portant to teach the farmers in regard to the best kind of fertilizer to be used and how to apply it? [Applause.]

Do not let anyone be frightened by this talk that the Morin bill will put anyone out of business.

The express company claimed that parcel post would put them out of business. Parcel post has been a great success and saved the people millions of dollars. The express company is still in business and their stock has advanced in price.

The powder interest claimed that they would be put out of business if the Government made powder. The Government proceeded to make powder, and the powder people are still in business; but the price has been reduced. The enactment of this bill into law may, and I hope it will, cause the fertilizer industry to modernize their antiquated methods of producing fertilizer.

The fertilizer mixers buy all the cyanamide nitrogen they can get for 7 cents a pound and use it along with Chilean nitrogen, which costs 20 cents per pound, and sell it at the same price. That is another reason why the Government corporation should

be authorized to make complete fertilizer, as the fertilizer in

dustry might not buy and use the Government nitrogen, and if they did the Government might not be able to protect the farmer in the price of Government nitrogen put into the mixed fertilizer. The farmers are becoming more scientific in their methods of farming and are just beginning to realize the advantages of a better and concentrated fertilizer and are going to demand it. If Government operation of Muscle Shoals is a success it should and will be continued, and no one will favor private operation. If it is not a success it will be discontinued and the way will be opened for a lease and private operation, but no lease will be made by Congress unless this should happen.

The fertility of the soil is being rapidly exhausted in every part of the country and it will not be long until it will have to be replenished by fertilizer and you all should be taking an interest in this subject.

The Morin bill is a real fertilizer bill. That accounts for the presence of the lobby that is here working against this bill and who admit that it is a fertilizer bill and set up the claim that it will injure their business by reducing prices of fertilizer to the farmers. The farmers are not able to come here. They must depend on us as their representatives to protect their interest. Some of their legislative representatives are here opposing this bill and in doing so they do not represent but misrepresent the wishes and the best interests of the farmers back at home who are paying their salaries and expenses. [Applause. While some of them claim that there is no fertilizer in this bill, still in opposing it they place themselves in the ranks of the fertilizer lobby which is here trying to defeat this bill. Those who are opposed to this bill are on the side of and aiding the power and fertilizer lobbies. What will farmers think of their representatives here? Let us stand

firm and loyal to the best interest of the farmers. Let the friends and supporters of this bill remain in the House-stand together and vote together and we will win a victory for agriculture. [Applause.]

PERSONAL PHYSICIAN TO THE PRESIDENT

Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 192, which I send to the desk and ask to have read.

The Clerk read as follows:

House Resolution 192

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House as in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union S. 3456, allowing the rank, pay, and allowances of a colonel, Medical Corps, United States Army, to the medical officer assigned to duty as personal physician to the President.

At the conclusion of the reading of the bill for amendment the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except ɔne motion to recommit.

Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, this resolution makes Senate 3456 in order. By the terms of the rule, the bill is to be considered in the 'House as in Committee of the Whole. The bill is exceedingly short. It simply gives the rank, pay, and allow ance of a colonel to the officer, a major in the Medical Corps, now detailed as the personal physician to the President. The bill does not permit the continuance of the rank or pay or allowance after this officer is relieved from duty on his present detail. The report from the Committee on Rules is unaniNo time has been asked on the rule. Therefore I move the previous question on the rule.

mous.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. MORIN. Mr. Speaker, I call up the bill S. 3456, allowing the rank, pay, and allowances of a colonel, Medical Corps, United States Army, to the medical officer assigned to duty as personal physician to the President, which I ask the Clerk to report.

The Clerk read the bill, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the officer of the Medical Corps, United States Army, who is now assigned to duty as the personal physician to the President shall have the temporary rank and the pay and allowances of a colonel, Medical Corps, United States Army, while 80 serving.

With the following committee amendment:

Line 7, after the word " serving," insert a colon and the words "Provided, That the officer now assigned to that duty shall have the rank, pay, and allowances herein provided from the date of his assignment."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the resolution just adopted, the bill will be considered in the House as in Com

mittee of the Whole House. The Clerk will report the bill for amendment.

The Clerk again read the bill and the committee amendment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the committee amendment.

The committee amendment was agreed to.

The bill as amended was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, and passed.

A motion to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed was laid on the table.

A similar House bill was laid on the table.
PINK BOLLWORM

Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the
Committee on Rules I call up House Resolution 193.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the
resolution.

The Clerk read as follows:

House Resolution 193

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of S. J. Res. 129, to provide for eradication of pink bollworm and authorizing an appropriation therefor. That after general debate, which shall be confined to the bill and shall continue not to exceed one hour, to be equally divided and controlled by those favoring and opposing the bill, the bill shall be read for amendment under the five-minute rule. At the conclusion of the reading of the bill for amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted, and the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and the amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, this resolution makes in order the consideration of the Senate Joint Resolution 129, authorizing an appropriation of $5,000,000 to be expended under the direction of the Secretary of Agriculture for the eradication of the pink bollworm.

infests cotton. The only successful way in which it can be The pink bollworm is probably the most deadly pest that combated is by its complete eradication by the creation of noncotton zones in which cotton is not permitted to be grown.

In 1918 this pest first appeared in the United States in a section of Louisiana, and also to some extent in the State of Texas. It was recognized that it was a great menace to the cotton industry of the country; that if it were allowed to spread, it in time would infest the whole cotton area.

Experience with the pest in other countries, like Egypt, where it had been permitted to spread, was that it had damaged the cotton crop from 25 to 30 per cent.

So steps were immediately taken by the people interested to handle this menace. At first it was undertaken in the State of Texas by voluntary agreement between the farmers in the infected area to have noncotton areas. In 1918 that plan operated rather successfully, where more than 90 per cent of the farmers in the infected area omitted to plant cotton and combated the pest by the noncotton-zone regulation. But a small percentage of the farmers, as it always the case where you try to have voluntary action of this kind, refused to go through with the program, and while very fine results were obtained, yet there was not complete eradication in that district.

So by legislation the State of Texas provided for the creation of noncotton zones where the farmers were prohibited from planting cotton in the infested area, and by an act of Congress

to the resolution.

The resolution was agreed to.

Government wherein the United States contributed toward the payment of damages to these farmers who, by reason of being

deprived of the right to plant cotton, suffered financial loss. Representatives of the Department of Agriculture stated before our Committee on Agriculture at the hearings that the pest was completely eradicated in two seasons in the State of Texas and the State of Louisiana.

During the past year this pest manifested itself again in about seven counties of western Texas and in a small area in Arizona. It is known that it was brought into this country in some way from the Republic of Mexico. The area infested-in some spots to a greater extent than in others-comprised more than 400,000 acres in the western part of Texas and over in Arizona.

The Committee on Agriculture has reported this resolution. It has already passed the Senate. It authorizes, as I said, an

expenditure of $5,000,000 under the direction of the Secretary of Agriculture to put on a campaign to completely eradicate this pest for this season of 1928.

Heretofore the States contributed under the law, I think, 33% per cent; I think that was the quota of the States. But conditions this year make it an absolute physical impossibility

for the State of Texas, where the larger area of infestation is located, to procure the funds to cooperate with the Federal Government. The Legislature of Texas is not now in session, and if it were in session and made an appropriation, there are no funds available. It would require, it is stated to the committee, a spread of assessments to bring in the necessary funds. A great emergency faces the Congress and the whole cotton industry of America, and the Committee on Agriculture of the House, following the action taken by the Senate, concluded that the situation warranted the Federal Government for the year 1928 in furnishing the funds necessary to carry on this campaign of eradication.

Every section of the country is interested in the eradication of this pest, because if it is not eradicated--and experience has demonstrated that it can be completely eradicated by this method and this method only-it will pervade a large area, and we shall ultimately be called upon to spend millions and millions of dollars to control it, whereas a small amount expended at this time will, it is believed, completely eradicate the pest. Mr. COLTON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield there? Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. Certainly.

Mr. COLTON. It seems apparent that if it is coming from Mexico we shall probably have a recurring epidemic of infestation. Now, I would like to ask the gentleman if any steps are being taken in the Republic of Mexico to eradicate the pest. Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. No steps have been taken yet that are adequate.

Mr. COLTÓN. It might be a continuing appropriation. Mr. FULMER. I may state that the experts who appeared before the committee have stated that they have had that question up and have been very successful in trying to keep down the pest.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. Yes.

Mr. ABERNETHY. I understand the resolution has passed the Senate and has a unanimous report from the Committee on Agriculture. I also understand the President and the Budget favor it.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. Yes. The Department of Agriculture also favors it and the Budget.

Mr. ABERNETHY. It looks as if we could put it through

without much trouble.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. We are going to.

The point has been raised in opposition to the resolution that it ought not to be passed unless the States of Texas and Arizona are required to contribute toward the eradication of the pest.

Mr. ABERNETHY. It is a national question, is it not?
Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. I think it is.

Mr. BLACK of Texas. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. Yes.

Mr. BLACK of Texas. My recollection is that the testimony brought out the fact that up until now the State of Texas has paid about 96 per cent of all the money that has been spent in the eradication of this pest.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. I believe that is true. Mr. KETCHAM. Will the gentleman yield on that very point?

Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. Yes.

Mr. KETCHAM. I am sure, touching the ability of the State of Texas to meet this assessment, that this little statement from the hearings will be of interest to the House. This statement is from the State secretary of agriculture:

As you understand, the amount of money to be raised by ad valorem tax in this State is limited by the constitution, and we are now levying

the constitutional limit for school purposes and for pensions, but we have not quite reached the limit for general revenue purposes. However, the constantly increasing demands of the departments of government and different institutions for more appropriations will probably cause a raising of the ad valorem tax the coming year, and the State could not possibly raise, under our constitution, the amount of funds necessary to pay for establishment and maintenance of noncotton zones in the 15 counties of Texas now infested by the pink bollworm.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. As I stated, it is manifestly impossible for the State of Texas at this time to raise funds with which to cooperate with the Government in this campaign. Without taking any more of the time of the House I will simply say that after a most careful investigation the Committee on Agriculture of the House, of which I have the honor to be a

member, unanimously reported this resolution. It is urgent and it ought to command. the support of every Member on this floor without regard to what section of the country he comes from, because, after all, the welfare of any section of this

country is the welfare of us all. [Applause.]

Mr. KINCHELOE. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. Yes.

Mr. KINCHELOE. Do not the hearings also show that the State of Louisiana paid, my recollection is, anywhere from 60 to 75 per cent of the cost there?

Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. Absolutely. I will say further that the resolution provides that this is merely for this year. After 1928 if any program is put on in the succeeding years the States infested will be required to pay 50 per cent of the cost.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 20 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Pou] and reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POU. Mr. Speaker, 40 years ago nobody supposed that the boll weevil would destroy cotton crops as far north as the State which in part I represent, North Carolina, yet during the last few years the destruction of cotton by the boll weevil has been simply immense, in some instances the crop being almost totally destroyed. Now, here is another pest that has

come from across the Rio Grande River, and by prompt action there appears to be no doubt about the fact that the pest can be stamped out. This appropriation is for that purpose.

The difference between the boll weevil and the pink bollworm is, as I understand it, that the boll weevil destroys a part of the crop, sometimes 75 per cent of it, but the pink bollworm, in instances, destroys the entire crop.

I think there is no more to be said, Mr. Speaker.

This appropriation, it is said, will do the job and it provides for noncotton zones in order to prevent the further migration of this pest over the cotton area of America. Mr. GREEN. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. POU. Yes.

Mr. GREEN. Does it attack the boll before it makes the lint or later?

Mr. POU. I can not answer that. Mr. Speaker, I yield, with the permission of my friend from Illinois, the remainder of my time to my colleague from Alabama [Mr. BANKHEAD].

Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of the House, I shall consume but a moment on this proposition. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. WILLIAMS] and the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Pou] have very succinctly, and I think completely, represented the emergency involved in this prop

osition.

What I desire to say-and when I say that I shall conclude, because I think the House is ready to vote on this proposition without much debate-has reference to the very gratifying spirit of cooperation that is always manifested by this House and its membership when a question of this character comes up. Here is a proposition which our friends from all sections of the country other than the South have recognized as a menace and as a real and actual menace to our entire cotton situation in all of the Southern States, and although it does involve the question of the Federal Government making a substantial appropriation apparently for the benefit of the citizens of one or two States, when it was shown to the committee by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. BUCHANAN] and others that the great State of Texas, however anxious she might be to contribute her just part toward the eradication of this great pest, was, on account of constitutional and other limitations, unable to do so, the committee gladly yielded that point and are heartily cooperating in the passage of this bill. That same spirit was shown with reference to the proposal last year for the eradication of the corn borer, a pest that threatened, and still threatens, the great corn industry of all sections of the country. It was gratifying then as it is now to see upon the part of all Members of this House, regardless of party or section, a fine spirit of cooperation. That shows that when an

wise, the Members here are willing to meet the issue and to make adequate provision to meet the emergency.

I hope there will be no objection to the bill in any particular and that we can soon vote unanimously in favor of its passage. [Applause.]

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. POU. Mr. Speaker, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. SANDLIN].

Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of the House, the statement made by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. WILLIAMS], who presented this rule, fully covered the case. I want to join in the sentiments expressed by the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. BANKHEAD] with reference to the manner in which this resolution has been received by the House.

I want to say further, gentlemen of the House, I feel that this Congress, if it is not following precedent and is making a new one, is fully justified in doing so by passing this resolution. I believe it will be economy for the Government at this time to pass the resolution and let the appropriation be made, because the pink bollworm is different from the boll weevil and the corn borer in that the pink bollworm can be eradicated.

In 1919 an area in the district that I now represent was infested by the pink bollworm and the Department of Agriculture, in connection with the people of Louisiana, created a noncotton zone and within three years the pink bollworm was entirely eradicated.

If the pink bollworm is not eradicated it will no doubt in a few years infest the whole cotton area and when it does this Government will be called on to regulate it, and its regulation will cost many times what it will cost now to eradicate it.

I think the entire country appreciates the work done for this resolution by the introducer of it, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. BUCHANAN, because it is almost entirely due to his energy that this resolution is now before the House and will soon pass, as I believe.

On behalf of my people I want to thank the Committee on Agriculture and its members from all sections of the country, and the Rules Committee, which is presided over by the present acting Speaker.

I think the resolution should pass. I believe it will be economical for the Government for it to pass at this time and I certainly hope it will do so.

Mr. POU. Mr. Speaker, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. COLLINS].

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, the pink bollworm has not made its appearance in my State, but the people of Mississippi are just as vitally interested in its eradication as the people of that small part of Texas where the pest is now doing so much damage. The pink bollworm is a more deadly foe to cotton than the boll weevil and its ravages are much more extensive. It exists in every country of the world where cotton is raised, and has only recently invaded a small section of ours, coming to us across the border from Mexico. It is transmitted from one territory to another in cottonseed. Where it exists eggs are laid or deposited in the seed and when the seed are planted the eggs are hatched, and in this way the new seed are similarily infected and in a few years the pest is spread everywhere cotton is grown.

The Agricultural Department has conducted extensive experiments with this insect and knows how to get rid of it. This is agreed. It behooves us, therefore, to immediately apply the remedy. The cost of doing this now will be relatively small. It is the duty of the Government to do it. The States can not. All sections of our country are interested in cotton and hence can not afford to let our largest agricultural activity be destroyed.

The lot of the farmer is bad enough at best. Efforts to relieve his conditions economically are pending now before the Congress. I have given these measures my loyal support and will continue to do so. It is to our country's welfare that its rural population shall have the same opportunities for health, wealth, culture, and happiness that goes to those citizens in other vocations.

The motion was agreed to.

Accordingly the House resolved itself into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the joint resolution S. J. Res. 129, with Mr. MICHENER in the chair.

The Clerk read the title of the resolution.

On motion of Mr. HAUGEN, the first reading of the resolution was dispensed with.

Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. BLACK].

Mr. BLACK of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I do not know that I will take the full five minutes which has been yielded me; but I have here a statement from Dr. W. E. Hinds, who is the entomologist of the Louisiana Experiment Station, and I think one of the ablest men in his line that there is in this country. In a statement he sent to all Members of Congress on April 14, entitled "Congress should wake up," he makes two or three very illuminating statements about this problem that does confront the cotton-growing industry. First he says:

To accomplish extermination of the pink bollworm in the present known infested areas in the United States will constitute a tremendous undertaking, but it is positively the only method by which the spread of this pest through the entire Cotton Belt can be prevented. The success of earlier extermination work indicates that it is possible to do as well again. The magnitude of the undertaking should not be discourage but rather make more certain the adequate effort that is required.

Now, it was brought out in the hearings before the Committee on Agriculture that the complete extermination by noncotton zones of the pink bollworm was perhaps the only instance on record where an insect of this kind had been completely eradicated and was an excellent illustration of the method that the Department of Agriculture should follow in cases of this kind wherever it is practicable. Doctor Hinds in his statement also lays special stress on the fact that it is a national problem. On this point he says:

The eradication of the pink bollworm must be considered as a national problem. It must be undertaken without delay if it is ever accomplished successfully. The protection of the vast cotton-producing and cotton-manufacturing industries of the United States justifies fully any needed national or State appropriations for such work.

Now, Mr. Chairman, in view of what this eminent authority says, I felt justified in asking for a moment's time to read it to the House.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BLACK of Texas. Yes; I will be glad to yield to the

gentleman from Mississippi.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. What are the statutes of the State of Texas relating to the noncotton zones?

Mr. BLACK of Texas. They provide that the pink bollworm commission is authorized to declare noncotton zones and, of course, the statute provides that the grower shall be compensated, because, naturally, you could not exercise that power unless you did provide for compensation.

Mr. SHALLENBERGER. Is that without consideration of what he may receive in the way of other crops?

Mr. BLACK of Texas. The language of the statute is "the actual and necessary damage," and of course that would take into consideration any crops he may be able to grow by way of reducing the damage. I am glad that the House seems to be unanimous for the passage of this bill.

The CHAIRMAN. Will the gentleman from Iowa advise the Chair whether an agreement for the control of time was made in the House?

Mr. HAUGEN. The rule provides for one hour's debate, 'but there was no agreement as to control of time.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will recognize anyone opposed to the bill.

Mr. FULMER. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I am only asking this time so as to give my hearty indorsement to this very meritorious bill.

The bill has the strongest kind of indorsement by the De

Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

The resolution was agreed to.

Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the joint resolution (S. J.

dealing with this pest, the pink bollworm. About two years ago we had one section in Louisiana and about two counties in Texas infested, and the Department of Agriculture put on the methods contemplated under this bill; that is, the enforcement of noncotton zone, and completely stamped out this worm. The Budget commission has also given its O. K. on the appropriation carried in this legislation.

I could very easily oppose this bill from a selfish viewpoint, believing that if the pink bollworm were undisturbed it would

eat up the farmers' cotton in Texas, thereby cutting the total yield annually in such a manner that perhaps my people would receive a better price for their cotton. This might work temporarily, but I am too well acquainted with the ravages of the boll weevil to take such a stand.

My people of South Carolina are very much interested and concerned in the extermination of the pink bollworm, because they believe that unless the Government will take the step contemplated under this bill it will only be a short time until the pink bollworm will be all over the cotton South just like the boll weevil,

I would like to state, also, that I noted just a few days ago that the county convention of Sumter County, my district, passed resolution in behalf of the passage of this kind of legislation. It is my belief that had the Government taken such steps when we first discovered the boll weevil we could have stamped out that most damaging pest. Members of Congress at that time tried to put over this kind of program, but were unsuccessful, and to-day the boll weevil is not only costing the Government millions of dollars annually in trying to keep down this pest, but our cotton farmers are using considerable extra labor and losing millions of dollars because of the destruction of the weevil when seasons are favorable for their dirty work.

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PINK BOLLWORM AS A COTTON PEST

The pink bollworm ranks as perhaps the worst of all known cotton insect pests. It has for the United States a special menace for the reason that we already have the boll weevil, now a source of annual and very heavy losses throughout the Cotton Belt. The weevil is particularly an enemy of the buds or squares, while the pink bollworm attacks, in preference, the bolls, and therefore is competent to destroy any part of the crop that may have escaped the weevil. Having both of these pests would place the United States under a very serious handicap in competition with other cotton-producing countries of the world.

The pink bollworm is a native of India. It was first recognized there as a cotton pest in 1842, but its early record was not exploited and was apparently thereafter overlooked. About 1906 or 1907 this pest was introduced from India into Egypt through the agency of seed cotton sent to Egypt for ginning. The parent insect is a small moth related to the codling moth of the apple. Its larva attacks particularly the seed and remains in the seed over winter, and it is this fact that has led to the rather rapid progress of this cotton pest around the world in shipments of seed.

In Egypt it spread rapidly after its introduction into lower Egypt and now covers practically all of the Nile Valley. Its economic status there is indicated in a publication of this year issued by the Egyptian ministry of agriculture. In a brief summary of cotton pests in this publication the following statement is made relative to this insect:

The pink bollworm (Gelechia gossypiella) is by far the greatest known pest in Egypt, as much as one-quarter of the crop being rendered unpickable annually through its ravages. Appearing in small numbers in June, it increases at a rapid rate until 90 per cent or more of the unopened bolls on the plant toward the end of the season are damaged

by it.

It should be noted that this damage is in spite of enforced application of all known remedies against the pest, including the removal of all cotton plants from the field early in the fall, the burning of all parts of the plant which contain the insect, and the disinfection of all planting seed.

This pest reached Brazil (1911-1913) through the agency of purchases of seed in Egypt for distribution by the department of agriculture of that country, leading to a very prompt and general distribution of the pest. The losses from this pest in Brazil are reported by the Minister of Agriculture of that country to have reached, by 1917, from one-third to two-thirds of the crop, involving losses in seven States in that year totaling $27,000,000.

In Hawaii a small but very promising industry has been wiped out by reason of this pink bollworm,

Very heavy losses are also experienced in East Africa, where it became established possibly even before it reached Egypt. Its present range includes India, Egypt, East Africa, a portion of the West Indies, Mexico, Australia, China, and some other countries. The United States is now the only important cotton-producing country of the world which is substantially free from this pest.

We now know that this pest reached the United States via Mexico. Two importations into Mexico of Egyptian seed were made in 1911 and planted in or near the principal cotton district of that Republic, namely, the Laguna district, some 200 or 300 miles south of our border. The department had been early advised of the occurrence of this pest in Egypt, and in 1913 a year after the passage of the plant quarantine act—had pro

mulgated a quarantine prohibiting the entry of cottonseed from all countries except Mexico. The fact of the entry of this pest into Mexico was learned by the department in 1917, following the transmission in that year of samples of injured bolls for examination and report, and while an immediate stop was placed on the further entry of cottonseed from Mexico it developed in the fall of that year that some of the seed which had previously come over from Mexico had resulted in an initial establishment of this pest at Hearne, Tex. Later on, in the same year, it was discovered that the pest had a very considerable foothold in the Trinity Bay region. I gathered from the hearings before our committee on this bill that this much more widespread infestation resulted from a large shipment of Mexican cotton lint which was landed at Galveston for transshipment to Europe. During the period that it was held at Galveston, the big hurricane or storm of 1915 took large quantities of this baled cotton and broke the bales and scattered the lint along the coast of Texas, and particularly along the shores of Trinity Bay, which opens into the Gulf near that point. A good deal of seed remains in ginned cotton, and it was evidently from this cottonseed so distributed that the infestation gained a large foothold in that part of the State.

This situation led to an immediate effort, under a Federal appropriation, to effect the eradication of the pest in these areas in eastern Texas. The main area in southeastern Texas about Trinity Bay was about equivalent to the area of the State of Connecticut, and a similar area was later found in Louisiana opposite the area in Texas. There also later developed three additional points of spread, one near Shreveport, La., and two others, one in Ellis and one in Grayson Counties in northern Texas. The two large areas and also the smaller areas, including the one at Hearne, were all placed under noncotton zones, with the intention of endeavoring to eradicate and eliminate the pest. The growth of cotton was forbidden in these areas and over a sufficient border strip to give greater security. These noncotton zones were maintained for 1, 2, and, in some cases, 3 years, and in each instance the effort was successful, inasmuch as for some 7 years no recurrence of the pest has been determined in any of these areas which, in the meantime, have been kept under yearly inspection. We have, therefore, a series of demonstrations that clean-up and noncotton zones for one or two years are efficient means of eradication.

The CHAIRMAN. If no one demands recognition, the Clerk will read the bill.

The Clerk read the bill.

Accordingly the committee rose; and Mr. NEWTON having taken the chair as Speaker pro tempore, Mr. MICHENER, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that committee had had under consideration Senate Joint Resolution 129 and had directed him to report the same back without amendment, with the recommendation that it do pass.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule the previous question is ordered, and the question is on the third reading of the bill.

The bill was ordered to be read a third time, and was read the third time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the preamble will be stricken out. Is there objection?

Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Speaker, if the preamble is stricken out would it not have to go back to conference? It is really important that there should be no delay, and I hope the House will not strike the preamble out.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair that would be such a change in the bill as to require the bill to go back to conference.

Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Speaker, was a motion made to strike out the preamble?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. No; the Chair stated that without objection it would be stricken out. Is there objection? Mr. BANKHEAD. I object.

Mr. FORT. A parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. Mr. FORT. The bill as printed (S. J. Res. 129) contains two committee amendments, which were read by the Clerk. Are those amendments adopted in the form the report was made?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has the wrong print. Those were committee amendments to the Senate bill and are in the bill as it passed the Senate. The question is on the passage of the bill.

The question was taken, and the bill was passed.

On motion of Mr. HAUGEN, a motion to reconsider the vote was laid on the table.

A similar House bill was laid on the table.

CONSENT CALENDAR

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. SNELL). Under the unanimeus-consent order, the Clerk will call the Consent Calendar, beginning where we left off last time the calendar was called.

TULE RIVER INDIAN RESERVATION, CALIF.

The first business on the Consent Calendar was the bill (S. 1662) to change the boundaries of the Tule River Indian Reservation, Calif.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the present consideration of the bill?

Mr. HOOPER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to objectand I have no intention of objecting-I ask the gentleman from California who is in charge of the bill what the reason is for the change?

Mr. ENGLEBRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, the reason for the change is the fact that certain private lands inadvertently were included within the boundaries of the reservation when the survey was made, and certain Indian lands that were intended to be placed in the reservation were left out. It is a matter purely of correction.

Mr. HOOPER. Mr. Speaker, I have no objection.
The Clerk read the bill, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the boundaries of the Tule River Indian Reservation, Calif., created by Executive order dated January 9, 1873, are hereby changed so as to exclude from said reservation the following tracts of land, which were shown by the plat of survey approved on the 2d day of February, 1884, to be a part of the public domain, and were duly patented or granted by the United States as such, but were shown by the plat of resurvey approved on the 12th day of March, 1927, to be within the outer boundaries of the said Indian reservation, to wit: Southwest quarter southwest quarter section 7; all sections 16 and 17; east half northeast quarter, southwest quarter northeast quarter, southeast quarter northwest quarter, east half southeast quarter section 18; east half northwest quarter, northwest quarter northwest quarter, northeast quarter section 20; northwest quarter northwest quarter section 21; and tract No. 48 in the southeast quarter section 28, all in township 21 south, range 31 east, of the Mount Diablo meridian in California.

The bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, and passed.

west quarter of section 29, township 36 north, range 38 east, Mount Diablo meridian, containing 20 acres, more or less, to be used as an Indian colony.

SEC. 2. That there is also authorized to be appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated the sum of $2,000 for moving the cabins of Indians residing in the vicinity of Winnemucca, Nev., to the above-described location, for making necessary repairs to said cabins, building roads in colony, and for erecting such new cabins as, in the opinion of the United States Office of Indian Affairs, may be necessary.

Mr. HOOPER. Mr. Speaker, I offer to amend, on page 2, line 6, by striking out the word "such."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. HOOPER: Page 2, line 6, strike out the word "such."

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. HOOPER. I also offer the following amendment, which I send to the desk.

The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. HOOPER: Page 2, line 7, after the word "cabins," strike out the remainder of the paragraph.

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill as amended was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, and passed.

A motion to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed was laid on the table.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

A message from the Senate, by Mr. Craven, its principal clerk, announced that the Senate had passed bills of the following titles, in which the concurrence of the House of Representatives was requested:

S. 3845. An act to prohibit predictions with respect to cotton prices in any report, bulletin, or other publication issued by any department or other establishment in the executive branch of the Government; and

S. 3991. An act declaring certain designated purposes with respect to certain parts of Santa Rosa Island in Florida to be "public purposes" within the meaning of the proviso in section 7 of the act approved March 12, 1926, entitled "An act authorizing the use for permanent construction at military posts of the proceeds from the sale of surplus War Department real property, and authorizing the sale of certain military reserva

NEV.

PURCHASE OF LAND AT WINNEMUCCA, The next business on the Consent Calendar was the bill (S. 2084) for the purchase of land in the vicinity of Winnemucca, Nev., for an Indian colony, and for other purposes. The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the present consideration of the bill?

Mr. HOOPER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. CRAMTON] asked me to have certain amendments inserted in the bill, which I shall move at the end of the reading of the bill. I desire to give notice of that fact now.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the bill. The Clerk read the bill, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That there is hereby authorized to be appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated the sum of $500, for the purchase of land in the vicinity of Winnemucca, Nev., described as the north half of the northeast quarter of the south

The message also announced that the Senate had adopted the following resolution: Senate Resolution 231 Resolved, That the Senate has heard with profound sorrow of the death of Hon. FRANK B. WILLIS, late a Senator from the State of Ohio.

Resolved, That as a mark of respect to the memory of the deceased the business of the Senate be now suspended to enable his associates to pay tribute to his high character and distinguished public service. Resolved, That as a further mark of respect to his memory the Senate, at the conclusion of these exercises, shall stand in recess.

Resolved, That the Secretary communicate these resolutions to the House of Representatives and transmit a copy thereof to the family of the deceased.

Mr. SCHAFER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, what lands are going to be exchanged?

Mr. ENGLEBRIGHT. These lands to be exchanged are lands that are very fine feeding lands for deer that are in the park. Lands of less value will be exchanged for these grazing lands. That is, an equal area of land situated in another part of the reservation of the park which are not grazing lands will be exchanged for these lands. It is a matter of game protection, purely, and is approved by the department. It is very desirable from a nature standpoint.

Mr. SCHAFER. And the gentleman says that the lands that the Government is going to receive are more valuable than the lands which the Government is giving in exchange?

Mr. ENGLEBRIGHT. Yes; from a game-conservation stand

point.