Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

Mr. LOZIER. That will be true if you fix the date in November. Mr. OLSEN. No. You are more apt to get the livestock population than by taking it in April when your young stock comes in.

Mr. LOZIER. Is it not true that the spring pig crop is a controlling factor in the production of pork not the fall litter?

Mr. OLSEN. That may be, but I do not get your point. Mr. LOZIER. If you want a correct enumeration of swine, can not, you get it better in the spring after the spring litters have come than in the fall, because the fall litters are not the determining factor in the swine industry, because the production of small pigs is small as. compared with the spring litters.

Mr. OLSEN. It would be desirable to have another figure that would represent the hog population after the spring litter. If you do take that census as of April 1, you will not get an adequate census of the springtime crop, as in some cases the sows will have farrowed and others will not

Mr. LOZIER. Spring farrowing begins in March. Any man who knows about growing or breeding swine, and I know to my sorrow a little about it, knows that the healthiest pigs come in March. Any experienced breeder will breed his sows to get a March litter of pigs.

Mr. OLSEN. That is very desirable. Wherever there is equipment you will find that thing happen. You will not find your litters all coming by April 1, because the farmers are not equipped. We are making our final figures in the department as of the last of the year and it will be quite serious to have a new census figure here three or four months away from the basis we have used in our work,

Mr. LOZIER. If the other date is better should not the department come to that date? Should efficiency or accuracy be sacrificed in order to promote the convenience of the Department of Agriculture?

Mr. OLSEN. It is a question of accuracy. We are interested in the date from the point of view of accuracy

Mr. MOORMAN. Does the gentleman not know that wherever there is tobacco, a large crop, in the United States, a better census can be had April 1 than can possibly be had November 30?

Mr. OLSEN. I can not say as to that.

Mr. MOORMAN. It is evidenced by the discussion between you gentlemen that corn is questionable and livestock is undoubtedly questionable, but you do not suggest some crop that you could get a better report on November 1 than April 1.

Mr. JACOBSTEIN. Spring wheat.

Mr. OLSEN. I could name a great many; oats, barley, and some other crops could be had better at the end of the year than April. It is exceedingly important in that we have a large tenant population which shifts between farms and No. 1 tenant may be on farm No. 10 and No. 10 on farm No. 1. How will you get an accurate report on that farm from the new tenant?

Mr. LOZIER. You would get it from the old tenant when you took his enumeration. He will furnish a statement as to the quantity of wheat, corn, and livestock that he produced. It makes but little difference whether he lives on farm when the census is taken,

Mr. OLSEN. Your results would be exceedingly uncertain.

STATEMENT OF DR. JOSEPH A. HILL, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF

THE CENSUS. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Doctor Hill. There is a slight misapprehension. When the enumerator goes to the farmer he does not ask him how much corn he produced last year but how much was raised on this farm. The farmer's recollection of corn raised on some other farm may be accurate but he may not have an accurate idea of how much was. raised on this particular farm.

Mr. LOZIER. Why should not you get the quantity he raised because the man will live on the farm one year and the next year the farm may not be occupied by any one.

Doctor Hill. We could not take a successful census that way by asking how much the farmer produced on the farm he occupied last year. We would get into difficulties. We have to go to each farm and ask how much was produced on that particular farm by the man who occupied it last year.

Mr. JACOBSTEIN. The only reason we sit here is that the Constitution provides that we shall have a census enumerating people and we are interested in reapportionment in order to get the number of people, and as I recall it, there is objection to reapportionment on the 1920 census by virtue of the fact that we did not get accurate figures. in the enumeration and the question came up as to when we ought to take the census. That is why we have not had the reapportionment, up to this moment.

The CHAIRMAN. One of the reasons. Mr. JACOBSTEIN. One of the reasons, I am sorry to say. I will remind these gentlemen that come from farming districts that they ought to keep in mind primarily the date wbich is best suited not for the counting of hogs, etc., but of people. Mr. MOORMAN. That is true. April 1 is the best date

Mr. JACOBSTEIN. I will ask these farm representatives do they think that enumeration on April 1 would do more injustice as far as farm population is concerned than November 1? It seems to me that is the central point. That is the point this committee ought to decide, upon a formal date on which the census of the United States shall be taken. .

Mr. MOORMAN. I agree that the census of the people is the princi-. pal thing, and in my section, I do not know how it may be elsewhere, there are hundreds and hundreds of men out of my own county on November 30 that would be there on April 1. All the people would be there on April 1 that would be found there any time in the year.

Mr. JACOBSTEIN. Are you suggesting April 1?
Mr. MOORMAN. Yes.

Mr. JACOBSTEIN. What is the date you figure out under the bill, Doctor Hill?

Doctor Hill. The census is to be taken as of April 1 and the census of agriculture as of November 1.

Mr. JACOBSTEIN. According to the suggestion made here they would be united. Doctor HILL. Yes.

85244-28 10

Mr. LOZIER. I will say the primary purpose of this census is to ascertain population. Having that in view I think May 1 or April 1 would be the better date. There are more reasons for that date than any other. With reference to the farm census I know of no reason why a different date should be adopted. I think, absolutely, with all due respect to these gentlemen, there is no logic in their position. You can get a better farm census if you want a real farm census as of the date of April 1 or May 1 than November because any farm census taken in November is based on speculation and guess absolutely.

There is not a single agricultural product that you can name where you can get an accurate census in November. It is true the wheat crop and the oat crop has been harvested and marketed, but we know the wheat crop and the oat crop and it is an easy matter to get a record of it. We will go to the elevators and go to the bank book and in one or two little transactions you have a summery of your wheat crop, barley, rye, or oat crop. There is no trouble to get that any time in the 12 months. But the crop is all in before April 1. Every crop in the United States has been marketed.

The CHAIRMAN. How does it affect the tobacco crop? Mr. MOORMAN. April 1 is the better date for tobacco because tobacco on November 30 is not stripped and until you begin working in tobacco you can not tell its weight or character, therefore, you can not get proper appraisal of it.

The CHAIRMAN. You do not get it sold or cased or started to market. Nothing has been done to it. It is hanging in the barn.

Mr. JACOBSTEIN. From the suggestions pending, while April 1 may be better than November 30, and I am not arguing against it, the value of statistics in April frequently lies in its comparative data, but if you take it this year, this census April 1 while all the others have been as of the fall there is no basis of comparison. I will not say it can not be done.

The CHAIRMAN. That is the agricultural census you refer to? Mr. JaCORSTEIN. Yes. I hope there will be some comparative data in the census to be taken.

Mr. Rankin. They all have been taken in the spring except on up to 1920.

Mr. MOORMAN. If it is wrong to take it November 30, it should be taken April 1. If you take it April 1 this time, then the next census for comparison will be as efficacious as any other time. If it is now wrong, it ought to be changed.

The CHAIRMAN. I will put this in the record. It has been handed to me by a representative of the Census Bureau. It gives the date of the censuses. The first census of 1790 was taken on the first Monday of August. In 1800 it was the first Monday in August. In 1810 it was the first Monday in August. In 1820 it was the first Monday in August.

These all refer to population figures. In 1830 it was June 1 for population. In 1840 it was June 1 for population and the agricultural date coincided, being the same. In 1850 it was June 1 both for population and agriculture. In 1860 it was June 1 for population and agriculture. In 1870 it was June 1 for population and agriculture. In 1880 it was June 1 for population and agriculture. În 1890 it was June 1 for population and agriculture. In 1900 it was June 1 for population and agriculture. În 1910 it was April 15 for population and agriculture.

In 1910 that is a departure from June 1 to April 15.

The Fourteenth Census of 1920 was taken January 1 for both population and agriculture. So the dates have coincided. Mrs. KAHN. They have never been separated, then?

The CHAIRMAN. The census of agriculture and population have been taken beginning on the same date in all these four years given you. They have been held strictly to one date for a long period. They were as of June 1, but in 1910, April 15, and in 1920, January 1. Mr. MOORMAN. We can hardly justify a departure. The CHAIRMAN. The fact is that they have been taken together.

Mr. LOZIER. Our statistics in America have been taken frequently by different groups, bureaus and commissions on a bureau-made rule without any regulation. I find a great deal of difficulty in my research with references to the activities of our Government and our people in the fiscal year and the calendar year. We get into all kinds of confusions. It is not our purpose to pass on that matter. That will be threshed out. But we have a definite date on which our statistics can be taken. We get into a debate in Congress and we are confronted by a set of statistics and you have to take 5 or 10. minutes in explaining why the production for this year is for the fiscal year and the income for that year is for the fiscal year and money loaned abroad is for the fiscal year, but these figures refer to the calendar year. Let us get the right date and then adhere to it.

The CHAIRMAN. For both censuses? Mr. MOORMAN. Yes.

Mr. OLSEN. While it is true that probably any one date is not the very best date for every one of the crops I do not think there is any question from the point of view of not only our own people but outside economists and statisticians working on the problems that we would get a far better result from the earlier date, and this second point mentioned by Mr. Jacobstein is important. It is true that your earlier censuses were taken earlier in the year but they have been moved forward in order to increase their accuracy.

Mrs. Kain. The one in August was moved back to April.

The CHAIRMAN. 1800 and 1810 and 1820 were in August. Then we had June 1 and in 1910 was moved back to April 15 and in 1920 we have it back to January 1.

Mr. OLSEN. We are concerned about the date because it is a factor in giving us something to use effectively in our work. It is fundamental from that point of view.

The question of population was mentioned here. I have a chart here, in order to bring out the studies of rural population for the country as of April 1 and November 30.

Note these black lines here. This covers the persons employed on United States farms. Some of these are estimates of our own bureau, in fact all of them. Here we have the population situation as of April 1, following these dark lines [indicating). Over here is the situation in November. As you get toward the end of November the same line goes lower. So from the population point of view there is not a great deal of difference from the farming population point of view between those periods, April and November 30.

FAMILY AND HIRED LABORERS COMBINED; PER CENT OF PERSONS

EMPLOYED ON FARMS IN THE UNITED STATES
PER CENT

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »