Mr. FORT. It is close for Texas, but far away for the rest of the world.

Mr. BLACK. Yes; Texas is a very large State as you know. But cotton is the principal crop in my district and naturally the farmers are alarmed at the menace and are interested in the early enactment of the bill. I thank the committee.

(The resolutions offered for the record by Mr. Black are as follows:) PARIS, TEX., March 15, 1928.

Hon. EUGENE BLACK,

Member of Congress, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. BLACK: At a meeting of the Chamber of commerce directors this morning a letter was read from the East Texas Chamber of Commerce, signed by the president, R. M. Kelly, with reference to the pink bollworm situation.

Mr. Kelly emphasizes the fact that it is a National rather than a State problem, and he is asking all the local chambers of commerce in the east Texas district to write their respective Senators and Representatives, calling attention to this fact and solicit their influence in securing a recognition of this kind.

I was instructed by our directors to write you with reference to this matter, and I know of nothing to say except that probably the Government has already promulgated some policy along this line. The battle with the corn borer in the northeast has probably been projected along some policy of this kind. I sincerely believe that you are better able to determine what is best to do with this matter than I am qualified to suggest. This letter therefore is to comply with the request made of me this morning and to rely on your good judgment and sound discretion what course you think best to pursue in this matter. With sincere good wishes, I am,

Yours very truly,

ED H. McCUISTION, President Chamber of Commerce.

Mr. SWANK. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Sanders is here from Texas, and Mr. Parks and Mr. Sandlin are over here, and maybe they want to be heard.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN N. SANDLIN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA

Mr. SANDLIN. I will take but a very few minutes of the committee's time. Like Mr. Black, I represent a cotton-gowing district. I represent a district in Louisiana which, a few years ago, was infested with the pink bollworm and, by the processes that have been described by these gentlemen, it was eliminated. Of course, like all those who represent cotton-gowing districts, we are intensely interested in this bill.

Mr. PURNELL. You have had a thorough eradication in the infested area in Louisiana which you represent?

Mr. SANDLIN. In the district I represent, we have.

Mr. ASWELL. They have in my district, too.

Mr. PURNELL. You have no more of the pink bollworms?
Mr. SANDLIN. None at all; it is completely eradicated.

Mr. PURNELL. Was the area in your State badly infested?

Mr. SANDLIN. I think so. It was not a very large area in my district; I think only about 800 acres or a thousand were infested, and there was also an infestation in the southwestern part of the State, in the district represented now by Mr. De Rouen, but represented at that time by Doctor Lazaro, which had a larger infestation than my district.

in

Mr. KINCHELOE. How many years did it take to eradicate it.

Mr. SANDLIN. It took three years there.

Mr. PURNELL. Was it eradicated through the establishment of noncotton growing areas?

Mr. SANDLIN. Yes; that was the only method used.

Mr. PURNELL. The same plan as suggested in this bill?

Mr. SANDLIN. Yes; they quit raising cotton entirely in that zone. Mr. PURNELL. What was done toward paying the farmers there for that loss?

Mr. SANDLIN. I am not as familiar with that as I should be, but at that time the Government paid. a third of the loss and they raised other crops.

Mr. PURNELL. Did the State make a like contribution?

Mr. SANDLIN. The State paid two-thirds.

Mr. PURNELL. The State paid two-thirds and the Federal Government one-third?

Mr. SANDLIN. Yes.

Mr. KINCHELOE. How did you arrive at that loss for the farmer? Mr. SANDLIN. I am not very familiar with the details, but it was this way: They planted other crops; they planted corn, and the commission there figured out the loss for each individual farmer.

Mr. KINCHELOE. I was just wondering how they arrived at their conclusion and whether it was satisfactory to the farmers.

Mr. SANDLIN. Well, it was satisfactory to the farmer in most instances.

Mr. KINCHELOE. But you do not know how they arrived at it? Mr. SANDLIN. Yes; I know to some extent how they arrived at it. They took the crops they grew in place of cotton, and the loss in growing other crops.

Mr. KINCHELOE. The difference?

Mr. SANDLIN. The difference. I think the strongest argument, gentlemen, in favor of this appropriation, is this; that it has been thoroughly demonstrated this pest can be completely eradicated and, by making an appropriation of $5,000,000, if it can be done, it will certainly be an investment for the Federal Government; because, if it is not eradicated and it spreads over the great cotton country down there, it will have to continue to appropriate millions of dollars in assisting to control it, like you have done in the case of the boll weevil.

Mr. ADKINS. And you will go to raising corn in competition with us, then.

Mr. SANDLIN. Yes; I am afraid we will have to do that.

Mr. PURNELL. Now Mr. Quinn, of Mississippi, has asked for a few minutes.

STATEMENT OF HON. PERCY E. QUIN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

Mr. QUIN. This pink bollworm has not yet reached Mississippi, but the entomologist of the agricultural college of the State of Mississippi is very much exercised over the danger. He recognizes what the boll weevil is, and now this pink bollworm is much worse, of course, as you are familiar from the evidence you have heard here and from what Mr. Buchanan has said on the floor of the House and, I presume, before this committee; and the State of Louisiana joins

Mississippi on the west. Of course, this Mississippi River is between most of Mississippi and Louisiana, but that river cuts no figure with this kind of a pest, and that would ultimately reach over into Alabama and into the Carolinas and into Georgia, and there is not any doubt about the pink bollworm being much more of a pest in a destructive way than the boll weevil.

Mr. PURNELL. You have not had the pink bollworm in Mississippi at all?

Mr. QUIN, No. sir; it has not reached us.

Mr. PURNELL. And you do not want it.

Mr. QUIN. And we are very uneasy about it. They prevent seed from coming from the infested territory and they have done everything on earth they can, so far, to keep this pest out of our State. It used to be that the State of Mississippi would get cottonseed from the State of Texas; they had a very fine species of cotton in the State of Texas, and our State used to get seed from that territory; but all of that, since the advent of this pink bollworm, has been stopped. We followed the same policy with the boll weevil and still we could not keep that out of the State, and this is a very vital matter to all of the cotton-growing States and, for that matter, for the entire Republic, for this pest to be eradicated. These gentlemen, who understand the way it has to be done, have explained that, and I certainly trust this committee will grant this appropriation Mr. Buchanan's bill calls for, to protect that territory. It can not be done in any niggardly way, because it is really destructive to that great branch of commerce, the way I see it. We can not get anything to take the place of cotton right away.

I certainly thank the committee for the time they have given me.

STATEMENT OF HON. MORGAN G. SANDERS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I want to take but little of your time. I represent the third district of Texas, situated in northeast Texas and containing eight counties. The people in these eight counties grow cotton and they grow corn, but cotton is their principal crop. This district is some five or six hundred miles, maybe, to where this infested area is, but the people over there, realizing that we have an infested area and knowing something about the nature and work and destruction of the pink bollworm, the Chamber of Commerce of Henderson, in Rusk County, Tex., have passed a resolution in support of this bill and for this appropriation, and sent me a copy of their resolution. The same action was taken by the Chamber of Commerce of Bass, in Smith County, Tex., and also the same action was taken by the Chamber of Commerce of Tyler, Tex., and then by the Chamber of Commerce of Kaufman, Tex. These resolutions are practically the same. They indorse this bill and this appropriation, and I would like to incorporate one of the resolutions, not all, in the record, because they are practically the same.

Mr. ASWELL. And put the other names in.

Mr. SANDERS. Yes; and let the record show there is a similar resolution introduced by all those other chambers of commerce.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection it will be done. (The resolution above referred to is as follows:)

Whereas the recent widespread outbreak of the pink bollworm in Texas threatens the cotton industry of the Nation, valued in 1927 by the Crops and Markets Report of the United States for cotton and cottonseed at $1,462,571,000, being 72 per cent of the value of and second in value only to the Nation's corn crop; and

Whereas cotton has for many years carried the balance of trade for the United States and cotton as a resource is so interwoven with our national prosperity as to affect numerous allied and related industries; and

Whereas the National Congress has established a precedent in appropriating $10,000,000 for the control of the European corn borer and now has before Congress a bill appropriating a similar amount for the continued prosecution of this work; and

Whereas the National Government has assumed the responsibility through its Federal Horticultural Board of preventing the introduction of dangerous insect pests into the United States, the said horticultural board having had absolute control of the promulgation and enforcement of quarantines to prevent the entry of dangerous insect pests; and

Whereas the State of Texas and its citizenship is in nowise responsible for the introduction and spread of this insect pest, but, on the other hand, its introduction has come from a foreign nation and it has made its entry into Texas in spite of the promulgation and enforcements of the Federal Horticultural Board: Therefore be it

Resolved, That we recognize this as a national emergency which threatens to shake the whole business fabric of the Nation, and therefore requires immediate and vigorous action; be it further

Resolved, That recognizing this as a national problem confronting the people of Texas and other cotton-growing States and the Nation in which the Texas people have been in no sense reponsible for the entry into, and occurrence of, the insect and that the Federal Horticultural Board has had full charge of all quarantine regulations, we therefore believe that the Federal Government should bear the full expense of stamping out this insect pest and for compensating the farmers for the losses incident to handling this problem, believing that the previous experiences in which the insect has been stamped out by the establishment of noncotton zones fully justifies the Federal Government in providing the means and otherwise taking steps to eradiacte this insect; Be it further

Resolved, That we petition the Seventieth Congress now in session through our Representatives in the Congress and urge the united support and petition of all the people interested in any way in the cotton industry or related industries to petition their Representatives in Congress to immediately appropriate the sum of $6,000,000, or as much thereof as may be necessary, to provide for immediate and active prosecution of the work of eradication, which offers more hope if attacked immediately than if carried out after long and repeated delays. STATEMENT OF HON. TILMAN B. PARKS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

Mr. PARKS. I did not come in here to make a statement, but every cotton grower in the United States is vitally interested in this legislation, because we feel that the cotton-growing section of the country is absolutely dependent upon some legislation to eradicate this pink bollworm, and everybody that is interested in cotton, in the cottongrowing section of the United States, is interested in this legislation. As we see it, this is the only means we have to protect ourselves against this pest.

I thank you.

Mr. FULMER. Mr. Chairman, we took up quite a lot of time here this morning and did not get anywhere, asking for figures of the cost of production of cotton and these other crops, and the amount of money they received for cotton and for the other crops. I would suggest that Mr. Buchanan, in his statement to-morrow, submit a

statement giving these facts, as to the cost of cotton and the other crops; the amount of money received for the cotton crop and the amount received for other crops, so that we might have in the record the actual figures you have been trying to get this morning. And in that, I would leave out the interest on the investment in either case, because it would be the same, and one would offset the other in this statement. I think that would get it clearly before the committee and we ought to have that statement.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection I submit for the record at this point the report of the Secretary of Agriculture on this bill: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,

Hon. G. N. HAUGEN,

Chairman Committee on Agriculture,

Washington, D. C., March 19, 1928.

House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. HAUGEN: Reference is made to your request of March 14 for a report from this department on H. J. Res. 237 "To provide for eradication of pink bollworm and authorizing an appropriation therefor."

This resolution has been introduced for the purpose of enabling the department to meet the emergency arising by reason of a serious outbreak of the pink bollworm involving some seven counties in the western extension of cotton in Texas, and which threatens one of the primary industries of the Nation and demands immediate attention if we are to protect the cotton-producing States. The fact that this ourbreak brings the pink bollworm into connection with continuous cotton eastward is the emergency feature, and unless drastic measures can be promptly undertaken to eradicate the pest in this area its natural spread will carry it rapidly throughout the Cotton Belt.

The alternative of eradication is regulation, with the object of preventing long distance spread by enforcing safeguards on the movement of cotton and cottonseed from the newly infested counties. Such regulation, however, does not eradicate nor does it prevent spread except as to districts so completely isolated from other cotton as to eliminate the possibility of the natural spread of the pest, and, therefore, the regulation of these new areas in contact with continuous cotton cultivation will necessarily permit the natural and probably very wide spread of this pest yearly, and will amount practically to giving up the battle to save Texas and the rest of the Cotton Belt from increasing invasion by the pink bollworm, accompanied by annual and greatly increasing costs of regulation. The advisability of adopting the program of eradication is therefore obvious. The only known and proved means of effecting eradication is the establishment of noncotton zones for one or two years, and this method has a long record of successes. Its success as to this western area, however, will largely depend on its application this year to prevent the natural spread which would otherwise result under regulation-spread which might double the area or even more, and with the mounting costs, render later effort to eradicate impracticable.

Hitherto the establishment of noncotton zones in Texas and other States has been on the basis of the joint resolution of Congress of 1921, which provides for State payment of farmers' losses, with Federal reimbursement of the State of not to exceed one-third of the amount so expended, and with a limitation of $5 per acre. The new western area, while not greater than areas already cleaned up in southeastern Texas and in Louisiana, nevertheless involves a very much greater acreage planted to cotton, and therefore a noncotton zone will entail costs to the farmers and the State very much greater than any hitherto considered.

The State of Texas fully appreciates the gravity of the situation and the desirability of establishing immediately a noncotton zone for the western area, but after a series of conferences in the district concerned and at Austin, in view of the impossibility of its meeting the costs of a noncotton zone, has felt compelled to recommend regulation for this year, in the hope that a noncotton zone may be made possible with more adequate Federal aid the year following.

The costs of a noncotton zone fall in the first instance heavily on the small group of farmers concerned in the invaded area, and inasmuch as these costs are in the interest of the cotton crop of the Nation, full compensation of such farmers for their actual and necessary losses due to the prohibition of the growth of cotton would seem to be fully warranted.