Page images
PDF
EPUB

(Witnesses: Zappone, Whitney.)

Mr. ZAPPONE. Yes, sir. On September 30 you had outstanding liabilities amounting to about $230 in round numbers. They were all the outstanding expenses you had.

The CHAIRMAN. You have a larger force outside of Washington than in Washington?

Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Has there been any addition to your personnel under the lump-fund appropriation? Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. To what extent?

Professor WHITNEY. Well, that would depend, of course, upon the size of the appropriation. Here is a list of the appropriations that we have had since 1896.

The CHAIRMAN. What was your appropriation for 1901? That was when the bureau was organized.

Professor WHITNEY. $31,300. Next year, 1902, we had an appropriation of $109.140; in 1903 it was $169,680; in 1904 it was $212,480; in 1905 it was $214,680; in 1906 there was a drop due to the fact that a number of changes were made from the statutory to the lump-fund places. It was not restored to the lump-fund roll. That year we had an appropriation of $204,680, $10,000 less than the year before. In 1907 we had an appropriation of $221,460.

The CHAIRMAN. The appropriation in your bureau is expended almost wholly in salaries, transportation, and traveling and field expenses?

Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir; a large part of it is for laboratory work.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have a separate laboratory here in Washington; that is, separate and distinct from the Bureau of Chemistry? Prefessor WHITNEY. We have several laboratories.

The CHAIRMAN. In Washington?

Professor WHITNEY. In Washington.

The CHAIRMAN. Would it be economy to unite these laboratories under one head in your bureau, and instead of having several to have one large, comprehensive laboratory?

Professor WHITNEY. No; for the reason that the work is entirely different and the personnel and the requirements are altogether different.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the difference?

Professor WHITNEY. We have a laboratory for soil chemistry, we have a laboratory for soil physics, we have a laboratory for soil fertility, and we have a laboratory for the fertilizer requirements of soils.

The CHAIRMAN. That is four?

Professor WHITNEY. That is four.

The CHAIRMAN. Do not all these investigations articulate with each other?

Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And involve necessarily the same subject-matter? Professor WHITNEY. To a certain extent; yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it feasible for a chemist when he is making an analysis for any one of these allied questions to complete his investi

(Witness: Whitney.)

gations and cover the ground that would be involved in one or two or more of those questions?

Professor WHITNEY. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Why?

Professor WHITNEY. He knows nothing of the subject-matter.
The CHAIRMAN. Why should he not? Could he not?

Professor WHITNEY. We have physicists and we have connected with the Bureau physiological chemists.

The CHAIRMAN. Assuming that you had a man who did know, who was familiar with each of these three lines of investigation--that might be assuming the impossible, I do not know how that may bea man who had scientific knowledge and experience to make and conduct experiments along those lines, when he is making his analysis could not he cover three of those cognate subjects all at one time?

Professor WHITNEY. In that sense I am the director of the laboratories myself and harmonize those various lines. The assistants in the laboratories have been specialists along narrow lines.

That is the most efficient way in which such an administration can be conducted. They are my advisers. They consult freely. They report directly to me and I keep informed of the progress of the work in these several laboratories, and where I see any need of it I bring two or three of them together in the solution of a single problem.

The CHAIRMAN. All these investigations are based on the soil; they begin on the soil and radiate out?

Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it a fact that an analysis of what is necessary in connection with determining the character of the soil involves some of the same work that would also be involved in determining the question of the proper fertilizer to be used for the soil. Do you not have to travel the same ground in each case?

Professor WHITNEY. NO. Where such a contingency comes up, where analyses are required in one of the other lines of work, they are done in the other laboratory. That is where I bring them together and put them together. That is, we do not duplicate the work in these several laboratories, but use the laboratories irrespective of this conventional distribution, where their efficiency will justify it.

The CHAIRMAN. During the analysis of the physical character, to reach the results in regard to it, they go through certain well recognized chemical steps. Having reached that result, if you wanted to examine that same soil to ascertain what was necessary as an artificial fertilizer for that soil, could you use the facts that you had already developed in determining the character of the soil?

Professor WHITNEY. It would be an important aid.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you not have to go over the same steps? Professor WHITNEY. No. It would be an important aid; but the determination of the fertilizer requirements of the soil would be done by different methods.

The CHAIRMAN. Is the foundation of the analyses different?

Professor WHITNEY. The foundation of the examination is different, and the character of the examination is different.

The CHAIRMAN. If you take a sample of soil and want to ascertain the physical components of the soil, and then you had a sample of the

[ocr errors]

(Witness: Whitney.

soil and wanted to ascertain what was a necessary fertilizer for that soil, you would reach those two results in two different ways, and in different steps?

Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. There would be no process in one case that was known to the other?

Professor WHITNEY. Not at all.

The CHAIRMAN. You would proceed from a different point of view and use different chemical agents and different chemical processes? Professor WHITNEY. Precisely.

The CHAIRMAN. So the fact that a man had gone through that analysis of the soil for the one purpose would not necessarily lessen his labor if he wanted to get the results in connection with the other purpose from the same sample of soil?

Professor WHITNEY. I do not think I quite understand that ques

tion.

The CHAIRMAN. Suppose your chemist had reached the result that he had undertaken to determine, the physical components of the soil? Professor WHITNEY. The physical components of the soil would be determined in the physical laboratory. The chemical components would be determined in the chemical laboratory and the manurial requirements would be determined by different methods.

The CHAIRMAN. Those three things have no chemical or physical relation to each other?

Professor WHITNEY. They have a relation to each other but are in themselves independent and are arrived at by independent methods.

The CHAIRMAN. Is the physical character of the soil a factor in determining the question of fertility?

Professor WHITNEY. It is a factor in determining the adaptability of the soil to plants.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that a factor in determining what fertilizer is necessary?

Professor WHITNEY. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Is the manurial character of the soil a factor in determining what may be necessary for a fertilizer?

Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Those two investigations would be allied? Professor WHITNEY. They would be allied, but not the same. The CHAIRMAN. Would the man making one necessarily need to go over some of the steps used to make the other?

Professor WHITNEY. In the examination for the manurial requirements the man would determine nothing as to the physical character of the soil.

The CHAIRMAN. I am speaking of the fertilizer; is that identical with the manurial requirements?

Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir. A man who determines the physical character of the soil and who does so in the classification of the soil could determine from his examination nothing of the manurial requirements of the soil.

The CHAIRMAN. One is physical and the other chemical?

Professor WHITNEY. One is physical, the other is not chemical.

(Witness: Whitney.)

The examination is conducted by methods which we ourselves have devised.

The CHAIRMAN. The manurial examination?

Professor WHITNEY. The manurial requirements of the soil.

Mr. SAMUEL. A chemist who could reach a conclusion as to the soil could not reach a conclusion as to the manurial requirements? Professor WHITNEY. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. So the results reached in the several laboratories are of such a character that the separate results are of no particular value to the persons engaged in the separate and distinct investigations to an extent which would relieve them of any appreciable amount of work?

Professor WHITNEY. I do not think I quite understood that ques

tion.

The CHAIRMAN. Are the results attained in each of these different lines of investigation of any value to the men engaged in those different lines; that is, is the result reached in one line of any value to the men engaged in the other lines?

Professor WHITNEY. Yes; they are necessary for an intelligent understanding.

The CHAIRMAN. Do they avail themselves of the work of these different men, or do they go over the same work themselves?

Professor WHITNEY. They avail themselves of the work of the other men.

The CHAIRMAN. They do not duplicate the work?

Professor WHITNEY. Not at all.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, if I understand it aright, the work of each chemist, so far as it aids another chemist engaged on a cognate subject, is utilized by that other chemist?

Professor WHITNEY. Always.

The CHAIRMAN. And the other chemist does not engage in that same original investigation on his own account?

Professor WHITNEY. Not at all.

The CHAIRMAN. And you have it so arranged as to eliminate all duplication of work on those lines?

Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir; absolutely.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the character of the work that your Bureau does which requires such a large force outside of Washington, and why is it necessary for them to be employed outside of Washington? Just explain that so that we may understand the necessity for that expenditure.

Professor. WHITNEY. The largest piece of work being done by the Bureau is the soil survey, which is done outside of Washington, with the exception of the necessary office work on the preparation of the reports and maps. Out of the $204,660, $74,664 is allotted to the soilsurvey work. That is expended almost entirely outside of the city of Washington. We have also our tobacco investigation, to which we allotted last year $23,760.

That is almost entirely expended outside the city of Washington. We have the soil-management work, to which we allot $19.837, which is to a considerable extent spent outside of the city of Washington. We have the alkali work, to which we allot $11,520, which is almost

(Witness: Whitney.)

all spent outside of the city of Washington. That is all we spend outside of the city of Washington.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the soil-survey work; what does that involve?

Professor WHITNEY. The soil survey consists of the classification and mapping of the soils of certain areas in the United States. We began first of all in the tobacco areas, under authority to map the tobacco soils of the United States, and that has been continued now for seven years.

The CHAIRMAN. What does that mean, an actual plotting of the surface area covered by the soil?

Professor WHITNEY. The area covered by the soil.

The CHAIRMAN. Do your men make a survey by lines and measurements?

Professor WHITNEY. No, sir. We have the base map. The base map is furnished which involves the distribution of the roads and the measurements and distances. It is obtained from the Geological Survey or from some county maps where they are available. The work of the soil survey consists in plotting on the map according to the distances given of the roads, streams, and houses, and other points of departure shown on the base map, the distribution and location of the soil area.

The CHAIRMAN. Who ascertains the points of departure?
Professor WHITNEY. That is done on the base map.

The CHAIRMAN. Are they ascertained on the surface by your men or are they reported to them?

Professor WHITNEY. They are contained on the base maps that we get from the Geological Survey.

The CHAIRMAN. With the roads and streams and lines?

Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Does the Geological Survey give the location of the tobacco soil area?

Professor WHITNEY. NO. We take maps that they have put out that happen to fit in the areas we are going to make a soil survey on, and we plat the soil on the base map that they provide.

The CHAIRMAN. How do you get the data from which you make the map?

Professor WHITNEY. The soil data?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir.

Professor WHITNEY. We get that with our own men.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you put your men right on the ground?
Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And they locate it on the surface of the earth?
Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And you ascertain these points of departure from the base map?

Professor WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. So the soil survey is really a survey of the soil of the earth for the purpose of determining the tobacco area?

Professor WHITNEY. The tobacco soil.

The CHAIRMAN. Does it involve also a further examination of the soil itself for the purpose of scientifically determining whether the soil is adapted to the production of tobacco?

« PreviousContinue »