1920 and of 1925 were as of January 1, prior censuses have been of different dates and we have had great difficulty in attempting to correlate the results of those two censuses-the enumerations of livestock-with the preceding censuses which were of different dates. We are extremely anxious that nothing shall happen to make that difficulty carry on during the next 10 or 20 years. want this enumeration of livestock to be of a date which is comparable with the situation as of January 1. That does not mean necessarily that we insist on the January 1 date, but in the general economy of the livestock industry of the United States there is a pretty definite closing of a livestock year. That date comes during the period from November to January 1, and so we do not find serious objection to the date set up here in this bill as written. There will not be much difference between the situation that will be found as of November 1 or November 15 or December 1 or January 1. There may be some. But when it comes to any consideration of making the date of the livestock enumeration at any material period later than January 1, then we will find difficulties which are absolutely insurmountable in our work of correlation and comparison. So I want to say that positively we want a statement, a census of livestock enumeration as of January 1 or earlier. I do not believe I need to go into the reasons for that further than I have done.

Mr. MOORMAN. I would like to hear them, if you don't mind stating them.

Mr. LOOMIS. They involve both the fact that tenant farmers are leaving and new men coming on the farms shortly after the 1st of January, which raises a large question as to the accuracy and completeness of your enumeration; and secondly, the fact

Mr. MOORMAN (interposing). Excuse me do you mean enumeration of the tenants or livestock?

Mr. LOOMIS. Of the whole business of the farm, of which the livestock is a very important part.

And, secondly, that the new crop of calves, as the dairy industry is organized, begins to come shortly after the 1st of January, so that any delay after the 1st of January begins to give you a new crop of calves and change the age of all the livestock which you are enumerating, and while it may be accurate as of that particular time

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). Change the average age?

Mr. LOOMIS. It changes the average age and ceases to be comparable with the results of the two preceding censuses, which is a most important thing, because, after all, trends are as important for us to know as actual numbers. So much for the date.

The CHAIRMAN. Right there, if my rceollection serves me right, I believe that there was some discussion in this committee that the date of the census, the last census, was not a good one. Am I right in that? That is, the enumerators could not get to the farms, and so forth.

Mr. LOOмIS. I appreciate the physical difficulties of taking a census during the month of January in certain northern States.

The CHAIRMAN. We had that question up in this committee, particularly in relation to the reapportionment bill that was before the committee in the last Congress and the preceding Congress, and it has been alleged here several times in this committee that the

time when that census was taken-not so much in reference to livestock as it was in relation to population-was an inappropriate one, and the census figures were disturbed to a large extent on that account. What are we trying to do is to get a date that will make the best census. That is our idea and our information.

Mr. LOOMIS. I don't want to go into the question of population, because I have no interest in that.

The CHAIRMAN. But the committee has to take consideration of that, of course, serious consideration of the population census, which is probably of the highest interest to the people at large-and that is not invidious to agriculture.

Mr. LOOMIS. Well, if this question is raised, I don't like to take your time here, Mr. Chairman, because I know there are other very busy people waiting.

Mr. MOORMAN. If you have any good reasoning along that line to support your date, I would like to hear it.

Mr. LOOMIS. Comparability is my first reason, and accuracy as to the thing in which we are interested is my second reason.

Third-and this I wish to say is brought on only by the questionI have had the experts in the Department of Agriculture checking and rechecking their figures as to that, and we think that the question of accuracy of the census as to population will not be seriously involved as to any one of these dates I have mentioned.

Mr. LOZIER. Do you think you could get anything like an accurate livestock or farm census of date November 1st and preceding?

Mr. LOOMIS. I do not.

Mr. LOZIER. And then, in order to get an accurate census of livestock, an accurate farm census, isn't it desirable to have this census taken as of a date as nearly as possible to coincide with the date when the enumerators engage in the work of taking that census? Mr. LOOMIS. Absolutely.

Mr. LozIER. Then again, do you think that throughout the United States the livestock period closes any time in the month of November or December. Isn't it a fact that throughout the great middle west the livestock year practically ends and begins in the spring of the year?

Mr. LOOMIS. I am unwilling to say. It may end a little later than January 1, but I would say that in the dairy industry the livestock. year ends before the end of winter.

Mr. LOZIER. Isn't it true and universally recognized that in the great middle west livestock is put on feed in the month of November, the latter part of October and November, and they are kept in the feed lots until March and April, and that there are fewer cattle in the feed lots, fewer hogs in the feed lots, in the month of April than in any other month of the year, because the last year's business has been wiped out, closed out, and the new year's business has not yet begun?

Mr. LOOMIS. I am frank to say I am very poorly informed as to either the beef or the swine industry. I am thinking in terms of the dairy industry. And in support of that statement I wanted to say, and I should have said earlier, that we find that the dairy industry at the present time supplies just a little over 25 per cent of the total

85244-28- -8

farm income of the United States. I will submit those figures if necessary.

I am not taking any issue with the statement that you are making; I am only raising the relative importance of getting this enumeration accurately as possible of the cattle in the dairy industry, which we believe, and I submit, can be most accurately taken as of the first of the year.

Mr. MOORMAN. You were speaking of tenants moving. They do not own any appreciable number of cows upon which this industry is based, do they, in the United States?

Mr. LOOMIS. Yes, I think they do own an appreciable number. Of course, it would not be a large percentage.

Mr. MOORMAN. Well, it would not be 2 per cent, would it?

Mr. RANKIN. Who is that you are speaking of?

Mr. MOORMAN. The tenant farmers owning dairy cattle.

Mr. LOOMIS. I would like to see the figures before trying to answer that. I suppose they are available, but I guess they would be considerably larger than that.

Mr. RANKIN. I don't know how it is elsewhere, but in the section of the country where I live the tenant farmers own a great many dairy cows.

Mr. LOOMIS. That is true of the limited area with which I am familiar.

Mr. MOORMAN. I assume the situation is different in different localities.

Mr. LOOMIS. Now, referring to sections 15 and 16, page 12, my suggestion as to section 15 is that that be made somewhat more definite, if possible, as to the census of agriculture.

There is in the United States, as you gentlemen all know, a county agent service under the direction of the Secretary of Agriculture, with a county agricultural agent in two-thirds or more of the counties of the United States, men paid in public service who are there, trained men who know the agricultural conditions in those counties. I have not consulted with the Department of Agriculture at all on this suggestion which I am going to make, but I wish that it might be possible in section 15 to require that for the period required to take the census in every county where there is a county agent, that that agent should be officially associated with the enumerator.

The CHAIRMAN. Aren't you going to load down this bill with a great horde of enumerators and make a division of authority in that respect?

Mr. LOOMIS. I want the census enumerator to have the authority. The CHAIRMAN. One department having authority under another department. How are you going to adjust that? For instance, the county agents are not responsible to the Department of Commerce in any degree. They are responsible to the Department of Agriculture. Now, the business of the Department of Commerce is to take this census, and this is covered here, I think, in section 15:

That the Secretary of Commerce, whenever he may deem it advisable, on request of the Director of the Census, is hereby authorized to call upon any other department or office of the Government for information pertinent to the work herein provided for.

Doctor HILL. I understand that they do consult the county agent for the purpose of carrying on this work now.

The CHAIRMAN. They have the power to do that.

Mr. LOOMIS. I appreciated that that was in the power, but I only wanted it definite enough so that these county agents would understand that it was their job to help the enumerator.

Mr. JOHNSON. The theory is that the census enumerator assigned to a particular division of the United States will call on the county agent? Would he be likely to do that?

Doctor HILL. I will say that in the taking of the census of 1925 he regularly consulted the county agent in connection with the work. Mr. AUSTIN. He helps the enumerator as best he can.

Mr. JOHNSON. Did the county agent have blanks for his particular use to furnish to the census chief?

Mr. AUSTIN. I did not understand that.

Mr. JOHNSON. Maybe I do not make it clear. Did the county agent report to the census officials in any way by counties or otherwise?

Mr. AUSTIN. We had correspondence with all the county agents listed by the Department of Agriculture, as to the instructions to the local enumerators to help them along in the canvass. The enumerator is the man to make out the individual farm report and turn it in to the Bureau of the Census. Not only that, but we used in 38 States statisticians of the Department of Agriculture as supervisors in the census of 1925. We consulted their field records from beginning to end.

Mr. LOZIER. Mr. Chairman, I want to make this suggestion-I have made it heretofore, and I want to emphasize it now-that the responsibility for the taking of this census is with the Bureau of the Census, and I for one am not willing to handicap the Bureau of the Census and impose a lot of conditions and limitations and restrictions here which will handicap them and possibly give them an excuse for something.

The CHAIRMAN. You give them as free a hand as can be in the bill. Mr. LozIER. Give them a free hand and then exact from them the service which I am sure they will be glad to perform.

Mr. DE ROUEN. We want to place the responsibility on the Census Bureau.

Mr. LOZIER. Put the responsibility on the Bureau of the Census, and I don't want to write in this bill a lot of provisions which will handicap them or make it more difficult or embarrassing for them to carry on their work.

The CHAIRMAN. Broaden it, in other words.

Mr. JOHNSON. You don't want to make a division of authority. Mr. RANKIN. You can't delegate Federal authority to State officials at any rate, and these county agents-at least in my Stateare State agents.

The CHAIRMAN. Aren't they paid for half and half?

Mr. RANKIN. Well, I think the Government pays part of it, but they are appointed by the State; but I think it is a 50-50 proposition. Mr. MOORMAN. Yes, that is the way it is.

Mr. DE ROUEN. I think in my State they are paid partly by the county through the school-board authorities, and the Government contributes the other part.

The CHAIRMAN. They are paid partly by the Government and partly by the State, whatever the department of the State it may be that they come under. It varies in different States.

Mr. MOORMAN. Of course we know that the Census Bureau in taking a census will avail itself of every agency and instrumentality that is open to it in order to get accurate information, and I believe that we ought to give them a free hand.

The CHAIRMAN. Excuse me just a moment. I don't want to interrupt Mr. Loomis, but Mr. Gosnell has had charge of that in the last census, and I presume that Mr. Loomis will give a moment to Mr. Gosnell.

Mr. GOSNELL. Mr. Chairman, we made every effort in the 1925census of agriculture to get the cooperation of the county agents in taking the census. We found that most of them were paid by the States, their principal compensation was paid by the States, and that in most cases they said they did not have the time to devote to census matters. So we did make an earnest effort along that lineand we would endeavor to do the same in this instance.

Mr. LOOMIS. Mr. Gosnell has stated exactly, in better terms than. I can state myself, my own reason for suggesting that this go into the act. I feel very sure, from 15 years experience with the county: agent service-I want to say to the committee that I helped organizethe second farm bureau organized in the State of New York. I have been in that work for many years. I served as assistant to the sec-retary of the New York State Food Commission in 1917, when wetook our State food census in New York State, and I want to say the county agent will make that reply inevitably.

The CHAIRMAN. That is what I was going to say, Mr. Loomis. Mr. LOOMIS. I want to say that they are not so busy with otherthings that if they are directed to put 30 days time on this matter once in 10 years they can not do so. It will not detract at all from their efficiency on their other work, but in addition to that will give the Census Bureau a tremendous amount of information and make them more efficient men on their own jobs, as long as they stay on those jobs.

The CHAIRMAN. By putting that into the act wouldn't you imply that it was the duty of a county agent to do that thing? In other words, imply that it was the duty of a man who is in a separate branch of the Government, who is paid partially by the Government and partially by the State or county or community in which he lives, and if he doesn't comply with that direction in here, what are you going to do? He can give as a reason that he hasn't time, and this, that, and the other.

Mr. LOOMIS. Mr. Chairman, each department of the Federal Government is the servant of the people.

The CHAIRMAN. Oh, we know that, surely.

Mr. LOOMIS. And here are men who have had years and years of experience, paid for by public funds, and I say that it is the duty of these men to be called upon and to answer that call to put their service into as important a matter as the decennial census of agriculture.

Mr. LOZIER. Haven't you overlooked this proposition, that these county agents are not exclusively agents of the Federal Government;