In one of 22,000 the police matron served as “health officer” when
 she was not otherwise engaged.

 Twenty-nine of these cities made no pretense of supervising their
 milk supply.

 Only nine of them had isolation hospitals for contagious diseases.

 Thirty-one of them kept no mortuary records whatever.

These conditions exist in a prosperous agricultural and manufacturing
State—and they can doubtless be found to exist in almost any State in
the Union.

AGENCIES THAT CAN HELP.

These are unpleasant facts, but they give us an idea of the way we
are performing the primary function of government—the guarding of
human life against avoidable destruction.

We have now briefly considered the extent of the waste of the most
vital asset of the nation, and how we are conserving it, or rather
how we are not conserving it.

Now let us rejoice over the fact that we not only know how to reduce
this waste, but that thanks to those who have aroused the life
conservation sentiment in this country, a general improvement in the
public health service is taking place in many States and cities. The
experiment has been successful. We now know what we can do. We have
the wealth and knowledge, and the machinery is organized throughout
the country to rapidly correct our appalling record of life waste.
Our work is to induce our people to use it.

Every business and social organization should do its full share of
this work.

The life insurance institutions of this country have a constituency
of 25,000,000 policyholders. These policyholders are directly
interested in the promotion of longevity, not only from the
humanitarian but from the financial viewpoint; for the lower the
mortality among policyholders, the greater will be the saving and the
larger the dividends to policyholders, which means a reduction in the
cost of their life insurance. It is estimated that about $50,000,000
is lost annually by postponable mortality among the insured.

The Equitable Life Assurance Society, with which I have the honor to
be connected, is endeavoring to do its part not only in conserving
the lives of its policyholders, but in stimulating community
action. The Metropolitan Life Insurance Company of New York is also
rendering a valuable public service in Conservation along somewhat
different lines. Two or three of the small companies, and perhaps
the same number of fraternal insurance societies, have also given
it attention. Let us hope that the time is near at hand when the
other two hundred-odd life insurance companies, and the fraternal
societies as well, will also increase their usefulness to their
policyholders and the public by joining in this great work.

SOME SUGGESTIONS.

This Congress will be asked to do and to advocate many things, for
there are a multitude of independent activities connected directly or
indirectly with this general subject. Among others I sincerely trust
the following suggestions will be duly considered:

 1. To encourage business institutions, civic, social and religious
 organizations which have influence over any considerable number
 of people to join in at least some of the many phases of the life
 conservation campaign.

 2. To encourage the education of the individual to adopt healthful
 habits of life—to avoid the intemperate life, which means excess in
 eating, drinking, working, playing—and unhealthful indulgence in
 indolence as well.

 3. To encourage communities to establish and maintain ample public
 health organizations consistent with the magnitude of the work in
 hand.

 4. To advocate the organization of local health leagues as a
 stimulus to public interest and to give aid and support to the
 public health service.

 5. To encourage the slowly growing sentiment for a rigid supervision
 (and isolation if necessary) of tubercular victims, which is the
 only way in which this devastating plague can be stamped out.

 6. To advocate the employment of civic nurses in the health service,
 who may also act as health inspectors and aid in educational work.

 7. To advocate the issuance and distribution by the States or
 municipalities of an official prevention manual to teach the public
 how to avoid preventable disease.

 8. To urge every individual to go to his or her doctor for
 periodical health inspections to detect disease in time to arrest or
 cure it.

 9. To urge employers of labor to give their employes these
 examinations free as a part of their efficiency and welfare program.

 10. To encourage philanthropy, now so generously contributing for
 the care of the sick, to also enter the field of disease prevention
 which it has so far quite generally neglected.

Human life is our paramount asset. Its conservation should be your
paramount issue.

President WHITE—The audience is certainly indebted for this great and
interesting paper. It is hard to get over stubborn facts and figures,
especially where figures are facts.

A great doctor once shocked the people of the country by saying that
everybody should be chloroformed when they arrived at the age of
sixty. From this paper it would seem we ought at least to reach the
age of sixty, the age of being chloroformed, and, better still, we
had better so conduct the board of health and so support liberally
the board of health in our city that people may just begin to live
when they get to be sixty.

I now have the pleasure of introducing Prof. Irving Fisher, of
Yale University, who has given this subject many years of study
and research and will now speak to you upon the “Public Health
Movement.” (Applause.)

Prof. FISHER—The Conservation movement is a movement to prevent
waste. When the Conservation Commission was appointed, four years
ago, emphasis was placed on the wastes of our natural resources,
but by the time the Commission made its report, it had come to
the conclusion that by far the most serious as well as the most
preventable wastes are the wastes of human life.

A generation ago it was a common impression that the average human
lifetime was fixed as by a decree of fate. When I was in college one
of our reverend instructors showed us a mortality table and said
with great impressiveness: “There is no law more hard and fast than
the law of mortality.” I believed it, and even yet many people are
under this delusion. Pasteur did much to introduce a more optimistic
view. He stated his belief in these immortal words, “It is within
the power of man to rid himself of every parasitic disease.” He
staked this opinion on his own wonderful laboratory revelations as
to germ life. Today we can confirm his words by absolute statistics.
And now his successor, Metchnikoff, has surpassed even Pasteur in
optimism. Metchnikoff is devoting himself to the question of the
prolongation of human life and already gives us a vision of the time
when centenarians will be regarded merely as in the prime of life and
when the normal span of a century and a quarter will be a frequent
occurrence.

The growing consciousness that human life is not a fixed allotment,
which we must accept as our doom, but a variable, which is within our
power to control, has recently led to extraordinary exertions all
over the world to save human life. This impulse has gained strength
also from the great and almost universal decline in the birth
rate. Old countries like France, and new countries like Australia,
are confronted with the specter of depopulation. Consequently,
as human life becomes scarce, it becomes precious—like any other
commodity! These two facts, the consciousness that much mortality
is preventable, or at any rate postponable and the fact that
increasingly fewer babies are being born in the world, are together
operating to produce a great health movement throughout the world.
Nothing will stop it until the whole world is convinced of the
paramount importance of this problem of human Conservation.

This world-wide movement for the conservation of human life has
expressed itself in many ways—in medical research; in societies
for preventing tuberculosis, infant mortality, social diseases,
alcoholism, and vice; in the growth of sanatoria, dispensaries,
hospitals and other institutions; in an immense output of hygienic
literature, not only technical books and journals, but also popular
articles in the magazines and daily news papers; in the constant
agitation and legislation for purer foods, milk supply, meat supply
and water supply; in the movement to limit the labor of women and
children and to improve factory sanitation; in the establishment of
social insurance in Germany, England, Denmark and other countries;
in the improvement of departments of health; in the spread of
gymnastics, physical training and school hygiene; in the revival of
the Olympic games and the effort to revive the old Greek ideals of
physical perfection and beauty, and last, and most important, in the
sudden development of the science of eugenics.

In the summer of 1911 was held in Dresden a unique world’s fair,
devoted exclusively to health—the International Hygiene Exhibition.
In this were shown the fruits of the whole movement in all
lands—except, alas, our own; for to our shame it must be said that
we, as yet, are among the backward nations in this movement for the
conservation of human life. Our Congress was asked to appropriate
$60,000 to erect a building and supply an exhibit to show what we
have done for our part in this movement, but Congress thought it
could not afford so large an expenditure for so small (!) an object,
and the result was that from the millions of people who visited this
exhibition one constantly heard the question asked: “Where is the
United States?”

And those few Americans who did go to visit the exhibition found that
other nations had far outstripped us in this movement for national
sanitation and health. Some of the achievements already attained by
other nations should be recorded among the wonders of the world. One
is the striking decline of the death rate in the city of London.
Within two decades, London’s death rate has virtually been cut in
two and is now only thirteen per thousand, or less than that of most
cities one-fiftieth its size.

Probably, however, the greatest achievement of any country is that
of Sweden, where the duration of life is the longest, the mortality
the least and the improvements the most general. There alone can it
be said that the chances of life have been improved for all ages of
life. Infancy, middle age and old age today show a lower mortality
in Sweden than in times past, while in other countries, including
the United States, although we can boast of some reduction in infant
mortality, the mortality after middle age is growing worse and the
innate vitality of the people is, in all probability, deteriorating.
The reason why Sweden of all countries has succeeded in improving
the vitality of middle age and old age, while other nations have
failed, is, I believe, to be found in the fact that Sweden, of all
nations, has seen the problem of human hygiene as a whole instead
of partially. In most other lands, and particularly in the United
States, public health has been regarded almost exclusively as a
matter of protection against germs; but protection against germs,
while effective in defending us from plague and other epidemics of
acute diseases, is almost powerless to prevent the chronic diseases
of middle and late life. These maladies—Bright’s disease, heart
disease, nervous breakdowns—are due primarily to unhygienic personal
habits. Medical inspection and instruction in schools, as well as
Swedish gymnastics, have aided greatly in the muscular development of
the citizens of Sweden. Swedish hard bread has preserved their teeth.
The Gothenburg system is gradually weaning them from alcohol. There
has even been a strong movement against the use of tobacco. Other
countries are tardily following in the path which Sweden has trod so
successfully.

The significant fact is that Sweden has not hesitated to attack the
problems of personal habits. I believe we must have a revolution
in the habits of living in the community if we are going really to
realize the promise of Metchnikoff and others as to the prolongation
of human life. Health officers in this country have not regarded it
as a part of their duty either to live personally a clean, hygienic
life, or to teach others to do so, or even to investigate what those
conditions of well-being are which make for personal vitality.

I can remember, thirteen years ago, talking with a doctor in Colorado
as to the habits of living of his patients. I said to him, “You tell
me that tuberculosis is a house disease, and that the reason it
exists is because people do not open their windows. Why, then, do
you not tell your patients they must open their windows, or sleep
out of doors?” He said, “I wouldn’t dare to do that; I would lose
my practice. They would think I was a crank and meddling in their
personal affairs.” Today that battle has been largely won. Today, not
only in Colorado and California, and in the places where there is
perpetual sunshine, sleeping out of doors is common and not confined
to invalids, but indulged in by the community generally. Even in New
England and throughout the country you will find sleeping balconies
going up all over. The change has even affected in some degree the
architecture of the country, and while as yet only a minority of the
people sleep out of doors, yet I believe it is true that the majority
of the people in the United States have far more air in their
sleeping and living rooms today than ten years ago. The fact which
the doctor in Colorado did not dare tell his patients thirteen years
ago, has in some way been told to the people of the United States.

But there are many other things that need to be told, after we are
sure that they are true. When we have, through our National, State
or municipal officers made thorough investigation and have been
able to discover the actual truth as regards eating and drinking,
hours of work, recreation and play—all those facts that go into
what may be called personal habits, then we may gradually overturn
existing unhygienic habits of living. John Burns attributes a large
part of the great reduction in London mortality to the improved
personal habits of working men, particularly in regard to alcohol.
In this country, Dr. Evans, both as health officer of Chicago and
later as health editor of a Chicago newspaper, has shown how public
instruction in personal habits can be made effective, and it will be
largely through affecting personal habits that the life insurance
companies will improve the longevity of their policy holders.

Scientific men today have reached substantial agreement that alcohol
is a poison. When everybody understands this, the days of alcohol
as a beverage will be numbered. Sweden in the thirties was called
drunken Sweden, but today the antialcohol movement there has
converted Sweden into one of the soberest of countries.

But the use of tobacco, tea and coffee ought also to be investigated,
so that we may know how far they are deleterious, and to spread this
knowledge among the people.

Fashions are in their essence changeable and the time will come when
the world will not be built on fashion but on reason. Japan has made
more rapid progress in civilization than any other nation, because
the late Mikado resolved and publicly stated that the institutions
of Japan must not be tied by tradition but must be based on reason.
When we have replaced tradition by reason, we shall have gotten a
solid basis for civilization, and this must apply to ancient customs
and habits of every kind. I am firmly convinced that we are looking
at only one-half of this public health movement as long as we confine
ourselves to the acute or infectious diseases. We shall not get more
than half the results obtainable until we realize that there must be
a revolution in the personal habits of the people.

Yet the United States, in spite of its shortcomings, has some special
triumphs to record. We have, through hygiene under Colonel Gorgas,
made it possible to dig the Panama Canal. We have virtually abolished
yellow fever on our shores and in Cuba. We have nearly eliminated
hook worm disease in Porto Rico and are gradually doing the same in
the Southern States. We have found a cure for spinal meningitis. We
have, in New York, made an object lesson in the last year of reducing
the summer death rate of infants in a striking manner. We have, by
individual milk stations in Boston and other cities and in individual
sanatoria, dispensaries and other institutions, demonstrated that the
death rate from specific diseases can often be cut in two.

Yet we have depended altogether too much on private initiative. In
New York the summer death rate of infants was reduced chiefly through
the work of the milk committee and individuals like Nathan Straus.
The elimination of hook worm disease and the discovery of the cure
of spinal meningitis came through the gifts of Mr. Rockefeller. It
is well that individuals should apply themselves to these problems
and without such personal interest they could never be solved.
Nevertheless, progress will be many times as rapid when the problems
for the nation are managed in a national way. There are three great
agencies to which we must look for the saving of human life in the
future and it has been the object of the Committee of One Hundred on
National Health, of which I am President, to help stir these three
agencies into activity in this country. They are the public press,
the insurance companies and the Government.

To a limited extent, all of these agencies have increased their
health activities in recent years. A few years ago, popular articles
on public health were seldom seen because the public and the press
thought the subject of disease uninteresting and repulsive. Today, on
the other hand, one can scarcely pick up a popular magazine without
finding not only one but several articles dealing with questions
of public health; and it has been found possible not only to make
these articles interesting, but, by emphasizing the positive, or
health side, instead of the negative, or disease side, to render
them attractive and beautiful. And yet, as Dr. Wiley has said, the
newspapers in spite of all the good they are doing with their right
hands are, with their left hands, in their advertising columns trying
to undo that good by advertising the fraudulent part of the “healing”
profession who are trying to line their own pockets at the expense of
the lives of the public.

The second great agency from which I believe we may expect wonderful
results in the future is life insurance. As our committee pointed out
to the Association of Life Insurance Presidents several years ago,
life insurance companies can save money by preventing deaths just
as fire insurance companies have saved money by preventing fires,
and steam boiler insurance companies have saved money by preventing
explosions. Since this suggestion was made, a number of progressive
life insurance companies have tried the experiment. The Metropolitan
and the Equitable have established departments of human conservation
and a number of other and smaller companies have undertaken similar
enterprises. The Postal Life Insurance Company has recently published
the statistical results of their experience, worked out in a most
careful manner, and have demonstrated absolutely that it pays life
insurance companies to save human life. This being the case, we may
expect life insurance companies in the future to become active in
life conservation. Already there are probably fifteen million policy
holders in the United States insured in companies which are trying
to do something for their health—through medical examinations,
instruction in hygiene, utilization of visiting nurses, participation
in civic health movements and otherwise. To save human life merely
to save money is sordid enough, but it is well to harness commercial
motives, when possible, in the service of humanity.

The third, and most important, agency is the government. State
and National health offices are becoming yearly stronger and more
efficient; and yet much remains to be done, particularly by the
National Government. We need a National Department of Health or
a Department of Labor which shall include in its operations the
conservation of human life. We have already passed the phosphorus
match bill to prevent one of the worst industrial diseases—phossy
jaw. We have passed effective legislation in regard to interstate
commerce in prostitution. We have established a Children’s Bureau and
a Bureau of Mines to prevent industrial accidents in mining. We have
enacted suitable legislation in regard to cocaine and habit-forming
drugs. We have a Pure Food Law and laws for the inspection of meats.
Yet, as Dr. Wiley, Mrs. Crane and others who have watched the
operation of these laws at close range well know, they need to be
executed with a stronger hand.

The truth is that as yet we have only made a feeble beginning in
public health work, especially in this country. We need first of all
to do what Sweden has done for a hundred and fifty years—namely, to
keep proper vital statistics. Vital statistics are the bookkeeping of
health, and we cannot economize health any more successfully than we
can economize money unless we keep books. At present only a little
over half of the population of the United States has statistics of
its deaths, while the statistics of the births are as yet nowhere
sufficiently accurate to be called real statistics.

Our National Statistician, Dr. Wilbur, illustrates by a story how
much better we keep our commercial books than our books of vital
statistics. In a Western State a girl was entitled to a fortune when
she became twenty-one. Reaching, as she supposed, her twenty-first
birthday, she laid claim to the fortune. Much to her surprise, her
father said, “But you are only nineteen;” and then the two tried to
look up the records. They had no family Bible, they had no public
record office to go to, and they were at sea as to how to discover
exactly the date when she was born. However it suddenly occurred to
her father, who was a farmer, that the very day his daughter was
born a calf was born on his farm and the birth of the calf had been
recorded. In that way he established the date of the birth of his
daughter.

In view of the great slack of our vital statistics, therefore,
we cannot measure even the death rate, much less the number of
preventable deaths in the United States. All that we can do is to
study carefully the registration area and on this basis to work out
certain minimum figures.

Four years ago, as a member of President Roosevelt’s Conservation
Commission, I endeavored to do this and to report on the condition
of our “National Vitality.” I found, after getting together all
the statistics available and taking account of the degree of
preventability of different diseases as estimated by experts that,
out of some 1,500,000 deaths annually in the United States, at least
630,000 are preventable. Of these preventable deaths, the greater
number are from seven causes. These seven causes include three great
diseases of infancy, then typhoid fever, which usually makes its
attack in the twenties, then tuberculosis, accidents in industry, and
pneumonia which come in the thirties.

Now 630,000 unnecessary deaths per year mean over 1,700 unnecessary
deaths per day or more than the lives lost on the Titanic disaster.
The nation cannot continue indifferent to hygiene as it gradually
dawns on the public that for lack of hygiene we suffer a Titanic
disaster every day of the year. The popular imagination was deeply
stirred by the image of 1,600 helpless human beings suddenly engulfed
in mid-ocean. That was a vivid dramatic picture which the blindest
of men could see and understand. It led to immediate official action
on both sides of the Atlantic to safeguard human life at sea. Yet
on land we lose three hundred and sixty-five times as many lives
as this every year and never stop to add it up. They are scattered
and diffused throughout the land—a Wilbur Wright lost from typhoid,
a handful of miners in an explosion, some railway employes in an
accident, some victims of lead poisoning, a little army of infants,
here a few and there a few. Yet these deaths are just as real and
mean an infinitely more serious loss than were the deaths from the
Titanic disaster. Moreover, they could be as easily prevented.

And concomitant with this unnecessarily great death rate, there
is, of course, a colossal aggregate of needless sickness. We have
no real statistics, but by analogy with English statistics we may
assume that, on the average, for every death per annum there are two
persons sick during the year. This makes about three million people
constantly lying on sick beds in the United States, of which, on the
most conservative estimate, at least half do not need to have been
there.

If, now, on the basis of these figures, we try to compute how much
human life is needlessly shortened in the United States, we find
that it is shortened at least fifteen years. Again, if we translate
these preventable losses into commercial terms, we find that, even
by the most conservative reckoning, this country is losing over
$1,500,000,000 worth of wealth producing power every year.

What does this mean? To us individually, it means that we are losing
a large part of our rightful life not only by death itself which
cuts off many years we might have lived, but also from diseases and
disabilities which are not fatal but cripple the power to work and
mar the joy of living. I believe I am far within the facts when I
venture the opinion that the average man or woman in the United
States is not doing half of the work nor having half of the joy of
work of which the human being is capable.

With all this room for improvement before our eyes, it is not
surprising that the zeal of the health movement is growing fast. Each
success serves as justification for further effort.

One of the most encouraging symptoms of progress is the great
attention which is being paid to public health in the present
political campaign. All three of the party platforms included planks
in behalf of public health. The Democratic and Progressive platforms
were particularly explicit and emphatic and all the candidates have
emphasized health in speeches and in their record in public life.
The Democratic campaign managers are carrying out plans to make
progressive health legislation prominent in the campaign.

These and other indications augur well for better legislation,
more energetic enforcement of the law and, above all, a more
appreciative public sentiment as to the transcendent importance of
the conservation of human life. It is now reported that the Hon.
Dr. Roche, Secretary of State in Canada, is in strong sympathy with
the proposal there for the establishment of a Federal Department
of Health and the Republic of China is reported to have already
established such a department.

From all these indications of actual activity as well as from the
logic of the situation we are justified in predicting that an age
of human conservation is at hand. Men and women are waking to
their responsibility to the race. Eugenics will be a watchword of
the future. To squander our natural resources is ignoble indeed,
but far worse is it to squander our vital resources. The most
sacred obligation of each generation is to bequeath its life
capital unimpaired to the generation which comes after. Scourges
like typhoid and tuberculosis must be swept off the face of the
earth. Habit-forming drugs, including alcohol (and even tobacco,
especially for young boys) must be recognized in their true light
as means of depleting the vitality of nations. Prostitution and
the white slave traffic must be condemned anew as robbers of the
race. Industries which kill and maim, poison or infect their
workers, which deform and stunt little children, which incapacitate
women for normal motherhood, which through overlong hours of toil
close each successive day’s work with progressive exhaustion,
must be controlled. Machinery was made for man, not man for
machinery. Immigration which drains European public institutions
of their criminal, insane, feeble-minded and other defectives and
delinquents and sets these creatures loose in America to breed with
and contaminate our population, must be regulated. Marriage laws
and customs must be adjusted so as to discourage or forbid the
procreation by the unfit. All these and other hygienic and eugenic
reforms will be realized as fast as public sentiment becomes educated
to the solemn responsibilities and higher valuations of human life.

The noblest task, therefore, which I can conceive for any man is to
aid in erecting true ideals of perfect manhood and womanhood. Our
ideals, though improving, are not yet worthy to be compared with
those of Japan or Sweden and the ideals even of these countries have
not yet reached the level of those of ancient Greece still imaged
for us in imperishable marble. With superior knowledge our health
ideals should excel those of any other age. These ideals should not
stop with the mere negation of disease, degeneracy, delinquency and
dependency. They should be positive and progressive. They should
include muscular development, a sound mind in a sound body, integrity
of moral fiber, a sense of the splendor of the perfect human body as
a temple of the human soul, a sense of the enjoyment of all life’s
proper functions. As William James said, simply to breathe or move
our muscles should be a delight. The thoroughly healthy person is
full of joy and optimism. He rejoiceth like a strong man to run a
race. Said Emerson, “Give me health and a day and I will make the
pomp of emperors ridiculous.” Our health ideals should be nothing
short of an abiding sense of the sweetness and beauty, the nobility
and holiness, of human life.

President WHITE—We have had wonderful addresses this morning from the
distinguished speakers upon this question of conservation of human
life.

I wish now to announce the Committee on Credentials: Mr. E. T. Allen
of Portland, Ore., Mr. Volney T. Foster of Chicago, and Col. W. A.
Fleming Jones of Las Cruces, N. M.

I wish also to announce the Chairman of the Committee on Resolutions:
Mr. Walter H. Page of New York. The different State organizations
will report to him a member for that committee from each particular
State. It will be well to report to Mr. Page either tonight or early
in the morning.

We all need to be put under authority. We find people are not taking
good care of their health, of themselves or of the community. We
will now hear from Dr. L. E. Cofer of Washington, D. C., Assistant
Surgeon-General of the United States Public Health Service, who will
address the Congress on the subject of “Authority In Health Control.”

Dr. COFER—Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen: I do not think any
invitation has ever been received with more satisfaction than the
one for a representative of our service to appear before you. It was
received with the greatest gratification.

The Public Health Service is absorbed in the work of health
conservation and Surgeon-General Blue evinced the greatest interest
in your invitation for him to send a representative to explain
the scope of the work being performed and discuss the question of
authority in connection therewith.

This topic is now receiving the consideration of many authorities
on public health matters, and on this account one may approach
the subject in a hopeful attitude. I say “hopeful” because public
health as an institution is rapidly growing, and its practical
value is becoming more and more manifest, and sanitary science is
not now nearly so far in advance of its practical application as it
was even a few years ago. The possibilities of sanitation in the
general advancement are being made a part of all high ideals of
government, so that it is not to be wondered at that the general
government should be called upon to do its share. The difficulty lies
in determining just what the government should do in aid of public
health and just what should be left to the States and municipalities.

History furnishes no precedents for this Nation to follow. It is
almost useless to seek a model for our guidance in some foreign
country. A nation with our conditions of boundary and magnitude,
with millions of immigrants coming to our shores from all parts of
the earth, has its own salvation to work out in the public health as
well as in many other problems. In other words, we must rely upon
ourselves, whether we proceed in haste or by feeling our way step by
step. There is a marked divergence of sentiment growing in regard
to national health control. One is that the government should do
far more than it is now doing towards the protection of the public
health, another that too much is expected of the National Government,
and that there is a tendency on the part of State governments to call
upon the Federal Government for service which should be performed
by the States themselves, but which service is asked for largely
in the interest of economy. These widely differing ideas in regard
to the apportionment of public health responsibility lead us to a
consideration of the provisions of the Constitution of the United
States relative to this matter. These provisions are contained in
Section VIII, paragraphs I and 3:

 Section VIII. The Congress shall have power—

 Par. 1. To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to
 pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare
 of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be
 uniform throughout the United States.

 Par. 3. To regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the
 several States, and with the Indian tribes.

It has been held by some that the powers of the National Government,
relating to public health, are restricted to paragraph 3, which
gives the right to Congress to regulate commerce, and, in regulating
commerce, to so regulate it as to prevent its being a carrier of
disease. Others have held that under the general welfare clause,
in paragraph 1, Congress has the right to legislate for the public
health.

Should the latter interpretation be the correct one, Congress could
establish the national health control over States and municipalities
with regard to municipal and domestic sanitation, with all details
as to house drainage, plumbing, sewerage, and disposal of garbage,
water supply, ventilation, school houses and public buildings
ventilation, examination of milk supply, food and drugs, disposal of
the dead, disinfection of dwellings, etc. Would it be desirable for
the National Government to have such authority? Would it be tolerated
by the people? It is a fact that the American people have already
decided this question when the old National Board of Health was
abolished.

The National Board of Health was created by an act of Congress,
approved March 3, 1879. Another act was approved June 2, 1879,
clothing the board with certain quarantine powers, but this last act
was limited to a period of four years, at the expiration of which
time Congress declined to renew it. The National Board of Health,
therefore, had an active existence from 1879 to 1883. The act
establishing the board remained upon the statute books until February
15, 1893, when it was formally repealed by Congress.

To state the case concisely, the National Board of Health was not
in accord with the spirit of American government, and the people
rejected it. Now, what do the American people want? I will not
attempt to answer this question, but will suggest that they want
a general sanitary administration which is capable of steady
development, and yet may be subject to such modifications as the
changing conditions of our country may necessitate, a sanitary policy
which can be made to expand until it will answer the public needs not
only for the present but even for decades to come.

Its direct aim should be the ultimate intelligence and education
of the average citizen in matters relating to his personal health,
and the health of his commonwealth. No better plan for sanitary
government appears at the present time than one modeled upon the
structure of the general government itself. Broadly stated, this
sanitary policy expects of each State a sanitary autonomy whose
influence should be appreciated by every individual in every hamlet,
however small, in its domain. It contemplates a State pride in the
development of sanitation, a self-reliance and an unwillingness to
surrender functions or call for aid from the general government
excepting after the clearest convictions of propriety or necessity.
This policy expects from the general government that since it
controls commerce, both maritime and interstate, it will prevent
commerce from conveying disease; that it will respect the sanitary
institutions of the States; that it will have such organizations
and establishments as properly belong to its sphere of action to
supplement where States fail, and to enable it to wield its peculiar
power when urgency demands.

As an apt illustration of this conception of authority in health
control, let us consider the present activities of our Federal Public
Health Service. These are as follows:

 1. The prevention of the introduction of infectious and contagious
 diseases.

 2. The sanitary regulation of foreign commerce.

 3. The observance of international sanitary treaties.

 4. The prevention of the spread of infectious and contagious
 diseases from one State to another through co-operation with State
 and municipal health authorities.

 5. The collection and dissemination of sanitary information.

 6. The conduct of scientific research in matters pertaining to the
 public health.

 7. The enforcement of sanitation in Federal territory and in
 connection with Federal administrative affairs.

THE PREVENTION OF THE INTRODUCTION OF INFECTIOUS AND CONTAGIOUS
DISEASES.

The chief national quarantine law is that approved February 15, 1893,
amended and extended by acts of Congress approved August 12, 1894,
March 2, 1901, and June 19, 1906.

Under these acts the maritime quarantine administration has become
national, many state stations having been voluntarily surrendered
to the Government, others supplanted by the General Government,
because of failure to comply with government regulations, and others
superseded by direct authority of law.

The diseases excluded from the country by the national quarantine
establishment are cholera, yellow fever, smallpox, typhus fever,
leprosy and plague.

Some quarantine stations are inspection stations only, but many
are large institutions, comprised of hospitals, quarters, barracks
for detention of crews and passengers, wharves and disinfecting
machinery, and boarding vessels, all requiring good administrative
ability on the part of the commanding officer, who must also be
expert in the detection of disease.

When a ship from a foreign port arrives off a port of the United
States, it is met by a quarantine officer for inspection under the
national regulations. Fifty medical officers of the service are
engaged in this work at forty-seven separate stations, extending
along the Pacific, the Gulf and Atlantic coasts from Alaska to
Portland, Me. Without the quarantine certificates given these
officers and the bill of health obtained at the foreign port, the
ship would not be allowed entry by the collector of customs and
without his permit it would be unlawful for the ship to unload its
cargo.

At a few ports, not more than three or four in number, this
inspection is made by a State quarantine officer, a relic of the
system which prevailed prior to 1893, when quarantine was considered
a State rather than a National function. They are obliged, however,
to enforce the National regulations, and are subject to inspection by
the Federal officers, and if they fail or refuse to comply with the
United States regulations the President is authorized to detail an
officer of the Government for that purpose.

In addition to the diseases remanded by quarantine, others are
excluded under laws relating to immigration, and for this purpose at
the principal ports of entry there are also stationed seventy medical
officers, who, during the past year, for example, examined more than
1,280,000 immigrants, certifying more than 30,000 of them on account
of physical and mental defects. The immigration laws exclude persons
afflicted with any loathsome or any dangerous contagious disease, or
having mental or physical defects which may affect their ability to
earn a living.

Humanity requires the treatment in hospital of immigrants arriving
sick with ordinary as well as prohibitive diseases, and the large
hospitals connected with the stations are under the professional
conduct of service officers.

Although the immigration stations are under the control of
commissioners attached to the Department of Commerce and Labor,
nevertheless the medical officers are subject in their professional
work to supervision by the Public Health Service, and their
instructions as to the medical inspection of aliens are prepared by
the Surgeon-General and approved by the Secretary of the Treasury.

THE SANITATION OF FOREIGN COMMERCE.

At certain foreign ports and at certain times, depending upon the
presence of the various quarantinable diseases, either in the foreign
ports of departure or in the country contiguous thereto, officers
of the Public Health Service are detailed by the President to serve
in the offices of the American consuls, to assist them in enforcing
the quarantine regulations for foreign ports. These officers keep
themselves informed of the prevalence of contagious disease in these
cities and the surrounding country. They sign a bill of health which
certifies that all the regulations required to be enforced at foreign
ports on vessels leaving for the United States have been complied
with.

This involves a knowledge of the point of origin of the freight and
passengers, disinfection of material from an infected locality, the
personal inspection of passengers, particularly steerage passengers,
and their detention if necessary. The power of enforcement of these
regulations lies in the above mentioned act of Congress approved
February 15, 1893, which imposes a penalty of $5,000 upon any vessel
from a foreign port seeking to enter a port of the United States
without this consular bill of health. The consul can legally refuse
a bill of health if the regulations are not complied with.

In this connection it may be said that officers of the Public
Health Service are stationed constantly at such ports as Hongkong,
Shanghai and Amboy, in China; Yokohama and Kobe in Japan; Salina
Cruz, Manzanillo and Puerto Mexico in Mexico; Guayaquil, Ecuador; La
Guaira, Venezuela, and Havana, Cuba. During the summer of 1911, on
account of cholera conditions prevailing in Italy, Russia and France,
there were officers of this service detailed in the offices of the
American consul at Naples, Genoa, Palermo, Messina and Catania, in
Italy, at Libau in Russia, and at Marseilles, France. In addition
to this, officers were ordered to several other foreign ports of
departure, there to confer with the American consular officers as to
the enforcement of the regulations for foreign ports, and for the
purpose of insuring uniformity of procedure.

The State Department has done much to assist in the quarantine and
sanitary work in foreign ports, through the interest it has aroused
in the said work on the part of its consular corps.

THE OBSERVANCE OF INTERNATIONAL SANITARY TREATIES.

These treaties or conventions establishing them have been ratified by
the Senate of the United States, as well as by the other governments.

The International Sanitary Bureau of American Republics at Washington
was founded by the International Conference of American States
held in the City of Mexico in 1901. That conference also called
for international sanitary conventions, which are now held every
two years. Two have been held in Washington. The object of the
conventions is to freely discuss all matters relating to the public
health and particularly those which affect the American Republics,
and the purpose of the international Sanitary Bureau is to encourage
the execution of the resolutions or agreements decided upon by the
conventions. The convention held in Washington in 1905 drew up a
treaty with regard to the quarantine treatment of cholera, plague
and yellow fever, which was signed ad referendum by the official
delegates, and has been confirmed by practically all of the American
Republics. At the meeting in Mexico in December, 1907, action
was taken which has brought the International Sanitary Bureau at
Washington into relations with the International Office of Public
Hygiene at Paris.

The International Office of Public Hygiene at Paris was formally
inaugurated December 9, 1907. It is the outgrowth of international
sanitary conferences at Rome, Venice and Paris, with regard to the
bubonic plague. The following governments are represented: Algeria,
Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, British India,
Bulgaria, Egypt, Canada, France, Great Britain, Holland, Italy,
Mexico, Peru, Persia, Portugal, Roumania, Russia, Servia, Sweden,
Spain, Switzerland, Tunis, Turkey and the United States.

Each of these governments has agreed to pay its pro rata of the
expenses necessary to maintain the international office. The
principal object of the office is to collect and bring to the
knowledge of the participating States facts and documents of a
general character relating to public health, especially as concerns
infectious diseases—notably cholera, plague and yellow fever—as well
as the measures taken to combat these diseases.

PREVENTION OF THE SPREAD OF INFECTIOUS AND CONTAGIOUS DISEASES.

These operations are conducted under two laws. One is the national
quarantine act of 1893, already referred to, which contains
practically the same provisions for interstate as for maritime
quarantine. The other is the annual law passed by Congress
appropriating an “epidemic fund” which contains a provision that
it may be used in aid of State and local boards of health in the
enforcement of their quarantine regulations, as well as those of the
national service—to be used, however, only against certain specified
epidemic diseases, viz., cholera, yellow fever, smallpox, typhus
fever and bubonic plague.

Now, with these two laws in hand, and when the appearance of any of
the above-named diseases in any State so require, the officers of
the Public Health Service are at once upon the scene with the double
object of seeing that the Treasury Interstate Quarantine Regulations
are enforced by the State or local authorities and to offer aid, as
authorized by law.

When aid is extended, the Government’s funds must be expended by its
own officers, and the latter are therefore placed in charge and have
the co-operation and assistance of the State or local authorities.
They have, therefore, the support of the State and local laws and
regulations, as well as those of the Federal Government. This is
fortunate, since experience has shown the importance, in a Republic
like ours, of local sympathy and support.

THE COLLECTION AND DISSEMINATION OF SANITARY INFORMATION.

The Public Health Bureau, through its Division of Sanitary Reports
and Statistics, compiles and publishes each week a pamphlet called
the Public Health Reports. It contains a statistical report from all
cities in the United States of more than 10,000 inhabitants, and
some others, giving the morbidity and mortality in each city with
regard to twelve diseases and the total mortality from all diseases.
It contains also a statement of the weekly mortality in some 120
foreign cities from thirteen communicable diseases. It gives special
information concerning quarantinable diseases and sanitary measures
in the United States and foreign countries. The foreign information
is received through the United States consuls and service officers
abroad.

Collective investigations are being made of the prevalence of
pellagra, infantile paralysis and leprosy.

A compilation has been prepared of state laws bearing upon reporting
diseases, with a view to increasing the collection of morbidity
statistics and bringing about improved methods and greater uniformity
in their collection.

CONDUCT OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH.

In the District of Columbia, in a commodious building, the Public
Health Service has its hygienic laboratory, a research laboratory
exclusively for public health investigations. It is conducted in four
divisions, viz., bacteriology and pathology, chemistry, zoölogy and
pharmacology. This organization brings under the same roof, and in
intimate association, scientific workers in each of these several
branches, interesting facts developed in one line of investigation
being made freely known to the investigators in other lines of
research.

Officers are detailed to receive instruction in this laboratory,
thus enhancing the scientific attainments of the corps and giving
opportunity for selection of those best qualified for permanent
detail in research work. In this manner specialists have been and are
being developed on various subjects, such as typhoid fever, pellagra,
hookworm disease, infantile paralysis, scientific disinfection, etc.

Public Health Service officers may be found in the States
investigating other diseases than those named in the epidemic law,
viz., typhoid fever, infantile paralysis, cerebro-spinal meningitis,
hookworm disease, malaria, pellagra, dengue fever, milk sickness,
etc. These investigations are usually made at the request of State
health authorities. The bureau at Washington, on receiving a request
from a city or locality for expert aid, invariably refers the request
to the State Board of Health before compliance.

The laws permitting these investigations are, first, the interstate
section of the quarantine law of 1893; and second, the act of
Congress approved March 3, 1901, providing a building for the
hygienic laboratory for investigations of contagious and infectious
diseases and matters relating to the public health. As the
investigations require laboratory examinations, they come within this
last named law and the appropriation which supports it.

In various States of the Union, there are thirteen establishments
engaged in the production of vaccines, antitoxins and serums,
which play so important a part in modern therapy. The variation in
the potency and the occasional impurity of these products caused
Congress to pass an act July 1, 1902, requiring a license for their
manufacture for sale in interstate traffic.

ENFORCEMENT OF SANITATION IN FEDERAL TERRITORY.

In the Philippine Islands, where the government is by commission and
a legislature, much work of value to the public health is performed
in the bureau of science under the insular government. There are,
however, in the several ports of the Philippines medical officers
of the Public Health Service under appointment from the Treasury
Department in Washington, engaged in the transactions of both
incoming and outgoing quarantine. Two of these officers, in addition
to their supervision of the national quarantine, are also director
and assistant director, respectively, of the public health of all the
Philippines.

In Hawaii you will also find medical officers conducting the national
quarantine. They are also assisting the territorial health board in
preventing the recurrence of plague by the extermination of rats
and continuous bacteriological examination of those captured. One
of these officers is the official sanitary adviser of the Governor
of Hawaii, and is carrying on a campaign for the eradication of
disease-bearing mosquitoes.

Here also may be observed the leprosy investigation station, also
controlled by our officers, both on the island of Molokai, where
hospital and other accommodations have been erected under the law of
March 3, 1905, appropriating $100,000 for this purpose, and at the
receiving station at Honolulu, where cases are seen in the earlier
stages.

In Porto Rico public health officers are enforcing the United States
quarantine regulations under the acts of Congress relating to Porto
Rico and national quarantine. The campaign which has practically
eradicated plague from San Juan is being conducted by the Federal
Public Health Bureau.

In the Canal Zone you will find two commissioned officers enforcing
quarantine regulations at Ancon on the Pacific and Colon on the
Atlantic. These officers are loaned to the Isthmian Canal Commission.
This is an important adjunct to the work of the canal, because it
would be useless to clean the zone if fresh importations of disease
were permitted.

I will now devote a few words to the Health Bureau organization in
Washington by means of which all the functions or activities above
described are administered under one head.

THE ORGANIZATION OF THE BUREAU OF PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE.

The law which changed the name of the Marine Hospital Service and
made it a Public Health Service was approved July 1, 1902. This law
fixed the status of the officers, enlarged the hygienic laboratory
and gave it an advisory board, provided for the conferences with the
State and Territorial Boards of Health, provided for compilation and
publication of statistics, and directed that the President should
prescribe rules for the conduct of the service and the uniforms of
its officers and employes.

It also provided for a Public Health and Marine Hospital Bureau at
Washington.

By an act of the Congress approved August 14, 1912, the name of the
Public Health and Marine Hospital Service was changed to Public
Health Service. The public health functions and duties of the service
were extended and certain changes were made in the salaries of the
officers.

The Public Health Service is under the supervision of the Secretary
of the Treasury, and is in charge of the Surgeon-General, who has six
Assistant Surgeons-General in charge of the Bureau Divisions. These
divisions are as follows:

1. Foreign and Insular Quarantine and Immigration.

2. Domestic (Interstate) Quarantine.

3. Personnel and Accounts.

4. Marine Hospitals and Relief.

5. Scientific Research and Sanitation.

6. Sanitary Reports and Statistics.

The above lengthy description of our present public health activities
has been necessary not only in order to demonstrate their character,
and scope, but also as an illustration of the variety of legal
authority existing for the enactment on the part of the general
Government of public health work.

This paper will not admit of the incorporation into it of the
national laws relating to public health which are now operative,
but a careful inspection of these laws will demonstrate that they
will admit of such interpretation as would make possible an almost
unlimited amplification of our present public health activities, the
limit being only one of appropriations and officers.

Careful analysis of the present health laws and activities will
also show that the Government is seeking to control nothing which
any other public health organization would wish to control. The
foundation of the national public health service is in the quarantine
law of February 15, 1893, referred to above. The quarantine service
is today almost entirely national, notwithstanding a local sentiment
for State or municipal control, which exists in two or three cities
only, and which it is believed is destined to a short tenure for the
following reasons:

It must be admitted that maritime quarantine should be a national
affair. It is a concomitant to commerce, over which under the
Constitution the national government has absolute control, and it
naturally belongs to that department of the government regulating
commerce in other respects. In other words, it seems especially
appropriate that quarantine should be one of the functions of the
Treasury Department which registers, licenses and enrolls all
merchant vessels of the United States, inspects the hulls, boilers
and machinery of such vessels, determines the number of passengers
which said vessels may carry and provides for the housing and rations
of the crews.

Besides this, it carefully examines all pilots upon American
vessels and determines upon granting them licenses. It enforces
the navigation laws and aids vessels in distress by an efficient
revenue cutter service. It also provides for the care of the sick
of our merchant marine. Then why should it relegate to a State
authority, or health officer of some small port, the one remaining
act of surveillance over vessels, namely, the determination as to
whether they may be admitted to entry from a sanitary standpoint? Why
should it be left to a local appointee, responsible only to a mayor
or governor, the power to determine whether all the people and the
merchandise on vessels destined for all ports of the United States,
shall be permitted to enter without detention; and why should it give
this local officer power to detain such vessels; and further than
that, why should such local officers desire that power?

In the same way, the other activities of the Public Health Service
conflict in no way with the functions and prerogatives of the State
and local boards of health. Therefore, the term “national health
control” is a misnomer. The term “national health co-operation” would
be much more descriptive of the conditions actually existing. The
interstate health activities above described must of necessity be
governmental functions. The duties and responsibilities connected
with them could not be discharged by States with any degree of
uniformity. Therefore, interstate commerce laws are considered as
appropriate national enactments, and their operation encroaches upon
no State or municipal rights.

It may be said with a feeling of conviction that the health control
in the United States today is just exactly in accordance with the
desires of the people. The people know that their State and municipal
boards are being aided by the health activities of the national
government rather than being encroached upon. In addition to this
the Federal Public Health Service and the State and municipal boards
are acting in harmony to the following ends: They are controlling
commerce, in order that commerce may not be clogged, and where
necessary they are laying the net of healthful restraint for purposes
of good.

The government is receiving the good-will and co-operation of the
State and local health authorities in its work of catching and
throwing back the diseased persons who seek entrance to our shores
in the great Waves of immigration. They stand together to check the
merchant or the manufacturer when he is ready or willing to risk the
lives of the people by furnishing improper or impure food or drug
products. They stand together to frustrate the lawyer who seeks by
illegal technicality in the behalf of an individual, or steamship
company perhaps, to force a way around a sanitary barrier erected for
the protection of the people at large. Again, the municipal, State
and government health authorities are standing together to stimulate
the knowledge of our legislators in public health needs and are
combining their knowledge to insure reasonable appropriations for the
carrying out of general public health projects.

The mission of the three classes of sanitarians above mentioned
may go still further. It may go to the extent of prodding the
conscience of the tardy doctor, and even to the sweeping aside of the
sentimental obstructions which the unenlightened are able to put in
the path of the conservation of life. There is ample law for present
and probably for future needs, and the control of national health
remains, after all, today where it has remained in the past, and
where it always will remain, that is, with the American people, not
solely with the government, nor with the State or municipal health
agencies. Each of the great nations of the world has gone about the
direction of its public health work in its own way, and always with
the realization that the ideal is not necessarily the practical, and
what is best today may be supplanted by better tomorrow.

To summarize the situation, we have today State boards of health
in control of State sanitation, operating under proper and ample
State law. We have municipal health organizations operating under
their own legal authority, and finally we have the United States
Public Health Service, operating under several laws, as stated
before, more far-reaching in their scope than is indicated by the
activities pursued under their authority. The people, apparently,
are satisfied so far as the Public Health Service is concerned. When
the people want anything more they will demand it, and if available
appropriations will not admit of compliance with such requests
they will be forthcoming. Therefore, I am at a loss to suggest
what additional health legislation is necessary or desirable to be
engrafted upon that already existing in this country, and I am unable
to see the necessity for any different plan of organization so long
as the people, in whose behalf the organization is being maintained,
are satisfied.

In closing, I wish to say that I have endeavored simply to place
various facts before this Congress, and while I do not pretend to
have exhausted this branch of the subject, I fear that I can not say
the same with regard to your patience.

President White here requested Dr. Henry Wallace, of Des Moines,
Iowa, to take the Chair.

Chairman WALLACE—We are now ready to hear the report of the Committee
on Lands and Agriculture. The first speaker will be Dr. George
E. Condra, of Lincoln, Neb., whose subject is “Land Frauds, or
Get-Rich-Quick Schemes.”

Dr. CONDRA—Mr. President and Delegates: Some of you may recall the
fact that the speaker has briefly outlined this subject at each of
the preceding Congresses, under the head, “Conservation of Business.”
The discussion offered at this time is based on reliable information
secured from many States. It is largely the result of field work. The
data are presented according to the viewpoint of Conservation and
should be so considered.

Do you fully realize that the principles of Conservation are
permeating every department of human industry, improving the
processes, increasing efficiency, and promoting common honesty, that
the idea of equity is increasing in force? That it is being extended
to business not for the purpose of holding it in check, but primarily
for protection against fraud? This movement for square dealing
certainly is in order for business is sore with graft and tracked by
fraud at every turn. Plain it is that many transactions in the realm
of commerce fall outside the sphere of true business. They grade
from those that are doubtful on through to those that are plainly
fraudulent and therefore criminal. The term “business,” however, has
a splendid meaning which should be conserved. It symbolizes honesty,
stability, honor and reliability. Sharp practice, double dealing and
doubtful promotion are but parasites and should be so regarded. They
have no legitimate place in business and are being eliminated.

Several persons have spoken in this Congress on pure food, eugenics,
etc. Their messages will tend to make people healthier and better fit
to be fathers and mothers. All this is good. Dr. Wiley and others
have emphasized the importance of pure food and health laws, but how
many go back of this matter of health and food to the land, or source
of our food and raiment and show the great need for pure land laws?
(Applause.) The State trains its sanitary engineers, lawyers and
physicians for their life work. It examines the lawyers and doctors
before permitting them to practice, but how about land agents? They
are good and bad. Many of them have no special qualifications for
their work and should not be permitted to do about as they please
without restriction, promoting this and that deal which may or may
not have merit. Grant me your closest attention and I will point
out certain classes of fraud that operate in connection with the
development of mineral lands, irrigation, fruit lands, eucalyptus
culture, drainage, dry land farming and the small tract propositions.

_Promotion of Mineral Land._—The amount of money sent from the
country and town and city to doubtful mine promoters is enormous.
The return for this outlay is small, in some places less than one
cent for each dollar. Yet the public does not fully realize that
nearly all reasonably sure propositions are not available for wanton
promotion, that a mere prospect is not a mine, and that fraudulent
promoters are hurting the mining business.[3]

_Oil and Gas Promotion._—The excitement caused by a developing oil
field is intense. Agriculture gives way to a spirit of speculation
and overvaluation and everything looks good to an investing public.
Fabulous returns appear to be in sight for all who invest in time.
This gives opportunity for professional promoters to do their work,
sometimes on a large scale. They claim a sure thing even when
wildcatting. So they send unwarranted prospectuses broadcast and the
money harvest is on. It is difficult to place the criminality of such
procedure. We only know that it works out badly as a rule. You should
know that it is bad business to accept the unqualified statements of
most oil and gas promotion concerns as a basis for investment. These
persons and concerns interfere with legitimate development and should
be brought under control.

_Irrigation Schemes._—The Federal Government spends vast sums in
developing the irrigation resources of several dry land States. Such
reclamation is of economic importance. Furthermore, many reliable
individuals and private companies do as well and even better in
developing some projects. As a result of successful irrigation
thousands of happy homes are made where once was only dry land.
Notwithstanding this fact there are fraudulent irrigation promoters.
Scheming individuals sell illegitimate propositions which can not
succeed because of lack of water, unsuitable land or heavy graft.
Such promotion has gone on to such an extent as to call for severe
criticism by many practical irrigationists of the West, and the
Reclamation Department of the Federal Government is increasing its
diligence in checkmating the work of persons who attempt to promote
bad projects.

_Fruit Land Promotion._—Have you visited the great fruit districts
of Oregon, Washington and other Northwestern States? Do you know
what care is there given to the cultivation and marketing of
apples especially? The fruit is so perfect in form and color. It
is accurately graded for the Eastern and foreign markets. These
splendid successes are widely known and are taken advantage of
by scheming persons who promote the sale of any and all kinds of
land in and near fruit districts. One of the leading fruit men of
Washington says that thousands and thousands of dollars are going
into the hands of concerns that are sure to fail and that the fruit
business is being hurt by such operations. The trouble of it is
that the average investor does not know that the fruit business is
highly specialized, and that many matters concerning soil, exposure,
climate, markets, etc., not known to him, are the features that
determine success and failure. Furthermore, the fraudulent promoter
does not know, neither does he care.

Doubtful promotion of this kind is not confined to the Northwest
alone. It has hurt the South and may do damage to New York and
other States in which are lands well suited for fruit raising, if
the proper authorities do not conserve the larger interests of the
industry and State against promoters.

_Eucalyptus Promotion._—For many years the forests of the United
States have been in process of depletion. Some have seen in this,
and with good reason, an approaching timber famine. The alarm has
been sounded, and the demand has gone forth for better methods in
timber utilization, for fire protection, and tree planting. This
is the right thing without doubt, but it affords a loop-hole for
promoters. It is understood, also, that some trees grow faster and
are more all-purpose than others. The eucalyptus are of this kind.
They are of many kinds. Such trees can not be grown on any and every
type of soil and are limited somewhat by climate. It so happens that
California, because of its soil and climate, is the leading State in
culture of eucalyptus. It has several successful groves and larger
plantings, yet the situation is promoted for all it is worth, and
perhaps more. The public (in the Central and Western States) is
worked by carefully-planned selling schemes. The fact is that there
is too much graft in some of them. The process has gone on to such
an extent as to cause the friends of eucalyptus planting to sound a
warning against such procedure. This should cause investors to make
a more careful inquiry of reliable persons, not controlled by the
promoters, before parting with money. The trees must have suitable
soil, climate, and care.

_Drainage Schemes._—One of the largest lines of development in the
United States is in the field of drainage, whereby swamp and flood
lands are improved. The amount of land that either has or can be
reclaimed by drainage is said to be about 75,000,000 acres. The
Federal Government, various States, companies, and individuals, are
doing this work. Much of such development is well founded, yet there
are bad deals, which might be called deliberate steals in some cases.
Examples of these exist in a few States and much money has been
squandered on projects that can never succeed. Teachers, ministers,
farmers, merchants and others are victimized. In the language of one
of Florida’s representatives at the National Irrigation Congress
of this year, “Persons selling certain wet lands of Florida are
practicing fraud and should be prosecuted as criminals. They are
hurting the good name of Florida and swindling people in the North.”
This person severely criticized certain cities of the North as being
promotion centers. Further comment is not necessary.

_Dry Land Deals._—Much dry land promotion is fraudulent, caused in
part by misinformation on the part of agents, but due to some extent
to deliberate misrepresentation. For instance, there are places in
Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado, western Nebraska, Wyoming, and
other States subject to such promotion. The fact is that a part of
the land in the dry area of each State named is well suited for dry
farming, but that unscrupulous agents sell anything and everything to
unsuspecting persons as being good, awaiting the plow and successful
development. So it is that geographic position has been overworked.
The following points are sometimes overdrawn in securing sales:

a. The idea that nearly all agricultural land is under cultivation.

b. The notion that dry farming methods are successful on almost any
kind of dry land.

c. That the climate, referring to the rainfall especially, is
becoming more favorable for agriculture in dry regions as the years
go by. This notion, used in deceiving thousands of people, is greatly
in error.

d. Advantage is taken of such fluctuations in rainfall as occur from
year to year and at more or less regular periods, ten to twelve years
apart. During the wet years the country is boomed; at dry times the
people move out and industry wanes. These ups and downs are recurring
features on certain areas not permanently suited for farming. The
process works havoc with the misguided settlers, hurts a State that
encourages it, and brings no lasting beneficial results to land men
who manage the operation.

Apparently, Nature is no respecter of persons, especially so on the
dry, sandy lands. It is coming to be known that there is no permanent
change for the better in rainfall, frost belts or any thing of the
kind. Some lands are better suited for grazing than for ordinary
farming and should be so managed.

The speaker is pleased to be the servant of a State that stands
strongly against misrepresentation of land values. Such a policy
works out the greatest good in the long run. It breeds a healthy
demand for a fact basis of development and minimizes the tendency to
“stand up” for the home State by unwarranted “boostings.”

_Land Schemes in General._—There are many other land projects. The
public has invested largely in small tract propositions in Florida,
Texas, and other States. Much of this promoted land has considerable
value, but some of it is over-estimated, and many investors are quite
apt therefore to lose all or nearly all of their money. Certain kinds
of land look more inviting during one season of the year than at
another. For example, there are places in Texas and Mexico to which
the promoters take their victims in the dry season and to other
lands during the wet season. This year the speaker heard a Texas
representative declare, in a national meeting, that many of the
small tract propositions, together with certain other land schemes
of his State, are filled with fraud. He criticized northern people
for promoting Texas. This should serve at least as a warning to
unthoughtful investors. The good agricultural propositions of Texas
and elsewhere are handled by responsible land agents.

The movement for the reclamation of the so-called abandoned lands
of some of the older States is quite apt to be hurt by unreliable
promoters.

_Misrepresentation and Overvaluation._—Not only do some promoters
misrepresent propositions for the purpose of receiving gain
therefrom, but they often advance the sale price unduly. Many
examples of this kind have come to my attention. Two weeks ago I
received a prospectus from Oklahoma, advertising lead and zinc land
for sale at $6.00 a block, twenty feet square, making 1,089 blocks in
the tract of ten acres. This would be $6,534 for the land. I happen
to know the region and own land close to the small tract. The fact
is that one can purchase such a place at $10.00 or less an acre, or
at not to exceed $100 for ten acres. So the difference between $100
and $6,534 is too much of an advance for those who invest. What do
you think of such a deal? The persons handling it use the general
statement of a geologist which recites the fact that the geological
formation that contains zinc and lead in the Joplin District, some
thirty miles distant, extends through the promoted land. This
statement has no specific importance, but is sufficient for persons
who accept the “get-rich-quick” bait. It is my judgment that Oklahoma
should not permit such a clean-up. (Applause.)

The public craze for land makes it easy for promoters to do their
work. Many farmers, dominated by a spirit of consideration for their
children, accept the “spiel” and assurance of the “dopster,” sell in
agricultural regions and move onto nearly worthless land, believing
that it will become about like the old home place in time, and that
each child will then have a farm and home. May we not say that he
who deceives a family in this way is a mean man? (Applause.) Can you
think of a worse service to a community? Certain railroads are not
free from blame in that they promote this traffic. The farmer who
accepts the bad “dope” is also to blame. It has taken a long time for
the people to learn that mere belief, opinion, and sentiment are not
strong enough forces to overcome the influence of land not suited for
agriculture.

If our land seekers could realize how important and far-reaching is
this matter of choosing favorable places for home building, they
would be less easily led astray. They would consider soil, climate,
water supplies and other necessary conditions of success, as they
actually exist, and be governed less by the old arguments and slogans
so often used for land development in general. They would pay less
attention to deceptive literature written for the special purpose of
securing emigrants and sales. They would inquire into the methods
whereby this phase of the land business is carried on, and avoid
being carried off of their feet, especially when on “home-seekers’”
excursions and worked by a well-organized plan.

Formerly, the newer States encouraged the work of grafting land men.
Time has shown, however, that this was bad business and really a
drawback to permanent development. The present trend is to conserve
the interests of those who go onto and manage the land, making it
easier for them to succeed. They are assisted by the publicity of
useful facts and the censure of fraud. Furthermore, it is coming to
be recognized that State emigrant agents, agricultural experiment
stations, soil surveys and Conservation Commissions should not lend
their support to any interest other than that which brings the
best results to the people of the State. They should stand for the
policies that insure permanent development and do so as their plain
duty. Do you know how public men are urged and tempted to further
the interests of promotion concerns and that there are plenty of
opportunities to sell one’s influence? That it requires diligence
and courage to rightly serve the State? Happily, our public-spirited
citizens who have at heart the best and largest interests of
their States, stand strongly against misrepresentation whether
unintentional or not. They claim that doubtful promotion serves only
in closing deals, and in directing settlers to the land, but that
in the long run the process works a positive harm to the misguided
people and to the State as well, if the land is not suited for
habitation. Fortunately, most States are coming to this viewpoint.
They have learned that it pays to tell the truth when transplanting a
population and directing the permanent development of a State.

Where do you delegates stand on this proposition, and what is to be
the attitude of your States?

_Promoters’ Methods._—Do you know the signs of fraud? They are
exposed in the method used in securing money from the community.
The plan is about as follows: A selling scheme is perfected. It is
constructed in a way that leaves no flaws, apparently. Each agent
learns the scheme; he becomes skilled in applying it to the different
types of individuals. Too often it is of little concern whether
the project has merit or not. The chief object is to get money.
Extravagant claims are made in which returns of 100 per cent. or more
a year are said to be a sure thing. The influence of nationality,
church, and fraternal orders are brought to bear in securing sales.
The support of persons with good standing in the community is
secured. Those who assist the promoter are given a reduction for
their influence. The dope is given them often and systematically. So
they soon realize the greatness of the project. This is promotion
psychology. The land is offered at high enough price to permit
reduction for quick sale, which bait works in many cases. Persons
filled with greed for money are easy victims. The above kind of
thing, though less common than formerly, is practiced in most States,
and the wonder of it is that it can continue and why it is permitted
to continue. It is fraudulent and should be stopped entirely if we
are to conserve the interests of good people.

_Effects of Land Fraud on Local Business._—Many families lose enough
through fraudulent entanglements to give a college education to the
son, a piano to the girls, and general improvements for the home
or farmstead. The drain is away from home and school. Perhaps the
greatest loss is the people who are lured to places where in many
cases they are less well off than in the old home. Persons who lose
in bad deals become suspicious of real business done by reliable men
in the community. They refuse to invest in local developments in
which the returns are sure, though smaller than those promised by
promoters. Many are put out of business entirely by land frauds.

Do you agree with me in that it is not good business to farm the
land, cash in its fertility and then scatter the proceeds among
grafters? Let us quit chasing the ends of the rainbow, and turn our
attention more towards the right use of the fruits of our labor in
education and home building. (Applause.)

_Regulation._—There are many laws for the conservation of business.
The Federal Government prosecutes persons who make fraudulent use of
the mails. There is opportunity under the law to recover on account
of misrepresentation; but these laws are not sufficient. Public
sentiment is now ripe for the enactment of special laws to conserve
business against land frauds. Nebraska has made a special study of
the subject, reduced fraudulent procedure by the force of publicity
and public opinion, and will pass special conservation laws in its
next Legislature. Kansas has gained distinction by the enactment
of the well-known “Blue Sky Law.” This is good so far as it goes.
It provides for registration, reports, supervision and penalties.
Many States, as, for example, Wisconsin, Wyoming, and Texas, are to
undertake legislation of this kind at the next sessions of their
Legislatures.

Provision should be made in the special act against land frauds for
field examination and report upon properties offered for sale. This
field work might be done by the State Soil Survey, or the State
Conservation Commission.

An essential feature of the act will be the registration of realty
agents and the furnishing of proof that they are competent and
reliable. This will reduce the number of land agents and insure the
responsibility of those permitted to do business. The Western realty
men are now framing a law of this kind to meet the needs of the
various States.

Apparently there is no opposition to the proposed legislation for it
is to conserve business and eliminate fraud. It is sure to receive
the support of all unless we except those who make gain through
doubtful promotion. If opposition appears before the various
Legislatures it will have the embarrassing position of being on the
side of fraud.

_Summary._—Let me close this report with the following statements:

1. This discussion, though favorable to reliable land agents is
against doubtful promoters.

2. Realty agents should have a practical knowledge of land
classification, soil types and the land business.

3. Reliable and competent real estate agents have an important place
in the State. They are against promoters and promotion values.

4. No one should deal with an agent who is not favorably known and is
not good at the bank.

5. See the land you purchase. Also get a reliable report upon it from
a competent, disinterested party. Base your transaction on facts—not
on opinions. Get a good title and not a mere promise to deliver.

6. Keep out of the “get-rich-quick” schemes. Quit chasing the ends of
the rainbow. If your fever gets too high, consult a banker.

7. As a rule, it is best to avoid the “home seekers’” excursions and
“boom” literature, unless you are sure of your footing.

8. Consult disinterested old-time residents whose places show that
they are actual, successful tillers of the soil in the locality
where you are to buy. They will give you the farm value, and not the
promotion value.

Ladies and gentlemen, are you ready to support in this important
movement? (Applause.)

Chairman WALLACE—I am sorry we haven’t half an hour longer to give
Dr. Condra to skin those skunks.

We will hear from Mr. Charles S. Barrett, President of the Farmers’
Union, and finally from Mrs. Lund, of California. I want these
speakers to show their appreciation, their gallantry, by giving her
the last five minutes, and I am going to call them down unless they
do.

Dr. CONDRA—It has been suggested that we close this discussion in one
minute. I am very sorry that neither Mr. Barrett, or Dr. Bateman can
be heard.

My friends, when a State puts upon its statute book an adequate law,
no fake concerns will seek to do business in that State. That is
true. Now, we ask that your committee be continued to the end that
we may report the conditions of the soil and the development of the
soil. I thank you and give ten minutes additional time to the lady.

Chairman WALLACE—It is my great pleasure to introduce Mrs. Haviland
H. Lund, of California, whose subject is the “Conservation of Land
and the Man.”

Mrs. LUND—It is a great pleasure to follow Dr. Condra, because his
speech is such a good precedent for what I have to say.

If the masses of the American people knew what one man could
accomplish for himself, physically and financially, upon from one
to five acres of land, this knowledge would revolutionize the
life of the Nation. The congestion in our cities is more than a
country-wide menace. It is an unnecessary outrage. There is land,
good, health-giving land, enough for all the people.

The conservation of the man has been too long overlooked.
The commercial policy of the Nation could scarcely be called
far-sighted—so wasteful have we been of all natural resources.

We have despoiled our forests, impoverished our soil, given away the
public domain. Our labor conditions in many respects shame us in
comparison with other nations. Looking about today, it would seem
that our thought has been “Get all we can, no matter how, and waste
it as we will, for after us, the deluge!” But a new commercial and
political spirit is being born; a renaissance of righteousness is
setting in, and the commercial leaders of the country are taking
stock, as it were, of the actual situation.

Big business men are realizing that a healthy man is worth more
in dollars and cents than a half sick one; it is recognizing that
sanitation is a good investment. It is beginning to wake up to the
fact that the children are more valuable producing machines when
they are well protected, housed, fed and educated. The cry of the
philanthropist to give because it was right and necessary that these
conditions be ameliorated, has met with only sporadic response, but
this new call to do the right thing because it pays in dollars to do
it, is meeting a greater answer from the people.

Little Farms Magazine found it impossible to evade the responsibility
imposed upon it by its readers. We roused them to a desire to go
out upon the land—to try the new condition. They came to us for
information. We could not go into the land business. We decided to
form “Forward-to-the-Land Leagues” in all principal cities.

Moneyed men are not asked to contribute alms but only to invest their
money at a nominal rate of interest, which the workingman with his
own home and garden, with health and a living assured, is willing and
able to pay. This has been proved where the experiment has been tried
in the manufacturing cities in England, and in such communities as
San Ysidro, Southern California, in our own country.

The work of the Little Farms Magazine in the founding of these
Forward-to-the-Land Leagues has been unique and necessary. And its
purposes two fold.

In the first place, it was of the utmost importance in meeting the
grave problems confronting the nation, particularly that of the
bringing our ratio of agricultural production where it safely
balances the ratio of population, to have a medium by which knowledge
of the intensive methods of agriculture could be brought to the
individual.

The widespread interest in the forward-to-the-land movement, which
has been taken up alike by press and magazine, has created a hunger
for specific information which occasional columns of general news
can not satisfy. Little Farms Magazine tells, specifically, how a
small acreage will yield and has yielded, industrial independence. It
quotes stories of those who have made good after leaving the old work
of bookkeeping and clerking and taken a “little farm.”

The problem which the farm presents today is not the same as that
of yesterday. The loneliness and isolation no longer obtains. The
message that the Little Farms Magazine takes to the world today
is that _scientific agriculture makes the acreage necessary for
individual maintenance so small that social life can be developed
on the farm in the most ideal manner_. The magazine advocates the
upbuilding of the social center, with its library, its clubhouse and
gymnasium, its moving pictures and mechanical music.

As I came through the country from the Pacific Coast and saw the
empty acres of farm land waiting, and then entered the big eastern
cities, and looked into the hopeless, pallid faces of its people,
I could think that the earth, if it had a voice, would cry aloud
with the cry of Him of long ago, who said: “How often would I have
gathered thee as a hen gathereth her chickens, but ye would not.”

Chairman WALLACE—There are fifteen minutes left. If Mr. Barrett,
President of the Farmers’ Union, is here we would be glad to give it
to him.

Mr. BARRETT—Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen: Speaking for
approximately three million American farmers, I can say with absolute
accuracy that the primary article in the creed of Conservation should
be the conservation of the man on the land.

In volume and variety of resources, the United States is the
mightiest nation in the world. It is true that the British Empire
may, through its dependencies, have a greater territorial reach, but
from the standpoint of a continuous stretch of land and the body of
acres cultivated and susceptible to cultivation, America admittedly
leads the world.

The effect of this handicap is indicated not only in the present
breadth of our domestic and international commerce, but to a greater
extent in the promise of its more wonderful commercial conquests
yet to come. The Nation is barely on the threshold of its destiny.
That fact should not mislead us as to the difficulties in the way of
making the destiny real, and not merely a boastful prophecy.

In the process of transmuting our possibilities into assets—what
is the dominant factor? The American farmer. I challenge any of my
distinguished audience to mention a single phase of commerce, one
feature of trade, the smallest detail of actual subsistence that does
not eventually trace back to the man plodding out there on the acres.

Napoleon said an army traveled on its belly. He could have said, with
equal truth, that civilization travels on its belly. And the farmer
is the factor that fills the Great American Stomach, and that keeps
full every dinner pail, regarding which we have heard so much during
political campaigns. More than that, he also clothes the armies of
development. Nor must we forget that with the South’s cotton as the
lever, he keeps the international trade balance on the American side
of the ledger. You tell me the manufacturer plays a large part in
our current and our probable development. This is true. You tell me
also, that what might be called trade-strategy, pure and simple—the
proverbial “Yankee shrewdness”—is going to win for America the bulk
of the world’s business.

I do not dispute these assertions. But I answer: That back of
trade-strategy and of dollar-diplomacy is—the American farmer.
Without him, all would be in vain; without him, all of those
resources we agree ought to be conserved would melt into impalpable
air.

Let us admit, then, that the farmer is the keystone in the arch
not only of national advance, but of sheer national existence. His
problems, then, are the Nation’s problems and his welfare, the
Nation’s welfare. No nation is stronger than its farmers. If the
farmer is poorly nourished, if the Government is negligent of his
rights, indifferent to his mental development and moral soundness,
the way will be surely blocked to our national march forward.

It is to the vital interest of America to cultivate intensively not
only the farm, but—what is more important—to cultivate intensively
the farmer. What use to conserve our resources, unless we conserve
the man behind the resources? The stability of national progress and
of government itself is dependent upon conserving the farmer.

All of you within hearing of my voice may say: “We concede these
facts. Are we not, right now, trying to aid the farmer, to conserve
him, to intensively cultivate his possibilities and safeguard his
rights?” And I answer: “Probably you are. But you can not help—you
can not conserve—you can not cultivate the farmer unless you mix and
mingle with him in the first person—not for twenty-four hours, but
more likely for twenty-four months or twenty-four years.” I give
full credit to the splendid intentions of the men who have tried and
who now are trying to aid the farmer. But you can not adequately
grasp his problem by using field-glasses from the convention hall or
interviewing him over a long distance telephone, so to speak.

The scientists who are searching for secrets, the missionaries who
are looking for converts, use neither of these methods. They go
straight to the scene of battle. And so must all persons do, my
friends, if they expect intelligently to conserve, to cultivate
the American element which is the pivot of all other elements in
this country. Study him at first hand, then your sympathies will be
practical, not theoretic; your suggestions based on conditions, not
on conjecture. Fight with him, side by side, in the ranks, day by
day. That is the only way you can learn of the foes—not the least
of which is his own weakness—which he has to combat, and what his
victory means to the weal or woe of this common country of ours.

At this point President White reassumed the Chair.

President WHITE—The ex-President of this Congress, familiarly called
“Uncle Henry,” and, in dignified circles, Dr. Henry Wallace, but who
doesn’t like the name and prefers “Uncle Henry,” will speak tonight,
as will Judge Ben B. Lindsey, of Denver, Colo., the children’s friend.

The morning session is now at an end. We hope you will get back here
at 2 o’clock, because we have a very full program.

FOOTNOTES:

[3] These statements are based on many specific examples of
fraudulent promotion.

FIFTH SESSION.

The Congress reconvened in the Murat Theater, at 2:00 o’clock p. m.,
and was called to order by President White.

President WHITE—On account of Professor Fairchild’s being called
away, having to leave on an early train, we will listen to his
address first this afternoon. Professor Fairchild is foremost in the
ranks of modern education, in teaching the conservation of human
life, the conservation of the soil, and everything that goes to make
up thorough manhood among the boys of the land. I now introduce to
you Prof. E. T. Fairchild, of Topeka, Kan., President of the National
Educational Association, whose subject is “The Duty of the Teacher.”

Professor FAIRCHILD—Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen of the
Congress: With your permission I want to change my subject as
printed. It is not the subject of my remarks this afternoon. I should
like to call it “A Plea for More Equal Educational Opportunities.”

In the few minutes allowed me, I can only hope to sketch briefly some
of the conditions that confront us today. I shall have some things to
say that represent definitely a great lack of progress, but that I
may not be labeled as a pessimist, I wish at the beginning to state
as my conviction that the present is the best moment educationally
that the world has ever seen. Had I the time, I should like to
describe to you the marvelous progress that has taken place in
certain types of our educational activity.

The growth of our universities and colleges is little short of
marvelous. In a single decade in these United States the increase in
enrollment has been fully 98 per cent. This increase in enrollment
has also been manifested in Europe, in England, where there has
been a genuine increase in the number of provincial universities.
The increase in enrollment in the past ten years is most marked
in Germany. In Germany, where there have been no new institutions
erected the increased enrollment in a single decade represents 60
per cent. Such is the history of the increased enrollment, which,
with increased efficiency in the way of larger and more efficient
faculties, has taken place in this country and in Europe. It is
a world-wide movement, my friends, and so far as I can see, is a
recognition that the best field of opportunity to the ambitious and
capable youth is through the college.

Then we come to the story of the success of our high schools. Here
again the growth has been phenomenal. Those schools in number and
in enrollment have gone forward by leaps and by bounds. In a single
State, in my own, if I may be pardoned for this allusion, let me tell
you what has happened in five years. The increase in the number of
high schools in five years is one hundred per cent. and the increase
in the number of teachers one hundred and twenty per cent. This is
simply typical of the condition all over these United States. Again
we have a concrete instance of the conviction upon the part of our
people that the boy or girl of today who is to have something like
an equal chance tomorrow, should have the opportunities provided by
our high schools. I wish I had time to expand before you this growth
and its meaning to our nation, but it is not my purpose to discuss
that at length. I want to say, however, that as the result of this
marvelous activity and growth we have had in our high schools and our
graded schools in the cities, we have reached a maximum term. We are
having a constantly enriched curriculum and generous expenditures
are being made everywhere. Modern buildings, the latest word in
lighting and heating and ventilation are found everywhere. Thorough
organization characterizes this type of our educational work.

A vital point in the development of this growth, this high
organization, is the expert supervision that has charge of these
schools everywhere.

It is upon these higher institutions, the universities, the colleges
and the high schools that the emphasis of educational thought
and interest has been bestowed. Here notable investigations are
constantly in progress with a view to still greater efficiency. Here
the active and moral influence of the best and wisest of our country
finds expression. Every one is aware of these educational activities
and all are proud of them. We are spending money most generously for
the city grade schools, for the high schools, for the colleges and
the universities.

But, good friends, now I come to the essential thing I wish to
present to your attention. Of the twenty-five million boys and girls
in the United States today of school age a majority receive their
foundation training in the rural schools, or in an environment that
is characteristically rural. And what of these types of schools? Do
we find the same advancement? Do we find the same public concern?
Do we find the same skill and organization and supervision? Do we
get such results as are being secured by city schools? They do not
measure up in the character of teaching, friends, in the kind of
courses of study, in the length of the term, in the results obtained
and this is perfectly obvious to the student of rural schools. There
has been no such progress. What we have too often is the untrained
teacher in the rural schools; terms ranging from three months up
to six and seven; buildings that lack in every modern application
of light, heat, ventilation and sanitation and all attractiveness;
ground that too often is the sore spot of the community; houses that
too often represent or suggest the pest house rather than a place of
learning; inadequate support financially and inefficient supervision.

I want to speak briefly, then, to you in the few minutes that I have
left as to four vital defects, as I view them, that it seems to me
are the defects that we, as a nation, ought to undertake to remedy.

First, we have too many untrained, inexperienced teachers in these
schools. In saying this, my good friends, I am not unmindful of the
fact that in thousands of communities in this country of ours are
to be found rural conditions that are most pleasant, that there
are thousands of teachers in rural schools consecrated to their
work, performing a daily service for those boys of inestimable
value; but listen, in one of the largest cities of this Union the
superintendent of public instruction in a report said of 10,500 rural
school teachers 9,400 are themselves but eighth grade graduates.
I want to avoid being too explicit in pointing to the places, but
I personally know of a State, a State that stands well above the
average, I think, educationally in the United States, in which of the
8,000 rural school teachers 4,400 in 1910 had only such training as
is found in the country school and not beyond the eighth grade. In
too many places this condition prevails. I believe I am well within
the truth when I say that of the teachers of the fourteen million
boys and girls in the rural districts of America today who are being
taught, more than fifty per cent. of those teachers have themselves
an academic training that does not extend beyond the grades.

But, to return to the subject of the high schools, that I spoke of a
moment ago. See how conditions have changed as to the training and
kind and character of the teachers that must be placed therein. It is
rare that you see a teacher of a high school who is not a graduate
of a high school and in many cases of a normal school. In the rural
school, the first defect is that we have too many poorly trained
teachers.

The next thing I wish to speak of as a great defect in our present
system is our manner of raising and distributing tax. You are aware
that the prevailing unit of school organization in America is the
district. In my own State we have 13,400 teachers; to boss, guide and
direct those 13,400 teachers is an army of 30,000 school officers.
By the way, he is the most numerous officer in this country. Within
a radius of three miles you will run across a school officer in
most of the States of the Union, a condition that makes for lack of
uniformity, lack of singleness of purpose, the most wasteful, the
most extravagant system that could be devised. But I want to speak
a word in regard to taxation. The trouble is, good friends, that
our system of distribution of taxes is utterly unfair and utterly
prejudicial to the best interests of the child. On the one side of
the road is a district having a splendid valuation with a low tax
that may maintain eight months of school with a splendid teacher, a
good building, and on the other side of the road, the maximum reached
by law or gone beyond it, they are only able to supply the most
inferior facilities for the boys and girls. The day must come when we
shall have a prevailing system at least with the county as a unit for
the taxes to be raised and distributed, so that the boy or girl who
lives in some poor part of that county or State shall have the same
opportunity as far as money will bring it to have a good teacher. The
fact is that poor communities are the ones that ought to have the
best teachers in all this land (applause), and that the contrary is
too often true I am sure you will all agree.

Let me say as to the courses of study now a word or two. I have,
good friends, said to you that there are twenty-five million boys
and girls of school age in America, fourteen million of these in
rural schools. Now, listen, of these fourteen million less than
twenty-five per cent. are so much as completing the work of the
grades in this, the morning of the twentieth century. If this does
not spell tragedy then I have no means of interpreting these facts.
Less than twenty-five per cent. To assign the reasons for this is
difficult, but because of the kind and character of these schools,
because they are lacking, because they are not making the progress,
because they have not the attractiveness that our city systems
have, is a reason why these boys and girls do not stay. But there
is another and further reason. The course of study too often lacks
vitality; somehow and someway we have not grasped the thought that
the school has a larger and wider duty than consuming all its time
and energy in text book knowledge. Somehow and someway we have
failed to see there, as we are coming to see in our more highly
organized system, that to interest that boy and girl, to send them
out capable, self-sustaining citizens, we must do more than consume
our time and energies on the text book knowledge. I should like to
see a reasonably but not rigidly classified course of study with
adequate attention to fundamentals, to large opportunity for hand
work and with every possible connection between the experience of the
school and the actualities of life. We must vitalize these schools.
Another important thing in connection with our rural schools is this:
the great majority of these boys and girls are denied high school
privileges. Here in the city of Indianapolis with the splendid system
of high schools that they have small wonder is it that the boy and
girl in the grades if possible persevere in the work, looking forward
always to the opportunity to get this liberal education afforded in
the high school. Often this is not true in the country. As I said a
moment ago, the great majority of these boys and girls are denied
such opportunities, denied for geographical reasons, for financial
reasons. If every township there could be created a rural high
school, in its course of study emphasizing the things that are most
needed in the lives of the boys and girls in that township, preparing
them by a well developed and organized course of study for the great
and important and practical business of life—if such an institution
could be put within the reach of those fourteen million boys and
girls, don’t you agree with me that many more than twenty-five per
cent. would finish the work of the grades in the hope that they, too,
might enter these schools and enjoy their advantages. And so I say,
there is another great defect that some way ought to be overcome.

Now, just a word or two further. The last defect that I will mention
is the question of supervision. In my judgment the commanding reason
for the development and growth of our city schools is the skilled
supervision supplied by the city superintendent. If we could have
like supervision in these schools in the country the development
would be marvelous and it would be rapid and vital. We have county
superintendents. They have them here in Indiana. We have them in
our State, but in no single instance so far as I am aware, is this
supervision adequate. First of all, to remedy the question of the
supervision of our schools, the question of the superintendency
should be taken absolutely out of politics. (Applause.) It is a
crime against the children of this nation to select either a city
superintendent or a county superintendent upon any other basis than
educational qualifications. (Applause.) The children of Indiana, the
children of every other State of this Union will never come into
their own, good friends, until the supervising element is selected
because of their being experts in the job they are looking for.

Now, just one other thing on that. It is perfectly preposterous to
expect a superintendent in a county such as there are in my State,
for illustration, to visit one hundred and fifty or more schools,
going over roads in all times of year, in all conditions, to make
his visits worth while. He may get there once a year. We ought to
imitate Oregon in this respect. In Oregon they have subordinate
superintendents, one for every twenty schools. There they can
accomplish something.

My time is more than taken. You have been patient, as has your
President. I thank you most sincerely. I only regret that I can only
touch the edges of this problem.

In conclusion, you representatives of this National Conservation
Congress, here is the problem. The great thing we need to do, first
of all, is to make public everywhere the actual condition of the
rural schools. Publicity is the first step; organization is the
second; organization of national scope and of State scope. Give me
twenty common people in any State in this Union and I will guarantee
to see that the rural schools make more real genuine advance in the
next five years than under ordinary circumstances they would do in
ten years.

The country is the Nation’s great recruiting ground. Here we look for
the best men and women of tomorrow who are to take leadership, who
are to represent in their actions and in their lives the good red
blood that characterizes the Anglo-Saxon race. Are we doing our duty
when but a paltry three million five hundred thousand out of a total
of fourteen million are not so much as accomplishing the work of the
grades? (Applause.)

President WHITE—Louisiana has been first and foremost in several
phases of Conservation. Louisiana stands first in making forestry
possible by wise and beneficial laws that encourage forestry, and I
think Louisiana stands among the first in its State Board of Health,
doing something worth while in every parish. I have the pleasure of
introducing to you Dr. Oscar Dowling, of New Orleans, Louisiana,
President of the Louisiana State Board of Health, who will speak on
“Hygiene in Relation to Public Health.”

Dr. DOWLING—Mr. Chairman, Members of the National Conservation
Congress, Ladies and Gentlemen: We are very glad to have this
opportunity to appear before this great Congress. In the beginning
I want to say that we owe much of our enthusiasm to the good work
of the Indiana State Board under Dr. Hurty, and to your pure food
department, under Dr. Barnard; also to Dr. Evans, of Chicago, and
Dr. Wiley, of Washington. We have endeavored to imitate them in some
ways, but nevertheless, in some ways we have fallen short.

Hygiene, the science of preservation and promotion of health, in
some form, has been recognized by every nation since the dawn of
civilization.

Among the people of antiquity, conquest and domination were directly
dependent on physical vigor, hence their laws regulating this feature
of national life. Among the Greeks, the health idea was embodied
in the cult of Hygeia which arose hundreds of years before the
Christian era, consequent probably to a devastating plague. In the
early period of Rome, when courage and patriotism were cardinal
virtues, physical development was provided for and emphasized. Social
and political fluidity in the middle ages precluded the evolution of
organized thought or systems in sanitary science.

Individuals set aside conventional thought and method and strove with
Nature that they might learn her secrets; their work was not in vain,
but with few exceptions their discoveries were unimportant.

The experimental method popularized in Baconian philosophy gave an
impetus to the study of the physical sciences, but many decades
passed before notable deeds were recorded. It was the nineteenth
century, scientific in spirit and achievement, that made vital the
long result of time and opened a perspective before undreamed of. The
awakened health conscience of today is the crystallized result.

In scientific annals, the discoveries of the bacteriologist rank
among the first. Perhaps, in the evolution of knowledge no truths are
more potential. Within a generation the influence is marked, not only
in relation to the individual and community, but in effect on the
civilized world. The sanitarian with this knowledge was enabled to
demonstrate control of environment. The success of the experiment has
opened a new world just as surely as did the discovery of October,
1492.

The changed viewpoint of the relative value of hygiene in its
application to life is due not wholly to the discoveries in medical
science. It is one phase of the general awakening to the defects of
the present social order: a manifestation of the modern attitude
toward “waste.” Efficiency implies economy, not alone of expenditure,
but of material resource and vital force.

Conservation and preservation of the material wealth of the country
is dominant in the intellectual activity of all enlightened people.
But it becomes increasingly apparent that the Nation which conserves
its mines, forests, soil and sources of power is poor indeed if its
men lack virility and mental initiative. This thought is back of the
public health movement. The impulse is in part commercial, in part
scientific. It grows out of recognition of the futility of remedial
and philanthropic measures and the conviction of the potentialities
of science for human betterment. In import the movement is ethical
and spiritual; it is beyond question the greatest of modern times.

This meeting is significant of the changed attitude toward the
Nation’s greatest natural resource—its people. The Congress is
national, its purpose conservation, its main topic—to quote from the
invitation—the conservation of vital resources. There is significance
also in the topics selected for discussion in the health section.
They relate to the larger aims of sanitary science. In the popular
mind health work has reference only to superficial conditions,
control of epidemics, cleaning of streets and similar activities, but
the hygienist knows that sanitary regeneration means an attack on
many existing institutions, customs, practices and methods that lie
deep in the roots of the social structure.

Housing, child labor, industrial occupations, labor insurance, vital
statistics, food supply, community methods and conditions are the
subjects chosen for discussion. Their primary importance is apparent.

The period of twenty minutes allotted for the opening of this
division makes imperative only brief suggestive statements of
the essentials in their relation to public health and individual
well-being.

Mr. Lawrence Veiller, in the Annals of the American Academy, says:
“We have paid dear for our slums.... No one has ever attempted to
estimate the cost to the Nation of our bad housing conditions,
because it is an impossible task.... Who can say of the vast army of
the unemployed how large a portion of the industrially inefficient
are so because of lowered physical vitality caused by disadvantageous
living conditions? Of the burden which the State is called on to
bear in the support of almshouses for the dependent, hospitals for
the sick, asylums for the insane, prisons and reformatories for the
criminal, what portion can fairly be attributed to adverse early
environment?” Describing surroundings, the author continues: “The
sordidness of it all, the degrading baseness of it, unfortunately is
withheld from the eyes of most of us. What it can mean to the people
who have to live in the midst of it we can but faintly conceive.
Let us frankly admit that these conditions result in imposing upon
the great mass of our working people habits of life that are more
compatible with the life of animals than with that of human beings.”

Moreover, not alone in the slums do these conditions exist. In almost
every city of the Union, a few blocks from the main thoroughfares,
there are congested districts unspeakably bad.

With the knowledge we now have of the relation to health and sickness
of air, sunlight and propagating agencies of disease incident to
dirt, it is nothing short of criminal to tolerate such conditions.
If physical suffering only were the result, indifference would be
unpardonable, but overcrowded homes, insanitary in every respect,
make for low standards of decency and morality. Vice, with its
correlatives, disease and pauperism result. Often crime and insanity
make the chain complete. The conditions of life in the middle ages as
recorded in history seem to us barbarous in the extreme; relatively,
ours really are. Then, there was no certainty as to the effect of
insanitary environment; the people did not know; we do, yet with
inexplicable indifference communities not only let the worst obtain,
but they permit a perpetuation of the system. Authorities stand
aghast at the expense involved in the tearing away of a whole section
of a city, but the cost of such a measure easily, often probably,
may become a mere item in comparison with the economic loss from an
epidemic of a virulent type.

It is a hopeful sign that a few enlightened municipalities have set
an example in remodeling districts, not only in the erection of
comfortable homes, but further in the establishment of healthful
and beautiful environments. The housing problem is one of the
most difficult and complex of our day. It can be solved only by
enlightened legislation supported by public opinion.

About a century and a quarter ago the factory system began to
develop with intensity in England. Later, in this country, it grew
by leaps and bounds. Child labor with its attendant evils was a
logical result. For nine years there has been systematic effort to
control the unhygienic features of the system. Some good has been
accomplished, but because of the nature of the problem progress
is slow. The injury to the child is plainly apparent. Long hours
in poorly ventilated rooms, with constant use of the same set of
muscles, stunts and dwarfs the body; equally, the mind. Toil of this
nature uses up the young life; it leaves the State the burden of
caring for an individual hopelessly inefficient if not worse. But
of more importance is the consequential physical deterioration. If
these youthful toilers grow to maturity their bodies are devitalized;
if they marry their children are almost invariably low in vitality.
Hygiene in its application does not imply the remedy of existing
conditions alone for the individual or the present; it looks to
the future. Therefore, protection of the child is a principle of
paramount importance.

Child labor laws are now more humane than a few years ago; conditions
in many factories have been vastly improved. But as yet we are far
from an ideal stage in the regulation and supervision of this feature
of industrial life.

Every argument concerning the employment of children in factories
may be applied to women engaged in similar occupations. In the mills
and shops where women stand all day, where they endure for hours not
only unhygienic environment, but in addition mental anxiety, where
the whip “employed by the week only” is held over them, the nervous
strain as well as physical exertion saps the very foundations of
vitality. Investigations made by Dr. R. Morton of New York, show
the health of industrial women is proving a serious thing in the
United States, and unless conditions are bettered that there will
be a general breakdown of the working women of the country. Nor is
this the sum total of the consequences. In the children of these
women low vitality is perpetuated. Records quoted by Dr. George Reid,
Health Officer of Stafford, England, give the mortality of children
under one year of age as greater among those of mothers who work in
factories than among home mothers. Statistics compiled by him show
the death rate one hundred and forty-five per one thousand births for
infants of home mothers and two hundred and nine per one thousand
births for infants of mothers who work in factories. The injury to
the State is apparent.

On the question of prevention of occupational diseases, I cannot
do better than quote the measures suggested by Dr. H. Linenthal,
of Boston. They are: collection of accurate data about working
conditions; data relative to the effect of occupation on mortality;
proper medical instruction; reporting to health authorities specific
industrial diseases; examination of all industrial workers; exclusion
of minors and women from certain industries; sanitary laws for
factories; regulation of dangerous trades by health authorities, and
the carrying of an educational campaign of hygiene among employers
and employes. The comprehensiveness of these measures indicates the
extension of the problem. No movement of recent times is more humane
and economic than the one termed industrial insurance.

The purpose is the capitalization of the workingman’s energy at the
time of his greatest productivity; the basic principle that every
far-sighted social policy is founded more on energy reserve than
money reserve. The aim is to secure for the nation the greatest
possible reserve of bodily and mental force and power and physical
and moral health.

The problem has been attacked in various ways by different
countries. Germany has been the most successful. There the
workingman’s insurance has attained the dimension of a gigantic
social institution. Dr. Frederick Zahn of Munich, Director of
the Bavarian Statistical Office, in a recent address, gave the
following interesting figures: Out of 16,000,000 laborers in Germany,
14,000,000 are carrying sick insurance, and 15,700,000 invalid and
old age policies.

In the past twenty-five years over one billion six hundred million
dollars have been paid in benefits. In addition, prophylactic
measures are provided for.

Only those familiar with the necessities for correct data in health
work appreciate the immediate and imperative need for statistical
information. Records of births and deaths and of supplementary
details form a basis for advancement. Without such data, the
sanitarian gropes in the dark. Yet no request from the health
department is so lightly treated. Reform in this can be wrought
slowly. Appropriations to pay registrars and enforcement through the
courts are the means for the inauguration of a more perfect system.

One of the hygienic essentials in this country is education in the
relative values of food products. The phenomenal growth of the urban
population which has reduced the number of producers and the almost
universal practice of adulteration make imperative the enforcement of
stringent laws and instruction in the nutritive value of classes of
foods and the economy of selection.

The campaign for a supply of clean, pure milk in many centers has
grown out of the effort to lower the infant mortality rate. It has
stimulated inquiry and supervision of other food products which is
encouragingly prophetic.

Hygiene in its application to personal and community life is
essentially preventive. This idea is not sufficiently understood to
be taken at its real value; curative measures the people commend,
but possible calamity seems remote, therefore, prevention does not
appeal. It is this concept of the collective mind that lies back of
the extravagant parsimony universal in health appropriations. It also
explains public apathy and indifference.

The most practical means for sanitary progress are two, education of
all the people in the primary truths of hygiene, and the application
of the science through governmental agencies. These are so closely
related that they are practically inseparable, but logically may be
differentiated.

Hygiene is an organized science; its principles are rational and
demonstrable; its application will bring returns economic, ethical
and spiritual. This must be acceptably taught to the people by
methods suited to the present state of the public mind. Conviction
that will lead to action is the end to be sought. Education will
create a public sentiment persistent and insistent for measures
promotive of public good. Concomitant with this effort, in fact a
part of it, the various units of government should be executives
in the establishment of hygienic measures and the abolition of
insanitary conditions. When people believe that the eradication of
typhoid fever and hookworm disease is more important than high or
low tariff; when they become convinced that malaria is a national
disgrace and uncleanliness a relic of barbarism, there will be money
and judicial decisions for the elimination of these defects.

Fortunately, these are the views of an increasingly large number of
people. There is a health awakening. The principles of the science
of health are every day becoming concrete in laws, and habits of
thought and living. It is the conviction of the progressive minority
that a Nation’s first duty is to conserve and protect its citizens,
to develop a community of efficient men and to minimize natural
disadvantages. Further, that collective intelligence must plan for
the preservation of the people and the perpetuity of the State, and
in so doing must recognize public health as fundamental, both in the
simple phases and in its comprehensive aspect. (Applause.)

President WHITE—The next subject to be discussed is by one who
employs labor in the State of Indiana, and who is a large employer of
labor. His subject is “The Duty of the Employer.” I now take pleasure
in introducing to you Dr. Edward A. Rumely, of Laporte, Indiana.

Dr. RUMELY—Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen: Four generations
ago, there were but three millions of Americans scattered along
the Atlantic Seaboard. Back of them was a vast virgin continent,
the richest the white man had ever found in the long migration upon
which our race started ages ago. The American continent was rich in
timber, in the soil fertility of its vast valleys and prairies, and
rich beyond measure in the superabundant deposits of mineral wealth.
The first settlers were few in number; they brought with them but
few tools and little wealth that today we would call capital. It was
the natural and proper thing for them to set to work to gain, with
the least possible labor, the great natural wealth that the virgin
continent treasured for them.

They killed the fur-bearing animals, felled the trees to export
lumber, dug in the quickest way the mineral wealth of the land and
started to grow such crops as would carry to market the greatest
value from the fertility of the virgin prairies. Wheat was easily
transported, and each bushel contained from twenty to thirty cents
of soil value. Hence with wheat our prairies were taken under
cultivation, and from the returns of the wheat crops cities and
railroads and homes were paid for.

Only today, when the average yield per acre has gone down from forty
to thirteen bushels are we beginning to see clearly that by this
process we have been drawing heavily upon our soil capital.

While the population was small, labor was difficult to secure. Cities
had to be built, roadways opened, railroads constructed, rivers
bridged, and a continent brought under subjection. The process of
the past four generations was possible only because our fathers
economized their own labor and created, as fast as possible, the
values they needed to barter off into the markets of the world for
capital from the superabundant natural wealth that surrounded them.

Today, we are mining our iron, copper, lead and other metals more
rapidly than any other country in the world. The pioneer farmers
who worked the soils of the south with tobacco and of the east with
wheat, can no longer move off to the west, when, having exhausted the
fertility of our lands, they find farming no longer profitable. The
hundred thousand vigorous Americans who went last year to Canada with
energy, capital and American tools are a concrete evidence that we
have reached the end of the course which we have been traveling.

The whole country has been startled by the warning of the far-sighted
men, and now the demand for conservation of our natural wealth is
becoming more and more insistent. We have been made to realize that
every child born brings a mouth that must be fed, a body that must
be sheltered and clothed, but no increase in natural wealth. We must
still learn that every child does bring two hands which can work,
and which, when highly trained and backed by scientific knowledge,
can create untold values. Stated otherwise, we must care for our