« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
Leifur Magnusson, International Labor Organization, Washington, D.C. William J. Maguire, department of labor and industry, Harrisburg, Pa. L. C. Marshall, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. Mark A. May, Yale University, New Haven, Conn. E. S. Mead, University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School of Finance and Commerce, Philadelphia, Pa. Wesley C. Mitchell, 161 West Twelfth Street, New York City. Robert R. Morton, Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute, Tuskegee Institute, Ala. Herbert W. Mumford, University of Illinois, College of Agriculture, Urbana, Ill. Howard B. Myers, Illinois Department of Labor, Chicago, Ill. Miriam Noll, Illinois emergency relief commission (Federal), Chicago, Ill. Paul H. Nystrom, Columbia University, New York City. Howard W. Odum, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N.C. William F. Ogburn, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. Ernest M. Patterson, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa. E. B. Patton, New York Department of Labor, New York City. H. M. Pollock, New York Department of Mental Hygiene, Albany, N.Y. Lowell J. Reed, the Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md Stuart A. Rice, president American Statistical Association, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill • Edward A. Ross, the University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. Frank A. Ross, Columbia University, New York City. Dwight Sanderson, New York State College of Agriculture at Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. Henry Schultz, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. C. A. Sienkiewicz, 925 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pa. William C. Smith, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, Tex. George Soule, editor The New Republic, New York City. Bryce M. Stewart, Industrial Relations Counselors, Inc., New York City. Charles L. Stewart, University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill. Edgar Sydenstricker, director, Milbank Memorial Fund, New York City. Warren S. Thompson, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio. Willard L. Thorp, Amherst College, Amherst, Mass. Clark Tibbitts, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. H. R. Tolley, University of California, College of Agriculture, Berkeley, Calif. Henry W. Van Pelt, department of internal affairs, Harrisburg, Pa. G. F. Warren, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. R. Clyde White, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Ind. Malcolm M. Willey, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn. R. Y. Winters, North Carolina State College of Agriculture and Engineering, Raleigh, N.C. Monroe N. Work, editor Negro Year Book, Tuskegee Institute, Ala. Erle F. Young, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif. Walter F. Willcox, 3 South Avenue, Ithaca, N.Y.
Dr. RICE. The additional documents which I have, have been received subsequent to the letters upon which this list of 97 is based. Mr. KINZER. You say there are 97 names on this list? Dr. RICE. It was counted, and I think that number is correct. Mr. KINZER. What was the reason for these letters being sent to you, or what question arose? Dr. RICE. I should say that it is a rather spontaneous recognition by social scientists of the types I have mentioned that the population data of 1930 were no longer adequate to give us the information that is required. I think I can assure the committee that they were not inspired by the Department or the Bureau. I think, perhaps, it would be well for me to state frankly here that through the calendar year 1933, I occupied the position of president of the American Statistical Association, having been elected to that office and having served half of my term before entertaining any idea of being subsequently on the staff of the Census Bureau, and I was under instructions from the time of my assuming the office by the American Statistical Association to further and promote in every way [ could, on behalf of the Association, a population census of 1934 and 1935. I did my best to carry out those instructions, and I dare say that in a number of cases, or in some of the cases—I would not undertake to say in how many—the writers whose names are submitted may have written at the suggestion of myself for the association which I represented, many of them being members of the association. Mr. KINZER. What was that association? Dr. RICE. The American Statistical Association. I happen also to be a member of the governing board of the American Sociological Society, and that organization, also, at its annual meeting in 1932, suggested and recommended a population census in the middle of the present decade, it already being evident in December 1932 that the population data of 1930 were out of date because of the extensive movements that had occurred; and there again, the activities of the organization and of its officers probably were responsible for some letters in support of this proposal. On the other hand, I want to indicate clearly that a great many of these letters have come spontaneously. I do not know how many there are, and I am sure that neither the Director nor the Secretary know. I have here, or at least, there are in the files, at least half a dozen letters, for example, from Los Angeles and vicinity, including letters from spokesmen of the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, the local department of health, and from various other leaders of civic bodies of that kind. I personally know none of those writers, and I have no idea how their interest developed. I am sure it was not through our associations. Mr. KINZER. A great majority of these letters are from educational institutions, are they not? Dr. RICE. I would say that a substantial number of them are, but whether a majority are, I do not know. I think I can indicate the general types of business that are interested. Mr. KINZER. I ask that question, Mr. Chairman, because this would indicate that this proposed census is of interest to educational authorities and educational institutions rather than to industry. Is that correct? Dr. RICE. I would say that a substantial part of the support is from educational institutions. Perhaps even more substantial support is from persons connected with public-health activities, these people being in a large measure State public health and municipal public health officers, statisticians of the actuarial type, such as statisticians for insurance companies, for instance. Mr. KINZER. Will you look at that list of letters, and tell us about what proportion of the communications are from industrial leaders? Mr. ELLENBogEN. I can find only one, unless you include insurance companies. Dr. RICE. Would you include Agriculture, or the American Farm Bureau Federation? The list includes a letter from their representative in Washington. The National Industrial Conference Board is not an educational institution, and it is not exactly an industrial institution, but it represents industrial interests. Now, I am just icking them out at random, and I find there are many noneducational interests represented. I should say that the number of industries represented is small. I would like to say, however, that there is a rather wide industrial interest, as is indicated by the support which has been verbal, rather than in the form of written communications, which we have had from representatives of the United States Chamber of Commerce here in Washington, in a number of conversations by myself and my associates with a number of representatives of their office in Washington. Mr. KINZER. What I would like to have you tell this committee, Dr. Rice, is whether this proposed census is the result of any request or concerted action on the part of industries, or whether industry desires this for industrial purposes, as an aid to the employment of individuals, or whether it is the result of a socialogical and educational demand. Dr. RICE. If I understand the Congressman's question, Mr. Chairman, I cannot say that there was a concerted request from any single source, except as indicated in the case of those two scientific societies. There has been a concerted request from them. Mr. KINZER. What societies are those? Dr. RICE. I refer to the two societies with which I was personally associated. There are others of the same general type which spontaneously, I think it is fair to say, indicated their support of this proposal. I do not know which of them have taken definite action, but I do not know that there has been a widespread business support of the proposal. The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed. Dr. RICE. If the committee desires, I think it might choose to have in its record some of these communications. I have a few of the general nature of those which Mr. Kerlin spoke of in his testimony yesterday. There is one from Mr. Hopkins, one from Miss Perkins, one from Mr. Wallace, and one from General Johnson, on behalf of their respective organizations. Mr. DUNN. Are they in favor of this census bill? Dr. RICE. They are in support of this bill, or the general purposes of the bill. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, they may be incorporated in the record. (There was no objection, and the letters referred to are as follows:) FEDERAL EMERGENCY RELIEF ADMINISTRATION, Washington, D.C., March 27, 1934. Hon. DANIEL C. RoPER,
Secretary of Commerce,
DEAR MR. SECRETARY: The Federal Emergency Relief Administration is tremendously interested in factual data relating to population and unemployment. We find that our reports showing the number of persons receiving relief by geographical subdivisions take on a new meaning when they are compared with census material. We believe, with others, that the population has shifted considerably since 1930, and a comparison of relief data with the census of that year is definitely limited in its usefulness. Certainly a new census of population would aid us considerably in administering relief throughout the country.
Inasmuch as the Federal Emergency Relief Act of 1933 is based on giving relief to persons made destitute because of unemployment, factual evidence of unemployment by political subdivisions would be of great aid in administering this act. Unfortunately, at this time but little evidence exists on this subject on which I can make the administrative decisions, and I therefore find myself an advocate of the taking of a population census with particular emphasis given to unemployment aspects. You may be sure that anything I can do to assist in the realization of this desire will be gladly undertaken.
Various proposals have been made looking toward a middecennial census of population and unemployment. Some of these have proposed such a census in connection with the quinquennial census of agriculture now authorized by law. Would you be so good as to let me know the present status of the various proposals. Sincerely yours, HARRY L. HoPKINs, Administrator.
DEPARTMENT of AGRICULTURE, Washington, D.C., March 31, 1934. The Honorable SECRETARY OF COMMERCE.
DEAR MR. SECRETARY: You will recall that on several occasions I have expressed an interest in the proposal to take a census of population in conjunction with the quinquennial census of agriculture provided by law. It is the judgment of my associates in the Department of Agriculture, which I share, that it is ab– solutely essential for our agricultural program to have a thoroughgoing and accurate census of agriculture. The opinion is freely expressed in the Department that it would be preferable to eliminate the census of agriculture entirely rather than to secure incomplete or inadequate returns. It seems apparent that completeness and adequacy in the agricultural census returns will be very largely dependent upon the concurrent population census. We are, therefore, very strong advocates of the letter. I am informed that a number of proposals to combine the census of agriculture with the census of population and unemployment are now pending, and that a bill proposing such a coordination of inquiries is now before the House of Representatives. I am not sufficiently informed to comment upon the details.of this proposed legislation, but I do want to assure you of the deep concern of the Department of Agriculture in the general proposal, and our desire that some racticable plan for the census be approved promptly. Representatives of this }. have participated in conferences on the subject and have concurred in the general agreement that November 12, 1934, be substituted for January 1, 1935, as the census date. It would appear that this substitution would require congressional action. I shall be very glad to assist you in any manner open to me in procuring approv of the population census, and would ask you to let me know at any time that might lend support effectively. Perhaps you will be so kind as to inform me of the present status of the various proposals to bring the census about. Sincerely yours, H. A. WALLACE, Secretary.
DEPARTMENT of LABor, Washington, D.C., April 6, 1934. Hon. DANIEL C. RoPER, Secretary of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: A Member of Congress has brought to my attention a proposed bill for a census of population and census of unemployment, to be taken in November of 1934.
I am extremely interested in this proposal, because I am of the opinion that the rapid changes that have occurred both in the geographical distribution of our population and the distribution of age groups, invalidates such data as now exist. I feel, and various experts in the field concur with me, that the data collected in the census of 1930 can no longer be used as a basis for portraying either the growth in population or the occupational distribution of our people. As you know, the shift from congested to agricultural areas has alone been sufficiently great to throw out of focus the population picture. Furthermore, the experience of the Department of Labor in making trial surveys of unemployment during the past 4 months has revealed profitable ways of securing data on unemployment. A census of unemployment in conjunction with a census of population, if made this year, would provide a valuable basis for making a continuing estimate of the effects of the administration's program for economic recovery.
I trust that the Congress will see its way clear to authorizing you to make a census of population and unemployment during the current calendar year.
NATIONAL REcovery ADMINISTRATION,
- Washington, D.C., March 29, 1934.
Hon. DANIEL C. RoPER,
MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: In a number of our codes the wage and hour rates and in some cases the application or nonapplication of the code itself, depend upon the population of the community concerned. Hence, we require accurate and up-to-date population data. We can no longer depend upon 1930 census figures and feel that a new population census is required to give us the information needed. We also require data on occupations and unemployment. I am informed that proposals are pending for a new census intended to secure such information. Would you kindly inform me of the present status of these proposals and advise me whether there is any way I can assist in securing these objectives?
Sincerely yours, HUGH S. Johnson, Administrator. . The CHAIRMAN. As I understand it, those agencies mentioned by
you are supporting the general proposal for a population, unemployment, employment, and occupational census.
Dr. RICE. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. AUSTIN. There are several letters there from the State of Pennsylvania.
Mr. DUNN. Will this census include a census of the physically disabled or incapacitated, the blind, crippled, and so forth?
Dr. RICE. As Mr. Austin, the Director, stated yesterday, the census schedule has not been worked out, but it will undoubtedly be what we call a limited census, as compared with the decennial census, but it will probably include such an inquiry as you mention.
I agree that the unemployment schedule must be worked out with a great deal of care, but I am unprepared now to say what specific inquiries may be found necessary in order to supply the information required by the public agencies asking for that information.
The CHAIRMAN. May I say to the committee that the question raised by Mr. Kinzer is, I think, germane to and apropos of this discussion. It seems to me that it would be wise to have Dr. Rice submit the requests that have come for this census, in order that we may know to what extent the proposal has support, and I believe it would be wise to allow those requests to be incorporated in the record.
Mr. ELLENBoGEN. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest that the names of these writers be put in the record for the information of the committee before handing the letters to the reporter?
The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Rice named them awhile ago. You enumerated the persons who wrote the letters that you have just handed the reporter.
r. RICE. I did; yes, sir.
The Director has just suggested that I include some communications from the State of Pennsylvania, a number of which have been received. I would like to explain that in addition to the 97 letters covered by the list I submitted to you, as of last June, those communications have continued to come in. A substantial additional number have been received, from which I have made very slight selections in coming to this hearing today.
The CHAIRMAN. Those that you have selected are typical, I presume.
Dr. RICE. I regard them as typical, or as of special interest because of the direction of the support or individual viewpoint of the writer.