you want to send these wines to the United States, you must certify before the consul, and to my satisfaction, that they have come straight from the vineyards they are represented to come from, and you can not send them under wrong names." Mr. Scott. Do you think that certificate would be worth anything? Mr. Wiley. I think so. Mr. Scott. Would not a man who would adulterate a wine and brand it falsely, and sell it for something that it was not, make a false certificate as to what wine it really was ? Mr. Wiley. What I want is evidence which will enable me to exclude a wine that comes in here with a false name upon it. If we could have evidence under the present law we could exclude these wines; what we lack is the proof. Mr. Burleson. You could exclude them on the ground of false labeling. Mr. Wiley. That is it, on the ground of false labeling; we do not need any legislation; we have that. The Chairman. Suppose they would come with a government cer- tificate that they were correct. You would have to accept that. Your HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTUBE. 245 analysis would not show whether it came from one vineyard or another vineyard. Mr. Wiley. No; of course the government certificate would be of great benefit in such a case. The Chairman. I think I can state with truth that they do take our certificates over there in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred. Mr. Wiley. Perhaps they do take them. The Chairman. In other words, one government could not afford to refuse to take the certificate of the other government or question its veracity; that would raise a row right off. Now and then they might investigate that certificate and see if it is correct, by chemical analysis or otherwise; I do not say they might not do that. Mr. Wiley. You know, Mr. Chairman, that under the law as it stands now the Secretary of Agriculture is furnishing certificates for export food products to foreign countries, and so far as I know they have not been refused. The Chairman. I know that is so; they test those products on the sly, as it were, sometimes, but they accept them. Mr. Haugen. Do foreign governments send chemists here to ana- lyze and inspect our products? Mr. Wiley. The Italian Government has a chemist in New York, Mr. Rosatti, who looks out for the interest of his people in this coun- try. He does not do that secretly; he is there in his office, and has been in my laboratory. He is a skilled chemist, and in fact he helped me in the examination of some of these Italian oils that he thought ought to be all right. Mr. Haugen. Practically, that is what you propose to do over there ? Mr. Wiley. Yes. Mr. Scott. What amount do you ask for for this agent? Mr. Wiley. For the whole expense next year, $50,000 is the sum we have asked. Mr. Scott. About what proportion of that amount will go to that man you propose to send over to Europe? Mr. Wiley. I should say that we could not get men of value for less than $3,000 apiece, and we ought to have three of those men The Chairman. You have asked for $78,000 Mr. Wiley. $50,000 is for that special purpose. Mr. Scott. About how many of those agents at approximately $3,000 would you expect to send over there? Mr. Wiley. About three. Mr. Scott. That would involve an expenditure of about $10,000, and what this committee wants to know, I think, is what assurance you can give us that we will get any practical results from the expendi- ture. We would like to know how you are going to accomplish what you wish to accomplish. I do not see how thesemen are going to get at this thing in a practical way. Mr. Wiley. I will tell you what put this idea in my head. It was my consultation last summer with Mr. Pheysey, who has charge of the wine department of the army and navy stores. I went into his store without announcement. He is an old friend of mine, and I knew him well. I said to him, "I came in to pay my respects, but I 246 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. am also here for information. I want to know how you secure the purity of the labels on the wines that you sell in this store." Mr. Burleson. That was in London ? Mr. Wiley. That was in London. Mr. Burleson. That is the point I wanted to know a while ago. Mr. Wiley. "It is very curious," he said, "because I have such a case on the hooks. A while ago we were offered a big invoice of wines under the name of a first-class quality and we thought it was impossi- ble that they should be sold in such quantity. We did not believe so much existed and we sent our expert to Bordeaux to investigate it, and he found out, as we suspected, that those wines were stretched, and our agent obtained that proof and so we have refused them." Mr. Scott. He did not tell you how he got that proof? Mr. Wiley. By the agent he sent who was skilled in that kind of work. Mr. Rodey. Suppose he succeeded in securing a market for those particular Government vineyards over here, and then the other wines were sold afterwards in the country for a cheaper price, those cheaper wines would take their place, would they not? Mr. Wiley. The result I have in view is to prevent the cheaper wines being sold at the higher rates. Mr. Rodey. Why would not the effect of this be to raise the price of the government vineyard wines ? Mr. Wiley. I was about to explain that. The Chairman. Please go ahead with your story about the army and navy stores. How did he find out, or how did his agent find out that those were not the wines that they purported to be ? Mr. Wiley. I could not tell you. He simply told me he sent his agent to investigate that and his agent got the proof. I have referred to a man that we sent over to Europe. He was a Frenchman and he knew the trade well. He went right to the people and asked them what he wanted to know. He said "I am a special agent of the Department of Agriculture; there is nothing secret about this, and I wish you would tell me what you do." He went to one place and he found that they had taken down the wall of an old wine house because the casks of Spanish wine that they brought there were too large to go in the door. He went in there and found them mixing Spanish wine and selling it for three or four times as high a price as it was worth. The Chairman. We are mixing California champagne with eastern champagne and selling it as eastern champagne. Referring to Mr. Scott s question, 1 wish you would tell us how this man can trace those goods, and how he is going to let you know just what goods they are that you must look after. They are on the steamer in different packages and fastened in different kinds of boxes in different ways, and I do not see exactly how you are going to get at them — how he is going to let you know that there is a parcel of goods on such a steamer misbranded. How is he going to get the information that they are misbranded when they are boxed up in the way they will be? Mr. Wiley. He must have knowledge of the dealers in the genuine articles. He knows who they are and where these wines that are entitled to be branded as these special classed wines go; and I want to say here that these high-classed wines do not go out into the general trade to any extent. They go largely into private cellars for indi- HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 247 viduals almost exclusively, and only a few go out generally into the trade. Mi\ Soott. Is it necessary to spend $10,000 to find out who is handling these high-grade wines ? Mr. Wiley. If we want to exclude those that are misbranded we have to have evidence on which to base our exclusion. Suppose I take a wine that I am absolutely certain is falsely branded and endeavor to have it excluded. They may have a mandamus issued compelling us to show proof, and we have to have the evidence to exclude it. The Chairman. Is not wine largely a matter of taste ? As long as there is no substance in it injurious to health do you not think that we have gone far enough in simply seeing that it is free from sub- stances deleterious to health? Mr. Wiley. Certainly; but the object of all these food acts is much more than simply to guarantee wholesome products. The Chairman. A man who likes a certain kind of wine may be willing to give a good price for that wine, and yet it may be really a cheap wine, and to a connoisseur it may not be worth the money this man pays for it; but still the man may be glad to buy it at that price. Mr. Wiley. And the same way with the man who likes oleomar- garine. It is a good wholesqme food, and why should you prevent a man selling it for butter? The Chairman. That. is a forbidden subject. Mr. Wiley. Excuse me, I withdraw my offensive remark; but it is a good illustration. Mr. Wright. If you had your agent there and he stamped the packages of those wines that were what they purported to be would not the merchants in this country insist upon having wine with this agent's stamp upon it? Mr. Wiley. I think they would, in order to protect themselves. Mr. Adams. And would not the producers of the genuine wines entitled to these names be glad to have the stamp on it? Mr. Wiley. I think they would. Mr. Adams. I would like to ask one other question. Do you recall the value of the importations of the classed wines of which you have been speaking? Mr. Wiley. Several million dollars in this country every year; but I do not recall the exact amount. Mr. Burleson. As a matter of fact, if these wines are not injurious to health what is the purpose of excluding them? Mr. Wiley. Because it is a fraud to bring them in, as is done, under names they are not entitled to bear. Mr. Burleson. But they are not injurious to health. Mr. Wiley. Perhaps not Mr. Lever. Your proposition is not to exclude these inferior wines, but simply to relieve the people from paying these high prices for them? Mr. Wiley. Yes. The Chairman. What might be considered an inferior wine by you would be a wine that would be considered superior by another gen- tleman. Is it not largely a matter of taste? Mr. Scott. But what the doctor is getting at now is that part of the law that requires all products to be correctly labeled. 248 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Wiley. What I am after is to secure means to execute this law. I am not after a new law. Mr. Henry. We have recently passed a law affecting the maple sirup made in Vermont and elsewhere. Mr. Scott. This is not designed to keep out these cheaper wines because they may not be of good quality, but because they may not be properly branded — may not be truly branded. Mr. Wiley. We want the opportunity to protect our people some way against false brands, and that is one of the ways I have suggested. It may not be the best way, but a part of the money I asked for I had intended for that purpose. The Chairman. I may be stupid about it, but I can not see how your agent can get at this information. That is what I would like to understand. Mr. Wiley. We did not know how to get at executing this law we have until we passed the law, and then we worked it out. The Chairman. But you did that on your own shores? Mr. Wiley. Yes. The Chairman. You have your own agents in this country to inspect, and they have the right to go ahead and do whatever is necessary, even so far as breaking bottles, if that is necessary; but over there I doubt whether your men would have any right to go ahead in that way. Mr. Wiley. They would not have to do that. The Chairman. How could your man tell whether it was misbranded just by looking at the bottle? Mr. Wiley. He could not. If that could be done of course it would not be necessary to send him over there, he could look at it in this country; but the only way to tell whether those wines are misbranded is by having men over there and having them find out where these labels are put on, and tracing those classed wines and seeing where they go. The Chairman. How many thousand vineyards is this wine coming from? Mr. Wiley. This classed wine comes from only about 38 vineyards in France. There are such vineyards in Germany also. Mr. Rodey. Your man might attend that big auction you spoke of and see what houses bought the wine ? Mr. Wiley. And then follow it up; yes. Mr. Henry. I suppose your man might find out that a big wine vendor was receiving Spanish wine in large quantities and selling wine with a French brand on it and you would come to the conclusion that he was doing a fraudulent business ? Mr. Wiley. Yes, certainly; but I can not know that by simply looking at the brand. We can not prove it without some evidence, which must be obtained over there. Mr. Lever. It seems to me you might trace these wines from the vineyards to the wine houses. Mr. Wiley. Yes; we could do that. I have no doubt that most of those wines go direct to the consumer. What we want to get at is to find out where these immense quantities of inferior wine are put up and branded as classed wines. Mr. Rodey. In our country they have large wool sales, and at those sales it is always known where each big ranchman's clip goes, and I suppose it is the same way in regard to the sale of these classed wines. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 249 The Chairman. I have been thinking about how such an inspection as you propose would apply to our own country. We export a tre- mendous amount of stuff. Suppose a foreign government should send a representative over to this country, in a way spying upon us; I do not believe the American manufacturers would tolerate it. Are they doing that kind of thing over here? Mr. Wiley. Yes; they have their commercial agents everywhere. I spoke about the Italian agent who is over here. But 1 do not know of any food products that we send out mislabeled to-day; I do not believe we send out mislabeled products. The Chairman. There probably are some. Mr. Wiley. Yes; of course there is a lot of stuff sent out every- where. The Chairman. There is a lot of stuff sent to the West Indies labeled "butter" which is not butter. Mr. Wiley. Of course that can be told without an inspector com- ing over here; butter can be told from oleomargarine by examination. Excuse me for mentioning that subject. I have told the committee frankly what I want a part of this money for. I want the other money for the enlarged work I have spoken of. The Chairman. 1 doubt if you could do that for $50,000, or even $500,000. Mr. Wiley. I wish I had that report which our special agent made to the Secretary of Agriculture which I have referred to and which is confidential. Mr. Brooks. Referring to that man you sent over there, if he was appointed an agent of the Government, and was known as an official investigator sent by this Government, would he not be unable to get the data which he did get, going as he did in his private capacity ? You said he found out about the different wines, that he got that infor- mation by asking for it. If he were known as the special agent of the United States, sent there to bring about certain results with reference to the blending of Spanish and French wines, would he not then meet with obstacles in his investigations ? Mr. Wiley. Of course the people who are putting those false brands on wines would try to circumvent him. Mr. Lever. But he would have the help of all the honest men ? Mr. Wiley. Yes. These houses that are entitled to brand their wine with these names would be able to tell him where the adultera- tions take place and would be glad to help him. Mr. Burleson. But would they be very much interested in it, because, as you have said, they sell their entire output to private consumers Mr. Wiley. Yes, I believe they would be interested in it, because I believe every man who has an established reputation is interested in preventing others from imposing upon the consumers by selling inferior wines under these established names. The Chairman. Those dealers have their remedy at law. They would have their remedy in this country, and in every country I take it they would have that same remedy. If I label my goods with your label you can recover from me for using your trade-mark. Mr. Wiley. Yes; that is true. Mr. Wright. If this law had the cooperation of the honest manu- facturers over there, and your agent was allowed to put his stamp upon 250 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. their wine, that would be sufficient notice that all others were imita- tions, would it not? Mr. Wiley. Yes ; I think it would. If they did not bear that stamp that would be an indication that they had no right to those labels. Mr. Wright. It seems to me that would be simple. Mr. Wiley. Yes; we would not have to go any further than that. Mr. Henry. You say you have not taken up the matter of beer inspection ? Mr. Wiley. No; we have not. Mr. Henry. Is that because you have not had time ? Mr. Wiley. We have not had time or the necessary force to do that. Mr. Henry. Is it necessary to take up the time to do that; do you think it is necessary to inspect beer that is brought in here? Mr. Wiley. Yes; undoubtedly so. Mr. Henry. You propose to do that when you can? Mr. Wiley. Yes; we propose to do it; I think it is very necessary to inspect beer, that it is necessary to have a complete enforcement of this law in relation to all food products. That is why I have asked the amount of money I have asked for. I believe we need it, because our previous examinations have shown a great deal of adulterated beer. They were made three -or four years ago. Mr. Henry. But you have not had time to do that recently ? Mr. Wiley. We have not touched beer under this law. Mr. Scott. Do I understand you that you want this $50,000 for conducting this foreign work? Mr. Wiley. Oh, no; we will only require about $10,000 for that; the rest of this $50,000 is for the various ports and the necessary expenses connected with that. The Chairman. I thought you wanted $50,000 for these inspections over there? Mr. Wiley. No; only about $10,000. The Chairman. But the salaries of three men would come to about $10,000, and I thought you required the rest of the $50,000 to pay their expenses. Mr. Wiley. No; we would let them pay their own expenses except their traveling expenses. The Chairman. They would have to travel a good deal. Mr. Wiley. No; not very much. That section of the country is not very great in area, and most of this work would be done at Bordeaux, Mainz, and Hamburg, and in a territory not covering a great area. If those three places are looked after the rest of it is so insignificant I do not think it would amount to very much. Mr. Adams. Have you made any investigation of the canned foods imported into Germany ? Mr. Wiley. Yes. Mr. Adams. Those beautiful specimens of strawberries are colored with carmine, are they not? Mr. Wiley. Yes. The Chairman. And those French peas are colored with copper? Mr. Wiley. Yes. Mr. Adams. What else is used? Mr. Wiley. In one case we found sulphite, but glucose is the prin- cipal thing used in fruits. Mr. Adams. That is used in the most expensive brands? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 251 Mr. Wiley. Yes; and they are all colored artificially. Mr. Haugen. Is there not danger of this extensive inspection giving offense to foreign countries and leading them to retaliation ? Mr. Wiley. I wish I had.brought letters which I have from people oyer there. I have many letters praising us for our efforts in this direction, and saying that they hope we will succeed in accomplishing this, because they want to get rid of the stigma which is attached to their trade by reason of the adulterations on the part of their com- petitors. The Chairman. We have gotten rid of their objections to our exports by giving a Government certificate. Now, why not let them do the same thing in regard to their exports ? Mr. Wiley. If they will do it The Chairman. They will do it for their protection. Mr. Adams. It is undoubtedly the fact there, as it is in this country, that j T ou go into one of our States and you will find the best sentiment of the State and the sentiment of the business community is in favor of honest food products. Every country is anxious to maintain the reputation its leading houses may have throughout the markets of the world, and I do not think there would be any danger of their resenting our efforts to secure honest branding of goods, or any danger along the line suggested by the chairman. The Chairman. The danger of what? Mr. Adams. Of retaliation; of any effort to retaliate. The Chairman. I do not think so, but I think they ought to give us a certificate of their own goods, as they force us to do in regard to ours. Mr. Adams. Of course it would be well if they would do it. Mr. Lever. If they do not give that certificate then we have to protect ourselves the best way we can. Mr. Wiley. But you see we are helpless now. Mr. Graff. Doctor, could you tell us approximately the value of these adulterated food products which came in during the past six months ? Mr. Wiley. I could by going to the Treasury. Mr. Graff. You spoke, you know, of 10 per cent of the 6 per cent of the goods were found to be adulterated. Of course that looks like a small fraction of the entire imports, which is true; but that small fraction, it has been suggested, might be a very large quantity of goods, and I thought you might give us some idea of the amount of those adulterated goods, by giving us a notion of their value or amount in some way. The Chairman. You can get that at the Treasury Department. Mr. Wiley. Yes; it can be obtained there. Mr. Graff. I thought you might give us some substantial idea of it. Mr. Burleson. As I understand it, what you want with these agents over in Europe is to prevent false labeling; it is not to pre- vent adulteration ? Mr. Wiley. That is correct. Mr. Burleson. So far as adulterations are concerned, you can attend to that on this side? Mr. Wiley. Yes; if they are of a chemical character. Mr. Burleson. As a matter of fact, the only purpose of these agents, as far as the people of the United States is concerned, is to prevent 252 HEARINGS BEFOBE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. the people of the United States from paying too much for those articles. Do you think that is a proper function of government — to exercise guardianship over the people and prevent them from paying too much for a particular article i Mr. Wiley. I do not know that I could bring in political economy or my opinion in regard to that. While it will result in that, my idea is that it will promote honesty and straightforwardness in regard to trade; that it will put trade upon a high plane, so that people will know that they are getting what they are paying for. It seems to me that is one of the things that the law ought to do. Mr. Graff. In other words, the people have no way to protect themselves. Mr. Wiley. No; the people can not protect themselves; there is no way except as the whole body of the commonwealth that this protec- tion can be secured. Mr. Haugen. Then it is the Government function to protect them against deception? Mr. Wiley. Yes. Mr. Scott. As I understand it, if Congress passed the law requiring honest labeling of all food products that are imported into this country Mr. Wiley. Yes; that is the object of the law. Mr. Scott (continuing). The enforcement of that law would be put into the hands of the Secretary of Agriculture? Mr. Wiley. Yes. The Chairman. That has not been put in yet? Mr. Wiley. Yes; it is in the law now. The Chairman. You add to this bill this year, "labeling." Mr, Scott. And Doctor Wiley, in the matter he has presented here, is simply seeking to insure the correct labeling of wines, just as he is using other means to insure the correct labeling of olive oil. Mr. Wiley. Exactly. Mr. Scott. He stated he required a certain oil importer here to have the olive-oil label removed and another label put on stating the exact contents of the package. Mr. Wiley. Yes. Mr. Scott. So it is not really a question of saving money for the people or of protecting them from foreign productions in that way, in a financial way ? Mr. Wiley. I think Mr. Scott has stated that in a very succinct way that where it is possible to determine by inspection and analysis whether these importations are what they purport to be we do not ask help. It is only where it is impossible from the chemical composition to judge that we ask help. And I would not like to see the law put too much on a mercenary plan. To me it is not a matter of dollars and cents, although it can be made so; but I look at it from a different point of view. I would like to see a feeling of confidence established among our people in the character of things which they purchase, that they may be relieved of that apprehension which everybody now feels that he is being imposed upon, that he is buying certain articles of food and is not getting what he is paying for, and we can not control some of those articles now coming from foreign countries. Mr. Burleson. That constitutes a small per cent, however, of what the people of the United States consume, does it not? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 253 Mr. Wiley. You would be surprised to see the value of food froducts that are imported. I think their value is something like 135,000,000 annually. Mr. Burleson. Still that is a small percentage. Mr. "Wiley. It is something. The Chairman. Most of those are delicacies ? Mr. Wiley. They are delicacies, to be sure. Mr. Henry. In the matter of salad oils, I do not object to a refined cotton-seed oil for salad oil, but I do object to a grocer selling me cotton-seed oil put up with an Italian or French label and called olive oil. Mr. Wright. At an olive-oil price? Mr. Henry. At an olive-oil price. I object to that. I think we have a right to be protected, if possible, from such an imposition. Mr. Burleson. The same objection would obtain in regard to the sale of shoddy as pure woolen goods, and there is more money involved in that industry than in the purchase of such things as canned straw- berries. The Chairman. My point is this : If it is taken up by our State Department with foreign Governments, and if our Department asks foreign Governments, in view of the fact that they require a Govern- ment certificate from us on nearly all our exports, that they shall furnish their certificate in return on things that are sent into this country, that we may be able to accomplish something along that line. Why is not that a correct position to take? Mr. Wiley. It may be that the method I propose is not the best way at all, but it is certainly one way; and I am sure that I could get at the very gist of this matter in the way which I propose, because other people have done it successfully in this way. The Chairman. Now, is there not a good deal of strength in the point made by Mr. Brooks that your man who went over there and did it successfully did it in a secret way, and if a Government agent went over there they would say to him, ' ' This is none of your busi- ness?" I am sure if a man came into my factory and said he was the agent of the French Government and asked me a lot of questions about my business that I would say to him, " That is none of your business." Mr. Wiley. Suppose you were selling some product to France, and a man should come into your establishment and say, "I want to see how this is; I want to see how your goods are put up, and that they are just what they purport to be. The French Government requires this inspection, and unless I see that everything is all right and make a certificate to that effect you will not be able to sell your product in France." The Chairman. I would say, "No; I will take the chances;" and if the French Government refused my goods, then I would ask my Government to inspect my goods; that is what I would do. 1 would not submit my business affairs to a Frenchman who came oyer here. Mr. Wright. It seems to me that people who were selling what they purported to sell would welcome an agent's investigating the purity of their goods or the correctness of their labels, as such an inspection, with a certificate as to the correctness of their labels and so on would prevent others from using their trade-mark, would pre- vent an illegitimate dealer from selling goods on the reputation of the established firm. I think the legitimate dealers would be glad to give 254 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. all evidence possible in order to keep out their dishonest competitors; that would help the sale of their high-grade wines, it seems to me. Mr. Wiley. I would suggest this: That if you can suggest a better plan for preventing these frauds, I will be glad to adopt it. I have thought about this, and this is the best plan I can think of; if you have a better plan I would like to see it tried. I believe I can work out this plan as we have suggested it pretty thoroughly. Mr. Graff. What would be the salary of these men ? Mr. Wiley. I do not know. There is the man we had there I think we could get for about $3,000, and you could not get a better man, in my opinion, than that one. The Chairman. Is he a Frenchman? Mr. Wiley. He was born there, but he is an American citizen now, and has been for twenty-five years. Mr. Haugen. Is he a chemist? Mr. Wiley. He is a practical wine maker; he has had a vineyard in this country ever since he has been here. His business is wine making. If I could get such a man as Henry Lackman, of San Fran- cisco, of course I would do it. I do not suppose that we could get him, and, if we succeeded in getting him of course, he would not go into it for the money, but simply for the love he has for the work and the interest he takes in it. He knows the wine business from begin- ning to end, and knows everything in connection with it. Of course, I am not thinking of anyone in particular, but only suggesting the character of the men that could do this work. You would want nigh- toned men, high-grade men. I would say that of the $50,000 which the Secretary has recom- mended for this purpose, I roughly propose to expend about $10,000 in getting evidence in order that we would be able to exclude a few of these misbranded wines, and if we succeeded in doing that I think that would soon settle the matter; and the rest of the $50,000 would be used to do the work I speak of in the various ports. The Chairman. Give us the details of that $40,000, please. Mr. Wiley. I estimated that about $10,000 of it would be used in the port of New York, and about $5,000 in Philadelphia, Boston, San Francisco The Chairman. $10,000 in New York? Mr. Wiley. Yes, it will take at least that there. The Chairman. $5,000 where? Mr. Wiley. In Philadelphia; $5,000 in Boston, $5,000 in New Orleans, and $5,000, or maybe a little more, in California, because that port has got to do the work of that whole coast; we have to do all that work in San Francisco. And then I want one station in the central part of the country for the internal ports, either at Chicago or St. Louis — probably Chicago. The Chairman. $5,000 for Chicago? Mr. Wiley. Yes. The rest of it would be for general expenses in our own Bureau. The Chairman. That would be $35,000? Mr. Wiley. And $10,000 for work in Europe; we will want $5,000 here at home. That is a rough estimate. Mr. Burleson. All that, with the exception of the $9,000, is to prevent adulterations ? Mr. Wiley. Yes. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 255 Mr. Burleson. And this $9,000 is to prevent false labeling? Mr. Wiley. False labeling and false branding. Mr. Brooks. That to be used in foreign countries? Mr. _ Wiley. In foreign countries; that is so we can have something on which we can execute this law. Mr. Brooks. I would like to ask one more question on that. Mr. Wiley. Certainly. Mr. Brooks. You said the Italian Government does maintain such an inspection for itself in other countries. Does any other govern- ment do that officially ? Mr. Wiley. I do not know of any other. The Chairman. Let me ask there, does the Italian Government retain that man specifically for this purpose, and for this purpose alone ? Mr. Wiley. No. The Chairman. Is he not an Italian merchant? Mr. Wiley. No, he is a chemist; he is employed by the Italian Government to look particularly after all the imports from Italy into this country, and also the exports into their country; he does both. That is, he is a general commercial agent. And the embassies here have attaches to look after matters for their government here. Some of them visit me almost every day. The chancellor of the French embassy saw me to-day and had a talk with me about the execution of that law. The Chairman. They will be apt to correct that promptly, because they are not going to run the risk of having their goods seized and returned. Mr. Wiley. One thing encouraging is that the merchants abroad have begun to unite to help the law, and also the people abroad, as they are convinced that we mean business, and they seem to be meet- ing this law in the proper spirit; no one has exhibited any ugly spirit, and no suits have been threatened. Mr. Burleson. They can not afford to meet it otherwise, because it would discredit them. Mr. Wiley. Yes, they do not want to get into court. The Chairman. As a matter of fact, has any one gone into court with a case ? Mr. Wiley. No, nor even suggested such a thing. The Chairman. You can see how quickly this law is going to enforce itself. Mr. Wiley. Yes, but that does not mean that we do not need the money. The Chairman. Oh, no. Mr. Wiley. But I do believe that if you give us the power we ask for, to make the inspection more general, that before the end of the year there will hardly be an adulterated invoice of food product come into this country. The Chairman. If we give you the $40,000, will you promise to ask for a decreased appropriation next year? Mr. Wiley. I do not know that we can promise that; but I will make this promise. I will not ask for any more than I can use for the benefit of the people. The Chairman. What else have you? 256 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Wjley. Did you want something in regard to the work we have done in regard to table sirup? The Chairman. Yes, we will be glad to have you tell us about that. Mr. Wiley. In regard to this work I am sorry to say I can not report such successful results. The Chairman. You have been at it practically only a few months. Mr. Wiley. This past year; but 1 will tell you one thing that hurts us most of all in regard to that, and that is the fact that when we made these estimates last year we based them on the price of materials at that time, and when we came to buy we found that the prices of materials were from 25 to 35 per cent higher than we had estimated them. The Chaieman. What do you mean by materials ? Mr. Wiley. The materials to put up our experiment factory at Waycross. We built a factory there to show the economies we pro- posed to introduce in sirup making. The Chairman. You mean the materials of construction? Mr. Wiley. Yes; materials of construction. These are the things we have accomplished. We have accomplished a great deal, but it has not been as successful as I had hoped it would be, because for two months we have not had a dollar for our own use, and the experiments we were doing had to be stopped. We built first a model factory, the plans of which were drawn by the best mechanical skill by Doctor Spencer, the most competent sugar expert of this country. We erected a six-roller mill instead of a three-roller mill, which had been used before. We have increased by actual measurement the extrac- tion from 60 per cent under the old style to about 76 per cent. The Chairman. Is that by increased pressure? Mr. Wiley. Bv double milling. Any of you who have stood by a sorghum mill know how the bagasse comes out. It comes out like the stalk itself. This bagasse was taken at random [indicating samples to the committee]. This is the condition to which the stalk is crushed by our method. It is an absolute success, and it has worked without a hitch. Instead of getting that mill for $2,500, as we thought we would be able to do, we had to pay $3,500 for it before it was finished. The Chairman. That mill would not be within the reach of the ordinary cane grower, then, would it? Mr. Wiley. Yes. The Chairman. How much cane would you have to grow to make that profitable ? » Mr. Wiley. That mill will grind three tons of cane an hour — 72 tons for twenty-four hours. The Chairman. How many acres would a man have to plant? Mr. Wiley. A single individual ? The Chairman. Each man does not use his own thrashing machine in the country ? Mr. Wiley. And this mill will grind about 250 acres of cane in a season of three months. The Chairman. How many sugar-cane growers are there of that size? Mr. Wiley. Not one. The Chairman. Not one, and the small mill is rapidly disappearing from that country and mills of this kind are taking their places. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 257 Mr. Wiley. This will do for a neighborhood. Some of the canes we have ground there were sent 40 miles. The Chairman. Just on the same principle that the beet sugar mills are doing their business? Mr. Wiley. Only in a smaller way. Sirup making does not pro- pose such an extensive operation as the beet-sugar operations. Mr. Henry. A year ago you or the Secretary of Agriculture or some- body else sent me a package The Chairman. That was Mr. Brantley from Georgia. Mr. Henry. That may have been very fine sirup when it was put up, but I took it home and put it a way, and when I opened it it had soured. Mr. Wiley. That is one of the points we have been working on. Mr. Henry. You are remedying that. Mr. Wiley. Yes; that is one of the points we had in view, and we have entirely overcome that trouble — that is settled; last year we settled that. I have two barrels of sirup which were kept through the hot summer here in an open shed without a sign of fermentation, and that sirup is as sweet to-day as the day it was put up. So I say we will have no further trouble on that score if the people will follow our prescription. The Chairman. What preservatives do you use ? Mr. Wiley. None; we put up the sirup sterilized and keep it tight, that is all. We first treat the barrels with steam until the}' are hot and we let the sirup run out of the kettle while it is hot into the barrels, and then we drive the bung in while it is hot, and that will keep forever as far as souring is concerned; a germ can not get into that. Mr. Chairman. In other words, this work will have to be carried on at central stations ? Mr. Wiley. Yes. Another point in connection with this is that this material (bagasse) makes a sufficient fuel to do nearly all the cooking. That was not done before. The Chairman. It is done in sugar making? Mr. Wiley. Yes; it is done in sugar making, but that was never done in sirup making. The Chairman. Is it not true that formerly this was done by horse- power? Mr. Wiley. Yes; altogether; and we now feed the fire with this stuff [bagasse], that burns like tinder; we put that in the furnace just as it comes from the mill. Mr. Lever. Does this have any value for feed ? Mr. Wiley. No; it is not valuable for feed; it is not digestible. What little sugar was left in here [indicating bagasse] is fermented. The Chairman. What is the need of putting up such a big mill to make these experiments ? Mr. Wiley. It was necessary to have the double mill, because we can not get anything as dry as that by running it through one mill. This mill is a tandem; the stalk passes through the first three rolls and then through the second three rolls, and it is necessary that it should go through that many rolls. Mr. Scott. You said that you had met with some failures in this matter. In what particular did you fail % ca 17 258 HEAKINGS BEFOBE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Wiley. Because we ran out of money. Mr. Scott. I do not mean that. In what particular were they not successful? Mr. Weight. You have established two or three points, according to what you have said Mr. Scott. Yes; and what other points were there in which you did not succeed? Mr. Wilet. Let me tell you first what we were successful in, and then I will tell you what we were not successful in. Mr. Scott. Very well. Mr. Wiley. The next thing was to utilize the waste steam. In other words, we did not allow a particle of steam to escape; it was all util- ized in the evaporation. We borrowed all that from the big industry and applied it in our mill. The only question was whether or not it could be utilized in a small mill, because so far as a large mill is con- cerned that has long since been worked out — that was worked out years ago. In these three things we have been entirely successful. We have a splendid extraction, we have burned the bagasse, and we have used the waste steam. The Chaieman. And you have stopped the souring of the sirup? Mr. Wiley. We have also stopped the sirup's souring, yes. One thing we were to work especially this year was to make a lighter- colored sirup, so as to make it more attractive in the market, and to develop fully methods of preventing granulation. We did that par- tially last year, but not with entire success. The sirup maker and dealer must have sirup in the first place that will not sour; in the next place it must not granulate. It must not turn into sugar. The sugar cane in Georgia is very rich in sugar; it is richer than the cane that grows in Louisiana. In the next place it must be bright and not too deeply colored. The Chaieman. It is on dry land? Mr. Wiley. Yes; it is on high land. Mr. Bueleson. What character of cane is it? Is it sorghum? Mr. Wiley. No; it is sugar cane. Mr. Bueleson. Uplands sugar cane ? Mr. Wiley. Real sugar cane. Mr. Bueleson. Uplands sugar cane? ,■ r. Wiley. It grows on the uplands, but it is the same sugar cane that grows on the lowlands. The Chaieman. Naturally it contains more sugar than that grown on the lowlands ? Mr. Wiley. Yes; sometimes. This industry was confronted by these three troubles — failure to extract cane; second, waste of fuel; and third, the souring of the sirup and the granulation of the sirup. Those are the problems we have worked out. I will say that in this par- ticular respect there are some changes that must be made in order to perfect the mechanism, but that is a matter simply of mechanical detail. What -we want now is to complete the work this year. 1 will promise not to ask for any more money for this purpose after this year, because I will be able to finish everything up, and then I believe we can sell the plant for a good price after we finish up, as we have done before under similar circumstanc'es. It has so commended itself to the people there that I believe we can sell the plant for something like its real value. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 259 The Chairman. You have given an ocular demonstration to the people ? Mr. Wiley. Yes, sir. One thing we could not do this year was to ask the people to come and see for themselves. In the first place, when you go to build anything under the Government you have a thousand things to deal with. If you want to buy anything you have to advertise if it is going to cost you over $50. Then, contractors do not finish on time, and we had put no penalty in because this was new work and we could not exact a penalty for not finishing on time. We expected to get started on the 1st day of October, and the first wheel was not turned until the 16th of November, which put us too far into the season altogether for the successful termination of the work. Now, we want to do this next year and get everything in proper trim; we want to invite the people there who are interested; and they all want to come, and we want to show them just how this is done, and in one more year I am confident, from what we have accom- plished, that everything will be completed. Now, there is one thing I have forgotten to say, that the important thing is the way in which the cane is grown, especially as to the quality, as to what the fertilizers, are that will influence it favorably, and so on. We are determining those things by experiments, and they are not very expensive. They will take, perhaps, a thousand dollars. The great expense has been buying this outfit. We had $15,000 • Mr. Weight. Last year? Mr. Wiley. Yes. Mr. Lamb. That is what we appropriated last year. Mr. Wiley. Yes; and that has been all spent in this work; we have not been recreant to our trust. The Chairman. Do not put in any deficiency bill now; we will make this sum immediately available. Mr. Wiley. Can you get it in shape for our spring work? The Chairman. Yes. Mr. Wiley. The estimate has gone to the appropriation committee for the spring work. The Chairman. You have not incurred any indebtedness? Mr. Wiley. Not a dollar; no. Mr. Youmans, however, who is greatly interested in the work, has paid some bills, probably $1,000, which might properly have been charged to our fund. The Chairman. We made it immediately available last year and it was passed by the 3d of March, and I think you will have this bill before then. Mr. Wiley. It would be too late then. The 3d of March is too late for our agricultural work, I fear. The Chairman. Why? Mr. Wiley. Everything, you see, will be planted. I mean for our fertilizing experiments. The Chairman. You say you only want a thousand dollars ? Mr. Wiley. Yes; only about a thousand dollars altogether for that. The Chairman. I guess you can do that some way. Mr. Wiley. I can do what 1 did in Waycross. I can advance my own money. We had to have little things there at once, and the only way to get them was to go out and buy those things and then send in the bills afterwards. It is necessary to do that sometimes in order to 260 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. get what you want. There is no other way to get them. There was no disbursing officer down there, and I could not hire a man even and pay him off Saturday night. The Chairman. If that is the field of Congress, if we do not give you enough money Mr. Wiley. I am not complaining of that. I am only illustrating how it is done. I have often done that when I have done work for the Government outside. Mr. Scott. Did you say you had solved the problem of granulation ? Mr. Wiley. That is partially solved. We want to solve it without adding anything to the sirup. We are working on the line of slow boiling, so as to have the heat applied for a long time. Mr. Haugen. How much did this outfit cost you? Mr. Wiley. The plant cost between $10,000 and $11,000, and the $5,000 we have used for ordinary expenses of running. The Chairman. It seems to me that that plant cost you a good deal of money. Mr. Wiley. If you could see it and see the character of the work, I do not think you would think so. There is nothing cheap about it. Mr. Haugen. How much did you say it would produce? Mr. Wiley. About 3 tons an hour; about 66 gallons an hour, or about 2 barrels. Mr. Scott. How much did you turn out this year? Mr. Wiley. We did not turn out any ourselves, because our funds would not allow it. We let the people, under the contract with them, operate it for themselves. They paid all the expenses of the operation and we let them use the building under our supervision. 1 do not know how much they made. The Chairman. You would not buy any cane yourself? Mr. Wiley. Oh, no; we only conducted the experimental work. The amount asked for, I think, is a proper amount to give so as to com- plete this work. The other increase is, Mr. Chairman, I believe, altogether in the proposed transfer of the funds for the investigation of road materials to the Bureau of Chemistry instead of appropriating it to the road office, and having it transferred by the act of the Secretary. We feel it will be best in the way of administration to have the money appropriated directly to the Bureau of Chemistry. It is a little awkward now, although no friction has arisen between Mr. Dodge and myself; but still it is a little awkward to use his money, and so the Secretary has put in $15,000, which is $5,000 more than Mr. Dodge gave us. When you consider the character of this work, and the fundamental principles underlying it in road construction, I think you will agree that it is a wise expenditure; because what is the use of building roads with materials that will not last? The object of our investigation is to determine beforehand -the character of the materials used for build- ing roads. We can tell you whether the material you are going to put on your road will last or not, whether it will break up or blow away in dust, and so there will be no excuse for building a road with poor material. That is the character of this investigation. We do that for all parts of the United States. Wherever a road is building, anybody that wants to do so can have the material that it is proposed to be used on the road examined in our bureau. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 261 Mr. Scott. Last year did you do anything in addition to what this 110,000 enabled you to do? Mr. Wiley. Yes; we supplied a good deal in addition to the $10,000 from our general fund. The Chairman. Is it a separate laboratory ? Mr. Wiley. Yes. It is one laboratory in the Bureau of Chemistiy, one of our laboratories. They all have different lines of work, but they all use the general stores under a common direction. Mr. Henry. The materials are sent from all over the country ? Mr. Wiley. Yes; costing us nothing. Mr. Henry. How large a quantity of stone do you require? Mr. Wiley. About 25 pounds, or the same weight of clay or anv other material. Mr. Henry. Have you analyzed trap rock? Mr. Wiley. Yes, sir; we are preparing a bulletin on that now. Mr. Henry. There is quite a difference in that Mr. Wiley. A most wonderful difference in their character. The Chairman. How long have you been going on with this? Mr. Wiley. We are beginning on ouv third year. The Chairman. Are you not beginning to come to the end of your work on that? Mr. Wiley. No; we are just beginning. The Chairman. I mean in regard to road material. Mr. Wiley. No; as long as roads are built you will need these investigations. The Chairman. 1 do not suppose, you could tell us whether Mr. Dodge would agree to have this amount deducted ? Mr. Wiley. I do not think he would object if he gets all he asks for. The Chairman. If he gets that of course he will not object. Mr. Wiley. We do not want to detract anything from his work; we do not want that injured in any way, but we would like to have this made independent. I recommended it last year, but the Secre- tary did not see fit to urge it, but this year he has thought it wise to do so. Mr. Scott. If it is a mere transfer of funds I do not see why there should be any objection to changing it. Mr. Wiley. Up to this time it has been a transfer of funds. Mr. Lamb. What suggestions do you make as to road materials in sandy and wet countries? Take the Atlantic coast from here down to Florida. Mr. Wiley. I will tell you what we are doing in that respect, Mr. Lamb. We are studying the properties of clay which we can mix with sand and make a road of, and we have made some interesting dis- coveries. We believe we can treat an ordinary clay by a certain degree of heat and make a cement with sand, if that can be done it will be the solution of the road problem in that kind of country. Mr. Eodey. Have you had any materials sent you from the West? Mr. Wiley. Yes, from all over the country. Mr. Burleson. Will it hold water ? Mr. Wiley. It will turn water. . Mr. Burleson. If so, why not line these irrigation ditches with it? Mr. Wiley. I do not know how it would be in a running stream, but we can destroy its plastic properties. 262 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Rodey. We have any number of roads in the West that have been traveled for 250 years and they are tine roads to-day. That road material is a perfect road material, and if we could treat clay so as to make it the same as. that it would be a good thing to do. Those roads are as perfect now as they ever were. The Chairman. The soil itself? Mr. Rodey. Yes. Mr. Wiley. It is a sort of natural cement. During this past week I had a letter from the editor of the New York Herald asking me this question — and I hope the fact he assumes will come true. He said, "If you had a million dollars, write me what you would do with it for the advance of science." I have completed a reply and among other things 1 said something about the principles of physics and chemistry in the construction of roads so that our roads will be lasting and serviceable; for I believe if this country had the system of England or France that the agricultural wealth of the country would be doubled thereby, and I believe that to-day. Mr. Lamb. When we get the population we will have the roads. Mr. Wiley. Yes; but if we have the good roads the population will come. The Chairman. Has France pursued any idea of this kind? Mr. Wiley. We borrowed our idea from France. They have a separate department of roads and bridges in France, and the idea of investigating road material started right there. That is where we got our start. We have copied in this. The Chairman. Caesar started them, did he not? Mr. Wiley. He started roads. I do not think he started the methods of examining road materials. The Chairman. He built roads. Mr. Wiley. Yes, he built roads. There are some along the Medi- terranean now that he built. I have traveled along one of those, I know. Mr. Rodey. In my country there seems to be a sort of natural cement that caps the whole drainage of the country within thirty feet of the surface, that makes a sort of natural floor, and in some places the river has cut down to it for many miles and no water goes below that. That makes artesian water. Mr. Wiley. Here are some pamphlets which I will pass around. This will show you about our experiments last year on sugar cane and sirup. Here is the result of our investigations in regard to insec- ticides. Here is what we have done in regard to olive oil. The Chairman. Does that all come to you? Mr. Wiley. Not the use of insecticides, but the chemical principles of them — the composition. Here is olive oil and its substitutes, and some research work from a practical nature on the influence of envi- ronment on the chemical composition of crops. That is, what are the effects, not so much upon the 3 r ield as upon the actual constitution of bodies; and this is the fourth year on the sugar beet, which is a typ- ical plant. These represent to you the work which has been actually published since I was up here before. We have four or five additional bulletins in the press at the present time. Mr. Rodey. Do these go out in the regular issue of farmers' bul- letins? Mr. Wiley. No; these do not go out as farmers' bulletins; they HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 263 are technical bulletins, and do not go out to the farmers, except this one in regard to the sugar cane. We hare had an issue of 15,000 of them. Mr. Scott. Is this road material bulletin of practical value to a man who is not skilled in chemistry ? Mr. Wiley. No; it is more for the engineer and builder. It is valuable in this respect. Anyone can read this and see what is neces- sary, but it would not teach him how to test. It would show him what is necessary in road materials and what characteristics they should have. Now, I have not begun to go over the whole line of our work, but I have dwelt merely upon that which is new and that for which we have asked for increases. Of course you always talk very nicely to me when I come up here, but when I go out you cut my estimates down nearly every year. I do not want you to do that again. I saw with approval that you voted $250,000 for the extermination of the boll weevil, and it is right for you to appropriate money for the cure of diseases of cattle and other things which you have appropriated for; but now I want to ask you to do something for man; I only ask $50,000 for the great human race, and do not cut that down. Mr. Scott. You have been doing something for man in the past year, I think, and we would like to hear about these experiments in the matter of food preservatives. Mr. Wilet. That is an old story, Mr. Chairman, but if you would like a few words about that I will be glad to go into it. The Chairman. Yes; we would like to hear it. Mr. Wiley. Last year we spent seven months feeding borax to a set of willing victims, and I can tell you now some of the things we have discovered. The Chairman. Some of the results ? Mr. Wiley. Yes; I can tell you some of the results, although I have promised the Secretary of Agriculture that I shall not divulge the results of our experiments in advance of the publication of those results, which will shortly take place. The Chairman. Then, if you do not wish this to go into the record it will not be reported. Mr. Wiley. 1 think it had better not go into the record. (Doctor Wiley explained to the committee some of the results of the experiments referred to.) Mr. Wiley (continuing). Another thing to note is that the cost of supplies is very much greater than in preceding years. Take plati- num, which is one of the most indispensable things in our work. Ten years ago it cost 37 cents a gram; to-day it is 77 cents a gram. The Chairman. Is it in a trust? Mr. Wiley. No. The platinum really is a trust, because it all comes from the Ural Mountains, in Eussia; but the expansion of chemical work and the use of platinum in the arts has brought the price up. Mr. Lamb. We have none here, have we? Mr. Wiley. Of course we have a very good supply, but it is wear- ing out. Mr. Lamb. 1 mean none is discovered here ? Mr. Wiley. No, only a very little, not enough to amount to any- thing. It all comes from the Ural Mountains. Since we started this 264 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. kitchen the gas and electric-light bills amount to $90 a month. A part of our experiments have to go on at night. For instance, the drying of the feces and the urine necessitate the burning of gas all night, and this has added to our expense. While we have been as econom- ical as we could be, we do need a little more money for the ordinary work than we have had before, on account of these expenses and higher prices. I believe I have gone over almost everything. There are lines of work I have not mentioned, but they are old and well established. The Chairman. Are any of them finished? Mr. Wiley. No, and they never will be finished, Mr. Chairman. Now, do not let us be deluded. You are going to have me with you right along, like the poor. We do finish certain lines of work The Chairman. For instance, your boracic acid. Mr. Wiley. Yes, that is done and the experiments with salicylic acid will be done this year; and also the experiments with sulphites. We hope we will not have to take that up again; that it will be done so well that the people will accept it as final. If it is reviewed and it is found that we have made an error Mr. Brooks. Have any such laboratory experiments been made elsewhere? Mr. Wiley. No, not to such an extent. I do not claim that ours have been better made than any others; we do not claim any superior excellence. We try to do good honest work, but do not claim it to be done better than anywhere else in the world. We know that there are others doing better work along some lines; others who have better opportunities for it; people who give themselves up more to one line of work. Mr. Lamb. Whom do you mean — French chemists? Mr. Wiley. Both at home and abroad. Take Professor Atwater. His work in nutrition has been better than anything we could do along that line; that is, he has worked along a specialty in respiration calorimeters. We could not do that work; we do not have the outfit. Take the work of Professor Chittenden Mr. Lamb. That is outside of your line. Mr. Wiley. Professor Chittenden's work has been largely on the same physiological problems that we have worked on. Mr. Richardson. Whereabouts does he do his work? Mr. Wiley. At Yale University. He is the professor of physio- logic chemistry at Yale University. You would expect men working on special lines to do more than we can, because we are working on broad lines. Take a man who is director of chemistry anywhere and he has to take up a variety of problems, and he can not claim to be an expert in all those lines. It would be folly for me to claim that I am an expert on all these lines. A man in such a position might have a general knowledge, but he would not have the knowledge along a special line that a man would who was engaged in that particular work. We could not get along unless we had men who devote all their time to special lines. This work spreads out, and the work in agricultural chemistry, as I have told this committee before — and it is true to-day as it was then — is the basic work of all agriculture; all agriculture rests upon it. There is scarcely an agricultural problem you can bring up anywhere that does not touch agricultural chemistry somewhere or other. Take HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 265 such men as Liebig, Humphry Davy, Bonssingault, Maercker, Lowes, and Gilbert, in Europe, and Johnson, Storer, and Hilgard in this country. Thej T laid this foundation broad and deep, the foundation of agricultural chemistry, their work is spreading all the time into every variety of agricultural research. Therefore we want to claim from you some consideration for our line of work. We do it for less money, and yet it is work that stands nearer the very base of agriculture than any other. If we thought we were not getting help in other parts of the world we would be willing to abandon it, it is of such magnitude. If there were not all over the world many others who are going ahead on these lines and helping us in our lines of work we would be overwhelmed. We recognize this work everywhere as being of the most important character. We recognize the value of the work that is going on in our universities and our schools and colleges and agricultural experiment stations. We are only doing a little branch of it here. And yetpeople are looking to us for help, and we want to be able to help them by tak- ing up those lines of research which others may not be able to under- take; and we do this work with a due knowledge of our inferiority in many instances to others who are pursuing this plan, others who per- haps have superior opportunities, and many who have superior ability. But they help us and we try to help them. We help the men in the agricultural stations, and they write to us for this, that, and the other, and we write to them for their help. We have a sympathetic fseling, and we have their support in what we are doing. They believe in what we are doing and think we are trying to do it right, and on just and right principles, and therefore they support us and believe in us, not only in this country but other countries. I have been in the Department of Agriculture twenty years, and I have seen it grow. I know what the opinion of the people of the world was about the Agricultural Department — about its scientific work — twenty years ago. Then there were two or three men only in the Department who had any world reputation at all. The late Pro- fessor Riley, the eminent entomologist, was one of those; and Professor Vasey, whose specialty was botany, and my predecessor, Doctor Collier, the Chief of the Division of Chemistry. Those were some of the few men in the Department who were then known throughout the world. And now where do we stand all over the world? Our men are recog- nized and their work is recognized everywhere and quoted hrall the scientific journals of the world. Mr. Burleson. But you can not kill the boll weevil. Mr. Lamb. Can you come to Richmond and give us a lecture on this ? Mr. Wiley. I think I can do my most effective work in lecturing right here to this committee. Mr. Haugen. You spoke about road materials a while ago. Have you an estimate about the cost of building roads? Mr. Wilet. No; that is Mr. Dodge's work solely; I do not know anything about that work. I submit herewith a statement covering the whole conduct of the food inspection from the time of its inception on July 1, 1903, until January 14, 1904, inclusive. This gives the total number of invoices inspected; the total number found contrary to the law, with the kinds of each; the total of that number admitted with a caution on the ground of being first offense; total number admitted when the labels were changed to harmonize with the law; 266 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. the total number required to be reshipped beyond the jurisdiction of the United States, and the number condemned but not yet disposed of, awaiting the arrival of additional evidence. Statement of imported food samples received by the Bureau of Chemistry, and result! of inspection reported up to January 14, 1904. Found contrary to law. Wine. Meat. Olive oil. Miscel- laneous. Total. Admitted with a caution on the ground ol being first offense. Admitted after the labels were changed to harmonize with 17 1 2 2 5 5 14 3 14 3 2 37 10 Req ired to be reshipped beyond the jurisdiction of the 29 7 47 10 Total 53 5 27 19 104 Total number of samples analyzed, 1,186. The committee then at 4.15 p. m. adjourned. Washington, D. C, January 18, 190J. — 11 a. to. ENTOMOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS. STATEMENT OF MR. L. 0. HOWARD, CHIEF ENTOMOLOGIST, DIVI- SION OF ENTOMOLOGY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. Gentlemen, Doctor Howard is before us this morn- ing, from the Division of Entomology, Department of Agriculture. Now, Doctor, the first thing that presents itself to the committee is the proposed change of your division into a bureau. What, in your judgment, is the need of that? What do you expect to accomplish by it, other than you are accomplishing now? Mr. Howard. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, we could do as much work under the division organization as I imagine we could under a bureau organization. And to confess the honest truth about the thing, the bureau has an advantage over the division in that it allows higher salaries to the principal officers — that is it, honestly. The divisional organization with the same amount of money could accomplish just about as much. Mr. Burleson. But it gives the head of a bureau more dignity and importance ? Mr. Howard. Yes; it puts him on a par with men who are already holding scientific positions under the Government in branches which are of no greater importance. Mr. Burleson. I mean in scientific work? Mr. Howard. Yes. I mean in scientific work also. For example, you made, two years ago, the Division of Chemistry into a bureau. That division, at that time, carried no larger appropriation than the Division of Entomology does at present, and it seems to me that if you did it with one branch of the service on that plane, it ought prop- erly to be done with another. The Chairman. It has come about exactly as it was predicted on HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 267 the floor of the House at the time. There was a good deal of objec- tion to it, and it went out on a point of order in the House, and was put back in the Senate; and it was predicted then that if one should be made a bureau the others would be eventually, and it was simply a raise of all salaries. Without proposing any increase of salaries, that objection, you see, was well taken, for it has come to that. Mr. Howard. Exactly. Allow me to suggest that there are only two other branches of scientific work in the Department which have a claim to bureau organization, and those are Biology and Entomology. The others have already been made into bureaus. I think it would make a better feeling in the staff of workers also. They would feel that they were on a better plane; that the service was a more dignified one, and I think possibly 'it would allow for a better organization. Men in charge of certain specific branches of the work could be made chiefs of sections. Mr. Adams. It would attract a better grade of talent? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir. Mr. Burleson. It would be a recognition of the merits of the work already done? Mr. Howard. Certainly; it would be taken that way. If the com- mittee thought fit to recommend it, the only changes in the statutory roll would be The Chairman. What is the salary of Doctor Galloway now ? Mr. Howard. $4,000. The only changes that would bring about would be an increase in the salary of the chief of Bureau ana of the first assistant Mr. Bueleson. Involving about how much a year, Doctor. Mr. Howard. Involving $1,500. The Chairman. An increase of $1,400? Mr. Howard. Yes. The Chairman. What did you get formerly, Doctor? Mr. Howard. $2,750; that would be $750 increase; in all $1,450. The Chairman. Now passing on to the general clause, the committee will notice there is quite a change. All that in italics is new — no, I will not say it is new, it is apparently a rearrangement of the clause. They are carrying out the idea of sections. Here is the way the paragraph reads: General Expenses, Bureau of Entomology: Promotion of economic entomology; investigating the history and habits of insects injurious and beneficial to agriculture, horticulture, and arboriculture; ascertaining the best means of destroying those found to be injurious, including an investigation into the ravages of insects affecting field crops; (a) southern section — cotton, tobacco, sugar-cane; (b) northern section — cereals and forage plants; investigations of the insects affecting orchard fruits; (a) northern section — deciduous orchard fruits; (b) southern section — citrus and other tropical fruits; investigations of the insects affecting small fruit and truck crops; forest and forest products and stored products; investigations of insects in relation to diseases of man and other animals, and as animal parasites; miscellaneous insect investigations, including the introduction of beneficial insects, quarantine work, and the study of fungus and other diseases of insects; for the expenses of insect labora- tory, collections, and experimental garden ; investigations in apiculture and in silk culture; investigations of insecticides and insecticide machinery; * * * Mr. Scott. Is all that new, or simply a rearrangement? The Chairman. That has been going on all the time. Mr. Howard. It is a systemization of the work, and the arranging of it in such a way as to indicate our purpose of employing good men and putting them in charge of each of these branches of the work. 268 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. Does this change involve a general increase — are you going to get the Secretary to raise all these salaries under a lump sum? Mr. Howard. No. I want him to employ a number of new men, if this plan is adopted; and it will he necessary to pay fairly good sala- ries in order to attract the best men. We want to get the best men that can be obtained for the investigation work of the Department. The Chairman. You are asking an increase in a lump sum of $25,000, are you not? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir, $25,000. The Chairman. $25,950 or $26,000, practically? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir. The Chairman. At the end of the paragraph you say: "Of which amount not to exceed $15,000 may be expended for silk investigations and $5,000 for apicultural investigations." Now, go on in your own waj', Doctor, and tell us what you propose to do with this increase, and the pressing need of the increase. Mr. Howard. One of the principal things which I hope to do is to get started a thoroughly systematic investigation of the subject of insects injurious to forest trees. We have begun that to some extent, at the request of the various forestry people in the lumbering sections of the country, but we have not had sufficient means. I would like to keep my present man, Doctor Hopkins, who is one of the most effi- cient men in his line anywhere, at the head of the work, and employ three or four assistants. The scheme that has been outlined is sub- stantially this — I will read from a little memorandum which I have had prepared, and which I have here with me: Section of forest insect investigation. The extent of depredations of insects on the principal kinds of forest trees in dif- ferent sections of the country, and the earnest demand for information on the causes and remedies, has rendered it necessary to employ a specialist to take charge of this line of investigation and to organize and equip a section of the Division for this work. The problems which demanded immediate attention and are now the subject of special investigations are: 1. Bark-beetle depredations on the spruce forests of the northeastern States, involving a great annual loss of the best matured timber. 2. The pine-destroying beetle of the Black Hills which is threatening the total destruction of the pine timber of the Black Hills Forest Reserve, and the mining and otner interests of the State of South Dakota which are peculiarly dependent upon this timber. 3. Bark -beetle ravages on the limited supply of matured pine timber in Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado. 4. Destruction by insects in the forests of spruce, hemlock, and fir in western Washington and Oregon; and the redwoods, Monterey cypress, pine, and tan-bark oak in California. 5. A threatened outbreak in the southern States of the destructive pine-bark beetle, which in 1891-1893 threatened the total destruction of the pine and spruce forests and shade trees of West Virginia and adjacent States, thus demonstrating its ability to devastate the pine forests of the South. 6. A serious trouble affecting the cypress industry of the southern States caused by insects. 7. Destruction of chestnut timber in the Appalachian region, and a widespread trouble affecting the hickories in the entire eastern United States, due to insect ravages. 8. Losses to importers of mahogany logs, caused by insects introduced with the logs, and from injuries to the lumber by native insects. 9. Ravages by insects on hard-wood lumber, stave bolts, seasoned handles, and tan bark, causing great losses to the manufacturers of forest products. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 269 ORGANIZATION AND EQUIPMENT. It has been necessary to rent a special building for the accommodation of the work- ing force, which consists of a specialist on forest insects, in charge; 3 field and office assistants, 1 stenographer, and 1 artist. PLAN OF WOEK. The entomologist in charge and the 3 assistants engage in active field work during the spring, summer, and fall months, and devote the winter months, in the office and laboratories, to working up notes for permanent record and publication. Two field stations have been established and equipped for the northwestern and southeastern problems, and it is planned to establish two more, one in the southwest, for study and experiments relating to the special trouble affecting the pines of that region; the other in the northeast, to make a detailed study of the insect enemies of the spruce. The organization and equipment of this work has been a heavy draft on the avail- able funds of the division, in addition to those advanced by the Bureau of Forestry in cooperative work; therefore, for its proper support in the future it would require an annual expenditure of at least $20,000. Mr. Howard (resuming). We wish, for example, to have 5 investi- gators in this line, who will be paid $6,000 for the whole 5. We will need a stenographer and 2 clerks also. We want to establish 4 field stations, each with an assistant in charge. And we want traveling expenses for the service. We want additional equipment of the office, laboratory, and field stations. We think $20,000 could be expended on this branch of the service economically. The Chairman. For the investigation of forests? Mr. Howard. Forest insects. We have been doing a certain amount of work already, but we have had to ask for the cooperation of the Bureau of Forestry. Mr. Scott. Have you accomplished anything? Mr. Howard. We have accomplished a great deal, sir. Allow me to refer you to a few extracts from this memorandum, which I will read: While this special work has been in operation less than two years, some phenom- enal results have been attained, especially in demonstrating that millions of dollars of the annual losses can be prevented by inexpensive adjustments in ordinary lum- bering and business methods and forest management based on the knowledge of the habits of the insects and the unfavorable conditions of their life and destructive work. This has been shown in recent published reports on results and progress of the work, and the recommendations are being adopted in the practical lumbering operations of the spruce forests of Maine to control the ravages of the spruce bark beetle; in the Black Hills Forest Reserve in controlling the pine-destroying beetle; in the manage- ment of a private estate in New Mexico to control insect enemies of the pine; in the cypress lumber operations in the South to prevent damage to girdled trees by insects; in the mahogany industry to prevent losses by insects from introduced and native species; on Belle Isle Park, Detroit, in the control of the hickory bark beetle; in the tan bark industry to avoid the destruction of bark by insects; in the care of handles and seasoned wood products to prevent damage by the powder post beetle; in working plans for farmers' wood lots, large private estates, and Government reserves. Large private interests in the South, West, and Northeast have been cooperating in the most liberal manner in the execution of expensive experiments to determine important facts relating to practical methods of preventing losses. Indeed, it is real- ized that the field in this new line of work by the Department is an important and comprehensive one which is most promising in practical results toward the protec- tion and perpetuation of our forest reserves. The principal cost of this work is the salaries of experts to conduct the investiga- tions; their expenses in active field work; facilities for working up results; and classification and care of the collections in the office and laboratories. The present members of the working force have demonstrated their ability to 270 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. economize and make the best possible use of the limited funds which have been available. Some of them are working for from one-third to one-half less salary than they were getting elsewhere in order that they might pursue the lines of work in which they are deeply interested. There is urgent need for pushing the more important investigations now under way in different sections of the country, and the amount which we desire to expend for this purpose during the fiscal year 1903^4, is $20,000, which may be itemized as follows: Salaries for five investigators f 6, 000 Salaries for stenographer, artist, and clerks, together with janitor service, etc. 3, 000 Expenses for four field stations with an assistant at each in charge 5, 000 Expenses of specialist in charge of the work 2, 000 Special investigations and experiments 3, 000 Additional equipment of office, laboratory, and field stations 1, 000 Total 20,000 , The Chairman. What is that you read about the hickory-bark beetle? Mr. Howard. The hickory bark is one of the most useful barks in the country. This beetle has been destroying the trees, and by the employment of men in my branch of the service we have been able to stop it. The Chairman. By the destruction of the trees? Mr. Howard. Not at all; by the destruction only of a certain portion of the infested trees, which is done at a particular time of the 3 r ear. If the thing is done at any other time, it has no effect whatever in controlling the spread; but if it is done at a certain time, it succeeds in settling the old trouble. The Chairman. What is the operation? Mr. Hopkins came up to our country and looked at our hickory trees. In our neighborhood we lost thousands and thousands of them. Mr. Howard. Doctor Hopkins presented a report on the subject? The Chairman. I remember at the time that he said he did not know how to stop it. Mr. Howard. Since that time he has been working on the bark beetle, and I will send you a copy of his report. He made a report, I think, to some relative of yours, a Mr. Wadsworth up there, I think — Mr. Austin Wadsworth. The Chairman. Yes; he said some insect was practically girdling the inner bark, but at that time he did not know how to stop it. Mr. Howard. Now, people who are manufacturing handles and hickory implements of all sorts — plow handles and hoe handles, fre- quently have their establishments invaded by a little beetle which reduces the wood to powder. Some investigations have been carried on to show how to get rid of that. The Chairman, f saw a statement somewhere that if you bored into a tree and filled the hole with sulphur and plugged the hole, the sul- phur, through the circulation of the tree, would destroy the insects. Mr. Howard. No; that is a quack remedy. The Chairman. There are two big hickories near my house. I saw the first symptoms, and I heard of that remedy and did that with them, and they have never been attacked since. Mr. Howard. It must have been a mere coincidence, for it would have, no effect whatever upon the insect. That is as old as the begin- ning of the last century. Back in 1808 that remedy was proposed. It is all the time cropping up, although repeatedly shown to be false. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 271 Here within the last five years a company was formed and incorpo- rated under the laws of New Jersey to manufacture a remedy for insects on trees, and they had a certain substance which they put into the bark. They sold the State rights in New Jersey for about $50,000, and the rights in Connecticut for a large sum of money. They went into Mr. Henry's region up there; and their agents went around and for $50 treated the trees of wealthy citizens there, and when people afterwards looked into the matter, and pulled out the plugs and analyzed the contents, they found it was simply sulphur treated with charcoal to change the color and make it look like some- thing mysterious. But it has no effect whatever on the insects, that eat the leaves. The Chairman. Could anything be taken up in the circulation of the tree, as in the circulation of the body ? Mr. Howard. I think so. Mr. Lamb. They did not fool anybody except in New England? Mr. Howard. They did in New England and New Jersey. Down South, I think, they would have feared the superior intelligence of the Southern people. The recommendations of Doctor Hopkins and his assistant have been adopted in the Black Hills region in the Northwest, and the people there are enthusiastic in their statements to us as to the value of their recommendations. It saves not only in the actual losses of timber itself, but it means a great deal to them otherwise up there, because they use the timber in mining and building houses in that particular region, and so it means a great deal to have good reliable methods of treatment. Mr. Scott. Have you accomplished anything in the way of con- trolling that pine beetle, or is that what you are' speaking of? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Can you arrive at anything that will be practical from a commercial point of view ? Mr. Howard. Oh, decidedly so. They vary the time of cutting the timber. Just some slight variation in the lumbering process will handle the whole thing. In the case of many of these insects, they prefer trees that are in an injured condition, and therefore oftentimes by girdling a very few trees you can attack all the bark beetles, which will, go into those dying trees in preference to the healthy trees. Then at the proper time, after the insects are concentrated on the girdled trees, we cut them down. Mr. Adams. That is a fact, that they will desert the healthy trees and concentrate on the diseased trees ? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir. They will concentrate on the diseased trees. That is the habit of nearly all insects of that class. They have that decided preference. Now that is one thing we hope to do. We hope also, with your permission, to devote more attention than heretofore to the subject of bee culture. Mr. Bowie. Before you go from the tree insects to bees, I want to ask you one question. How many acres of trees would it be necessary to girdle in order to accomplish that result? Mr. Howard. Two or three trees to an acre. Mr. Bowie. So that there would be comparatively little loss? Mr. Howard. Comparatively no loss. The Chairman. Is that the hickory beetle? 272 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Howard. No; the pine and spruce beetles. Mr. Adams. Is that true of the insects that affect the cypress swamps ? Mr. Howard. I do not know anything about cypress. Mr. Scott. I have seen in the spruce forests of Colorado a great manj T trees with some sort of moss hanging from them, looking a great deal like the Spanish moss hanging from the trees in the south- ern latitudes; and the trees were all dead or dying. What was the nature of that disease? Mr. Howard. I am not a botanist, but probably the trouble was caused by a parasite that attacks trees that are already in an enfeebled condition. Mr. Burleson. The moss is a parasite, just as the mistletoe is, and will kill a tree. They attack a perfectly healthy tree in the South, they do, and kill it. Mr. Henry. Doctor, I want to ask you a question in regard to the elm tree. Have you made any progress in finding a check to the parasite that infests the elm tree ? Mr. Howard. No, sir; that elm-tree beetle seems to be one of those creatures which has no animal enemy. Even birds will not eat it. Mr. Henry. The beetle was not very destructive last year. I saw very few indications of it about the country last year. Mr. Howard. You had a very rainy spring, did you not, Mr. Henry? Mr. Henry. Yes, a rainy June; and I attribute it to that. Mr. Howard. Yes. Mr. Henry. There was considerable sprinkling of the trees early in the season in cities and towns. But even in the forests I did not see the beetle, or in the open land. So you attribute that, do you, to the wet June? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir; entirely. Mr. Henry. What will be the effect of that off year, if you can call it so, upon another year? Mr. Howard. There won't be so many to begin with, next year. But if it is a dry June, they will probably increase very rapidly. There is nothing to be done for that insect except spraying the trees. Mr. Henry. That is being done in the cities and towns. It was done last spring, but evidently it was unnecessary. Mr. Howard. Every city or town should have a city forester, who should be equipped with a good spraying apparatus. The city of Washington ought to have one. We are suffering very much here, not only in the streets, but in the reservations and parks. Mr. Lamb. Why do not the Commissioners do it? Mr. Howard. They say they have not enough money granted them from Congress. They receive about $20,000 for shade trees, and spend it all in setting out new trees. They make almost no attempt in getting rid of the insects. Sometimes there will be an outbreak of some insect in the midsummer that leaves hardly a leaf on the trees. There are usually two visitations of these insects in the summer. The first is in the early summer, and the other one in the late summer. The one in the early summer is the one that ought to be fought. But at the time it appears the old appropriation of the Commissioners is exhausted, and the new one is not available until after the 1st of July- Then, -,vhen the second visitation comes, they make a half-hearted attempt to attack it. They send out squads of men and carts, and cut HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 273 oft' branches and put the caterpillar webs in the carts, and the men atop to smoke a pipe, and then go on to the next tree, and in the mean- time the caterpillars crawl off the carts and get onto the trees again, and then the men burn the lopped-off branches. The people in charge of the public parks, under the superintendence of the officer in charge of public buildings and grounds, have no control over the shade trees of the streets, and the parking commission, which has control over these, has no control over the reservations. While a little spraying is done for the elm-leaf beetle, as soon as the sprajung is over the insects from the interlocking elms across the pavement, 15 feet away, follow right across and begin over again. Mr. Henry. Then that is labor lost. Mr. Howard. Yes, sir. The Chairman. How old is the study of entomology? Mr. Howard. The real scientific study of entomology began with Linnaeus, about the year 1745. But the real economic entomology began in this country with Thaddeus William Harris, of Massachusetts, in 1830. The Chairman. Are we subject to more parasite insects and tree- destroying insects in this country now than formerly ? Mr. Howard. 1 think not, sir. The Chairman. How do these forest trees grow that are subject to these insects ? Mr. Howard. 1 do not know that they do, but it may be. We have not any record of them for years — away back. Mr. Henry. Right there, what has been known of the elm- tree beetle until within the last twenty years? Mr. Howard. It is an imported insect. It is a city insect, brought to us from Europe. Mr. Henry. Like the San Jose scale? Mr. Howard. Yes; that was brought from China. Mr. Lamb. When our settlers came here, had not the old forest trees died out, and the new ones were here when the settlers came? Mr. Howard. Possibly. Mr. Burleson. Doctor, have you any knowledge as to whether our forests are more subject to destructive insects than the forests of Europe are? Mr. Howard. No, sir; they are not. Mr. Bowie. Are the_v better cared for, or not? Mr. Howard. They are better cared for in Europe than they are here. The subject of entomology is made a serious study in schools in Europe. They are ahead of us in that direction, but only in that. In the whole subject of economic entomology we are ahead of them. The Chairman. Now you want $20,000 for your forestry ento- mology and $5,000 for your apiculture? Mr. Howard. We would use more than $5,000 in apiculture. The Chairman. You have been doing something? Mr. Howard. We have been doing very little. We have been pay- ing $1,400 for one of the best bee experts in the country. He has been largely engaged in answering letters of inquiry. He has pub- lished a number of bulletins on scientific bee keeping, and he has been making experiments on bee forage — as to different plants used as for- age for bee keeping. Mr. Adams. What is the most serious problem? What do you hope to do? oa 18 274 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Howard. The most serious thing is the disease of bees, which wipes out colonies of bees. Particularly in your State, sir; it has destroyed many colonies in Wisconsin. Mr. Burleson. Is that a breeding insect? Mr. Howard. No, sir; it is a disease which they have not deter- mined the nature of as yet. The Chairman. Is it a fungus growth ? Mr. Howard. No, sir; I think it is a bacteriological disease, which kills the larva? in the hive. Mr. Bowie. What do you expect to do with that? Mr. Howard. We hope to find some way of destroying it. Mr. Bowie. Have you done anything in that regard yet? Mr. Howard. We have not yet been able to; no. Mr. Bowie. What appropriation have you had available for that purpose in the past? Mr. Howard. Nothing, except to pay this man's salary — $1,400. Mr. Bowie. You ask for $5,000? The Chairman. You know all these bureaus carry lump sums to carry on their general work, and I supposed the Secretary would direct the work in the most necessary lines, and in apiculture I remember we added the words that you should look into the question of apiculture. Mr. Howard. Yes; you put it in as a phrase in the bill, to conduct investigations in apiculture. With your permission I will read a little of the memorandum I have here. ■ Apiculture, fiscal year 1904-5. SALARIES. Apicultural investigator in charge of work $2, 250 Assistant investigator 1, 200 Assistant, or clerk 900 Clerk 720 Total 5, 070 EXPENSES. For the purchase and fitting up of a model apiary of 50 to 60 colonies of bees to be used in experimental work, with small laboratory, workshop, and implements, at Arlington Experimental Farm 600 For the introduction, testing, and dissemination of seeds, cuttings, roots, etc. , cf new and promising honey-producing plants 1, 000 For the investigation of certain contagious bee diseases, particularly the foul brood or black brood, now devastating apiaries in the State of New York 300 For an investigation of the bees of the Far East, particularly the large races known as the Giant Bees of India (Apis dorsala and zonata), found in East India and the Philippine Islands; also incidentally to investigating the possibilities in apiculture in the Philippines, and the possible benefits from the introduction of modern methods there 1, 800 For the importation and testing in various portions of this country of breed- ing queens of the Caucasian, Cyprian, Dalmatian, Italian, and Carniolan races 400 For a test of the employment of artificial heat in the wintering and rapid breeding of bees 200 For the purpose of constructing and testing hives and accessories adapted to migratory or pastoral bee keeping 100 For supplies, chemicals, necessary labor, and incidentals 130 For traveling expenses in connection with the above investigations 400 Total 4,930 Total appropriation for apiculture 10, 000 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 275 ■ Of the force indicated above the assistants could devote considerable time to office work, and all of the time of the clerk would be occupied in this manner. The office work, in addition to the experimental work which has been enumerated above, which it is proposed should be accomplished, is: First. To collect data regarding apiculture in the United States: (a) As to princi- pal honey-producing plants of the various regions; (6) as to losses of bees by disease, and in wintering; (c) as to races now kept; (d) as to proportion ■:£ frame and box hives now in use. Second. On the basis of these data it is proposed to map on outline maps of the United States the areas of the principal honey-producing plants, and to determine where and what new plants could be disseminated for the purpose of increasing bee pasturage. Third. The publication of a bulletin on pasturage for bees, the manner of increas- ing it, with cultural and other notes on new honey-producing plants; a bulletin treating of migratory or pastoral bee keeping; and a bulletin on the best methods of rearing queen bees. Fourth. The beginning of a card index of apiarian literature. Fifth. The beginning of careful studies to complete a knowledge of the life histories of various insect enemies of bees. Sixth. The rearing and distribution for the testing and introduction of fresh blood into different parts of the country of 300 queen bees of improved races and crosses. DEMAND FOR WORK OF THIS NATURE. Apiarian societies, including the National Bee Keepers' Association of the United States, have repeatedly passed resolutions favoring such work as is here indicated. Committees have been appointed, both to urge legislation and executive action in favor of it, and if their influence and activity have been slight, it has been chiefly caused by a lack of knowledge of how to proceed. The Department has frequently been appealed to by letter and by numerously signed petitions to undertake nearly all of the investigations here enumerated. The apiarian journals of the country have for many years been unanimous in urging the extension of the investigations of the Department. All bulletins of apiculture thus far issued have been very highly com- mended by the bee keepers of the United States as being worthy of rank with the most useful work done by the United States Department of Agriculture. They are in constant demand. Many thousands of copies of Farmers' Bulletin No. 59, " Bee Keep- ing, ' ' have been called for. Three editions, including a Congressional edition of 20, 000 copies, and several reprints of the third edition of the larger bulletin entitled "The tloney Bee: A Manual of Instruction in Apiculture," have been eagerly sought for by individuals. Frequent suggestions have also come to the Department that bulletins on special topics relating to the industry would be equally acceptable. • ESTIMATED VALUE OF WORK ALREADY DONE. It is extremely difficult to arrive at a definite money value of the work already done by the Department of Agriculture for the advancement of this industry, espec- ially the indirect value. The introduction and extension of bee keeping favors the production of larger and better fruit and seed crops through the more perfect pollination of fruit blossoms and seed blossoms. Information on this subject has been widely disseminated by the Department, and the views of fruit and seed growers have been greatly modified thereby, so that the great value of bees to the orchardist and seed grower has come to be generally recognized. Individual bee keepers also often express in letters addressed to the Department the direct value — even to the extent of many hundreds of dollars, to them, of the methods advised by the Department publications on api- culture, and of the new races and crosses of bees introduced by the Department. With the increase in apiarian products the demand has steadily kept pace. Vast quantities, as compared with those actually used, could and would be profitably employed, were the public to understand more fully the wholesomeness of honey as an article of diet, and the practical applications which honey and wax find in the arts, in manufacture, and medicine; also the introduction of better methods, and the resultant larger yields from the individual apiaries, would tend to place the price of the products at a figure more within the reach of the masses of the people. So many uses have been found for wax in recent years that the article has become scarce and prices have been advanced considerably. With the introduction of more productive races of bees, and through the introduction of honey-yielding plants into new regions where thev would fill in gaps in the honey yields, it is safe to say the value of apiarian products might be doubled within a decade. 276 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. It would be a modest claim to assert that 5 per cent of the annual return derived in this country from apiarian products is to be attributed to the promulgation by the United States Department of Agriculture of improved methods in the care of bees and the introduction of more productive races of bees than were formerly raised. The sum named by the Census Office, nearly $7,000,000, as the valuation of apiarian products for the year 1900 is assuredly lower than would be the case were all reports obtainable. On this basis, however, the work of the Department in the develop- ment of bee culture may be credited with $350,000 annually. Mr. Burleson. How do you propose to expend this additional $5,000; how much of it will go to salaries? Mr. Howard. I should like to raise that man's salary to $2,000, and let him have an assistant at $1,800, and keep the other money for lab- oratory expenses and supplies, and things of that kind. Mr. Bowie. It is an addition, then, of nearly $3,600? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir; for that particular branch of the work. However, we can do a great deal if we have the funds. The Chairman. Now, you have $15,000 for expenditure in silk investigations ? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir; that is a question in which the Secretary of Agriculture is very much interested. I felt, myself, last year very doubtful as to the ultimate success of any investigations or experi- ments in the way of introducing silk culture in the United States, but I feel more hopeful this year. We sent out last year mulberry cut- tings, and distributed eggs to those who had mulberry trees already growing, and at the end of the season we published manuals of infor- mation and instructions, and purchased at the European market rates the cocoons that were raised. We have imported two experienced cocoon breeders, and the cocoon crop is about completed now. The Chairman. Last year that appropriation was a separate item? Mr. Howard. No; that was the year before last. Last year it was a general Department appropriation. Mr. Henry. Why do you ask an increase of $5,000? Mr. Howard. We want to send out more eggs and more mulberry cuttings. The demand for these is very great indeed. We were able to send out only a small number of eggs. • Mr. Bowie. How much of the extra $5,000 will go to salaries, and how much to eggs and the extension of the work? Mr. Howard. I have not estimated it in detail, but I should think we would be obliged to retain a considerable sum for the employment of reelers. The Chairman. How much was done under the previous investiga- tions on this subject, twenty or thirty years ago ? Have you not all that data, so that you do not have to go over it again? Mr. Howard. Yes, we have that data, but it is very largely a ques- tion of labor now, and the conditions, according to the Secretary's idea, have changed. It is certain that commercial reeling establishments can not be established in this country unless there is a guaranteed sup- ply of cocoons. That is a sure thing. We want to educate and get as many people in the country as possible interested and acquainted with the methods of raising the silkworm. We want to get enough mul- berry trees started in order to guarantee a supply of cocoons. Mr. Scott. If it is true that a reeling establishment will not be established unless a supply of cocoons is assured, is it not also true that a supply of cocoons will not be assured without the reeling establishment? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 277 Mr. Burleson. That is a point I was going- to ask you about. Is it not more a question of the market of cocoons, rather than of labor? Mr. Howard. It is both. We find things absolutely at a standstill, and therefore we are doing this work. We are creating in this interim a sort of artificial market. Mr. Scott. What do you propose to do with the skeined silk? Mr. Howard. Sell it in the open market. The Chairman. How much have you of it? Mr. Howard. About 500 pounds. The Chairman. What is that worth? Mr. Howard. From $3.50 to $4 a pound. Mr. Brooks. At the European market rate is there any profit? Mr. Howard. It is not a profitable industry; it is, a household industry. Mr. Bowie. A sort of pin-money affair. Mr. Howard. Yes; like the chickens and the beehives. Mr. Bowie. A side issue, as it were. Mr. Howard. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. Nobody could concentrate their time on it? Mr. Howard. Not on silkworms. Mr. Bowie. Where do you get your inquiries from? Mr. Howard. From all over the country, but mostly from the South. The Chairman. Where can you raise the silkworm? Mr. Howard. They can be raised wherever they will grow. In western New York, for instance; that would be an excellent place to raise silkworms. As I said before, the only way to keep people inter- ested and get this guaranteed supply of cocoons is to get up this arti- ficial market here, and after a few years after it is shown that the country is raising cocoons to a certain amount and of a certain grade — because they do not raise good cocoons when they first start — then you may reasonably expect a reeling establishment to be put in operation. Mr. Scott. It is your experience that the same people come back several years in succession asking for eggs? Mr. Howard. Some of them are discouraged by the low price, and do not come back at all. That means that they had extravagant ideas to start with. Mr. Scott. I know of a number of cases in which families have sent here for eggs and gone into the business with a great deal of enthusiasm, and got all over their enthusiasm at.the end of the first year, and never repeated the operation. I wondered if the applica- tions that came to you were not every year from a new set of people, who are attracted by the glowing prospectuses they may have seen, but who, after a season of experience, find that the business was either not profitable or not pleasant to carry on, and so abandoned it, and that the next year it would be a new lot of families who would engage in it. Mr. Howard. I understand your idea. There is a great deal of that fluctuation, and a great many people who get discouraged and drop it. Mr. Henry. I might say in reply to Mr. Scott's suggestion that the growing and production of silk is no new proposal in this country. It is nearly a hundred years since we began to produce silk in this country, and I know of families that followed it for a generation; and to-day you can go to the Connecticut Valley and find elderly ladies 278 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. who have as practical a knowledge of the handling and growth and reeling of silk as the Agricultural Department has — with all due defer- ence to the Department's trained men. And it was only abandoned because it did not pay for the labor bestowed upon it. That was the reason for the abandonment of the silk growth in New England. Labor was more profitable in other directions. The mulberry tree can be found scattered all over the Connecticut Valley. I have trees on my farm. In fact, there was an old cocoonery on it that 1 pulled down only a few years ago. Mr. Scott. My observation has been that it has been carried on spasmodically, and, just as you state, it is due to the fact that it is not a profitable way to employ labor. Mr. Henry. The silk manufacturers in this country "originated in American-grown silk, and all those manufacturers, like Chainey Brothers, who have millions of capital invested in the business, first bought their silk from local producers, in small quantities. Mr. Scott. After once gaining a foothold, it has declined until it now amounts to little. Mr. Howard. That discourages me more than anything else. Mr. Scott. The Secretary stated last year that he thinks there are sections in the South, remote sections, where it will be advantageous to the people, and where the labor problem is somewhat different. Mr. Bowie. Somewhat different. Mr. Adams. This silk production is undoubtedly profitable, to a cer- tain degree, in foreign countries. Why is that? Mr. Howard. It is not more profitable there than it is here, but the people there are satisfied with less money. It is the well-to-do people who give this thing up, after trying it the first year. The very poor people, to whom $10 is a big thing, are the ones that keep it up. Those are the ones the Secretary tries to help. Mr. Adams. I confess I am dubious about, the merits of a kind of business on the farm which will not pay to carry on on an extensive scale. I can not understand how a business can be profitable in a small way that will not be profitable in a large way. Mr. Howard. If you raise silkwerms on a large scale, they are pretty sure to become diseased and die, but if you raise them in a small way, as is the experience all over Europe, better results will be obtained. In Europe the very large cocooneries die off. The silk business is a household industry there. Mr. Bowie. Is that the experience in other countries ? Mr. Howard. Yes; it is the same way. Mr. Bowie. Can not you urge your scientific experts to find a remedy for the disease ? Mr. Howard. They have found it for certain diseases. The first thing that Pasteur did that gave him a great reputation was to find a remedy for one of the silkworm diseases. The situation in regard to this thing is encouraging. Only recently a Syrian, an importer of certain grades of silk in New York City, came to me and told me that he could get, in the vicinity of New York, no less than 5,000 Syrians, experienced persons, who would be willing to work at 25 cents a day in this business. The Chairman. Syrians ? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir; he said he could get them, and he says he HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 279 is strongly tempted to start a commercial silk reel as soon as a supply of cocoons can be had. The Chairman. Do you suppose the labor unions would allow it? Mr. Howard. I do not know. There would be no competition. It would be the sole industry of the kind in the country. The Chairman. How long would they stay at 25 cents a day ? It would not take them ten days to find out that they could get more wages at something else. Mr. Howard. At all events, the man says he is prepared, as soon as we can get commercial cocoons; and he says the people are here now, in the vicinity of New York city. The Chairman. And willing to work at 25 cents a day? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. Why? Mr. Howard. Probably because they can not get any other work. Mr. Adams. Probably they do not know enough to go on a farm. Mr. Burleson. M a y°e they are not willing to undertake hard labor? The Chairman. They are willing, if paid for it. Mr. Howard. There is a firm of Italian bankers in San Francisco known as Barbaro & Rossi, who have started a colony known as the Asti Colony; and they also say they are willing to start an establishment. Mr. Bowie. Do you know how much silk we import into this country ? Mr. Howard. I had the figures, but I can not just tell you now. Mr. Bowie. Can you give me an idea? Mr. Howard. My impression is that it is three or four hundred million dollars. The Chairman. Manufactured silk? Mr. Howard. No; raw silk. Mr. Adams. I think, Doctor, you are mistaken. Mr. Howard. That was merely my impression, sir. Mr. Adams. Our total imports are nearly eight or nine hundred millions. Mr. Howard. The silk manufacturers import all their raw silk. Mr. Burleson. Have you made a calculation of what a girl or woman can make, per day or month, growing silk in the cocooneries? Mr. Howard. It she is expert and has plenty of eggs she can make in six weeks about $45 or $50. Mr. Bowie. And that does not take all her time ? Mr. Howard. Toward the end of the life of the worm it takes all her time, but it is only six weeks in a year. Mr. Bowie. 1 got the impression from you that it was a sort of side line, or side issue. Mr. Howard. Members of the family do it. Mr. Graff. How many employees have you in the silk work ? Mr. Howard. We have at the present one silk-cultural adviser, Miss Skerry, who has studied in the laboratories of Europe, at $1,800 a year. Then, we have three persons engaged in reeling at the Depart- ment. Now, two of them get $20 a month each, and one gets $50. We have had, this summer, two expert French women, whose expenses we paid, and who are paid $50 a month each. 280 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Graff. How many employees does that make, in the aggregate? Mr. Howard. We have only three permanent employees; the others are all temporary. Mr. Graff. One was paid $1,800 a year, and the other two— one is paid $1,000, and one of them, I think, is paid $840, or something like that. Were these civil-service appointees? Mr. Howard. Yes; one of them was a civil-service appointee. There was a civil-service examination for the $1,000 position. The Chairman. A clerk? Mr. Howard. No. He thoroughly understands the care of the silkworm. Mr. Bowie. How does the Civil Service Commission get up the series of questions? Mr. Howard. They applied to me for the questions. These ladies served about three weeks for nothing, and now we are paying them $20 a month. Mr. Scott. Is that the standard wage? If they would work the year round, would they get only that price? Mr. Howard. No; not unless the business was commercially started. Mr. Scott. I presume the work over here is handicapped consider- ably by its having to be done on a small scale, so that they can not earn as much as they would in a factory. Mr. Howard. I do not think they would earn more than $15 or $20 a month in a factory. I do not think any reeling establishment would pay more than that. We are paying liberal wages. Mr. Scott. Do you know what fraction of a pound one of these girls could reel in a day? Mr. Howard. I am sorry I do not remember exactly. I can not tell you that. Mr. Graff. What is the purpose of the reeling? Mr. Howard. To show that it can be practically manufactured. Mr. Graff. What do you do with it after it is reeled? Mr. Howard. It is sold to manufacturers. Mr. Graff. Do you purchase silk or cocoons from the people in the country? Mr. Howard. From persons who have raised our eggs. They sell them to us; we reel it and sell the silk. Mr. Graff. Has any private industry attempted to take hold of this work. Mr. Howard. Not as yet. Mr. Bowie. Doctor, do you recommend really the extra $5,000? Do you think it is very important? Mr. Howard. No; not very important. It does not occur to me that the whole thing is of supreme importance. But I think, as we are trying to get the thing started as rapidly as possible, we can do it much more rapidly with $15,000 than with $10,000. Mr. Bowie. You could get rid of it quicker, and see what was going to happen? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir. Mr. Adams. Back of this is a theory. Here is an article imported into this country every year to the extent of many millions of dollars, and this country, in climate and soil and so on, is adapted to its produc- tion and industrial conditions HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 281 Mr. Bowie. And we ought to make an effort to meet those conditions and find them out. Mr. Howard. True. The Chairman. Does that include all your subjects of increase, Doctor? Mr. Howard. No, sir; I wanted to indicate what would be the expenditure of a particular typical one of these sections into which we propose to classify the work of the division, and so I have had drawn up here a memorandum on the investigations of the insects affecting the deciduous fruit trees and insects destructive of bush trees and nursery stock — a very important subject; and those of you who have any interest at all in it know that it suffers to the extent of many millions of dollars a year. The Chairman. These investigations have been going on for years ? Mr. Howard. Yes; but having arranged this thing, and having put it under some competent person, and allowing that man and his assistant to pay their entire attention to that subject, we can get better results than we have had in the past, where my own attention has been diverted over the whole field; and my first and second assistants also are men who cover large fields. If we can put one of them on one distinct field and give him an assistant we think the work can go on better. Mr. Scott. Why c,an not you give a man an assistant under the division arrangement as well as under the bureau plan ? Mr. Howard. I started in by saying that it could be done under the division plan. The Chairman. Read the statement, please, as to how you propose to expend this money. Mr. Howard. The man whom I told to draw up a statement as to what he would do if the money were appropriated and put in his hands has drawn this up, for laboratory equipment: Estimated expenses fiscal year 1904-5, investigation deciduous fruit tree insects, including insects destructive to bush, fruits and deciduous nursery stock. LABORATORY EQUIPMENT. Microscope, dissecting microscrope, photographic apparatus and supplies, insect cases, glass work, breeding cases, and miscellaneous supplies $850 EXPERIMENTS AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS. Lime, sulphur, and salt experiments 300 Experiments with carbon bisulphid against peach tree borer 200 Experiments with plum curculio 300 Experiments with woolly aphis of apple on nursery stock and orchard trees. . 300 Experiments with fruit tree bark beetle . 200 Experiments in fumigation of nursery stock 150 Experiments with black peach aphis on nursery stock 200 Miscellaneous insects _ - 400 Spraying machinery and insecticides 300 Labor 300 Experimental orchards, Arlington and flats 200 Traveling expenses 1, 500 Salaries - 3,800 Total - 9, 000 Mr. Howard (resuming). Nine thousand dollars, then, as you will see, could be definitely assigned to these investigations. 282 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. That would be an increase? Mr. Howard. It would be spending more money on that line of work than before. Mr. Bowie. What would be the actual increase? Mr. Howard. About half of that. Mr. Bowie. That is about $4,500, approximately? Mr. Howard. Yes. The Chairman. Have you got a statement like that for everything? Mr. Howard. No, sir; webave not. Mr. Brooks. I want to ask you about entomology in connection with forestry. You propose to increase that work? Mr. Howard. Very much. Mr. Brooks. And in what sections of the country ? Mr. Howard. Wherever there is a call for it. Two field sections have already been established. One in the Northwest and one in the Southeast; and two more seem to be urgently desired, one in the Southwest and the other in the Northeast. Mr. Brooks. I think you said we were behind the European gov- ernments in our treatment of forest entomology ? Mr. Howard. Yes, sir. Mr. Brooks. Has there been a call from the Rocky Mountain region for work in that direction ? Mr. Howard. In the Black Hills, yes; and onp over in the Yellow- stone Park. Mr. Brooks. Is it not true of the Rocky Mountain forest region that the destructive insects are increasing very rapidly now? Mr. Howard. I have heard so. Mr. Brooks. In the last two years there have been very serious depredations there, threatening the existence of the forests. Mr. Howard. Some of the agents of the Bureau of Forestry have told me so. Mr. Brooks. The fact will come out when Mr. Gifford Pinchot comes before us. The Chairman. The fact will come out. Mr. Brooks. I am not speaking of Colorado alone. Mr. Burleson. Is not that attributed to the destr action of birds in this country? Mr. Brooks. I do not know, but it is a very serious question in regard to the water supply. Some cities in my section have attempted locally to deal with it, and the caterpillars would get into the water supply and appear in the bath tubs. I simply call attention to that. Mr. Howard. You say the caterpillars defoliate the trees ? Mr. Brooks. Yes; the deciduous trees, particularly. I have seen the whole side of a mountain, probably 10,000 acres, burned as though a fire had gone through it; and at the same time the city water supply would be very much damaged by the excreting of the insects, and the bodies themselves. The quaking aspen is very much attacked. There is one place where Mr. Pinchot wants to establish a forest reserve. There are trees there 4 feet through and 150 feet high that have stood there from the beginning of time, and they are being gradually cut down by the borers there. The Chairman. Is it extermination and death ? Mr. Brooks. Yes. That is, down along the New Mexico line. Mr. Scott. In northeastern or northwestern New Mexico ? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. '283 Mr. Brooks. In northwestern New Mexico and southwestern Colorado. The Chairman. Doctor, is there anything further you want to say to us, particularly ? Mr. Howard. Nothing, sir, except to answer questions. The Chairman. Well, then, the committee will now adjourn until 2 o'clock this afternoon. I am very much obliged to you, Doctor Howard. Thereupon, at 12.03 o'clock p. m., the committee took a recess. after recess. STATEMENT OF C. HART MERRIAM, BIOLOGIST AND CHIEF OF THE BIOLOGICAL SURVEY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. Gentlemen, we have Doctor Merriam, Chief of the Biological Survey of the Department of Agriculture, before us this afternoon. Now, Doctor, we notice that on page 20 of the estimates the Secretary recommends, as he did in the case of the Entomological Division, that your division be transferred into a bureau. What benefit do you expect to be derived from that, outside of increase of salary ? Mr. Merriam. The bureau organization would put us in a better position with respect to the other branches of the Department, and with respect to the outside world, in a more dignified position. Doc- tor Howard and I suffer now from being below the rank of men who have heretofore been coordinate with us in their work. I am speak- ing of the work of which we have charge, and not as respect to our- selves as individuals; but the work is recognized generally as of a much higher grade when it has been elevated to bureau rank, as in the case of the Bureau of Plant Industry, Bureau of Chemistry, Bureau of Soils, Bureau of Forestry, and so on, which were divisions coordinate with ours a few years ago. The Chairman. Do you think your work will be done in a better way than it is now, as a matter of fact? Mr. Merriam. It will not be done any better; we hope to do more of it. It would place us on a better footing in the Department and outside of the Department if we have equal rank with other lines of investigation to be carried on. Mr. Scott. In just what way does it put you on a better footing — in what practical way — looking toward the better prosecution of your work? Mr. Merriam. In our field work and in all the lines of work that we are carrying on. We are now considered as merely a subordinate division. The work has not the rank that commends itself to the people with whom we come in contact in the office and in the field with the work that is recognized by the Government itself as of greater rank. Mr. Scott. When your men go out into the field to do this work, do the people with whom they come in contact there inquire, first of all, whether they are working under a bureau or under a division? Mr. Merriam. Certainly not. Mr. Scott. Then I hardly understand what you mean by saying that your work will have a higher rank and a better standing with the people with whom you come in contact out in the field. 284 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Merriam. We come in contact with several classes of people in the field, as we do here in Washington. Occasionally we come in contact with other classes, for instance, when we are investigating the prairie-dog scourge. When we are in contact with the leading horticulturists and agriculturists in different parts of the country, they often express surprise at the difference in rank between our work and other work in the branches of the Department with which they are familiar. Mr. Scott. In what way is that difference in rank made manifest? Mr. Merriam. Simply, the question is often asked us, how it is. that we are not a bureau; that we are a division and have not the same rank as other work which was formerly coordinate with ours. Mr. Graff. Is not the chief difficulty in this case that it is a little embarrassing for you to present this subject yourself? Mr. Merriam. 1 do not think it is embarrassing, but it is a difficult thing; it is one of those things that you can feel more easily than you can express in words. Mr. Scott. You understand, of course, I am asking these questions for the purpose of eliciting information, not to imply any criticism whatever. The advance of this work from a division organization to a bureau organization involves a considerable expense, and I think the committee would like to know — I certainly would like to know — as clearly as you can state it, exactly how much work or better work the Government would get by reason of this advanced organization, and why? That is the purport of all my questions. Mr. Bowie. It is now a division? Mr. Merriam. Yes. All but two of the divisions of the Depart- ment have been raised to bureau rank. The Division of Entomology and the Division of Biological Survey are the only two which have remained at the old grade. The Chairman. Was " Statistics" made a bureau last year? Mr. Merriam. Yes, sir. The Chairman. It never should have been. Mr. Bowie. Is it not the real fact that the people in your division rather feel it is discrimination against them that ought to be corrected? Mr. Merriam. Certainly; we all feel that; there is no question about that. Mr. Graff. What additional expense is involved? Mr. Merri m. $1,400, or a little over. Mr. Graff. How would it increase your salary ? Mr. Merriam. From $2,750 to $3,500 if the salaries' recommenda- tion is carried out. Mr. Graff. Where will the balance of the $1,400 be? Mr. Merriam. In the first assistant, who has always been held down to $1,800. It has been very embarrassing, as we have had assistants at $2,400 and $2,500 — assistants paid about $2,500, which was my sal- ary. The assistant chief is acting while I am in the field, which is half of every year. A large part of my time is always spent in field work. Mr. Bowie. Is that a good man ? Mr. Merriam. An excellent man. Mr. Bowie. And entitled to an increase of $700 a year? Mr. Merriam. I think he ought to have had $2,500 years ago. It was a shame to keep a man of his grade and ability at so low a salary. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 285 Mr. Bowm. Has he charge of the office, you say, half of the time? Mr. Merriam. He has all the time. He has absolute charge of the office. This year for several months when I was in the field Mr. Bowie. Does he ever do field work ? Mr. Merriam. He has done field work for a number of years; he has had charge of parties in New Mexico, Nevada, California, Ari- zona, etc. Mr. Bowie. You get expenses in addition to salary when on field work? Mr. Merriam. In field work we get traveling expenses. We do not get per diem, we get actual expenses. Mr. Haugen. Are you allowed subsistence, then, besides railroad expenses ? Mr. Merriam. Yes, in the field. Mr. Haugen. But no fixed price ? Mr. Merriam. No. It varies from 10 cents a day up to about 50 cents; sometimes 60, in the field — in regular field work. Mr. Bowie. Ten cents a day, up to 50 or 60; what do you mean by that? Mr. Merriam. Subsistence while actually in the field — field work: Our field expenses for subsistence have ranged from 10 cents a day up to 50 and 60; I think 60 cents is about the highest. Mr. Bowie. Does that include your board ? Mr. Merriam. That is board. Mr. Bowie. I was wondering how you got it. Mr. Merriam. Camp fare is not Delmonico. Mr. Graff. I want to ask one question, Mr. Chairman. Your division is not in a bureau? Mr. Merriam. No; it is a division, and it has no near relations with any existing bureau. Mr. Graff. For how long? Mr. Merriam. Always. Mr. Graff. Is that usually the case, that a division is not a part of some bureau ? Mr. Merriam. That grade of divisions. The history of the divisions in the Department of Agriculture on different lines of inquiry is that they were created, established there by the Secretary or by Congress — usually by Congress — as divisions, and during the past few years they have been taken up one at a time and given bureau rank. Mr. Henry. The Department itself was once a bureau. Mr. Merriam. Yes. Mr. Henry. And a part of the Department of the Interior? Mr. Merriam. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Doctor, coming down to your increase, last year you had $51,850; you had $50,000 in round figures for the lump appropriations Mr. Merriam. 133,000 for the lump sum. The Chairman. $34,000 for your lump sum, and increased to $50,000. Mr. Merriam. Yes; a part of that is for a special purpose. The Chairman. The committee would like to know what is the need of this increase, and what you propose to do with it. Mr. Merriam. The need of it is along the three different lines of inquiry that the Biological Survey has always carried on, or, rather, has carried on within the last few years. For the last sixteen or 286 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. eighteen years, ever since we have been in the Department, we have carried on two lines of work: The Biological Survey proper — studying and mapping the geographical distribution of animals and plants, and the natural life belts, the agricultural belts, of the country; and, sec- ond, an investigation of the food habits of birds and mammals with reference to horticulture and agriculture generally. Those have been two separate divisions. To those have been added, a few years ago, by the Lacey Act, a third — investigation in relation to the introduction and importation of game animals and nongame animals and birds into this country, and supervision of interstate traffic in game; and, more recently still, another which comes under the same division — the charge of all matters relating to Alaska game, and the granting of permits for taking game out of Alaska. So that for two or three years we have had three divisions under the Biological Survey. The Biological Sur- vey, from the Economic Ornithology and Game Preservation divisions, issue permits for the introduction of all birds and animals brought into this country from abroad. Two hundred and fifty-four thousand birds were introduced into this country last year. The Chairman. Live birds ? Mr. Merriam. Live birds. The Chairman. What were they, principally — canaries? Mr. Merriam. The vast majority of them were canaries. Other birds are brought in from all over the world, and we have inspectors at the different ports. At New York the great bulk of inspections are made; others at Philadelphia, New Orleans. San Francisco, and Hono- lulu. We do a great deal of inspection at Honolulu (perhaps more than anywhere except New York) to keep out birds, mammals, and reptiles which the natives of the Hawaiian Islands regard of the great- est possible injury to them should they come to be introduced. They have suffered severely from the introduction of species which have been naturalized there — the mongoose, the fruit-eating bats, and birds which are destructive; and they are afraid of the introduction of cer- tain reptiles; so they secured a certain enactment against the intro- duction of any reptile without inspection. The Chairman. You mean the local powers? Mr. Merriam. The local legislature. An order was issued by the Secretary of Agriculture on the subject under the general law, which is in effect there; and we have an inspector there who examines all shipments; and we allow nothing to come into this country from the Philippines on account of the diseases there. The Chairman 7 . What reptiles? Mr. Merriam. They are afraid of poisonous reptiles, poisonous snakes, and poisonous lizards, and they seem to be afraid of some rep- tiles, the reason for which was not quite clear to me. The Chairman. What are the grounds for that feaH Mr. Merriam. I do not know. Mr. Scott. Who are likely to import poisonous reptiles here? Mr. Merriam. A great many people. Some people import them just as curiosities and freaks, and others import them because they think they will destroy some of our insect pests. Snakes have been introduced to kill rats, just as the mongoose is introduced to kill rats. We have never had any money to pay for the inspections of importa- tions, so that the importer pays for every inspection of his own goods. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 287 This is a hardship on the importer, which he objects to very strongly, but thus far there has been no way out of it. The Chairman. You say that is a hardship on the importer-, what is the object of most of the importation of animals — menagerie purposes? Mr. Merriam. In a small percentage of cases they are for menageries. The Chairman. In other words, there is a very small percentage for the commercial good of the country ? Mr. Merriam. Most of them are for private preserves, game pre- serves, which are becoming very numerous all over the country, and others are unusual pets; but most of them are imported through dealers. And dealers complain. The dealers in merchandise of vari- ous kinds have Government examination by custom officials without cost to them, but here we discriminate against them in the matter of live animals and birds, and make them pay for the inspection of their own goods, which is $5 an inspection. That could be put under the existing law — the same fee to the inspectors. It. does not amount to much after all. In New York City this year there were only 125 inspections, which would be only $625. The Chairman. What becomes of that money? Mr. Merriam. The inspectors keep it. It is paid to the inspectors. They are not employed by the Government at all. They simply agree to go on call to inspect any incoming cargo, and they are notified by the collector of customs and also by the importers; and they have to leave their business — they are all business men — and go down and examine these things at once. We have to have three in New York, three alternates, because it has happened that one has been sick when a large importation came in; so to obviate such an embarrassment we have had three. In one case Doctor Palmer had to go from here to New York to examine a large shipment. The Chairman. A large shipment of what? Mr. Merriam. Of birds. Some very large consignments came there at once. Then, in the way of field work we need more money under all three of the lines. In the work of the geographical distribution and map- ping the life zones and crop zones in detail, we are able to work only a comparatively small part of each year. Each field party has a small allotment, and when that is used up, has to come back. It would be much more economical if they could stay out the full season without having to come back to Washington as soon as their allotments are expended. The Chairman. What beneficial results to the agricultural interests of the country have you obtained from this work of mapping the crop and animal zones? Mr. Merriam. We show the areas where certain crops can be raised and where they can not. The Chairman. Have not people very generally found out where they can raise things and where they can not? Mr. Merriam. Those that have found out have found out by an expensive method, by spending hundreds and thousands of dollars, where a few dollars . This is one of the maps [showing and dis- tributing them to the members]. Those maps show, in a general way, on a very small scale what we are doing in mapping the areas that are fit for cultivation of certain crops. 288 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. Are you not practically doing this work in some other way? Mr. Merriam. Not at all. It would do no good to see that grapes and oranges and raisin grapes would do on a particular kind of soil, if you found that soil in Maine, New Hampshire, or Connecticut. You have to know what belt that soil recrosses in order to know the variable areas. So, on the other hand, with hardy cereals and hardy apples, if you found soils like that on which they grow through the Southern States, it would be impossible, obviously impossible, to grow those crops there, because they are in a different life zone entirely — in a belt in which they could not possibly thrive. The Chairman. What is your method of determining that? Mr. Merriam. We determine the climatic belts which control the distribution of animal life and the growth of plants. We actually map the real distribution of animals and plants as they occur in nature, in a wild state, and then coordinate those areas with the climatic factors which govern them. We have found out that the northern limit of species of southern origin is determined by the activity of heat for the season of growth and introduction. We have determined that the southern limit of southern species is determined by the hottest part of the summer; and I have maps here showing the actual temperature, and showing the extent of areas determined in that way, with the boundaries of the life zone as we have mapped them, from actual dis- tribution of species in the field. Mr. Scott. What do these maps indicate ? Mr. Merriam. They indicate the boundaries of the principal trans- continental belts that are fitted for large association of species that are not fit to thrive in other areas. They are based on the study of wild animals and plants in the field coordinate with temperature data, and are the natural agricultural belts. We are carrying this on in very much more detail than you see in these small-scale maps here. Mr. Lamb. Have you one defining the cotton belt? Mr. Merriam. No; I have not, here. The cotton belt is a subdivi- sion of this austral riparian belt. Mr. Scott. Do you publish a bulletin to go with this map? Mr. Merriam. Yes; giving a list of the different varieties of apples, peaches, grapes, plums, cherries, and cereals of different kinds that thrive in each of these areas. That is our principal and most important work for agriculture. It means a great deal in a region which is developing fast agriculturally, like many parts of the far West, where it saves a man an absolute loss— ras has occurred over and over again, year by year — in futile experimentation, to try to make things grow in areas where nature is not fitted for them, and where they can not be a commercial success. Mr. Graff. Do you mean that the result of these investigations has been obtained principally by the habitat of the various animals and birds? Mr. Merriam. Certainly. Those are the main factors we have used; and these same areas have been found, as Doctor Howard has shown, to coincide with the areas over which noxious insects extend. When we have an outbreak of some noxious insect it is in a natural home area, and in extending its range it will not pass the boundaries of its natural zone. So we can lay out beforehand the area where it will occur next year or the year after next, or the same year, in its exten- HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 289 sion 5 and where it can be combated or avoided by notifying the farm- ers in advance. Similarly with yellow fever. Investigations have recently shown that the yellow fever is strictly confined- -the breeding of the yellow-fever mosquito — to the austral riparian region here, this lower transcontinental belt, to humid parts of that region; and yellow fever does not occur outside of that, and that is a matter of enormous practical importance to the people of the United States. It is so in the spread of many diseases of cattle, that they are limited by these definite regions. Mr. Graff. How do you ascertain about what particular grains or fruits grow in certain localities by the location of these wild animals and birds? Mr. Meeriam. We find the area where a particular crop does best, and then we find additional areas where it does well, and that shows us at once, by platting them on our map, in what part of a zone or area this crop flourishes best commercially; and we know then that it is adapted to that zone, where conditions of equal humidity occur, and favorable soils, that it can be grown in that zone. We find sometimes, that in certain kinds of crops which have a wide latitude, they do fairly well in two zones; like the sugar beet, which does well in the transition belt — the belt colored blue on this map. That is its natural and best home, and it also thrives in the adjacent belt of upper Sonora. It does best in the boundary between the two. Mr. Scott. These conclusions of yours have been reached by an examination of the growing crops ? Mr. Meeriam. Of the growing crops. Mr. Scott. And by weather conditions too? Mr. Mereiam. Yes; by study of climatic data of the temperatures and humidity and of the actual crops which are a success in definite places — a commercial success. We do not mean the things that have to be nursed and cuddled, but the things that do best in the open. Mr. Graff. Mr. Scott remarked just now, asking if animal life had anything to do with it; I understood you to say it did a little while ago. Mr. Merriam. It does; certainly. Animal life and plant life coincide in their distribution. Where you find a certain species of animals you find certain species of plants, right across the country. You find cer- tain trees and shrubs in each of these belts that do not occur in other belts, in association with certain birds and reptiles. Where they recur, we know the crops that do best in the area will do quite well in other areas where soil conditions are suitable. So, in mapping these animal life areas we are mapping the agricultural belts, and we make a study of the crops throughout the belts, and publish lists of those that are adapted to each area and each subdivision of an area. Mr. Adams. Is not this one-hundredth meridian here a pretty arbi- trary line on your map? Mr. Mereiam. That is a transition between the arid and humid. It is a somewhat irregular line, but it is a well-known line of division. Mr. Henry. Your investigations are originally with animal and vegetable life? Mr. Meeeiam. Yes; we study both together. Mr. Heney. To what extent, if at all, does the work of your division conflict with or supplement the Bureau of Soils and the Bureau of Plant Industries. ca 19 290 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Merriam. It has nothing to do with the work of plant indus- tries except so far as that in importing crops from foreign countries they try to ascertain in which of these regions we have mapped the introduced crop will thrive best. In the Division of Soils they deter- mine what particular soil is adapted to a particular crop, and Jhe recurrence of that soil within the climatic belts fitted for it give the limitations of utility in that direction. As I stated a few moments ago, it would not do any good to find a soil in Texas that was there adapted to any particular crop, and a repetition of the soil in North Dakota. It would not give the same crop in North Dakota as in Texas, because they are in different climatic belts — in different life zones. So the knowledge of soils is subordinate to a knowledge of climatic belts. It is one of the many minor subjects that have no particular bearing on one another, although they all fit in together to the advantage of the farmer eventually. Mr. Henry. I gather from some of the remarks of the gentlemen preceding you that these investigations were similar to those they were carrying on. I noticed in the Bureau of Soils that the determina- tion of the place where tobacco would grow was similar to what you are talking about. Mr. Merriam. They can utilize our climatic maps, and by study of soils in one of the zones as shown on these maps, you arrive at once at the areas where tobacco or any other crop would be likely to do well. Mr. Scott. To what extent have you carried the mapping of these belts? Mr. Merriam. We have worked in every State and Territory of the United States, and also we have done some work in Mexico and in Canada, and we are working down in more detail in the Western States. We are going over ground that we went over in a preliminary way. in order to enable us to publish this small map, with much more care, and are actually defining on a large scale map — for instance, in Cali- fornia — on the land-office map, in which the sections are shown, the actual boundaries of the life zones as they exist; that that map is of practical use to a farmer, wherever his farm is situated. He can look on the map and see what he can hope to raise successfully, and what he can not, as soon as he locates his place. Mr. Scott. What is the purpose of your extending this work into Canada and Mexico ? Mr. Merriam. To find out where the centers of these areas come from, and to find in Mexico particularly crops and natural products that are useful in those areas that could be equally useful, the exten- sion of those areas in our country in the case of many fiber plants of Mexico which will do in Sonorian areas in Mexico and southern Cali- fornia. In Canada we have a double purpose. We are doing a great deal of work in Alaska, and have been for some years — are there every year; and we are trying to carry the belts we take up in Alaska, east of the coast ranges, down into Canada, and coordinate and continue them with the belts that are known there, to see if really any of the lands in Alaska come particularly under the head of agricultural lands; whether actually fit for agricultural pursuits, and that range along the east of the coast ranges to the Mackenzie Basin. We have one man up there. Mr. Scott. Will you expect to extend these inquiries to South America and Europe after you have finished Mexico and Canada? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 291 Mr. Merrtam. We will not, at all. We are not doing detailed work there, as we do in the United States. We are getting the gen- eral facts that are necessary to us in our work here, but we are not doing the detail work in those countries like we do in our country. Mr. Scott. Will you ever finish the work in our own country? Mr. Merriam. Yes; we will finish it, but it will be a slow process with our present force. It is very difficult, indeed, to get men of sufficient training to carry on this kind of work, because they must be zoologists and botanists, and accomplished ones, and they must know practically every mammal and bird, tree and shrub, that we find from Alaska to Mexico. It is a big field and involves the knowledge of thousands of species — and not every man has that knowledge. We have all the men in the world who have it, and they are men we have trained ourselves. So the work can not be done with very great rapid- ity, but it will be economy to keep the good men in the field as long each year as the season will admit. Mr. Scott. How many men do you keep in the field each year? Mr. Merriam. We have a varying number. We generally have four or five parties, and we are doing the economic work similarly. We have men in the field studying the food habits of birds and mam- mals of economic importance. For instance, our economic ornitholo- gist has spent a large part of two years now in California in studying the food of. birds of the fruit districts of California, where the fruit industries are of enormous importance, and where insect devastations are of great importance, and where it was believed a few years ago that a number of species of birds were doing great damage. We have shown that in nearly every instance — not in every instance, but in nearly every instance — that the bird was of great benefit to the orchardist, and we have demonstrated that to their satisfaction; that they recognize it as a fact and protect birds that a few years ago they were killing. We find some birds are destructive for a very brief period — for a few weeks or a month — while during the rest of the year they are very beneficial, and if we can suggest means of warding them off during this brief period when they are injurious; then their serv- ices are of enormous benefit to the fruit men; and that is what we are doing. We are also called upon to expend a great deal of money, which amounts to more than the increase in our appropriation has amounted to, in carrying on the work imposed upon us by the "Lacey Act" and the bill proposing game laws for Alaska. This matter has taken Doctor Palmer, of the Biological Survey, who receives the highest salary — has taken his entire time and that of two assistants and a stenographer, and to that must be added traveling expenses and various incidental expenses. They have taken that out of the Biological Sur- vey appropriation without any special appropriation for it. Last year we had an item of $1,000 for fencing and transporting and caring for elk and other animals in forest reservations. The Chairman. They had an idea in the Senate, in the conference committee, that these elk were to be in captivity for a few months, and then would be turned loose. We were told that they were a gift to the Government, and the Government would take care of them a few months, and then they would be turned loose. Mr. Merriam. That latter statement is incorrect. As a matter of fact 292 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. Tell us the history of that. Mr. Merriam. The Miller & Lux cattle concern, one of the largest cattle concerns in the West — in California — have a herd of elk on their lands in the lower San Joaquin Valley. This elk is a very important animal for the reason that its species differ from the elk of the north- west coast and the elk of the Rocky Mountains. It is unlike every other elk, and all there are of them in the world are on this range in the lower San Joaquin Valley. They are in great danger of extermi- nation. They were given to the Government by Miller & Lux, pro- vided we would take care of them and transport them to some forest preserve, and we have undertaken to do this. This has involved great expense, because a thousand dollars will not pay for the fencing that is . necessary to put up. We had a man in California last summer mak- ing a special examination of forest reserves with reference to this, apart from the attention I was able to give personally to the same mat- ter, and we have selected a locality on the Keweah .River, and we have a man there now laying out the fence, and we want to fence as much as we can with the small amount of money we have. It is sufficient for this herd of about 100 elk — about 120, altogether— as nearly as we are informed by Miller & Lux. Mr. Scott. How many acres will you have to inclose for the care of these elk? Mr. Merriam. I do not know, I can not answer that. The Chairman. What do you think of the Government going into a thing like this; is it not an extraordinary movement on the part of the Department? Mr. Merriam. It is in line of what has been proposed in the way of game preservation; it is in line with what has been done in Yellow- stone Park in the care of buffalo. The Chairman. But we do not fence and take care of any game. Mr. Merriam. We are doing that in the Yellowstone Park. The Chairman. That is a public park. Let us turn these elk right in there. Mr. Merriam. So is this park also a public park, but the land we have selected is in the National Sequoia Park, in California, on the Keweah River. We do not propose to purchase any land, but to fence a part of that, so that they can not get out. Mr. Scott. How far do they have to be transported? Mr. Merriam. About 100 miles. Mr. Scott. How are they caught and handled? Mr. Merriam. Miller & Lux agree to put up wings, and corral and hold them for us; and then we have to take them on a car to a place called Exeter, and then carry them in wagons about 30 miles. The Chairman. In wagons ? Mr. Merriam. In wagons. We have to crate them and put them in wagons, and carry them about 30 miles to the boundary of the national park. The Chairman. What good is going to accrue from it? Mr. Merriam. We are going to preserve a species of big game from extinction, and which is now destined to speedy extermination. They are on a cattle range, with no protection at all except such as Miller & Lux give them through their cowboys. Mr. Rodey. Where did Miller & Lux get those elk? Mr. Merriam. They were always there; they have lived there from HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 293 time immemorial. This species is the San Joaquim Valley elk. It has been exterminated, except in a small area south of Tulare Lake. Mr. Bowie. What is the advantage of these elk? For game? Mr. Meeriam. No special advantage. The elk is supposed to be the noblest game animal we have; and we, as a nation, are concerned in preventing the extinction of our game animals as long as we can. That is what every civilized nation has tried to do. Mr. Bowie. Do you think the society of Elks will object to the extinction ? The Chairman. If they can not take care of themselves, you will admit they are of no good to anj'body. Mr. Merriam. When fenced in. They would not stay there at all if left there now. They would return. The valley is all under culti- vation, or under cattle range, and is fenced land. The Chairman. What would become of them if they were simply turned loose? Mr. Merriam. They would return to the valley that we took them out of. The Chairman. What harm would that do ? Mr. Merriam. They would be killed. Their tusks are worth from $10 to $30 apiece there — are in much demand by the society of Elks. It is only because they are so isolated in this range country that they have not been exterminated before this. Mr. Scott. How long will they have to be kept under fence to have them become acclimatized to their new habitat? Mr. Merriam. We have taken pains to select a place which is almost climatically the same. There is no snow in the lower part of the range, and it is where they can go up on a still higher ground in the moun- tains in the summer, where the conditions are, as near as possible to get, to those they live under now. The Chairman. How many acres do you propose to fence in ? Mr. Merriam. I do not know; we have not measured it up in that way. We have selected a strip along the river, and have a man in there now measuring it and laying out the line of the fence we will have to build. The Chairman. Will the river follow the fence on one side? Mr. Merriam. No. It will in part, but in part it will not. But we want to use in part some natural cliffs in the lower part of the Keweah canyon — extend up into the canyon far enough so that we can utilize this line of cliffs, and not be obliged to build any fence on that part. We can not build the fence for less than $2,000, and that money ought to be immediately available. Miller & Lux are very much dis- pleased that we have not already taken the herd off their hands. The Chairman. Why do they want to get rid of them ? Mr. Merriam. Because they consume a great deal of alfalfa and a great deal of grain. They have had various offers from other parties to take these elk, but they do not want to put them where they will be exterminated, and they think the Government ought to take them and put them in one of its reserves. After the cost of the fence, the cost of maintaining will be very little, indeed. Mr. Bowie. Do they multiply very rapidly? Mr. Merriam. They have been holding their own apparently for some years. Mr. Brooks. What about these societies? 294 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Merriam. The Elk society has wanted to transplant them to some nucleus near Salt Lake City. Mr. Brooks. That is for purposes of propagation ? Mr. Merriam. I do not know, but it would undoubtedly result in the extinction of the species in a short time. The Yosemite commis- sioners have taken some move toward getting them into the Yosemite Park. It is where the snowfall is heavy, and these elk, not being mountain animals, would undoubtedly die in a short time. Mr. Scott. Is it expected they will have to be fenced in all the time, for all future generations, or will they after a while become attached to their new habitat and stay there without a fence? Mr. Merriam. The probabilities are, where they find good feed — you will have to see that they are fed a little in the severest part of the winter — they will stay there after they get well acclimated. And the place we have selected in California is the most favorable one in Cali- fornia, so far as the ease of protection or care is concerned. It is in a forest reserve, where there are several competent rangers who are interested in the idea of having them there. The Chairman. The idea of the Government taking this herd, and taking care of them in perpetuity Mr. Merriam. In a forest reserve, the same as is now done with the buffalo in Yosemite. Mr. Chairman. You do not have a fence down there? Mr. Merriam. Yes; they are fenced and fed. A Member. The elk in the Yellowstone Park are not shut up while they are in the park; there is nothing to prevent their getting out of the park into the forest reserve ? Mr. Merriam. The region they are in now is their natural home. Mr. Burleson. After they are fenced in, what does the Department propose to do with them, then? Mr. Merriam. Simply, you will have them there indefinitely. They will probably require some little feed in winter. Mr. Burleson. Some one will have to be there all the time to look after them? Mr. Merriam. It would be better; but it is not essential that some one be there. It would be better to have some one keep track of them, especially for the first year or two, to see that the fence was not broken down by falling trees, and so on, and to see that they were fed in case feed were needed. Mr. Rodey. Is there no way of getting citizens who raise elk and buffalo, and all that sort of thing, interested, so as to relieve the Gov- ernment from having to take care of them in the future? Mr. Merriam. A number of citizens have tried, more or less suc- cessfully, to breed buffalo and elk. Austin Corbin has both, and William C. Whitney, of New York, has both; and there are to-day a number of private preserves in which both buffalo and elk are kept. Mr. Rodey. Could you not get some of these elk and put in there? Mr. Merriam. The trouble is that the climate is unfit for this species, which is almost a subtropical animal. It lives in the Tulare plain. Mr. Rodey. How would the Gila Forest Reserve in New Mexico do? Mr. Merriam. It would do equally as well, possibly, as the one we have selected. Mr. Rodey. There is a tremendous forest reserve there, as big as a HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 295 whole State, and a whole lot of rangers taking care of it; and I do not think they have much to do. The Chairman. That was just the idea, Mr. Rodey, when we con- sented to this appropriation in the Senate; that they would be taken care of temporarily, for a month or two, until they could be turned loose on a Government range. We would not have consented to it under any other conditions. Mr. Rodey. The various rangers there now would look after them. We use it for pasturing largely, but there is room for elk there. The Chairman. The very same thing was said in the conference with the Senate committee. There are rangers on all these forest reservations, and if turned over to the Department of Agriculture this year, then the rangers will be under the Secretary of Agriculture and can take entire charge of this work. Mr. Bowie. Do you state that it will cost a thousand dollars every year to keep up these elk? Mr. Merriam. No, indeed; that was not put in with exclusive reference to these elk, but possibly taking care of other animals which might come into the possession of the Government and which it was desirable to protect from extermination. Two thousand dollars will cover the cost of fencing, as nearly as we are able to estimate it now, and the cost of feed would be very little, indeed; and if the forest reserves are transferred to the Department of Agriculture and their rangers authorized to take care of these animals, it could be done without the additional expense of getting anyone to look after them. Mr. Scott. What part of this appropriation have you used? Mr. Merriam. None at all, because we have not bought any fence yet; but the Biological Survey has a man now who is laying out the line of the fence. The Chairman. Why did you make that expenditure until you knew whether Congress would make you the appropriation ? Mr. Merriam. Because Miller & Lux asked us to take those elk, if we are to take them; and we did not want to have them exterminated; and we want to know exactly what it will cost to put up that fence. Mr. Bowie. How many acres of ground is it going to cover? Mr. Merriam. I do not know how many acres, the equivalent of about a mile on a side. Mr. Bowie. Six hundred and forty-eight? Mr. Merriam. That would be the minimum that we could possibly expect to use. Mr. Burleson. What kind of a fence do you expect to put up ? The Chairman. A Page fence?- Mr. Merriam. A mesh- wire fence about 6i feet high; not so expen- sive a fence as the Page fence. We find that we can get a cattle fence, with meshes about 14 inches long and 6 inches or 4 inches between the meshes, that will last a number of years; a fence that the cattle- men are using. We can get that at half of the price that we can a Page fence, and we are going to ask bids from a number of firms for fencing as soon as we have the lines measured. The forest wardens could take all the care of, the elk after they are transferred, as long as it is necessary to employ anyone to do it, if they are authorized by the Secretary of the Interior; or if the forest reserves are transferred to the Agricultural Department. The Chairman. It is a good illustration of where Congress was 296 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. misled by somebody. It was a distinct understanding that those elk would be turned loose on the public domain. It is another example of starting in and not knowing where it is going to end. In this case it is absolutely provoking, and Mr. Henry will bear me out when I say that we would not have agreed to it in conference except for the distinct and positive statement that that was all there wasto it. These elk were given, and it seemed impolite not to accept them, and all that; but to go there and transport them, and take care of them for- ever, is not right. Turn them loose on a Government reservation and let them go, if they can not take care of themselves. They will take care of themselves all right if we can give them an area large enough to afford them food. If they can not do that they are of no use to us from a practical point of view. Mr. Scott. I understand you to say, then, that the $1,000 appro- priated last year was intended simply to pay the cost of transportation? The Chairman. That was what I understood. Mr. Hen-ry. That was the representation at the conference. Mr. Scott. They did not say anything about building the fence ? Mr. Merriam. Yes; that is in the bill; that is the way it reads in the last bill. The Chairman. Yes; for the winter months, until they could be transported. I think Mr. Henry will bear me out. He was in the conference. Mr. Burleson. What was done with the thousand dollars that was appropriated last year? Mr. Merriam. Not a cent of it has been used. Mr. Scott. Are you paying the man that is making this survey out of that fund? Mr. Merriam. Not at all. We are paying him out of the Biological Survey appropriation, so that this fund could be used entirely for fencing, if a large enough area can be fenced to really afford them the necessary food. Mr. Scott. As I understand you, then, the only expense involved in this matter will be the expense of transportation and the cost of a fence, with what little feed may be needed from year to year. Mr. Merriam. Yes; that is the only expense. The Chairman. Then there is the maintenance of your fence here- after. Mr. Merriam. That is, of course, a very small matter. If the forest rangers will look after that it is a trivial matter. I do not suppose it will be over $10 a year. The Chairman. The posts only last a certain number of years, any- way, and then you will have to have new posts ? Mr. Merriam. That country is a dry country, and posts last a long time — blue oak or cedar — either. The Chairman. They do not last forever? Mr. Merriam. They do not last forever, exactly. Mr. Brooks. If the Department of Agriculture takes over the Department of Forestry will they not be charged with the duty of game wardenship ? , Mr. Merriam. In part; in places. Mr. Brooks. The trouble is the forest ranger has not the power of arrest. Mr. Merriam. Yes, he lacks the power. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 297 Mr. Brooks. If the forest ranger remains where he is, and is given the power to arrest the trespasser, does not that solve the problem? The only authority he needs in addition to what he has now is author- ity to arrest for depredation. He is charged with the duty now in general of being the game warden, but there is not coupled with that the right to arrest? Mr. Merriam. You are right there. Mr. Scott. What are the value of his services if he can not arrest? Mr. Brooks. A good deal. Mr. Scott. I think in some places he would have to go 200 miles to get a warrant. Mr. Brooks. That is why he ought to have the right to arrest a trespasser in the act. Mr. Rodey. It will be too bad if you let the only species of elk there is die out. They ought to be taken care of. Mr. Merriam. It is a noble game animal, and it would not be cred- itable to us to let it become extinct, especially when the owners of them have made a present of them to the Government, and will be to the expense of corralling the elk and loading them for us. Mr. Chairman, I want it distinctly understood that this matter of the elk is nothing that the Biological Survey took the initiative in. It was something thrown on us, and we felt that these animals ought to be preserved from extinction and that here was an opportunity to do it at really very small expense, so long as the land was kept by the Government as a permanent national park, anyway. The Chairman. Have you seen these elk yourself? Mr. Merriam. Yes. The Chairman. Are they naturally a very wild animal ? Mr. Merriam. They are rather a timid animal, but they are pot so wild as elk are usually where they never see persons. They see the cowboys going back and forth on horseback, and if they do not come too near they are not disturbed by them. Mr. Henry. How large are they ? Mr. Merriam. They are a small elk; smaller than the big elk of the Rocky Mountains. The Chairman. They are no longer useful as a food supply ? Mr. Merriam. No. The Chairman. Were they ever numerous enough for food supply? Mr. Merriam. Yes; thousands and thousands of them have been killed for food by the early settlers and miners of California. They used to swarm in the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys. The Chairman. You admit it would not be possible to establish these in the food supply? Mr. Merriam. Not food enough for any consequence, because there is not land enough available for them to multiply on. The land is used for other purposes — the land they used to range over — until the range is contracted more every year. Mr. Rodey. Why is it not possible to range buffalo as it is cattle? Mr. Merriam. There is no land available for that purpose. The Chairman. Cattle are taking the place of buffalo. Mr. Rodey. I did not know but that buffalo was just as good meat as cattle. The Chairman. There is not the same amount of good beef in a buf- falo; there is very little good beef in a buffalo. 298 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Merriam. In carrying out the requirements of the game law for Alaska we have difficulties because we have no money to be used for that purpose, no wardens, and we are obliged to give permits. A number of foreigners come over here each year to hunt big game in Alaska, because big game is so accessible there and so easily killed. A number of sportsmen go from the United States; and the men who are out there, the natives, and people who are there temporarily — it is hard to speak of most of them as inhabitants, as very few are real inhabitants, but men who are there from one to two or three years as miners — want to kill what game they need for their own use; and the enforcement of this law, even in a limited Way — in a specified way — is a very difficult matter; and there is a great deal of local feeling against letting sportsmen from the United States and from abroad go there and kill game. Mr. Scott. You will know in a few weeks how much the fence will cost? Mr. M erei am. Yes; but we have made preliminary estimates, and we do not think we canput up that fence for less than $2,000. That is the real difficulty. We have not money enough to buy the fencing and put up the posts. It is expensive to put up the posts, even when we are allowed to cut them on Government land. The Chairman. Go on, Doctor, in your own way. Mr. Merriam. That is all with respect to this; and this, of course, is no part of the regular work of the Biological Survey. It is some- thing put on top of us that we have had to try to look out for. In the work in economic ornithology we are carrying on investiga- tions of food habits of birds with respect to their value to the people and publishing the results in little special bulletins — as in our bulletins, with. which you are familiar — on the hawks, and owls, and blackbirds, woodpeckers, and so on. We take up a crop at a time and point out what species are of value to the farm or to the forest and what species are injurious. And this is work that is of immediate practical inter- est to all agriculturists and all interested in forestry, and can not be done any too early, because in certain areas birds of enormous impor- tance have been destroyed, just as many important mammals have been destroyed. Big epidemics of injurious insects would not have occurred in many cases if it had not been for the destruction of their natural enemies. The destruction of the large hawks and owls, the coyotes and rattle- snakes, has enabled the prairie dogs to increase disproportionately and inordinately and to spread over a much larger area than it originally inhabited, and become much more abundant on parts of that area than formerly. We take up questions that seem particularly important wherever they arise, and send men into the field. We also cooperate with the States in helping them to enforce the game laws under the Lacey Act, in preventing interstate traffic in game. We found the largest source of supply of cage birds in the United States was in Louisiana, and by enforcing the Lacey Act, preventing interstate traffic, we have checked that traffic immensely. In Kansas the quail was trapped for propagating purposes in immense numbers, until they were nearly exterminated in southern Kansas, and by cooperating with local authorities we have largely stopped them; and Kansas has passed very stringent laws in some of its counties. About twenty of HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 299 of its counties have absolutely prohibited the killing of quail, as well as the shipment. Mr. Lamb. How about it in Virginia? Mr. Merriam. I can not give you an authoritative answer myself. I would have to ask Doctor Palmer; but there is difficulty there in allowing game to be sold in the District. I think the Virginia game can be sold here in the District; and 1 think that prevents the enforce- ment in the usual way. In brief, Mr. Chairman, the demands under the Lacey Act, which were never independently provided for, have used a great deal of our fund. The Chairmats\ Did we not increase that ? Did we not give you a ' 3,000 increase one year? Mr. Merriam. You gave last year a $5,000 increase, and the expenditures last year under the Lacey Act alone have amounted to probably between $7,000 and $8,000 already, so that the increase did not provide even for the expenses under that one division; and we have employed no warden and we have paid no inspector. It has been office work and what field work we have been obliged to do in sending men to different places. Mr. Henry. Was not the increase of $10,000 to provide for all the extra cost? Mr. Merriam. Yes; an increase of $10,000 as the work stands now, but all of the work is growing all along the line. We ask an increase of $12,000 to cover everything. If we are granted bureau organiza- tion, we are to organize with three divisions of coordinate rank — the three divisions we already have — and allot the appropriation in a more definite and specific way. The increase of $12,000 asked for was to be appropriated among the three divisions, which would be an average of $4,000. increase apiece, to meet the increasing demands. We are already spending vastly more than that on this game-preserve division, because we either have to do that or let the work drop. Mr. Scott. In what way did the Lacey Act involve additional office expense ? Mr. Merriam. It was put on the Department of Agriculture, and the Secretary turned it over to the Biological Survey — the adminis- tration of all matters respecting game in the public domain; the inter- state commerce in game; the inspection of birds and animals coming into this country, whether game animals or not; the importation of eggs and the game law of Alaska — put that work on the Biological Survey, and neither of those bills are accompanied by any appropria- tion, so that, in order to obey the law, we were obliged to carry on the office work in our office, and that has gradually taken more and more of the force, until the man who had been my best man, my right-hand man for years, has, for the last two years, given practi- cally all of his time to it; has taken two other good assistants and a stenographer, and still can not keep up with the work. Mr. Scott. What I failed to understand was how it could be that a man in an office here in Washington could enforce game laws in Alaska. Mr. Merriam. We do it by the way the law is phrased. We have charge of granting permits for killing game, and the way we enforce the law is by looking out for the shipments, and by preventing the landing of game at the ports of entry. The customs inspectors at Seattle and 300 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. at San Francisco examine all game. We have arranged so that the game trophies must be sent to those ports, and must be so packed that they can be examined, and through cooperation with the Treasury officials we know what game is landed there. They can not kill any game without a permit, and we furnished last year 105 permits — not last year, but since the game law of Alaska went into effect. That is, we have issued 105 permits altogether. Last year we issued 11 to for- eigners and about 94 to citizens of the United States and Alaska, mainly out there in Alaska, to the men who live there. Mr. Scott. Can no one kill that game lawfully without a permit from your office? Mr. Meeriam. He can not bring it out, if he does; You or I could not go up there and kill a moose or a sheep — a mountain sheep — and bring it out of that country without a permit. Nobody can. Mr. Scott. Does everybody who applies for a permit receive it? Mr. Meeriam. That depends on who he is, and what we know about his record and about him. If he is a taxidermist who is after trophies to sell, we will not grant him a permit; but if he is a respectable man we will giVe him a permit to bring out what the law allows, except in regard to the Kenai Peninsula. That peninsula is so accessible that a man can in twenty-four hours get into the finest hunting country, where the largest moose in the world are to-day, and where he will see 500 sheep in a day. The attractions of that country — the moose, and the sheep, and the great big brown bears, and the caribou — are such that we have had to restrict and cut off hunting in that particular place. We tell them that they can kill anything that the law allows in other parts of Alaska, but that they can not kill in the Kenai Peninsula. The caribou are so easily gotten at that they are almost exterminated already. The Chairman. Is there anything further that you want to speak to us about? Mr. Merriam. Not unless there are some further questions that some member wishes to ask. The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? (There was no response.) Thereupon, at 3.40 o'clock p. m., the committee adjourned. January 13, 1904 — 10.30 o'clock a. m. Hon. James W. Wadsworth in the chair. STATEMENT OF GEORGE WILLIAM HILL, EDITOR AND CHIEF OF THE DIVISION OF PUBLICATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. Mr. Hill, we have asked you to appear before us in regard to certain changes. The committee will turn to page 21 of the estimate. A change in your estimate is "one editor, who shall be assistant chief of division, $2,500." Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. The Chairman. That is absolutely new. Kindly tell the committee, in your own way, what the necessity for that is ? Mr. Hill. It is a plea for help on the part of myself, Mr. Wads- HEARINGS BEFOKE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 301 worth. The increase in editorial work between last year and the year before was 30 per cent, and you will notice that I relieved the editorial force of one man at $1,400." It was too loaded with the cheaper class of men, and I did not have enough of the best. Now, I want to make it a little stronger in the upper story. The Chairman. Does the increase of salary always make things stronger ? Mr. Hill. It does if you get the right men. The Chairman. We do not always get the right men. Mr. Hill. I will get the right men. The Chairman. How has your editorial increased 30 per cent? Mr. Hill. It has increased by 6,000 printed pages of editorial mat- ter, and I want to say in calling for extra help I take this into account, that I have not had time to do two hours' editorial work during busi- ness hours the last three years. Every single bit of editorial work I have had to do I have had to do at home and after hours; and the increase is something I can not control. The Chairman. What is causing the increase ? Mr. Hill. The increase in the development of the Department; the growth of the other bureaus and divisions. All this work finds its ultimate expression in publication. We issued the year before last, for instance, 750 publications; last year we issued 938 publications. The Chairman. You only have to do with bulletins? Mr. Hill. All bulletins and books. The Yearbook is edited by us, you know — everything that is issued by the Department, the Depart- ment order; it is issued by the Department itself. The Chairman. You do not have the soil publications ? Mr. Hill. Yes. The Chairman. Do you publish this report of the operations of the Bureau of Soils? Mr. Hill. It all passes through our hands. The Chairman. Did you edit that [indicating] ? Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Do you have anything to do with the maps ? Mr. Hill. I have a good deal to do with them — do my best to sup- press the number of illustrations and number of maps. Mr. Scott. Can you give the committee the cost of this bulletin and accompanying maps [indicating soil bulletin and maps] ? Mr Hill. 1 think they will cost about |37,000 or $38,000 for the complete report — two volumes we call it. Mr. Scott. Is that cost paid Mr. Hill. That is paid by special appropriation of the Printing Committee. Congress appropriates for the printing of our Depart- ment, aside from the sum that is disbursed through myself, the $300,000 for the Yearbook, and so many thousand dollars for the Bureau of Animal Industry reports, etc., and it amounts to over $400,000 a year that is expended by the Public Printer under the order of Congress for publications of our Department irrespective of what is done over my signature. The Chairman. That is practically a half million dollars spent in dissemination of the knowledge gathered by the Department of Agriculture. Mr. Hill. Yes, sir; outside of the $300,000 for the Yearbook. The Chairman. In addition to the other expenses of the Department ? 302 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Hill. In addition to the expenses of my Division. For instance The Chairman. And in excess of anything that appears on the Agri- cultural appropriation bill? Mr. Hill. Yes, sir; the entire editing has involved so much extra work on the part of all of us it is getting to be more than we can stand, almost. Mr. Bowie. How much time do you have to give at night to the editorial work ? Mr. Hill. It will run from November until April, which is cm- busiest time, four or five nights in a week, and from one to three hours an evening, for my share. My helpers have to do a good share of all extra work. Mr. Graff. You do not mean to be understood, Mr. Hill, that you write, for instance, all of these bulletins and all of the articles that appear in the Mr. Hill. That I write them? Mr. Graff. Write them, or that your Bureau writes them? Mr. Hill. Oh, no, sir. The manuscript comes to us in all its native purity and strength, and we have to edit it. The first duty I have is to read it for the Secretary, to see that there is nothing there, for instance, that might conflict with his policy, nothing that he might prefer not to give to the public just yet. He may think they are pre- mature; that these gentlemen are claiming too much. He expects me to call his attention to everything in the manuscript of the bulletin that is proper for him to see before it is printed; and then we do the usual editing, such as is done in every magazine. Mr. Adams. You do the same work as the editorial manager of a newspaper ? Mr. Hill. As the managing editor of a newspaper. Mr. Graff. You act under the direction of the Secretary of Agri- culture? Mr. Hill. Yes, sir; he is our umpire. For instance, an author and I come together about a difference of opinion as to what is permitted; it is the Secretary of Agriculture Mr. Graff. Your duties are not confined to the writing of original matter. Mr. Hill. No, sir; we have done a little occasional writing of orig- inal matter, but not usually. It is the supervision of the printing or the administration of the fund. Mr. Haugen. How many thousand pages do you edit? Mr. Hill. Last year we edited 23,000, and it is running bigger than that this year. Mr. Scott. I would like to inquire what your practice is when proofs come back from the Printing Office, in regard to the report. I am told at the Government Printing Office that one of the largest items of expense over there arises from the changes in manuscript that are made Mr. Hill. Do they make that complaint of us now ? Mr. Scott (continuing). That are made in the proofs sent out. I wondered if you had got things fixed in your Department so as to eliminate that. Mr. Hill. We have eliminated it very largely. It was a very seri- ous expense when I first took hold of the editorial work. I have known HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OK AGRICULTURE. 303 a case where the original composition was $200, and the corrections cost over $200; and the Secretary issued an order of the most positive character that no alterations must be permitted in proofs except such as were intended to correct errors made in the proof or where entirely new matter was added, which, of course, makes no additional expense. The addition of a paragraph is no further expense than the original composition would be. Sometimes new matter comes up during the course of — we do our very best to limit that, and two or three times when it has been excessive we have altered the requisition so that the amount of the correction was charged to the fund of the sinner — of the offender. Mr. Scott. How did it happen that the sin was committed? Was it due to carelessness in the preparation of the copy ? Mr. Hill. Probably it was partly that. The tendency used to be a great many years ago, when I took hold over there — they used to get in the habit of editing things in the proof themselves, going over it, and they would put things in in very unprepared condition, and then go over it and make great changes in the galley proof. Now, it is more or less the tendency of every man in going over his matter to change and rewrite and fix up, and we have to check that all the time. We find everybody has that tendency. Mr. Graff. By checking them you make them more careful in the preparation of their original matter? Mr. Hill. Exactly. Of course, the editing saves a good deal of it. I take this ground, that if either my man or I can not understand it, it will not be better understood by the people outside, and conse- quently it has to be rewritten in the manuscript in such a way as to reach our modest understanding. Mr. Burleson. Is that one of the tasks imposed on you, to under- stand all of the things these scientific gentlemen write over there ? Mr. Hill. Yes; except science. If Doctor Wiley says C0 2 killed a cat, I do not know whether it does or not; that is his lookout, and the Secretary will not be held responsible. Mr. Graff. I would like to ask you a question, Mr. Hill, about the farmers' bulletins. The Chairman. Suppose we take that up after we get through with the salary list; that will be more appropriate. You submit for a chief clerk at $1,800? Mr. Hill. Yes; and 1 promote the best man I have got to a $2,500 job. The Chairman. Is that your editor, at $2,000? Mr. Hill. He is getting $2,000 now. The Chairman. He is on the statutory roll? Mr. Hill. He is on the statutory roll, and he has been getting that salary for several years. Mr. Scott. Who is that man ? Mr. Hill. Mr. Arnold — my first assistant. The Chairman. He appears now on the statutory rolls as an editor, at $2,000? Mr. Hill. At $2,000; yes, sir. Mr. Graff. What became of this $1,400 man that you say you eliminated ? Mr. Hill. I can spare the $1,400 man. Mr. Graff. What becomes of him? 304 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Hill. The money went back in the Treasury for a while. Mr. Graff. Where is he? Mr. Hill. He did not exist. The Chairman. Never was created? Mr. Hill. We had one for awhile, you know, and after while we got him into one of the $1,600 places and The Chairman. He did not leave the Department? Mr. Hill. We promoted one of the $1,400 clerks and left a $1,400 place vacant. We had the distressing experience of seeing the money go back into the Treasury. Mr. Graff. I understood from you, Mr. Hill, that the $1,400 man was unsatisfactory. Mr. Hill. I mean if the matter was left as it is 1 would need to get in another man at $1,400, and that would not be satisfactory. I have got enough of that sort of help. Mr. Graff. You had a $1,400 clerk and advanced him to $1,800? Mr. Hill. To $1,600. I have certainly got one of them that is good, but I can not get as good a man for $1,400 as I can for a higher price, you know. He showed himself to be especially worthy, and he was promoted at the first opportunity we had to $1,600. I still have one at $1,400, and in the course of time he will grow to be a very good man. Mr. Scott. As 1 understand it, the pressing necessity in your office now is high-grade help, and in order to get high-grade work you must pay a decent salary ? Mr. Hill. That is what I want. I want to keep and help the best men I have got, and to relieve them, and let us get more chance to do editorial work. I have 158 people in my division, and the purely administrative details of that are very exacting and constant. Mr. Bowie. Mr. Hill, let me ask you just one question there in ref- erence to that clerk at $1,400 that you say, technically, was dropped. That was really a reduction, for the reason, was it not, that you, prior to that time, under the statutory roll, was entitled to two assistant editors at $1,600? Mr. Hill. Yes. Mr. Bowie. And 2 at $1,400? Mr. Hill. Yes. Mr. Bowie. You gave 1 of your $1,400 men $1,600 and left the $1,400 place vacant? Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. You were entitled previous to that to 2 at $1,600 and 2 at $1,400, and now you have 2 at $] ,400 and 1 at $1,600? Mr. Hill. Yes. The Chairman. Who is acting as chief clerk now ? Mr. Hill. Practically myself and Mr. Arnold — principally myself. I take at least three hours which is devoted to the chief clerk's work by myself. W T ith a force of 155 to 160 people that I have every year it means quite a lot of detail. Mr. Burleson. Would these same publications printed by private concerns cost as much as they cost the Government now? Mr. Hill. 1 do not see how they could, sir. The Public Printer pays a third more wages, about, to what is paid generally, and he gets. a short day. He pays about $4 a day on an average to men who in HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 305 the most of the country get $3, and then he pays thirty days a year for work that he does not get. Mr. Burleson. The additional expense goes to the labor, does it? Mr. Hill. I think the great bulk of it does; yes, sir. Of course I do not know, hut it is popularly supposed that the Government really makes contracts as cheaply and as favorably as with other people. I confess they do our work pretty cheap, considering the difference in wages. Our farmers' bulletins, with which you are familiar — some of you gentlemen — we print those at an average cost of a cent and a half apiece. We could not better that a great deal, I think. Mr. Burleson. The reason I ask the question is because you said the Yearbook cost $300,000. Mr. Hill. That is the amount that Congress sets aside for it, but I do not suppose the Public Printer spends all of it for the Yearbook. One Yearbook will not cost as much as another, and a great deal will depend on the amount of illustrations (colored illustrations), but the edition, you remember, is half a million; 60 cents a volume. The Chairman. How much has your work increased this last fiscal year? Mr. Hill. This present year over last? The Chairman. Yes. Mr. Hill. It has increased steadily, Mr. Chairman. Tbe Chairman. How can it, under the orders of last year? Mr. Hill. There is more activity. We are certainly issuing more publications even than last year. The Chairman. Last year your estimate was $29,000, and we gave you $29,320. Mr. Hill. For statutory salaries, and the present arrangement asked for $1,200 more. The Chairman. An increase of $2,820? Mr. Hill. $2,820. The Chairman. That is a big increase; that is about a 10 per cent increase on your statutory roll. I notice you ask for 2 copyists at $840 ? Mr. Hill. 1 have dropped them entirely in this present estimate. I have 2T copyists at $840, but I leave them out. I am trying to strengthen it up above a little, and spare what I can below. The Chairman. You ask for an increase of salary for assistant in charge of the document section, and you ask for a second assistant in the document section at $1,400? Mr. Hill. That document section has come to be a tremendous piece of work. Mr. Lamb. I want you to explain that, please, sir. Mr. Hill. In thatdocument section we have over 120 people engaged, and during the past three weeks, for instance, many of those people have worked every night to 5 o'clock and 5.30. We were unable to get out the mail without it. We have sent out in a single day, of farmers' bulletins alone, 1,000 orders, which means a transcription of name and address twice over; and that is apart from the general mis- cellaneous mail. The Chairman. We relieved you from addressing these franks this last year. Mr. Hill. From addressing these Congressional f ranks, Mr. Chair- oa 20 306 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. man, and that was a very big job; but we have got to address all our own franks. We have 1,000,000 addresses in that room a month, I think, without a doubt. The Chairman. Is not this assistant in the document section one of the hardest worked men you have got? Mr. Hill. It is very hard, indeed. His Congressional mail alone, which he attends to himself, for me, is a big job during the session. The Chairman. I have come in contact with him; that is the reason I ask you the question. Mr. Hill. I want to give him an assistant at $1,400 that will relieve him of some of the minor details of that office. I want to say another thing, Mr. Chairman — to take this opportunity of saying it — it is a very difficult thing to get hold of a man who will run an office of 120 people. He has 105 ladies in that department. The Chairman. What? Mr. Hill. About 105 ladies in his section; and I assure you they require constant, judicious, and careful handling. He has got to be a sensible man and have a great deal of tact and judgment. Mr. Lamb. He has that. Mr. Hill. He has got that; but it takes time. Our force is a very good force; I am not saying anything against them. We have a little "deadwood," but there is getting less and less of "deadwood" every year. But you can not handle 90 or 100 women with just the brusque- ness with which you can handle a force of 90 or 100 men. Mr. Henry. Will that remark apply to the other divisions and bureaus of the Agricultural Department? Mr. Hill. I think so — in regard to the " deadwood," I think so; but I think there is a marked improvement year by year. The Chairman. You have a greater percentage of women than any of the others, with the exception of the Statistical Division. Mr. Hill. I beat them all. They are cheap help; a great majority of them get but $50 a month. Mr. Graff. You could not get men to do this work? Mr. Hill. I do not think so; not perhaps as accurately. Mr. Henry. What salary do you pay them '( Mr. Hill. We pay them $50; I think they will average $50 for the bulk of them. The Chairman, Do not some of them work at $30 when starting in? Mr. Hill. When starting in, some of them get $30. Mr. Henry. Where is the periodical list of documents compiled? Mr. Hill. I do that in my office. Mr. Henry. Complaints have been made to me by a number of the members of the House that they are annoyed by early publication; for instance, of the horse book; it was announced through your cata- logue several weeks before it reached the House folding room. I had 20 applications filed upon my desk, and they all involved a reply to explain why I could not send them. Mr. Hill. I think I can explain that. Mr. Haugen. I had 157 requests before it was issued, before we had a single copy; it got into the newspapers about six or eight weeks ahead of time. How did it get into the newspapers ? Mr. Hill. They were watching for it. Mr. Henry. They obtained it from your catalogue? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 307 Mr. Hill. My catalogue did not come out until we got a copy. We get the first copy before it gets into the catalogue. The chairman read as follows: No. 471.] United States Department op Agriculture, Division op Publications, Washington, D. C, September 19, 1908. THE HORSE BOOK. The Special Report on Diseases of the Horse has been revised under a joint resolution of the Fifty-seventh Congress, is now in press, and will soon be issued. This report was prepared under the direction of the Bureau of Animal Industry of the United States Department of Agriculture, and was first issued in 1890, and the limited edition that the Department was able to publish was soon exhausted. The demand was then turned on Congress, and that body has from time to time ordered reprints for distribution by its own members, exclusively, until the number already issued has reached nearly half a million copies. The resolution under which the present revision was made provides for the print- ing and binding, in cloth, of 200,000 copies, the same to be first revised and brought up to date under the supervision of the Secretary of Agriculture; 128,000 copies for the use of the House of Representatives; 64,000 copies for the use of the Senate; and 8,000 copies for the use of the Department of Agriculture. The allotment to the Department is so small that it will have none for general distribution, and those who may desire copies of the report should apply to members of the last Congress (the 57th), to whom all copies of the Congressional allotment will be delivered. New members of the present Congress will not be entitled to a quota. The report has been carefully revised, either by the authors of the several articles or by veterinarians of wide reputation. An entirely new article on The Examina- tion of a Horse, by Dr. Leonard Pearson, State veterinarian of Pennsylvania, is included; also a chapter on shoeing, written by J. W. Adams, professor of surgery and lecturer on shoeing, veterinary department, University of Pennsylvania. The report also contains the following articles: Methods of Administering Medi- cines, Diseases of the Digestive Organs, and Wounds and their Treatment, by Ch. B. Michener, V. S. ; Diseases of the Urinary Organs, Diseases of the Generative Organs, Diseases of the Eye, and Diseases of the Skin, by James Law, F. R. C. V. S. ; Dis- eases of the Respiratory Organs, by W. H. Harbaugh, V. S. ; Diseases of the Nerv- ous System and Diseases of the Heart, Blood Vessels, and Lymphatics, by M. R. Trumbower, V. S. ; Lameness, by A. Liautard, M. D., V. S. ; Diseases of the Fetlock, Ankle, and Foot, by A. A. Holcomb, D. V. S. ; General Diseases, by Rush Shippen Huidekoper, M. D., Vet.; and Surra, by Ch. Wardell Stiles, Ph. D. It is illustrated by 41 plates and 18 text figures. Mr. Hill. That was information that was given to us from the House folding room. The Chairman. It was issued from your Division of Publications. Mr. Adams. And states that it will soon be issued. Mr. Hill. Will be issued in the future. The Chairman. What was the necessity for issuing that? Mr. Hill. To answer our innumerable correspondence that came to us through the newspaper reports to the effect that the new edition of the horse book would be issued and would soon appear. Mr. Henry. I dislike very much to criticise the work of your divi- sion, but it does seem to me that this announcement might have been delayed approximately to the time the publication reaches the House folding room and save all of this annoyance. Mr. Scott. Sometimes the newspapers will not only announce the fact of the publication about to issue but they give a lot of detailed information as to what is in the book. Mr. Bowie. I suppose that can not be prevented. Mr. Burleson. And they also urge that everyone who wishes to read this book will immediately write their Congressman for it. 308 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. The article states what the report contains, and also that it is to be illustrated with plates, and carefully revised, etc. Mr. Hill. I would like permission to look at it. [Takes paper.] This is not a monthly list. This is a press report. We sent that to the papers to correct some of the most extraordinary misstatements which were causing us an enormous amount of correspondence, and we concluded it would be better to send out this; but we at that time anticipated, and had every reason to anticipate, that the book would be out in about three weeks, and were getting such an enormous num- ber of applications and letters based upon this information, some of the most ridiculous character, that we thought we had better send out a slip giving the exact facts. If we had had an idea that the Horse Book would not have been out in three weeks we would not have done it. It saved us an immense amount of correspondence. The Chairman. Why would not a copy to the effect that they had been provided for answer ? Mr. Hill. The sequel proves that that would have been better, but we had every reason to believe thej r would be out. The fact was, at that time, it was not expected the new members would have any, because it was expected to be out before the next Congress met. Mr. Bowie. How many of these announcements of the publication do you send out? Mr. Hill. We aim to send out the announcement of our new pub- lication when the last page proof goes back to the printer, and we have reason to suppose that in the course of ten days or a fortnight that they will be ready. Mr. Burleson. How many did you send out? Mr. Hill. Every newspaper on our list. Every newspaper that asks to be put on our list, we put on our list. Mr. Scott. Do you send to private individuals who ask to be put on your list? Mr. Hill. No, sir; we send them a monthly list, giving the details of the publications issued — a monthly publication — and we send that to everybody that asks for them. We send out 120,000 of those every month, and the demand is increasing constantly. Mr. Adams. Is there to be another edition of the Cattle Book? Mr. Hill. Yes, sir; it is under revision now. Mr. Adams. When will that be published ? Mr. Hill. It will not reach my hands for a long time yet. The Chairman. Your general answer to these questions concerning increases of salary, then, and increases of force on the statutory roll, is increase of work? Mr. Hill. It is increase of work, Mr. Chairman, and — I will be. perfectly frank — an earnest desire on my part to relieve myself, and to relieve my assistant, of a lot of extra work that we have been very cheerfully performing. I do not expect to get rid of it all, but I would like to get rid of the constant night work that I have for five or six months of the year. Mr. Haskins. Is it not true that the Department is increasing in all its branches every year as the country increases in size ? Mr. Hill. Exactly; and perhaps a little faster, because we have not caught up to the country yet. There are 6,000,000 farmers in the United States, but I do not believe we reach a million of them. The Chairman. You reach all that want to be reached? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 309 Mr. Adams. The trouble is that the fellows we want to reach are the fellows who do not want it. Mr. Graff. I believe this division is one of the most important divisions, because this is the medium through which the people are to get the benefit of the information, if they get it at all. Mr. Soott. You said a moment ago that a large number of the em- ployees on your roll are kept during most of the session of Congress until 5 or 5.30 o'clock. Mr. Hill. That would be an exaggeration — not during the most of the session of Congress, but frequently during the session we have to keep them late. Mr. Scott. When that is the case what arrangement do you make for extra pay ? Mr. Hill. None. The law prohibits it; the law says the Secretary may exact extra hours, but he can not compensate with extra pay. It is only the laborers that get extra pay. I want to say, Mr. Chairman, it is a little overlooked that our people have been giving the extra work that they have. Lots of our people give more than the half hour amounts to. The Chairman. Would that be an average for a year — a half hour a day? Mr. Hill. It would come, every year, very near it. If you remem- ber, we give the half holiday on Saturdays very cheerfully and ungrudgingly to the Government service. We exact that from our employees. Mr. Adams. We figure the Government would gain fifteen to six- teen days' actual work. Mr. Hill. I think that is it. 1 have figured that out. The most responsible men I have put in from twenty to thirty days of extra work — the equivalent of twenty or thirty days of extra work. Mr. Adams. Are you quite sure of that? Mr. Hill. 1 know it, sir. You have not got a finer lot of men in the world than my force. Let me tell you this. I have had many of my men face a lot of work that I know would take a man four or five hours to do, at 4 o'clock in the afternoon, and I know they have brought it to me completed at 9 o'clock the next morning, many and many a time. As soon as they find out I want it, and I am going to be disappointed if I do not get it, I get it.""' Mr. Bowie. Those are the men you want to promote? Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. Is it not a fact that many of your men do hot take a thirty -day leave? Mr. Hill. I do not think that in the fourteen years I have been here that I can think of a half dozen cases where responsible men have taken thirty days of leave. Mr. Bowie. All of it, you mean? Mr. Hill. All of it, I mean. I have been there fourteen years last July, and I do not think I have had thirty days in all that time. The Chairman. Why do they not take their leave ? The law says they can. Mr. Hill. If the Secretary permits. The Chairman. I thought it was obligatory. Mr. Hill. No, sir; it is purely permissive. The Chairman. Is the act in your Department exceptional? 810 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Hill. No, sir. You will find the law says that where the De- partment shall be so and so, the head of the Department may, in his discretion, if the work of the Department permits, allow employes not to exceed thirty days' leave, during the year. The Chairman. I have been here sixteen or eighteen years, and that is absolutely new to me. I though that obligatory. Mr. Hill. It is with the Public Printer. It is made obligatory, but on the other hand they never ask a man The Chairman (reading). "One second assistant in document sec- tion." Do you think you need two assistants there? Mr. Hill. Indeed, Mr. Chairman, I do. It is perfectly impossible for me or Mr. Arnold to be free when occasion requires Mr. Handy's absence. You must remember, Mr. Chairman, another thing, that that section is scattered all over an acre of ground. The Chairman. You have a foreman in the document section at 11,400. You have one assistant in charge of the document section Mr. Hill. At present getting $1,800. The Chairman. You want him increased to $2,000? Mr. Hill. I would like to get him increased a couple of hundred dollars; he has never had an increase. The Chairman. Who is the foreman? Mr. Hill. A man named Hendricks; but he is not competent to take Mr. Handy's place in any way. It would be like appointing a sergeant to be captain; some of them are good sergeants, but not fit to be captains. The Chairman. What is the character of the foreman's work ? Mr. Hill. He simply has charge of some 30 men who do what I call the heavy work — mailing of the Year Book and Horse Book, the mail- ing of the Soil Report; he superintends men who do practically manual labor. The civil service calls it "semi-clerical," because they have to know how to read and write. The Chairman. . If it is manual labor, you are giving him a pretty big salary. Mr. Hill. He supervises 20 or 30 men, too. It is the supervision we pay for. The only fault I have to find with the old man is that he tries to do too much manual labor. The Chairman. How long has he been there ? Mr. Hill. About eight, or nine, or ten } T ears. Mr. Lamb. What is his name? Mr. Hill. Hendricks. The Chairman. How old is he? Mr. Hill. That is a delicate subject; but he was all through the war; he is an old soldier; I should judge he is a man in the late sixties. The Chairman. Nearly 70 years old? Mr. Hill. I should think so. The Chairman. It is all owing to his age or decrepitude that you feel bound to ask for a second assistant for him ? Mr. Hill. No, sir; but he can not supervise outside of these men, and I want a second assistant. I want a man who has got education, a man who can write letters, a man who can dictate, a man who under- stands bookkeeping. The foreman understands nothing about book- keeping. We keep accounts; we keep a ledger account with every Senator and Member of Congress; we keep card indexes, and things HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 311 of that sort. I have got to have a man with clerical experience and education as second assistant. Mr. Scott. Did you say the foreman knows nothing about book- keeping, and you must keep books; what have you been doing here- tofore ? Mr. Hill. I have been keeping it with a part of the clerical force, but to our very great disadvantage. I have been helping Mr. Handy in a spasmodic way, sending somebody over there at times. I want somebody to be there permanently. You see our force is scattered; our document-section force is in three different buildings, a great many rooms, and Mr. Handy, with all his good qualities, is far from being ubiquitous. He is absent a great deal, from one place to another. He is very earnest, tries his very best, but I need to give him help; it has grown beyond us. The present force has not been increased in that section, Mr. Chairman, since the time when we issued 7,000,000 publications during the year, and we handled nearly 12,000,000 last year. We are accomplishing a great deal more for the reason that we are getting rid of the "dead wood," little by little. My force is getting more and more efficient as time goes on. We are accomplishing more and we are doing 25 per cent more work, without additional help, than we were doing four years ago. But it is The Chairman. Are you troubled much with what is generally called "dry rot," either on your lump sum or statutory roll? Mr. Hill. There are a few ladies and gentlemen that 1 could spare, but they seem to have too much influence to be gotten rid of. 1 think we probably have as little " dry rot" as anywhere. Mr. Lever. Your force is under the civil service ? Mr. Hill. Yes. The Chairman (resuming). What percentage of the whole — 10 per cent? Mr. Hill. No, sir; I should think it was less. The Chairman. Five in 100? Mr. Hill. I thiAk possibly I might, out of my force of 150 or 160, if I had to do it, take out about 8 or 10 or 12 that I would be glad to see taken away. The Chairman. Mostly on account of age, or on account of incom- petency ? Mr. Hill. With some, natural meanness; some, just natural lazi- ness; some, because they can not see why I am worrying about their doing work when they have got pull enough to keep them there with- out doing it. The Chairman. Have you ever tried to get rid of them? Mr. Hill. I furnish a semiannual report, in which I state that their absence would be better than their company. I try to persuade them to resign; sometimes I have made them unhappy enough so that they have resigned. Mr. Bowie. Have you any power to discharge them ? Mr. Hill. No; I have no punitive power whatever; that belongs to the chief clerk. The Chairman. He makes the recommendation and it goes to the Secretary ? Mr. Hill. I make the recommendation. Mr. Burleson. The chief clerk of the Department of Agriculture? Mr. Hill. Of the Department of Agriculture. 312 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Burleson. Who is the chief clerk? Mr. Hill. Col. S. B. Burch. A Member. I thought Geddes was chief clerk? Mr. Hill. He has not been for nearly six months. The Chairman. If these 8 or 10 people that you think are incom- petent for one reason or another were supplanted by 8 or 10 good people you would not ask any increase? Mr. Hill. Well The Chairman. I do not mean increase in salary, but increase in your force. Mr. Hill. Well, Mr. Chairman, I am asking for so little increase now for force ; I would have to for what we have already been decreased; and I would have to ask, anyway, because the people I speak of are so insignificant as regards salary and position — "the dead wood" — it would not help me in the points we have been making. When it comes to the other $10,000 we are going to get to, that is mostly for material. There is very little of wages there, except for some additional photo- graphic help. The Chairman. I thought we "sat upon" photographic help, or photographs, last year? Mr. Hill. We sat down on expensive illustrations, and that is what increases photographic work. Mr. Burleson. Before we pass from these 8 or 10 clerks, it strikes me that when it is brought to our attention that there are 8 or 10 men in any division who are not rendering proper service, who are ineffi- cient and idle, and when the chief of the division says that he has tried to get rid of them and can not, on account of "pull," 1 think we ought to ask who they are. Send for the chief clerk, and ask him why he does not dispense with their services. The Chairman. Did the committee understand you to say that you had recommended their discharge ? Mr. Hill. I have never formally recommended it; I have discussed the matter occasionally with the chief clerk, that such and such a one was a very ' ' poor sister. " In some cases I have discovered there are reasons; in one or two cases they may be eleemosynary; may be cases almost of charity. I can think of one case now that I think is largely due to long and faithful service of many j^ears of a father who is now help- less. He served his country for many years in responsible positions at a good salary and he is now old, helpless, and I think the party who is trying to do this work is conscientious and does the best possible, but is not very fit for work. Mr. Haskins. You say the influence of Senators and Members of Congress keep them there ? Mr. Hill. As a rule; yes, sir. It is generally something of that sort; yes, sir. I think that the reduction which has gone on with us in that respect has been very satisfactory, and that has given us all hope. There has been a continual sloughing off of that kind of thing, and no additions to it. Mr. Bowie. You think the present Congress is improving in that respect? Mr. Hill. Either in that respect or it is becoming to think it is a kind of hopeless matter to get people on now. W e are hedged about with a great many regulations, you know, but I do not think they get after us as they used to do. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 318 Mr. Adams. We can not. The civil-service business comes in. Mr. Hill. It does; and it helps a good deal, but there has been a steady reduction in that direction for the last five years. The Chairman. You have never really made a distinct recommenda- tion for the discharge of these incompetent people? Mr. Hill. I have in two cases, but they were both old soldiers, and the Secretary told me he would not discharge an old soldier; said he would punish them, suspend them, and try to make them see the errors of their ways, but he would not discharge an old soldier. The Chairman. What was the punishment in that case ? Mr. Hill. One man was f urloughed for a fortnight with loss of pay. The Chairman. Do you know what those men are getting to-day ? Mr. Hill. One of them the Lord took to himself a few months ago. Mr. Bowie. Were they incompetent or did they commit breaches of discipline, of insubordination ? Mr. Hill. Incompetent and insubordinate, and occasionally very drunk. On anniversaries, for instance; and anniversaries of great battles were very much to be dreaded. The Chairman. What salary does the man get who still holds his position there. Mr. Hill. $60. I have asked to reduce him to $40. I have con- cluded that he wastes so much money that the less salary he has the better it is. Mr. Haugen. It is possible for you to reduce their salaries ? Mr. Hill. I have no punitive power at all. I can not suspend him for two days. If he became particularly offensive I would ask him to leave the place, and refer it to the chief clerk to see what he would do. Mr. Lamb. The Secretary suspends them when they fight? Mr. Hill. When they fight; yes. The Chairman. I think we will have to pass to your lump-sum appropriation. You ask for $15,000 for additional assistance — edito- rial, proof reading, inspecting, and other necessary help in the city of Washington or elsewhere, etc. — and an increase to $90,000 for labor and material required in the distribution of documents — both of those cover labor of certain kinds ? Mr. Hill. The additional assistance cover occasionally an additional emergency clerk, an additional artist, and occasionally when we have to purchase manuscript The Chairman. Who from ? Mr. Hill. We sometimes find a man who is possessed of a certain amount of very valuable information upon some line of work in which we are engaged, and we want to publish it, and we want to publish it as a publication of the Department. The Chairman. Those are men who are not connected with the Government? Mr. Hill. They are not connected with the Government. We could not do that if they were. The Chairman. I think I have seen some of those that were fur- nished by the officials of the experimental stations. Mr. Hill. They are, frequently, by some of the officials of the experimental stations. The matter was decided by the Comptroller that they were not employees of the Department, and could not be treated that way. The Chairman. I remember seeing those publications. 314 HEARINGS BEFOEE COMMITTEE ON AGBICULTUBE. Mr. Hill. Occasionally, for farmers' bulletins. Mr. Henry. Not very many of those, Mr. Hill? Mr. Hill. Not very many. The Chairman. Very few. I remember seeing one on irrigation expenses last year. Mr. Hill. The foreman that is now an employee of our department; there was a time we got one from him, as a drainage expert. We got one from him; and occasionally we have a Yearbook article, and in addition to that we pay our artists — the bulk of our artists — from that fund; but it is not altogether a permanent force. We have left it in that lump sum because we have occasionally to put on a man for two or three weeks — sometimes for two or three months — and yet not permanently; and there are a few of them that have practically become permanent because they have grown up to our work. Then in our photographic work, in our efforts to reduce the more expensive illustrations and to avoid the expense of artists, we use photography more and more. We have a very good equipment, and I find it absolutely necessary for me to have one or more assistants at work in that line. But I can §et assistants at from $840 to $1,000 in that line, that would cost from 1,200 to $1,400 if I had to put artists on. It would cost at least $1,000 more in wages, for artists, than it would Mr. Bowie. Do the plates cost any different? Mr. Hill. That would be mechanical; but as to the artists them- selves, you can get a man who will help in our photographic laboratory for $400 or $500 less than I can get a first-class artist Mr. Bowie. 1 want to know what you save on the plates. Mr. Hill. A great deal less on the plates. We are doing much more line engraving and half-tone, all of which is done with our pho- tographic work, and we help a great deal on the map work, and save a great deal. Most of our illustrations are made by photography, where a few years ago we made them by hand. Mr. Burleson. Did you print that [showing map], issued by Biol- ogist? Mr. Hill. I think I did. That was prepared here; yes. Mr. Burleson. How much does that cost? Mr. Hill. 1 could not tell you. Mr. Burleson. Approximately? Mr. Hill. It is one of the most difficult things in the world. I would have to count the colors and know the exact size of the edition, which I can not remember. Mr. Burleson. It would cost $300 or $400? Mr. Hill. I should think so, yes; in bulletin form I should say about $300 — I should think that would be a safe estimate, but I would not like to be tied down to $50 one way or the other. That is for an issue for 3,500 or 4,000 copies. Mr. Graff. Are these farmers' bulletins that are issued, all of them, extracted from the same matter that goes into the Yearbook? Mr. Hill. By no means. That occasionally happens. We occa- sionally have a Yearbook article that is good material for a farmers' bulletin, and there is no use sending a man a whole Yearbook because he simply wants the one article, so we reissue it as a farmers' bulletin; but that has happened I, think, in only about half a dozen cases. Mr. Graff. Are not these employees of the Department in any HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 315 capacity, in jour department of investigation, bound to furnish arti- cles when they are asked to do so in the line of their work without extra charge? Mr. Hill. Certainly. Most of our farmers' bulletins are written by employees of the Department who get no extra remuneration. It is rare that we have an article in our Yearbook that is not written by one of our men. It has happened very seldom, and they get no extra remuneration. Mr. Bowie. I want to ask you one question. You stated once or twice this morning, and I have heard it frequently before, that the Department had many more requisitions for Yearbooks than it had ? Mr. Hill. Three times as many as we have. Mr. Bowie. Why can not that be corrected by increasing the Department quota threefold? What is the use of printing it without furnishing it to everybody that wants them ? And just fill out those that ask for it in your list of correspondents — your regular list — and then stop. Mr. Hill. We practically use that entirely as a sort of remunera- tion for correspondents and collaborators who work for the Depart- ment for nothing, and one of the few things we can do toward keeping them ready to help us, is to give them some of our publications, espe- cially the Yearbooks. Mr. Lamb. You do not send that Yearbook to anybody but these? Mr. Hill. No, sir; that is one reason we got into trouble with Members of Congress, because we have to state to them that our quota is exhausted, and they can only get one by applying to your Senator or Bepresentative. The Chairman. You remember last year attention was called to what was considered a tendency to over illustrate ? Some of the illus- trations we considered rather ridiculous. Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Has there been any determined effort to curb that tendency ? Mr. Hill. There has, most assuredly. I do not think you can show in twelve months a single example of serious overillustration, or one that would compare with three or four cases that were brought up here a year ago. The Chairman. You can not show me another photograph of a hog- pen, can you ? Mr. Hill. I think not. The Chairman. That was one of the most ridiculous things I have ever seen, I think. One of these bulletins contained a photograph of a plank hogpen down in Georgia. A determined effort has been made, Mr. Hill? Mr. Hill. A determined effort — most assuredly. If you were to consult with the authorities, and show sympathy, they would denounce me. The Chairman. This volume here is pretty profusely illustrated [indicating]. Mr. Hill. What one is that? The Chairman. Soils. Mr. Hill. For a volume of that kind I think there were between 40 and 50, and there were 100 submitted. 316, HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Scott. Who determines what bulletins shall be issued and what shall not be issued? Mr. Hill. Well, sir, that is mainly the head of the bureau. If he says that he has information that is worth printing and ought to go out, it is generally conceded to him that it is so. Mr. Scott. Is there any place in the Department where the cost of each individual bulletin is figured and placed on record ? Mr. Hill. Yes, sir, and charged to each bureau. Mr. Scott. Where is that? Mr. Hill. My report will show you the exact amount chargeable to the printing fund of each bureau and division in the Department. I keep a ledger account with each one of them. Mr. Graff. Do you mean the amount is deducted from the appro- priation and set aside for that particular bureau ? Mr. Hill. We have no printing appropriation set aside for each bureau. It simply enables me to keep one man from "hogging" the whole thing. It keeps me posted as to how much each one is spend- ing. Sometimes, of course, you will see that one is spending a great deal more than another, but there seems to be a good reason. It does not become a burning question only until the last three months of the fiscal year, when the fund begins to run low, and I have to concede to one man who has not had his share for the previous nine months, and, perhaps, to the exclusion of another man who has had more than his share. Mr. Graff. Do the heads of the different bureaus show a disposi- tion to be governed in the issuing of bulletins that Mr. Hill. I think so, sir. There is another thing. In most of the bureau appropriations there is a clause which permits them to pay for printing, and we get after them that way — " if you want this, you can have it by paying for it yourself, out of your own funds; you can not have it out of the general printing fund." The Chairman. In view of the two orders requiring clerks to work a half hour additional every day, you will still recommend that $5,000, and eliminate the other portion of it — the $2,000 for labor? Mr. Hill. Between $2,500 and $3,000 is for material. I have run short of material this year. I tell you frankly, Mr. Chairman, I hope to be able to use that for promotions of from $40 to $50 and from $50 to $60. I do not expect to add a single person to my force. They have handled the work so cheerfully and so well, and so cheerfully performed extra work, and all that kind of thing, I am inclined to think we will be able to pull through without increasing the force. There are women there who used to write 500 franks a day who have gotten so they write 700 or 800. I really find it is more economical to increase the efficiency of the force than it is to increase the number. There is another thing: I can not increase the number, because I have not room, and I must do my best to increase the efficiency of the force, and would like very much to have a couple thousand dollars leeway. If you will notice the total of my increase, Mr. Chairman, it is barely 5 per cent increase on this year. The Chairman. What was the increase last year? Mr. Hill. There was none, sir, except $500 on the total amount, except in the printing fund. The Chairman. Was there not an increase in the lump sum? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 317 Mr. Hill. No, sir; there was a little readjustment in the lump sum, but there was no increase in this year over last. There was an ap- parent increase because the material, labor, got 85 instead of 80, but you took it off of the farmers' bulletin and additional assistants, and, except the increase in my own salary of $500, there was no increase. The Chairman. Yes; we only had $280,000 in 1904, Mr. Hill, was it not? Mr. Hill. In 1903 the appropriations were just the same, Mr. Chairman, as for 1904. The Chairman. You had $200,000 last year? Mr. Hill. I had $200,000 last year, and 1 have got $200,000 this year. The Chairman. Yes; that is right. Mr. Hill. So it is an increase of 5 per cent in two years. And, as I say, the amount required for additional assistants, a good share of that will have to be to enable us to cheapen the illustration work, to meet the increase at the least expense possible, by enlarging our pho- tographic facilities; and of the other five thousand, nearly three thousand has got to be allowed for labor. The Chairman. That is the second five thousand. Mr. Hill. I do not expect to add a single person to the force. I think possibly the additional hours may help us to get through, though I have never had any trouble about that. My people never fail to respond when 1 ask them to work for an hour later. They always do it without grumbling, and cheerfully; and it was a little convenience to us leaving it free in that way, because we worked them until 5 o'clock when there was an emergency, and let them get out at 4 o'clock when there was not an emergency. The Chairman. A year ago we allowed you to purchase a wagon, horses, etc. Has that been a source of economy to you? Mr. Hill. Yes, sir; in fact it has been more than a source of econ- omy. We actually could not have done the work. We would have had to hire men. The Chairman. You used to hire, but you have found it more eco- nomical to do it with your own horses. Mr. Hill. A great deal. Of course, there is a great deal in the convenience. We have it there, and we keep it very busy. The Chairman. Could you not have wagons by the month, by contract? Mr. Hill. I never thought of that. I never tried that. The Chairman. A great many people job their carriages by the month. Mr. Hill. We have this team now in use constantly for over two years and it is the greatest kind of a convenience. You see the mail work has become something perfectly tremendous. I can load seventy- five or eighty bags on that wagon at one clip, and it is always there when the material is ready to go, and we get at it; and we do not have to wait for a man to come and call for it; and we have so little room that it is a matter of great importance to us. We have hardly room to turn around in when we get stuff together; it must go out. The Chairman. How much are you paying the driver of that wagon ? Mr. Hill. I am paying him only $50; I think he is worth The equipment is worth $1,300 or $1,400. The Chairman. How much does it cost to maintain your horses ? 318 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Hill. That does not come out of my fund, and I do not know. I am hoping that nobody will bring up that question, because if they do they will make me pay for it. The Chairman. I do not believe if you get the dollars and cents together you will find it is any economy. Mr. Hill. Possibly not, sir. The Chairman. In the first place, the average dray and livery stable man here does not pay $50 or $60 a month for his driver, to start with, and men who make a business of that thing feed 60 or 100 horses cheaper than 5 or 6? Mr. Hill. We did not have any additional barn room. We found barn room for them by readjustment of the stable that was there. The Chairman. But you had to buy horses? Mr. Hill. We have bought the horses, and we have got to have a man as a driver who is a little better than the ordinary. He has got to handle the post-office people, and he has got to have a good deal of intelligence; then he has got to handle things for members of Con- gress. The members of Congress took 4,000,000 of farmers' bulle- tins last year; and I think we have got to have rather something bet- ter than an ordinary teamster. The Chairman. It is a small detail. I wanted to know if it was a matter of economy; as a matter of fact I did not think you would find it economical. Mr. Hill. It is really something on which I am not competent. I know so little about horseflesh — I never kept but one in my life — I think he had to be shod every two days ; and I sold him. The Chairman. As a matter of fact your rush does not come steadily, it is periodical during the year; and at times you are comparatively easy? Mr. Hill. There are times when we are comparatively easy; but we have pretty good steady work all the time, now, but unfortunately the absence of a watchman or 'the departure of somebody else does not occur with special reference to our easy times, and we have a great deal of trouble in helping them out. A man turns up sick in the post- office and they send to me to know if I can not supply his place; a watchman fails to turn up and I have to help out. The Chairman. Are there any further questions the committee wishes to ask of Mr. Hill ? If not we will stand adjourned until 2 o'clock p. m. Thereupon the committee adjourned until 2 o'clock p. m. AFTER RECESS. The committee met, Hon. James W. Wadsworth in the chair. Mr. Frank L. Evans, chief and disbursing clerk, division of accounts and disbursements, Department of Agriculture, appeared before the committee. STATEMENT OF MR. FRANK L. EVANS. The Chairman. Mr. Evans, the chief of the division of accounts of the Agricultural Department, is before us, gentlemen. You have what might be called the Secretary's roll, have you not, Mr. Evans? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; I have some figures here. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 319 The Chairman. Would you not be the proper person to consult in regard to that on the estimates for what is called the office of the Sec- retary. Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. The Chairman. The chief clerk, the telegraph and telephone opera- tors, and there is an increase asked for an assistant engineer, and other things asked for. Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Who would have specific charge of these people? You do, do you not? Mr. Evans. Not entirely; no. The Chairman. Whom ought we to see about that roll? Mr. Evans. The chief clerk of the Department. •The Chairman. Then let us go to page 21, division of accounts and disbursements. The first change that I notice there is the increase of the salary of the chief of the division, $250, making it $3,000, instead of $2,750 which you get now. Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. The Chairman. I suppose that you have a little delicacy about giv- ing your reasons for your own increase, but you may state in your own way to the committee why you think that you ought to have an increase. Mr. Evans. That increase was based upon the work and the respon- sibility that I have as chief of the division, not as disbursing clerk. As chief of the division I have a great deal of work to do that other disbursing clerks, the disbursing clerks in other departments, have not. For instance, all the accounts of the Department are prepared in my office, audited, and paid there. In the other departments, as a general thing, the accounts are prepared in another division, and merely come to the disbursing clerk for payment. With me, from start to finish, it is all in my office. The Chairman. And any appropriation for your Department passes through your office? Mr. Evans. Yes; I am the only disbursing clerk of the Department. I pay all the moneys for the different appropriations. All the requi- sitions for supplies are issued by me and over my signature. All letters of authorization for travel and otherwise are issued by me, and all requisitions for transportation and orders for transportation of Government property are issued over my signature. I prepare the schedules for annual supplies and all the legal work of the Department is done in my division and under my supervision and direction. All those things are really outside of my duty as disbursing clerk. The Chairman. What increases have you had? Mr. Evans. I have had only one increase, which came the 1st of last July. The Chairman. You had $2,500 before that? Mr. Evans. I had $2,500 for a good many years. And the appro- priations for the last ten years have doubled, from about $2,600,000 to $5,200,000 for the present year. The Chairman. It has more than doubled? Mr. Evans. More than doubled. Mr. Adams. It is $6,000,000, is it not? Mr. Graff. Do 1 understand this increase is for the present year? Mr. Evans. For the present year. 320 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. It is in effect now, since the 1st day of last July? Mr. Evans. Since the 1st day of last July. Mr. Graff.' That carries $3,000. The Chairman. The estimate was submitted. Has the number of employees increased any — in your division? Mr. Evans. They have increased; yes, sir, somewhat. They have increased from 13 to 21, and several of those are detailed from other branches of the Department. The Chairman. There is one assistant chief of the division; he is for the Weather Bureau? Mr. Evans. Yes. He is in charge of the present weather accounts division of the Weather Bureau. The Chairman. That increase, you remember, gentlemen, was advo- cated by Professor Moore here the other day, so that we will not touch upon it with Mr. Evans. Mr. Scott. You spoke just now of some of the clerks in your division being detailed from other divisions in the Department. Mr. Evans. From other branches; yes, sir. Mr. Scott. How many are there, on the average? Mr. Evans. There are 5, 1 think, now. Mr. Scott. Would that mean that some division has had more clerks than it needed. Mr. Evans. More than it needed, and they furnished these addi- tional clerks in order to enable me to do this additional work. Mr. Scott. As a matter of fact, then, a certain number of clerks ought to be cut out of some other division and put into yours ? It is not good administration, is it, to give one division more clerks than it needs with the expectation that they will be detailed into some other division ? Mr. Evans. No, sir; that would be the proper thing, to give them permanently to this division. Mr. Scott. Is it not true that these clerks are doing the work of those separate divisions in your division? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Working on the accounts of those bureaus? Mr. Evans. When detailed from a bureau that clerk has charge of the accounts of that bureau; for instance, the clerk from the Bureau of Plant Industry has the accounts of his division. The clerk detailed from the Bureau of Soils has charge of the accounts of that Bureau, and so forth, and practically they should be paid from the appropria- tions of those several Bureaus. Mr. Scott. I understand, but you know that there has been a good deal of criticism about this practice that has prevailed in nearly all of the Departments of detailing clerks from one part of a Department to another, or even from one Department to another Department in some cases, and it seems to me that that is bad administration. Mr. Adams. That is economy, sometimes. For instance, in our State government — and it can not be very different here — we have in our State capitol several hundred clerks, and there a,re times in the year when it is absolutely required to have the whole force in one department, and in another part of the year there is no work to do in that department, and they are sometimes transferred, and in a case of that kind it is an economical measure, and it might occur in these Departments here. I do not say that it does; I do not know. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 321 Mr. Evans. There was a question submitted to the Comptroller about a year ago, and he decided that it was proper for such details to be made, under the law. The Chairman. You spoke of a supervising auditor. That is abso- lutely new? Mr. Evans. That is new; yes, sir. The Chairman. That is the next item. Professor Moore, you know, spoke about that. This is an instance of one of those details, Mr. Scott. The chief of the division is paid by the Weather Bureau ? Mr. Evans. No, sir; he is paid on my roll. The Chairman. But he attends specifically to the Weather Bureau accounts? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; all the time. He simply goes back and forth to report to me, and he is there to do that work. The Chairman. Are his headquarters with you in your office? Mr. Evans. No, sir; his headquarters are in the Weather Bureau. The Chairman. That is what I thought. I have always seen him there when I went there. Mr. Evans. His headquarters are at the Weather Bureau, but he is carried on my roll, and he is detailed there as a matter of convenience because the building being located at another part of the city it is more convenient. The Chairman. I thought that this stood on all fours with the other details, but it seems that it does not. In a way he is one of Mr. Evans's subordinates, and yet in a way he is the subordinate of the Weather Bureau. He is a subordinate of both of you, in a way, is he not? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; he is detailed there because the accounts of that office are there, and the clerk doing that work is there, and it is more convenient to send him there than to bring them to the Department. Mr. Scott. There is no danger, I suppose, of his being carried on a salary in both of your offices, is there ? Mr. Evans. No danger of that; no, sir. Mr. Scott. What bureaus have details to your office? Name them specifically, these five clerks? Mr. Evans. The Bureau of Plant Industry, the Bureau of Animal Industry, the Bureau of Forestry, and the Division of Publications; and the other detail is only temporary— that is, for a short time, on account of additional work. Mr. Scott. To meet an emergency at certain times of the month, on pay days, or something of that sort, in special times of emergency ? Mr. Evans. Just to meet emergencies; yes, sir. The Chairman. Now, you estimate for a supervising auditor, and that is an absolutely new place. What do you propose to do with the supervising auditor, and what is the necessity for that? Mr. Evans. To have the accounts, after thej r have passed the usual audit under my direction, to be supervised by another clerk who will be under the Secretary, to give them an administrative audit, as it were, so as to catch up anything that might escape the first audit, and to be an audit that is practically outside of my office, as it were. The clerk is located there, but the audit will be under the direction of the Secretary and under his supervision. It is an additional safeguard. The Chairman. Is there any evidence of mistakes being made that suggests an additional supervision ? c a 21 322 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Evans. No; nothing of that kind. They have a board now in the Treasury Department who have been making some investigations in regard to the methods of accounting, and so on, in the Treasury, by direction of the Secretary of the Treasury, and one of the things they propose to recommend, it seems, is that after the accounts have been audited and paid, and passed practically out of the hands of the dis- bursing officer, then there shall be a second audit under the direction of the head of the Department before the accounts go into the Treasury. Mr. Scott. Is it not rather late to have that audit after the accounts nave been paid ? Mr. Evans. It would seem so, because the accounts go to the Treas- ury Department and are audited there, and any discrepancies would be caught there. Mr. Levee. This suggestion comes from the Secretary of the Treasury ? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. This is an audit by the Secretary of the Treasury, practically. Mr. Levek. And you want to be able to meet that suggestion ? Mr. Evans. Yes; it is in anticipation of any action that may be taken on that suggestion. The Chairman. Did you recommend this to the Secretary ? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; that was talked over with the Secretary, and the Secretary wishes it. And he thinks that ^t will be an additional safeguard. The Chairman. It strikes me that this is like locking the door after the horse is stolen. Mr. Lorimer. Is this audit to be made after the account ispaid? Mr. Evans. Yes, it is an audit between my office and the Treasury Department. Mr. Lorimer. Before the account is paid ? Mr. Evans. No, sir; after it is paid. Mr. Lorimer. After the account is paid? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; before the account is paid and referred to the Treasury Department. Mr. Graff. You pay the accounts and submit them to the Treasury afterwards ? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. Mr. Graff. And approve them. Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Mr. Evans is a bonded officer, and he takes^ the responsibility on any of his accounts that are paid and are refused by the Treasury. On any such accounts he has to make good. That is correct? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; that is correct, and the Treasury has just doubled my bond. The Chairman. How much bond do you' have to give? Mr. Evans. $50,000. The Chairman. What kind of a bond do you give ? Mr. Evans. The bond of a security company. Mr. Scott. Would this second auditor have access to exactly the same-papers that the present Auditor has access to? Mr. Evans. Precisely. Mr. Scott. Nothing more or nothing less ? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 323 Mr. Evans. Nothing more and nothing less. The Chairman. The officers of the Treasury Department have to furnish additional bonds? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. The Chairman. The same amount that you do ? Mr. Evans. Yes; as the old bonds lapse in issuing new bonds they make the amounts the same. The Chairman. How much do you have to pay for that bond of yours ? Mr. Evans. It is costing me about $125. The Chairman. $125 a year? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. Mr. Henry. Have there been any discrepancies in the accounts that have made these recommendations which have been made seem necessary ? Mr. Evans. This has really come up on account of the War De- partment trouble, the trouble with the disbursing clerk there. If you will remember, a short time ago the disbursing clerk of the War De- partment died and after his death it came out that he had been raising vouchers after they had been paid, and in one instance he increased a voucher from a very small sum to the amount of $10,000, and it was paid and allowed by the Treasury. Mr. Henry. That was some years ago? Mr. Evans. Not very long ago ? The Chairman. How did he do that; how did he get that voucher paid? Mr. Henry. It had been paid, had it not? Mr. Evans. No, sir; he raised the voucher from a small amount, whatever it was, to $10,000. That voucher went to the Treasury, and there was nothing on 'the face of it to show any irregularity in any way, and it was allowed there, and he was given credit for it, and he drew a check for $10,000 and made it come in a roundabout way, so that he got the difference between the small amount of the original voucher, whatever it was, and the $10,000. Mr. Scott. Suppose you tell us the manner, the method, in which your appropriation is drawn from the Treasury ? Mr. Evans. In the first place I make a requisition on the Treasury, which is signed by the Secretary. That goes to the Treasury, and it goes to the division of bookkeeping and warrants. They see whether there is money on their books, sufficient money, to cover this amount. They refer it to the auditor, who audits my accounts, and he compares it with his books and sees that it is all regular as far as is shown. The Chairman. The Treasury keeps account of every one of these funds ? Mr. Evans. Of everything. The Chairman. Of each bureau fund ? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. Then it goes back to the division of book- keeping and warrants, and they enter it up in their books, and from there it goes to the Secretary of the Treasury, who signs it; and then it goes from there to the Comptroller, who sees that it is all regular as far as his office is concerned; and it goes from the Comptroller back to the Secretary of the Treasury, and from the Secretarj^ of the Treas- ury down to the division of accounts, and from the accounts division 324 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. into the cash room, where it goes to my credit on their books; and when it goes on their books I can draw against it, and not until then. Mr. Scott. What governs you in the amount of your requisition? Mr. Evans. The number of vouchers that I have for payment and in sight, and I draw that requisition against the different appropria- tions. Mr. Scott. How often do you draw a requisition — once a week or once a day ? Mr. Evans. That depends altogether on the way the vouchers accumulate. Mr. Scott. It is riot a matter of periodicity ? Mr. Evans. No, sir. In the first half of the month there are a great many more vouchers than we have in the last part of the month, and a large portion of the vouchers coming in the early part of the month are salary vouchers — pay rolls. Mr. Scott. Do you pay those vouchers in cash or by check ? Mr. Evans. By check, personal check. Mr. Scott. Against the Treasury of the United States ? Mr. Evans. Against the assistant treasurer of the United States in Chicago and The Chairman. You do not pay by your personal check? Mr. Evans. No, sir; by official check. Mr. Scott. I mean that the check is signed by yourself officially 'i Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. I have a credit in Washington and with the assistant treasurer in New York and with the assistant treasurer in Chicago, so as to make it convenient for people out in the West to have their checks cashed. The Chairman. Now, if you by any chance audit a voucher wrong- fully, you are charged with it? Mr. Evans. I am charged with it; yes, sir. Mr. Adams. It might happen that if you were to pay an account and the warrant was issued by the Treasury, a warrant issued there, and then this new auditor should come in, his work would be liable to occur after the transaction was all completed, as I understand it, the work of this supervising auditor? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; after the transaction is completed and the voucher paid. Mr. Adams. If a man comes in who is an outsider and he has a bill against your Department, and he gets that bill paid and goes out with the money, and the Auditor comes in and finds an error in that pay- ment Mr. Evans. Then my bond is good for it. Mr. Adams. Your bond is good for it? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. Would they not discover that at the Treasury Depart- ment? Mr. Evans. Yes; in all probability they would. The Chairman. How many years have you been in the Department ? Mr. Evans. Twenty-nine years. The Chairman. What did you start at? Mr. Evans. I started as a laborer at $540 a year in the seed division, and I went there expecting to be there about six months. The Chairman. And you have been there ever since? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 325 Mr. Evans: Yes; I got married and expenses accumulated, and Mr. Adams. You could not get away ? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. Mr. Haugen. This assistant chief properly belongs to your office? Mr. Evans. Yes. Mr. Zapponi. Mr. Haugen. He should be retained there? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; he is a part of my division. Mr. Haugen. It will be practicable, then, to assign the disbursing officers to any of the different bureaus or divisions? Mr. Evans. It would be practicable. There would be no advantage in it. Mr. Haugen. There would be no advantage? Mr. Evans. No, sir; no advantage at all. Mr. Haugen. The cashier; where is he? Mr. Evans. He is in my office. Mr. Haugen. Did you not state that there were two men in your office detailed to the different divisions? Mr. Evans. No, sir; they are detailed from other divisions to me. The cashier is one. Mr. Haugen. There is only one man detailed by you. Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; only one detailed by me; that is to the Weather Bureau. Mr. Haugen. The reason that I asked was, I thought there was a suggestion here. That this man would be transferred to the Weather Bureau, Mr. Moore's division? Mr. Evans. Transferred to the Weather Bureau ? Mr. Haugen. Yes. There was a suggestion of it. Mr. Evans. There would be no advantage in that. Mr. Haugen. I should think that it would be advantageous to have it under you? Mr. Evans. Yes, I think so; and then the Government would have to deal with me instead of with two or three persons. Mr. Haugen. It would simply lead up to a disbursing office in every division or department of the Bureau. Mr. Evans. It might come to that. The Chairman. Do you not have charge of the contingent fund? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. The Chairman. There is no increase asked there? Mr. Evans. Nothing asked there. The Chairman. There is no change in that. Are there any of these other subdivisions that y ou have ? You have not any others, have you ? Mr. Evans. No; the supply division comes, in a great measure, under me. The Chairman. Do you call that contingent? Mr. Evans. The expenses there are paid largely from the contin- gent. All the stationery and supplies of that nature are paid from the contingent. All supplies for general use are paid for out of the contingent fund. Mr. Lorimer. I would like to ask why, if this auditor is appointed, the auditing can not be done before the money is paid out. Mr. Evans. Why it should not be clone? Mr. Lorimer. Why can it not be done before the money is paid, so as to check any discrepancy that might occur in the examination of the first auditor. 326 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Evans. The idea would be that in case there is any connivance on my part with anyone under nly direct supervision while the account is in my bands, that after that there will be another audit made which will catch any irregularity or fraud. Mr. Adams. Mr. Lorimer wants to know why that could not de done before the account is paid. Mr. Evans.' It could be done before. Mr. Loeimek. It does not necessarily follow that this man is to be appointed to prevent the first auditor from stealing. I take it that he is appointed largely to detect any error that might honestly be made. And why should not, if we are going to make an appropriation of this kind, this auditor perform his duties before the money is gone ? Mr. Evans. He could make the audit before the amount was paid, and the accounts could be made to be paid on his audit. Mr. Scott. Has there ever been any other case, to your knowledge, except the one which you mentioned in the War Department, of a voucher being raised? Mr. Evans. Well, I do not recall positively any case where a voucher has been raised. There have been other irregularities. Mr. Scott. In the way of false vouchers? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; in the case of the disbursing clerk of the State Department, several years ago, Mr. Keikhofer. Then there was the case of General Burnside, some years ago. They both got into trouble in that way. And it was the same way in the Department of Justice some two years ago, where some irregularities were committed, and they made a change there. So that it is not an unusual occurrence. Mr. Scott. The system of bookkeeping in all these Departments is such that all irregularities of this kind are certain to be detected sooner or later, is it not? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; I think, without presuming to take any unnec- essary credit to myself, that the system of the Department of Agri- culture relative to checks is perhaps as complete and thorough as can be found in any of the other departments. Mr. Haugen. What checks nave you in your Department? How are the accounts checked ? Mr. Evans. An account, for instance, is audited by one man, and then that will be reviewed by a second man. Then it will go to the Secretary, and the Secretary will approve it; and then it will come back and go to the cashier, and the cashier looks it over and enters it in his day book, and he passes it to the draft clerk, and the draft clerk will draw the check for it. Then it goes from the draft clerk — the check goes to the draft clerk, and the voucher will go to another clerk and he will compare them and see that the amount and all is correct, and then they write a letter transmitting that check, explain- ing just what it is for. Then tbat voucher will be passed to the bookkeeper, and the bookkeeper enters it against the proper appro- priation, and then at the end of each day's transactions the several bookkeepers and the cashier a ndthe draft clerk, who keeps the check book, compare notes, compare the vouchers, compare the amount on each voucher and the several entries, and the check stubs; so that it it would be practically impossible for anyone of those persons to perpetrate a fraud. Mr. Haugen. How many entries are made of a single check? Mr. Evans. Of each check ? There would be the entry on the stub HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 327 and the entry of the bookkeepers — there are two bookkeepers — the liability bookkeeper and then the bookkeeper who takes up an account after it has been paid. We have the liability bookkeeper, and we have the cashier, and as I say, no one of those persons can perpetrate a fraud without the others knowing of it. Mr. Haugen. These are entered up on the different books? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. Mr. Haugen. On the different sets of books, and one is a check on the other? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; one is a check on the other, and then the auditor, who originally audits the account, has his record. Practically each account goes through six different hands before it is finally in shape to go to the Treasury Department, and then the Treasury Department sends its experts down at least once a year, or oftener, and they go over my accounts, and all my books, and everything I have there — the office is turned over to them and they spend two or three or four days, whatever time it may take them to go through all the transactions. Mr. Lorimer. When a voucher comes to you for a purchase made by the Department, how do you ascertain whether or not the goods have been delivered? Mr. Evans. The voucher is prepared and goes to the division receiv- ing the goods, and the clerk wno receives the goods initials that, and the chief of the division certifies to the receipt of the goods, and if there is any question at all with me I have one of my clerks take that voucher and check it up with the other office. Mr. Lorimer. When the Department comes to audit your accounts do they go right down to the point where you began ? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. Mr. Lorimer. I do not see what is the need of an auditor, then. The Chairman. Do you wish to be heard on the other points Mr. Evans ? Mr. Adams. This suggestion did not originate at all with your Department? It came entirely from the Treasury? Mr. Evans. It was a recommendation. The Chairman. And it was indorsed by the Secretary ? Mr. Evans. It was to anticipate what might required, possibly, by the Treasury Department. The Secretary of the Treasury has not officially announced his decision in the matter as yet, but we anticipate that. Mr. Haugen. The pay roll is sent to you by the chief of each dif- ferent division and bureau, and certified to as to the amount to be paid to each clerk? Mr. Evans. No, sir; the pay rolls are prepared in my office and sent to the different bureaus and divisions, and then they are certified there, and they are also certified by the chief clerk of the Department and approved by the Secretary. Mr. Haugen. Then you pay the amount certified ? Mr. Evans. I pay the amount certified, and the division or bureau certifies to me on a separate slip the time of the employee, what he is entitled to, and any deductions that are necessary, on account of absence or otherwise. The Chairman. It strikes me that it is guarded enough, and the present method seems to be well guarded. 328 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Evans. I think so, sir. The Treasury Department experts are, or seem to be, satisfied with it. The Chairman. You are bonded? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. The Chairman. That bond would cover any change in a voucher? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. My bond is good for all my acts. Mr. Scott. Is any other officer in your division bonded? Mr. Evans. The cashier and my assistants are bonded to me. Mr. Scott. In what sum each. Mr. Evans. $10,000 each. That covers any amount of mone} r they would handle at one time. Mr. Haugen. There is not any need of this additional supervising officer, then, is there? Mr. Evans. I beg your pardon. I did not hear you. Mr. Haugen. I say, is there any need of this additional supervising officer? Mr. Evans. It is not essential, Mr. Chairman, I think. As I say, it comes between my office and the Treasury Department. It is a dupli- cation, that is all. It probably might be considered as an additional safeguard. Mr. Scott. Do you ever handle more than $50,000 yourself? Mr. Evans. I do not; no, sir. Mr. Haugen. You stated a while ago that your accounts were checked by some experts from the Treasury Department. Mr. Lorimer. Twice a year? Mr. Haugen. Yes; twice a j r ear. Mr. Lorimer. And he audits that away down to the delivery of the goods. Mr. Evans. I have credit at the Treasury Department sometimes for more than $50,000, because it is necessary. I might start business this morning with $50,000, and to close business in the afternoon I might not have $5,000. It depends on the number of vouchers that I have ready for payment. So that it might make it necessary to put in requisitions in order to have sufficient money to meet the demands. The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? Mr. Scott. Do you submit vouchers along with your requisition? Mr. Evans. No; I state in my request that I have paid vouchers since the last requisition amounting to so much, and that I have vouchers ready for payment amounting to so much. That is stated in the requisition. And in the Treasury Department these vouchers are there subject to inspection at any moment. Then they check that amount up with the number of vouchers that I have already paid and the amount of the. vouchers turned over to them. Mr. Scott. If it should happen, then, that vouchers should come in for a greater amount than you have to your credit, you would hold those vouchers up until you could make a requisition? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. Or until you had been notified that the amount had been placed to your credit? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. The Chairman. What is the limit of this^ six months or a year? You generally used to have a statement. Mr. Evans.' I have one here for this year. The Chairman. For the last six months? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 329 Mr. Evans. No, sir; for the last fiscal year, 1903; but we have spent more than one-half of the appropriation — as we always do in the first of the year — the appropriation for 1903. We have about $320,000 which is still undrawn; but I suppose that there are about $75,000 or $80,000 of liabilities which are against that, and the balance will be turned back to the Treasury. The Chairman. That is for 1903? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. The Chairman. You say about three hundred and odd thousand dollars for 1903? Mr. Evans. $320,000. The Chairman. For 1903. You sa} r that there are vouchers for how much against that? Mr. Evans. About $80,000. The Chairman. That would leave $240,000. Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. The Chairman. To be turned back into the Treasury? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir; I think that will go back into the Treasury. The Chairman. From what appropriation does that ccme ? Mr. Evans. Over $200,000 of that would be from the urgent defi- ciency of last year for the Bureau of Animal Industry. The Chairman. It is all right there? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. How long after the close of the fiscal year does this money remain to your credit ? Mr. Evans. For two years after the end of the fiscal year. It is three years in all before it is finally covered into the Treasury. Mr. Scott. If it is not drawn within two years after the appropria- tion it reverts without any further action into the Treasury? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. Mr. Morgan. Does your statement show the amount turned back to the Treasury, of which you spoke ? Mr. Evans. Yes, sir. My statement shows the amount that has been expended and the amount available. The amount drawn from the Treasury on warrants. The Chairman. And the amount that has lapsed by time is about $200,000, and that is practically all there? Mr. Evans. Yes, a part of it. The Chairman. I did not know but that we had found a place where you had not expended the amount that we had given you ? Mr. Graff. If it remains there three years, how can it have lapsed ? Mr. Evans. It has not lapsed for 1903. All appropriations lapse after three full fiscal years. Mr. Graff. After what? Mr. Evans. After three full fiscal years. Mr. Graff. Then this $200,000 has not lapsed? Mr. Evans. No, sir. It will be available for a year and a half yet, that $200,000. The Chairman. Are there any further questions that the members of the committee wish to ask Mr. Evans? There being no further questions, at 3.25 o'clock p. m. the com- mittee adjourned until to-morrow, Thursday, January 14, 1904, at 10.30 o'clock a. m. 330 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Committee on Agriculture, Jam.ua/ry 1$., 190^. — 10.30 a. m. Hon. James W. Wadsworth, chairman. The Chairman. Mr. Dodge, on page 27 of the estimate, you have asked for an increase from $35,000 to $65,000 — really an increase of $45,000, because $15,000, according to the estimate, which heretofore has been taken from your lump sum, is transferred to the Chemistry Division. Go on in your own way and tell us what you propose to do and what you have been doing. STATEMENTS OF MARTIN DODGE, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC-ROAD INQUIRIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICUL- TURE. Mr. Dodge. The request for the increase is based primarily upon two facts: One is that we have more demand for assistance than we can respond to with the help that we have. Of course, you understand, I suppose, that we do not pay money in aid of any work of any kind, but we have a number of persons employed by appointment of the Secretary, whose services are available for such work as is called upon; and I find that there are many States, especially in the Southwest and in the far West, that receive no assistance of any kind, and receive but little attention from us, because we have not a sufficient number of men to send. And another reason for asking for an increase is, that heretofore the railroad companies have given us free transporta- tion of machine^, but they have lately refused to do that in some instances; and I have reason to think that they might cut off that altogether, and in that case we would be almost paralyzed. I thought it was wise to treat the States as nearly alike as possible. It is known to many members of the committee, especially the older members, that work was started years ago, and General Stone was the first director. Much of the work he did was confined to the East. Since I have had charge of the office I have been working more in the West and in the South. I have gone into 22 different States and assisted in the construction of object-lesson roads. I have gone into a larger number of States and assisted in convention work, addressing legislatures and committees of legislatures, explained what- ever topic might be up for discussion; and I must say to the com- mittee that the information we have given has been acted on very generally. It seems to be highly appreciated, and the theory that we work on is that it is desirable to cooperate in the building up of the system of roads. Of course you know, in the first instance, the Gov- ernment did build and pay the entire cost of a national road and some others, but later they abandoned that policy in all of these States. I think the whole matter was turned over to the local authorities, being the county commissioners, the township trustees, road super- visors, and petty officers having small jurisdiction and small revenues. But within the last few years several of the different States have set a good example in showing that a general fund raised by general taxa- tion and applied so as to be a portion of the cost of this road building is very beneficial. It takes off a portion of the burden that rests upon the owners of agricultural lands. It seems that the burden has been HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 331 so heavy that the farmers have been either unable or unwilling to bear it, so as to bring us in very good results. I say we have had a very beneficial illustration and object lesson to the whole country, and to the whole world, for that matter; that when a State takes hold of this work and raises a general fund it is a meas- ure of relief to the agriculturists. You take notice of the fact that half of the population in the older States — at least in the northern States — is concentrated in cities, and a good deal more than half of the wealth, and under the prevailing system — that is, under the system that has prevailed up to very lately — all of that population of wealth is relieved from sharing in the burden of cost and improve- ment; but if you adopt a method of a general fund, of course they are brought in to the extent that the general fund furnishes a portion of the cost. The Chairman. Pardon me for interrupting you, but is not this a line of thought more applicable to the consideration of the general road bill when we reach that? We want this morning to confine our- selves strictly to the appropriation of the public road increase; and to bring you back, perhaps, to what information the committee needs this morning, I will take this question in your item, entitled " Experi- ments and object lessons in road building," and ask what you propose to do under that new legislation. Do you propose to go into several States and build sample roads ? Mr. Dodge. No, sir; not to pay the cost of building. We respond to requests from different sections of the country to send men and machinery to aid, and we find that the aid which we give and which perhaps is not more than equal to 10 per cent of the cost of the road is so highly appreciated that these requests are multiplying on us. Mr. Scott. You have been doing this work for some time? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir; about three years. Mr. Scott. What is the object of the new language in this para- graph? The Chairman. The committee will notice in italics what we term "New legislation" — "Object lessons in road building;" the next is "Employment of experts." Mr. Cassingham. What page is that on? The Chairman. On page 27. The title of the paragraph is "Public road inquiries." Mr. Dodge. Mr. Chairman, I have not noticed just how it was printed here. I suppose the words in italics are new words? The Chairman. Yes, sir; that is what we call "new legislation." Mr. Dodge. It is not the thought or purpose of the Department to do anything different than what we have done, but simply to do more. We do not propose to build any road, but simply to give assistance, in the way I have partly stated, to those who are in a position to go for- ward with the work, but are in doubt as to how to proceed. We find there are a good many people, a good many communities, that have got to the point of desiring to do something, and they have some means to do with, but they often are in doubt as to material to be used, and they send for us to advise them in that respect. We either send an expert to examine or request them to send samples of the different road-building material that is common in their section of the country. After ascertaining the most suitable for use we advise them accord- ingly, and advise them that, if they have sufficient money or labor and 332 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. power, in the way of animals and teams, to do the work, we will send the rock-crushing machinery, the rock crusher and rollers, and earth- handling machinery, and skilled persons to operate that machinery and show them how to build a section. Sometimes we make as much as half a mile, and generally try to make about a mile. In one or two instances I have gone so far as to construct 2 miles in this way. That is, I pay no money, but I send a man to superintend the work and another one to operate the machinery. That is the extent of the The Chairman. As to this machinery, I see further on in " new legislation" you want to buy machinery. You say, "for necessary office fixtures and supplies, apparatus, machinery, and materials." The Department has built object roads, then? Mr. Dodge. In this way; we have never built a road by purchasing the material and building the road apart from cooperation. We simply give the service of our men to direct this work, and we secure machinery. We have been able to do that heretofore by manufacturers, who, in order to have the indorsement of the Government officials, in so far as that is given by the use of machinery, have been willing to furnish it to us. I am inclined to think that they will continue to do so, but am not absolutely sure. It is this way, if they have an abun- dance of machinery in stock, they are willing to oblige us, but if they have demand for it, of course the}' do not like to oblige us. Some- times we have not been able to get everything we wanted. The Chairman. Eoad machinery consists of the modern scraper, the stone crusher and roller, does it not? That is about what machinery you use? Mr. Dodge. We have an automatic spreading cart, so when the crusher has finished the crushing of a rock and leaves it in a bin, and that goes by gravity into the cart, and is spread without the use of manual labor. The Chairman. It is something on the manure-spreading type? Mr. Dodge. Well, possibly; it does not require relif ting or reshelv- ing. It is a great saving by showing how this can be done from the field and finished without the expenditure of a great amount of labor. We are able to show people how they can produce roads for about $3,000 a mile, which I think are fully as good as many they have built at $6,000 a mile. Now, in my county, Cuyahoga County, Ohio, they have been building roads for the last ten years that cost from $12,000 to $20,000 a mile. I was requested to give something in the way of information and instruction in object lessons, which I nave done; and we have produced roads in parts of that county, and one in the adjoin- ing county, and it seems the roads that we have built at $3,000 a mile are as good as those at $12,000 a mile. Mr. Henry, How wide is the road? Mr. Dodge. Twelve feet wide. Mr. Henry. How deep is the stone? Mr. Dodge. Eight inches. Mr. Henry. Is that enough ? Mr. Dodge. We think it is. Miv Henry. Does your machinery handle the coarser stone or only the finished? Mr. Dodge. It handles the crushed stone. Sometimes we put down a base of uncrushed stone. We do not recommend that. If we have HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 833 a sufficient quantity of suitable machinery we prefer to have it all crushed and make the road of small stone. Mr. Henry. Do you think a road 12 feet wide is wide enough for all purposes ? Mr. Dodge. For a country road we think it is all right. Mr. Henry. Two teams can not pass abreast on a road 12 feet wide. Mr. Dodge. They can pass. Two single carriages can pass upon 12 feet of road. The Chairman. Two carriages could just about do so. Mr. Henry. It would be close work. Mr. Chaff. How do you keep the road material from spreading out onto the sides of the road? Mr. Dodge. We repair the roads by means of scrapers and other tools, so as to form a shoulder, before depositing the stone. The stone is deposited upon the roadbed, which is made to conform with the finished surface, so far as the curve is concerned, and that is rolled and made as hard as we can make it before anything is spread on it. Mr. Burleson. Do you think a deposit of 8 inches will stand upon a black, waxy soil 6 feet thick? Mr. Dodge. Well, probably it would. Of course, if this soil is fully saturated with moisture there might be, under great weight, some depression, but we are not troubled about the foundation, as a general thing, and I think 8 inches is quite sufficient in almost every case. The same question you ask me I remember was asked of Macadam when he was before the committee of the House of Commons. It was contended before his time that it was necessary to put in heavy foun- dation of large stone according to the Telford method, and he con- tended that large stone was unnecessary, and it was a waste to put in so much material. Mr. Burleson. Provided your road is waterproof? Mr. Dodge. They asked him the very question, whether it was so in ordinary conditions in building over a bog, and he contended, in answer to that question, it was often preferable to have a little elas- ticity, and he could build with the small stone over any sort of bog or soft land. Mr. Adams. Do I understand you to say there are roads built in Ohio that cost from $12,000 to $20,000 a mile? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. Mr. Adams. Outside of corporation limits? Mr. Dodge. All of the roads. In Cuyahoga County — Cleveland is the county seat of that county — they used, before, the plank road, built by companies and subject to toll. They were built only about 8 or 8£ feet wide, a sufficient width to carry single vehicles. Of course, the theory of these narrow roads is that the loaded wagon is coming toward the market, and the empty wagon returning can easily turn out and give the road. Although the road is, of course, not hard, it would be sufficiently hard to bear an empty vehicle. So in many places, especially about Cleveland, the roads were only built 8 feet wide. A few years ago the county commissioners adopted the policy of buying these roads and making them free roads, and they soon took up the plank and put down other material, mostly brick. • They only made these roads 8 feet wide, the same as the plank roads, counting on the fact that the empty returning teams would give 334 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. the entire road, which they generally do, to the loaded teams coming in; and it was claimed by our people in the beginning that about $3,500 a mile would be sufficient to build those roads; but when they came to the work it increased rapidly. The cost went up to as high as $20,000' a mile, and the smallest cost is reported by the engineer as $12,500 a mile. That includes grading. The Chairman. Material is available there, too, is it not? Mr. Dodge. We have no rock except bowlders; that is, no road- building rock. We have the sandstone. The Chairman. You have rock sufficient for the foundation, but not for the top coating? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir; we have rock of that kind. If you use an inferior rock for a foundation it is desirable to have greater thickness than I speak of. When I speak of 8 inches being sufficient, I think it ought to be of homogeneous rock — consolidated. Mr. Scott. What methods are used in keeping these roadways clean after being constructed? Mr. Dodge. I do not know if there is any system for keeping them clean. They are not likely to be injured much by litter. The nar- row road will not only keep itself cleaner, but it will stand, I think, longer without repair; because, with the wide road, as soon as you have a soft place or small depression, it will hold the moisture and that softens the mass, whereas a narrow road will shed the moisture, and litter disappears very rapidly. Mr. Adams. You speak of $3,000 a mile as the expense of a macad- amized road. That is very interesting to me. But you can not quite make that as a general statement because of the varying cost of mate- rial in different localities ? Mr. Dodge. I do not say that is a universal price. I said, especially, had we built in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, some of those object-lesson roads that exceeded that amount. Mr. Adams. It is a very low cost? Mr. Dodge. A very low cost. It seems to me that cost would be a great deal if our assistance were to be withdrawn. We do not pay any money. I give the aid I have in the way of the skilled superintendents and the machinery in the way I have said. Of course, we have plans blocked out in advance for almost every conceivable kind of road and condition of soil, so we know at once what to do; and I have no doubt it is very beneficial service to all those who receive i ; t, and I think it is a matter of sincere regret that I have to deny so many applications that are very reasonable indeed. Mr. Henry. The roads that'you refer to in Ohio that were built for $3,000 a mile, were they trap-rock roads? Mr. Dodge. No, sir; those roads were built of the granite bowlders. Mr. Henry. Is that material durable for roads ? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir; very durable. Mr. Henry. What material do you use for a binder with the granite that you use. Mr. Dodge. Sometimes we do not have to use any. You under- stand the bowlders are not of uniform Mr. Henry. Hardness? Mr. Dodge. Hardness; nor really of the same formation in every case. We have a variety of rock, and it is generally found a mixture of all will furnish a sufficient binder, but if it lacks the binder we will HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 335 put on a little gravel sometimes; and in one instance last year up in Red River Valley of the North, where they all said it was impossible to build any macadamized roads at all, partly because of lack of mate- rial and partly because the material they had was granite and destitute of the binding quality, we went there and built three roads of granite and made the filler, or the binder, out of the common soil, which is an exceedingly viscous soil. We spread it on in this way and found it made a consolidation of the mass that was extremely good, and have the best of reports from those roads. I visited one of the roads about a year after it was built and found they were in extremely good con- dition, and I have reports from the others. So that we have demonstrated for the Red River Valley that they have material that is very satisfactory for the work when combined with the other substances that are so common there. And I will say in that connection that at Grand Forks, the last place where we put in an object-lesson road, we built for about $3,000 a mile a road that was as good in every respect as what they were building on the opposite side of the river at $12,000 a mile, except it was not quite so wide. They had let a contract on the other side of the river and the road was being built when I was there. Mr. Adams. You speak of these requests that come to you. Please state explicitly what they are and who they come from. Mr. Dodge. They come from the road officials in nearly every case. Once in a while we get a request from the chambers of commerce. In the smaller cities of the West the chambers of commerce are active in introducing helpful improvements, not only pertaining to the cities in which the chambers are located, but the circumjacent territory, and in many instances preliminary negotiations are made through the secretaries of the chambers of commerce; but we do not go into any city. If we cooperate through their initiative, we locate the road out- side of the city and entirely in the agricultural region; but they have been helpful to us in the matter of assembling the cooperating forces. You understand that in order to carry on this work it is necessary to have the assistance of quite a number of elements. Of course the primary thing is the community itself. If the community does not wish anything, we do not do anything; if they do wish to have some- thing done and are able to do their part and we are in a position so that we can afford any aid, we always do it. And I regret exceedingly that I have not been able to go farther into the Southwest and to spread into the other States to a great extent. Mr. Adams. In how many States have you been ? Mr. Dodge. Twenty-two States altogether. Mr. Bowie. What are those States? Mr. Dodge. Every one of the Southern States, except Florida and Texas— — Mr. Bowie. Where did you go in Alabama — what part of Alabama? Mr. Dodge. Mobile, Montgomery-^that is, they were the headquar- ters. I will say that in those Southern States we have the assistance of the national. association and of the railroad company to an unusual extent, in this, that the railroad company offered us a train, at our service, fully equipped, and the manufacturers in the different parts of the country gave us 8 or 9 carloads of machinery. The national association, organized at Chicago in 1903, took the initiative in that respect. I want to say in this connection, that Mr. 336 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Richardson, the secretary of the association, at that time and ever since, is here at the present time. He happens to be in the city, and I would be very glad if the committee would see fit to hear him some time on this matter. The national association made the proposition to me to cooperate with them and the railroad companies, and in the Southern States the work I refer to was done through this cooperative method, and we only did a very small amount in each State. Mr. Bowie. The Southern Railway Company was the company that took so much interest in it, was it not? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. I speak of building half a mile, a mile, and two miles, in Michigan; but in these Southern States the greatest num- ber, probably, of the 22 I mentioned, we did not build so much. It is desirable to build, at least, half a mile. It is desirable it should be done in the most scientific and economical manner. You can hardly do either one of those things in the hasty trips that are according to schedule time, because we are interrupted by bad weather and often delays are caused by unexpected failures. So, when I spead of going into this large number of States, I do not want you to understand I have done that the way I would like. I think if this committee would see fit, in its wisdom, to provide us with a sufficient fund, so that we could go to every State and build, anyway, four object lessons, in four sections of the State, of perhaps a mile in length, and show them what could be done with their material, and with proper machinery and with the proper mixtures, that it would be of almost incalculable benefit. Mr. Scott. How long have you been doing this work in the 22 States? How many years will that cover? Mr. Dodge. About three years. Of course, General Stone, for about six years, was at the head of the office, and he did a few small pieces — one in New York, one in New Jersey, and perhaps two or three other small cases. It- was a matter of very great doubt what should be done. Of course, I think we all understand that this is an unsettled question. We do not any of us feel certain just what to do or just how far to go. I have been feeling my way carefully, and had some doubts as to the beneficial results, but I am free to say to the committee that the reports coming in every way, by letters and by oral communications, all show that the people receiving the benefits are pleased with the benefits, and they think well of the Government that is willing to do something in a small way that comes close to the homes of the people. Mr. Scott. As I understand it, then, you want this increase chiefly for the purpose of being able to extend this work of sample road building { Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. In the event that the increase were granted, how much of it would you say would probably be spent in office work, in addi- tions to your office force here in Washington? Mr. Dodge. There would be no increase at all; we do not require any increase in office force. It would be given to outside work. I would like to . ay in this connection that the Secretary has appointed for three years past four resident agents — I think, perhaps, the com- mittee is informed, but possibly some of them are not — but out of the appropiiations which have been made, $6,000 have been deVoted to the payment of four resident agents at $1,500 each. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 337 The Chairman. The country was divided into four districts? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir; four districts and a resident agent at each one was appointed,- and then $10,000 was devoted to the laboratory work; and this year they have asked for 18, as the chairman has said. Mr. Scott. In that connection, you are carrying now on your lump- sum roll one'chemist? Mr. Dodge. No, sir. That is in the Chemical Division. That would be taken care of, and has been taken care of, out of the $10,000 that has been set over. Your act of appropriation, of course, makes a lump sum of it, but the Secretary has made the apportionment of the fund and set over $10,000 each year for that work, and this chemist is paid, and an engineer, out of that, and all the office force and the machinery that they have bought in that work has been taken care of but of the $10,000. Then $6,000, as 1 have said, has also been set aside for the payment of four resident agents, so it has left me, I think, but an exceedingly small sum out of which, of course, I had to pay the office force. Our office force is hot large, is not expensive, but what we really need is a larger number of persons in the field to respond to the very numerous and, 1 think, very reasonable requests. As I recollect, Mr. Scott, you had a request for some work in your State, but we have never been able to respond to that, although we did go to the State in 1900 and do a little work. Mr. Scott. I understand that that $10,000 of the appropriation which you had last year was set apart for chemistry work? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. And $6,000 for the resident agents? Mr. Dodge. Yes., sir. Mr. Scott. So that left you only about $4,000 — adding the cost of your office force to the $10,000 appropriation for chemical work, and $6,000 for the resident agents, you are only left about $4,000 for the miscellaneous work? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir; traveling expense and miscellaneous work, and all. Mr. Adams. What is the practical relation of chemistry to road building? Mr. Dodge. The only practical relation, so far as I know, is ascer- taining the properties of material. There has been some doubt and some question among scientific men as to what process took place in the consolidation. You understand, the angular fragments of rock when reduced to about a uniform size will consolidate under proper treat- ment with pressure; they consolidate and make a mass almost like solid rock itself. It is impervious to water. That chemical change, or physical change, was questioned, and they are investigating that. I do not know really to what extent the chemical feature cuts a figure, but, as I understand it, most of the work in the testing laboratory is done by the machine to stand the physical properties of the rock. Mr. Bueleson. As I understand you, Mr. Dodge, this $30,000 increase would be expended in building roads as object lessons, prin- cipally ? Mr. Dodge. That is, in cooperating in building. I do not want to be misunderstood. We would not take any money to go to any place on our own motion and build any roads, but we would try to respond to those who requested us to assist them, c a 22 338 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. # Mr. Burleson. About how much of road could you build in these States that you have never visited at all — about how would be its pro rata, about? Mr. Dodge. It would be exceedingly small. Mr. Burleson. A hundred yards ? Mr. Dodge. I do not think you have a proper idea of it. You all the time think about our building, but we do not build; we only assist and instruct those who are ready to build. For instance, to give you a little illustration that comes to my mind at the present time, the com- missioner of public works of the city of Detroit came to our office a few days ago, and said he had been authorized by new acts of legisla- tion on the part of the council to purchase all the brick that would be necessary to build all the streets they intend to build during the next year. Always heretofore in that city, and I think in all cities, they have let the contract to a contractor, and he has secured his brick, but they have changed the law there and the commissioner is authorized to buy about 8,000,000 brick. He came to us to ascertain what was the best to do to determine the quality of his brick. We can not test all of the brick that would be used for such an occa- sion, but we offered to test some and give him our advice. If anyone in Texas should apply, which they have already, we would not take any of the money that you may give us — however little or however much — we would not take the money and go there and build 100 yards of road. We say to them, "If you have the labor and material and the animal power, or the fuel to furnish steam power, to work the machines, and desire to have us do so, we will send skilled men to assist you in building half a mile, or a mile, and maybe 2 miles," and we believe, according to our past experience, the little mite we put in will enable them to build more and better roads. I have already stated that in my own county we built, at a cost of about $3,000 — . I am using that language in connection with this explanation that we build with the materials and labor furnished — we built roads at a cost of about $3,000 which corresponded very well with those that would cost $12,000. I want to make it clear that the thing we do is not to build and pay for as the Government is building harbors or deepening rivers. We do not pay the cost. The Chairman. What do you want to buy machinery for? Mr. Dodge. I do not want to buy machinery, Mr. Chairman, unless The Chairman. You have estimated for machinery. Mr. Dodge (continuing). Unless these gentlemen would refuse us, which I have sometimes thought they might; but I will say, with the close of this year< since this request was made, that I have communi- cations from several manufacturers professing a willingness to furnish still further. I would not use that money to buy unless we were stalled for want of it, and it is possible we would not have to do that. The Chairman. This machinery is exhibited at all the State fairs? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Have you ever tried to do any object work at the State fairs? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir; we have at "two State fairs — the Illinois State fair in 1900 and at Minneapolis in 1902. We have done two object lessons at those two places. The Chairman. I remember that the Secretary, at the time he made HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 339 the request for these four men, said he was going- to organize the country into four districts, and assign to each district what might be. called a " road lecturer," with the object in view of arousing the interest of the people in the necessity for better roads; and that he did not propose to build any roads; simply proposed to tell them, by means of these lectures, how to build them, etc., and what material to use. Has that organization been kept up? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir; that organization has been kept up, and the gentlemen in the field do give most of their time in instruction, but they also discover material and send it for testing, and they have discovered The Chairman. Who are those four gentlemen ? Mr. Dodge. Professor Holmes, of South Carolina, is the represent- ative of the Southern district. Mr. Lever. What State? Mr. Dodge. Of North Carolina, I mean. Mr. Burleson. He is in charge of the geological display at the World's Fair? Mr. Dodge. He is, and we have allowed him, since he was appointed to that, to make a substitute of another gentleman. Mr. Lamb. What was his name ? Mr. Dodge. W. L. Spoon. The Chairman. Is not Mr. Holmes in the experimental station in North Carolina ? Mr. Dodge. He was; but I think not now. He used to be the State geologist of North Carolina, but Mr. Holmes has been an exceedingly valuable and efficient man in this service, and has written many pub- lications, which he keeps up. He is issuing bulletins in his own State. Mr. Lamb. Is he lecturing now ? Mr. Dodge. He gives a good many lectures, and he has also intro- duced the method of combining the raw clay with the sand, so as to make a mixture. Mr. Spoon has sort of grown up under his tuition, and we have allowed him for the last year to make this substitution. Whether he would be able to give any time to it from now on, is a question. Mr. Burleson. On that very point; you say no road building has been undertaken in Texas and that no expert has ever visited that great State as a lecturer % Mr. Dodge. Mr. Holmes did about two or three years age. Mr. Burleson. At what point? Mr. Dodge I do not know as he gave lectures at any point, but he made a trip through there and reported upon the general conditions. I have already stated that I thought the Southwest had been neglected. I want to refresh your recollection about what I said as to Mr. Stone giving much attention to the Northeast; and since I haye been in charge of the office 1 have been giving much to the South and West; but the Southwest 1 have not been able to reach, but expect to do so. Pro- fessor Holmes was appointed under this plan that the chairman has understood, and has had the special jurisdiction of that. It is a prett}^ large division. Mr. Burleson. Right on that point I will say that we are accus- tomed to living on hope. Mr. Dodge. I think it is a pretty large jurisdiction. I have not fully answered the question, because you interrupted. I have stated 340 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. that Professor Holmes has charge of that section of the country, and Mr. Richardson, who is here, has charge of the prairie country,, begin- ning with Ohio, and extending west to the Rocky Mountains. Mr. James W. Abbott, of Denver, Colo. , has charge of the mountain and western country, and Mr. J. F. Brown, civil engineer, of Cleveland, Ohio, has charge of the other division, and we think, of course, that the Northwesthas had during the years of General Stone's adminis- tration a pretty fair share of attention, and we think they have made great jjrogress, and that they are able to help themselves; and as a result of that I have been giving much attention to the Northeast. I have given as much as I could to the other sections, but they are very large, and it is impossible, as you all know, to get over such great territory with the very small number of , men that I have had at my disposal. I would like to say, when the winter season comes, as it has now, we furlough all but two of our outside men. The Chairman. Do you not use the winter months for lectures and institute work? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir; we do. We furlough the machinery men, and we have two expert builders The Chairman. Do they not furnish the machinery men with their machines ? Mr. Dodge. They generally designate the person, but they require us to pay his wages. We have less responsibility for the care and safety of the machine by having them designate a person whom they know to be skillful, and which we might not know. We pay them during just the temporary season. If we take a month to build a road in Texas, we pay the operator for that month, and then he goes off. Mr. Lamb. How much road did you assist in building near Rich- mond, in Henrico County? Mr. Dodge. That was a very small bit. That was done with a train — the "Good Roads Train "went there, and the bad weather came on — I think three days out of the six. Mr. Lamb. You had a very bad time there ? Mr. Dodge. That, I think, was in the crty of Richmond, too, if I remember. Mr. Lamb. Just outside — just in the county of Henrico. Mr. Dodge. I think it was. Mr. Lamb. Did you have an opportunity to examine the roads in Henrico County ? Mr. Dodge. Somewhat. I went out one day. Mr. Lamb. You must have seen that they had given attention to them? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. Mr. Lamb. They seem to be studying good roads there? Mr. Haugen. You stated a moment ago you were now building, roads at the small cost of $3,000 a mile; I take it that that is the lowest estimate at which a road can be built? Mr. Dodge. Yes, the lowest estimate of that class of road. It is a high class of road, with finished rock surface, and well done. We can build a much cheaper road of gravel, and a much cheaper ;road of a mixture of sand and clay. Captain Lamb has referred to the excel- lent condition of roads about Richmond. Those were built with a mixture of clay and sand. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 341 Mr. Haugen. Did I understand that you had built some roads in Iowa? Mr. Dodge. No, sir. Mr. Haugen. In the Eed River Valley — some $3,000 for building and grading? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. Mr. Haugen. What would be your estimate for my State, in Iowa, outside Mr. Dodge. I think we can build a good road there for $3,000 a mile, exclusive of grading. Mr. Adams. That depends entirely on the accessibility of the right kind of rock, does it not? Mr. Dodge. It does not depend so much on that as you think, because, as you know very well, the rates of freight are the same on the long haul as they are on the short haul. That question has been fought for years; it is claimed there is unjust discrimination made on the part of the railroads because they charged the same for the long haul as the short haul. It really does not make as much difference as you suppose under that, for the rate of freight is almost uniform. We have quite a remarkable illustration of that in the State of Tennessee. We built a road down at Jackson, Tenn., from material furnished from near Cairo, 111., and it was so satisfactory that in two years from that time they extended the road 7 miles, bringing all the material from Illinois. The Chairman. Is not Jackson in the limestone belt? Mr. Dodge. No, sir; I think not. Mr. Haugen. Have you any estimate of building these roads in a single State — for instance, the State of Iowa ? Mr. Dodge. We have not any estimate made with especial reference to that. Mr. Haugen. The fact of the case is, it would cost more than one- quarter of the real estate of the State? Mr. Dodge. Oh, no. Mr. Haugen. I think it is safe to say that in our State we have at least 110,000 miles of road, and, at $3,000 a mile, that would be about 1330,000,000, would it not? Mr. Dodge. Well, possibly. Mr. Haugen. I think the assessed valuation of my State is about $370,000,000. Mr. Dodge. The assessed valuation is a great deal less than the real valuation. Mr. Haugen. The assessed valuation of my State is one-quarter of the value. Mr. Dodge. Do you find anything on the map to indicate whether that The Chairman. 1 thought Jackson was near enough to Columbia to be in the limestone belt. What was that material? Mr. Dodge. That was what they call a noviculite. It is a very rare material, but it is suitable for road building, and I believe if the atten- tion of the people round about that situation — that is southern Illi- nois and over across the river in Missouri — if their attention was called to the extreme usefulness of that material, it would be worth hundreds and thousands and millions of dollars. I desire to state to the gentleman from Iowa that it is not possible 342 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. that the cost of building roads at $3,000 a mile would approximate anything like half of the value of the land. I do not know what your land is assessed at Mr. Haugen. If you will permit me right here; they asked a ques- tion here about selling the land at the assessed value. I would say . that the $370,000,000 is 31 per cent of the value of the land, according to the reports made to the census enumerators; so that $370,000,000 is one-quarter of the value of the real estate in the State of Iowa. Mr. Dodge. Is that the decennial appraisement of 1900 ? Are you giving, the result of the appraisement of 1900 on land? Mr. Haugen. No, sir. Mr. Dodge. When was that? Mr. Haugen. In 1890. Mr. Dodge. Land was at a very low ebb at that time. I would like to state to the gentleman from Iowa that, so far as we have any knowl- edge or experience from observation or testimony of any kind, we find that the cost of the road, whatever it may be, whether it is $3,000 or $6,000 a mile, adds a great deal more than its cost to the value of the land. You do not substract. Mr. Haugen. What do jon estimate the value of these lands from the building of these roads ? Mr. Dodge. I made an estimate of that cost at one time. I do not know that I can hold it in memory, but it was based upon the idea that there should be 2 miles of road for every 640 acres of land. Mr. Haugen. That was the basis I had. Mr. Dodqe. I can not now recall those figures or make the compu- tation instantly. Mr. Adams. That would make about $1 an acre? Mr. Cassingham. About $5 an acre. Mr. Haugen. That is $6,000 for every section. One hundred and sixty acres would be $1,500 — about $10 an acre. Mr. Burleson., It is somewhat of a severe tax on land. Mr. Haugen. Is it not a fact that the common graded road, such as we have in Iowa, is far superior to the roads you propose to build, about nine months out of the year? Mr. Dodge. The graded road is the best road there is when it is dry, and in proper shape it is all right. Mr. Haugen. You take it in the winter with the sleigh and in the dry season of the year, which would probably be about nine months of the year, it would be far superior to the road that you propose to build. Mr. Dodge. Of course they would be just alike in time of sleigh- ing; one would be as good as another. So far as superiority is concerned, I think the summer road is all right, and I recommend, in connection with what you say, and in connection with what I have already said about the 12-foot road, we should always make the earth road adjacent to the other, so that they are both open for traffic all the time; and when the dirt road is better, which it often is, it takes the traffic off of the stone road, and increases its life. The Chairman. Have you not found that the modern scraper has done wonders for our roads all over the country wherever they have been introduced? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. The Chairman. In the district in which I live, which has been set- HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 343 tied for one hundred and fifty years, they have increased 50 per cent in the last fifteen years. Mr. Dodge. Undoubtedly. The gentleman from Iowa seems to have it in his mind that if any- thing at all is done it must be done with stone road at a cost of $3,000 a mile. That is not what I am contending for at all. I have already stated^ that we produced the sand and clay roads in the South, as Captain Lamb haw called attention to here, at a cost of probably $300 a mile, and they are exceedingly good. Mr. Haugen. How do you propose to build such roads outside of the ordinar\ T grading ? Mr. Dodge. We mix the sand and clay. If it is a clay road we spread sand on, and if it is a sand road we spread clay on, until the whole thing is mixed to the point of puddling. We add from time to time, according as observation reveals the necessity for it, enough sand to take up the excess in moisture. Mr. Haugen. That is what the ordinary road supervisor does at the present time; that. is no improvement on the present system. Mr. Dodge. The ordinary supervisor does not do that way. If it is a clay road he uses clay; if it is a sand road he uses sand. We haul the sand on the clay road and haul clay on the sand road, and use such a mixture that it becomes a consolidated mass that is hard and dura- ble. It is really quite a discovery and very helpful. Now, we believe that we shall be able to' take clay, that is so common in your country, and burn that into angular fragments without the necessity of mold- ing as they do for brick, and make a substance that is practically as hard as brick, which can be used on the surface of these roads and diminish the cost very greatly. We are not contending that every road should be improved with stone. Mr. Haugen. Is not that being done by the railroads at the present time? . Mr. Dodge. It has been done for ballast, but it has never been done on any common road that I know of for common traffic. It should be done. ' That is a case where I think it would be warrantable for the committee to authorize the entire building by the Government; because you can not find any community, probably, that would be willing to go into anything that is so much of an experiment as that is. Mr. Adams. Let me ask you about this machinery once more, Mr. Dodge; is your machinery given to you by the manufacturers? Mr. Dodge. They give us the loan. They do not give us the machinery. The Chairman. They furnish the machinery and allow a man to accompany it, and we pay the man. Mr. Adams. They do- that for advertising purposes? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. Mr. Adams. Would you not prefer to buy your machinery and select such as you thought was best? Mr. Dodge. I think that is a good plan — that I be allowed to do it. The Chairman. That would be an advertisement of certain kinds of machinery. Mr. Adams. At the same time it would give these gentlemen an opportunity to go into the market and get the very best there was, and not depend upon the charity of machinery manufacturers. Mr. Dodge. I recommended that that should be done, but I must say 344 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. we have done very well. ' I was rather disappointed that the committee did not allow the money for that purpose, but we really have done exceedingly well, and perhaps as well as we would have done by buy- ing the machinery; but the question is, how long this will continue. The machinery companies are all getting into trusts, like everything else, and I do not know The Chairman. They have got no better way to advertise their goods than this. If I was engaged in that business I would endeavor to have the Goverment exhibit my goods around the country. I would furnish the goods and furnish a man to run them, too; and I would not ask the Government to pay the man. 1 could not have a better advertisement. Mr. Haugen. What discoveries have you made in building roads that would be of benefit? Mr. Dodge. I think a very valuable discovery is this that I have referred to in the mixing of sand and clay. Mr. Haugen. When was that discovered? Mr. Dodge. It is a growth that results from many trials and long years 'of observation. It is a new thing. Also the vitrification of the clay. Mr. Haughen. Fifteen years ago the verj y same thing was done by the road supervisor in my own county. Mr. Dodge. That is a credit to him. Did it work all right? Mr. Haughen. Worked very satisfactorily; yes, sir. Mr. Dodge. I am giving Professor Holmes great credit for that, because, so far as I know, he has done more of it and has introduced it to the public notice. This, as you say, is a good thing, and it ought to be used very generally, but it is not known very generally, and furthermore those who do know probably may not know just how to proceed in the most economical- manner and how to determine the pro- portions and quantities. Mr. Haughen. Can not this information be disseminated through bulletins? Mr. Dodge. We are doing that; and we would like to say in ref- erence to Mr. Spoon, who is operating under the authority of Profes- sor Holmes, in the Southern division, I called on him only the day before yesterday to go to the farmers' institutes in Maryland and explain that very process for a period of one month. For the fol- lowing month he is to go to Raleigh, to the Agricultural College, and explain to the students there. We aim to keep these field men, that do the work of the summer time, at work in the winter time, explain- ing these processes — all that we discover in that respect. The Chairman. You speak of this mixture of clay and sand as a discover}-. The exact proportion may be a discovery, but we have known that in our country for years — that the thing to try on a sand road was clay and on a clay road was sand. Mr. Burleson. What is the best proportion to use, Mr. Dodge ? Mr. Dodge. That has to be determined b}>- the quality of sand and the quality of clay on observation. I should think approximately half and half. There is no mystery about this, but it is useful infor- mation, and, of course, it is given out through oral instructions. Mr. Lever. Did j r ou build any roads in Columbia, S. C. , in Richland County ? Mr. Dodge. We have not built any sand-clay roads. HEARINGS BEFOKE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 345 Mr. Levee. Have you ever examined those roads there ? Mr. Dodge. I took a short trip around about Columbia when I vis- ited there. Mr. Lever. What do j^ou think it would cost a mile to build such a road with sand and clay as they have there ? Mr. Dodge. About $300 a mile, I should think. Mr. Levee.- If you had to haul the clay from an}- distance, that would cut some figure in the cost? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. Mr. Burleson. Do I understand you to say that is the best char- acter of roads that can be built at that place? Mr. Dodge. No; not at all. That is the best thing to do, consider- ing the price. Mr. Burleson. What I meant, is that the best character of road for those people to build i Mr. Dodge. Now, you take it in approaches to your cities, and it might be necessary to harden the surface with something more durable. You could put on a coating of stone. That works very well and satis- factorily, i Mr. Levee. That is about the cheapest road you could possibly build? Mr. Dodge. I believe it is. Mr. Haugen. About a year ago when I was driving through Wis- consin, I found they were treating a sandy road there by sprinkling oil; is that one of your discoveries? Mr. Dodge. I can not say it is one of our discoveries; but we have assembled all the facts together pertaining to that, and issue a bulletin instructing the people how to do it. Mr. Abbott, our western repre- sentative, whom I mentioned a few moments ago, has devoted a good deal of attention to that in California, where thej r have probably done more than in any other place. He has made an exhaustive study of it, and has made a thorough report, which is published, and we have had very many calls for that. A suitable thing, I believe, would be vitrified clay, broken in angular fragments, and treated as broken rock, would be all right. We want to go further than that before we issue any statement about it. Mr. Haugen. This oil has to be applied very frequently, does it not? Mr. Dodge. Once a year, I think. Mr. Geaff. Have you made an investigation of the best road mate- rial for central Illinois, where they have the black soil ? Mr. Dodge. This noviculate I have referred to, that is so common in southern Illinois, would be an excellent thing. Mr. Geaff. What could this material be purchased for in southern Illinois? Mr. Dodge. It is a cheap product. It comes without any labor in quarrying, and I think it costs about 25 cents a ton. Mr. Geaff. At the quarry ? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Will it stand frost after it is taken out of the quarry \ Mr. Dodge. It seems to stand it very well. The Chaieman. How much of a trial have you given it? Mr. Dodge. The two years that it has been in use. 346 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. In Jackson \ Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir; I wish to say in further answer to this ques- tion, it is most likely that the black soil of your country, could be vitrified the same as clay. We have made some experiments with the black soil further down in Mississippi, and find it works all right. We expect that the black soil of your country would be all right, if it were properly treated, and it would make a very cheap road. Mr. Graff. You have not made any experiments with it? Mr. Dodge. We have made experiments in the laboratory, but we have not made any in roads for actual use. Mr. Graff. Many times there for three months in the year, in the , spring, it would be impossible to pull an empty farm wagon over the road. Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir; I understand that. The Chairman. Is it that long — three months ? Mr. Graff. Probably one month. It is simply impassable. The rural carriers are able to go around only on foot. It is the best soil in Illinois. And the reason why the farmers there are prejudiced against road building is on account of the fear of taxation and incurring of great expense. You meet with that prejudice whenever a reformer attempts to preach good roads in central Illinois. He has a hard task. Mr. Dodge. I think myself the burden is a little hard. I agree with the sentiments as expressed generally about that. It is rather too much of a burden for the agriculturists to bear alone, and that is one reason I have stated that they appreciate very highly in New York and in New Jersey the assistance that is given by the States, and they also appreciate very highly the little assistance that has been given them in the way I have stated here. The Chairman. Is not the road problem of the South a compara- tively easy one, in view of the fact that you do not have to compete with the frost to any great extent ? Mr. Dodge. I think it is an easy problem in that respect, but the law of compensation seems to work there as it does everywhere else. While they have an easier task, they have less means with which to do it. They do not have so much of a revenue in any of their States and counties as they do in the North. While it costs more to build in the North, the revenues and resources of the North are proportionately greater. Mr. Haugen. Did I understand you to say you had built roads in cities or in towns ? Mr. Dodge. There was one or two cases where this "Good-Road Train" visited cities, and I thought they had stopped in Richmond, but Captain Lamb corrected me. I am not sure whether they did it in any place. They make their headquarters sometimes in the city, but they go outside, and, as I said, we cooperate with the chambers of commerce. In some instances they have raised the money, or a por- tion of it, to defray the cost, but we always insisted on the road being built outside of the city. Mr. Burleson. You speak of the gratitude of the agriculturist for the assistance rendered him by the State and the little assistance ren- dered him by the Federal Government; do you think he overlooks the fact that he is bearing the greater portion of that burden? Mr. Dodge. No; I think not. I think he is a little conscious of HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 347 that, and is glad of a little help, and would be glad for more. I remember very well in Fargo, when we had quite an important meet- ing there, one gentleman from the country made a speech in which he said that if you gave a man 50 cents he would do $5 worth of work to get it. That is about the way with the work we do. Mr. Burleson. That is mistaken economy, is it not? Mr. Dodge. Not if they put the $5.50 together and make five dol- lars and a, half out of it, and especially if they stimulate the community to activity by reason of exertion or this desire to get 50 cents. It would be a clear gain. Mr. Burleson. At last, the community bears the burden. Mr. Dodge. 1 believe the community bears the burden. You are burdening the people in the country by taking half their revenue from them, and you do not return to them half of that which you take. The Chairman. Mr. Dodge, have you got any figures in your Bureau showing the average haul to the farmer f Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. The Chairman. What is it % Mr. Dodge. About 12 miles. The Chairman. The average haul of each farmer in the United States — of each farmer to his market? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. Mr. Adams. Do you not think that is pretty high ? Mr. Dodge. That includes very long hauls in the mountain States and in the Southern States. The Chairman. It would be hardly fair to include the arid region, and all that. Mr. Dodge. I think that figure is based on the idea that the tonnage for all distances would be of equal amount; subject to any error in that respect, 1 believe that figure would be correct. As the distance increases the quantity decreases, and this estimate, or the quotient derived from the computation which was made by General Stone, gives 12 and a fraction as the average; but I do not think he took . into account all of the varying quantities. Of course, you want to take quantity into consideration, for the mile haul has more quantity as a 12-mile haul. Mr. Adams. In addresses prepared by 87 Wisconsin farmers- institutes, they made quite an elaborate estimate as to that very mat- ter, and all also obtained with reasonable degree of correctness the tonnage of the State which was transported from farms to market,, and estimated that the average haul was 6 miles, and that cost over and above what the cost would have been if the roads had been properly graded, and the money which up to that time had been expended had been intelligently expended, made a difference in the annual cost to the farmers of that State in moving their products of 16,000,000 a year. Mr. Graff. Did they estimate the haul of 6 miles to be the distance both ways? Mr. Adams.. Yes; that is my calculation. No; I am mistaken. The Chairman. Perhaps Mr. Stone's estimate covers both ways ? Mr. Dodge. I had an estimate for the State of Ohio of about five. I think General Stone estimated only one way, but I know he took very long hauls in the South and West. 348 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OK AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. I made a statement yesterday to a gentleman to whom I was talking that in my State it was not over 2£ miles. If it is 6 in Wisconsin I should say it was less in my State, because we are gridironed with railroads. Mr. Dodge. I would like to state to the gentleman with regard to diminishing the amount of revenue that is taken from the people, whatever they might do, as a matter of fact they have not done it, and I do not think you would make any mistake if you would be lib- eral in appropriating to benefit the rural districts. Mr. Graff. Have you been able to see any marked effect in interest the farmer has taken in road building and in the actual building of roads, through the work of your department? And if so, give us some instances of it. Mr. Dodge. I have noticed remarkable changes in that respect. I believe them all to be based, however, on the expectation that they would have assistance. I would call the gentleman's attention to some testimonials published in the report. I took occasion to request reports from the different places where these object-lesson roads have been built, after a considerable lapse of time — one, two, and three years' time — and 1 published a number of these testimonials in a report. I would be very glad if the gentlemen would read them, especially to show the effect after the road was built, and the beneficial results that would come and were recognized in the community. You will find a number of such reports by way of letters that I have included, and 1 think, if you can get the time to read them, it would throw consider- able light on this question. I must say I was greatly pleased, almost surprised, at the uniform testimony given, and often by pei'sons I did not know. Mr. Graff. With reference to central Illinois and to road building in that country, gravel has been practically the only thing used. What do you think of that material for central Illinois? Mr. Dodge. Gravel is very good. Of course there is a great variety of gravel, but the hard gravel, that is not too large, is exceedingly useful for road building. Mr. Burleson. But gravel upon a black soil, without something to bind it, will sink just like lead in water. Mr. Dodge. That will be the case. It needs something that rests like a cushion over the mass; must be consolidated by this process in order to make sure it would not settle. When you get a heavy pres- sure on a portion of it, like a horse's foot or a narrow-tired wagon, it will cut through. Mr. Graff. Is this material that you have obtained from Cairo for your operations in the South a stony substance? Mr. Dodge. It seems to be a sort of granulated rock that is accom- panied by a powder, some of which is so fine as to be almost like a powder, and by spreading the powder in with the other it makes a filler that comes to a very hard, smooth, durable surface. Mr. Adams. What sort of expression do you get from the people you have helped in this matter of road building? Mr. Dodge. Very favorable expressions. Without any exception they always want us to do more than we are able to. When we have built half a mile they want us to go ahead a mile; when we have built a mile they want us to go ahead with 2 miles. There are a great many instances where individuals have furnished money to carry on the work after the public money was spent. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 349 Mr. Bowie. May I ask you a question? Perhaps you have already explained it, but it is not in my mind. You have asked for an increase in the lump sum of 130,000; "but, as I understand, that is an actual increase of $45,000, because $15,000 now chargeable against the lump sum you propose to transfer to some other department and let it be carried against some other lump sum. Ten thousand dollars off from $35,000 will be $25,000. Under what theory was the $10,000 charged to this lump sum at all? Mr. Dodge. The theory of that did not originate with myself. I am not asking to have this done. It is the Secretary's request. The Secretary, as I have already stated, has divided this fund which was heretofore appropriated into three portions, one portion of $10,000 for the testing laboratory, another portion of $6,000 for the resident agents, and the balance for Mr. Bowie. Office expenses ? Mr. Dodge. And force; and whatever work we could do in the way of object lessons. Now the laboratory has been pretty well developed. It seems, however, they think they need a little more. The laboratory work, I will say, is in the building where the Chemical Bureau is situated, and they work in collaboration, and I suppose the theory is that it would be better for them to work for us, so it was divided. I was not particular about it myself at all; it was not suggested by me, but it was believed by the chief of the division and by the Secretary and by the chief of the road-material laboratory that it would be better to have it so. I have no objection to it. Mr. Bowie. Let me ask you another question: Suppose we consent to the transfer of the chemical work to another lump sum appropria- tion, raising that other a sufficient amount to take care of it, would it not leave you a net increase of $10,000 for your general work, even if we left your lump sum appropriation at $35,000? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir; it would. Mr. Bowie. You would get the increase; so you are interested in it to that extent, so far as the work of your department is concerned ? Mr. Dodge. Yes, sir. Mr. Haugen. When these estimates were made, were not the $15,000 included in the estimate? Mr. Dodge. Not in the estimate you have cited here. It was included in my report. Mr. Haugen. Did you expect the $15,000 besides the $65,000? Mr. Dodge. Yes; 1 remember now. They did call me in conference about this matter — the Secretary and Doctor Wiley of the Chemical Bureau — and the Secretary took it all under advisement and finally divided the figures in this way and asked for the two different amounts. Thereupon the committee adjourned until 2 o'clock p. m. AFTER RECESS. IRRIGATION AND AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING INVES- TIGATIONS. STATEMENT OF HON. W. R. SMITH, M. C, OF TEXAS. Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, I desire to thank the committee for this privilege, and to say that I shall consume but a very few minutes in presenting the remarks that I wish to make. I want to make a state- 350 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. merit with reference to the continuation of the appropriation, perhaps an increase of it, that has heretofore been made for the purpose of carrying on experiments and investigations in irrigation throughout the country. 1 do not desire to discuss this matter general!}', but merely to make a statement as to the conditions prevailing in my State, in so far as they apply to this question. There is a pressing necessity for the work that has been carried on by this bill, in what we call the semiarid region of the State of Texas. This region is in the western part of the State and embraces perhaps 150,000 square miles, or something like 100,000,000 acres, a territory about equal in size to all the New England States, New York, and Pennsylvania combined. The lands in that section of the State, or most of them, as a general rule, are very fertile and very productive whenever there is sufficient rainfall and whenever the crops are put under irrigation. That section of the State is rapidly settling up by farmers — an industrious, thrifty set of farmers, from all parts of the United States, from almost every State in the Union. To give you an idea, gentlemen, of the growth and development of that country, 1 desire to state that we have gained two Congressmen within the last ten years, since the last apportionment. I mean in the western part of the State. I am not speaking of the eastern part of the State, where they usually have sufficient rainfall. As I say, this portion of the State is very fertile. There is no more productive land, perhaps, anywhere in the whole country than is to be found in that part of Texas. The only obstacle in the way of the farmer is the want of water. As a general rule, there is not sufficient rainfall for the crops. Frequently the crops are completely destroyed, and they are almost every year injured greatly by the drought. That part of the State, as I say, is in great need, right at this par- ticular time, of the usual experiments that have been carried on by the Department. There are a number of rivers traversing the arid region of the State of Texas, running from the northwest to the south- east, with a great many smaller tributaries, through which during the year a great deal of water flows, and, of course, for the want of proper irrigation work in construction, the water is wasted and lost to the farmers. Furthermore, there are a great many draws and natural depressions where water can be stored for irrigation purposes, if the farmers understood how to go at' it. In addition to that, through almost all of that country plenty of underground water can be found at a reasonable depth, and in some places an abundance of artesian water at a depth of from 90 to 250 feet. Along one of the rivers are two or three different irrigation plants, owned and controlled by large corporations, and they are farming under those irrigation plants very successfully; but in the greater part of the country there is no irrigation whatever, and I believe if the farmers were properly instructed, if proper experiments were made down there, where there is a small water supply, the farmers of that section could at once take up the work, if they understood it, and in a great part of that section of the State furnish plenty of water to raise abundant crops, where they are now almost failing in their efforts to carry on farming successfully. Gentlemen, I do not know how long these irrigation experiments have been carried on by the Department of Agriculture, but some HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 351 several years, I understand, or at least last year the appropriation was something' like $65,000. This money has been expended in different parts of the country in quite a number of different States of the Union, but not 1 cent of it has ever been spent in the section of the State that I now speak of. I believe there has been a little expended in the eastern part of the State where rice culture is being carried on, but in this great semiarid region of the State that 1 speak of, not 1 cent, so far as I know, has ever been expended, and the 'Government has never sent anybody there to make experiments. I do not say that the State of Texas has been discriminated against by the gentlemen. I do not contend that at all. Of course they had to take up their work in some part of the coun.try and pursue it in the way they thought best, but for some reason they have not reached our State. Now, if the appropriation that has heretofore been made has been insufficient to reach that section of the country, I hope the com- mittee will increase it to the extent that will justify the Department of Agriculture in going into that section of the State and doing for those people what it has been doing for other people in other parts of the country. Mr. Burleson. As I understand you, Judge, what you want is some experiments made with a view of determining whether the small sources of water supply there can be conserved and utilized for irri- gation purposes? Mr. Smith. Yes, sir; that is one of the objects of the experiment, but I think it would be well to carry on nearly all of the experiments that have been usual by the Department, showing those people, who are absolutely ignorant of the methods of irrigating, and of raising crops by irrigation, how to apply the water, when to apply it, and so on, and, as you say, how to utilize the small supply of water. I believe, gentlemen, that is about all I desire to present. As I say, I do not care to take up the general discussion of the propriety of making the appropriation further than to say that I hope the com- mittee will make an appropriation that is sufficient to reach that part of the country which is, right at this time, so badly needed. Mr. Graff. How much of an area have they there that is now irri- gated % Mr. Smith. It is very small. I do not suppose that they have over 30,000 or 40,000 acres out of 100,000,000 acres unirrigated. Mr. Graff. Have they commenced to enlarge the area? Mr. Smith. Wherever it can be done, yes, sir — they are experi- menting with it. This irrigation that I speak of — all that is worth speaking of — is where it is carried on by the ditch companies in the larger streams. Mr. Scott. Have you done anything there, Judge, in the way of raising water? Mr. Smith. No, sir. Mr. Scott. You stated there was plenty of it? Mr. Smith. No, sir; we have not tried that except by artesian water along the west side of the Pecos River. There is some irrigation by artesian wells. The Chairman. Is your home in that part of the State? Mr. Smith. Yes, sir. Mr. Brooks. These places where you want experiments tried are, in a great many instances, is I understand it, places where the sources 352 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. of supply are too small to justify Government irrigation, even if they were'public lands? Mr. Smith. Yes, sir; we have no public lands in our State. Mr. Brooks. What 1 want to bring out is that they are small enter- prises that do not justify irrigation on a large scale, but would abun- dantly justify the individual farmer doing itif he can do it intelligently? Mr. Smith. Yes, sir; that is the point. Mr. Bowie. He needs the experiment as a demonstration. Mr. Graff. What did these experiments consist of that were had by the Department of Agriculture? Mr. Smith. Those experiments can be explained better by Mr. Mead, who, I believe, .will appear before the committee after me. He can explain them more satisfactorily, more in detail, and I will leave that to him. Mr. Burleson. I would be glad, Judge, if you would make a short statement to the committee about the ownership of public lands in Texas, and why it is that Texas will not benefit under the general irrigation law as passed. Mr. Smith. When Texas was admitted as a State into the Union she reserved all her public domain to herself. None of that went to the Government, and there never has been any Government land in the State of Texas. The general irrigation act, as I understand it, only applies to those States and Territories where there are public lands of the Government, so the Interior Department, which has that work in charge, will not enter the State of Texas or do any work in the State at all. Mr. Henry. Why would it not.be the preliminary step for the State of Texas to enact legislation in the line of legislation that has been enacted by Congress, by providing for the sale of these lands and that the proceeds shall be applied to irrigation purposes ? Mr. Burleson. Most of that land belongs to individuals. Mr. Smith. Most of it belongs to individuals, and the lands the State still owns belong to the school fund of the State and that fund can not be diverted to any other purpose. Those lands are being rapidly taken up by actual settlers at a nominal price. The lands are very cheap. The Chairman. How are these settlers supporting themselves ? Mr. Smith. By farming and stock raising in connection with their farms. Mr. Burleson. And when they have the proper amount of rain, by .making most abundant crops. » Mr. Smith. Yes; it is the most productive country on earth when they have the rain. The Chairman. Some years you have enough ? Mr. Burleson. Sometimes. Mr. Lorimer. What is the crop in the irrigated country ? Mr. Smith. They have a variety of crops. They have corn and the lighter food stuffs, and cotton, grapes, and fruits. Mr. Lorimer. In the rainy season what will the soil produce to the acre of corn? Mr. Smith. Well, the corn crop is not grown as successfully as some other crops, but I have seen all the way from 35 to 60 bushels of corn raised to the acre. Under irrigation, I will say to the com- mittee, I have seen grown 2 bales of cotton to the acre; I have seen 6- HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 353 tons of alfalfa to the acre; I have seen $100 worth of grapes to the acre taken from the land. Mr. Henrt. Does the cotton-boll weevil infest that land? Mr. Smith. No, sir; the cotton-boll weevil has not reached that section of the State yet, but we are expecting it. The Chairman. We are much obliged to you, Mr. Smith. Now, Mr. Mead, I think we had better hear you, as long as we have touched on this irrigation subject. STATEMENT OF ELWOOD MEAD, OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. You may go on, Mr. Mead, in your own way and tell us what you have done in the last year and what you propose to do with the increase asked for, etc. Mr. Mead. The work of last year has followed along the same line generally as the work of the previous year, and I can perhaps best give the committee an idea of the work we have done and what we propose to do by taking up the three climatic sections of the country, the arid, semi-arid, and humid regions of the country, and telling the problems we are dealing with and something of the methods we are following. Beginning with the arid region and taking the Pacific coast, the State where irrigation has the greatest importance is California. There the great question is to make water that is now used in the irrigation of one acre of land irrigate two acres of land, b} r the adoption of better methods. You will understand that practically every man now irrigating in California went there knowing nothing about irrigation, and there are probably 10,000 farmers going to California every year and irri- gating for the first time. They are taking up an entirely new industry. It is like a man going froni the counter in the dry goods store and undertaking to plough and plant and carry on all of the operations of a farm. The difference is almost as great in the operations of irriga- tion and in the operations in a humid country. Mr. Bowie. Is it not also true that the fellow who goes there and takes it up for the first time thinks he knows more about it than any one else? Mi\ Mead. I think so. In California the development has gone far enough so that the necessity for the economical use of water is im- perative. Take it in the southern part of the State at this season — they are confronted by that situation. In the citrous fruit belt, where both land and water are enormously valuable, there has been a great temptation to expansion — to put much more knd under irrigation than can be safely watered in tb'j methods that farmers of the kind 1 have spoken of would naturally bring into operation. What they must do there in order to protect and save the lives of the trees that are already planted is to bring about better methods of supplying water, and those are things that farmers under those conditions, if they ever learn them at all, would only learn in a very long series of years and at a great loss to the country. Mr. Scott. That suggests a question I was going to ask right there, Mr. Mead. You have been carrying on this work in California for some time; you have published a very handsome and elaborate report c a 23 354 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. about it. I would like to know whether your experience has shown that the farmers are to any considerable degree profiting by the work you have done there. Mr. Mead. Decidedly, yes, sir; there is no question about that whatever. Mr. Brooks. And is not that same bulletin with regard to the dis- tribution of water there a great deal of use in other lines? Mr. Mead. I think so. Mr. Scott. I should think it would be. Mr. Brooks. In my State the bulletin is very valuable, indeed, in the economical use of water in different soils. Mr. Mead. The interest in and appreciation of the work we are doing in California is shown by the fact that the State legislature at its session last year appropriated $10,000 to assist in the prosecution of the work in California, and they have left that $10,000 — $5,000 to be expended each year — absolutely under our direction. The Chairman. Under the direction of your Bureau? Mr. Mead. Yes; of Doctor True. — under the Office of the Experi- ment Stations. The Chairman. Has any other State done the same thing? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. It has not appropriated so much, but the State of Nevada appropriated $2,000 for the same sort of work. The Chairman. Has Colorado appropriated any monej'. Mr. Mead. No, sir. The Chairman. Colorado is a very rich State. Mr. Brooks. They have not appropriated money in that way, but they have appropriated very large sums in other ways. Mr. Scott. Let me ask the gentleman from Colorado in what way they did appropriate a very large sum? Mr. Brooks. We maintain a State engineer whose duty it is to fol- low out lines of work very much like those Mr. Mead is talking about now. He has a corps of assistants, and does a great deal of work in that line. Mr. Scott. It is devoted almost exclusively to the irrigation work? Mr. Brooks. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. It goes to salaries, like everything else, does it? Mr, Brooks. Yes; partly to salaries. Mr. Mead can tell you about that. Mr. Mead. The work we are doing in California is to determine for the people of the State, by a series of experiments carried on in the southern and central districts of the State, how much water is needed; to determine the minimum amount of water that is needed in the production of crops in that region, and to determine how that water can be applied to the best advantage. Those are questions of application. There is another factor that enters into economy in the use of water, and that is distribution,, the waste from loss in canals. A great man} r canals in California were built at a time when it was not understood that canals through some cause would leak like a sieve, and the result of the operation of canals of that character has been that a great deal of the water that entered the canal was lost to the canal company so far as the distribution was concerned, and it has filled up large areas of the soil with seepage water, which, instead of being a benefit, has proved a very serious injury and has made the question of the removal of HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 355 seepage water — the question of drainage — a matter of great moment in certain sections. So that we are studying the question of how to handle those canals, carrying on experiments to determine whether or not the canals can be treated in such a way as to stop the excessive losses. The Chairman. Are these canals mostly owned by companies? Mr. Mead. The greater partiof the canals in California are coop- erative canals, owned by the farmers. We are not carrying on any investigation under company canals. The Chairman. Under what? Mr. Mead. Under company canals. The principal study of seep- age, in which we have made a report since I last appeared before the committee, embraced a district of 25 square miles, where, when the water was turned in the canal last spring, it rose at the rate of half an inch, and it was 6 feet below the surface before water was turned in. That left an ample soil surplus for trees and plants to grow in. By the 1st of June it had risen to within 2 feet of the surface in certain sections of the»country, and was smothering out the roots of all kinds of plants, certainly all kinds of trees. There they must supplement their irrigation system by a drainage system, and indeed just such measurements and experiments as 1 we are carrying on to enable those people to plan a drainage system that will be of the right kind. They realize it and they are waiting for the results of our work. We have been requested to publish, and have published, as a circular the results of last year's measurements in advance of our ordinary reports for the benefit of those people. Mr. Scott. Would it not be cheaper and better to construct canals which will not leak than to build leaky canals and then have to put in an expensive system of drainage afterwards ? Mr. Mead. We do not know whether it is within the limits of rea- sonable cost to construct canals that will not leak. What we are endeavoring to ascertain for those people is what is the kind of coating that will make those canals nonleakable. That is one of the things that is being studied all over the world at the present time, not only here but elsewhere. - I will say that this summer I saw where an invest- ment of nearly a million dollars had been made in cementing canals that had proved failures, and now they are doing what we are doing in advance of that sort of improvement in California. They are making experiments with other kinds of coating material. The Chairman. What was the cause ? Was it failure of the cement ? Mr. Mead. Freezing. Mr. Burleson. You mean the cement would crack? Mr. Mead. Yes. Not freezing alone. It froze in the winter, and then in the summer time whenever the canal was empty the intense heat of the sun would dry it out so quickly that it would be dry on one side and wet on the other, and would crack. It was filled full of cracks. The Chairman. That cement was badly made, was it not? Mr. Lorimer. How thick was it coated ? Mr. Mead. Just as thin as they could make it, probably between a quarter of an inch and half an inch. Mr. Lorimer. That would crack anywhere. Mr. Brooks. Where was that experiment? Where did that failure occur ? 356 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Mead. In Italy. There is another phase of economical use of water in different parts of the West that we are dealing with in California, and I speak of it here simply as an illustration of the kind of questions we are study- ing in the arid region. I can explain that by giving a concrete illus- tration. In the valley of the Lagrange Hiver, in California, they have country that can be farmed without irrigation. It is very much the same kind .of country you have in Texas. Farming is hazardous. The only sure crop they have there is wheat, and it is impossible to grow wheat continuously on the same land without destroying its fer- tility; and they have reached a point where they must diversify their crops. There is a community of farmers that settled and occupied that whole country. They had a change all at once. They have spent over $2,000,000 in building canals. . They raised the money by levying an assessment on the land of the farmers there, and the canals are the common property of the farmers in those districts. One of the canals irrigates 80,000 acres of land and another irrigates almost the same amount. There are 150,000 acres under the two canals. Here is a community of several thousand farmers beginning to irri- gate for the first time. They have to handle several hundred miles of canal and to manage a distribution system that in order to be efficient and successful needs the same kind of organization that is needed by a railroad or express system. What happened the first year was this: Work began to be active, and they did not know how much water each man ought to have. They had not made any apportionment of the supply to each individual. Proper arrangements were made for the regulation of gates, and they left everybody free to take water as they pleased. The man at the upper end of the canal took more than he needed and the man at the lower end went without. At the end of the first season they were up against this proposition. They either had to spend half a million dollars more to build a canal so large that that wasteful use could not absorb the supply, if they were going to supply the man at the lower end of the ditches and laterals, or they had to inaugurate some sort of economic system of distribution. So we have been petitioned by both of those districts to assist them this j'ear in a determination of hpw much water is needed for an acre of land in that country so that they can make their regulations fit their necessities, a proper method of policing, and the establishment of by-laws and regulations to determine how their gates shall be raised and lowered. They also ask us to begin now a record there to deter- mine whether or not the leakage of those canals, the wastage in the use of water by farmers, is going to cause the soil water to rise and flood out the lower lands as it has in some other cases, so as to force them to institute a drainage system entirely or their crops are lost. We have that same question of how to set about making water, under the ignorant and unskillful use of ,the beginner, do a larger duty in a great many of the communities of the West. Take the Yakima Valley in Washington. There is a valley that is very fertile, very productive, and hence it is the scene of an active settlement and development in irrigation, and they now have canals that will water probably 200,000 acres of land. I do not remember the exact area. They have about 100,000 acres under irrigation, and last year they used the whole sup- ' HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 357 ply of the stream. Those canals can be extended to irrigate 300,000 acres of land, and yet do that without an excessive duty of water — do it with a less duty of water; that is, the applying of a less quantity of water to the land than is done in Colorado; and the whole question of whether they have 100,000 acres of land irrigated or 300,000 acres of land irrigated rests on the establishment of better practices on the part of those farmers. Mr. Brooks. Is it true that as a usual thing the tendency is to over- irrigate and waste water? Mr. Mead. It is with the beginner. It alway is. Mr. Brooks. Your idea is that there can be a more economical use of water instituted under the direction of this Bureau? Mr. Mead. Oh, yes. I think the work we are doing is going to result ultimately in making the water that now irrigates an acre of land irrigate 2 acres, and that means larger profits, of course. Mr. Brooks. That is just the point, the less water the best results. Mr. Mead. Yes, to a certain point. The same situation exists in Utah. There we are cooperating. I will say the work we are doing in Washington is being carried on in cooperation with the State agri- cultural college and experiment station, and there is such an interest in the work that we are doing in the Yakima Valley that they are desirous that next year we should issue monthly bulletins which will give to the settlers and the ditch owners of that country an idea of what is actually taking place in the application of water to those lands, how much they are putting on the lands from month to month, so that they can guage themselves whether they are making advances in their lessening the use of water, because they all realize — the ditch com- panies realize, the farmers that are not irrigating all their land realize — that the complete development of that country rests entirely on the adoption of better practices in the use of water. Mr. Bowie. How many thousand acres of land have you already irrigated there now? Mr. Mead. In the Yakima Valley? Mr. Bowie. In that western country which you have been discussing. Mr. Mead. It is approximately 10,000,000 acres. Mr. Bowie. In which you expect to increase the sufficiency of the water supply so that it will cover 20,000,000 acres? Mr. Mead. Yes; there is about 10,000,000 acres irrigated, and about 5,000,000 additional acres under canal already built that is not irrigated, and I feel certain that it is a safe proposition, by better methods of administration and operation of the canal, that you can operate every acre of that additional 5,000,000 acres without any additional canals or any additional water supply. That covers the principal line of our work in the arid region. Now, let us take up the semiarid region. Mr. Brooks. May I ask you a question before you do that? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Brooks. Does the presence of seepage permanently injure the land? Mr. Mead. No, sir. Mr. Brooks. If it can be removed, the land will be restored to its original condition? Mr. Mead. Entirely. Drainage is not only a remedy for the sur- 358 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OK AGRICULTURE. plus water that comes into the land, but it is also an effective means of removing the alkali, which is simply brought to the surface by this accumulation of soil water. Mr. Bowie. I want to ask you before you get away into another heading, while it is on my mind, this question: Congress has recently passed the irrigation act, of which, of course, you are advised. Since the passage of that act, what is the necessity of this work that you are doing now and for this appropriation? That act turns over all the proceeds of the sale of the land to be applied to irrigation purposes. Mr. Mead. No, it does not turn it over to be used for those pur- poses at all. That money is to be expended entirely in the location and construction of works. What we are doing is aiding the farmers under ditches already built to use water to better advantage. Mr. Bowie. That act does not apply to your work at all ? Mr. Mead. Not at all. It does not authorize expenditures for that purpose at all. That deals with unirrigated countries. It is not only a different field, but it occupies a different geographical territory. It deals with the country where irrigation does not prevail. We are dealing with it where it is an issue. The Chairman. This deals more particularly with what you might call the agriculture of irrigation. Mr. Bowie. Private ownership? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Scott. Your view of it, I presume, would be that the fact that the country is going into the business on a very large scale renders your work all the more important? Mr. Mead. I think so. I think the Government has the same interest as a private individual in having farmers educated to use water to the best advantage. Mr. Bowie. Undoubtedly. I was just trying to gather the connec- tion between the two lines of work. Mr. Mead. When I come to speak about drainage I will come back to the arid region on the question of seepage. Drainage is a separate proposition. Mr. Brooks. And alkali? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Mr. Brooks. Let me ask you one question there in regard to this private ownership. As I understand it, your work is the application of the water to the soil after it has been collected and stored by the Government in the larger reservoirs? Mr. Mead. At the present time we are dealing entirely with the water after it has been collected and stored by private individuals. We are dealing with the development that has already been accom- plished by the individuals. Mr. Brooks. But that would be your relation to the Geological Survey ? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Now, coming to the semiarid region, there is a great belt of country that extends from Canada down to almost the Gulf of Mexico, that lies between the boundaries where you can get crops by rainfall and where you can not. That region happens to be one of the most fertile regions of the whole country, and one of the places which is most attractive to the farmer, because it is a broad-plains country, which is just suited to the plow and the reaper. In certain sections of the HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 359 country that attraction has drawn in whole counties of people, and then they have been depopulated again. Certain counties in that region have been peopled and depopulated two or three times. Kainy seasons would bring them in, and dry seasons drove them out. There is no question in my mind but that that country is going to be permanently settled, permanently inhabited, but it has got to be by a peculiar kind of agriculture. You have got to develop the kind of agriculture that is suited to that country, and the kind of agriculture that 1 think would succeed there is this: That each farmer must have a relatively large area of land for general cultivation, but he must supplement what Tie can do in that line by having 10 or 20 acres of land that he can irrigate, for which he can have a water supply each year. On that 10 or 20 acres of land he can be assured every year of a garden. He can be assured of a little fruit, and he can be assured of a few acres of alfalfa to take care of his milch cows and feed animals, so that when a season of drought does come he will not have to take off what he is making in the fat years to support him in the lean years. He will be able to make a living on his small irrigated area and will have to depend for Lis prosperity on the fat years. By a system of farming of that kind you can, 1 believe, give a stability and attractiveness to the agriculture of that country, just the same stability and attractiveness that it has in other parts of the country. In the first years that we were carrying on these investigations we had to deal with two general questions. One was the determination of how much water was being used, because we were being bombarded with interrogatories from everywhere, and we had to carry on through that region a large number of measurements to determine what farmers were going on under the unskillful methods, and we had to carry on certain investigations similar to the one referred to in California to determine what was the system— the legal and social institutions that they were working under. But we have made considerable progress. I do not feel that there is the same necessity for expending money along those lines that there was before, and last year we made a beginning in the study of what could be done with small quantities of water in the semiarid region — that is, to determine what it would cost to procure it, determine the best methods of supplying, and the best methods of distributing it and using it. It is a peculiar question there because you have not what they have along large rivers, the" possibility of developing means of economy by using large volumes. You must use large quantities and you must develop a system "based on the idea that you are only going to have small quantities of water to distribute and apply. Last year we did some work in western Kansas in cooperation with the State experi- ment station. They appropriated $1,000 to aid in that investigation. We instituted some inquiries in western Texas, and I made two visits to the Wichita Hiver to study the conditions existing there. This, in a broad way, is what happened there. In probably two years out of three they can raise a fine grain crop. Probably the third year they have a failure. But with the application of a very small quantity of water in the fat years I am satisfied those grain crops could be doubled if the water supply could only be supplemented by a very small addi- tional supply. 360 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Scott. Would the application of this small supply of water save the crop in the lean years? Mr. Mead. Yes; it is probable that in lean years you could not save your whole crop. In the lean years in many sections you would have to confine it to your 10 or 20 acre garden and alfalfa patch, but there are relatively large areas — I do not mean the whole country, but prob- ably 10 per cent of the whole country — where it could be irrigated every year. Mr. Scott. Your work in Kansas was carried on at Hays City ? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. Will you tell us what you did there ? Mr. Mead. Yes; we laid out 10 acres of land for irrigation, put down a well and installed a pumping plant, and irrigated during the season the staple farm products to determine what would be the effect of irrigation, and to ascertain what was the cost of pumping. Those were the two things we did last year. That is as far as we tried to go with them. Last year happened to be in that section of Kansas a fat year. They had what everybody believed to be an ample rainfall, but the increase in yields in the different crops that were irrigated varied from 25 to 77 per cent. So that it showed its value even in the best year. Mr. Scott. What did j^ou demonstrate there as to the cost of pumping? Mr. Mead. It paid, even in that year. Mr. Scott. Can you give an idea as to the actual cost? Mr. Mead. No; I can not without figures, and I did not bring those with me. Mr. Burleson. What is approximate cost of the outfit? Mr. Mead. The outfit costs about $1,000. Mr. Haugen. How deep did you have to go for the water? Mr. Mead. Between 20 and 30 feet. The well is 30 feet deep, but the water level varied. Mr. Haugen. The expense depends largely on the distance you have to lift? Mr. Mead. Yes; the expense of lifting depends on the height. Mr. Brooks. Are those pump plants easily within the reach of the individual farmer? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Mr. Brooks. You are conducting experiments, are you not, on the line of finding out the depth of the subterranean water supply? Mr. Mead. No; we have not been carrying on our experiments with that in view. What we are doing is to determine the best means of applying water ; that is, to find out how many acres of land you can irrigate with a cubic foot per second of water; how you can spread that out so as to get the most out of it. That is the f undamentalidea. Mr. Scott. Have you concluded your work at Hays, or do you expect to continue it this year? Mr. Mead. We expect to continue it, and we expect to supplement that by work farther west in the State. Mr. Scott. What power do you use in lifting the water? Mr. Mead. That depends on different places. Mr. Lamb. What kind of power did you use at Hays? Mr. Mead. We simply Used last year an ordinary traction engine. Mr. Burleson. I understand you could carry on a system of experi- HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 361 mentation in the conditions described by Judge Smith and Mr. Brooks, so as to illustrate to the farmer that it is practicable and would pay? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Burleson. You can do it? Mr. Mead. Yes; and I think we ought to do it. I think that is one of the fields of work to which we ought to give considerable attention, because it is one of those emergenc}^ questions. Here is a country that is filling up with people, and the question of their staying there depends very largely on the adoption of a kind of agriculture suited to that country. Mr. Burleson. You are asking for an increase of $5,000? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Burleson. Will that be sufficient to carry on these experiments ? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Mr. Burleson. If you get what you ask (the $5,000), that will enable you to carr}^ on this system of experiments in the semiarid region ? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Burleson. To show the farmer what can be done with small sources of water supply ? Mr. Mead. Yes. This kind of agriculture is not limited to that par- ticular belt. As we come to understand the arid region better, we are finding out it is not a solid dry region. It is. .scattered throughout detached areas of land that have exactly those conditions where you can grow certain crops every year. You can grow all kinds of crops some years, and by the addition of a small quantity of water you can greatly increase the area that it will pay to cultivate without the adoption of complete irrigation. We have been doing work to promote that kind of development with, I think, great benefit to particular sections of the country in showing what can be done to conserve moisture in certain parts of Montana, Idaho, and Oregon. In Oregon we are carrying on precisely what we propose to carry on in Kansas, Texas, and Oklahoma. There are about 3,000,000 acres of land in Oregon right on the border line between ability to grow crops without irrigation and certain failure in attempting to do it, and suc- cess is based entirely on this idea of making the best possible use of all the available water supply. It is not a question of crops; it is not a question of soil. It is a question of using the water that is available to make farming permanently profitable in that region; so that the experiments we propose to carrj T on will be carried on not alone in this district, although that will be the principal field, but we will carry them on also, as we did last year, in Oregon. We have carried them on for two years in Montana.' When we come to the humid part of the country, we began several years ago in connection with the State experiment stations of New Jersey, Wisconsin, and Missouri to determine what was the field of profitable irrigation in the eastern part of the United States. Irriga- tion in Europe is not confined to the dry parts of Europe. They irri- gate in Germany, in Switzerland, in Italy — where the rainfall is greater than in any part of the Mississippi Valley — and it has been my belief from the first that as the population increases and we adopt more intensive cultivation irrigation will become more and more an impor- tant factor in agriculture in the eastern part of the United States. 362 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The work in New Jersey was to determine how far irrigation could be used to aid the market gardener and in the irrigation of sandy lands. Mr. Scott. Let me inquire whether any work of that kind had been done by private individuals in New Jersey at all before you under- took it. Mr. Mead. Yes, sir; some few market gardeners, I have found out since, have been irrigating there for twenty-five years; but it was not generally understood, and our work has certainly had the effect of extending its adoption by market gardeners, in a great measure. That has been the principal usefulness of our work in the East; and a canvass of the market gardeners in the vicinity of New York and Boston shows that irrigation is becoming now the rule and not the exception in all the progressive market garden districts. In Wisconsin our work is to help in putting the growing of cranberries on a satisfactory financial footing. For fifteen years they have been trying to grow cranberries in Wisconsin. They have the climate and the soil, and they have a great market for them; but the balance has been on the wrong side of the ledger most of the time. The trouble has been that they did not know when to put water on and when to take it off, and that is the vital issue with cranberries. It wants to be put on at the right time and taken off promptly at the right time, and that means a study of the size of ditches, the kind of ditches, preparation of fields, to enable that to be done. That is what we are doing in cooperation with the State experiment station of Wisconsin. In Missouri the question is just how far and in what way irrigation can be made use of in the Mississippi Valley, and the results of the irri- gation of small fruits and of nursery stock shows that it is going to be one of the features of their production in the future. I think that much has been determined; but there still remain questions of how to irri- gate in this eastern country. The question of whether you can do it best by a sprinkling or by volume is a thing about which the market gardeners are all quarreling; and we hope to continue that line of work with the idea of betterment in future years. We have been requested by the State experiment stations of New York and New Jersey to place in the eastern section of the country this year a man who understands irrigation, a skilled and experienced irri- gator, to study the conditions here and to advise them what his con- clusions are in regard to the field of irrigation in this part of the country. It depends on what the committee does whether we do it or not. I think the expenditure of a few hundred dollars for the services of a man in the summer is one of those things that could be made wisely, but it is a thing that we can easily drop. But I believe throughout the whole humid section of the United States, wherever intensive cultivation is adopted, irrigation is going to be employed as an insurance and as a means of increasing the yield. I believe irrigation is going to be used as it is in Europe as an adjunct of dairymen. The adoption of irrigation in Italy, where they have 40 inches of rainfall, enables the farmers of that section to furnish the British army with the most of its cheese, and it has doubled the selling value of the land and trebled its production in the last twenty years. Mr. Scott. Is that connection between irrigation and cheese made by means of the larger forage crop that can De grown by means of irrigation ? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 363 Mr. Mead. Yes. Two things 'enter into it; one is that the very dry, hot summers destroy their pastures there The Chairman. Where was that did you say, Mr. Mead? Mr. Mead. In Italy, in the Valley of the Po. The other thing is that being able during the hot, dry months of the summer to have fresh and green food to supply to dairies so increases their yield as to make a great factor in the annual output of produce. They get more off of their land, they get more out of their cows, and I believe that is one of the things where irrigation, when a water supply can be had anywhere under 30 feet, will be largely adopted in the eastern part of the United States. In the southern part of the country we have this year been measur- ing in five places the amount of water used in the irrigation of rice, to determine the duty of water in that section. We took that up at the request of the i-ice growers of Louisiana. Mr. Bkooks. What do you mean by the duty of water? Mr. Mead. The amount of water required to irrigate an acre of land. Mr. Brooks. Does that vary according to the soil and climatic conditions ? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Brooks. Is that one of the problems you are studying? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Along the Atlantic seaboard we have made several visits at the request of the rice growers to advise with them about some of the questions that concern the reestablishment of the rice irrigation along the seaboard, and I think we can, by continuing that friendly service at no very great expense, assist materially in the carrying out of cer- tain reforms that they believe in, that they ought to be encouraged in adopting, making use of the experience we have had in the western country, by advising them how to go about it. Two years ago we were authorized to begin studies of drainage in connection with irrigation; and there had been before that time — in fact, from the very beginning of this investigation — requests for us to study the seepage problem of the West. With the study of drainage we took up, in connection with certain districts, the study of whether lands could be drained best by ditches from the lower end, or by ditches that reached up and cut off the seepage supply from the canals that were flooding the land — that is, certain peculiar questions connected with the preparation of drainage plans, under irrigation, contrasted with the preparation of drainage plans in the East. The publication of our reports on drainage in the West brought us last year a large number of inquiries from communities in the East for advice about the same matter, and I think was assisted by the fact that we had in our employ, I believe, the best drainage engineer in the country. At least, he is the man who is recognized throughout the Mississippi Val- ley as an undoubted expert in farm drainage. Last year our drainage experts met with communities and advised with them on definite proj- ects upon land, all told, to the amount of $1,300,000 in value. About half of these were in the arid region and about half of them in the humid region. I believe the drainage work ought to be extended east. There are large sections of the country in the Mississippi Valley and along the 364 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Gulf coast, in farming districts, where a little study and advice and preparation of plans will serve to bring under cultivation lands that are now absolutely worthless, and that if they were reclaimed would be just as valuable as the arable lands. The people who own them are willing to undertake the expense if they can be assured beforehand, if they can feel confident, that the measures they are adopting will be successful and the lands productive. The people are ready to occupy them to-day, and there is a field there for the extension of the country that we ought to aid in bringing into cultivation. So that in our esti- 1 mate this year we have provided an increase in the amount of appro- priation that will be used for salaries and traveling expenses and in other ways for drainage. It is just double what it was last year, and we have employed two men in the State of Washington. Mr. Burleson. Is that character of work intended to be embraced under this expression, "agricultural engineering," that you have embodied in the estimate? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Henry. Have you anything to add to the very interesting explanation you gave us last year in regard to the lands that had been injured by overirrigation, the alkali lands of Utah and other sections? What progress have you made in that particular? Have you any- thing more to add? Mr. Mead. Yes, I will just give some concrete illustrations. In the Yakima valley is a considerable area of land under ditches. When they began to irrigate the ground the water was 60 feet below the surface. Last spring the surface of the ground was covered. The water had reached the surface. Now, some of that land was devoted to hop culture, and it sold from $150 to $200 an acre. The people who went there went to an arid region, and when they found they were living over a swamp, it was an entirely new proposition to them to know how to go about changing those conditions. To have adopted the methods of drainage that are employed in the east would have subjected them to very great and needless expense, because they would probably put down drains a certain distance apart, just as they did in the east, and made an underdrainage. It would have carried off the water, but would have made great expense. We made a plan that involved just a single intercepting ditch. Our expert went there and studied that country, determined where the water was coming from, what ditches were leaking, measured the ditches to find out the ones that leaked, finally located the direction from which the seepage water was coming, and laid out an intercepting ditch without any underdrainage, and they formed themselves into a community enter- prise and built it. Mr. Brooks. And that was successful, was it? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. We have done the same thing for the Gray Bull Valley in Wyoming. There the work has not been carried out, but it will be carried out and will be a success. This work is having an influence on other communities. Mr. Burleson. How much saving did that result in to those people? Mr. Mead. There were about 12,000 acres in the Yakima Valley, and I suppose it would be a conservative estimate to say it was worth $120,000. The land would be practically valueless without it. We saved certainly $10 an acre on those 12,000 acres. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 365 Mr. Burleson. On the cost of "the different character of drainage ? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. I believe that covers in a general way the lines of work we are carrying on. I have, however, omitted one feature, the studies of laws and insti- tutions relating to irrigation. The only new work that we inaugurated in that respect this year was a study of the interstate water right ques- tion, in conformity to a provision that was inserted in the appropria- tion bill last year, as to the rights of irrigation in riparian proprietors. Mr. Brooks. Is that interstate question becoming an important one in the irrigation regions ? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Mr. Brooks. Why? Mr. Mead. It is becoming an important one, because as you exhaust streams and utilize them, it creates a shortage on both sides of the line and makes necessary an adjustment on many streams that was not neces- sary when there was little use of the water, and free water to people on both sides of the line. The matter is now in the Supreme Court of the United States. In the work that we undertook, before undertaking anything, we looked over the country, and this is the situation. The place where the riparian doctrine and where the rights of the irrigators come most directly in contact with each other is in streams that flow east from the Kocky Mountains. That seemed to be the best place to settle the question. We conferred with the governors and attorneys-general of Kansas and Nebraska, Colorado and Wyoming, with the State engi- neers of the three States that have State engineers, and all of them welcomed this investigation most heartily, and all of them agreed as to the field where it would be most useful. Now, what we are doing is not taking up the question of a deter- mination of decisions, or studying the legal questions at all. We are simply gathering the facts as to what has been the effect of the diver- sion and use of water on irrigation — just simply studying the physical conditions along those streams, so that whenever this question does come up there will be one concrete illustration of just what the con- ditions are. Mr. Brooks. Is that the crux of the controversy between the States, as to the amount of diversion there has been in taking out the water higher up the stream ? Mr. Mead. Well, yes, that is part of it; but I think this is the view that we have of the importance of our work — that it would cer- tainly contribute to a right settlement of this matter if the people who have to decide upon it could know'from an impartial source and from investigations that were carried on in a thorough way just ex- actly what the conditions were, and what effect irrigation did have on the application of these two doctrines and on the welfare of the people living on the streams. Mr. Scott. Have you been called upon by representatives of the States of Colorado or Kansas for the results of these investigations? Mr. Mead. No, sir. Mr. Haugen. What are the experiment stations doing along this line in the different States ? Mr. Mead. In all of the arid States but one they are cooperating 366 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. with us and doing work. That is, we are working together along the lines of our work. Then they are doing a great deal of additional work on other lines, on local and special questions. Mr. Burleson. In what part of the United States is the most money being invested at this time in irrigation work? Mr. Mead. Probably this year in California; last year it was Louisiana. There was more money going into irrigation, for the past two years, in Louisiana and Texas than in any other part of the United States. Mr. Brooks. And that land is under private ownership? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Brooks. And therefore not under the Interior Department? Mr. Mead. All the land in California is under private ownership, too. Mr. Brooks. And the same thing is true with regard to a good deal of the Kansas and Nebraska lands ? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Brooks. And South Dakota lands ? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Brooks. Then this work of yours is outside the field of the Interior Department? Mr. Mead. The greater part of the work we are doing is on ground under private ownership. Mr. Scott. Is the work which has been done in Louisiana and Texas the result in any degree of your work, or done in any particular way under your advice, or was it undertaken wholly as a private enterprise and with private initiative ? Mr. Mead. Private initiative entirely. Mr. Burleson. But they benefited largely by the suggestions you made? Mr. Mead. I think we can claim one thing in Louisiana and Texas that would entitle us to an appropriation if we had never done any- thing else. That is, we showed the people down there how to build contours over which they could run their harvesters. They were building abrupt ditches, abrupt banks, on their contours to hold the water in particular places. We showed them how they did that thing in California, where there was a long rounded turn over which they could drive their harvesters. That is one improvement that we intro- duced in the rice cultivation. Mr. Graff. Do you mean that you made the ditch wider and the approaches more gradual? Mr. Mead. Yes; and the banks. Mr. Graff. The banks more gradual, so they could drive right into the ditch and out of it again ? Mr. Mead. Yes.' The Chairman. What have you done along the lines of the laws of the several States ? You remember that was a point under discussion last year, and it was one of the wedges that restarted this appropria- tion after it had been allowed to lapse four years. Mr. Mead. Yes; I feel this way. The work we have done in that line has been of very great service. The passage of the Utah irrigation law, we are assured by the State engineer and others who were instru- mental in its passage, would not have been possible without it. The Chairman. Just state to the committee the difficulties you HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 367 labored under at first owing to these different laws in different States, so the members can understand the question a little more fully. Mr. Mead. You will understand that irrigation in this country has grown up very rapidly. It has been developed by people who had been accustomed to working independently of each other. When they went West they were confronted with and thought most about the pnysical obstacles, the leveling of the lands, the getting out of the ditch, and they did not appreciate at its true importance the necessity of the people who live along the river, and who are all dependent on one single water supply, securing an organization that would protect the man at the lower end of the stream when there were enough users above him to take the entire supply. They went on in that kind of development, without organization, without system, until all at once they came up to this situation. Here were a large number of rivers with more ditches than the river would fill, and there was no sort of law, no sort of regulation that would protect the rights of the people who were entitled to that water supply, and no provision for any pos- sible division of it. The first thing, to get out of that chaotic situation, was to ascertain just what the facts were, to go on certain typical streams and measure the facts as to the location, the kind of laws that existed there, the kind of measures they adopted, so that each farmer would get what he thought was his share of this common fund flowing down through the channel. That was the leading line of our investigation in the earlier years of this investigation. That was the fundamental line at that time; but having collected the facts appertaining to that line of work I do not believe it has the same importance now. The publication of those reports has had a great influence on public sentiment and has led to the enactment of laws reforming those rules. Mr. Scott. That is one of the problems, then, that you have to a large degree solved? , Mr. Mead. Yes. I do not say we have solved it, but I will say it has ceased to; be the important problem, and there is no particular need at the present time, if these reports illustrating them are published, to go on with that the same way we did before. It is probable that in time, with changing conditions, it may need further investigation, but not at the present time. Mr. Scott. Can you indicate any other lines of work that you have, to a considerable degree or wholly, completed? How about the inves- tigation in California? 1 asked you a few moments ago to what extent the people there had profited by it. You answered, I believe, that they had profited by it to a very large degree. Will it be neces- sary to repeat that work or to continue it? Mr. Mead. You mean the kind of work that was done in bulletin 100? Mr. Scott. Yes. Mr. Mead. No; we are not carrying on that kind of work in Cali- fornia now at all. Mr. Scott. That is what I wanted to know. Mr. Mead. No; our work in California now is along these lines: Te determine, in a country where water rents are $45 an inch in a year, how you can distribute that water most economically, how you can apply it so as to make an inch of it go over the greatest possible area of land and to secure the largest yields. That is one question. 368 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The other is the question of stopping seepage losses, the improvement of methods of drainage, and the organization of some of those new districts in this rapid development that is going on there; that is, the organization of the people themselves, so that they can handle their affairs, their water, their ditches, so as to get the right results out of them. I have omitted in going over this one other thing. That is an important subject of investigation in California, and will be a factor in our States in the semiarid region. It is this matter of pumping water for irrigation. Within the last five 3 T ears several million dollars have been invested in pumps by individual farmers to irrigate . their ten, twenty, or forty acres of land. That is becoming and has already become a great feature in irrigation. In the Santa Clara Valley in California there are over 1,500 pumps going. I think it is safe*to say that in the beginning of that work for every $10 the farmers spent they lost $1 by putting down the wrong kind of wells, using the wrong kind of engines and the wrong kind of pumps, which were not suited to their peculiar conditions. The Chairman. Were they not the best available at that time ? Mr. Mead. No; they could have obtained others. The Chairman. For many years we had thrashing machines and mowers that were the best obtainable at that time? Mr. Mead. Yes. What I mean is this, that farmers went and put down rotary pumps when centrifugal pumps would have been better, while the rotary might have been better in another place. Mr. Brooks. Are the farmers showing an appreciation of this work, and are you getting inquiries from it in other sections ? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Brooks. Coming to a question which is suggested by Mr. Burleson's comments in regard to the small farmers, are they cooperat- ing, and do they appreciate the work you are doing? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Mr. Brooks. And is that work enlarging among the jmall farmers as the result of your own work ? Mr. Mead. Oh, yes,; we have met with the most gratifying recep- tion for this work and a consequent increase in the number of practical inquiries from farmers all over the country. The Chairman. How many offices do you maintain now, Mr. Mead? Mr. Mead. Two. The Chairman. One in Wyoming and one here? Mr. Mead. Yes. The Chairman. How much rent do you pay in Cheyenne? Mr. Mead. $720 a year. '' The Chairman. You estimate here for the rent of a building in Washington. Where is your headquarters now? Mr. Mead. In the Department. The Chairman. What is the need of a new building ? Mr. Mead. Well, I was not consulted about that estimate for rent here, so I do not assume any responsibility for that. I did not know it was in there until I saw the estimate. The Chairman. You are satisfied where you are now ? . Mr. Mead. Yes, sir; we are satisfied where we are. I have no doubt they would like to get rid of us, because we work almost on top of one another in the little rooms we have. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 869 The .Chairman. But in the summer time you are out in the field nearly all of the time with most of j^our force, are you not? Mr. Mead. Personally, I am ; yes, sir. The Chairman. You have not much force here in the summer time? Mr. Mead. We have to keep sending out a force of men. The Chairman. How much force do you keep here in the summer 'time, when crowding would be objectionable? Mr. Mead. We get along easier in the summer time than we do in the winter. The crowding is in the winter. The Chairman. How much force is here in the summer time? How many people have you here, in numbers? Did you state that? Mr. Mead. I should say five or six. There is one connected with the distribution of publications. We have to attend to that. Then 'there is simply the force that is connected with the editing of bulletins That sties on during the summer. It goes through the whole year, but all our field men, all our engineers, are put in the field in the summer. Mr. Henry. How large a number of employees do you keep in your Wyoming station ? Mr. Mead. That varies, of course, in the winter and summer quite largely. The Chairman. Do you think it is necessary to keep up an office there also? Is not all your work returned here really to be put in shape for distribution ? Mr. Mead. I think it is economy to keep it up. • The Chairman. You do ? Mr. Mead. Yes. In the first place, we would have to have new offices if we had all our force here. We would have to rent offices here. We have got just as many people in the rooms we are occupy- ing how as we can keep, and we have some of our force out in the library, in the alcoves there. Mr. Henry. In other words, the maintenance of the office in Wyo- ming is not an extra expense? Mr. Mead. No. Then another thing. In our work of measuring water we have to have quite a large number of instruments for keep- ing records. They have to be brought in and corrected and checked up and tested every year. We have a station in Wyoming that the State has fixed up for us free of cost that we are able to utilize. We have not anything of the kind here. The Chairman. Did you say Wyoming had done something toward paying expenses in cooperation with the experiment stations ? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Then California, Nevada, Wyoming, and what other State has helped you — Kansas? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Washington? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir; quite a number of the stations have helped us. The Chairman. I mean, have any other States contributed money, besides those I have mentioned, to be expended by you? Mr. Mead. They have not contributed money outright, but the different experiment stations have aided us in our work for equipment and men. Mr. Haugen. How many of these arid and semiarid States are there ? o A 24 370 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Mead. Sixteen or seventeen. Mr. Haugen. We appropriate, then, about $4,000 for each State? Mr. Mead. Yes; .but we are working in the whole country. It is not all being expended out there. Mr. Scott. When you were before us last year you spoke of hav- ing an investigator in Egypt. Can you give us briefly the result of his work ? Mr. Mead. Yes. The investigation of irrigation in Egypt was un- dertaken because of the interest shown in the oldest irrigation country in the world, the completion of the two great dams there, and the widely existing desire for information on the part of people of this country as to whether or not we could not learn from 'Egypt some les- sons that would be of great service to this country. We went there to see just what lessons Egypt did have for us in our development. The results of that have been that the information that was gathered regarding the construction of those dams has been of great service to engineers. The facts that we learned regarding drainage and its influence on the removal of alkali, have served to show that drainage is a remedy for alkali, and some of the devices used in pumping can be used here. Those are the positive gain that come from it. So far as concerns the adoption of their methods, their laws, or their system of control- ling irrigation, they show we can not adopt them. That is a negative result, but it is still a valuable result because it tended to clear up what was a widely spread misconception in this country. There was one thing we did not anticipate that was an altogether unexpected benefit from that report. I do not believe there has been a prominent cotton grower, or certainly a cotton factory, that has not applied for that report to find out what influence these improvements in Egypt were going to have on the cotton industry in this country. We had a gentleman from New York here yesterday to inquire about that matter. They wanted to find out how far the influence on grow- ing long staple cotton would go on prices in this country, and the report covers that ground. Mr. Brooks. You spoke of the work you are doing in Wisconsin. Mr. Adams was not here at that time, and I would like to have you repeat it. Mr. Mead. I stated we were cooperating with the experiment sta- tion in Wisconsin in the development of methods for the irrigation of the cranberry beds of Wisconsin. That is, the devising of a system for the applying and removal of water. It does not simply mean the devising of a method of fixing the form and shape of ditches, but where you have got a large area of country where there is little fall, it seems }^ou have got to fix a plan that a larger number of people can work together on, so that the removal of water from one man's bed will nor remove the water from the bed of the man below him. Mr. Brooks. That work is embodied in Bulletin 130? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Mr. Adams. Are you still engaged in that cranberry work? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. You spent last summer in Italy ? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. Could you tell us briefly the results that you think will come from that investigation? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 371 Mr. Mead. The studies in Italy were undertaken because there were no reports on Italian irrigation within the last half century, and in that time it has come to be the foremost irrigating country in Europe. _ I went there to see what had brought about that supremacy, what their administrative methods were. I went there with the idea that its lessons would be for the arid region, but they are both for the arid and the humid regions. In the valley of the Po, where I spent the entire two months that I was over there, the sections are the most densely populated of any part of Europe, and more densely populated than Egypt. There are agricultural districts there that supply 800 people to the square mile, and the lessons of Italian irrigation are the great success and ability that they have shown in the distribution of water. They have worked out a system there by which an association of farmers, 14,000 irrigants working under one system, operate 9,000 miles of canals, and in fifty years there has not been a lawsuit nor a failure to pay their water rent. It is a remarkable system. I saw another section where there are 8,000 irrigators working under a system. Mr. Henry. Is this in northern Italy? / Mr. Mead. Yes, sir; along the Po. That is the very thing in which we are weak in this country, in the organization to work together peacefully and harmoniously. Mr. Adams. Is that a purely business organization without any connection whatever, semi or complete, with the Government? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Adams. It is absolutely an independent private enterprise. Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. The one that has 14,000 members rents a large number of Government canals and operates them. The canals were turned over to them by the Government to operate them. This sys- tem in Italy was created by the then minister of agriculture of Italy, and he was the first president of the parent volunteer association. It grew out of exactly the same kind of difficulties we are having in the West at the present time. Mr. Brooks. Have those difficulties been one of the major causes of trouble among irrigators in the West? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Brooks. And the streams there are appropriated a good many times over in volume? Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Brooks. Do you know any facts about any of those instances ? Mr. Mead. Oh, yes; there is no doubt about overappropriation there, but I think if you can get the farmers along a stream, the farmers that live under a canal, to realize that they are part of a sys- tem, that they all have a common interest in a common water supply and get them to organize together for its distribution, you get over all those difficulties. Mr. Brooks. You mean that with the adoption of a proper system, even though a stream is appropriated eight or ten times, as it some- times is, the water will, to some extent, at least, be divided ? , Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. Mr. Adams. Does that association embrace all the farmers within the irrigated territory? Mr. Mead. Yes; of that particular district. Mr. Adams. It takes them all in, every one? 372 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Mead. Every one. The Chairman. Have you gotten through with Italy. Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Then the money that was used for the Egyptian and Italian investigation can be used along other lines? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. The Chairman. What was about the sum spent in those two inves- tigations ? Mr. Mead. About $1,000 in each one. Mr. Scott. Of course that did not include the expenses of the report. Mr. Mead. No; I do not know what the expense of printing the Egyptian report was. Probably about $1,000. Mr. Scott. It was a little over $1,100. Mr. Mead. Yes. Mr. Brooks. Do you mean the work of collecting this matter was all done for $1,000? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Exclusive of salaries? Mr. Mead. Yes, sir; so far as my salary is concerned, it did not count, for one month. I spent my vacation there and the Government got $200. The Chairman. Are you not entitled to a vacation with $ay? Mr. Mead. Yes; but I was willing to spend it over there. The Chairman. If there are no further questions to be asked Mr. Mead, we will go on with Doctor True. We are much obliged to you, Mr. Mead. STATEMENT OF DR. A. C. TRUE, DIRECTOR OF OFFICE OF EXPERI- MENT STATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. Gentlemen, Doctor True is the head of the experi- ment station work. That division appears on page 25 of the estimates. Doctor True. Before we leave this matter of irrigation, Mr. Chair- man, if I may be permitted, I want to say just a word or two. The Chairman. Very well. Doctor True. This irrigation appropriation, under the orders of the Secretary of Agriculture, is intrusted to the care of the office of experi- ment stations, so that I am responsible for that as well as for the other work, and I want the committee to be aware of the general policy under which, under the instructions of the Secretary of Agriculture, this work is being carried on. We are endeavoring, as Mr. Mead has pointed out, to build up work along distinctly agricultural lines, so as to have for irrigation in the Department of Agriculture a distinct field and a field which properly belongs within the domain of the Department of Agriculture. Wher- ever any question has arisen as to the conduct of our work with that of the Geological Survey or any other branch of the service we have made a careful study of the matter and have endeavored to remove causes of friction and to keep our work within strictly agricultural lines. Another thing is this, as a matter of general policy, that we are not attempting to build up a large force and to spread the work out to cover the individual States. That is, we are undertaking nothing in the character of a general survey. Our object is to assemble a sufficient body of experts to study definite problems. We must study them in HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 373 localities, but it is not simply a question of an individual locality and the interests involved in that locality when we go to make study. We do not want to go into any locality unless there is some question there, the study of which we think will bring out results which will be of use broadly. So that there need be no fear with reference to that matter that we shall try to spread this work out and make a great survey or anything of that sort. Mr. Mead has spoken of some of the lines of work, and yet he has omitted one direction in which our work is developing, which is reflected in the Book of Estimates in the suggestion for the broadening of the type of this work and in the use of certain things a little differ- ent from what was used last year. Mr. Mead has already pointed out that the work under this appropriation is no longer confined to irriga- tion, but covers drainage and questions relating to the application of power, not only to irrigation, but to other agricultural purposes. Mr. Scott. Is that what you mean, Doctor True, by this phrase "agricultural engineering?" Doctor True. That is what we mean by the phrase "agricultural engineering." That matter of drainage, of course, is not a matter at all confined to the irrigated regions. For example, when I was out in Iowa last summer, visiting the experiment station there, I spent a good deal of my time on the cars passing through that State, in discuss- ing with men questions relating to drainage of large tracts of land in Iowa. They need, in some respects, as it appears to me, to change their drainage laws. They need to adopt better methods of drainage. There are large tracts of land where lately they have had a great deal of trouble, in Iowa as well as in other States; so that there are large questions relating to drainage, and we are taking those up as Mr. Mead has indicated. Beyond that the farmers of the country, and particularly of the West — that is, beyond the Alleghenies — are coming to take a great deal more interest in problems relating to the proper care of their farm machinery and the use of the best kinds of machinery for specific purposes. It is a curious thing that while in this countay we have been the larg- est users of agricultural machinery, the Department of Agriculture has never taken any direct interest in that matter and never had any funds at its disposal which it could use for investigation along that line, so that the whole matter has been left to the manufacturers of machinery . But even the manufacturers themselves are now coming to realize that to make the best kind of machinery and specialize that machinery, as the farmers desire more and more to have it specialized, they should have in their employ a class of experts who have not onty studied mechanical engineering in the ordinary way, but have studied it with reference to the agricultural use of the product. So, to meet the demands of the farmers and the demands of the man- ufacturers, the agricultural colleges are taking up the study of prob- lems relating to farm machinery. They are organizing courses of instruction along those lines. They are putting up special buildings for use in those courses. We have had recently in the the State of Iowa a fine building put up by the agricultural college which will be wholly used for instruc- tion and for investigation along these lines. Wisconsin has an appro- priation of $15,000 this year for a special farm engineering building. 374 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. W hen we take up work at the agricultural colleges and experiment stations, they find that there is not in this country at hand the data on which to base the courses of instruction and that there have been no systematic investigations of the problems relating to farm machinery. What we would like to do is to help the agricultural colleges and experiment stations along this line just as we have been helping them in other lines; and so we have asked that the title of the appropria- tion shall be changed so as to read "Irrigation and agricultural engi- neering," and that the wording of the act shall be such as to permit us to extend our investigations along that line. The Chairman. What investigation do you make with regard to agricultural machinery? We had this up last year, you remember, and I took the ground that if the Government was going into that sort of thing of course it would naturally lead to a recommendation. It would be of no benefit unless you recommended finally some plow, or some cultivator, or other machine that was superior to all others. Then where are you, if the Government is going into that business? Doctor True. That is not the kind of work we propose to do. The Chairman. Would it not lead to that inevitably ? Doctor True. I think not. Investigations along these same lines are being conducted in the European governments. The German Govern- ment is helping the German manufacturers to-day to devise special forms of machinery for use in Germany, so as to keep out the Ameri- can machines which are getting in to a considerable extent. The French Government has maintained in the city of Paris for a con- siderable number of years an experiment station wholly devoted to the study of farm machinery, endeavoring to determine the correct prin- ciples on which machinery should be made; not to make particular machines and put them on the market, but to study the problems con- nected with the making of machines in a more general way; and I do not see that there is any difficulty in the colleges and stations marking out a useful line of work in this direction, as they have in other directions. What we propose to do first is indicated in the report of the Office of Experiment Stations. That is, we would like to collect and publish information in regard to the evolution and character and the uses of farm implements and machinery. The Chairman. You are still addressing 3'ourself, then, to the irri- gation item? Doctor True. The irrigation item; yes, sir. That knowledge does not exist at present in this country. The Chairman. Why should that thing come under the irrigation item ? Doctor True. It comes under the irrigation item if that item is broadened to read " irrigation and agricultural engineering." Mr. Burleson. Is that what that is intended for — irrigation and agricultural engineering? I thought it was intended to embrace the system of drainage. Doctor True. Well, it does. The term " agricultural engineering" embraces drainage and irrigation — the whole thing. If you wipe out " irrigation" it will leave it "agricultural engineering." We would not object to that. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 375 Mr. Burleson. What possible benefit would it be to the farmer to issue a bulletin on the evolution of the plow, commencing with the first one and bringing it up to a 4-disk harrow? What possible bene- fit would it be '( Doctor True. A bulletin of that kind would not he so much for pop- ular distribution as to give the material which would form the basis for the work of the teachers and educators in the agricultural colleges and experiment stations. Of course that is what the Department is con- stantly doing. We are investigating that subject and issuing technical bulletins, which we distribute only in small editions in order that they may be the basis for work the results of which will reach out further, but beyond that we would make and encourage the experiment stations to make laboratory and practical tests involving the study of the prin- ciples of construction and methods of operation of farm implements and machinery, with special reference to their efficiency and economy. That work is, as I said, already begun in some of our larger agricul- tural institutions, notablj' in the States of Illinois, Minnesota, Wis- consin, and Iowa, and they are appealing to us to enter upon this work so as to furnish them with the information which is necessary for them to successfully maintain these courses of instruction, and also to investigate further the problems that are brought to their attention. Mr. Scott. If they have already begun this work, why can they not dig out that information themselves ? Doctor True. Well, for the same reason that they can not do the other work that the Department of Agriculture is doing. Here is the propo- sition in Wisconsin, taking a concrete illustration. The legislature of Wisconsin has given the college of agriculture an appropriation of $15,000 to put up a farm engineering building. They have employed, also with an appropriation from the legislature, a professor of farm engineering. That is as far as at present they feel able to go. Mr. Scott. And that professor of farm engineering wants you to furnish him with information to conduct his department, does he ? Doctor True. Yes; he wants us -to help him to put the work on a good basis. Mr. Scott. It rather seems to me that if he is a professor of farm engineering and qualified for the position, he ought to be able to con- duct that work himself. Doctor True. You must understand this, that this is a new line of work in this countrj', and what the colleges have to do practically, in employing teachers along that line, is to take men who have been trained in engineering in our engineering schools and then to set them to work to study these special topics which relate to the farm. Mr. Scott. And it is precisely because this has been done in the State of Wisconsin that it occurred to me unnecessary to undertake it here. Doctor True. But the State of Wisconsin can only do a little part of what needs to be done. That is, the situation in that direction is just what it is in other directions in which the Department of Agri- culture is working. Mr. Haugen. What is the object sought? Is it to determine the relative value of the different machines and how to construct imple- ments ? Doctor True. Both of those objects; that is, to determine whether 376 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. the machines in use are the best that could be devised, whether the principles of their construction are the best and most economical that eould be devised. Mr. Adams. Professor, the subject of farm engineering, I should think, would also naturally cover the subject of the use of power upon the farm. Doctor True. Certainly. Mr. Adams. And the adaptation or adjustment of that power, the . manner in which it should be located in the farm buildings, and where it can be economically employed. Doctor True. Certainly. Mr. Haugen. This, then, leads up to what the chairman has referred to — a recommendation. You find one implement of greater value than another, and it would be your duty, of course, to recommend that machine or implement? Doctor True. Oh, no. The Chairman. Are you not obliged to announce that fact? Doctor True. Not with reference to a special machine. Mr. Haugen. What good would it be unless it was announced? Doctor True. What we would announce is that machinery con- structed in accordance with certain principles is the best. Mr. Burleson. For instance, Keating makes a certain disk plow. Moline makes a certain disk plow that is essentially different. If you found the principles involved in that Keating plow would be the best, and you pronounced in favor of it, would not that be an advertise- ment for the Keating plow over the Moline plow? Would not that, as Mr. Haugen says, be the sum and substance of all that could be done? Mr. Scott. If you describe the principle that you determine is the correct one in a certain machine, do you not suppose the manufacturer of that machine would be smart enough to fit that description of a principle to his machine and use it as an advertisement ? Doctor True. I should think he would be wise enough — I hope he would — to adapt the machine to the correct principle if it was discovered. Mr. Haugen. Would not the farmer be the first one to discover the merits of the different machines? Doctor True. I do not think so necessarily; no, sir. Mr. Haugen. I mean the farmer or whoever operated the machine in preference to the manufacturer of the implement. Doctor True. I think the farmer in a general way is just as liable to make mistakes with reference to the use of machines as he is with reference to the crops that he raises. Mr. Scott Have you "spent any money on this work during the past year? Doctor True. On this particular work? Mr. Scott. Yes. Doctor True. No, sir. Mr. Scott. You have not undertaken it at all ? Doctor True. No, sir. The Chairman. He was not authorized to do so. The doctor advocated this thing last year, and the committee refused it. Mr. Henry. Is it not true that the farmer becomes attached to the machine he uses and thinks it the best machine, and if he has a Buck- HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 377 eye mower he thinks it is better than any other mower, and so with the plow he uses ? Do you think your report would overcome that prejudice in favor of a machine that possibly might not be as good as the other machine that he did not like? Doctor True. It think it would be an influence in that direction with reference to machines just as it is with reference to varieties of tobacco or anything else which the Department would make. Mr. Lorimer. Do you know, Doctor, whether the Illinois college has taken up this investigation in connection with the technical depart- ment of their school, or is it just specifically to disseminate information to the farmers of the State ? Doctor True. In Illinois ? Mr. Lorimer. Yes; I thought you said Illinois. Doctor True. Yes; Illinois, as you doubtless know, has, in recent years, put up an expensive building for the use of its college of agriculture. Mr. Lorimer. Yes. Doctor True. Another one of the large departments in that build- ing is used for this work relating to farm machinery. Mr. Lorimer. You know they have a technical department there. Is that just added to the technical department? Doctor True. No, this work is connected with the department of agriculture in the university, not with the engineering department. It is a special work. The Chairman. Doctor, are you through with that item ? Doctor True. Yes; I have nothing further to say upon that subject. The Chairman. Now, coming back to your agricultural experiment stations, on page 25, there seems to be a little misprint here. Have you asked for $15,000 increase or $5,000 increase? Doctor True. $5,000. The Chairman. Then that is all right. There is no misprint about it. Doctor True. Yes; there is a misprint. That is on page 25 of the Book of Estimates the total sum is stated at $815,000. That is a change from ten to fifteen, and that is as it should be. Mr. Scott. It ought to be $815,000, ought it not? Doctor True. Yes. Now, to account for that $815,000, there should be on page 26 The Chairman. Including the preparation and printings of charts, diagrams, etc.? Doctor True. Yes. Above that, under the item relating to the farmers' institute work, it should be The Chairman. We understand that. We will reach that later. Now, reading that paragraph there you will see this: " Forty thousand dollars of which sum shall be payable upon the order of the Secretary of Agriculture, to enable him to carry out the provisions of section three of said act of March second, eighteen hundred and eighty-seven." Just explain to the committee what that is. The older members per- haps know it, but the new members do not. Mr. True. That money is used for the maintenance of the office of experiment stations, which acts as a central agency for the agricul- tural experiment stations and agricultural colleges throughout the country, publishing the results of their work in different forms for distribution through the country; so that the results obtained in any 378 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. one State are brought to the attention of the people in all the States. Last year, in pursuing that work, you will observe by looking at the report of the general editor of the Department, there were issued from the office of experiment stations farmers' bulletins amounting to just about two million copies, or one-third of the total output of the Department. Now those bulletins, for the most part, recorded the results obtained from the experiment stations in different States and also kindred institutions in other countries. They were put in pop- ular form, and of course they were called for by members of Congress, which means that there was a general demand for them. It is that general work of promoting the interests of the agricultural colleges and experiment stations and preparing publications based upon the publications of these institutions that constitute the principal work of the office of experiment stations. Mr. Graff. Those bulletins were issued by the experiment station itself, were they ? Doctor Teue. No; the experiment station in any one State issues its own bulletin. It is required under the law to issue one at least every three months. We get all the bulletins of all the stations here at Washington. Then we work them over in various forms, taking out of them those results more especially which are of general application, and on the station bulletins from all the States we make up farmers' bulletins that are distributed in the regular way by the members of Congress and by the Department, the object being to make the results obtained in any one State available to the farmers in all the other States, so far as their use throughout the country goes. Mr. Scott. Immediately following that appears here this statement: " Fifteen thousand dollars of which sum shall be expended by the Sec- retary of Agriculture to investigate and report to Congress upon the agricultural resources and capabilities of Alaska." The Chairman. And it goes on: "And to establish and maintain agricultural experiment stations in said Territory." Doctor, I wish you would recast this paragraph. Alaska is injected there right in the middle of what you might call the legislation requiring you to look after certain matters relating to experiment stations. I would take those three stations, the Alaskan, the Hawaiian, and the Porto Bican, and put them together. Doctor True. Yes; this paragraph is, of course, the growth of years, and the language has seemed to work all right. The Chairman. Do not change the language, but just change the order. Mr. Henry. It is a repetition of the same language. Could it not be continuous and say "the stations of Porto Rico, Hawaii, and Alaska?" The Chairman. We give each one of them $15,000. Mr. Henry. Well, the provisions are practically the same. Doctor True. There are some little differences. There is at least one difference that I think of now. In the case of Alaska we under- take to publish everything here at Washington, there being no facili- ties of publication there. In the other cases we publish in the islands themselves. Mr. Scott. 1 was misled by the insertion of that semicolon after "Alaska." I read it this way: "Fifteen thousand dollars of which sum shall be expended by the Secretary of Agriculture to investigate HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 379 and report to Congress upon the agricultural resources and capibilities of Alaska;" I naturally supposed that was the entire purpose of that $15,000. So it seems to me there ought to be only a comma there if the succeeding clause is to be included under that $15,000. Doctor True. Yes; I should think that would be better. ^ The Chairman. You go on in that paragraph and say: "And the Secretary of Agriculture shall prescribe the form" of the annual finan- cial statement required by section three of said act of March second, eighteen hundred and eighty-seven." You leave the act of March 2, 1887, temporarily injected into the item there of the Alaska business. Doctor True. That came about because the Alaska station was established first, and before the Porto Rico and Hawaiian stations. The Chairman. Not before the other stations? Doctor True. Yes; before the Porto Rico and Hawaiian stations. The Chairman. Yes, but section 3 of the act of March 2, 1887, does not refer to Porto Rico or to Hawaii. It refers to the act under which we gave this money to all the experiment stations in the several States and Territories. Doctor True. As far as the language of the act is concerned, it has always been a mystery to me why it was put the way it is. Of course I had nothing to do with it. The Chairman. Suppose you recast that, without changing its mean- ing in any way, and send us up a copy. Doctor True. Yes; I shall be glad to do so. The Chairman. Now you may go on, Doctor, if you will. Mr. Haugen. On page 26 you add the word " experiment" in con- nection with the appropriation for Hawaii. How does that happen ? Doctor True. It happens that that was called an agricultural station in the last' act. The Chairman. I think it is just an omission. Doctor True. Yes ; the word ' ' experiment " was dropped out. That is not a vital matter. Mr. Haugen. Are these bulletins that are sent out by the stations sent out under the frank of the Agricultural Department? Doctor True. No, sir; each station has its own frank under the gen- eral law. ' Mr. Haugen. They have their own frank ? Doctor True. The director of the station has his frank. The Chairman. Coming down to the end of paragraph 1, page 26, the committee will notice' that last year we put in this new proviso: Provided, That five thousand dollars of this sum shall be used by the Secretary of Agriculture to investigate and report' upon the organization and progress of farmers' institutes in the several States and Territories, and upon similar organizations in foreign countries, with special suggestions of plans and methods for making such organization more effective for the dissemination of the results of ' the work of the Department of Agriculture and the agricultural experiment stations and of improved methods of agricultural practice, And the Department wants added — including the preparation and printing of charts, diagrams, photographs and lantern slides for use in connection with lectures delivered at farmers' institutes. Those words in italics are the cause of the increase asked for. Am I right, Doctor? Doctor True. Yes, sir; so it provides. Instead of $5,000 it should read $10,000. That is where the mistake was made. 380 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. Are you not going into a sort of show business there, when you get lantern slides and all that sort of thing? Doctor True. I would be glad to explain just what we mean by that. The Chairman. I wish you would. Mr. Graff. You say that ought to be 110,000 instead of $5,000? Doctor True. Yes; that ought to be $10,000 instead of $5,000. Mr. Graff. Eight after the word "provided?" Doctor True. Yes. We have at present $5,000. That is used to pay for the salaries of an officer called a farmers' institute specialist, who has a salary of $2,000, and one clerk, who at present has a salary of $840. The balance of the money for the most part is used in paying the traveling expenses of this agent, who must necessarily, in order to do the work that we desire him to do, travel about in the different States, confer with the State directors of institutes, and speak at rep- resentative meetings and come in touch with the members who are doing the work in the institutes. Now, the institute system of the United States has grown to be a very large enterprise. According to the data which we have collected more thoroughly this year than ever before, there were held during the past year in the United States about 3,700 institutes, and these were attended by over 900,000 persons. You can see that that is a very large force of people to receive instructions through the institutes, and if this work can be properly organized and made most efficient, it will be a great agency for the proper dissemina- tion of the results obtained by the Department and the agricultural experiment stations. At present instruction is given in those institutes by about 4,000 different people. Of that number about 900 are men who are paid to attend the institutes in a general way in the respective States. They are called regular institute lecturers. The other 3,000 are local men largely who are called in to give a lecture or two at the individual institute. Now, as the institute system develops in this country, there is a greater and greater demand that the institute lecturers and speakers shall not only give their own experience as successful farmers in some particular line, but that they shall be able to interpret that experience in the light of what the experiment stations and institutions have deter- mined and the general experience. That makes it necessary that this body of lecturers should keep up to date in these matters that relate to the improvement of farm practice and the results of scientific investi- gation along those lines, and everywhere we find that the State super- intendent of the farmers' institutes are trying to get men who can do this, and failing that, because it is hard to find them, they are trying in various ways to train these men so that they will be better adapted to do what the farmers want them to do in the institutes. One large feature of our work, as we have planned it, is to help these farmers' institute lecturers get the information which they need, and to supply them, in any reasonable way, with facilities for making the best use of this information. The Chairman. Eight there, Doctor, that was just what you told us last year and we inserted the item, but we had no idea you were going into sending lecturers around yourself. We thought you were going to supply the information for these lecturers, but we did not think you were going into what I might call the show business, with HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 381 lantern slides and all that. If you remember the conversation at the time, you said j^ou would only require a small sum to supplement and keep moving along this institute work. Doctor True. That is exactly the policy now. The Chairman. Now you come to us with an estimate of $5,000. That is doubling up the sum in less than six months. That sum has ■only been available since the 1st day of July, and you want $5,000 for the printing of charts, diagrams and photographs, and lantern slides for use in connection with lectures delivered at farmers' insti- tutes. I think from that language 'you intend to have your own lecturer deliver this lecture. Doctor True. That is not the idea. The Chairman. The language certainly would imply that. Doctor True. The idea is this: Take, for example, the working dairy. I suppose there will be hundreds of lectures on dairying given at the farmers' institutes, and it seems to me it would be a useful thing if the Department was in a position to chart some of the very useful results that are being obtained from time to time in the work of the stations and in other ways, and send those charts out, so that the institute lecturers could have them to use in. the institutes. That is a form of publication which- does not differ essentially from what the Department is already doing and has done in the past. The Chairman. But how about the use of lantern slides? Doctor True. As regards the lantern slides, it is the same principle. The Chairman. That means casting your pictures, etc. , on a sheet, does it not? Doctor True. It is a more and more common and useful means of illustration. The Chairman. I do not deny its usefulness, perhaps, but ought we to go in that business ? It never was intended last year when we gave the appropriation that you should go on those lines. Doctor True. We could establish here in Washington, I think, an exchange system with reference to lantern slides which would be very useful to the institutes, which would not involve any large expense, and which would enable us to send the lantern slides, illustrative of the work of the Department and of the stations, all around the coun- try in a single season, reaching in that way thousands of people who would never get these results otherwise. Mr. Scott. Can you not do that gradually with the appropriation you have? Doctor True. I do not see that we can, with the appropriation we have. Mr. Haugen. These lecturers are paid, are they not? The Chairman. The State institute lecturers are. Doctor True. They are paid very small sums. Mr. Haugen. A number of them make a business of it, do they not, and receive so much a lecture? Doctor True. Yes; it is a side business as a rule. The institutes only run for a limited term in each State. The Chairman. During the winter. That is the only time you can run them properly. Mr. Adams. Mr. Chairman, let me state for Mr. Haugen's informa- tion that 1 spent three years in the institute work. I attended hun- dreds of meetings and assisted in those meetings more or less and met 382 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. tens of thousands of farmers; and here is just what I found, as an illus- tration, as I imagine, of the work which the doctor is endeavoring to do. Governor Hoard is a specialist in talking about dairy cows and beef cows; and he had prepared, because he had enough interest in it and sufficient means, a number of oil paintings, crude, perhaps, but still as large as that map, giving different types of cows, the dairy cow and the beef cow, and then, of course, illustrating the different breeds. Of course that is very useful in a practical demonstration to a farm audience, where you are trying to impress upon them what the real dairy cow is or what the beef 'type is. That also extends to other fields, such as sheep. Not only that, but Professor King, down here, when he was lecturing in our institutes upon the subject of farm buildings, which is a very practical and important subject, would illustrate his lecture very effectively by the use of charts, and in fact he really required them. Then the charts which show the composi- tion of feeding stuffs can be made quite impressive when properly prepared. These individual workers, working in the States for small salaries, of course are not always able to obtain these things in the best form. I imagine the object of the professor in this matter and of the Department would be to supply all these institute workers to as great an extent as possible throughout the country with illustra- tions of that character, which would be in the best form. Is that correct, Professor? Doctor True. Yes; that is it. Mr. Haugen. I understood you to say there are thousands of these lecturers in this country. Mr. Adams. Oh, no." Mr. Haugen. I understood you to say there were a number of thou- sands of lecturers. Doctor True. The number of regulary employed lecturers is about 900. Then, there are besides that several thousand local men who occasionally lecture. Mr. Haugen. Would you undertake to supply all of them? Doctor True. Certainly not. We are not asking for money enough to do any very large thing. Mr. Bowie. You just want to pick out a few? Doctor True. A few of the best things and use them in the best way. Mr. Haugen. But that would practically lead, up, would it not, to lantern slides for every lecturer? It would not do to discriminate, would it? Doctor True. It would not be our idea to give these lantern slides away. It would be simply a matter of loaning the lantern slides, so that the same lantern slides might be used ultimately in every State of the Union. Mr. Haugen. Every lecturer would want to use them, and you would have to have them, would you not, in order not to discriminate? Mr. Burleson. They could be used like a circulating library. Mr. Lorimer. How many slides would you use in each lecture? How many would they average ? Doctor True. From 30 to 50, I should say. Mr. Lorimer. Are they plain or colored slides, or both ? Doctor True. We would use both at times, but mostly plain slides. Mr. Lorimer. A set of slides for a lecturer would cost about $10. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 383 The best lamp you could get would cost about $60, which would be about $75 for each lecture outfit. Doctor True. We would not undertake to supply the lanterns. Mr. Lorimee. You would supply the slides? Doctor True. Yes. Mr. Lorimer. Then a sufficient number of slides, colored and uncol- ored, would cost about $10 for each lecture. Doctor True. Yes. Mr. Lorimer. How many of ,those would you want ? How many sets would supply the country, or the sections that vou want to send them to? Doctor True. That is a matter we have not worked out at all. Mr. Lorimer. Have you any idea? Would you want a dozen sets or a hundred sets ? " Doctor True. I should think one hundred sets would not be a very large number. Mr. Graff. That would be $1,000. The Chairman. It would necessitate boxing and all that, so that they could be sent by express. Mr. Lorimer. Ten dollars a set would pay for them. Mr. Haugen. The lamp would cost $60, did you say? Mr. Lorimer. He said he would not supply the lamp. Mr. Haugen. How would they supply the lamp ? Mr. Lorimer. You could get a lamp all the way from $5 to $100. The $5 is about as good as the $100 lamp, if you put the right sort of light in it. Then I suppose they would arrange their own screen. It would cost about $5,000 to get as many slides as you would want. Doctor True. That covers all in the appropriation in which there is any change suggested. The Chairman. Is there anything further you want to say to the committee of your own accord, Doctor, that the questioning has not brought out ? Doctor True. I do not know that there is anything specially Mr. Chairman. Of course you understand that the next item comes under my jurisdiction as well? The Chairman. Nutrition? Doctor True. Yes. The Chairman. We will not go into that. The subcommittee (at 4.30 o'clock p. m.) adjourned until Friday morning, January 15, 1904, at 10 o'clock. Committee on Agriculture, January 15, 1904 — at 10.30 a. m. STATEMENT OF S. R. BURCH, CHIEF CLERK OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. We consider page 1 to-day of the estimates. Mr. Burch, looking down the list there we find the first new matter sug- gested is, "One solicitor at $2,500 per year." Mr. Burch. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Tell us what good reason the Department has for that? 384 HEARINGb BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Burch. I will read a little brief here showing the work he has done and the necessity for it: The principal legislation for law officers of the various Departments is the act of 1870, which provided for the Treasury, Post-Office, Interior, and State Departments; the War and Navy Departments were already provided with judge-advocates-gen- eral. At that time there was no Department of Agriculture, merely a small bureau; hence it was not provided for in the act of 1870, and the omission has never been supplied. Since 1870 the War Department and the Navy Department have each been provided with a civilian law officer in addition to the judge-advocates-general. The new Department of Commerce and Labor has 17 attorneys, in addition to several higher law officers. The Department of Agriculture has at present one acting law officer paid the salary estimated for from a general fund, but as the work belongs to all the bureaus and divisions it is thought unfair to require one bureau to carry the entire expense, and more desirable to have a statutory place on the roll of the Secre- tary. This change from a lump sum to a statutory place is in accord with the expressed policy of the committee. Now, showing the work performed by the acting law officer of the Department of Agriculture during the fiscal year 1903 : Court cases, 8 — convictions, 6 ; nollied, 1 ; lost, 1. Number of cases presented to grand jury (assisting United States attorneys), 15. Cases briefed on request of dis- trict attorneys, 2. The criminal prosecutions are based upon the animal-quarantine and meat- inspection laws of the Bureau of Animal Industry, and of the renovated-butter act of the same Bureau. The number of convictions secured under these acts during the fiscal year 1903 was 6, and no convictions had ever before been secured thereunder. The office duties of the acting law officer are heavy. Number of leases, agree- ments, options, etc., prepared was 168, and the aggregate amount involved was something over one and one-half millions of dollars. The majority of these papers related to the work of the Bureau of Plant Industry and the division of entomology, the latter division requiring agreements for boll-weevil work. Considerable advice and research has been cau.-ed by the operation of the pure-food law under the direction of the Bureau of Chemistry. Nearly 500 contracts for the purchase of supplies were drawn during the year, and of course affected all the bureaus and divisions of the Department. The Secretary and chiefs of bureaus, etc., have been . advised almost daily as to the legal aspects of proposed policies. Two cases still pending in the Court of Claims have received considerable attention. One of these cases is the New York Market Gardeners' Association v. The United States for a balance claimed to be due on a seed contract. Mr. Bowie. Let me ask you a question; you transfer the solicitor which you already have, from the lump sum to the statutory sum? Mr. Burch. That is what we request. Mr. Bowie. What is he paid from now ? Mr. Burch. From the Bureau of Animal Industry. He was first put on because of the violation of laws, and prosecuted a good many cases. The Chairman. Mr. Burch, did I understand you to say that all the other departments have these solicitors ? Mr. Burch. They certainly have; every one of them has a law department and a great many law officers. The Chairman. What is the use of a law department in the Govern- ment, then? Mr. Burch. It would be impossible for the Department of Justice to furnish a solicitor at the time needed; they would have to detail one from that Department to be constantly on hand to transact the business that is necessary to be done. The Chairman. Is not that really the way it ought to be ? Mr. Burch. If you provide the man that is necessary, of course. The Chairman. This man's opinion has no force of law? If the HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 385 Department of Agriculture wants an opinion of the law of the Govern- ment they would have to go to the Attorney-General to get it? Mr. Buech. It has this effect; he has a legal mind and prepares all these papers and goes into the United States courts and assists the United States courts. The court officers have refused to take up many cases he has taken up, and he has furnished the evidence and assisted the attorneys, which they have given him great" credit for in' accom- plishing the results. The Chairman. Do you know whether these solicitors or attorneys in the several departments are paid for from the law department? Mr. Buech. They are paid by every department; each pays for its own law officers. There is not a department except the Agricultural Department but has a law department. The Chaieman. I believe it is all wrong. I think they ought to be employed by the Department of Justice and then detailed to the several departments. That might be of practical use. 1 do not see how you can appoint a law officer and have him try your cases. Mr. Burch. He is, and has been recognized as such. He assists the United States attorneys throughout the country. He goes and secures the evidence and he tries the cases. The Chairman. The cases are tried? Mr. Buech. They are tried. The Chairman. That is my point; I thought you read from your brief there that he tried these cases. Mr. Buech. He has assisted in these cases, and convictions have been secured through the evidence he has worked up, and when he has briefed the cases for the attorneys; they absolutely refused in several cases, and said that they had no case; and he furnished the evidence and secured convictions. Mr. Bowie. He acted as associate counsel in many of the cases? Mr. Burch. Yes, sir; but that is not the principal thing — these prosecutions for violation of the law — but it is making the contracts that will stand in law and looking up evidence in regard, to this pure- food business in the Chemistry Division. He is constantly at work searching through the statutes in regard to the business pertaining to the Department. He is drawing these contracts, letters of authority, and he has as much work as any other man in the Department. We had about as well do without a chief clerk or a Department clerk. The Chaieman. He has not any color of law; that is all there is about it. The law business of the Government is supposed to be car- ried on by the law department. He acts in an advisory capacity, perhaps ? Mr. Burch. Yes. Mr. Scott. I presume that is chiefly what his office is. The Chairman. All of these Departments have Auditors from the Treasury — the Auditor for the Post-office Department, and so on; I can see perhaps the necessity for a man down there who has a good knowledge of law, in an advisory way; but my point is that he should form a part of the force of the law department of the Government and be detailed there. Mr. Buech. I will say for the information of the committee that the Department of Justice is very slow in taking action. Last spring, in June or May, I contracted for a piece of land. Let me make a little statement which will show you the condition we would be in if we c A 25 386 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. depended on the law department. I contracted for a piece of land, to- be paid for out of the appropriation that would be available on July 1. I contracted in May for that property. The man who sold to me was old and feeble and was anxious to sell because he wanted to divide this money. We got the deed and abstract and submitted them to the Department of Justice, and the man I bought from died in January (the 26th or 27th) and in September (six or eight months after) we got the title that we requested early in May; we got the opinion of the attorney. Mr. Bowie. After the man was dead? Mr. Bubch. The man was dead; and then it took two or three weeks longer, until the administrator was appointed, before we could pay for it. Mr. Bowie. The point I wanted to make by my question was, that when you transfer an officer of this sort from the lump-sum to the statutory roll that increases the statutory roll and ought to increase the lump-sum roll. Now, does it have that effect? Mr. Buech. It does, in a measure. It only takes the expense off of one Bureau and puts it on to another, and properly. Mr. Bowie. Is there a lump-sum reduction in the whole estimate? Mr. Buech. I do not suppose there is; because the Department is growing and the necessities are more. You can see very plainly they all have to increase, have to continue to do the same work they are doing, with the prospect of more; and the duties of the Department are growing each year, and the demands are greater. The Chaieman. The committee has always opposed this on the ground I have mentioned, that it is a part of the work of the, law department. I notice also, Colonel, that heretofore you have esti- mated at $2,000 and now you raise him to $2,500? Mr. Buech. He is getting $2,500 now. The Chaieman. The last two years he has been stated as of $2,000 on the statutory roll? Mr. Buech. That is very true. He has been considered by the Sec- retary as being valuable and not overpaid at that. The Chaieman. "What would you nave done, supposing we had allowed him at $2,000? Mr. Buech. We would have asked j r ou for an increase. The Chaieman. The Department submitted at $2,000 for him last year and the year before that, and the committee took the ground that it is a part of the work of the law department to furnish its offi- cers to do this work, at any rate. If you have been paying him $2,500 on the lump sum and we put him on the statutory roll at $2,000, how would the Department meet that question ? Mr. Buech. It would be for him to determine whether he would accept it or go to some other department where he could get more. Mr. Scott. What are you paying your present law clerk? Mr. Buech. $2,500. The Chaieman. How long have you been paying him that? Mr. Buech. Three or four months — some time in September, I think, August or September — I do not remember. Mr. Gteaff. Is he a regularly admitted lawyer. Mr. Buech. Oh, yes; admitted to the bar here. Mr. Geaff. How long has he been in practice here? Mr. Buech. I could not tell you. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 387 Mr. Graff. When was he admitted to the bar? Mr. Burch. I could not tell you. I think he graduated in the law school here. Mr. Graff. How long ago ? Mr. Burch. 1 am unable to tell you. Mr. Graff. Just a few years ago. Mr. Burch. Yes. Mri Graff. How old a man is he? Mr. Burch. He is about 30 years old. The Chairman. The Committee heretofore has claimed that the law work should be done by the law department of the Government — in other words, the Department of Justice. Mr. Graff. Have they not a law officer detailed from the Attorney- General's Office for that Department? The Chairman. I claim there should be one — that this man should be detailed from the Department of Justice. Mr. Burch. If you gentlemen will secure one for us, we have no objection where he comes from, but we certainly need one. Mr. Scott. Has there been a demand on the Department of Justice for one ? Mr. Burch. I do not think there has; because of the fact that we are unable to get a decision in six months. Mr. Graff. How was this man appointed ? Under the Civil Service ? Mr. Burch. Yes; under the Civil Service. Mr. Graff. How long has he been in the Department? Mr. Burch. About two years. He was transferred from the Treas- ury Department. The Chairman. What was he doing in the Treasury Department? Mr. Burch. I think he was an auditor. Mr. Graff. He has never been engaged in the practice of law? Mr. Burch. Not to my knowledge, except at the present time — in the last year. I guess you were not in the room when I read what he had accomplished last year. Shall I read it again? Mr. Graff. No. I will read the hearing after we get through. Mr. Lever. His proposition is to facilitate the work of the Depart- ment? Mr. Burch. Yes. It is an aid in being present at all times; it would be impossible unless they detailed a man and sent him down there, to do the work properly. As you know, contracts have to be attended to, and attended to expeditiously; and there are a great many questions of law coming up in our Department now. The Chairman. We do not disagree on that point, as to who should do the work; but I claim the work comes under the Department of Justice. This law clerk's decisions will have no binding force on anybody. If a legal question came up, the Secretary of Agriculture would not be safe in following his decision, while the decision through the Department of Justice, of the Attorney-General would convict. Mr. Burch. These trials and arrests throughout the country are carried out through the Department of Justice; but that is not the extent of his work. That is only a small part of it. The Chairman. I do not dispute his work; that I agree to; there is probably a lot of work for him to do there. The next change is "one telegraph and telephone operator, (addi- tional) submitted at fourteen hundred dollars." Tell us about that. 388 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Buech. We have two switch boards and two instruments — telegraph instruments — and we found it was impossible to get con- nected on the switch boards to expedite business, and we had to have an assistant in that office, especially. Of course there must be one present every minute of the time. The Chairman. For how many hours of the day ? Mr. Burch. The whole day. The Chairman. Eight hours ? Mr. Burch. Yes, indeed; just as long as the Department is open — seven hours. The Chairman. When does the Department open? Mr. Burch. At 9 o'clock. The Chairman. And closes at 4.30? Mr. Burch. 4.30. The Chairman. The hours of the telegraph and telephone operator would be just the same as the clerk? Mr. Burch. They are supposed to be there really before the office opens — ten or fifteen minutes. The Chairman. Are they there? Mr. Burch. Yes, they are; I can say they are; and frequently they have to stay half an hour longer — stay as long as the Secretary stays. Mr. Scott. I notice that the telegraph and telephone operator you have now is rated at $1,200. Why is it necessary to have two hun- dred dollars more? The Chairman. That is to raise that person, and give the other twelve hundred dollars. Mr. Burch. That is the point exactly. That lady has been there a great many years. She is an expert— probably a very few others, if any, in Washington have The Chairman. Do you know anything about the wages paid by telephone and telegraph companies? Mr. Burch. It is more than she gets. In all the Departments you will find The Chairman. I am comparing them with outside work. Mr. Burch. I know nothing about the outside work. I was saying that she is an expert and can telegraph with one hand and give you connections with the other. A person that can do that is pretty good, and she is capable of doing it; and she is worth the money, as we think. The Chairman. You submit three clerks in class 3; "increase of one submitted." That is the $1,600 clerk? Mr. Burch. There is one file clerk, and another in the appointment clerk's office, and the other I want to provide for should be in my office. Those are the three. Now, I have one detailed and carried by the Bureau of Plant Industry. The Chairman. What is the need of that additional clerk? Mr. Burch. As I said, for my office. I have one who is paid from the Bureau of Plant Industry, and we think he ought to belong to the Secretary's office; that is all. The Chairman. He is now paid on the Bureau of Plant Industry roll? Mr. Burch. Yes; Plant Industry. The Chairman. From the lump sum? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 389 Mr. Bueoh. I do not know what fund he is paid from. They carry him, at least. The Chairman. Does he get $ 1,600 where he is? Mr. Burch. $1,600; yes, sir. The Chairman. If we transfer him to you we should deduct it from the Plant Industry ? Mr. Burch. That is for the committee. We want to arrange the rolls, Mr. Chairman, as they properly should be. Mr. Graff. That is the way it ought to be, too. Mr. Burch. I took him in the office when I was appointed chief clerk. He was in the Bureau of Animal Industry and transferred. They were carrying then some ten thousand dollars that the Secretary ought to have actually carried on his rolls. He was transferred to the Plant Industry because of the fact that they carried much less. They relieved one bureau and put it onto another that was carrying less people. Mr. Graff. This is not a position that can be shifted around; it is a regular man that you have all the time ? Mr. Burch. Oh, yes; he has been in the Department a good many years. The Chairman. He is not on the statutory roll? Mr. Burch. No, sir. The Chairman. The next increase is ' 'One lieutenant of the watch." Mr. Burch. Lieutenant of the watch. The Chairman. That is a new Mr. Burch. We have now a captain of the watch, and his duties are such that it is impossible for him to look after the watchmen as they properly should be. For instance, we have some eight or ten buildings spread around in various parts of the city, and we have two night watchmen at each place, and my idea was to have the lieutenant of the watch perform duty during the day as a day watchman and at night — every night — visit all these points and see that every man was per- forming his duty; once every night at different hours, at no stated time at all, to go around and examine thoroughly and see that every- / body was on his post; and to perform other duties necessary to be looked after by the captain of the watch. The Chairman. Where is that watchman provided for — that captain of the watch ? Mr. Lever. "One engineer, who shall be the captain of the watch " — just above there. The Chairman. Who is the captain of the watch? Mr. Burch. Captain Harvey. He has been there a great many years as captain of the watch and as engineer. Mr. Graff. Is he now employed in the daytime? Mr. Burch. All the time there, and frequently has to come at night and look after the fires and one thing and another, and it is more work than he ought to be required to perform. Mr. Graff. You need the captain of the watch to work in the day- time and the lieutenant to work at night? Mr. Burch. I want him to work in the daytime, too; he will be on the ground in the daytime as watchman, and at night to visit the dif- ferent buildings to see that the duties are performed and the watch- men at their posts. 390 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Graff. What would the lieutenant do? Mr. Burch. That is what I am saying — the lieutenant of the watch that we ask for now. Those are the duties I want him to perform. Mr. Graff. What does the captain of the watch do in the daytime? Mr. 'Burch. He does various things. And he has charge, of course, of the engines; he is captain of the watch and chief engineer; and he has charge of the different laboratories and the laborers" that are required to move furniture and do various kinds of work; to see that the buildings are kept in repair; and when there is a call for an engi- neer or a plumber, to go and investigate and have the work performed under his direction. Mr. Scott. In this connection you ask for two additional watchmen; what conditions have arisen that have made these two necessary? The Chairman. Do not let us skip the engineers. Mr. Scott. I was connecting this with the watchmen. He was speaking of the lieutenant of the watch. Mr. Burch. I do not know that there are any ; only are employing three laborers as watchmen and we should not do it. The Chairman. You know it is impossible to control these watch- men when laborers are doing clerks' work and messengers are driving the Secretary's carriage; I wanted to change that, but it was said it would not look well on the bill to have a "driver to the Secretary." "Two messengers at $720" — I think one of them is the driver of the carriage. Mr Burch. I think not. The Chairman. Who are the drivers? Mr. Burch. I am not familiar The Chairman. They come under these messengers ? Mr. Burch. They are in the Secretary's office, and I never investi- gated that. The Chairman. They come under messengers, do they not? They are charged as messengers on the bill? Mr. Burch. I do not know; 1 am not positive about that. Mr. Bowie. Can I go back just a minute? I want to ask a question about that solicitor. Do you expect, if this recommendation should be adopted by the committee, that the present solicitor who is doing this work that you refer to should be appointed to this statutory place ? Mr. Burch. Yes. Mr. Bowie. How old a man is he? Mr. Burch. About 30 years old. Mr. Bowie. I misunderstood you; I thought you said 20 years old awhile ago ? Mr. Burch. Thirty or 32. Mr. Bowie. Did he ever practice law? Mr. Burch. I could not tell you. He came to us from the Treas- ury Department. Mr. Bowie. You do not know what experience he has had in the courts as a practicing lawyer? Mr. Burch. No, sir; I do not. The Chairman. What is his name? Mr. Burch. McCabe. The Chairman. Where is he from? Mr. Burch. From Ogden, Utah. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OK AGRICULTURE. 391 Mr. Bowie. Is it customary to have the principal law advisers of these Departments certified by the Civil Service Commission? Mr. Burch. I could not tell you; I think not. Mr. Bowie. You said this one had been certified. Mr. Burch. Yes; he held a former position. He was an auditor, you know, in the Treasury Department, and transferred to our Depart- ment. He is in the classified service. Mr. Bowie. I have always imagined that a man competent to advise a great Department in the expenditure of several millions of dollars is a man who should have shown his ability in something besides stand- ing a civil-service examination. Mr. Burch. I do not know anything about his ability beyond what he has accomplished. Mr. Bowie. But he draws contracts. Mr. Burch. So far as conducting cases is concerned, that would come under the Attorney-General's Office if there was a prosecution. Mr. Bowie. I do not see, after all, that he does much more than gather evidence; he has not the power to try cases. Mr. Burch. He does not try a case at all; he only assists; gathers the evidence, and makes briefs and prepares the cases for the Attorney- General, as in all instances where he has secured convictions for vio- lation of law, quarantine laws, and Mr. Burleson. The contracts the Department enters into from time to time could be drawn by the head of the division, could they not? Mr. Burch. They are not lawyers; I do not think any of them could draw them properly. They may be wise in their line of work and are, I think, but The Chairman. We have covered the lieutenant of the watch. Now this "assistant engineer." Mr. Burch. To have charge of the different engines — there are three or foui- — and to assist the engineer, as I said before, in that line of work — to go with the plumber, to determine what is necessary to be done in that work there. The Chairman. I thought nearly all of those Bureaus in rented buildings have engineers and pay for them. Mr. Burch. None of them have, over in that part of the town. The Chairman. They have firemen ? Mr. Burch. Yes, sir; firemen. The Chairman. There are no engines in those rented buildings? Mr. Burch. No; except what we have put in. The chemical labora- tory has an engine; the Bureau of Plant Industry has an engine, and the Bureau of Animal Industry has an engine. All those have engines. The Chairman. What kind of engines are they — steam engines or vapor engines? Mr. Burch. Steam engines, all of them. The Chairman. They have engineers to run them? Mr. Burch. They do not have an engineer, they have a fireman The Chairman. He is called a fireman; but he must be, practically, an engineer? Mr. Burch. He has got to understand it, and he is under the instruc- tion of the engineer; and that is what we want the assistant engineer for, to visit these places and instruct these men. 392 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. Have not these men been running these engines for years? Mr. Btjrch. Some of them have, and some of them have not. The Chairman. Who has been running them if they have not been running them ? Mr. Burch. They have been changed, you know. They do not stay more than a year or two — some of them — and some stay longer, and then, recently, of course, some engines have been put in — the Plant Industry put in one recently. They heat all the buildings, you under- stand, and the laboratories. The Chairman. The Bureau of Plant Industry, the Chemical Labo- ratory, and the Bureau of Animal Industry ? Mr. Burch. Yes, sir. The Chairman. One man runs each one of them ? Mr. Burch. And one at the Museum; that is another. The Chairman. They have been run heretofore by one man apiece, eight hours a day ? Mr. Burch. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Has there been any complaints about their not being in order, or anything of that sort, more than happens to any engine ? Mr. Burch. We have to have them examined once a year by a District officer. The Chairman. I suppose every engine, whether it is out of order or not, you have to submit to that? Mr. Burch. Of course; if there is anthing-out of order, we have to call on the engineer to put it in order. The Chairman. The next is "Electrician" on page 2. An increase of $100 is submitted in his salary. On what ground do you ask that? Mr.' Burch. For the amount of work that is necessary to be done and the qualifications of the man — it requires a man skilled in that kind of work. He has been performing it in the last two years very satisfactorily, and last year we had a system put in for the Depart- ment alone which has 50 'phones on and the necessary lighting of all the buildings; and that is his principal work. The Chairman. Now, as to your 11 night watchmen. Only a cou- ple of years ago we rearranged all that watchman business so that it was satisfactory to everybody, I think, and, if my memory serves, it was arranged so that there was a full double watch — night and day watchmen— enough supplied for all purposes; now you ask an increase of two. Tell us what you want those two for ? Mr. Burch. We have rented other buildings since you rearranged that, Mr. Chairman. There is the Chemical Laboratory that requires two watchmen; the Bureau of Animal Industry, two watchmen; the Vetetable Pathology, two; Botanical, two; and the Bureau of Soils have two provided for in their estimate; and the museum, stable, and Statistical Division buildings are all under one watchman or two watchmen, for the year. They look after the museum and the stables and the Statistical building. And the Bureau of Plant Industry, two; and the annex to Entomology; they have rented a building recently and have none; and then there are day watchmen, one on the grounds and one at the door of the main building. The Chairman. The Bureau of Animal Industry has a watchman on their lump sum? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 393 Mr. Buech. They have two men acting as watchmen, but they are skilled laborers; they are not watchmen. The Chairman. What is the difference? Mr. Buech. There is not much difference. We can use skilled labor for watchmen. And then, you see, we have now three laborers that are not properly employed, and they are acting as watchmen under the Civil Service, and we have none. Now, there are sixteen watchmen, and if you allow these men a month's leave it would take sixteen months; and we are asking for one extra watchman to take place of watchmen when on leave, so we will have a watchman without having to detail laborers to perform that duty. As it is now, we have to call on some of the bureaus to furnish a laborer to act as watchman when any of them take a leave of absence. Mr. Geaff. Government buildings are never insured, are they ? Mr. Buech. Not to my knowledge. Mr. Graff. It has been suggested that the number of watchmen, not only in the Agricultural Department, but in the other Depart- ments, is much larger than the number employed by a private enterprise. Take a large lumber yard, or a great manufacturing establishment, and they have a good many less watchmen, and they have to cover in some cases a block. The watchmen report at a cer- tain time at the office, where there is a machine apparatus with a clock attachment, where they have to report, showing not only at the ' office, but at other places in the building, that the watchman has been there at that particular time. Mr. Buech. That would work all right if we were in one build- ing. We have that kind of record in the main building over at the Department. Mr. Geaff. Do you think it would take more than one man to go over that whole building at night ? Mr. Buech. That is all we have there. But we have so many buildings, at so many different places. We have but one watchman in the main building. The Chairman. With the half-hour additional work now required you will accomplish a good deal more, of course ? Mr. Buroh. We hope to; but that half -hour of work would not add at all to any of the requests that we have made for additional force, and would not apply in any way. Mr. Bowie. It does not add to it, but will it subtract from it ? Mr. Burch. No, I do not think it would subtract in any way. Mr. Bowie. The statement has been made here, as to some of the bureaus and divisions, that they are already working more than half an hour and consequently it would not be an}^ gain. Mr. Buech. That is true. Mr. Bowie. How is it with reference to the Department generally ? Mr. Buech. You will find in every bureau men who will stay there as long as they can see to work. Mr. Bowie. Do you think, on the whole, there will be any gain from that half hour ? Mr. Buech. Yes; in the clerical work, but not in the scientific, because those scientists will get there as quickly as they can get there in the morning, and will stay as long as they can see to work. The Chaieman. Does the committee wish to ask Mr. Burch any more questions? If not, we are much obliged to you. 394 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. STATEMENT OF MR. E. S. HOLMES, ASSOCIATE STATISTICIAN OF THE BUREAU OF STATISTICS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRI- CULTURE. The Chairman. You want a chief clerk? Mr. Holmes. That man has been acting as chief clerk for two or three years, and he is our financial man and looks after our appropria- tions, and sees if we are running ahead — he has been paid $1,800 a year. The reason that I recommended two thousand was that he is a good man, and that is the customary salary for that position. He is one of the best men we have. The Chairman. "Four clerks of class 4," is the next. Last year you submitted 3. Mr. Holmes. You will notice we have reduced the lump appropria- tion accordingly there. No ; that is one of the clerks from the ' ' foreign markets " who has been added. The chief clerk is the only addition to that roll. Mr. Adams. What compensation do the State agents get? Mr. Holmes. Well, from $300 to $800 a year. It depends on the size of the State and the amount of the work they have to do. Mr. Adams. No one agent has more than one State in his territory, has he? Mr. Holmes. No, we have a special agent who this year has done the State agent's work on the Pacific coast for us, simply because we had no agents out there. Mr. Lever. What is the duty of that State agent? The Chairman. There was no statutory roll in the division of foreign markets last year? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir; there was a roll of $8,500 there for salaries, and I think $7,500 for supplies, etc. In reply to Mr. Lever's question, I will say that the State agents maintain a corps of correspondents and report to us monthly. Now, I think I am correct in the statement I have made that we have no other addition to the statutory roll. If we have, we have cut them off of the lump sum. The Chairman. There was a statutory roll last year for "foreign markets" — 1 chief of division, $2,500; 1 chief of division, $1,800; and 1 assistant at $1,600. Is that the man you transferred — 1 assistant at $1,600? Mr. Holmes. No; it is that $1,800. That is class 4. The $2,500 we have named specifically there. The Chairman. Now, you have added 4 clerks of class 4; you state that one of those was transferred from the Mr. Holmes. That one is the assistant chief of the Division of For- eign Markets, 1 clerk of class 4, $1,800 — that is the salary. You find he is not provided for there in any other way. The Chairman. Oh, yes, sir; I see. Now, going on, you say " 5 clerks, class 3;" that is an increase of 1? Mr. Holmes. That is also a foreign-market clerk; we simply put those foreign-market clerks on our roll in the proper place. The Chairman. That is the $1,600 man? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 395 The Chairman. "Six clerks, class 2" — you have decreased that, have you not? Mr. Holmes. I do not think we have. I think we have left that roll just as it was last year with the exception of that chief clerk. Mr. Adams. The chief clerk's salary is the only addition to the total ? Mr. Bowie. That is right. The Chairman. Did you have 6 clerks there last year? Mr. Holmes. I think so. The Chairman. You had 4 last year, and estimate for 5 this year? Mr. Holmes. That is, foreign-markets clerk. The Chairman. "Five clerks of class 2" — you estimate for 6? Mr. Holmes. This clerk for foreign markets, also. The Chairman. "Ten clerks at $1,000 each;" now, you reduce that to 9 clerks in your estimates this year ? Mr. Holmes. No, sir; you have it here "ten." The Chairman. I beg your pardon; I am wrong there. "Eight clerks of class 1;" you have got 9 now. That is a transfer, too? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Then you have 10 clerks at $1,000, the same as last year? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir. The Chairman. And 4 clerks at $840? Mr. Holmes. I think that is all, sir. The Chairman. That is the same as last year ? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. I was going to ask him what this increase in the lump sum The Chairman. We are going to reach that; but I will first ask if anybody wishes to ask anything further in regard to the salaries ? Now, coming to the lump-sum roll, we notice, the first thing, the monthly crop reports, issued on the 10th day of each month. What is that? Mr. Holmes. It was formerly the custom to issue all crop reports on the 10th of each month, but on account of making some additions to our cotton correspondence it became necessary to have separate dates, so we decided to issue the cotton report on the 3d of each month and the regular grain report on the 10th. We have been doing that for two years or more. Mr. Bowie. It does not really involve any additional work or expense? Mr. Holmes. Oh, no, sir. Mr. Chairman. Coming down to the question of your increase, why have you found that increase necessary ? Mr. Holmes. We have asked for $22,800. The first item is for a particular man we have in mind, at a salary of $2,800. He is now receiving from another branch of the Government about $10,000 a year. He was assistant director of the Philippine census. He is a man we have had in our office, and he is thoroughly familiar with our work, and we want him to take entire charge of our crop report, so the statistician may be relieved at the rush time of the month of a good deal of the detail. He is a man who thoroughly understands the business; he was formerly assistant statistician. The Chairman. Why does he give up a $10,000 place? 396 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Holmes. It will terminate shortly. His present appointment will terminate shortly, as soon as he has completed that work. The Chairman. Who paid him that 110,000 ? Mr. Holmes. It was paid by the Phillipine government through the Bureau of Insular Affairs. This gentleman is Mr. Victor H. Olmstead. He was formerly our assistant statistician. Mr. Bowie. How much of this increase is due to a transfer from some other bureau? Mr. Holmes. Not a bit. This is all due to additional business. Mr. Bowie. Additional work? Mr. Holmes. Every cent of it is additional work — an additional amount. Mr. Burleson. The purpose of creating this place for Mr. Olmstead is to relieve Mr. Hyde of the details of the work in the monthly com- pilation of statistics? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir. The Chairman. How did you arrive at that sum of $2,800? Mr. Holmes. I asked the Secretary what was the most he would pay him. He has been offered $3,000 1 know, and we fixed on $2,800, and asked him if he would take that if he could get it, and he said he would. The Chairman. Why would he take $2,800 under the Government if he was offered $3,000 elsewhere? Mr. Holmes. You undoubtedly know that the speculative element of this country: — the cotton speculators and the grain speculators — are always looking for good men to make crop reports for them, and they are continually after our men and offering higher salaries than they get. I received two offers myself this year at larger salaries than 1 get. The Chairman. In all frankness, why did you refuse it — unless it is a private reason? Mr. Holmes. I was offered a considerable increase on my salary about three years ago; I stipulated for a year contract, and the gen- tleman who made me the offer did not want to do it, and while we were dickering — before we came together — he failed. There is always an element of uncertainty in going with a speculative house, and that is one reason. The Chairman. Your argument, then, is really, broadly, that a man ought to work a little less for the Government than for an out- sider? Mr. Holmes. I think so; particularly in statistical work. Most men who are interested in statistics want to make a reputation for themselves. Mr. Adams. I do not think Government salaries are as high in a higher class of work. Mr.' Holmes (continuing). And they can make it to better advantage under the Government. A young man can afford to work for the Government along work of this kind or along scientific lines, because he has a chance to publish his original ideas at different times. He gets before the public and makes a reputation. The Chairman. Is he publishing the bulletins under his own name? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir. The Chairman. What I want to bring out is why, when the Gov- HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 397 eminent salaries are lower than those paid by individuals, the Govern- ment clerks very seldom leave? Mr. Holmes. The Government salaries for the routine clerks are probably higher than paid by outside people, but for higher clerks they are not nearly so high. The Chairman. For a few experts, I agree with you; I think that is true. That is $2,800 for Mr. Olmstead; now, go on with your items. Mr. Holmes. The $20,000 in addition to that is all for field work. We want more men. We want to pay them $7 a day salary apiece and their expenses — approximately $3,000 a year. The Chairman. How much do you calculate $7 a day would amount to ? Mr. Holmes. About $2,000^about $2,100. The Chairman. Do you pay them for every day of the year except Sundays? Mr. Holmes. When they work. It will amount to about $2,000 apiece. The reason we ask for these men is this — for instance, we want to have another grain man. We have the grain States of Illi- nois, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, and Nebraska covered by one man — one field man. Now they are the great surplus corn and wheat States, and we should have another man in there undoubtedly. In fact, we have two men covering those States I have named, and Ohio, Michigan, Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky. We would like to have three and divide that group of States into three territories instead of two. We need a man there and need him badly. Mr. Adams. Your sources of information, as I understand it, are State agents, and through them they obtain the reports of their cor- respondents in the various counties. In addition to that, I understand that is duplicated by the agents who report directly to the Department. Mr. Holmes. By two sets of agents who report direct. Mr. Adams. In addition to that you have these men in the field who make personal inspection of certain belts of territory? Mr. Holmes. When we hear of a severe storm or frost we send a man right in there. With unusual conditions is when we use them most; and we want them the worst. Mr. Adams. These various reports must to a certain extent be con- tradictory; then what sort of weight do you give to the reports of these inspectors who are experts and specialists and go over the ground? Mr. Holmes. It would surprise you to know how nearly they came together in ordinary weather. In fact, it is seldom there is a differ- ence of one point, or 1 per cent, in the reports of all classes of corre- spondence. But suppose after our correspondent has mailed his report there should come a severe drought or frost, or any weather detri- mental to the crops, we get our field men in there to supplement the report of our correspondent. Mr. Adams. That ver y often happens ? Mr. Holmes. It happens every month. That is one of the men we want, and we need another man for cotton and rice, in the cotton States. This summer I was forced to put in almost all of my field tiine. One man was all we had, and we had sufficient appropriation to appoint another man for forty days only. I had to keep most of those men in Texas about all the time, and one of the men — one of our oldest men — I would let make flying trips to the other States. 398 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Burleson. The reason you kept him in Texas was because Texas produces the stuff? Mr. Holmes. Yes; and because we had so much trouble in Texas. "We should have another cotton man there, as I have said, a man for cotton and rice. Now, we have a rice report practically ready to pub- lish. We are ready to make a report on rice, the same as we do on other crops. But we can not do that unless we send a man down there who is thoroughly posted, and to verify and to substantiate our origi- nal figures. You see, we have nothing to start on. That is our great trouble in adding new crops to our list, and the rice people all through that section have been after us for the last two years to do it. Mr. Levee. What section is that? Texas, too? Mr. Holmes. Texas; yes, sir; and a few other States. And we also have the necessity for a tobacco man in the field. Now, they are the four men we want, and they will take, approximately, $ 20,000 for sala- ries and expenses. Mr. Bowie. What proportion do the expenses bear to the salaries? Mr. Holmes. Larger than the salaries. Mr. Bowie. That makes up your $20,000? Mr. Holmes. That makes up the $22,000. The Chairman. How does your rice man operate? What would be his real work? What would he do actually, after he gets down there? Mr. Holmes. I am not a rice man. The Chairman. Take a tobacco man, or a corn man — any man you please. Mr. Holmes. He would go to the great rice houses, the rice dealers, and he would ascertain the consumption of rice, and he would then ascertain from the railroads the receipts and shipments of rice. He would besiege anybody who had any information on the subject, and either confirm or disprove the figures we have ready for him now. The Chairman. Would he get the information daily or at the end of the rice season? Mr. Holmes. In the first place, he would get right to work now and finish up as quickly as he could on last year's crop, make an estimate of that, and after that he would report rice just as we do grain and cotton, and we would use him for rice part of the time and for cotton part of the time during the cotton season. He is really more of a cotton man than he is a rice man. The Chairman. It is an estimate, after all ? Mr. Holmes. We want him to supplement our reports on cotton and rice. The Chairman. Why do you want them supplemented ? It is sim- ply another estimate. Mr. Holmes. Yes; but it is the best estimate we get at the time there is anything that affects the crop. Our work in grain and cotton with the men we have had has been so very successful — our field work — that we feel that that should be increased even at the expense of something else. The Chairman. In grain and cotton, how much discrepancy has there been between the final reports of these men and the statistics gathered before the report? Have they simply confirmed it? Mr. Holmes. If they do not confirm it, they give us their reasons HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 399 and their reasons have to be good. As a matter of fact, their reasons always are good. The Chairman. Practically, why not do away with the other people and take their report? Mr. Holmes. Then we would have to have too many men and it would cost too much money. We can only afford to send those men in the places where there is some offset to the crop — something the matter with the crop detrimentally or something that helps the crops. We can only send them where there is an unusual condition existing. The Chairman. I do not see how these specialists can be usedevery day in the year ? Mr. Holmes. Because there is always, something unusual existing. The Chairman. But the cotton crop or the rice crop — some years it is hardly in the ground before Mr. Holmes. We would use them more for cotton than we would for rice. The Chairman. For a certain number of months there is no cotton in the ground. That comes under your regular crops; you are getting the acreage while it is growing, and after a certain point you get the condition. Mr. Holmes. We report the condition every month. The Chairman. After it has started to grow ? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir. It requires a good deal of explanation; but we have on our cotton list every cotton mill in the South. We have a great deal of trouble getting reports from them at different times. During the off seasons we send these men to the secretaries or presi- dents of these mills and insist on their giving those reports. The Chairman. Suppose they refuse? Mr. Holmes. We can talk them into it. We always have been able to. The most of them do not refuse; they simply neglect to do it; they are slow in sending them in. This year I had to send thirty- five or forty telegrams to owners of cotton mills to get their final reports. Mr. Scott. What I wanted to inquire about was this: As I under- stand it you have a State agent in every State who gathers from his correspondents throughout the State the reports upon the condition of the crops every month. Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. In the event of a late frost, such as you suggest, or any extraordinary condition which might affect the crop, why can not this State agent ask his reporters? Mr. Holmes. Because it is too late; he does not have time, usually. Mr. Scott. I do not know why they could not send in a report and get in as quickly as a special agent could travel from Washington. Mr. Holmes. He does not travel from Washington. He is located in a certain territory and covers that territory, unless we order him out of it. We are in constant communication with him and know where he is every minute. We say, "There has been a frost in such and such a country; go down there and see how it has affected the crop." These men are experts. They can go into a wheat field and probably tell you better than a wheat farmer how much damage has been done, what the yield is going to be, if the conditions are to be maintained as they are when they go into the field. 400 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Graff. This operates as the opinion of another man, as a check upon the judgment of these other men. You have some men doing this work? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir; but we have not a sufficient number. The Chairman. You will admit now that the whole thing after all is an estimate? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir. The Chairman. My point is, gentlemen, whether or not it is a function of the Government to give estimates on anything? Mr. Holmes. We have been doing it for a great number of years. Mr. Bowie. It may be a proper subject for discussion after we come to the bill; but I believe that this Bureau of the Government that is under consideration has saved the cotton farmers of the South $500,000,000 at least, in the last five years, by putting out their reports. These speculators have estimated their crops from half a million to a million in excess every year, until the Department of Agriculture took hold of it, and began to tell the truth about it. Mr. Scott. Undoubtedly, if any estimate is to be made at all, it out to be made as accurately as is possible. Mr. Burleson. And from an impartial source. Mr. Holmes. Suppose we did not make estimates. You would have a man on the "bull" side of the market making any estimate he pleased, giving it out and probably forcing the market up; and next day a man on the other side would come out with an estimate of a great big crop, and it would go down. That is what it did. The Chairman. It is paternalism, the Government going in to guard all of these things. Mr. Holmes. We are supposed to be in the estimating business for the purpose of letting everyone in on the same basis; that is, we let the farmer in and the mill owner in just as quickly as the member of the board of trade or the chamber of commerce. Mr. Burleson. As a matter of fact, it is for the protection of the producer and the consumer of cotton ? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir. The Chairman. How long have these statistics been going on in cotton ? Mr. Holmes. Thirty or forty years. The Chairman. Going on before the war? Mr. Holmes. No; not before the war. The Chairman. 1 do not believe you gentlemen in the South con- tend that you are any more prosperous now than they were then in the cotton-raising States. Mr. Bowie. We get more truthful statements than we used to get. I think it is due to perfection of the system of crop reporting that has gone on. Mr. Holmes. If we are going to do it at all we should do it properly. The Chairman. In that I agree with you perfectly. Mr. Bowie. There has been a tendency to accuracy all the time. The Chairman. There has been a question in my mind all the time whether it is the Government's function to furnish guesses. The guesses are founded on pretty accurate information; I can see that; but it is very doubtful if it is a Government function. Mr. Adams. It is a Government function, under the Constitution, HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 401 to provide for the general welfare. Of course, that is a pretty broad phrase. I suppose it is expected of us that we should interpret it reasonably. The Chairman. Let me ask you one question, Mr. Holmes; do you think that your work has improved under bureau formation? Mr. Holmes. Yes; it has given us a more elastic organization. The Chairman. How do you mean, by elastic? Mr. Holmes. It has given us a chance to do a good many things that we could not do. We have had to go through a lot of red tape to get some supplies that we wanted in a hurry, and various other things; now we can decide on things ourselves. The Chairman. Who did you go to before to decide these things? Mr. Holmes. To whatever executive branch of the Department it came under. In the supply division the supply man would carry our requisitions around in his pocket for a month before we got them. The Chairman. Do you mean that? Mr. Holmes. Well, that is a pretty strong statement, of course. Mr. Bowie. More or less? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir; but the organization is very much better. The Chairman. Whose fault was that that those requisitions were not honored promptly ? Mr. Holmes. Probably the fault of the supply man. When one division of the Department has to transact business through another there is always a delay; there is no doubt about that. The Chairman. Coming to your field work and gathering of statis- tics, that is a small detail ? Mr. Holmes. 1 do not think our bureau organization has helped us at all there. We could have had that under a division. The bureau organization merely is a more elastic organization, giving more power to the chief of the bureau than he has under a division. Mr. Bowie. And usually an increase of salary? Mr. Holmes. We only got a small increase last year. I think you gave us $15,000 increase last year, and we had to have a part of that made immediately available. We had already used some of it before the year The Chairman. I will say to the members of the committee that we did not pass upon this question at all. There was another considera- tion, the proposition to transfer the statistical work to the new Census Bureau. The Secretary of Agriculture was very much opposed to that on the ground that it was purely statistical work affecting the agricul- tural interests of the country and ought to be kept in the Agricultural Department, and we passed it over entirely, and when it got over to the Senate the Secretaiy appeared before the Senate committee per- sonally or by letter and urged that this division be made a bureau, and they inserted it in the bill. Am I right, Mr. Holmes? Mr. Holmes. I think that is right. The Chairman. That is the way it was changed from a division to a bureau. Mr. Graff. It was done in the Senate? The Chairman. It was done in the Senate last year, with an increase of $15,000. The Chairman. What did you do with that $15,000? Mr. Holmes. Principally for field men, for salaries and expenses. c a 26 402 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. We appointed, I think, one additional expert in the office, and I think that is about all. The Chairman. What will be your limit for field men; how much further do you want to go with field men ? Mr. Holmes. I think we will have the country pretty well covered if we ask for those four men. The Chairman. You would not want to agree not to ask for any more next year 'i Mr. Holmes. I would; yes, sir. I would be very well satisfied. During the season when we do not have to report on cotton crops, if we have no use for the cotton men going around to see our milling people, we might use them in the wheat country. The Chairman. Can not you use your wheat men in the rice country ? 1 Mr. Holmes. Our wheat men start to report the wheat before they do cotton. We start reporting wheat the 1st of March. The Chairman. How about rice? Mr. Holmes. I know very little about rice — and I am not prepared to say much about it. That is what we want the rice man for. Mr. Haugen. It seems to me the statement you made a few moments ago is an extraordinary one, that the supply division held requisitions for a month. Mr. Holmes. I would not like to haye that taken down. That was a very broad statement; but we have had requisitions held a few days. Mr. Hauoen. Can not that be remedied by putting in an efficient man and pay attention to business in that department i Mr. Holmes. They have got a good man there; every one knows that if you transact business through another division you will lose time. Mr. Haugen. You are conducting this business in the same build- ing, are you not? Mr. Holmes. No; we are in a separate building. Mr. Haugen. What is the distance between the buildings? Mr. Holmes. A hundred yards. Where anything has to go through an extra set of hands, you lose the time. Mr. Haugen. Certainly some time will be lost, but nothing like a month or twenty-four hours. The Chairman. You said that, as far as the field work is concerned, there is no practical benefit from it? ,, p Mr. Holmes. It is merely in the executive work of the office. The Chairman. Tell me, Mr. Holmes, when would you send your rice men to work? Mr. Holmes. Immediately. The Chairman. At what period of the year? Mr. Holmes. For a starter, I would send him to work the minute I would get him. The Chairman. What would he do if you sent him to work to-morrow? Tell the committee what he would do. Mr. Holmes. He would get right down into the rice country. The Chairman. It is practically all harvested ? Mr. Holmes. What we want him for now is to get us on the right track to make our first estimate on rice crop of last year. It is very essential that we should make that an accurate report. Mr. Burleson. And ascertain the proper acreage next year ? Mr. Holmes. And then ascertain the proper acreage for next year. The Chairman. When is rice ripe? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 403 Mr. Holmes. I think Mr. Burleson knows a good deal more about that than I do. Mr. Burleson. They plant it in the spring. The Chairman. What time in the spring? Mr. Holmes. I should say February and March. Mr. Burleson. At the same time they plant wheat. The Chairman. You do not want him to do anything with past crops ? Mr. Holmes. We want him to estimate on the crops of last year. We want him to verify the estimates we have in our office before we put them out, and then he will go on reporting the same as our other reporters do, using probably two-thirds of his time on cotton and one- third on rice. Rice is a small crop. - The Chairman. 1 want information as to what his actual work would be down there. Would he gather the acreage? Mr. Holmes. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Don't you gather that now under your system ? Mr. Holmes. We gather it just as we do cotton and wheat. The Chairman. How could one man accomplish that; how could he get the acreage ? Mr. Holmes. Experience has proven to us bur field men can set us straight on acreage when our county and township and State corre- spondents are off. That is our weak point, our acreage — the weakest point in the system of estimating crops. The only way we can get at an estimate of acreage is on a percentage basis, and our county cor- respondents hesitate to put down an increase of 50 per cent in acreage, or in some cases it might be 100 per cent. We fell into an error some years ago out in Nebraska, which was not straightened out until I straightened it out. I used to be the field man they had had there. They reported almost no winter wheat for the state of Nebraska — nearly all spring wheat. As a matter of fact, there had been a steady increase in the area of winter wheat in Nebraska; and almost a steady decrease of the area of spring wheat; they were planting winter and cutting out spring wheat because it was a better crop. I went out there and found out the condition of affairs and immediately sent word into the office, and the estimate was changed. We were the first people to discover that. The Chairman. As I said a little while ago, why not do away with all these local men % Mr. Holmes. Our men would have too much work to do; we could not cover the country. The Chairman. How many men would it take to cover the country if you have more reliance on your own men than on the local people? Mr. Holmes. You have misunderstood me there a little. I did not say we had more reliance on them than on our local people, except in some unusual condition which generally happens after our local reports are in, and those unusual conditions exist all the time. Mr. Burleson. How do you pay your local observers? Mr. Holmes. Do not pay them anything, except the State agents; we give them publications and seed. Mr. Haugen. How much are you paying these State agents? Mr. Holmes. From $300 to $800 a year, depending on the size of the State. Mr. Haugen. They are paid by the State also ? Mr. Holmes. Oh, no. They are very independent from any State 404 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. organization. In most of the States they have State secretaries of agriculture, but they are not our employees. Mr. Haugen. Does not Mr. Sage do your work for Des Moines? Mr. Holmes. Mr. Sage is our State man. Mr. Levee. Is there any tendency on the part of the county corre- spondents to underestimate the acreage of a crop? Mr. Holmes. Sometimes they underestimate and sometimes they overestimate. Mr. Lever. No tendency to underestimate? Mr. Holmes. No general tendency in any one direction. Mr. Bowie. Do you think the general tendency for each man is to do the best he can in making a candid report ? Mr. Holmes. I think they do. I think they are all perfectly honest. The Chairman. If they are, is it simply a matter of judgment? Mr. Graff. Y ou do not think there is a tendency for your local crop of reporters to underestimate? ' Mr. Holmes. There may be a tendency among a certain number of them to do that, but there is just such a tendency on the part of a lot of other correspondents to overestimate. Mr. Burleson. As a matter of fact, now, do not your local reporters feel a pride in their estimates and try to make them as accurate as possible ? Mr. Holmes. They try to make them as accurate as possible. As a matter of fact we get reports on cotton not only from the producer, but from the manufacturer also; from the miller; from the ginner, and the railroads. Mr. Haugen, Is it possible that these local reporters have a pride in their business, and not discover the difference between spring wheat and winter wheat, as you discovered in Nebraska?. Mr. Holmes. Acreage is a very weak point in all systems of esti- mating crops. They would report a decrease of 2 per cent, when it ought to have been 25. Mr. Haugen. There could not have been very much pride in those reports with that discrepancy. The Chairman. It was more a knowledge of arithmetic in that case, I reckon. Mr. Holmes. They decrease those areas almost unconsciously; and they put in winter wheat in the place of spring wheat, and forget all about it; forget to report it, perhaps. The Chairman. Is there anything further of which you desire to speak? Mr. Holmes. Not that I desire to speak of; no. Thereupon the committee adjourned until 2 o'clock p. m. after recess. The committee met, Hon. E. Stevens Henry (acting chairman) in the chair. Mr. Overton W. Price, Assistant Forester of the Bureau of Forestry of the Agricultural Department, appeared before the committee. STATEMENT OF MR. OVERTON W. PRICE. Mr. Henry (acting chairman). The committee will come to order, and we will hear Mr. Price. Mr. Price. Mr. Chairman, the marked characteristic of the Bureau J. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 405 of Forestry during the present year is its increased application to Government work. Within the past three years the amount of the bureau's appropriation spent in public work has risen from about 7 to 30 per cent. The amount spent in work for private owners has de- creased from 21 to approximately 13 per cent. Not only is the Bureau spending a larger part of its appropriation on public work each year, but public work is given its best men and first place throughout in its plans. The public work now in the hands of the Bureau comprises the mak- ing of practically all recommendations for new forest reserves and for changes in the boundaries of existing reserves. Since it took up this line of work the Bureau has examined 91 separate areas proposed as forest reserves and as additions to existing reserves, with a total area of approximately 45,000,000 acres. In addition to its studies of pro- posed reserves and of reserve boundaries, the Bureau makes recom- mendations for grazing regulations governing the forest reserves, makes detailed working plans for reserve management, and makes studies of Indian reservations, all under the request of the Secretary of the Interior. A large and increasing part of our appropriation is spent in this way. The cooperation of the Bureau with States is becoming an exceed- ingly important feature of its work. It is now cooperating with Cali- fornia in a study of State forest problems under an appropriation of $15,000 by the State. It is conducting in New Hampshire, under an appropriation of $5,000 by the State, a systematic study of the State forests. To sum up, the work of the Bureau now falls under three main heads: 1. Work upon Government lands and in State cooperation. 2. Studies of independent forest problems whose scope renders it impossible that they be taken up by the private owner but whose solution is of urgent importance to the private owner and to the public owner as well. Among these are studies of tupentine orchard- ing, timber tests, studies of forest fires with a view to their prevention and control, studies of the uses, possibilities, and best management for commercial trees, and, among the most important, studies in wood preservation. In the latter line of work, the Bureau is cooperating with several of the great railroads to find the best methods for the preservation of railroad ties. 3. The preparation of working plans and of planting plans in cooper- ation with the private owner. I want to make it very clear here that the Bureau is not competing with the private forester in this work, because the private forester does not yet exist. As soon as he appears the Bureau will step out of his way. Nor is the Bureau making the entirely futile attempt to handle all the private work in the United States, but merely to institute upon carefully selected tracts, charac- teristic of wide areas, the successful application of practical forestry. The results of the work of the Bureau in cooperation with private owners upon their lands is shown more than in any other way in the strong and growing influence which forestry has upon the lumber industry to-day.' At the last convention of the National Lumber Manufacturers' Association, held in Washington, more attention was given to forestry than to any other subject. The convention expressed itself in favor of the perpetuation of the forest by wise use, and gave evidence of its good will by visiting the Bureau of Forestry in a body. 406 HEARINGS BEFOBE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. And, more than this, its attitude has taken form in the express desire upon the part of several of its members to put practical forestry into effect upon their own lands under recommendations of the Bureau. These three great lines of work — work upon public lands, studies of independent problems, and work in cooperation with private own- ers — are all three greatly in arrears. The total appropriation of the Bureau for the present year could be expended upon any one of them and there would still be urgent work left to do. If the Bureau could have put 100 men instead of 30 men upon its studies of proposed reserves, during the past season, the result would have been that a correspondingly larger portion of the rapidly disappearing vacant public lands would have been reserved for their best use. In its studies of independent forest problems, the work of the Bureau has been fruitful so far as it has gone, but its amount is piti- fully small compared with the urgent work there is to do. And I want above all to make it clear that these studies of forest problems are not merely academic or scientific, they are aimed at the best solution of urgent practical problems and are taken up only upon the basis of an actual and widespread need. I realize fully that, seen only in the light of the rapid growth of the Bureau from a small beginning, the request for an increased appro- priation for the coming year may appear questionable. But seen in the light of the work that is still to be done, the question before the Bureau is, how it may handle work already far beyond its resources. The fact that this committee has encouraged Government work in for- estry by increased appropriations in the past has given an impetus not only to the Government forest work. It has been the direct and per- vading influence in arousing interest in forestry and in instituting work in forestry throughout the country. The fact that States are taking up forestry, that great lumber companies are taking up forestry, and that the general tendency throughout the country is toward the preservation of the forests by wise use rather than toward its destruc- tion by careless use, is due above all to the forest work of the Gov- ernment. If that work receives a check then the national forest move- ment will receive a corresponding check, because the national forest movement can not yet stand alone. It requires support and in many cases it requires the active cooperation of the Government. We are confronted in the United States by forest problems more urgent and more far-reaching than those which confront any other country. We are far behind other countries, and far behind our need, in the solution of national forest problems. So far we have made no more than a good start, and it is in my judgment of vital importance to the forest interests of the Government and of the private owner that that start be maintained, because this country has before it to-day not the consideration of forest questions in the abstract, but the direct question of how it may save the forests before they are destroyed. Mr. Scott. I should like to call your attention to a statement made earlier in your remarks to the effect that you are doing a smaller per- centage of private work. Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. Less now than formerly? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. Does that mean a smaller actual amount of work ? Mr. Price. It means a smaller actual amount. HEAEINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 407 Mr. Scott. Why is that so? Have you ponducted the work to such an extent that the people can now carry it on by themselves? Mr. Price. It has come about for these reasons: The demand is growing all the time, both for working plans and for planting plans. But we have felt that our best effort .should be given to the Govern- ment work, whose claims have been 'very great in the last few years. We felt, too, that we must confine our private work to carefully selected areas and avoid even the appearance of an attempt to handle all the private work in the country. Mr. Henry. Where have you been doing your work in the past year ? Mr. Price. Forest reserve studies have been the most important work that we have done in the past year. Mr. Henry. You have done some private work ? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Henry. As I remember, last year you gave an interesting statement of the work in eastern Texas. Mr. Price. That work is being continued this year. It comprises the preparation of a working plan for the lands of the Houston Oil Company and the Kirby Lumber Company. The owners are now employing a forester as the result of our recommendations. Mr. Henry. They approved of the work. Mr. Price. Even before it was entirely finished; yes, sir. Mr. Henry. Have you done work of that description in the north- western forests? Mr. Price. No, sir; although we have several applications for assistance from that region. The only work in the far Northwest this year has been in the studjr of reserve boundaries. Mr. Henry. There has been none in Washington or California? Mr. Price. In California we have made a study — -a cooperative study — under an appropriation of $15,000 by the State. The specific purpose of it is to solve practical problems in order to suggest sound State forest policy. Mr. Scott. You have not responded to all the calls that you have had from private owners ? Mr. Price. Not one-fifth of them, I should say, although I have not the figures with me. The Chairman. Have you been called upon to investigate the forests of Alaska? Mr. Price. We had a man in Alaska last summer. Mr. Henry. What do you know about those forests? Mr. Price. He came back with recommendations regarding forest reserves in Alaska based upon a three months' study. He is a man who has spent several seasons in Alaska and is thoroughly acquainted with its needs. Mr. Henry. That' is in southeastern Alaska? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Brooks. What are you doing toward the preservation of rail- road ties and the growing'of ties in connection with railroads? Mr. Price. We have applications from five railroad companies for aid in determining how railroad ties may best be preserved, and how a permanent supply may be obtained. The work is just beginning, but it looks now as if it might reasonably lead to the application of forestry by the railroad companies to their own lands. 408 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Brooks. As a practical matter for them? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. The New York Central Railroad is now con- sidering, under our recommendations, the purchase of forest lands in the Adirondacks for the production of hard-wood ties. Mr. Lamb. What have you done with the cypress, and can you treat the soft pine in order to make it hard enough to hold the spike? Mr. Price. We are making experiments with that. Mr. Lamb. What was the plan of the Pennsylvania Railroad? Mr. Price. The plan of the Pennsylvania road is to determine, with our help, if by entering into cooperation with private owners along their lines they could get a permanent supply of ties, or whether they had best buy the land outright for the production of ties. > Mr. Lamb. If they will buy the land and let it stand there nature will bring the ties ? Mr. Price. Yes; but a great deal quicker under careful manage- ment. Mr. Scott. Have you made any progress in the search for a pre- servative that would extend the life of a tie? Mr. Price. Yes; the Santa Fe Railroad and several others are now treating with preservatives a portion of the ties they use. The result is in every case greatly to lengthen the life of the ties in the track. Mr. Scott. To what extent does this preservative protract the life of a tie; can you make any estimate of that? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. For example, the life of the untreated lob- lolly pine tie in southeastern Texas, where a tie rots quicker than anywhere else in the United States on account of the unfavorable conditions of drainage and climate, is about a year. If the loblolly pine tie is treated with chloride of zinc, its life will be extended to three or four years. For instance, to give you an idea of the won- derful effect of preservative treatment, I have seen sections of creosoted beech ties which have been in use thirty years in the French Eastern Railway and are practically as good as when they were laid. Mr. Scott. Do you mean to say 'that they have been using this preservative for thirty years? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; the creosoting process was known and used thirty years ago. Mr. Scott. They have not found anything better than that? Mr. Price. There are many processes; which is the best still waits for proof based upon experiment and study. Mr. Scott. It would seem that problem was pretty nearly solved, if thirty years ago a preservative was found that would preserve a tie in that way. Mr. Lamb. It is solved in regard to the pine ? Mr. Price. The results for beech can not be applied to pine. Beech would not rot so quickly under any conditions. Mr. Lamb. Beech is very hard? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Brooks. Some of the roads are taking steps toward the re- planting of adjacent areas? Mr. Price. They are considering it. Mr. Brooks. How about the consolidated roads of New England? Mr. Price. The advisability of commercial tree planting is being carefully studied in New England. Mr. Brooks. That is in connection with your Bureau? HEAKINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGKICULTURE. 409 Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr Bowie. What is the cost of the treatment on a tie that would increase the life of a tie three or four years? Mr. Price. That I could give you only roughly. Some species are harder to impregnate than others. Probably 15 or 20 cents a tie. Mr. Bowie, lhat is a good deal less than the first cost of the tic 2 Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. And it makes one tie equal to three or four? Mr. Price. Three or four. And then it also does away with the expense incident to changing ties in the track. Mr. Bowie. A large part of the expense? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. Why is not that of sufficient importance to justify the railroads in doing that work themselves ? Why does the Government have to do that ? Mr. Price. Because it hastens matters. The railroads probably would come to preserving ties when the urgent necessity drove them to it, but not until then. If we can lead thein to do it sooner we will save the forests that much more. It all goes back to the question of forest preservation. The longer the ties last the longer the forests will last. Mr. Bowie. I can understand why it takes a good deal of time to explain to a man who owns 640 or 160 acres of land the necessity for this, and how it takes time to scatter that information among several million farmers, but it seems to me that a self-evident proposition of that sort ought to be acted upon by the railroad managements in a great deal less time. Mr. Price. They have not gone into it simply because neither the need nor the way had been brought home to them. Mr. Bowie. Has the Southern Eailroad taken it up? Mr. Price. It is the Santa Fe road I have spoken of. Mr. Bowie. That is the Western? Mr. Price. In the Southwest. Mr. Bowie. Has the Louisville and Nashville, or the Southern Railroad ? Mr. Price. No, sir; but I believe the Southern Road is consider- ing it. Mr. Bowie. Has the matter been presented to them? Mr. Price. It has, I believe, been discussed between the Southern Railroad and our representatives. Of course the problem is not so serious for them as it is for the western roads, since they run through a forested country. Mr. Bowie. It is merely a question of economy ? Mr. Price. Yes, and not nearly so urgent for them as it is for the roads in the West, where timber is scarce. Mr. Lamb. Have we not got large quantities of hard wood in our colonial possessions? Mr. Price. As I understand from Mr. Pinchot and Captain Ahern the difficulty of getting that out is great. Mr. Bowie. They have no roads there ? Mr. Price. No, sir; and logging operations are difficult. Mr. Lamb. I thought that they had a lot of hard woods over there. Mr. Henry. Have you one of your experts in Porto Rico? Mr. Price. We had a man there this summer making an investiga- 410 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. tion of the proposed reserve. His report will soon go to the Secretary of the Interior. Mr. Henry. There is a large forest there? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; and forests of high local value. Mr. Graff. Why could not this system of preserving woods be extended to building materials? Mr. Price. It could in a great many cases. Mr. Graff. That is especially to that portion of the wood of a building that is exposed? Mr. Price. That is exposed to the weather? Mr. Graff. That is exposed to the weather. Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. What is the treatment that is given these woods? Unless it is a secret, or something of that kind, we would like to have that information. Mr. Price. No, sir; it is not. Sometimes it is done through impreg- nation under pressure, and sometimes by boiling in a vat for a certain time. t Mr. Bowie. What is the material that they boil it in and impregnate it with ? That is what I want to get at. Mr. Price. There are several chemical solutions; sulphate of copper arid zinc chloride are the most common. Mr. Bowie. Does the tie have to be submerged in it? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. How long does it have to stay there? Mr. Price. Of course it depends upon the heat to which it is sub- jected; probably ten to twenty minutes. Mr. Bowie. You pitch it in? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; it is passed into the impregnating tank and out again. Mr. Bowie. What does it cost to establish a system for that work, a plant of that sort, at some place where the raiiroads have headquar- ters for ties ? Mr. Price. Of course that would depend on the number of ties to be treated, but a good plant would cost about $15,000. Mr. Bowie. It would probably cost that much ? Mr. Price. Yes; probably that much to put in a plant which would be worth while. Mr. Bowie. And the treating can be done at an expense of 15 or 20 cents a tie. Mr. Price. Fifteen or 20 cents a tie, approximately. Mr. Bowie. It would seem as though they would adopt that pretty quickly if they were convinced of it? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; they will. Mr. Henry. Take a hard-wood tie, a chestnut tie, that does not cost over 40 or 50 cents; would it pay to treat those ties? Mr. Price. Yes; particularly if the timber was naturally short lived. Mr. Henry. I say chestnut. Mr. Price. Yes, sir; I should think it would by all means. It would prolong its life two or three times. Mr. Henry. Most of the Eastern roads use chestnut timber ? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; to some extent. Mr. Scott. The first change that I notice in the wording of your bill is on page 15, where you insert new words, "Including the erec- HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 411 tion of the necessary buildings," in connection with the investigation and planting of native and foreign species, suitable trees for the tree- less regions. Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. What is the need of those buildings? Mr. Price. We consider them necessary for the tree-planting work. Mr. Scott. You mean on the reservations? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. We need permanent buildings upon those national reserves on which the Bureau of Forestry is planting trees. Since the propagation of the tree seedlings and the setting out of the forest plantations will continue for several years, and since after the plantations are completed their care will necessitate the continual pres- ence of agents of the Bureau of Forestry upon the ground, the erec- tion of permanent buildings for the housing of seeds and tools, of wagons and teams, and as quarters for the agents of the Bureau in the work is necessary to its best execution. Mr. Scott. Have you any estimates as to the cost of these buildings ? Mr. Price. It will be probably slight for the coming year; not more, I should say, than $5,000, if so much. The Chairman. I notice your wording is otherwise the same as last year. Mr. Price. Yes, sir. The Chairman. What is this last sentence in italics on page 15: "Of which sum not to exceed fifteen thousand five hundred dollars ma} r be used for rent," etc.; that increases the same item of last year? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; that increases the item of last year. Mr. Henry. That is for rent in Washington ? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; rent in the Atlantic Building, where we are already very much crowded. Mr. Scott. Do j^ou expect to get more room or pay more than you do for what you have ? Mr. Price. To get more room. We have a lease with them that covers the whole building, if we should need it, on the same terms. Mr. Scott. How do you expect to spend this $100,000 increase that you ask for? Mr. Price. That will be spent in continuing the three main lines of work — the work upon the reserves and, in cooperation with the States, the investigation of urgent forest problems, and the giving of assist- ance under cooperation with the private owner. The reserve work will take the larger part of it, and more than has been taken this year. We feel very strongly that the sooner we complete the examinations of proposed forest reserves the better it will be. The land is being taken up very fast, and if we do not get it now we will never get it. Mr. Brooks. So far as that particular branch of the work is con- cerned, it is at a crisis? Mr. Price. That is our feeling. Mr. Henry. How many States have made appropriations to partic- ipate in your work, and how much have they appropriated? Mr. Price. California has appropriated $15,000 and New Hampshire $5,000. The specific purpose of the work in New Hampshire was to report upon the proposed^ White Mountain forest reserve. The field work is completed. Mr. Scott. Most of this amount then will be spent for salaries for additional employees and for field expenses? 412 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Price. Yes, sir. I am glad to say that our office expenses have decreased steadily. The office is costing proportionately less now than it did three years ago, and it is costing less each year. Mr. Scott. Why is that so? Mr. Price. Because our work is more and more in the field. Mr. Scott. Will the difference in the working hours in the depart- ments make any difference in your office force and enable j'ou to get along with fewer men ? Mr. Price. No, sir; I think we are already as far along the line of economy as we can go with safety. We have a comparatively small office force at present, and with the exception of the necessary clerks and stenographers and of the computing clerks, who are working out the results of the data obtained in the field, we have no permanent office force. Mr. Scott. What have you published this year? Mr. Price. Two bulletins have already been published: One A Working Plan for Forest Lands in Hampton and Beaufort Counties, South Carolina; the other, The- Diminished Flow of Rock River in Wisconsin and Illinois, and Its Relation to the Surrounding Forests. It is expected that 19 additional bulletins will be published or sub- mitted for publication before the end of the present fiscal year. (See list attached.) ALREADY PUBLISHED. A Working Plan for Forest Lands in Hampton and Beaufort Counties, South Carolina. The Diminished Flow of Rock River in Wisconsin and Illinois, and Its Relation to the Surrounding Forests. TO BE PUBLISHED OR IN HANDS OF PRINTER BEFORE JUNE 30, 1904. The Planting of White Pine in New England. The Basket Willow. The Forests of Texas. The Red Fir. Adirondack Fires in 1903. The Forests of the Hawaiian Islands. Forest Planting in Western Kansas. Forest Planting in Oklahoma and Adjacent Regions. The Reproduction of White Pine on Farm Lands, in New England. The Maple Sugar Industry. Factors Determining the Destruction of Coniferous Forests in the Northwest. Silvicultural Characteristics of Long-Leaf Pine. The Relation of Forest Cover to Run-off in the San Bernardino Mountains. Studies of the Production of Tannin by Eastern Tan Barks. A Comparative Study of American and European Methods of Turpentine Orcharding. Timber for Telegraph and Telephone Poles. Report on the Condition of Treated Timbers Laid in Texas, February, 1902. Part II of A Primer of Forestry. Part II of The Woodsman's Handbook. Mr. Brooks. Is there a demand for the Woodsman's Handbook? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Lamb. They are asking me for it down my way all the time. Mr. Price. Yes, sir; it has been received in a very gratifying way. Mr. Scott. In the matter of emergency you spoke of, I hardly understand why it happens that unless you get this work done right away you will never be able to do it. Mr. Price. We will be able to do it, true enough, later on, but it seems to me that now is the time to do it, because if it is not done now, HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 413 harm will be done which later effort can never repair. The products of lumbering are increasing instead of decreasing, and in other ways also the demands upon our forests are growing. Mr. Brooks. One reason, I think, why there is more or less of a crisis now is that there is more of a race now between the locators of the forest lands and the forest-reserve people. In a good many places where there should be a forest reserve created it will not be possible in a few years, because any addition to the reserve will have to be impracticable in shape. That is true in the Rocky Mountains, and all over. Mr. Scott. Is it not true also that after the President has issued his proclamation setting aside the forest reserve it is no longer open to settlers ? Mr. Price. That is true; but the point is, that if a blanket proclama- tion were made setting aside all public lands a feeling would be engen- dered which would be very inimical to the best interests of the forest reserves. Mr. Scott. The point that I want to get at is this : I have understood that you have no authority to go onto any territory with a view to conducting j'our examinations unless it had already been set aside by the President's proclamation as a forest reserve. Mr. Price. No, sir; our examinations have been mainly on lands that have not been withdrawn from entry. The withdrawal has been the result of our recommendation, and generally has not preceded it. We are determining what public lands are suitable for forest reserves. Mr. Scott. And you do not know where the best places are? Mr. Price. To know definitely requires an examination on the ground. It is very urgent work, by reason of the rapidity with which the public lands are being taken up. Mr. Brooks. There are now nine proposed additions in Colorado ? Mr. Price. I think so. Mr. Brooks. Now, in three of those' instances the fact that there has been a kind of blanket order, such as you have spoken of, has aroused the most bitter hostility, and I have been deluged with letters and so has the Department. Now, in order to have the administration of a forest reserve successful, the excess in the withdrawals should be cut out as quickly as possible. In one instance, by the accident of the situation, the town of Salida was included in a forest reserve, and they had mass meetings, and it aroused the greatest public indignation. Mr. Scott. To what extent will it enable you, if you are given this, to complete these surveys % Mr. Price. I think it would enable us to go a long way toward that in the coming year. The actual completion of the work is some dis- tance off. We have to be content with reserving smaller and smaller areas, and, instead of several hundred thousand acres, the time is near when we will be glad to get a reserve of several thousand acres. This is work which brings in very large returns upon the investment. It costs only the living and traveling expenses and the salaries of trained men. In return it yields forest reserves for the nation. Mr. Scott. When you were before us last year you spoke of the difficulty of obtaining trained foresters. Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Adams. Has that been overcome to the extent that you can find men enough to put in the field? 414 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Price. Yes, sir; that difficulty is largely disappearing. The Yale Forest School, for example, has a graduating class of 30 men. The University of Michigan will turn out several more. A forest school is beginning at Harvard also. Mr. Scott. How much training do you have to give these men after they graduate from the university schools before you send them into the field ? Mr. Price. In many cases we have had a chance to judge of these men by their employment as student assistants. As a matter of fact, very few men come to us on whom we have not already got a very good line in this way. Mr. Scott. What do you have to pay these men? Mr. Price. The examination for field assistant is an exceedingly rigid one. Those who pass it get $1,000 a year and expenses. Mr. Brooks. What do the student assistants get? Mr. Price. $ 25 a month and expenses. Mr. Bowie. What do the expenses amount to — more or less than their salaries? Mr. Price. That varies a good deal. The expenses of a party in permanent camp average per month about $10 a man, while on the reserve boundary work, where a man often requires a pack train of four or five animals, and a packer, it will run up as high as $10 a day, and averages not less than $5 or $6 a day. Mr. Scott. Your appropriation has been increasing at about the rate of $100,000 a year? ' Mr. Price. I realise that. Mr. Bowie. What was the increase in appropriation last year? Mr. Price, From $291,000 to $350,000. Mr. Scott. 1 think the committee will be interested in knowing, if you can state in regard to that, how many years you will continue to go on increasing and come in with a request for a $100,000 increase? Mr. Price. It certainly will not go on much longer at the present rate. But the fact that impresses us most strongly in the Bureau at present is that we have never had the resources to satisfy the urgent requests for assistance which we receive. The Chairman. Where do they come from? Mr. Price. From the Government, more and more, and from the people. Mr. Bowie. What do you mean by the demands coming from the Government? Mr. Price. I mean the demand for examination of reserve bound- aries, all of which we are making. Mr. Bowie. For reserve boundaries? Mr. Price. Yes sir. Mr. Bowie. On the Government lands out in the West? Mr. Price. The examination of areas proposed as forest reserves, or the examination of existing forest reserves upon which there has arisen the question of change of boundaries, work upon which we employed thirty men this last summer. Mr. Bowie. Is that surveying work? Mr. Price. It is in no sense surveying work. They make, no sur- veys. They go over public lands in order to determine which are suitable for forest reserves. They consider the value of the lands in regulating stream flow, for grazing and for other uses; and they rec- HEARINGS BEFOEE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE 415 commend, as a result of this study, those lands for forest reserves which, so reserved, will be of greater benefit to the people than if unreserved. Mr. Bowie. Where are these forest-reserve lands, mainly? Mr. Peice. They are in the Middle West and on the Pacific coast. Mr. Bowie. Could you give me an estimation of the number and the amount? Mr. Price. It is about 63,000,000 acres at present. Mr. Bowie. Has the Government any forest reserve in the Blue Ridge range of mountains? Mr. Price. No, sir; none. There is the proposed forest reserve in the Southern Appalachians. The Chairman. That is not included? Mr. Price. No, sir. Mr. Henry. You do include the national parks ? Mr. Price. No, sir; only the reserves. Mr. Scott. There is a forestry division in the Interior Department? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. And the proposition is now pending to transfer that to your Bureau? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott. If that were done would the added work which is trans- ferred to your Bureau absorb any considerable portion of that $100,000 ? . Mr. Price. No, sir; that is making no allowance for reserve work; I mean for reserve work that is now handled in the division of forestry in the Land Office. Mr. Scott. What is that division doing? Mr. Price. It is expending, I think, $350,000 a year in the admin- istration of the forest reserves. It is conducting no studies in any wa} r ; it is simply administering the reserves and employing the rangers and supervisors. Mr. Brooks. It is attending to the police protection ? Mr. Price. It is charged with that duty. Mr. Scott. If the reserves were transferred to your Bureau they would have to carry the appropriations along with them? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; they certainly would. Mr. Scott. You think that the work of that Department would dovetail into your work so as to make a smaller expenditure by the combination ? Mr. Price. I do not, because they are are two distinct lines of work. One is a question of the actual administration of the national forest reserves; the other is the study of forest problems which they present and which are presented elsewhere. The expenses of the two had, it seems to me, better be kept entirely separate. Mr. Scott. If they are separate problems and ought to be kept entirely distinct, is it not better that the division should remain where it is? Mr. Price. No, sir; because in both cases the problem is one of practical forestry. Practical forestry, in my judgment, is necessary both to the best administration of the reserves and to the best solution of problems there and elsewhere. But I do not think they should be handled from the same fund. In India, for example, where there is an excellent forest service dealing with forest problems not unlike ours, there is one head — one inspector-general of forests — but the expenses of forest administration are defrayed from a separate fund. 416 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Scott. Do you think that the work you are now doing could be better done if you had the administrative work also ? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; because we would know a,t all times just what the problems were; we could solve them as they came up, and practi- cal forestry would govern the work throughout. Mr. Bowie. You recommend, then, the transfer of the Bureau of Forestry in the Interior Department to your Bureau in the Agricul- tural Department? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. Ana the consolidation of jurisdiction? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. Would that operate to produce a greater economy or not? Mr. Price. That is strongly my opinion, as regards effort. Mr. Scott. You have just answered my question, as I understood you, that it would not involve any economy ? Mr. Price. You mean that it would cost less to administer the reserves than now ? Mr. Scott. Yes. Mr. Price. No, sir; I do not think so. Mr. Adams. You mean economy of effort? Mr. Price. Yes; economy of effort. I do not think that we are spending enough money now on the forest reserves. Their protec- tion is not sufficient to keep fires off. The reserves are not as well administered as a good many private holdings. Mr. Scott. It is practically impossible to prevent fires by any prac- tical administration ? Mr. Price. Oh, no., Mr. Scott. You would have to have an army brigade to do it? Mr. Price. Not in order to prevent fires; an army can not put a fire out, when it is once well started, but it is comparatively easy for one man to stop it, if he sees it soon enough. Mr. Bowie. What is the destruction, annually, from fires? Mr. Price. The destruction in the United States amounted to $10,- 000,000 last year. It has been so estimated. Mr. Bowie. How much is spent by the Government on that? Mr. Price. I do not know what the amount is. That would be a part of the cost of administration, because the rangers are supposed to . put the fires out. It would be hard to differentiate that from the total amount expended in reserve administration. Mr. Bowie. Do they have horses ? Mr. Price. They have horses. They are expected to provide their horses themselves, but in order to make their beats they should have horses. Mr. Bowie. Where does this $300,000 go; how many employees have you? Mr. Price. In the Bureau of Forestry ? Mr. Bowie. Yes. Mr. Price. Three hundred and twenty, during the past field season. Mr. Bowie. Three hundred and twenty? • Mr. Price. Three hundred and twenty last summer. The number is now 258 employees. Mr. Brooks. Have you any specific instance showing what one or two men can do in regard to putting out fires? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 41 Y Mr. Price. Speaking of my own personal knowledge, a fire could be stopped by a very few men, before it had gotten headway. Mr. Brooks. My recollection is that Mr. Gardner, when he was in Colorado — Mr. Gardner of your Bureau Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Brooks (continuing). He met there the most intelligent forester in the State, General Palmer, and he has told me, repeatedly, that when they were building a road on the Rio Grande, at that time he and his associates acquired a tract of 40,000 acres on the divide, and he incorporated a little land company and he put that tract in charge of one man after the forest was cut off of it, and in about thirty years there has come up as good a growth of the long-leafed pine, and it is very nearly ready to cut now; and in that time he has never had a destructive forest fire in that tract, although the Government land on all sides has been burned off. The Chairman. How does he keep the fire off? Mr. Brooks. That particular line is fenced, and he keeps a man on there. Mr. Scott. What I had in mind is this: All through this vast Rocky Mountain region there are innumerable trails, and hunting parties and touring parties are traversing these trails every day in every direction, and the fire which any one of these parties makes to cook its coffee might start a forest fire, and it certainly would require an army of men to patrol that region so as to keep an eye on all those parties. Mr. Brooks. I do not think it would require so many men. A man goes on a reserve and he builds a camp fire, as you say, and the forest ranger follows him up and finds him, and saj's: " When you leave there I want you to put that fire out; " and he says: "All right, I will do it; " but the next morning he takes no precaution whatever, and there is no penalty and there is no way of enforcing that. Mr. Bowie. Why do we not get a statute on that, then ? Mr. Brooks. I think it is very' important, to increase the scope of the power of the rangers and to increase their numbers. Mr. Scott. The rangers should have power to follow that man up; but I have been spending much time in Colorado and I never have seen any forest ranger there, and I have seen several destructive fires. , Mr. Brooks. You have been in the Pikes Peak Reserve? Mr. Scott. No, sir; I have been in the country. Mr. Brooks. There is no reserve there ? Mr. Scott. No, sir. • Mr. Brooks. On the Pikes Peak Reserve there are three rangers to cover all that whole country. Mr. Brooks. Unless there is a rigid system of arrest you can not accomplish anything. Mr. Scott. The system we have is inadequate and must remain inadequate unless the number of rangers is increased. Mr. Brooks. Or their power is increased. Of course this tract of General Palmer's that you speak of is in private ownership, and he can enforce his regulations and he has the civil power back of him. The proper control of the reservations by the forest rangers if they are given an increase of power is very feasible and practicable, and that man has been able to do there what a forest ranger could not do. Mr. Scott. Is that not a very small tract? Mr. Brooks. No, sir; it is 40,000 acres, c a 27 418 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Scott. That is fenced, though, is it not? Mr. Brooks. 1 do not think the fencing cuts any figure. Mr. Price. I think a great deal can be done by raising the standard and increasing the power of the rangers, rather than by increasing the number of rangers. There are places where it would be advisable to put on more rangers only during the fire season. The effective pro- tection of the reserves from fire is practicable without enormous expense; but the details need working out on the ground. Mr. Scott. You spoke in your preliminary remarks about the studies of forest fires. Mr. Price. Yes. The purpose of those studies has been to ascertain the effect of fire on the forest, the causes of fires, and the best methods of prevention. The result of that work will be published this year, and I believe it will be of practical value. That is the purpose of it. For instance, there has been a study made of forest fires in the Adiron- dacks, the only comprehensive study of the terrible fire that raged there last spring. A representative of the Bureau will appear before the State senate committee of New York on next Tuesday in order to testify along the lines of that report, and in order to suggest a forest policy for the State to the committee. Mr. Haugen. What can you tell us about the forests of Alaska? Mr. Price. I wish I had Mr. Langille here, who made that exam- ination. Mr. Haugen. You have a general idea of the results ? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Langille had a very interesting trip and drew the boundaries for the proposed reserves he was sent to examine. He reports that there are dense forests, but the area of merchantable forest is decidedly small. Mr. Scott. Owing to the difficulties of transportation ? Mr. Price. Yes. And because the trees are exceedingly scrubby and short. For instance, the red fir, which is of such immense size in Washington, in Alaska is a comparatively small tree, and a very branchy one. Mr. Henry. It is rather worthless, then ? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; except as a forest cover for the mountains. . Mr. Bowie. I want you to please explain what you mean by investi- gating the causes of fires? Do you not know in advance, without investigation, what causes a fire? Mr. Price. We do not always know, locally. Fires may be caused in a good many ways, and the cause frequently indicates the best method of prevention. Mr. Bowie. What causes have you found out that you did not know of before you began to investigate? Mr. Price. None that we did not know existed, but through knowl- edge of local causes we have found the best ways of preventing the fires. Mr. Lamb. It is a sort of detective work? Mr. Price. No, sir; not exactly that, but a close study on the ground. Mr. Bowie. What do you mean by determining the effect; what is left unburnt? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; what the effect is on the forest. For exam- ple, the fire does not kill the mature long-leaf pine, while it practically destroys a spruce forest in the Adirondacks, so that the question of HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 419 how serious the results are is exceedingly important to determine. The effect of fires silisculturally is also of vital importance very often. For fires do not only influence existing forests; they are an impor- tant factor in determining the composition of the forests of the future. Mr. Haugen. What are you doing in northern Minnesota? Mr. Price. There we are putting into effect the provisions of the so-called Morris bill, so far as they relate to the Bureau of Forestry. The bill provides that the regulations of the forester shall be put into effect in the cutting of 95 per cent of the timber on those lands which will constitute the Minnesota National Forest Reserve. As you will remember, the Morris bill provides that 231,400 acres of the Chippewa Indian lands be set aside as a national forest reserve; that 95 per cent of the timber be sold, and the rest be reserved. Mr. Haugen. Only 5 per cent of it? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; but since it can be reserved as we indicate, although it seems very little, I think it will be enough to leave suffi- cient trees standing after the lumbering is done to serve as a basis for a future crop. There was a great deal of anxiety among some of the lumber men when they saw the regulations. It was said by a great many, "these provisions will cause the price offered for the pine" — the fact that the tops have to be burned and the lumbering done care- fully — "to be very low." But as a matter of fact more money has been offered for that pine than for pine to be lumbered without restrictions. Mr. Haugen. The market price of lumber was higher ? Mr. Price. No, sir; there was only three weeks between the two sales. Mr. Haugen. What is the condition in northern Michigan? Mr. Price. The condition is generally bad. Lumbered lands are practically a waste in many cases. Mr. Brooks. And are we doing anything to reforest these areas ? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; we are in communication with private owners in establishing forest plantations in this State and in the Middle West. Mr. Haugen. With what success ? Mr. Price. With excellent success. Mr. Haugen. What is your opinion now as to the supply of lumber in this region, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin? Mr. Price. I think it is nearly gone. Mr. Haugen. Very nearly gone? Mr. Price. As a factor in the lumber supply. Mr. Gannett in his report on lumbering, which came out in the census, showed the grad- ual change in the geographical distribution of lumbering, and how it has moved southward and westward as the result of waning supplies in the North. Mr. Adams. You mean the pine lumber supply ? Mr. Price. No, sir; the entire lumber supply. He gave for the past ten years the percentage of the total lumber supply yielded from each of "the great forest regions, and showed that it is increasing steadily in the Pacific and Southern States. Mr. Haugen. What suggestion have you to make as to the supply of lumber in the Northwest, in those States, Minnesota, and Dakota, and so on ? Mr. Price. If they protect the cut-over lands from fire,. they will 420 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. get the forest back, but they will get it back very slowly, because vast areas have already been burned over repeatedly for many years. Mr. Bowie. The growth is very slow there? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; not so rapid as in more favorable localities. Mr. Haugen. How long will it take a tree to grow large enough to cut it into lumber ? Mr. Price. Second growth large enough for pulp, say thirty to forty years; for lumber nearly twice as long. Mr. Haugen. How large a tree will you get in thirty years? Mr. Price. Six to eight inches at the most. That would be rapid growth. Mr. Haugen. The tree would not be large enough for lumber? Mr. Price. No, sir; unless smaller sizes were used than are used now. Mr. Haugen. It would take at least fifty years for lumber? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; at least fifty years. Mr. Bowie. Would it pay to grow it? Mr. Price. In many cases. It would not generally pay the lum- berman unless there were the basis for a second crop on the ground. Practical forestry for the lumberman does not require him to plant trees in order that his grandchildren may get the benefit of them. As a matter of fact, if in cutting off the first crop he would protect the trees which are slightly below the size of those he cuts, for instance, if he is cutting 10-inch trees, if he would leave the 7, 8, and 9 inch trees and take care not to injure them, it would generally not be long before he would have a second crop. But if he cuts carelessly he dam- ages these small trees so greatly that their future value is practically destroyed. If land is lumbered carefully and protected from fire, it will yield in most cases a second crop of sufficient value to return a good interest on the value of the land, sometimes as high as 6 per cent. Mr. Haugen. Under present conditions, how long will it take to exhaust the timber? Mr. Price. Under the present conditions, how long would it take to exhaust the timber in this region that you have been speaking of? Mr. Haugen. Yes. Mr. Price. That is a question which it is exceedingly difficult to answer, because of the character of the sources of our information. All that we have to go on are estimates of the crudest sort. Mr. Haugen. Yes, I understand; but I wanted information on the subject. Mr. Adams. It is estimated that the timber of Wisconsin will be exhausted in twenty«-five years, anyway, and possibly sooner. Mr. Price. I think that is a safe estimate. Mr. Haugen. Would not that apply to Minnesota and Michigan also? It is already exhausted in Michigan. Mr. Price. Practically so, except the little remaining in the far north. Mr. Haugen. What suggestions have you for supplying the North- west with lumber in the future ? Mr. Price. It will inevitably have to tide over its bad time by get- ting timber elsewhere. No method known will enable them to get a supply in time from its own lands. Mr. Bowie. To keep up with the home consumption? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 421 Mr. Lamb. They will get it from the South. Mr. Price. Yes, sir; from the South and the Pacific coast. Mr. Bowie. Where is the bulk of the timber supply in the country now? Mr. Price. • On the Pacific coast, in Oregon and Washington and California. Mr. Haugen. Is its quality that of the hard pine? Mr. Price. I think the Ted fir is intrinsically as good a timber, but it is not adapted to the same local uses. Mr. Haugen. Red fir? Is that the Oregon pine? Mr. Price. Oregon pine it is called. Mr. Haugen. There is considerable pine shipped to our country, but I am told that it is less resistant than the soft pine. Mr. Price. I think it will not be as good a quality as the native white pine for home use. Mr. Haugen. And it is very expensive. Mr. Price. Very expensive on account of the long transport. Mr. Adams. It is heavier and has more sap. ' Mr. Price. It has more sap; yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. Were you speaking of the western pine ? Mr. Price. I was speaking of the Oregon pine. Mr. Bowie. What about the supply of long-leaf pine in the South? Mr. Price. The estimate is that the long-leaf pine will be exhausted in ten or fifteen years. Mr. Bowie. Have they made any practical experiments in forestry among the yellow- pine owners in the South ? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Bowie. What States have most of the yellow pine supply, and where are these experiments going on ? Mr. Price. The most of the yellow-pine supply at present and the centers of lumbering operations are in Georgia and Florida and south- eastern Texas. We are in cooperation with private owners in Arkan- sas, Texas, Alabama, and South Carolina, and we have work ahead in several other Southern States. Mr. Bowie. Where are you in Alabama? Mr. Price. In northern Alabama. Mr. Lamb. You call Virginia nearly exhausted? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; practically exhausted. Mr. Lamb. It grows up there every fifteen years, and they saw it again ? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; it comes up fast for firewood, but the lumber is gone. Mr. Lamb. It does. There is land there now that I cut the big tim- ber off of twenty years ago, on which there is already another forest. Mr. Bowie. How long does it take the long leaf pine to reproduce itself? Mr. Price. It takes a long time; at least seventy to eight}' years to reach timber size. Mr. Haugen. What can you tell us about fence posts, and such things ? Mr. Price. What species do j t ou mean? Are you not growing catalpa for that purpose ? Mr. Haugen. It grows small and freezes out the first two or three years. 422 • HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Price. How about black locust? Mr. Haugen. I do not know much about that. What would you recommend in our locality ? Mr. Price. I would rather leave that recommendation to Mr. Hall, who has charge of our tree planting. I will ask him to write you along those lines just what he would recommend. Mr. Haugen. I wish you would. Does red cedar make a good fence post? , Mr. Price. An admirable post. It is of very slow growth. It makes a post practically as good as locust. Mr. Haugen. Practically as good as oak? Mr. Price. As locust, practically as long lived. Mr. Haugen. How long lived is the red cedar 1 Mr. Price. I would say twenty or twenty -five years in the ground. Mr. Haugen. A good bur oak will last that long? Mr. Price. Yes, sir. Mr. Haugen. There is not much difference then between that and a good bur oak post? Mr. Price. No, sir. Mr. Bowie. On that question that I was asking you, earlier in your statement, about the ties for railroad purposes, say on the line of the Southern Railway from Virginia to Mississippi, through the States of North and South Carolina and Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi and Tennessee, in the Southern States, what kind of ties do they use there and what is the life of those ties ? Mr. Price. That could be answered better by the man who is inves- tigating along the very lines of your inquiry, but as I know it, most of the timber they use is oak and pine. Mr. Bowie. What is the life of those ties? Mr. Price. Of the oak, five or six years, and the pine not so long. Mr. Bowie. Suppose they chemically treated it with this solution that you are speaking of? Mr. Price. Yes. Mr. Bowie. What addition would that make to its life? Mr. Price. It would double it. Mr. Bowie. It would double the life of an oak tie? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; and it might extend its life even longer. Mr. Bowie. What about the life of the pine tie? Mr. Price. It would have quite the same effect. Mr. Bowie. What is the life of a pine tie as compared with the life of an oak tie ? Mr. Price. It is shorter; two or three years shorter. Mr. Bowie. What ties had you reference to when you said that they rotted in ahout a year ? Mr. Price. Those were loblolly pine ties in southeastern Texas, where the conditions are very unfavorable for timber. Mr. Bowie. These ties that you were just talking about live longer? Mr. Price. Yes, sir; because the climate and the soil is better for timber in the ground. Mr. Bowie. Have you ever discussed that tie-preserving solution with the Louisville and Nashville Railroad people ? Mr. Price. I do not know whether it has been taken up by them or not. I will find out whether they have considered it. I hope so. Mr. Bowie. Have you any bulletins on that subject? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 423 Mr. Price. Yes, sir; we have. Mr. Bowie. On preserving ties? Mr. Price. We have a couple of very good bulletins. Mr. Bowie. I wish you would send me one or two. Mr. Pbice. I will be delighted to do so at once. The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? Mr. Bowie. I have finished. He has told me what I wanted to know. Thereupon, at 3.02 o'clock p. m., the committee adjourned. Committee on Agriculture, January 16, 1904 — # o'clock p. m. Hon. James W. Wadsworth, chairman. STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES WILSON, SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE. The Chairman. As we announced yesterday, the Secretary of Agri- culture is before us for the purpose of giving us a r&ume" of the work of his Department, and any other information he sees fit to give. Mr. Secretary, we have had a very interesting time hearing your subordi- nates. I think the committee will join me in saying that you have a bright set of men over in the Department. Now, Mr. Secretary, please proceed, and we will ask you questions as you go along. Secretary Wilson. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I take it for granted that the hearings that you have had have brought out the details of the work of the Department along the several lines in which it is being prosecuted, so I will speak briefly about the gen- eral policies of the Department under your charge and direction here, such matters as the several bureau chiefs and scientists might not have to consider in their more limited spheres. The remark that the chairman has just made furnishes a suggestion with regard to the Department. We have a fine lot of scientists. The world has not, I think, as many scientists along the several lines; no one country begins to have such an organization as we have. When I came down here first, with President McKinley, in 1897, I had in my mind the wisdom of helping the experimental stations to strengthen themselves with regard to their scientists — I knew they were weak — and to help them with regard to their work in the several lines in which they ought to engage. And, looking the Department over, I discovered that the first thing necessary was well-equipped scientists, educated men, who could take hold of such work as the people in the various localities of the United States and various States and Territories needed to have done. To that end we have been encouraging young men of character and education, such as we could get at agricultural colleges preferably, to come to the Department and specialize. I brought it to the attention of the committee in those days, and got a word or two put in the law giving me authority to do it. It has turned out well. We have brought into the Department altogether 496 young men, up to the time I wrote my last report, who have been studying any special line of work the people of our country want done. I am more 424 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. impressed than ever with the value of that work when I consider what other countries say to us. Last week the British ambassador came and asked me if I could give him a man to send to Bermuda. They are destroying their soil over there in the growing of onions, lily bulbs, etc. I had to tell him we had such men, but while we had been trying to educate up to our own necessities, we had not enough to really do our own work in the Department and throughout the several States in the country. The minister from Cuba came and preferred the same request, and I had to give him the same answer. They want a subtropical botanist. We have such a man, but we need him in connection with our own work. The Secretary of War for nearly a year has wanted to find a first-class man trained particularly to go out to the Philippines and take charge of the work there under the Commission; but I have not been able to find a man that I wanted to recommend, and that can be spared, in the United States. The people in South Africa, in North Africa, and in Egypt, and throughout the world, you might say, are wanting men that we have been training. And some young fellows do go. Seven years ago, when this matter came under my attention, there were very serious losses in the Department of its strongest men. They were not getting as much pay as men of like intelligence were getting in other parts of the Government and in the States and other coun- tries, and so we lost heavily of that class of men. Since that time there has been a little increase in their salaries. We paid in those days some $1,600 and $1,800 for our very best pathologists. That was all we were paying, and it was an easy matter for other people to take them away from us. We have lifted that up several hundred dollars and we are holding our men better now. The Department was never as strong to do work as it is now. It does not make much difference what emergency comes to the Department, we are ready now to attack it at once. We are organized. The work done in the New England States in regard to the foot-and-mouth dis- ease is an illustration; the work we must begin to do, and do at once, in South Dakota and Montana with regard to cattle scab, we are organized and ready to do and will do. It will take vigorous work for some time to clear out those States and prevent the diseases from spreading over the country. As to this boll-weevil emergency that has come upon us, we are ready; we have the men. We have the men to put at the head of all the several movements along those lines to help the southern people to meet this emergency down there. We are equipped to do that kind of work, and I think I can congratulate the committee on that one result. We are paying them a little' more money. We are not losing them as we did. They are encouraged to go on with their several lines of investigation. In continuing for a moment with regard to our educational work, I want to call your attention to what we are doing in several States. It has been the theory of the Committee on Agriculture of the House that we should cooperate with the States, and we are doing a good deal of that; in fact, we are doing a great deal of it. We are not only doing that, but we are helping institutions of edu- cation throughout the country. Seven years ago there was not a lec- ture delivered anywhere in the United States on meteorology. We have furnished the services of 14 gentlemen to lecture in universities HEARINGS BEFOBE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 425 and colleges in the States along those lines, for the purpose of having, eventually, scholars in the land along those lines. There is only one thoroughly organized meteorological bureau in the world, and that is ours. We have jurisdiction over sufficient territory. We are telling the steamboats that start for Great Britain and the continent of Europe every morning what kind of weather they will likely have for the first three days of the voyage; and we are telling the ships that start from Europe to come here what they are likely to meet coming over; and no other country presumes anything of the kind. We are reaching out on the Pacific — that great ocean is to be an American lake sometime; it is to be our lake; we are going to dominate it. We have just succeeded in establishing wireless telegraphy between San Francisco and the Farallone Islands successfully. As the com- mittee knows, we have been pushing this along our own lines of investigation; taking out patents ourselves, and keeping the matter independent of the Marconi or any other system. It has certain limi- tations up to date, but we know as much as other people know about it. I gave instructions to Mr. Moore lately to bring those 14 gentle- men — they are observers in certain localities who incidentally lecture to these colleges and universities (Yale was -the last institution that applied for one) — into a summer school in Washington and strengthen their lectures, so that when they go out to entertain classes they can do it with effect, to the end that some of those students in meteorology will find their way in here and enable us to do better work some day. Along the line of soil physics, we are helping to establish that study in two institutions to begin with; one is in the State of New York, at the Cornell institution, and the other is in Kentucky, at Lexington. I have never had any mercy on institutions that take money from the Federal Government and do not use it for the purpose for which Con- gress appropriated it, and I have laid the lash unsparingly on any Cornell man I have ever met, no matter where or when. They were better endowed than any institution in the land and should be doing the best work of any institution in the land, yet never did anything. They have disgusted the State of New York to such an extent that, in despair, it had to go and establish an experimental station under its own auspices at Geneva. But they heard from the people down here, and they now propose to establish a college of agriculture. We sent a man down to start them in soil physics. I inquired how he was getting along, and found that he got 75 students within a few days, and nad to shut the door. That is all any one man can teach, and I think it is rather more. Now, we will let that man get those people well started along, and then will bring him back, or they will have to pay his salary. We are doing the same thing in Kentucky. They see the point of teaching some- thing about the soil on which we walk and from which the producer draws the food that sustains the world. We are doing work along these lines in a good many places. I think the Bureau of Plant Industry has cooperation with over forty State institutions. The result of all this will be that they will get their heads turned in the right direction; they will see the necessity of doing this kind of work; they will train up men along those lines. The day will come, I hope, when the Department of Agriculture will not be under the necessity of teaching as much as it teaches now. Wo. are really a post-graduate institution for the agricultural colleges and 426 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OK AGRICULTURE. experimental stations and giving opportunity to men who could not complete their studies in any other direction; and, speaking on gen- eral principles (and I should withhold nothing from this committee), there is a little feeling that the Department is getting to have a good deal to say in the several States and Territories, and that it would probably be a little more agreeable to them if we would just turn the money over to them and not bother them with our opinions about things. I think that that idea is growing a little here and there. There was a little of it seen last winter at the meeting of the agricultural experi- ment stations and colleges. Some one said there was no difficulty at all; but some of our scientists*, in going to some of the States, had not taken their hats off or made due deference to the people of the agri- cultural colleges and experimental stations. Some of our young peo- ple may be often a little bit bumptious. I think I detect the fact that they recognize the valuable work that is being done by this Depart- ment here. The cooperation is quite cordial, however, and we are having cooperation in as many lines as possible, to the end, of course, that there will be better work done in all those institutions, by their own people, than they are doing now. We are trying to be helpful to all of them, and in a great many directions. We are trying to encourage them to start in the teaching of things that must be taught to a young farmer if he is to become a strong man, with the view, of course, of withdrawing that kind of help as soon as we get them to take vigorous hold of the work. That is the object of our teaching cooperation in these several States that is going on at the present time. With regard to our outside work, we have not done much of that. There is authorit}' in the law to send men abroad and get information, etc., but we do not do very much of that. We do keep one man in London all the time in charge of our live stock, to look after them and see to it that they get fair play, and see to it that charges are not made of disease when disease does not exist, and so forth; and we are trying to reach out along this line and get information from the several nations of Europe with regard to their productions that come into competition in the markets of the world with our productions. That line of work, however, we will gradually turn over to the new Department of Commerce and Labor; that belongs to them. You fentlemen will find in your document room, I think — at least, if you o not find them there, you will find them in our document room — some reports from Argentina. There is an interesting question before us now with regard to the supply of meat to the world's market. The Argentine people are our principal competitors, and I thought it wise to get facts regarding the development of their live-stock industries and their capacity to ship grass cattle across the Atlantic in either live or in chilled condition. And so we have something along that line. And still, speaking with regard to getting information from abroad, we expect to learn from the several countries, and from all of them as soon as possible, what their staple crops are. We receive that monthly from some of them now. Mr. Hyde went over to organize that work, and, unfortunately, the poor man took sick and has not returned yet. But he is succeeding along several of those lines. Now, take up the bureaus one after another Mr. Graff. Right there, Mr. Secretary, I wanted to allude to the HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 427 cooperation of the experiment stations with the Department of Agriculture here. The sense of the committee last year was that since thesewere Federal funds that went to the experiment stations, they were in effect appropriations for the national work done by the Department of Agriculture; and they were very insistent that these appropriations to the different experiment stations should be under the supervision of the Department of Agriculture and under the supervision, therefore, of the Secretary of Agriculture. Secretary Wilson. We are gradually reaching out our authority further and further every year along those lines. Mi . Graff. It seems to me they ought to be sensible enough to see that that is the theory upon which they get this money. Secretary "W ilson. The primal theory under which they get this money, in their mind, is that it is given to the States. Mr. Graff. That is not the way the committee regard it. Secretary Wilson. I am aware what the mind of the committee is, and have been gradually extending our authority along those lines. That is, we are getting cooperation more and more from those people, and they are listening more and more to our suggestions and the arrangement of the disposition of the moneys that, they get to handle. Mi. Graff. The minute it would become generally understood that these State experiment stations consider themselves independent of the Department of Agriculture, that minute there would arise a move to discontinue these appropriations, on the theory that we have no par- ticular right to contribute money to State institutions. Secretary Wilson. That is precisely the theory they have — that the money has been given to them. Mr. Graff. If they do not look out they will succeed in depriving themselves of this aid. The Chairman. Most of the committee, I think, are familiar with section 3, chapter 314, of the laws of 1887, under which this money was given to the experiment stations, and to show the intent and pur- pose of Congress in giving this aid to the experiment stations, let me read the language: That in order to secure, as far as practicable, uniformity of methods and results in the work of said stations, it shall be the duty of the United States Commissioner of Agriculture to furnish forms, as far as practicable, for the tabulation of results of investigation of experiments. Now mark this language: to indicate, from time to time, such lines of inquiry as to him shall seem important; and, in general, to furnish such advice and assistance as will best promote the pur- poses of this act. There could not be anything plainer. The Secretary has absolute power to indicate from time to time such lines of inquiry as to him shall seem most important. Mr. Graff. I think it is a good thing that this should go into the record, so that these stations may know. Mr. Henry. Has not Doctor True been devoting his efforts in that direction? Secretary Wilson. We are working along that direction gradually. They had the idea that the money went to them as States? The Chairman. And they could do as they pleased with it? Secretary Wilson. That they could take up such experimentation as they pleased. That has been their idea. 428 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Burleson. As a matter of fact there should be the most cordial cooperation between the Department of Agriculture and the experi- ment station. Mr. Graff. But the Agricultural Department ought to dominate. Mr. Burleson. Because it would result often in great saving. If they had a corps of scientists who are experts along certain lines and an investigation was ordered from here along that line it would be much more economical to employ their assistants than to employ * new men. Secretary Wilson. Yes; we have not just exactly gone the length of telling them what to do. The Chairman. I think the greatest result that will come from cooperation, Mr. Secretary, will be the avoidance of duplication. Secretary Wilson. That is one of the potent reasons why there should be an understanding as to what a station is going to do, so that no one station would duplicate the work of another that is being done along identically the same lines. But we think we are making progress along that line, and we think the stations are doing better and better work gradually. I wish the colleges were doing as well. The colleges' we have little to do with; they are doing better than they have been, but the disposi- tion to educate lawyers and doctors and dentists and preachers and typewriters still prevails in the land a little more than it should. That money goes from Washington to these institutions to educate the farmer and mechanic — that is the intention of it — and because, as a general thing, there is no fee charged, people' who want a cheap edu- cation are apt to sneak in and then start off in some other direction when they get through. But they take up the room and. absorb the funds. I remember being at Berkeley, Cal., when President McKinley was there last — I think that was three years ago now — and I saw a class of 150 graduate; but Berkeley gets 175,000 a year from Washington. There was not a farmer in the lot, not one. I made a good deal ado about it. I talked freely to the newspaper men; and I think they are beginning to do a little better out there. They did what you people in New York did. They appropriated $60,000 to begin a farm down at Santa Barbara — they lost hope of anything being done at Berkeley— and they are turning their attention toward something of this kind now, and progress is being made along those lines. With regard to cooperation, mere is quite an important movement in the mountain States. Those people would like to know, through experimentation in growing forage crops and in feeding, how to finish their stock for the market; and I would like very much to engage in a feeding experi- ment of that kind; would like to encourage them; would like to send a scientist there to discuss methods with them, and pay a little money to those that keep the records, so that we could get them for publica- tion, and all that. It is a matter in which the whole mountain country is interested. They can grow things out there; and now, since we have taken hold, 1 have gotten grasses and grain and legumes for them from all parts of the world; and we are studying their condition with regard to production. This question becomes more and more pressing with them, and I think they are going to send a committee to see me and to see you gentlemen. I shall ask you to give them a hearing if they HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 429 come. It is a most important thing. Take, for example, the small horse of the mountain States out there. He is first class, with splendid legs and great courage, but is not big enough for a cavalry horse, and it they have forage to carry on the growth of the colts the first and second winter and make them three or four hundredweight heavier, they might supply the armies of Europe with their mounts. The mountain States have not studied those questions sufficiently. We are getting crops for them that they never grew before; we are hunting the world all over to find them such things; and 1 can help them along those lines if you give us gen- erous amounts in the Bureau of Animal Industry. The Chairman. Would not that come under the Bureau of Plant Industry. Secretary Wilson. The Bureau of Plant Industry is at work, you know, establishing the plants. The question now is the feeding in actual experimentations. The Chairman. Those experiments ought to be made through the experiment stations. Secretary Wilson. Surely; but they would like to have us cooper- ate with them. The Chairman. It is the same cooperation you give the others ? Secretary Wilson. Yes; and I can help them through Doctor Sal- mon's bureau. We can do that. There is another matter I want to call your attention to — I am speak- ing mostly to-day of the policy of the Department — if you notice, the American people have never produced a breed of animals, except they have transformed a running horse into a trotting horse; and they have produced a large hog. There may be a breed of chickens that we have established somewhere in the United States, but, if you think a moment, we import the heavy horse and the light horse for Florida, for Vir- ginia, for Iowa, and Minnesota, and we keep them pure. We import the heavy shorthorn and the little Jersey for the North and the South and for the East and the West, and take good care to keep them pure. We import sheep from the fine- wool Spanish Merino to the great big Leicester and keep them pure; and keep them in the North and keep them in the South. Those animals are the product of intelligent breeding from the localities from which they were pro- duced. The shorthorn comes from the heavy soils and pastures of Great Britain; the Holstein comes from the soft grasses of Holland; the Jersey comes from the dry grasses and the scant grasses of the Channel Islands. So it is all along the line. Breeders have produced both animals that we keep pure. They have produced them for the surroundings of the localities in which they were produced. We do not do anything of the kind. Now, the high-selling horse in the British market, they say, is the Irish hunter. An Englishman wants to follow the hounds and he will pay almost any price; he will pay £500 for a first-class hunter that will take the hedges and ditches as he comes to them. Where do they get them ? When Professor Curtis, of the Iowa Agricultural College, was going to Europe for some purpose, I said to nim, "I want you to find out for me while you are there how they breed the hunting horse over, or where they get him if they don't breed him; and where they get the big horse." When he came back he informed me along these lines; a man goes to Chicago and he sees 10,000 horses pass through the market; he picks 430 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. out 30 or 40, buys them, and takes them over to Ireland. They are trained there and sold to the English gentlemen as Irish hunters. They are American horses, every one of them. Lipton, this man of whom you have heard so much, had a factory in Chicago, in which he worked up all the light, thin hogs, and sold them to the British for Irish bacon. We have lost the name both in regard to the hog and the horse. Now, our people don't know; I have not met a man in my lifetime who could tell me how to produce that hunting horse, or how to most economically produce the heavy, high-stepping carriage horse; and, going beyond that, how to produce the animal that is wanted for this locality or that — way down South, or way North, or way West, or way East. Those pedigreed animals we import from foreign countries, from the produce of their pastures. Our pastures vary just as they vary abroad, but we have not set about the systematic breeding of domes- tic animals for use on our farms in the several localities of the United States. And I think it would be wise for the Department of Agri- culture to cooperate with a little at three or four experiment stations along those lines; set out and see if we can not produce the horse the European hunters want. We can produce a horse cheaper here than thejr can anywhere else in the world, because we have the cheapest grain and the cheapest grass and the most intelligence in our people. Our people are about all horsemen. But it has not occurred to any of our people who have plenty of means to experiment along those lines so that they can tell us how to breed those norses. I confess I have some idea of how to produce the several breeds, but I do not know enough about it so as to authorita- tively speak to the American people and tell them how they should produce a hunter. We have got blood down in the South, and splen- did horsemen Mr. Lamb. Do you not find the finest hunting horse almost in the world in Virginia now ? Secretary Wilson. You find the foundation for them, without ques- tion. But you must have the hunting horse that will take the ditch with ease. He must have good blood, but when he carries that 16- stone Englishman on his back he must have more strength and size than a thoroughbred horse has got, and the question is where to bring in and how much to bring in, with the colt blood, to get size and strength. Mr. Lamb. I would like to show you some of them down there. Secretary Wilson. Probably we can find a few; a man can go South and buy one; if he wanted a thousand I do not know where he would find them. Mr. Lamb. The trouble is there; they raise them for their own use. Secretary Wilson. We get some of them in the North. I would like to be empowered by the committee by sufficient appropriation to the Bureau of Animal Industry to begin a series of experimentations along that line, both with regard to horses, cattle, and sheep; I think we have solved the hog question pretty well. The Chairman. You are doing some of that work at the Iowa station ? Secretary Wilson. A little of it, along the sheep lines; and we will have opinions in regard to the most profitable sheep. The Chairman. You are doing some of it along cattle lines, too? HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 431 Secretary Wilson. The college is doing that itself. We are not helping them any in the cattle line. The Chairman. They are doing it; I do not know whether you are helping them or not. Secretary Wilson. Yes; the Chicago live-stock people are helping them do something along cattle lines; that is true. But the horse has not been touched. Mr. Burleson. As a matter of fact, the horses used in the East and North for polo ponies are bred in Texas. Secretary Wilson. That is the kind of horse that is wanted, and he is a high-selling horse. The Chairman. He is too small for anything except polo; he is too small for a cavalry horse. Secretary Wilson. But, mind you, the proper wintering of the colt the first and second winters would put the weight on him. He has got the feet and legs and courage now; he has all those. Now, then, we come to plant industry. I suppose you have had detailed information with regard to our sugar work. I went out and spent a week with the Michigan people, and talked in their barns and sheds with them and found out where the sticking place is. Some years ago we grew 29,000 tons of sugar. This year we will have some- thing like 260,000 tons of beet sugar. Michigan, for example, is growing all the sugar she needs for herself, lhat has been accom- plished there. I find a difficulty exists with regard to raising enough of tons to the acre. I went out there to study facts and ascertained exactly where the sticking place was. We can beat the Europeans; we can beat the cane- sugar people because the by-product of sugar beet feeds domestic animals. But they do not know how to raise tonnage. Of course we will meet that in our annual report; will have a chapter covering that particular thing. Last week we went particularly into the consump- tion of pulp, and now they are drying the, pulp, making a merchant- able commodity and sending it all over the world. The. Chairman. Is that worth being done under a special appropria- tion for sugar or under the Bureau- of Plant Industry? Secretary Wilson. For investigation with regard to what the sugar factories are doing for the last seven vears we nave had an appropri- ation of $5,000. The Chairman. This work is being done under that? Secretary Wilson. Yes, under that particular one. Singularly enough, when you have built up a bureau to do a certain thing, you come to the place where that line of work done by that bureau does not meet the requirements; and I will give you an illustration right now. We went into the Connecticut valley with some Sumatra tobacco seed and showed the people there how to grow that wrapper tobaccOi We found the proper soil there. There has not been any difficulty in getting the thing set well on its feet, but a peculiar condition of affairs now presents itself. The seed comes from Sumatra, but the people in Sumatra who grow that seed do not know anything about the plant; and we find we have three or four or five kinds of tobacco. The Bureau of Soils has done its work there; we must send men up there from the Bureau of Plant Industry to make a selection of plants that produce the highest selling tobacco, and preserve the seed from 432 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. then, and exclude the others. Now, an interesting fact comes to my attention with regard to our work in the Southern States. . Mr. Henry. Right there; the Connecticut experimental station, under Doctor Jenkins's supervision, has been conducting experiments during the last year right along in that direction and he has made some Secretary Wilson. We kept a man under Galloway's supervision there last summer, and we will keep him there next summer, and we will probably settle it. I sent two scientists to Cuba. I said to them, ' ' Go and find out where they grow that fine aromatic tobacco; study the conditions under which they do it; ascertain the intelligence they bring to bear on that matter; bring back some of the soil with you, and find out what per cent of the leaf they get is first-rate aromatic leaf." They did. We analyzed the soil, and the problem was to find that soil somewhere under the American flag. They found it in South Caro- lina, Alabama, and Texas. We have been growing that fine tobacco, and we find now, say, 30 per cent of that fine aromatic leaf growing there from seed brought from Cuba. Probably there will be 40 or 50 per cent of it when the ripening process is completed that is not the kind of tobacco we want; and, harking back to Cuba, we find they do not get more than 40 or 50 per cent of aromatic tobacco in the Veult Abajo District, which is famous throughout the world. The question comes as to what is the matter with the Cuban. He don't know anything about the plant. He plants a tobacco plant; it grows up and he cuts it off and makes tobacco out of that. It grows up again; he cuts it off again and makes tobacco out of it. That is the second crop. It grows up again, and he saves the weakly suckers for seed, and it is injuring his plant. They have no plant physiologists. The Cuban minister and Cuban people know that. Minister Queseda has been to see me, to get a man to go down and superintend that kind of work for them. I think we are far advanced in this, but not quite far enough to do that yet. Now then, Mr. Chairman, the soil men have done their part in pro- ducing that fine aromatic filler tobacco that makes the Havana cigar. I must turn to Mr. Gallowa3 r now, and bring in that Bureau, and have them take hold of these tobaccos that are growing now in these three southern states, tag the plants and save the seed from them, and get rid of that 50 per cent of tobacco, which is really good tobacco, but not the finest; and eventually we will have a uniform crop, not only of Sumatra, but also of the fine Cuban leaf. This is an illustration of the unity of the Department of Agriculture. We have not anything there that we do not need. The time comes when one bureau has to help another, and that is where a Secretary is required to be not only as narmless as a dove, but as wise as a serpent, sometimes, in order to get that beautiful, fraternal harmony that might not voluntarily come if he did not happen to be around sometimes. • We have a very harmonious Department, how- ever, and things are going along, but it comes to the time when one bureau chief who has 200 men under him finds there is . work to do that he can not do — somebody else must take hold and do it. Mr. Scott. Mr. Secretary, reverting a moment to the beet-sugar question, I would like to inquire whether the industry has advanced HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 433 during the past year in the same ratio in which it was growing for- merly, or whether there has been the check that was anticipated? Secretary Wilson. There was a little check, but it increased prob- ably this last year 40,000 tons. It has a healthy growth now. You can see the value of the Department work there. There is a sti-ip of country along the Gulf coast 50 miles wide and 700 miles long. Seven years ago we produced 25 per cent of our rice, now we are producing the equivalent of all the rice we consume. We do import some varieties, because the Chinaman is a queer proposi- tion; he will not eat any rice but the kind that grows in the neighbor- hood of where he was born. The California Chinaman, heretofore, would not eat American rice, and imported it; but we found that out, and they will eat American rice unbeknown to themselves some of these days. That is becoming an enormous industry down there. We found a queer condition of affairs in New Orleans. One set of men were swearing at the Cuban bill for its possible injury to the Cuban crop, and another set were going to send a committee to Wash- ington to insist on its passage in order to give them a market for their rice. So we have a big income now. We are saving a heap of money to the United States along rice lines. The rice work is substantially finished. If they want help there, as they will by and by when an insect will get there, we will have to send an entomologist or, if a plant disease, we will have to send a plant pathologist. But the work is finished there and out of the way. Searching the world for crops necessary and desirable for the several localities in the United States has resulted in finding many things that grow in localities where nothing grew before. There were 10,000 bushels of macaroni wheat grown this year. I was out in that Utah Valley this summer. I learned there they had planted this Durham wheat — hard wheat. It grows in northern Algeria and in northern Russia on the Volga in 10 inches of rainfall, and it was grown in the Utah Valley on stretches that could not be irrigated, and they got as high as 9 bushels to the acre. The legislature of Utah appropriated as high as $30,000 to take not only that wheat but other things we are introducing there and get them started all over the State of Utah for the benefit of the people. They put $30,000 in it at once. Mr. Henry. Has there been any difficulty in finding a marketo for that macaroni wheat? Secretary Wilson. There was a difficulty with the millers. Twenty- five or thirty years ago, when we got the first hard wheats from Russia into the Northwest, the millers objected because the mills would not grind them without remodeling. However, they finally remodeled the mills. Now those wheats are the most popular wheats and thej' do not want to get anything else. Mr. Henry. Are the macaroni wheats bringing the price Secretary Wilson. They are intrinsically worth the price; and if for the time they do not happen in the various localities to get what it is worth it will be only a short time until they will get it, because there is more muscle-forming material in the macaroni wheat than in the bread wheats, and the bread they get is more sweet and nutritious. Next year it will go on the desert from western Texas to Arizona and North Dakota, and it will continue its way westward. There is scarcely any part of the desert but that has 10 inches of rainfall. c a 28 434 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Henry. Have we been able to export that wheat to Italy* Secretary Wilson. When we began to hunt a maiket for it I went to Secretary Hay and had him telegraph to every American repre- sentative abroad to find markets for it. They are finding markets. We are exporting it. We do not hesitate a moment when anything of that kind can be done to help the American farmer. I assure you of that. Mr. Graff. What is the average crop of it? Secretary Wilson. The average crop of wheat that is grown in the United States, of the bread variety, runs from 13 to 15 bushels. The average crop of this would be twice that. Mr. Haugen. Does it make as good flour? Secretary Wilson. Better flour. There is more muscle-forming material in it — more protein. The development of it has been fast; a vear ago there were 2,000,000 bushels of it; this year there will prob- ably be 10,000,000 bushels; next year there will probably be 25,000,000 bushels; two years more there will probably be 100,000,000 bushels of it grown — where nothing grew before. Mr. Henry. And where the ordinary variety of wheat could not be grown ? Secretary Wilson. Where nothing else would grow. Those people who live in northern Russia, on the Volga, and have been there for hundreds of years, and those people who have lived in northern Algeria for centuries, have found out what that wheat would do, and we are stepping in and reaping the result of their investigation; that is all. And not only with wheat, but with oats. Mr. Brooks. Macaroni wheat is pretty generally known through that semiarid region, is it not % Secretary Wilson. Yes, they know all about it. Mr. Graff. How long ago did you first take it up? Secretary Wilson. When I first came to the Department. We are not only sending wheat, but oats; and we are sending grasses, etc. Then we go into other fields. In some localities in the United States they require something that, we can not find anywhere else in the world. We go and create varieties. I can illustrate that by work that we have done for Florida. I presume Doctor Galloway told you about it. They lost their whole crop by frost four or five years ago. We will find a variety of tree that will stand that frost. We got a Japanese orange of the genus trefoliata. We are waiting now for some results. We have got some new varieties now that are planted, but none of them are sweet enough. We may have to put a bigger per cent of the Florida orange into the hybrid than we want, but, if we get just one orange sweet enough, we will extend that all over the State of Florida. The Chairman. Will the seed from that orange be prepotent? Secretary Wilson. If it has the seed. The Chairman. In half -breed animals there is sometimes a lack of prepotency. What has been your experience in that line in regard to seed? Secretary Wilson. If they have a few seed we could carry them on, but we might have to graft them or bud them, you know. We are never positive about the truth of a plant that comes from a seed of that kind, because they have to be pollenized, and you are never sure as to where the pollen comes from. If we get one of them we will HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 435 extend that one, as they did with the navel orange in California. All the navel_ oranges in California came from the one tree that we have up here in the Agricultural Department garden now. We are having some success in hybridizing those grains, grasses, and legumes, for several localities. This leguminous question is a mighty interesting one. The only way we know that nitrogen comes out of the atmosphere is by the operation on the root of leguminous plants of little colonies of bacteria. We know the nitrate beds of the world are limited. Suppose we get into a war, where are we going to get nitrates ? This question of leguminous plants is a mighty interesting one. Away back in other periods of the world's history the great nitrate beds were formed down there in South America — the only ones the world knows of up to this time. We could not get along without the leguminous plant in our systems of agriculture. We can keep up the soil in the North by growing clover; the South is doing a good deal toward it by use of the cowpea, and they are beginning to learn, both North and South, of the great value of alfalfa. It is the most valuable and economic plant of which we have any knowledge. We are encouraging the growth of that. We have a very interest- ing question now with regard to all parts of the United States, as far as the growth of forage plants is concerned. We have very much to learn everywhere along those lines. We are trying to make" ourselves useful. I had a talk with Mr. Spillman, our specialist, along that line this morning, and I gave him instruction looking toward the prepa- ration of a bulletin on forage plants for the East, for the Northwest, for the South, and for the Pacific coast, because successful agriculture depends on forage plants, if you grow cultivated crops at all. Where a man can pasture all the time, the land keeps up — that is, most lands do; but where you cultivate, the very moment you plough land you have begun the process of destruction in that soil, and the more you cultivate that land without filling the soil up again with organic matter that comes from the roots of plants the more valueless you are mak- ing that soil every year. That has gone on in parts of the United States to an alarming extent; and one of tie things we will do now in the Southern States in the boll- weevil investigation will be to provide object lessons all over those States with regard to the building up of the soil again through rein- troduction of the organic matter that has been oxidized and burnt out by continual cultivation for a century. With regard to forestry investigation, you find a pretty heavy esti- mate there. We have chopped down our woods, Mr. Chairman; there are but few left. Our great woods will be gone before we can repro- duce them. We have been at work trying to build up a bureau of forestry consisting of young gentlemen of education ana character. And," incidentally, I might make that remark with regard to the per- sonnel of this Department all along the line. We are getting young men of education and character. We are insisting in most cases of those experts that they be college graduates, and we have a large num- ber of them now studying forestry. If you take up this question of furnishing moisture to growing plants — and plants will not grow with- out it — you come to the original proposition that the forest was the great reserve for water — the great reservoir. Our work along for- estry lines is to restore the hills to conditions to admit the moisture 436 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. and hold it. You have appropriated extensively to buijd dams to hold water, but our proposition antedates the dam. The mountain should hold the water. If you take the woods away from the mountain the water never gets into it and the capacity of the mountain to hold water is destroyed — you can not get the water in there. If you have woods over a mountain they admit the water; the ferns, the mosses, etc., hold the rains until they percolate into the hills, and then they keep coming all the summer in rills and springs, and so forth, and you can get the use of them. Now, we are studying these matters all along the line. We are studying the forest reserve — some seventy millions of acres. There is a proposition pending, I believe, in Congress in regard to the question of turning the scientific study of those reserves over to my Department. I do not meddle with legislation. You never found me here lobbying. But there are no scientific foresters in the Interior . Department. They do not pretend to be. It is an awkward thing to carry on the scientific study of forests that are altogether under the jurisdiction of another department. However, we do the best that can be done. The Secretary of the Interior and I agree that the Department of Agricul- ture would more economically and effectively study the problems if we controlled the whole situation. But that is a matter for you to determine. Mr. Bo'wie. You would recommend, Mr. Secretary, that the for- estry department in the Department of the Interior be transferred, and that also is recommended by the Secretary of the Interior? Secretary Wilson. Yes; that ought to be done; it will be done some day, without question. Mr. Brooks. Would there be economy if they were consolidated? Secretary Wilson. Yes; there would be economy. The Chairman. There is some gentleman in the House opposing that bill on the ground that there would be a larger expenditure. I wish you would say something for the record here that I may quote to Mr. Cannon and Mr. Hemenway. Secretary Wilson. There is certain work to do in the study of forestry. There are 500 rangers taking care of those forests. We have nothing to do with them. We do not grasp at added authority for our Department but, if we are studying, through these 200. edu- cated foresters in our Department, those forest reserves, we can tell how many men we need and how many we can dispense with, and the character of the men we should have, much better than some other department that is not studying our problems at all. Mr. Bowie. And has not the scientific experts that you have? Secretary Wilson. And does not pretend to have the scientific experts that we have. Mr. Brooks. Might not a part of the work which the Interior Department rangers are now doing be done by the same men who are carrying on the scientific investigations in your Department? Secretary Wilson. There will be a great saving in supervision; there is no question about that. This only comes up incidentally; I am not lobbying here for that. The Chairman. If I may say, I think the bill is going to pass, with- out doubt; and the little opposition left is on the ground only that it will materially increase the expense of the management of these forest reserves. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 437 Secretary Wilson. It will lessen it very materially. It will add to our agricultural work. It will be for this committee to determine, when you consider the added officials that would come over to the Department of Agriculture in that transfer, where these economies would come in, and you could i-eadily see it. Mr. Bowie. Would it disturb your line of thought for me to ask you, in this connection, what particular additional work is desired that will call for an extra f 100, 000 of appropriation for the Bureau of Forestry? It is $350,000 now, and it is proposed to raise it to $450,000. Secretary Wilson. Every week or so there are additions made to the forest reserves of the country. There are 70,000,000 of acres now, or such a matter, and Mr. Bowie. The extent is increasing? Secretary Wilson. The problems of that forestry investigation are growing. We are studying the harvesting of woods, we are studying the planting of woods, we are studying the strength of wood, we are studying the enemies of wood — all along those lines. We have hardly got to the point where the work is quite' " complete in its magnitude. Mr. Bowie. You think the continued efficiency depends on an increased appropriation, to some extent? Secretary Wilson. I tell you what I do when I go to make esti- mates. I send for each man who is to spend the money and talk the matter all over with him. For a good many of those bureaus that have been created in the last six or seven years, we are not asking heavy increases. This is the heaviest one, because our forests are almost gone, gentlemen. The Chairman. It is a new subject in the D nited States. Secretary Wilson. It is a new thing. We can see the end out there, and I have thought it wise in that case to recommend to you this heavy appropriation for this year in order to enable us to do enough of work along those lines. Private corporations come to us and pay all the expenses of our men if we Will only give them working plans. West Point Academy came to us the other day; they did not know what to do with their woods. We sent a man there to show them working plans. Private individuals, corporations, who own thousands of acres, come to us and say, "We will pay all the expenses now if you will only tell us what to do;" and we send scientists and tell them what to do. The question of rehabilitating the United States with trees and what kind of trees in the several localities are the great questions, gentlemen. Of course, if there should be no additional appropriation we would go on with the force we have and do the best we could. Mr. Brooks. If there were no increase, the number of men you have now would have to be spread over a wider area, would there not? Secretarj r Wilson. Yes; and the area of the United States is grow- ing steadily. Mr. Brooks. In one State I know of they are now contemplating adding nine forest reserves — more than double what we now have. Secretary Wilson. They make forest reserves and call on the Department to see where we advise bringing them in. Mr. Bodey. I am glad of that, because in our section they have been taking in all the pasture land we have got. Secretary Wilson. 1 think there should be animals pasturing in the 438 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. forests; it should be regulated; the trees should not be eaten by ani- mals, and quite often, if you pasture a forest, you will prevent a fire. It requires intelligent supervision and control. I would have people living in the forests, sufficient to get workmen Mr. Rodet. On the contrary, they drive the people who are there out; give them script and on that account take a great deal of value out of the country. Secretary Wilson. I think there are probably two sides of that question. They are pretty sharp fellows who live out in that country. They are not so far behind but that they will catch up. A word with regard to chemistry Mr. Rodey. I would like to put in the record there, because I have to write a good deal about it to the President and the Secretary, that we think down in our country the forest reserves are created without proper investigation before. they are created — they are done in a night without notice to the people, and the first thing you know you are surrounded with forest reserves. If they were created carefully and properly there would be no objection anywhere. Secretary Wilson. There has to be a forest reserve in your Terri- tory or your Territory will not amount to a row of pins after the for- ests are all out. Mr. Rodet. We do not object to that, but we do not like to have the pasture lands in forest reserves Secretary Wilson. I think the Government intends to do wise things and kindly things by our Western people. Mr. Rodet. I believe in a general way that is the idea, of course. Secretary Wilson. Referring to chemistry — we got authority last year to look into the importations of foods that might be misbranded or might be poisoned, and we have really sent back a great deal of stuff that had acids in it that were deleterious to the health of our peo- ple. It is working smoothly. The merchants generally say they were not aware of the condition. I think that is true. I do not think the American merchant, as a general proposition, wants to poison his cus tomers, and I think we will do a great deal less of it by and by. We have done work along sirup lines. The people along the Gulf Coast have been producing one hundred and sixtj^-five millions of gal- lons of cane sirup every year, and they have been at work for nearly a century, and they needed help along the lines of a uniform color, the prevention of sugaring, and the prevention of souring; and we are at work to show them how to do that, and we are succeeding. We are showing them how to cultivate and get better results, and that money given has, I think, been expended with discretion. We will solve that thing in a few years, so it will not be necessary to continue. The Chairman. Doctor Wiley told us that two or three of the prob- lems were already solved; that the main question now was the uni- formity of color. Secretary Wilson. Yes; the trouble has been, if you ordered a dozen barrels of sirup from one of those good people down there they were colored differently and look differently and the consistency was differ- ent; some of it might solve and some of it might not. I think it is the finest sirup in the world which those people make. Now, with regard to the Soils Division. I suppose you have had Mr. Whitney here. They are in great demand. The people are calling upon us to give them information regarding the different kinds HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 439 of soils in the different States in the Union. I think we were in M States last year. They are pushing matters with a good deal of vigor, and certainly to the satisfaction of the people in that Bureau. The tobacco work of that department I have said something about incidentally. It is succeeding. I spent a while in Tennessee, myself, looking into the tobacco con- ditions there, other than Sumatra and Habana tobacco, and I found the people needed help down in that country with those tobaccos, and we are beginning object lessons to help people out along those lines. They have been reducing the fertility of the soil by improper methods of cultivation, and are not getting as good tobacco or as good yields of it as they did in an earlier day. And we are going to help them out of that difficulty. In regard to statistics. You have heard a great deal about leaks in our statistical work — charges made by people who probably may have happened to be on the wrong side of the market. I am going to do this next spring when we begin — in the course of two or three months we will begin our monthly reports again — I shall invite the chairman to appoint a committee to come down and look at our work; see how it is done, and know all about it. A hundred thousand dollars to-day, wisely and judiciously expended, will procure for a private firm accurate information with regard to every crop in America — pretty accurate information — but the private person does not publish that. He keeps that to himself; he paid his money for it and it is his. Mr. Bukleson. He probably publishes some other information in order that he may profit by it. Secretary Wilson. Surely. My idea in regard to the intention of Congress is that we shall get an accurate condition of each crop and tell everybody at the same hour. Take cotton, for illustration. In the last two or three years we have come very close to it. How we shall come out next year I do not know, but I am tolerabty well satis- fied we have not put it far out of the way. And it will be a satisfac- tion to us if a subcommittee of this committee would know exactly how we do our work, and we would be ready for any suggestions you might make. We think it is about an impossibility for any leaking to take place at the present time. Mr. Burleson. As a matter of fact, have you not invited these gentlemen in the cities to point out if there were any defects? Secretary Wilson. I went further than that. I told men of the Cotton Exchange in New York to send a particular man and I would appoint him in that very Bureau and let him learn the whole business. They sent us a man, and I appointed him; but he had not the capacity to comprehend it. It is no small matter. This is the most carefully thought out statistical work that is done anywhere. There are 250,000 people reporting to us — a large volume of intelligent gentlemen that get no pay and feel proud of the fact that they work for the Govern- men without pay; and I would not have them paid, for fear they would have competition for the small pittance we might give them, from fel- lows that would want to be on that job for the money there was in it. Mr. Haugen. It was stated by your statistician that the reports sent in by your local men were not altogether reliable. Mr. Bowie. 1 think the gentleman misunderstood him. Secretary Wilson. He might have said something to the effect that 440 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. we have seven or eight sources of getting cotton reports. If you go to one class of men they may lean a little one way from what a dif- ferent class of men would lean. We get reports from those classes year after year, and when we come to make up our estimate for a given year we look over all the reports of all those people and find where the conservative estimates come from and where the sanguine estimates come from, and give weight accordingly. Mr. Haugen. I would state to Mr. Bowie that this did not have reference to the reports on cotton ; it had reference to the wheat crop in Kansas, or some other western State. He said the local reporters had not discovered the fact that the plantings had been changed from spring to fall wheat. Mr. Burleson. With reference to the acreage. Mr. Bowie. I misunderstand your remark to the Secretary; but what I really understood the gentleman to state was that there was a remarkable degree of accuracy, but that oftentimes the information that was given out periodically by these regular reporters was not always accurate because of changed conditions by reason of a severe drought or a severe frost, or something of that sort, rendering it necessary to get special reports; that these special reports, of course, sometimes on account of those conditions, make it necessary to modify the others. But he testified to the remarkable accuracy in the main of the reports. Secretary Wilson. Yes; but as I stated, if you go to a certain class of people you will get a more conservative report on any given crop than you will from some other class; but if you have this every year you will by and by find which bridge carried you over. Next May we will know all about the movement, and know what the commercial crop was, and by looking back through several sources of information find out which was Mr. Bowie. Which was sanguine? Secretary Wilson. Precisely. Any of you gentlemen are welcome to come down on the day we get our reports out, and we will let you in and lock the door and you will see every step that is taken until it is finished and then we will let you out. A word with regard to irrigation. A movement has been taken by Congress in regard to damming, up the waters in the uplands for the purpose of using it where there is not enough of rainfall. I sent a man to Europe last summer to look over the irrigation systems where they have rainfall, and pretty heavy rainfall. The people of Italy dam up their mountain streams and hold the water until diy times come and then use the water; and by that means they have maximum crops every year. The use of water is a question that is new; irrigation is not new. People in bygone centuries used it extensively; but there is nothing on record to show us they understood the effect of a given amount of water on a given crop. We have found, as far as we have gone, they use far too much water for the benefit of the crop, and we propose to study the use of water, and its use with regard to the several crops. You want a crop of oats, for example, and 500 pounds of water must go through the plant, if I remember correctly, to produce 1 pound of dry matter. If you put in 1,000 pounds of water you are wasting half of it. If you want a crop of wheat, less will do. Much depends on the soil. We will study the soil also of those countries. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 441 I am well satisfied the da}' is coming when the people of the mountain countries of the United States will build tens of thousands of dams and hold up these waters that are now going away in spring freshets. The}- will either do it through State expenditure or private effort, and hold up those waters in order to put them on lands when the dry time comes. The difference quite often between a maximum and a mini- mum crop is getting water at the right time. I was astonished this year, in Looking over the sugar crop of Louisi- ana and Texas, that it is a light crop because of drouth, and there is the great Mississippi River, 90 feet deep, lying 40 or 50 feet above the level of the country. If they had only tapped that river and brought the water out they would have had a maximum crop. They will do that some day. We have plenty of rainfall in the country to give us much better crops than we are getting now. One of the les- sons the Department of Agriculture is trying to teach to every one, and it is one of the most necessary, is the conservation of moisture in the soil and the proper methods of cultivation by which moisture is taken care of. I stopped off in Nebraska last summer and spent one day in a new locality where they had built dams and were growing beets. I went into the field and tried to pull up a beet, but could not — the ground was all solid around it. The superintendent of the beet factory was there, a man who had devoted his whole life to that business. I said to him, " When did you cultivate that field?" He said, "We have not cultivated it since we irrigated it." I said, "You irrigated it and didn't cultivate it, and now you have gotten the field the same as brick. Did not your beets stop- growing just then?" "Yes; they stopped growing just then." I said, "If you had not wet it at all and had kept your cultivator going you would have had a much better beet crop, and that water might have gone somewhere else." That is one of the most interesting problems in America to-day. The people of the United States who grow sugar beets are growing 9.6 tons to the acre. If they will increase the tonnage up to 15 tons to an acre, you can repeal your protective-tariff laws; the sugar-beet men will not need them. But that one thing has to be impressed all over the United States, and you would think it so simple a proposition that any farmer would understand it; and yet very few farmers do understand it — the conservation of moisture in the soil by cultivation and the necessity for adding moisture to the soil in irrigation countries. That problem we are studying. It is one that is going to be of very great practical value, not only to the people who irrigate, but to the people who Jive in the rainfall countries and depend on the rain as it comes to the soil. We have not made, Mr. Chairman, estimates for much increase along salary lines ; not much this year. There have been a few that we thought wise to make. The man who writes the weekly report of the Weather Bureau, Mr. Berry, is doing a pretty high class of work. I wish you would look into it and remember him. I think Mr. Moore has only t,hree or four. I wish you would give it careful consideration. Mr. Berry, I think, deserves a little more than he is getting. That weekly report is a valuable report. He writes it with ability, and he is getting a small salary. I think I have kept you long enough and have said all I care to. If you think of any questions to ask about the general policy of the Department, I would be glad to discuss them. Mr. Burleson. I would like to divert your attention to the fact, 442 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Secretary, of this appropriation with reference to the amount of money to be expended for boll-weevil investigation. Do you think there will be any necessity for more money before that appropiation has lapsed? Secretary Wilson. When will it lapse? Mr. Burleson. In July, 1905; a year from next July. Secretary Wilson. I think not. I think that ought to be enough money. If there should be any necessity for more, we will tell you a j r ear from now ; but I think there will be enough there to do" anything we are able to do. But we are going to do it at once. I will send a man down there to work at once along those lines, to do everything that can be done to help the people out of that emergency. Mr. Kodey. Is there anything being done to find uses for plants that grow in the West, and all over the nation, that are now practically wild? Secretary Wilson. We train the wild plants and obtain uses for those that exist in large quantities. We are making a careful study of the poisonous plants and the medicinal plants. Mr. Rodey. It came out here the other day that there were a few cactuses down in Texas and Arizona for which some use is being found. What has been done along that line ? Secretary Wilson. You can make very valuable fiber from most of those kinds; nearly all of them have a valuable fiber. Mr. Rodey. They said something about cattle feeding. Secretary Wilson. Well, that has been considered. There have not been many cattle fed, I think, along that line. But this is being done: We are hunting the desert countries in other lands where they grow things they might introduce down there. I think they have found a cactus without spines on it, and we are cultivating and introducing a sagebush from Australia that the cattle winter on in that country. Yes; we are studying those propositions. Mr. Bowie. Mr. Secretary, I want to ask you one question. It has been claimed that the experts of the Department of Agriculture are so enthusiastic that they are really ahead of the needs of the country. I would like to know whether, if all of their suggestions were adopted, we would not have such a superfluity of crops it would rather react by reason of overproduction ? 1 would like to know if it is not true that it is necessary for the Department of Agriculture, or the experts of the Department, to keep ahead of the country in order to keep the country from getting behind the growing demand of the world ? Secretary Wilson. If we do not keep ahead and think out these things for the people it would never be done. This country has run for a century without any of this kind of work being done; and if there had been a Department of Agriculture a century ago, with as many educated men as we have now, the United States would have been a much more powerful and wealthy country to-day. I do not think we are quite up with the necessities of the times. Mr. Bowie. You do not think the agricultural production of the United States is equal to the demands upon it from the world? Secretary Wilson. Now, in regard to the industries of the United States, we have been growing as a manufacturing country because the farmer furnished cheap food for the workingman, and we have been prospering as a nation because within the last fourteen years some three billion and nine hundred millions of dollars balance of trade HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 443 have been put to the credit of the United States by the farmer after paying the adverse balance against the United States on account of other trade. Mr. Lamb. Mr. Secretary, you saw what Mr. Chamberlain said about that a day or two ago. We have been building up our manu- factures. Secretary Wilson. Manufactures are growing in the United States, and the farmer wants to have them grow in order to furnish a market for his products; and the American farmer always has the manufac- turer in mind. At the same time, the manufacturer has not come to the place where he can sell enough to equal the manufactures we buy. We buy more than we sell, and the farmer makes up the difference and puts some three or four or five millions of dollars to the credit of the country every year in addition. The work of this committee — the work of this Department — is what is helping to do it. I want to see every mortal thing that is produced or can be produced on American soil produced here — that we want to use. We have been paying a hundred million dollars a year, and more every year, for the winds and waters that blow and flow over the country, that are changed by foreigners into sugar. Why should we pay that $100,000,000 ? Have we not got winds and waters enough at home? Why should we not do that? We sell ever y year, on an average, $850,000,000 worth from our fields; but we buy from foreign fields something like half that amount all the time. Well, now, of that half, part of it can be grown in the United States — say the half of that half. A fourth of all we import can be grown in the United States. I am speaking of things in the fields — sugar and a treat many other things that we are buying; those things can be pro- uced here, and it is the aim of this committee, I hope, and of this Department of Agriculture, I know, to encourage the production of all those thingswe are paying that $200,000,000 for. Now, the $200,- 000,000 worth that we can not produce in the United States, such as coffee, and rubber, and spices, and things of that kind, can be produced in these new island groups of ours. Mr. Lamb. People can not sell everything and buy nothing, though, can they ? Of course I do not wish to get into an economic discussion. Secretary Wilson. We own the territory and we can produce every- thing we want under the American flag. Of course our ladies want to buy feathers, and diamonds, and laces, and all that, from foreign countries, but there is no reason why these things should not be made here some day. The Chairman. Including diamonds, I suppose? Secretary Wilson. Including diamonds. Mr. Scott. 1 would like you to say a word or two about the work of the Biological Survey. I think some of us got the impression from the hearings we have had hitherto that the work of that Survey, in so far as it did any good at all, was better done by the Bureau of Soils and other bureaus. I would like to have your opinion on that. Secretary Wilson. The division in our Department that comes nearest to being purely scientific is that very one. The Chairman. It has the least commercial touch? Secretary Wilson. The least commercial touch to it. And yet the scientific facts brought out by that division have a value. They are studying the meridians, say, along which they find certain plants 444 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. growing, the conditions under which they find them, beginning at the South and running way up to the North. At certain elevations they find certain plants, certain birds, and certain animals, flora, and fauna, and where they find the one they know they are apt to find the same thing under the same conditions farther north or farther south. They study the bird to ascertain which one is injurious to the farmer and which one is beneficial. They study the animal for the same purpose. They are, I think, men who have a value of their own. I would not like to see them turned loose from the Department. They have brought to our attention some plants, etc. , that can be made valuable. There is no scientific division in the Department to whom we would more readily turn for exact technical information with regard to plants and animals than we would to Doctor Merriams division. Mr. Scott. 1 can readily understand, of course, the value of their work in the matter of determining what birds and animals are helpful or hurtful to fruit and crops of various kinds; but it rather occurred to me that they were not spending money wisely in mapping the country as to the arrangement of various crops. The gentleman who appeared before us stated he might find one soil in Florida and might find pre- cisely similar soil in Montana; and the function of his Bureau was to teach the Montana farmer that he can not grow on his soil what would grow in Florida, although the soil was precisely similar. The Montana farmer would probably know that. Secretary Wilson. You notice they have in charge the execution of the game laws. Mr. Scott. That is all right; we have no criticism to make on that, but whatever money they spend in this other matter — speaking for myself; I do not assume to speak for the committee; whatever money they spend in this other direction seems disadvantageously spent as far as the results obtained are concerned. The Chairman. The result they get at too slowly ? Secretary Wilson. There is probably less money, value in their report at the end of the year than there is in other bureaus, but at the same time they do study effectively some of those propositions; and I think it would be wise to continue the work along those lines. By the by, there is one thing I had pretty nearly forgotten; 1 hope you will make bureaus of these scientific divisions that nave not been bureauized. The Chairman. How much better results are you getting from the Statistical Division owing to the fact that that had been made a bureau ? Secretary Wilson. To begin with, the heads deserve the money The Chairman. Is that really the main point? Secretary Wilson. That is one point; but they have more freedom in organization in the bureau condition than they have in a division. Mr. Scott. Can you explain how that comes about? Secretary Wilson. Well, in the bureau organization, if you will take Doctor Galloway for example; he has his pomologist, his botanist, his pathologist, and physiologist, and so forth, all along these lines. There is a distinct class of men, each working under his own name; and there is rather more dignity to a bureau. The Chairman. That Bureau is more homogeneous? Secretary Wilson. Oh, surely; it must be homogeneous. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 445 The Chairman. The Bureau of Statistics stands by itself; apply your remarks to that; why do you get better results from that as a bureau than as a division '( Secretary Wilson. A year ago when I asked Congress to make the statistical division a bureau, I found from experience it had been run- ning down from the fact that it had been training men who were getting low salaries, and after they became valuable other institutions wanted them and took them away, and the Bureau had severely suf- f erred. I wanted more compensation for the men who deserved more compensation in that division. It could not be very well done in a division in order to keep it in line with other divisions of the Govern- ment. The Government of the United States is doing: its work through bureaus. It created them. The new Bureau of Commerce and Labor started out with a succession of bureaus. It got four or five from the older departments, and it created one in manufactures and one in cor- porations, and so forth. Now, then, the men at the head of those bureaus are not a bit abler men, better educated in their line, than the scientists of the Bureau of Statistics in their line; but a bureau officer gets a certain salary, and a division officer gets a certain salary. Mr. Burleson. As a matter of fact, it was in the nature of a pro- motion for this man who had rendered efficient service? Secretary Wilson. Undoubtedly; it was a promotion for him, and I make no bones in saying 1 want to promote Doctor Howard. He has not his equal on earth as an entomologist. I am going to start him next week in charge of at least half of that work down in the South- ern States in regard to the boll weevil, and he ought to have the small amount that is given to our bureau officers — $3,500. You notice the facility and ease with which Congress creates bureaus and gives them $5,000 or $6,000, and the man that works under them often gets $3,000 or $4,000. I tell you, the men who work under you gentlemen are as great scientists as you will find in the world in their lines; and when a man has been as long in that Department as Doctor Howard has, he deserves that $3,500. And take Doctor Marlatt, who went to the Orient and brough back the lady-bird to attack the San Jose scale. That class of men deserve a little more money. We are not asking it but for one man at present; but if we are going to hold those strong men, they will have to get, eventually, some increase. We are holding our scientists now better than we did seven years ago, because you have been giving them more money. Otherwise we would have been down at the low level that we were seven years ago. There is no use in hesitating about speaking my mind on that question. 1 want those men to get more money because they are earning more. I am not asking it for anybody but the heads of the, proposed bureaus. Our bureau chiefs are the most poorly paid of any in the United States Government. All of the new bureaus under the new Secretary of Commerce and Labor get their $5,000 every one of them. We have been content with $3,500. I think the Senate put in $4,000 once for Doctor Galloway; he gets $4,000. Doctor Salmon, who has no equal in his line in the world, whose investigations led up to the ascertain- ment of the source from which malaria and yellow fever come, is get- ting $4,500. Some of his very best men have gone into the War Department, and are getting $5,000 with a prospect of a pension when they retire. 446 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Now, I have asked one increase that I am anxious about. I would like to make Doctor Salmon's salary $5,000. And you, having Agri- culture in your keeping and charge, and being responsible for it, I ask you to see to it that it is dignified by worthy men just as much as men who work for the other Departments of the Government, and who are not mealy-mouthed about asking for big salaries. Mr. Haugen. Does this promotion and increased salary carry any- thing else with it? I mean, horses and carriages? Secretary Wilson. No. Mr. Haugen. 1 read in the Post this morning that a great many carriages and horses are owned by the Government; it was estimated, I think, by a member of- the House yesterday, that if they were strung out on a single line they would reach from the White House to the Capitol, a distance of a mile and a half. It seems that that estimate was too low, according to the views of the Post. Secretary Wilson. I can tell you a Cabinet secret, Mr. Haugen. Mr. Haugen.' This has no reference to Cabinet officers; they are certainly entitled to carriages; but the impression is that the chief of every bureau and every division has a horse and a carriage, and a foot- man, or Secretary Wilson. The President asked each Cabinet officer indi- vidually whether he had increased the number of carriages or horses in his Department for his subordinates in the last seven years, and each one of them answered that they had not — had not increased them at all. The Chairman. How many, as a matter of fact, have we in the Department of Agriculture? Secretary Wilson. When I came there, there was a carriage for the Secretary, one for the Assistant Secretary, and one for the Chief of the Weather Bureau Mr. Haugen. There is no question raised as to the first two men- tioned. Secretary Wilson (continuing). And there are no more to-day. Mr. Haugen. Why should one chief have a horse and carriage over another? Secretary Wilson. I suppose it is because the Weather Bureau is so far over there by itself; I suppose, maybe, that is one reason why. Mr. Henky. But you have made no increase ? Secretary Wilson. No increase since I went into this Department. The Chairman. There is a small increase asked for in the general expenses of the library — some $2,500. We have been increasing that every year a little more. Are they publishing more books all the time that you have to purchase? Secretary Wilson. As our scientific departments grow, the demand for scientific literature grows steadily with it; that is all. We get a good deal by exchange; then we buy considerable. We have the finest agricultural scientific library in the world. The Chairman. The best technical library in the world? Secretary Wilson. There is no question about that, and that is not a very heavy increase — a couple of thousand a year. The Chairman. It is not a heavy increase — it is a mere drop — but we have been increasing that every year for the purpose of books, and I was wondering myself whether they were absolutely publishing HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 447 so many more scientific agricultural books every year than they were formerly. Secretary Wilson. For quite a while, if I remember, there was not any increase for that. The Chairman. For the last three years we have . increased it. It was increased $3,000, was it not, last year? Secretary Wilson. The library needed that. There is a very careful little Vermont lady in charge. She is exceedingly efficient, and she is building up that library along scientific principles, and the scientists of the Department are greatly pleased with her work; and I hardly think we can deny them access to all that is published in their line that is worth having. The Chairman. It has doubled since 1896. Secretary Wilson. The whole Department has doubled since 1896. The Chairman. The library has doubled since 1896. Secretary Wilson. Exactly; the whole Department has. The Chairman. More than doubled. Secretary Wilson. It is interesting to state that you are giving as much money for agriculture as the income of Harvard, Yale, Colum- bia, Chicago, and Leland Stanford universities, all put together. Indirectly you are giving us $6,000,000 a year, and the world has no parallel to it; and we are doing the work that you know is doing. We sent out last year nearly 12,000,000 pieces of agricultural litera- ture; and until the Department of Agriculture began building up this literature, there was no agricultural literature in the world. I have works on agriculture 150 years old, and I can take one of them and compare it with the average country farm editorial, and they are about word for word now. But are we furnishing the people agri- cultural literature? See what the effect is in the great West. The Chicago Tribune, the Chicago Record-Herald and the Chicago Inter Ocean each find it necessary to put in a farm column everyday. There is a demand for it all over that country. Mr. Graff. The smaller papers are taking that up ? Secretary Wilson. Surely. I edited one of these myself for ten years before coming here. The Chairman. Every newspaper circulating through the country has an agricultural column. Secretary Wilson. They are getting it. The great Chicago dailies tell the tale; and some of their highest paid men are doing that kind of work. The Chairman. How near are you through with the tea investiga- tion ? Secretary Wilson. We are just setting out a big orchard in Texas. We have a lot of things to study along the tea line. I have seen a good many birthdays, but 1 expect to live to see the day when we will pick tea with a span of horses and a reaping machine, going down one side and coming up the other. You can not limit the ingenuity of the American people. Mr. Eodey. Has it been determined that the possibilities will be equal to that? The Chairman. Who ever thought we would cut wheat and bind it at the same time? Secretary Wilson. That is an extreme statement, but it is not impos- sible. It is in the minds of a good many men now. 448 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Burleson. Nothing is impossible when you consider Yankee ingenuity. Mr. Graff. There has been considerable discussion about a bulletin that was issued by Professor Whitney; none of the rest of the gentle- man has the courage to ask you about it, but I presume to do so. Secretary Wilson. From Liebig's day up to the present time the chemists have had the floor, and whatever was told us was told by those chemists all these years back. Now .we have started in to study the soil for the first time in this Department; and Doctor Whitney finds certain indications. He can tell by putting an instrument in the soil the per cent of moisture there, and the per cent of salt in the moisture, and he thinks that by examining the salt content of the moisture he can tell the capacity of that soil to feed the plant; and the chemists do not believe a word of it. But let me tell you some- thing about the limitations of the chemists. I wanted to have a tobacco leaf analyzed by a chemist, and 1 could not find anybody that could do it; could not tell me anything about it. And I found a little German who told me that tobacco leaf had some ferments in it, the same as the milk of the dairy cow has, that ripens the cheese, and this next leaf had two of these ferments, the next one three, and another had four. That opened up a thought. The Japanese came and took him away, at $7,000 a year, and then we did not have a chemist. I sent over to Johns-Hopkins. There was a young man there from Iowa whom I used to know. He had graduated at the Ames Agricultural College, waited and got the master's degree, waited another and taught chemistry; then went to Johns-Hopkins University. I said to him, "Can you analyze the tobacco leaf?" He said, "I can not." I said, " What in the world have you been doing all these years in Johns-Hopkins and can not analyze tobacco? " He said "They did not teach me plant pathology," but he added, "A new world has opened up to me." We got two doctors of chem- istry. I sent for Doctor Wiley and Doctor Galloway and several chiefs, and I said "Gentlemen, we are up against it now. Here are a couple of doctors of chemistry; they are ready to study this problem. How are they to be taught?" "We'll," the plant man said. " it is no use to teach them more chemistry; they have plenty of chemistry now. The trouble is, they do not know anything about the plant; they must go to work and study the physiology of it." They began to work at $60 a month, those doctors of chemistry, and they are studying and bringing i about results, and by and by we expect to have chemists that can analyze a tobacco leaf, a cabbage leaf, and things of that kind. Mr. Graff. Doctor Whitney attempts to lay down as an absolute fact conclusions that, if true, are certainly very startling. Secretary Wilson. With regard to that, Mr. Graff, I say to Doctor Whitney, "1 know a great many things you are doing; nearly every- thing you do is valuable to the Department; 1 do not know whether you are right or wrong on this proposition you lay down, but go to work and demonstrate it; take time, go to wqrk with it; " and he has. I am going to give a man opportunity to prove whether he is wrong or whether he is right, and if he is wrong with regard to that one thing, then he is wrong, that's all. Mr. Graff. I am glad to have the Secretary say that, because if it could be stated that the Department absolutely supported these alleged discoveries as being a truth which had been fixed, then the HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE OK AGRICULTURE. 449 investigation of soils and fertilization would be utterly futile; it would be useless. Secretary Wilson. There is a certain per cent of truth in what Whitney has said ; that I personally know of. Mr. Graff. You permitted the use of the bulletin on the ground that it would stimulate investigation of the question? kSecretary Wilson. Precisely. I give him a free field. I am glad that the chemists have awakened to the necessity of agriculture along these lines; if we have put new life into them it will be valuable. We have not hardly an agricultural chemist in the world; it is a new science. When a man who makes his living by working the field comes to me with his troubles 1 yoke up a scientist with him. I want to find out what can be done to help that man, and we come right along against his propositions -that have never been solved because scientists in the past have never proven anything. They have never applied themselves practically to help anybody; that is where the trouble has been. Now, what can 1 do in this case? I have a faint knowledge of the direction in which every one of the three or four scientists of the Depart- ment are working — the objects for which they work; I have not a practical familiarity with it. The details of every scientist's work is something that is only comprehended by men in their own line. Whit- ney has challenged the chemists. If it comes to a head, I shall ask Mr. Whitney to appoint a man, and I shall ask the chairman of the chemistry organization to appoint a man, and we will have a third man appointed by those two, and we will let them go to work and find out whether Whitney is right or wrong in that particular line. Mr. Graff. There was an article by a man by the name of Hilder, in California, who attacks the methods of the investigation. Secretary Wilson. He is a fine, old-fashioned chemist. Mr. Graff. I do not know anything about Hilder's scholarship. Secretary Wilson. We are going to give our men an opportunity to see whether they are right or wrong. Whitney is going in so many ways that are valuable that we can afford to have him go wrong. Most of them never did anything for agriculture worth speaking about. Mr. Scott. Do you not think, as a general proposition, that bulletins ought to .be published only — or, at least, chiefly — along lines in which definite conclusions which are not disputed can be laid down ? Does it not leave the farmer in a rather confused frame of mind to have a bulletin come out from the Department of Agriculture asserting one thing and find immediately that men working in similar scientific fields dispute it ? Secretary Wilson. Well, we published some seven hundred publi- cations last year and there is only one of them disputed; and the farmer is not going to bother himself about that one, because that is a technical bulletin on chemistry. It is worth publishing to have them discuss it. Mr. Adams. If I recollect right, the statement which excited criti- cism, and about which I have received one letter from the College of Minnesota, was to the effect that all soils contain enough plant food for unlimited crops. Mr. Graff. Wnich would lead to the conclusion that there was no such thing as wearing out land. c a 29 450 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. Mr. Adams. There may be some qualification surrounding this statement. Mr. Graff. There was another conclusion, and that was the fertili- zat on of soil by manure or by the artificial fertilizers which are made contributed to the soil no lasting additional chemical content, and that it produced no permanent result in the growth of the immediate crop; that the utmost it would do, perhaps, was to stimulate the growth of the plant when it first began to germinate; and that is certainly con- trary to the general view of the practical farmer. Secretary Wilson. Yes; I have gone all over that with Doctor Whitney. The growth of crops by chemical or what are known as commercial fertilizers alone will eventually ruin any soil, because the organic matter is oxidized or burnt out of the soil and the soil becomes loose and subject to be carried away with the waters in the summer time and will not retain moisture. Mr. Lamb. That is true; we all know that. Secretary Wilson. Yes; there are limitations to all those statements. I do not pretend to conclude with regard to Doctor Whitney's Bulle- tin No. 22; but we will have it looked into by competent authority if it is thought best to do it. I have had it in my mind. Doctor Whit- ney is doing such good work that we can still find work for Doctor Whitney. Mr. Henrt. The discussion of this Bulletin 22 will be productive of good results, whatever Secretary Wilson. I think so. You had a discussion of that at one time in regard to Doctor Salmon and his hog-cholera investigations by a man in Nebraska. Doctor Salmon is still here, and I do not know what has become of the man in Nebraska. Mr. Lamb. That leads me to make a new inquiry of you, Mr. Secretary. I have received letters saying the Government is making serum to destroy blackleg, and trying to interfere with private enterprise. I would like to hear from you on that. Secretary Wilson. Blackleg is a disease that affects young animals, mostly calves; sometimes yearlings, and, very rarely, 2 year olds. The people had great difficulty in getting serum that was powerful enough to treat it. We make it here for probably a tenth of a cent a dose; and we send out, say, a million and a half doses a year, free to the people, and the result is that wherever we send it blackleg is dis- appearing. We are pushing this work with the theory that if we can prevent black-leg it will die out. It is the same with rabies. If you muzzle every dog in the District of Columbia and allow no other dog to come in rabies will not come in. You could not do that. The love for the pup is stronger than the love for man, woman, or child in the District ot Columbia, and dogs can not be muzzled here. That is the theory on which we are trying to experiment with blackleg, and we are succeeding. The day should come when there will not be a particle of blackleg in the United States. Mr. Burleson. As I understand it, Mr. Secretary, these laboratories are maintained by the Bureau of Animal Industry and its manufacture costs a mere trifle. Secretary Wilson. Yes. Of course we are interfering with the trade, and if we destroy blackleg in cattle we will destroy their trade in blackleg serum altogether. The economic question is whether we should maintain blackleg for the benefit of these manufacturers. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 451 Mr. Haugen. Are you carrying on experiments with hog cholera? Secretary Wilson. "Yes. Doctor Salmon is quite hopeful of the experiments that are being carried on under his direction. We never stop anything we undertake. We stick right to it. Mr. Graff. I notice here a reference in a press clipping which, perhaps, you had occasion to use. Secretary Wilson. What is it? Mr. Graff. A press clipping with reference to the efficiency of the Weather Bureau, and the report on it. I will hand it to you. I think perhaps it belongs to you. Secretary Wilson (examining paper). It is none of my property. Mr. Burleson. I think Mr. Moore left it here the other day. Secretary Wilson. Along that line let me say a word about the Weather Bureau, which I might otherwise have forgotten. That loss of life at Topeka should not have occurred last year if we had had observation of that river and reports; and I would certainly appro- priate enough money so that the Kansas River and some others can be reported upon. There was no occasion for all that loss of life there. Wherever we reported on rivers in other parts of the country we notified people ahead and they either built their levees or got their property away and saved themselves. With regard to the river reports of the Weather Bureau, they are as near perfect as can be gotten. They ought to be extended somewhat. There was more loss at Kansas City last year from the overflow of the Kansas Kiver than this Weather Bureau has cost since its first inauguration. I do not think of, anything else that I had in my mind to say, Mr. Chairman. I ami very much obliged. The Chairman. We are very much obliged to you. Mr. Haugen. You were speaking about sugar; have any new facto- ries been added during the last year? Secretary Wilson. Yes; many added last year, but no new ones being built just now. There are 55 now in operation. I am very much obliged, gentlemen. Thereupon the committee adjourned. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 453 Washington, D. C, Wednesday, February %, 1904.. The committee met at 11 o'clock a. m., Hon. James W. Wadsworth in the chair. The Chairman. Gentlemen, President Schurmann, of Cornell Uni- versity, is here to-day and desires to make a statement to the com- mittee somewhat in answer to the statement made by the Secretary of Agriculture when he appeared before us the other day in regard to the work done by Cornell University for the promotion of agriculture. STATEMENT OF J. G. SCHURMANN, PRESIDENT OF CORNELL UNIVERSITY. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I am very much obliged to you for the opportunity of appearing before you, and I appear, as you, sir, have said, to correct certain errors which have crept, no doubt inadvertently, into the statement made before this committee by the Secretary of Agriculture on the 16th of January last, in your afternoon session. The paragraphs will be found on page 425 of your printed hearings, and as there are only five or six sentences which concern me I will take them up seriatim. The first two sentences are as follows: Along the line of soil physics we are helping to establish that study in two institu- tions to begin with; one is in the State of New York, at the Cornell institution, and the other is in Kentucky, at Lexington. I have never had any mercy on institutions that take money from the Federal Government and do not use it for the purpose for which Congress appropriated it, and I have laid the lash unsparingly on any Cornell man I have ever met, no matter where or when. That statement seems to imply that there is a diversion on the part of Cornell University of Federal funds to objects other than those specified in the acts of Congress under which the funds are received, how, Mr. Chairman, Cornell University has received from the United States, first of all, the Morrill land grant, the scrip granted under the act of 1862. She has received from that source $688,000. That scrip, you will remember, sir, in all States which had no Federal lands within their own borders, had, under the terms of the act donating it, to be sold immediately. These forced sales all over the country pro- duced a glut in the market, and the price soon fell from the Government price of $1.25 per acre to $1, and then to 80 cents and to 70 cents, and finally to 50 cents and lower. The State of New York realized on the sale of its scrip $688,000. That is about the average that was received for the scrip by States not having public lands within their own borders. Those States having public lands within their own borders were not required, as 1 have said, under the act of Congress of 1862, to sell their scrip immediately. In New York the sum I have mentioned, 1688,000, was turned into the State treasury and a certificate of indebtedness issued to Cornell University, on which Cornell University receives annually 5 per cent interest, amounting to $34,000. Now, sir, the Federal act of 1862 provided that the moneys received from the sale of these lands should be used for the establishment of at least one col- lege where the leading object, without excluding other studies, clas- c a— 04 30 454 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. sical and scientific, and including military science and tactics, should be the teaching of sciences relating to agriculture and the mechanic; arts. We have $34,000 annually from the Federal Treasury, which, by the terms of the act, is to be used, among other things,/for the teaching of subjects related to agriculture and the mechanic arts, and which ! may be used for other scientific and classical studies. I affirm that the entire amount of $34,000 received from that source is used by Cornell University in the teaching of subjects related to the sciences of agri- culture and mechanic arts. Secondly. We receive, under the Morrill Act of 1890, $25,000 annu- ally from the Federal Treasury. That is to be used, by the terms of the act, for instruction only in agriculture, the mechanic arts, the English language, and the various branches of mathematical, physical, natural, and economic science, with special reference to their applications in the industries of life and to the facilities for such instruction. We divide that money between the several objects specified in the act of Congress itself, giving to agriculture $10,000, to mechanic arts $10,000, to the English language $1,000, and to the other objects mentioned in the act — namely, the mathematical, physical, natural, and economic sciences — $4,000. I affirm that this second appropriation, equally with the first, is used by Cornell University for the objects specified in the act. I have before me the report of the treasurer, which contains the budget for the current year, and the figures 1 have just given you, showing the distribution of the appropriation under the second Mor- rill Act, will be found in this report. Thirdly. Cornell University receives from the United States $13,500 a year, under what is known as the Hatch Act, passed in 1887, for an agricultural experiment station. That money is used by Cornell Uni- versity exclusively for the payment of investigators and the conduct of investigations and experiments, and I think if you will consult any body of scientific experts you will find that the agricultural investiga- tions emanating from Cornell University are second to those from no agricultural experiment station in the United States. I hope, there- fore, that I have demonstrated that when there is a suggestion, no doubt made inadvertently, in the statement before me, that Federal moneys have been diverted from the objects for which they were ap- propriated to objects other than those specified in the acts of Congress, the statement is without foundation. The next sentence is as follows: They were better endowed than any institution in the land, and should be doing the best work of any institution in the land, yet never did anything. That is a pretty hard saying. "They were better endowed." That means, of course, that the Federal endowment coming to Cornell Uni- versity was larger than that given to any other institution in the United States. That is true, because the State of New York had the largest population, and the grant was in proportion to the number of Repre- sentatives. But, as I pointed out, New York ? s share amounts to only $688,000, on which we get $34,000 of interest. I think, though, that there is something else underlying that statement, and with the per- mission of the committee I will develop it a little. It is often assumed that a larger portion of the endowment of Cor- nell University has in some way come from that Federal grant. And HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 455 even in our own State there are amiable and friendly critics who occa- sionally tell us that we have gotten all our money from the Federal Government. Now, the occasion of such a statement is this: The State of New York sold the land scrip that it received in 1862 at the figures that I mentioned. When it was more than half sold Mr. Ezra Cornell, then a State senator, who until middle life was a laborer get- ting a dollar or a dollar and a half a day and then grew rich and became immediately an earthly providence, desired to have the pro- ceeds of the grant turned over to an agricultural institution — not to Cornell University because it was not then in existence, but to an agri- cultural institution at Ovid, where the State insane asylum now is. But this scheme was defeated by the friends of the different colleges who wanted the money divided among their institutions. Mr. Cornell and his colleague, Andrew D. White, thought that was a plan to fritter away the money without doing any good. Whereupon Mr. Cornell said: "I will found a university at Ithaca with an endowment which I will present to it, provided you will turn the whole of that land scrip over to it for the purposes mentioned in the act of Congress." That was done. Later Mr. Cornell said to the State: " You are selling this scrip at 40 and 50 cents an acre, and I will buy it from you." The State could not sell it for more. There was a glut of land all over the country. He said: "I will hold it until prices go up, and I will pay the interest on my investment and protect the property from trespass and fire, and whatever profits I thus make from holding this land I will turn over as a gift to the new university under one condition — that such gift shall be recognized as the private gift of Ezra Cornell, and be free from all restrictions imposed by act of Congress on the moneys received from the sale of the scrip." The State of New York accepted that offer. Mr. Cornell went on and carried that land out of his own pocket. After Mr. Cornell's death, the trustees of the university continued to carry the land for some years longer, and in the end a large profit was made out of it. At one time the whole of it was under contract of sale for a million dollars, but the would-be purchaser backed out. A larger sum was eventually made out of it. But the point that I wish you gentlemen to understand is that everything in the shape of profit that was made by Mr. Cornell, and after him by his successor, Henry W. Sage, and the trustees, by holding these western lands was, under the conditions of Mr. Cornell's contract, his private gift to the university, absolutely unrestricted by any conditions attaching to the donation by Congress of the public lands in 1862. This is not a mere statement of mine. The courts have settled it. We received some years ago a gift, a legacy, of between $1,000,000 and $2,000,000. At that time the charter restricted the holdings of Cornell University. The friends of the testatrix attacked the will on the ground that Cornell University was incapacitated to receive the gift, as it already held property in excess of the limitations of its charter. Those limitations have since been removed, but of course that would not have any retroactive effect. Now, the university had absolutely no plea to make but one, and the lawyers, ingenious as these gentlemen always are, seized on this contention that Mr. Cor- nell's gift to the university was not a private gift, but was a part of the Federal land grant, and consequently that Cornell Universit} 7 did 456 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. not own that fund, but that, like the land-grant fund of $688,000, it was owned by the State of New York and held in trust for the university. The matter went to the court of appeals in New York State, and that court decided against us, and then it went to the Supreme Court of the United States, and that court decided against us. That is, the Supreme Court of the United States has decided that the gift that Ezra Cornell made to the university of money which he had made in the way of profit on land scrip bought from the State of New York in the open market was his private gift and not the gift of the United States. I mention tnat lest the fact should afterwards come to your attention and you might think that when I said that the amount of money derived from the sale of land scrip in New York was $688,000 I was not telling the whole story. So that when it is said of Cornell that ' ' they were better endowed than any institution in the land " it should also be added that the total amount derived from that endowment was $688,000, on which we receive $34,000 yearly in interest, which $34,000 we are spending solely for the objects specified, in the act of Congress. The whole sentence is as follows: They were better endowed than any institution in the land and should be doing the best work of any institution in the land, yet never did anything. Cornell Dniversity never did anything! Well, twenty years ago there were over 300 students in the university. To-day there are over 3,000. The faculty numbers 391 to-day. • It numbers more than the entire student body did twenty years ago. You can imagine my feelings when 1 read that we ought to be doing something, but yet never have done anything. We have students at Cornell from practically every State and Territory in the Union and every continent on the globe. But suppose the meaning to be that in the way of agricultural teach- ing Cornell University is doing nothing. Can that charge be ^made good? Cornell University has a college of agriculture with a large faculty in which there are enrolled to-day 276 students. In 1901 we had 193 students. In 1903 we had 235. I have a table here showing ,the attendance for several years, and I will hand this to the stenog- rapher and ask that it be made a part of my statement. The paper referred to is as follows: Students in college of agriculture of Cornell University for the past five years. Regular. Special. Winter. Total. 1899-1900 41 48 49 60 76 47 61 43 54 64 83 94 96 121 136 171 1900-1901 193 1901 2 188 3902-3. .. 435 1903-4 276 That does not include students of veterinary medicine, in which course we have 85. And, furthermore, while Cornell has 361 students in agriculture and veterinary medicine, it is, Mr. Chairman, giving instruction to thousands of persons in the State of New York. We conduct correspondence with farmers and farmers' sons and with farmers' wives and with teachers all over the State. We send them out lessons. These lessons are taken by them and studied, and their answers are sent back to Cornell. We examine the answers and then HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 457 send out a report. The secretary of the New York State Grange said yesterday at Albany at a hearing before the finance committee in my presence that this university extension work of the Cornell college of agriculture was of incalculable good to the farmers of the State, and because he and his friends appreciated it so much he was there to ask, on behalf of the grange of New York, that the State legislature should appropriate $250,000 for a hall of agriculture for Cornell University. Let me give you the figures as to the numbers we are carrying on this extension work. They are as follows: Farmers' rea.iing course 4, 495 Farmers wives' reading course 5, 028 Junior naturalist clubs, 467; members 15, 159 Junior gardeners 18, 455 Teachers in home nature-study course 1, 200 Total 44,337 So that we give instruction to 44,337 persons throughout the State of New York, exclusive of the 276 students now in the agricultural col- lege and 85 in the veterinary college, and all this instruction, whether given at the university or throughout the State, is absolutely free. We have never charged a cent at Cornell University for instruction in agriculture since the university was opened and we are not charg- ing anything to-day. Perhaps I might add for the information and for the interest of the New York gentlemen on the committee — I hope the others will excuse me for referring to a matter that is primarily of interest to our own State — that while we give free agricultural instruction to these students, we also give free instruction in all departments of the university to four students annually from ever}' assembly district, 600 persons in all, so that Cornell is to-day giving free instruction to over 900 students at the university. Those 600 are selected from the inhabitants of each assembly district on competitive examinations held by the State super- intendent of education, and I do not know who the winners are until they come to me and hand me their certificates- of appointment. " Should be doing the best work of any institution in the land, yet never did anything." Now, I submit, Mr. Chairman, that we have done something; nay, that we have done good work. I appeal to the number and quality of the experiments conducted by our Cornell investigators, and I appeal to the instruction given to the large number of students who have patronized our agricultural college in rebuttal of the statement made before you, and if further refutation is needed of that statement I will mention one other fact. Here is a report on our college of agriculture signed by the president of every agricultural society in the State of New York. It speaks for our State Dairymen's Association, our State Agricultural Society, our New York State Grange, our State Breeders' Association, our Western New York Horticultural Society, our State Fruit Growers' Association, our State Sheep Breeders' Association, our Shropshire Sheep Association, our State Association of Beekeepers' Societies, our State Poultry Society, our State Association of County Agricultural Societies, our Patrons of Industry, and others. Here is a report indorsed by these agricultural societies in our State, commending the work we are doing in the Cornell College of Agricul- ture, and asking the State of . New York to grant the college large 458 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. additional facilities for this beneficent work. If you want further demonstration of the fact that we are not doing anything, I could hand you a long list of our graduates and former students in agriculture who have become eminent as investigators in experiment stations, as teachers in agricultural colleges, as practical farmers, scattered not only over New York State, but over the entire country. I was told a little while ago, when I had the honor of being presented to the members of your committee, that the gentleman from Wiscon- sin, Mr. Adams, is a practical farmer. Well, Mr. Adams will recall that the work of agricultural education has been inaugurated and successfully carried on in Wisconsin by a Cornell man; and when I made a trip last winter, going into ten or twelve States, visiting all of the foremost agricultural colleges of the country, with a view of possibly getting information that would lead to the improvement of our own work, the thing that surprised me most was the number of our own graduates that I met. At the agricultural college of Iowa, at Ames, 1 think there were 12 men on the staff who were graduates of Cornell. You will excuse me if I go into some detail in order to' prove to you that Cornell, which has been so severely criticized here,, has done work in agriculture of which we are justly proud. Mr. Burleson. Bo you not think it is possible that the Secretary, when he used that expression "never did anything," meant along the line of soil physics ? President Schurmann. 1 should be glad if that were the meaning.- And I think it is very likely that the statement went to the press with- out the Secretary reading it. Mr. Burleson. I heard the Secretary make that statement, and that was the impression it made on me — that he meant that to apply to what you had done along the line of soil physics. Mr. Bowie. It is possible that this did not convey the shade of meaning that he had in his mind. A Member. That might be disproved and utterly discredited, how- ever, by the words which follow these. They have disgusted the State of New York to such an extent that in despair it had to go and establish an experimental station under its own auspices at Geneva. President Schurmann. I want to say that I am not in any way reflect- ing on the Secretary of Agriculture, and I am here simply to correct errors in your records. They may have been made through the fault of the stenographer. The next sentence, to which reference has just been made, is as follows: They have disgusted the State of New York to such an extent that in despair it had to establish an experimental station under its own auspices at Geneva. That can be refuted, and fortunately for me, it can be refuted con- clusively and briefly. Does it refer to the experimental-station work or does it refer to the teaching work? Let us assume, first, that it refers to the experimental work. Then the answer is that the state- ment therein contained can not be true, because the experiment station under the Hatch Act of 1887 was organized in Cornell University in 1888, and the State experiment station in Geneva was founded in 1880. It can not, therefore, refer to investigations. Can it, then, refer to teach- ing? Does it mean that Cornell disgusted the State by its teaching in agriculture, and therefore the State founded a better institution at HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 459 Geneva? It can not possibly refer to teaching, because, while Cor- nell has a school of agriculture in which it teaches, Geneva does no teaching, and it is simply an experimental station. Whichever horn of the dilemma is adopted, the statement can not stand the test of fact. Mr. -Bowie. Now, as to the work you are doing at Cornell in the experimental station, what is the nature of that work? President Schukmann. In the experimental station we have men engaged on each of the different subjects. We have, for instance, the horticultural side represented by Professor Bailey, who has just pub- lished his great encyclopedia of horticulture, and whose investigations have given him so high a standing both in this country and in Europe. Then, this year we have Doctor Hunt, whom we called from the direct- orship of the college in Ohio to our professorship of agronomy. This branch has to do with crops from the time the seed is sown until they are harvested. Then we have in Professor Wing a man who has long been making important investigations in animal husbandry and dairy- ing. But Professor Pearson is now our specialist in dairy husbandry, and I expect great things from him. We have as colleague of Professor Bailey Professor Craig, who was formerly head horticulturist of the Dominion of Canada. For botany in its application to agriculture we have Professor Atkin- son, who has a high reputation as an investigator. In entomology we have Professors Comstock and Slingeiland. It will be remembered by the chairman that when the pear psylla attacked our State a few years ago, Professor Slingerland was able to invent a spray that killed the insect, and a very distinguished gentleman from Niagara County told me that that discovery of Professor Slingerland's was worth a million dollars to his county alone. Then we have in chemistry, as applied to the soils, Professor Cavanaugh, who has been doing successful work for a number of years and is much in favor as an institute lecturer as well as an experimenter. Mr. Scott. Does Cornell have any supervision over this station at Geneva? President Schurmann. No; that station was established by the State of New York before the Federal Government had established this work at Cornell. It is absolutely under the control of the State. Mr. Scott. What precaution is taken to prevent any duplication of work there? President Schukmann. The common sense of the director and pro- fessors is a safeguard, and that I consider a sufficient safeguard in ref- erence to all the experiment stations. And since the point is raised I will say something more. I do not set myself up as an authority on science, because I am not; but I know from my experience in dealing with scientific men that if you undertake, by a board or a secretary or any other civil official, to direct their work, you will take the life and the nerve out. of it. The scientist must be left absolutely free. He will blunder along through nine hundred and ninety-nine experiments and finally, on the one thousandth, he reaches something that may revolutionize an industry. Look at what Babcock did in Wisconsin. What matters some duplication? By the instructors and professors we have in Cornell there is a constant duplication of work, but it is all the better on that account. Mr. Adams. Is it not true that the value of a great many experi- 460 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. ment is dependents on the fact that they are duplicated and reduplicated, and the original results are thus confirmed or disproved? President Schukmann. Certainly it is. If any gentleman in this com- mittee doubts that — this is not the question that I came here to argue, but you will excuse my digressing for a moment — if you have any thought of establishing a Congressional control or an administrative control of scientific men, I beg of you before doing so to read Dar- win's Life and Letters and then try to imagine how that man could have done his work and revolutionized the thought of our time as he did if he had not been left absolutely free. And what is true of one scientist is true of all others. If the Government official knew enough to direct the scientist's work he could get on without him. Absolute freedom is the breath of life to science. The next sentence is as follows: But they heard from the" people down here and they now propose to establish a college of agriculture. We sent a man down to start them in soil physics. Well, considering that we have had a department or college of agri- culture ever since the university was started, and the head of it, Pro- fessor Roberts, retired last year on reaching the age limit, 70 years, and that he aroused more interest in agricultural education and the application of science to agriculture than anyone else ever did in New York. I naturally feel aggrieved for his sake, now that he is not here to speak for himself, to hear it said that we have just now established a college of agriculture. We have had a college with an excellent faculty. What we have done is to substitute one director for another. When Professor Roberts reached the age limit and went out we appointed another man in his place, Professor Bailey, as director of the college. And, of course, he has made certain changes. For instance, we have bought, since Professor Bailey became director of the college, three pieces of land, one a farm and the other two half farms. We have bought 212 acres of land within the last year, on which we spent $18,500. Professor Bailey wanted other improvements, so that we have spent this year, over and above the money spent on the land, $8,000 or $10,000 more, to provide him with these extra facilities, than we have been in the habit of spending in the past or than we probably will spend in the future. I make this explanation to account, perhaps, for this statement that we have just established a college of agriculture. Perhaps, also, there is another explanation of it. The State of New York has done little for Cornell, nothing like what the Western States have done for similar institutions, and recently the State has appropriated $35,000 a year for the promotion of agricul- tural knowledge throughout the State. That may have suggested the statement that we were establishing a college of agriculture. But the fact remains that we have had a college of agriculture for many years and that it has been attracting large numbers of students, and Director Bailey and I hope that if the present rate of increase is kept up for the next few years we may have a thousand students in agriculture. I do not think this is a dream, because we have a col- lege of mechanic arts, and fifteen years ago we had only 100 or 200 students there, and this year we have 942 students in that college. Science is later in being applied to agriculture than it is in being applied to mechanic arts, but the day is coming — it is here — and this HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 461 generation is going to see a revolution in the matter of agricultural education. I look forward to the day when we shall have agriculture taught in the common schools of the State, and when, having gotten such work in the high schools, the pupils can then go forward to the agricultural college of Cornell University. Mr. Bowie. Legislation in Alabama has made it compulsory to teach certain branches of agriculture in all rural schools in every county of the State. President Schurmann. Yes; and that may be done elsewhere, but the point is, gentlemen, that you must have the men. The men are every- thing. What we are aiming at in Cornell is to turn out men who are capable of teaching agriculture, and then to send them as mission- aries all over the States. The next sentence is as follows: We sent a man down to start them in soil physics. I inquired how he was getting along, and found that he got 75 students within a few days, and had to shut the door. Now, that means this, that the Secretary of Agriculture was good enough to detail Mr. Bonsteel to Cornell to give instruction in soil physics. We had not the money to care for this subject, and the State of New York was not giving it to us, and it was exceedingly kind of the Secretary to send Mr. Bonsteel to us and I appreciate his action, and I wish here to express my gratitude for it, and I hope the com- mittee will stand by him in this policy. It is only fair to say that Mr. Bonsteel, excellent teacher though he is, did not draw 75 students to Cornell. On the contrary, the students were all there, and what happened Was this: We offered a number of elective courses and among these new studies was soil physics, and 75 students out of the 276 students in the college of agriculture elected this course. Now, that was a very meritorious action on the part of the Secre- tary, and I should think it good policy to follow in the future, to detail experts on agricultural specialties to different colleges in the country. But my regret, and I regret it infinitely, is that such a meri- toriout act should have been in any way coupled with such a statement as I have had to traverse here to day. I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, and unless some gentlemen of the committee have questions to ask me that is all I desire to say. Mr. Brooks. What is the total amount that Cornell University receives from the Government — $34,000, or is that from the land grant only? President Schurmann. The $34,000 is the income from the land grant only. We then receive also, under the second Morrill Act, $25,000, making altogether $59,000 for the purposes of agriculture, the mechanic arts, and the sciences related thereto. Mr. Adams. And military science? President Schurmann. Yes; that is included in the act of 1862 also. Mr. Adams. Besides the $15,000? President Schurmann. You mean for an experiment station ? It is $13,500 in our case. Let me repeat that, apart from this $13,500 for the experiment station, we receive $59,000 on behalf of agriculture, the mechanic arts, and the allied sciences. Let us make a very liberal assumption; let us assume that although the seven of eight subjects mentioned in the acts of Congress were in the minds of the legislators, 462 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. and, of course, they were when they passed the laws, they really meant, to give agriculture half of the $59,000. We spend far more than that, on agricultural education at Cornell. The agricultural instruction that we offer costs nearer $140,000. That estimate takes in such departments as chemistry, botany, and all other sciences in which students in agriculture receive instruction. But if you exclude — though you should not — from your consideration all fundamental or allied sciences and take account only of agronomy, horticulture, animal industry, dairy husbandry, poultry culture, and similar divisions of technical agriculture, we are spending on instruc- tion and facilities therefor more than $30,000 — and that excluding the station money. Mr. Brooks. Spent by the university from its other funds ? President Schuemann. Spent by the university from all these funds, including the Federal fund. Let me repeat that. I say that if you exclude the Federal station money and take account of money spent on instruction in departments open only to agricultural students for subjects in technical agriculture, we are spending on them this year $30,290. Mr. Scott. Then you figure that the remaining $29,000 of your Federal funds could be properly charged up to the other purposes in the act? President Schuemann. Yes; to the other subjects mentioned in the acts of Congress, namely, mechanic arts and the physical and natural sciences. I would say also if you ask me what snould be charged to the college of agriculture for the services rendered to it by depart- ments like that of botany and chemistry and the like, the studies in which are taken by other students, that it would be three or four times that sum as a fair share. Mr. Scott. How much land have you? President Schuemann. Our total domain is 500 acres, and if we take out 150 acres of that for campus proper and 50 for playground, it leaves 300 acres. Mr. Scott. What is the State doing? President Schuemann. It has founded a veterinary college at Cornell University, for which it votes $25,000 a year, and it has given us a dairy building at a cost of $50,000. We hope it is going to do more now, and a bill providing for agricultural buildings is pending at Albany. It also gives us $35,000 for extension work in agriculture. Mr. Bowie. That is for that correspondence work that you have just detailed? President Schuemann. Yes. Mr. Bowie. Is it not true that the officers of your university and the professors of the university also do some farm-institute work? President Schuemann. Yes; that is a voluntary thing, but we do it constantly. I say to the agricultural professors at the time of their appointment that along with their official duties I want them to attend agricultural meetings and institutes in the State whenever it is pos- sible. Mr. Adams. Your statement is interesting, and the facts that you have given us as to the support of Cornell University I never have understood before. I never have understood before that the scrip was sold. HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 463 President Schurmann. Yes; it had to be sold Under the provisions of the act of Congress. Mr. Adams. I can see that in the State of Wisconsin where Cornell University has lands how we have always supposed that they had con- served their lands there and made a profit out of them when we went on and sold our lands, and what we got for them did not amount to anything. Can you tell us how much that has amounted to ? President Schurmann. Yes; I have the report of the treasurer in my hands. In our books we use specific names for these different funds. We call that under the second Morrill Act the "Congressional industrial fund," for instance. Mr. Bowie. That is the bookkeeping name? President Schurmann. Yes; the fund to which you refer, Mr. Adams, is included in what we call the Cornell endowment fund. Mr. Cornell's original gift was $500,000; to this he later added more. His latest gift, in the form of profits from his lands, was over $±,000,000. The Cornell endowment fund amounted on the 1st of August last' to $4,928,568— practically $5,000,000. Mr. Adams. All the lands have been sold? President Schurmann. All except a few odds and ends which may bring us in money enough, in view of the decline of interest, to keep the income from the fund where it is for the next five or ten years; and instead of treating the residue of our western lands as ordinary capital we are using it as a reserve fund to keep the income where it is in view of the decline in interest. Mr. Scott. That is the Federal endowment fund ? President Schurmann. I must protest against Mr. Cornell's gifts being called the Federal endowment fund. That is money that Ezra Cornell made b}^ going into the open market and buying of the State the scrip which any other man in the country could have bought; and there was only this difference, that if any other man had bought it and made money on it he would have put the money in his own pocket, whereas Mr. Cornell donated the profits which he made by holding the scrip to the university as a personal gift. A Member. Does this include the actual amount received for the scrip by the State of New York? President Schurmann. No; the actual amount received by the State of New York for the sale of its land scrip was $688,000, and that amount is held by the State of New York in trust for Cornell Univer- sity. The State pays the university 5 per cent interest on this land- scrip fund. Mr. Scott. And the difference between that amout and this $5,000,000 is the amount that was turned over to the university as a private.gift by Ezra Cornell ? President Schurmann. No; the $5,000,000 represents Ezra Cornell's fift to the university, and the land-scrip fund of $688,000 (which is eld by the State) is additional thereto. Mr. Scott. I understood your first statement. President Schurmann. I am glad to have these questions asked, because we have critics in New York who say that we have had mil- lions from the Federal Government, and they say, "Here you are now asking for something from the State of New York." Mr. Burleson. The secretary mentions first the soil physics, and in 464 HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. the conclusion he mentions the soil physics, and is it not only fair to the secretary to assume that when he spoke of Cornell never having done anything that he referred to matters along the line of soil physics? President Schurmann. If that is the interpretation it would relieve my feelings very much. Mr. Burleson. Is not that a fair interpretation to place upon it? .President Schurmann. The first sentence and the last sentence deal with soil physics, as you say, and if it was meant that all the inter- vening sentences should refer solely to soil physics I have very little to say, because I have already acknowledged that Cornell, not receiv- ing from the State of New York what your State colleges receive in the West of your State legislatures, we have been unable to provide for the teaching of soil physics. Mr. Brooks. I think it is only fair to say, also, that I personally heard the statement of the Secretary, and I did not gather from that statement that he was making any sweeping indictment against Cornell University, but I thought that it was as to the subject of soil physics. President Schurmann. Well, I acknowledge that with the resources at our command we are not able, and unless the State of New York helps us we shall not be able, to secure for all the subdivisions into which the science of agriculture in this day has fallen full and proper attention, and soil physics is one of those subdivisions which we have not money to care for. In other colleges of the university the fees of students enable us to expand, but in agriculture all tuition is free. Mr. Haskins. I have been very much interested in your statement as to what Cornell is doing, but I did not hear the statement of the Secretary. But I have read with a great deal of care what he said here, and I can not construe it as referring to anything else except soil physics? President Schurmann. Well, 1 must acknowledge that we have not been able to do for that what we have done for agronomy and horti- culture and animal industry and dairy industry and poultry keeping; and I am very grateful to the Secretary for the help he has given us in detailing Mr. Bonsteel to lecture on soil physics. Mr. Haskins. Is it not true that in the Agricultural Department there are a number of graduates of Cornell? President Schurmann. Yes, sir; a number. There is Doctor How- ard; and Mr. Coville, the botantist, is from Cornell, and there are a number of others. The Chairman. What is the range of salaries paid your scientists at Cornell? President Schurmann. The normal salary of a professor at Cornell University is $3,000 a year, and he retires at 70 years of age on half pay. That is the pay of a full professor, you know, who is appointed for life. But, while that is the normal salary^ there are deviations upward to the extent of $250, $500, and $1,000 in the cases of men that we are very desirous of retaining. Deans get from $250 to $500 extra. My previous statement applied ta professors only — that is to say, some professors get $3,250 and some $3,500, or more. Deans get $250, $500, or $1,000 over and above their professorial salaries. Our assist- ant professors get $1,500 and $2,000, and our instructors get $1,000. As to students, let me say a word. Harvard and Yale and Princeton have been celebrating their 250th, 200th, and 150th anniversaries, HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 465 respective^. Cornell opened its doors thirty-five years ago, yet, with the exception of the first institution I have just mentioned, Cor- nell has a larger attendance than any of them. Mr. Scott. Are they undertaking anything in the way of soil-physics investigations at Geneva? _ President Schurmann. I do not know. I think that they are not limited by the law to agronomy or horticulture. Mr. Scott. Is there not any specific requirement in the act of Con- gress that you shall teach this soil physics at Cornell? President Schurmann. No. I quoted to you at the beginning the terms of the act of Congress under which these moneys are expended. Mr. Scott. There is no specific requirement of that kind? President Schurmann. No; we are to give instruction in the sciences relating to agriculture and mechanic arts, including military science, and in the physical, natural, mathematical, and economic sciences. Mr. Bowie. You say that the cost of teaching the mechanic arts and those allied subjects is many times greater than the amount provided for? President Schurmann. Many times greater. Mr. Bowie. You said that the university should be credited with the expenditures on that account, and that they were much in excess of the amount received from the Government? Mr. Schurmann. Yes; several times over. Mr. Brooks. That would be including students outside of the col- lege of agriculture, which has 276 students? President Schurmann. Yes, outside of agriculture we have colleges of mechanic arts and engineering (civil, mechanical, electrical, and marine), and colleges of veterinary medicine, architecture, law, medi- cine, and liberal arts and sciences, on which we spend hundreds of thou- sands of dollars annually. The students of these colleges pay in tuition fees more than $200,000 a year. In agriculture, as I have said, stu- dents pay no tuition. Then rich men give us endowments for other colleges, but never for agriculture. I am very much obliged to you, gentlemen. I want the committee to understand that I am simply correcting errors, in your records, and that I am grateful to the Secre- tary of Agriculture for the help that he has given us in soil physics. (Thereupon the committee adjourned.)