To be ensigns Thomas A. Ahroon. Alfred M. Aichel. John C. Alderman. Stephen H. Ambruster. Paul R. Anderson. Robert J. Archer. Carl R. Armbrust. Theodore F. Ascherfeld. Thomas Ashcraft. Michael P. Bagdanovich. Alan B. Banister. Richard N. Belden. Irwin F. Beyerly. Lex L. Black. John A. Bole, jr. John T. Bowers, jr. Clarence M. Bowley. John M. Boyd. James H. Brett, jr. Chesford Brown. Cuthbert J. Bruen. John E. Burke. Albert C. Burrows. Raymond O. Burzynski. Harlow J. Carpenter. Eugene C. Carusi. Max L. Catterton. William A. Cockell. Victor B. Cole. George W. Collins. John L. Collis. Gordon V. Conway. Albert B. Corby. Neale R. Curtin. Roger M. Daisley. Edwin B. Dexter. Thomas A. Donovan. George P. Enright. Augustus W. Estey. Edward T. Eves. Albert J. Fay. Evan E. Fickling. Joseph Finnegan. Eugene W. Fitzmaurice. Michael F. D. Flaherty. Leonard F. Freiburghouse. George Fritschmann. Allan G. Gaden. Philip D. Gallery. Norman F. Garton. Marcel R. Gerin. Donald S. Gordon. Walter N. Gray. Robert S. Hall, jr. Weldon L. Hamilton. Edward A. Hannegan. Claude M. Harris. Wilfred J. Hastings. Earle C. Hawk. Lindell H. Hewett. Allen S. Hicks. William E. Howard, jr. Charles P. Huff, jr. George K. Huff. William H. Jacobsen. Ralph K. James. Milton G. Johnson. Horace B. Jones. Julian H. Leggett. Edward E. Lull. Elwood C. Madsen. William F. Raborn, jr. Basil N. Rittenhouse, jr. William W. Shea. Thomas H. Simmonds. Charles R. Smith. Thurmond A. Smith. Phillip G. Stokes. Phillip F. Wakeman. Albert J. Walden. William M. Walsh. Charles R. Watts. Harry B. Whittington. To be assistant paymasters James S. Bierer. Edward H. Koepel. POSTMASTERS NORTH CAROLINA Ocie O. Freeman, Gates. Lucile L. White, Salemburg. OHIO Melroy C. Johns. Caldwell, OKLAHOМА Stephen M. Gold, Indianola. Isaac W. Linton, Jones. PENNSYLVANIA Albert A. Campbell, Zelienople. Robert H. Wilson, Littlestown. SOUTH DAKOTA Floyd Twamley, Alexandria. Philip S. Feldmeyer, Garden City. Hellen S. Angus, Humboldt. Charles J. Moriarty, Marion. Clyde C. Asche, Olivet. Hugh H. Gardner, Ree Heights. Carl O. Steen, Veblen. John A. Hawkins, Waubay. Edward A. Wearne, Webster. Charles G. Kuentzel, White Rock. WEST VIRGINIA Lawrence Barrackman, Barrackville. Aileen J. Calfee, Eckman. Alphonse Leuthardt, Grafton, Gertrude Smith, Oak Hill. Norvell H. Burruss, Spring Hill. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THURSDAY, May 10, 1928 The House met at 12 o'clock noon. The Chaplain, Rev. James Shera Montgomery, D. D., offered the following prayer: O Thou who art all in all, Thou art such a merciful Father, for height nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God. O give us an outburst of faith with the assurance that nothing can defeat divine care and divine compassion; we shall wonder then at the richness of life that shall come to us. Chasten all desire and graciously help us to know ourselves and Thy purpose concerning us. Give us wise views of the needs of our country and renew our strength and hope in all good things. Continue, blessed Lord, to establish us in all those virtues and in the love of that truth as taught by the Teacher of Nazareth. In His blessed name. Amen. The Journal of the proceedings of yesterday was read and approved. IMMIGRATION Mr. CARLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from New York asks unanimous consent to extend his remarks in the RECORD. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. CARLEY. Mr. Speaker, under the permission granted me, I want to call the attention of the House to the very meritorious provisions of H. R. 12816, entitled: A bil relating to immigration of certain relatives of United States citizens and aliens lawfully admitted to the United States. This bill has been favorably reported from the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, and is now on the House Calendar. Its purpose is to remove some of the hardships now imposed under the present immigration quota law, which in its strict application has practically severed many family ties. The population of the eighth congressional district of New York, which I have the honor to represent, is composed to a very large extent of foreign-born citizens, their American-born children, and resident aliens. Since being elected by the people of the eighth congressional district of Brooklyn, N. Y., to represent them in Washington there have been called to my attention many pitiful and deserving cases. Hardships and family separations caused by the strict enforcement of the immigration law are so frequently found and called to my attention that I am in favor of amending the present law and humanely modifying many of its provisions. I heartily agree with the report of the committee and favor the early passage of the bill. This bill would permit the entry, outside of quota limitations, of the wives of United States citizens, the husbands of United States citizens, and the children, under 21 years of age, of United States citizens. The present law does not give a nonquota status to the husbands of citizens or the children between the ages of 18 and 21 years of citizens. This bill also gives a certain preference status, within the quota allowances, to the unmarried children under 21 years of age, the wives, and the husbands of aliens already lawfully admitted to the United States and permanently resident here. I would urge greater leniency than would be accorded under the terms of this bill. I would not set any age limit upon the children of United States citizens, for so long as either parent was a citizen I would admit their unmarried children irrespective of age. In fact, I would even go further; I would give a nonquota status to those minor children living abroad of aliens who have been legally admitted to the United States and who have filed their declarations of intention to become American citizens. In many instances immigrants legally in the United States, some of them having filed their declarations of intention to necome citizens, have appealed to me to assist in bringing their minor children here to join the family group in their established home. The only answer I could give those people was that their children would have to make application in the regular way at the American consulates abroad and come under the quota allowance, which, in most instances, on account of the small quota allowance, meant a wait of long and weary years. I would be in favor of further amending the immigration laws so as to give the Secretary of Labor, or some officer designated by him, certain discretionary powers to meet unusual emergencies which can not otherwise be properly met on account of the strict interpretation of immigration law. I have particularly in mind two pathetic cases in which discretion, if it were authorized, would have relieved a very distressing situation. The first which came to my notice when I assumed office was the case of an alien widow who, with her infant child, came to this country on a visit to near relatives. While here on a visitor's visa this alien mother was taken ill and died. Under the technical interpretation of the quota immigration law the motherless infant could not remain here with its blood relatives but was compelled to return to its native land, the same as an adult alien. Within the past few days an appeal was made to me by a young woman, a naturalized citizen, to procure permission to bring her infant sister to live with her, the widowed mother having died, leaving this little sister alone. Under the present law there was no provision whereby this child could be admitted to the United States, even temporarily, as she was under the age that she might be admitted for educational purposes. I can not believe that anyone, not even the strongest advocate of total restriction of immigration, in circumstances as in the cases cited, would or could object to a provision in the immigration law that would give to the proper officials some discretionary powers to take care of such an emergency. The adoption of the amendments suggested would not seriously affect the quota provisions of the present law; it would be merely granting to our own adopted citizens the benefit of humane provisions and common-sense interpretation of the quota law. In conclusion, I sincerely hope that before adjournment of the Seventieth Congress some remedial and humane legislation will be enacted so that the many hardships now imposed under the quota immigration law will be partially, at least, eliminated. MUSCLE SHOALS Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD on the subject of Muscle Shoals legislation and to include certain figures with reference to the cost of electricity. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Wisconsin asks unanimous consent to extend his remarks in the RECORD on the subject of Muscle Shoals legislation and to include certain figures in regard to the cost of electricity. Is there objection? There was no objection. amount startling to every American citizen. The average consumption in an eight-room home in the United States is less than one-fifth of that amount. Now let us compare the bill Mrs. Cullom received for that month with that of a consumer in our own country, as shown by Senator NORRIS. Her light and power bill for the 334 kilowatt-hours she had used was $3.55. Had she lived in Washington, her bill for the same amount would have been $23.18; in Birmingham, Ala., she would have had to pay more than $32; and if she had lived in some of the towns in Florida, her bill would have been more than $60. During the past year, Senator NORRIS says in his address, domestic consumers of electricity in the United States paid an average of 7% cents per kilowatt-hour, while Ontarians were paying 1.85 cents. Profiting by the low rate, Mrs. Cullom is able to use nearly every electrical appliance known to science to lighten her labors. Electric sweepers, irons, kitchen ranges, customary with people of like circumstances in this country are within the means of almost everyone in Ontario, but who can afford such conveniences with the exorbitant power rates in force here? Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Speaker, after almost a decade of strife and controversy, during which resources worth millions have been permitted to lie idle, it seems that the Muscle Shoals question is about to be settled. Begun originally as a war measure under the national defense act of June 3, 1916, comple-heaters, washing machines, and twice as many lights as are tion of the great project has been delayed by at least 10 years while selfish, profit-seeking private interests have sought to obtain possession of the work already completed so that they might amass new fortunes at the expense of the consumer, and through their tactics have obstructed the passage of requisite legislation. I refer to the Power Trust and the fertilizer interests, who have been responsible for withholding undoubted benefits of great magnitude from the public these many years. If the measure becomes a law as approved by both Houses there will be three chief ways in which the Nation will benefit. First, through the production and sale of power at a rate much cheaper than that extorted from the consumer by the electricpower interests; second, by the efficient and therefore much less costly production of fertilizer and fertilizer ingredients on an experimental basis; and third, by the opening of more than 400 miles of the Tennessee River to navigation and the control of its waters in time of danger from flood. Originally this immense project was planned for the production of nitrates to be used in the manufacture of explosives needed in unprecedented quantities for the carrying on of the World War. An idea of the growing need of nitrates for this purpose may be gained from the fact that more explosives are used in one demonstration of modern bombing practice than were expended by both armies in the Battle of Gettysburg. Before entering the World War we were absolutely dependent upon foreign countries for our supply of nitrates, and Chile, our If this source had been chief source, was uncertain at best. cut off there is no telling what disastrous effect might have been the result. As it is, millions of dollars are spent annually for nitrates in this country, both for fertilizer and for explosives. At the time of its erection the Muscle Shoals plant was modern in every respect and one of the best of its kind in the world. Since that time, however, great strides have been made in the cheaper and more efficient production of nitrates, and the new methods that have been developed necessitate improvements in the plant as it now stands. To the original cost of the work already carried out-approximately $150,000,000-we must now add $37,000,000 for the construction of another dam at Cove Creek and about $33,000,000 for altering and modernizing the present plant. The erection of a dam at Cove Creek will serve the double purpose of flood control and will increase the output of power from the combined sources 300 per cent, so that the power development will be in the neighborhood of 300,000 horsepower. While the primary purpose of the development was the production of nitrates, the immense masses of water held in leash by the great dams at Muscle Shoals are capable of generating a considerable surplus of power over and above that needed to run the nitrate plants. What use shall be made of this power? Is it to be allowed to fall into the hands of private interests who would use it to mulet the people out of every possible dollar, or shall it be developed and distributed by a Government corporation at a fair price? Volumes of propaganda have been spread over the country forecasting ruin to private interests if the Government should take over Muscle Shoals and thereby enter into competition with the power and fertilizer interests. According to these tales, want and deprivation will be the share of thousands of owners of power stocks if power prices are lowered through Government operation of the plants in question. Senator NORRIS, the champion of the present Muscle Shoals legislation, has very ably portrayed the results of Government control by graphic illustrations from Ontario, Canada, where power is furnished at cost by a publicly owned corporation. One of the cases cited is that of the wife of a laboring man, a Mrs. Cullom, of Toronto, living in a modest home of cight rooms. Notwithstanding the small size of her household, this woman used 334 kilowatt-hours of electricity in one month, an Another instance of the benefits of cheap power is presented the address of the honorable Senator from Nebraska : by Mr. NORRIS in the case of an Ontario farmer. I quote from I have before me a photograph of the farm home of Mr. B. L. Siple, a Canadian citizen who lives in Ontario. He has 79 acres in his farm, and at the time I visited him he was milking 17 cows by electricity. He filled his silo by electricity. He ground his feed by electricity. He pumped the water by electricity. Every cow in her stall had a bucket of water within her reach. When she drank the water in the bucket Mr. Siple's barn could be lighted throughit was automatically refilled. out by the pushing of a button. The house was a beautiful modera cottage, the equal of any in our cities in America. There was running Mrs. Siple cooked the year water in the kitchen and in the bathroom. She had an electric fan in the kitchen. around on an electric stove. She washed her dishes in water that she heated by electricity. The bathroom was supplied with water heated by electricity. In fact, she had practically all of the modern electrical conveniences known to science to-day. The installation on this farm of electricity had practically saved Mr. Siple the expense of one hired man and it saved his wife the expense of a hired girl. He paid for the entire facilities for the year in which I visited him $115.49. Like the city man, he paid an amortization fee, and also included in this bill an item which in 30 years will pay off the entire capital stock, including the construction of the transmission lines. To quote Senator NORRIS still further: And it must be remembered that in all the Canadian rates I have given there is included an amortization fee. That is, there is included in the prices a fee which in 30 years will pay off the entire invested capital. So that the rates are not only paying interest on the money invested in the development, not only paying for the expense of operation and depreciation, but they are likewise paying a fee that in 30 years will leave them with nothing to pay except the expense of maintenance and operation. In view of these facts does it look as though the American Power Trust were operating on a philanthropic basis and due to suffer greater losses if their rates were forced down by Government competition? Are not the American people entitled to profit by resources owned by themselves as well as are the people of Ontario? And, without a doubt, Government operation of the power plants at Muscle Shoals will have a far-reaching effect in reducing power rates. The power emanating from this plant will be placed, first, at the disposal of the States, counties, and municipalities, and any surplus that remains will be sold to distributors who desire it. It will be the part of the Government corporation to see that the power is resold at a fair rate, and the rates thus set will serve as a basis throughout the country in the near future, it is to be hoped. The power problem is but a single aspect of the Muscle Shoals question. The plants there will assure the country of a permanent nitrate supply within its own borders, and in case of war will result in immense savings. In times of peace these nitrates will be available for the manufacture of fertilizer at much lower prices than the imported product. Fertilizer interests have opposed Government operation on grounds similar to those presented by the Power Trust, claiming that they would have to shut down their plants if the Government were to go into the business. As a matter of fact, their arguments are | contradictory. They claimed, on the one hand, that the Government could not distribute fertilizer at a profit beyond a very restricted radius, due to the high transportation cost, and, on the other, that they could not hope to compete with Government prices. As it is provided in the present bill that fertilizer shall be produced on an experimental basis only, the fertilizer interests themselves will derive great advantage. If the Muscle Shoals bill becomes a law, the Government corporation will have at its disposal any documents in the United States Patent Bureau, and thus will be able to carry on experiments looking toward the cheapest and most efficient production of fertilizer, a procedure admittedly far beyond the means of most private manufacturers. The results of these experiments would be passed on to the private manufacturers and naturally would be of great benefit to them. Furthermore, the nitrates produced at Muscle Shoals will be sold to the manufacturers, who now have immense freight bills to pay on the waste matter that comprises more than 80 per cent of the product imported from abroad. The nitrate content of the product mined in Chile, it has been pointed out, is seldom more than 16 per cent, the remainder being filler. Thus the production of cheaper nitrates and experimentation in fertilizer manufacture will be of untold benefit both to the private manufacturer and to the farmer. The importance of commercial fertilizer in agriculture is constantly growing. This fact may be better appreciated when it is understood that its production has been the study of scientists for the past 25 years, during which period great strides have been made. As to the standpoint of navigation and flood control on the Tennessee River, more than 400 miles of water navigation will be thrown open by completion of the Muscle Shoals project and the construction of the dam at Cove Creek. The great dams would serve to eliminate most of the danger of floods in the Mississippi Basin and thus would be directly in line with recent flood-control legislation. WILLIAM LADD AND THE AMERICAN PEACE SOCIETY Mr. NELSON of Maine. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 10 minutes. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Maine asks unanimous consent to address the House for 10 minutes. Is there objection? Mr. SNELL. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I very much dislike to object, we have agreed on to-day for the consideration of the emergency officers' bill and there are to be five hours of general debate, so I dislike to let in extraneous matters. I wish the gentleman would wait until Saturday. Mr. NELSON of Maine. I will say to the gentleman that I am a man of few words. Mr. SNELL. I appreciate that, and this is a very embarrass ing position for me to take. Mr. NELSON of Maine. The matter I intend to speak about concerns this day, and if I wait until a later day the occasion will have passed. The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. NELSON of Maine. Mr. Speaker and Members of the House: The thoughts of lovers of peace the world over are turned this morning to the city of Cleveland, Ohio, where there is now in session a World Conference on International Justice, attended by some of the outstanding world statesmen of the present day, and promising much for the promotion of a better understanding among nations. This conference has been arranged as a part of the contennial anniversary celebration of the American Peace Society, founded on May 8, 1828, by William Ladd, of Minot, Me. This peace society, the first of its kind in the United States-patriotic in the truest sense, standing always for adequate national defense, yet seeking always world peace through reason and justice-has been now for 100 years one of the world's greatest forces for right thinking along international lines, and to it humanity owes a very generous debt of gratitude. The president of this society to-day is our distinguished colleague, the Hon. THEODORE E. BURTON, of Ohio, whose eloquent utterances on the floor of this House in behalf of world tolerance, world understanding, world sympathy and justice, have repeatedly won our love, challenged our admiration, and compelled our respect. [Applause.] May God spare this man of magnanimity and vision to many years of useful service. [Applause.] We need such men as he in this House; for long ago it was written, Where there is no vision the people perish." This day commemorates not only the hundredth anniversary of the founding of the American Peace Society, but it commemorates also the birth, 150 years ago today, of William Ladd, the founder of that society. And because this man spent the greater part of his useful life on one of the thousand beautiful hillsides of my native State, in the little village of Minot, because he also was a man of vision, and there dreamed the golden dream of world peace, and there wrought the labors that won for him the title which still graces his name, "The apostle of peace"; because the people of my State honor his memory, as it is honored by the world in Cleveland to-day; and because the problem that he sought to solve is the greatest problem that now challenges the effort of the Christian world, I crave your brief indulgences this morning, that I may say just a word as to the life and labors of this man. William Ladd was a simple toiler on a Maine farm, yet he was a great man. He was great because he contributed largely to the ideals of mankind and because he gave to the service of those ideals all that he had. I may not review here the story of his earlier life. Suffice to say that he was 41 years of age when he received from the Rev. Jesse Appleton, president of Bowdoin College, then on his deathbed, the inspiration and urge to world-peace work. The remainder of his life, some 33 years, were devoted unceasingly to this cause. In it he spared neither his health nor his fortune. Ten years later he gathered together the various peace societies of the United States into one great organization, the American Peace Society, the hundredth anniversary of which is now being celebrated. In thought William Ladd was far in advance of his time. As early as 1831 he conceived the idea of an international congress and a high court of nations. In his writings and in his speeches he simply sought to extend the principles of the American Constitution and our Supreme Court so that they might apply to nations as well as to States. His entire physical strength was spent in advancing these ideas, in the press and from the lecture platform and the pulpit. In the last years of his life, health failing him, unable to stand, he often addressed large audiences from his knees. On his return home from one of these speaking trips, exhausted, he died, and on his tomb are inscribed these words: Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. It was one hundred years ago that this man lived and worked and gave his life in the service of a great ideal, inspired by the vision of a better world, in which reason and justice should be substituted for violence in the affairs of nations. His was a voice crying in the wilderness. To the then world at large Ladd was simply a dreamer of pious dreams, a visionary, an idealist seeking Utopia. William Ladd may have been a dreamer, but he was more than a dreamer. His was a vision that pierced the future, a faith founded on the teachings of the Man of Galilee, and his a courage and a determination that enabled him to play a man's part in making his vision a thing of reality and substance. He who has a vision Sees more than you and I; He who dreams the golden dream Lives fourfold thereby ; Time may laugh, worlds may scoff, And hosts assail his thought, But the visionary came, ere the builder wrought. He, the dreamer of the dream, The vision that William Ladd saw a century ago is slowly but surely coming to fulfillment. The idea which he gave to the world still lives, and grows greater and more sublime, as men of the present day seek peace under his benign and simple doctrine. Outlawry of war may no longer be classed as the pathetic fancy of the impractical idealist. War is being outlawed to-day, and the area of its banishment is continually widening. Year by year the specter of war is passing more and more into the background, and the day draws near when the great conflicts of the world shall be not those of nation against nation but those of all the peoples of the earth combined against ignorance, poverty, disease, and crime, the four great enemies of mankind. The task to which William Ladd set his hand a century ago is ours to-day, and no longer impossible of accomplishment. Thomas Nelson Page, who has the power at times to clothe truth in the garments of imagination, once said: God, with His mighty wind, has shaken his hand over the river, and men are beginning to go dry-shod on the places where once there was no passage. Nineteen centuries failed to give us an international Christianity, an international desire and effort for world peace. We would not listen to the still, small voice of conscience, so God spoke to us out of the whirlwind of war. Out of that war, refined by its fires, has come a new world conscience, a world desire for peace, a world consecration to the obligations of our present-day civilization. God has, indeed, shaken His hand over the river, and we may if we will, if we have the faith and the vision and the courage, walk dry-shod on the places where once there was no passage. [Prolonged applause.] EXTENSION OF REMARKS Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the RECORD a short editorial from the Chicago Tribune and one letter relative to the Tyson-Fitzgerald bill, which we will soon take up for consideration. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Oklahoma asks unanimous consent to extend his remarks in the RECORD by printing an editorial and letter with regard to the Tyson-Fitzgerald bill. Is there objection? Mr. UNDERHILL. I shall have to object, Mr. Speaker. THE ROMANCE OF PUBLIC HEALTH Mr. SUMMERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD on public health and sanitation. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Washington? There was no objection. Mr. SUMMERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, it is refreshing to note that the Congress of the United States within the past few weeks has paused in its consideration of routine legislation and has given thought to the health of the Nation and the world. Two bills recently passed by the House and Senate dealing with important matters relating to scientific studies and the public health serve to remind us of the striking advances that have been made in the sanitary sciences within the past few decades. The development of modern science has been a triumphant march. It is a matter of great pride that medicine has kept abreast of the advancement made in all other branches of science. Gratifying progress has been made in internal medicine, surgery, pathology; in fact, in all branches of medicine. It is of interest to note that preventive medicine, hygiene, and public health laws have also kept apace with the growth of knowledge. H. R. 8128, a bill to authorize a permanent annual appropriation for the maintenance and operation of the Gorgas Memorial Laboratory in Panama, which has been passed by the House, is one of the important bills to which I refer. This laboratory is intended to be a permanent memorial to Dr. William Crawford Gorgas, former Surgeon General of the United States Army. It is fitting that such a memorial be established in Panama, where General Gorgas demonstrated the most striking application of the principles of modern sanitation that has been made within recent years. The Panama Canal could not have been constructed, and the American efforts would have failed had it not been for the success of General Gorgas in conducting the sanitary and health work of the Isthmus. The field of tropical and medical research is large, and the needs involved are great. The present research facilities are limited, and it appears that there is no likelihood of the completion of this work for a great many years to come. The studies in tropical diseases have scarcely been touched in comparison with what is needed. SANITATION AN ANCIENT SCIENCE Such great strides have been made in public health, preventive medicine, and hygiene within the past few decades that many persons regard sanitary science as of modern origin. This is not the case. In the history of early peoples we almost invariably find that the health of the population was a subject of serious consideration and legislation. The Egyptians filtered the muddy water of the Nile at an early date. They gave special attention to their food and to child welfare. They recognized the danger of floods to health and resorted to preventive measures. Joseph's Well, near Gizeh, was excavated through 300 feet of solid rock and was an object lesson in obtaining pure water. Reservoirs were common in ancient times. The Chinese for thousands of years have used alum in the clarification of muddy waters. The Bible reveals that Moses proposed and enforced many excellent sanitary measures. The Mosaic laws contain specific directions for personal cleanliness, the purification of dwellings and camps, the selection of healthful and the avoidance of unhealthful food, the isolation of persons with contagious diseases and various other points bearing on the welfare of the race. The inhabitants of old India also gave attention to their food, habitations, games, exercises, and the isolation of children in the case of infectious diseases. The wonderful physical development of the ancient Greeks is well known. The Romans were among the first peoples to recognize the value of ventilation and to provide for a good supply of fresh air. They brought fresh water from the mountains and provided underground drains for the disposal of sewage. Amongst their military operations the Romans found time to construct the Cloaca Maxima, some 2,400 years ago, which not only served for the removal of refuse, but also helped to drain bogs and marshes. It constitutes the principal sewer of modern Rome. Aqueducts were constructed to cover miles of the surrounding plains. Their remains, many of which have been restored, are now used for their original purpose. At one time there were 14 large and 20 small aqueducts bringing water to Rome, some of which carried the water from a distance of more than 50 miles. During the reign of Tiberius and Nero, the per capita supply of water was over 1,400 liters a day. It is a matter of historical record that between 400 B. C. and 180 A. D., about 800 public baths were installed among the "thermæ carcallæ," which accommodated 3,000 bathers at one time. These things evidence the munificence and abundance with which the first of sanitary requisites were supplied to Rome. CHOLERA WIDESPREAD In the thirties, forties, fifties, and sixties of the last century cholera was by no means unusual in many places in the United States. Congress passed special legislation relative to outbreaks of cholera in 1832 and in 1866. More than 50,000 persons died of cholera in 1831-32 in 18 cities of Europe. In Hungary during this same epidemic, 1 person out of every 46 died of this disease. In Montreal the rate was given as 1 person out of every 20; in New York, 1 person out of every 100; and in Albany, 1 out of 77. As late as 1873 cholera was epidemic in several of our States. Prior to the Civil War yellow fever was so common throughout the South, particularly in New Orleans, Galveston, Mobile, Key West, Pensacola, and Charleston, S. C., that some writers spoke of these places as endemic centers. Philadelphia, Baltimore, New York, and other cities suffered epidemics of yellow fever. In fact, no less than 90 epidemics of yellow fever have made their appearance in the United States at different times. DISCOVERIES OF PASTEUR Modern public health may be said to date from the discoveries of Louis Pasteur, a great French scientist. His work was largely in the field of bacteriology and was carried on from belief, which was almost universal at that time, that putrefacabout 1857 to 1885. Pasteur's work successfully disproved the tion, fermentation, and similar processes were the result of what was spoken of as the "spontaneous generation" of lower forms of life; that is, that such forms could originate de novo from inanimate matter. The work done by Pasteur included the discovery that certain diseases in both man and some of the lower animals were due to the growth and multiplication of microscopic disease-producing plants, which are ordinarily spoken of as bacteria. It was not until the late eighties of the past century, however, that the leaders of medical science either in Europe or in America generally accepted the demonstrations and existence and the pathologic significance in health or disease of the bacteriological discoveries of Pasteur. DOCTOR JENNER AND THE MILKMAID It should be recalled that the demonstration of the value of vaccination against smallpox by Edward Jenner about the year 1798, was the first notable victory of modern times over disease and pestilence. Until that time smallpox reaped a large harvest of lives every year, and was as common as measles is at the present time. Jenner's demonstration antedated the work of Pasteur by about three-quarters of a century. In order to appreciate the importance of the discovery and use of vaccination against smallpox it is of interest to know something of the historical development of this important contribution to the prevention of disease. At one time smallpox was the most common and the most dreaded disease in the world. Before the days of vaccination only 5 or 10 people out of every 100 escaped smallpox, and of those who contracted the disease about one person out of every four died. Many of those who recovered were scarred, maimed, or even blinded for life. The disease was so feared, and people were so sure that they would get it, that many of them had themselves inoculated with smallpox so as to have it and get through with it. Many of those who were thus voluntarily inoculated with smallpox died, but the death rate among the inoculated was much less than among those who contracted the disease in other ways. While a medical student Edward Jenner learned from a milkmaid that persons who had been inoculated with cowpox were not subject to smallpox. This fact impressed Jenner, and when |