I would call attention to the fact that this brief review upon stream regulation goes far enough to show that so far as damage from floods is concerned alone, the matter is not only of local but of great National concern, affecting as it does railroads and manufacturing interests which supply the Nation. What is true of Pittsburgh is also true of many other river localities, and it is therefore urged that the question be looked at in a progressive manner and that suitable State and National legislation be enacted at the earliest possible moment to provide not only for full navigation requirements, but in addition for flood damage and the combination of needs as outlined in the report of the Flood Commission. It is hoped that this Congress will lend its powerful cooperation in bringing about the accomplishment of this great movement which is so necessary to the public welfare. (Applause.)

President PACK-I am sure we are all indebted for this paper, and to Mr. Lehman for coming from Pittsburgh to present this valuable subject.

If there is nothing more before the Congress at this time we will adjourn until 2:00 o'clock.

ELEVENTH SESSION.

The Congress was called to order by Mr. J. B. White, in the Murat Theater, Indianapolis, at 2:30 o'clock p. m.

Chairman WHITE-It is long past the time for our meeting, but we have not had the last word from Governor Hadley. He wired me night before last of an accident, and that his physician said it would not do for him to come yesterday. Last night we had another telegram, saying he was afraid he could not come, and that we had better not depend on him. I also received a letter. Then I wired him again, but have no reply, so it is barely possible that he will be here in time to speak to us. this afternoon. The committee has gone down to meet the 2:50 train. In his letter, he says:

"I want to thank you again for your kindness in giving me such a prominent place upon your program, and were it not for the fact that I know your meeting will be a complete success with Governor Wilson alone, it would be an added regret-my inability to be present."

I know many of you came expecting to hear Governor Hadley, and he certainly will give us a splendid address if he comes. He appointed a commission in the State of Missouri, of which I have the honor of being a member, and we have had meetings at the Governor's mansion, and we are trying to induce the Legislature of Missouri to pass a good law in favor of Conservation of all natural resources. I cannot report as to our

progress as I would like, so I will not say anything about what we have done. We know what we are trying to do.

The newly elected President is not here, and he insists that I take his place until he comes. We will now listen to "The Story of the Soil," from one who has given it great thought and attention. He has brought about good results that will be of benefit to the farmer and to every one who lives in the country, and therefore of benefit to all the citizens of our common country. I have pleasure in presenting Mr. H. H. Gross, President of the National Soil Fertility League, who will speak on "The Story of the Soil." (Applause.)

Mr. GROSS-Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: I am here representing what we think is one of the most distinguished organizations of this country-one devoted to a specific and definite purpose, and that is to secure the application upon our farms of the best methods of farm practices.

In our self-sufficiency we are sometimes disposed to pooh-pooh science. I have heard farmers say, "What do I care about science? I know how to farm. I am a practical farmer." When I hear a man talk about being a practical farmer, or a practical shoemaker or anything else, I begin to question his knowledge of the art. Reduced to its last analysis, science is simply applied common sense. In other words, to find out the best way of doing anything and then doing it that way. Scientific farming will increase the output per man, per plow, per mule, per acre, and at the same time it will build up the fertility of the soil. Unscientific methods will wear it out. Millions upon millions of acres of land have been wasted by practical farmers in unscientific farming, by abuse and misuse until the land fails to yield enough to pay the labor of cultivating them. There are millions of acres east of Albany that are not worth today one-fourth as much as they were one hundred years ago.

The soil is our greatest natural asset. It is God's best gift to man outside of Him who came to save us. It is our duty to conserve this gift as a priceless heritage. In a higher sense the man in whose name the title stands is not the real owner of the land; it is his to use during his lifetime and to pass it on to his successor. It is his paramount duty to turn it over to those that follow him as useful as when he received it. The land is not his except to use, it is not his to abuse. The fertile fields were placed here by God Almighty for the use of humanity for all time and no one has the right to rob the soil of its power to produce and thereby imperil or destroy the birthright of succeeding generations.

Let us look at Europe. They produce two or three times as much as we do upon the same area, notwithstanding their lands have been a thousand years longer under the plow than our own. There must be a

reason, and it is that Europe, because of its large population, has been compelled to adopt intensive farming or go hungry. With us it has been different up to the present time. A few years ago, some of we older men can remember the time, when the United States invited everybody to come in and possess the land. An old song says, "Uncle Sam is rich enough to give us all a farm." Since then our population has increased faster than the farming industry. We are now consuming ninety per cent. of our wheat and ninety-eight per cent. of our corn. The population is rapidly overtaking production. In fifty years our population will be doubled. What shall we do about it? I say to you this, we must do better farming or the people will go hungry. A thousand years or so ago Japan and India were at the parting of the waysabout where we stand today. Japan chose the better part and conserved the fertility of her soil and by intensive seientific culture she has fed her people and has demonstrated that a very small patch of ground indeed is sufficient to support an individual. This has been shown in this country-that one or two acres, properly handled, will take care of a small family. Japan acted wisely and is rich and prosperous today. India neglected her duties and her opportunity and today there are millions starving there on account of the lack of foresight of those people who lived thousands of years ago. Shall we follow Japan or India? There can be but one answer. The intelligence of the American people, the spirit of the age demands that we go forward to attain the highest and best and it is our duty to help to this end.

Denmark, a generation or two ago, was in poverty and distress, its people were crowding into the cities. The government saw something must be done to improve conditions. It wisely decided that agriculture must be encouraged, so it commenced to teach agriculture in the schools. It had its agricultural colleges strengthened, it sent men out among the people as traveling schoolmasters, visiting one community after another. Agriculture was taught in the schools. This helped some, but did not solve the problem. Finally they adopted the plan which we propose to follow, of sending a trained farm demonstrator into every community and stay there, study local conditions, meet the farmers right on the soil, and help them to understand and apply the best methods and get the best results for the time and effort expended. In two generations it brought Denmark from poverty to thrift, and today it is the finest agricultural country in the world. This comes about from carrying the knowledge to the farm home in the personality of the farm demonstrator who helps the farmer apply the best methods in practice.

Wherever the plan has been tried it has succeeded. It is the one plan that has made good, and in my judgment it is the only one that ever will. Now, then, what are we going to do about it? The most important question that has been discussed on this platform during this Con

gress is the one under discussion now. It is vital, it touches every human interest. The question is, shall we build up our soil and insure the food supply for coming generations, or shall we not? It is a tremendously important question and one pressing for answer.

I am glad to say this to you, that the National Soil Fertility League determined upon a plan, and so far we have had greater success in carrying it forward than we had any reason to expect. Its plan has the approval of nearly every agricultural authority in the land. It has awakened a tremendous amount of interest. It shows many people were thinking in a general way that something ought to be done and were ready to rally to the support of any definite proposition that commended itself to their judgment. The National Soil Fertility League, together with the agricultural college men, drafted what is known as the Lever bill, the object of which is to provide for the co-operation of the Federal Government and the several States in carrying forward this farm demonstration plan. Under this bill the Federal Government makes an annual appropriation to every State of $10,000 a year, irrespective of condition; then it makes further appropriations conditioned upon the States furnishing an equal sum beginning with $300,000 and increasing to $3,000,000 in ten years. Except for the $10,000 all the appropriations are pro rated among the States on the basis of rural population. Indiana under this plan would get $10,000 right off the reel from the fixed appropriation; it would get $9,400 from the conditional appropriation provided Indiana should furnish an equal sum. So Indiana would get from the Federal Government the first year a total of $19,400. This would go to Purdue University. Next year it would be increased to $28,800 and would go on up to $104,000 from the general government to the State College of Agriculture. In order to get this money Indiana would have to raise $94,000, so that the State would have when the maximum was reached approximately $200,000 to expend for carrying to the farmers of Indiana the existing methods of agriculture and carrying to the farmer's wife the best they can give her. What a wonderful help this would be.

There are three great needs in the open country. One is better schools. The country schools of today are not worthy of their name. They fail to meet the requirements of the day and generation. The next important need is good roads, and the third is scientific agriculture. Bringing these improvements about will revolutionize conditions. It will raise agriculture to the first place and the highest place in the estimation of the people. It will be the strongest possible magnet to hold the girl and the boy to the farm home. It will make agriculture more pleasant, more profitable and in every way a more desirable vocation.

When I was a boy and went away to school, I entered a class of boys and we were lined up before the principal and each was asked his name

and his father's business; one would answer his father was a banker, another a merchant, another a doctor, a manufacturer, and so on. When it came to me, I said a farmer. The boys all laughed and I was obliged to take it. I licked two or three of them afterward to get my standing

on the campus.

We used to think that anybody could run a farm. A story is told of a man who had three sons. One was very smart, one was exceedingly good and one was simple-minded. The father said: "Tom is smart as chain lightning; I am going to make a lawyer of Tom. William is about the best boy I ever knew; you can't get him to go wrong; I am going to make a preacher of him. But Jack don't seem to know much of anything, and I will make a farmer of Jack." (Laughter.)

Let me say to you with all possible emphasis that it takes as much ability to run a farm well as it does to run a bank or a factory, and much more than it does to run for office. (Laughter.)

When the Lever bill was introduced in Congress, it passed the committee and was placed on the calendar and was buried there. The question was to get that bill on the floor for a vote. Upon inquiry I found there was only one way to do it in order to get quick action, and that was to get a petition signed by a majority of the members, asking that the bill be taken from its position on the calendar and placed at the head of the list as unfinished business. Mr. Lever secured the required signatures and the bill was thus advanced to the position of unfinished business. The leaders of both parties rallied to its support and the bill finally passed the House by unanimous vote. It is now before the Senate and we want your help to get it enacted into law before the holiday season arrives..

The mind can hardly grasp the benefits that will flow from this legislation. Let me tell you a little of what scientific farming means. Dr. Hopkins, of the University of Illinois, and one of the world's authori ties, just told me that they raised on an average ninety bushels of corn to the acre, covering a period of six years, and twenty-three bushels of wheat, average for six years. The Ohio experiment station on wheat for twenty years showed an average of about thirty-five bushels, while the average for the whole country was less than fifteen bushels. Denmark raises forty bushels average, many fields returning sixty and seventy-five bushels to the acre. We must do better farming.

During the ten years from 1900 to 1910 our population increased twenty-one per cent., our meat supplying animals decreased more than twenty-five per cent. We have an unparalleled high cost of living, due to the fact that population is pressing hard upon production. In short, we have too few producers and too many consumers. Increased production is not the only thing necessary. It is quite as important that the farm production shall reach the ultimate consumer from the farm