field. Also, it is to be observed that we have made far less progress in reducing the costs of distribution than we have in production. As an indication of this, if we take the factory and the retail prices of commodities at 100 for 1914, we find that to-day falling prices are from 140 to 150, while retail prices are from 165 to 170.

In any event, it is certain that there is relatively little specific information on the distribution of commodities. We do not even know the volume of our retail trade nor can we guess at it within $10,000,000,000. To the best of our information there are upwards of 1,482,000 retailers and some 82,000 wholesalers engaged in our domestic business. These men collectively and many of them individually have approached the Department of Commerce asking for some fundamental statistics regarding their operations. They are convinced that large economies could be brought about if such information was available. We believe that these men are entitled to some assistance from the National Government in a task which they can not perform for themselves. For this reason, we have suggested to you that provision should be made in the next decennial census for a census of distribution in addition to the regular censuses which have been taken in the preceding periods.

In order that we might have some experience in the kind of information which could be developed in a national census of distribution and also in order that business might see whether such data would be of use, we carried out a few experiments last year. Experimental censuses of distribution were taken in some 11 cities of different sizes and in different parts of the country. These experiments were made possible through the material cooperation of various private agencies, including the Chamber of Commerce of the United States and the chambers of commerce in the various cities where these censuses were taken.

These experiments were undertaken with the guidance of a special committee of 16 men of professional economists, Government representatives, and practical business men. After these censuses had been completed, this committee met last fall in West Baden, Ind., and after a very careful examination of the results, particularly with reference to their value to business, the committee voted unanimously to recommend to the Department of Commerce the desirability and urgent necessity of a national census of distribution. This action was later approved and ratified by the board of directors of the United States Chamber of Commerce. We have also received many similar resolutions from other business organizations urging the necessity of the work.

The reports of these experimental censuses of distribution in the several cities are before your committee. They relate to obtaining information from wholesalers and retailers regarding the character of their business, the number of proprietors and employees, the wages paid, the volume of business, the stocks on hand and the commodities which they handle.

I shall not prolong this statement with any attempt to point out the usefulness of these data, but I would like to suggest one or two items which seem to me particularly significant.

In Baltimore, 33 per cent of all the retailers in that city did a gross business of less than $5,000 per year. That means that the total sales in these stores average less than $100 a week. Fifty-five per cent of the retail stores did less than $10,000 worth of business a year, or less than $200 gross sales per week. This is starting wholesalers to considering how much of a high-priced salesman's time should be devoted to visiting such stores. It bids fair to be of assistance in pointing out some of the wasteful practices in our distribution system. Many other similar points could be pointed out.

It is our feeling in the department that a national census of distribution would form the foundation for a marked advance in the efficiency of our marketing system, and I trust the committee will give careful consideration to the advisability of including it in the next decennial census.

Faithfully yours,

85244-28- -1

HERBERT HOOVER.

FIFTEENTH AND SUBSEQUENT DECENNIAL CENSUSES

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON THE CENSUS,

Wednesday, January 11, 1928.

The committee met at 10.40 o'clock a. m., Hon. E. Hart Fenn (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, we have for consideration this morning H. R. 393, a bill which I might characterize as a departmental bill having in view the taking of the next census. Before I came to Washington I communicated with the Secretary of Commerce and the Census Bureau, making inquiry as to whether they had any proposed legislation for this Congress in anticipation of the taking of the Fifteenth Census, and this bill was referred to me by Mr. Hoover, through the Speaker of the House; it is what I may characterize as the bill which the Department of Commerce and the Bureau of the Census consider advisable to be adopted for the taking of the Fifteenth Census. The bill is now before us, and perhaps we had better first hear from the representatives of the Bureau of the Census who are here this morning.

Mr. RANKIN. It is the proposition of the chairman to have these hearings before the full committee and not before a subcommittee?

The CHAIRMAN. I thought we would hold them before the full committee, so that we would be better informed. It is just as easy to get a quorum of the full committee as of the subcommittee. Without objection, we will hear first from Doctor Hill, Assistant to the Director of the Census Bureau.

STATEMENT OF DR. JOSEPH A. HILL, ASSISTANT TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Doctor HILL. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am very sorry that Mr. Steuart is not here himself to explain this bill. This is a bill which provides for the taking of the next census of the United States, which, as you all know, is going to be a very big undertaking. We shall have over 120,000,000 people to enumerate, taking an army of 100,000 enumerators to do it. It is a big administrative job; I need not expatiate on that. The bill is drafted, as your chairman has explained, in the department, consulting the officials of the bureau, and consulting the advisory committee that we have on the census, composed of representatives of the American Statistical Association and the American Economic Association. I do not think I should say more by way of introduction. The first paragraph defines the scope of the census, as a census of population, agriculture, and distribution. You may perhaps notice that it does not mention manufactures; that is because the

1

census of manufactures is provided for in section 17, which perpetuates a biennial census of manufactures that we have been taking for some time, and that biennial census, in the regular course of events, will be taken in 1930 to cover the year 1929; so it was not necessary to consider it as a part of the decennial census but just to continue the biennial census. You may also notice that it covers a new feature, that is, the subject of distribution, which has never before been covered by any decennial census. That is provided in section 1, which covers population, agriculture, and distribution. There has been a good deal of call from various quarters for information regarding the distribution of economic goods. We have for many years had very complete statistics of the production of economic goods, and we have felt that there is a lack in that field as to sales and handling of manufactured goods or other lines of goods after they have been produced. Last year we made an experiment in taking a census of distribution for 17 of the principal cities of the country, and we are now publishing the results of that census. this feature of the bill is retained, this census will be a comprehensive one, in connection with the census of 1930, to cover the greater part of the country, if not all of it.

If

The next clause in the bill provides for the areas to be covered by the census:

The census herein provided for shall include each State, the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Porto Rico.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not want to interrupt the continuity of your remarks, except with regards to this section. I see you provide for each State, the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Porto Rico; then you say:

A census of Guam, Samoa, and the Virgin Islands shall be taken in the same year by the respective governors of said islands and a census of the Panama Canal Zone by the governor of the Canal Zone in accordance with plans prescribed or approved by the Director of the Census.

Has any consideration been given to taking the census of the Philippines?

Doctor HILL. The first census of the Philippines was taken by the War Department; it has been a separate and distinct census. The last one, I think, was taken for 1919, by the Philippine government, just a year before we took ours.

The CHAIRMAN. There is provision for that, then, in the War Department?

Doctor HILL. Well, I do not know whether there is any legislation. The CHAIRMAN. I mean, it does not come under the Census

Bureau?

Doctor HILL. No, sir.

Mr. JOHNSON. The question of pay would be different in the Philippine census from that of the other census.

The CHAIRMAN. I only speak of it, Doctor Hill, because the matter has been brought to my attention. I have no interest or knowledge in the matter, except to ascertain the fact about it. The territorial area is just the same as it was 10 years ago?

Mr. MAGRADY. I notice the bill says "in the year 1930 and every 10 years thereafter." Is that just as it has been carried in previous legislation?