get from the planters, who also had moved out temporarily for their safety, a great deal of information and a good many samples of cotton seed from different localities, enabling him to determine pretty accurately the distribution of the insect in the Laguna district, and to secure some information on the distribution of seed for planting outside. In addition to that he made a fairly complete survey of the area in Mexico opposite the lower Rio Grande, where the majority of the cotton that comes close to us is grown. He made similar surveys of a few scattered fields farther north, up in the vicinity of Eagle Pass and Laredo, but the great mass of the cotton grown near us is in the Matamoras district.

The CHAIRMAN. What do these figures on this map represent, bales or acres?

Mr. MARLATT. They are bales.

Mr. HUNTER. The interesting point about these statistics, Mr. Chairman, is this: They show the production in bales from 1909 up to 1915, the latest figures available. These are very accurate statistics, obtained by the Census Bureau under a special act in 1911. This county produced 13,000 bales. In 1912, 8,000 bales; in 1913, 6,000 bales, and it dropped to 4,000 bales the next year and to 2,000 bales the following year. Now, taking a look at the statistics in the adjoining county of Hidalgo, in 1911 they produced 11,289 bales, falling down to 50 per cent of that the next year and down to 1,900 bales and then to 1,100 bales. That shows that the natural tendency in those counties is to go out of cotton. Cotton is being replaced by other crops.

Mr. CANNON. At what county does the production of cotton in Texas cease along the border?

Mr. HUNTER. It stops here at Valverde County, practically at Eagle Pass.

Mr. SISSON. Did the Mexican boll weevil cut any figure in the production of cotton prior to the time that these figures were obtained? Mr. HUNTER. It did. The Mexican boll weevil is one of the principal reasons for the falling off in production year after year.

Mr. SISSON. What is the best information as to the distribution of the pink boll weevil that we fear? Where is the pink boll weevil now?

Mr. MARLATT. Mr. Hunter discussed that just before you came in, I think.

Mr. SISSON. Well, where is it?

Mr. MARLATT. It is now in Mexico.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you say that this man made a pretty complete survey?

Mr. MARLATT. He has made a pretty complete survey of this region between Brownsville and some distance beyond Eagle Pass.

The CHAIRMAN. Was that with the acquiescence of the Mexican authorities?

Mr. MARLATT. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. I also understood you to say he made a survey on the Mexican side?

Mr. MARLATT. Yes; that was with the acquiescence of the Mexican authorities. As a result of the correspondence we had with the Mexican authorities they gave us permission and urged us to do it

and offered to cooperate. The offer of cooperation did not materialize very much, but we made this survey, and there is very little risk down in this part of Mexico. What risk there was he took. He went out and surveyed 40 or 50 miles in depth on all the roads in all directions.

The CHAIRMAN. What does that survey show on the Mexican side? Mr. MARLATT. It did not show any actual infestation with the pink bollworm, but it developed the fact that several fields had been been planted this year with seed secured from Laguna. It was too early in the season for the weevil itself to be seen in such plantings. That survey will be repeated later.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the program for work in Mexico under this request?

Mr. MARLATT. Under this request the work in Mexico is divided, and perhaps should be discussed in two parts. They are very closely related. One is this survey such as we have already started near our border with the idea of keeping in touch with the fields that have had seed from Laguna, to keep in touch with the condition of all fields, to determine at the earliest moment the appearance of the insect there; and then, when such facts are determined, to cooperate with the local authorities and with the planters concerned in such destruction and clean-up as may be necessary.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the remedy? What can be done after you have located it? Just what can you do?

Mr. MARLATT. If we find a field infested with the insect we can have that cotton immediately cut and destroyed.

The CHAIRMAN. I mean, is that essential?

Mr. MARLATT. That is desirable. If that is not permitted the cotton crop of that field can be harvested in the normal way and the field can be thoroughly cleaned of the old cotton stalks on which the insect may remain. The cotton that is harvested would have to be safeguarded. A much better plan, of course, would be to destroy the field at once and pay for it, if necessary.

The CHAIRMAN. In addition to the survey along the border, what other work is contemplated?

Mr. MARLATT. In Mexico the other part of the work is a survey, when such survey should be possible, of the district actually known to be infected; that is, the Laguna district and the outside points to which seed for planting has been sent from that district, to determine the present status of the moth in Mexico. This information would be the basis for a determination of whether it is worth while or practical to undertake to destroy in cooperation with the Government of Mexico, this pest in Mexico with the idea and with the intention of forever safeguarding the North American Continent from it. The other measures discussed are merely palliative things which may keep off the loss for a considerable series of years. The initial purpose of that survey is to determine whether it is worth while to attempt. extermination. The survey itself will not cost very much, but it is desirable that a fund be available if extermination should be shown to be reasonably possible, with which work of extermination can be begun immediately, pending the securing of larger funds. If such work should prove to be desirable, it very probably can not be safely postponed. In other words, if we find out that there is anything that

must be done, it probably must be commenced this fall. The fund for clean-up work in Mexico may not be spent, but if it is necessary to spend it, it ought to be available for proper expenditure.

All of this proposed work is described in a statement which I have here and which, with your permission, I will submit for the record. In addition to the $160,000 for the modified cotton-free zone already discussed, we have estimated $30,000 for the border survey in Mexico. That will be fairly expensive work and will require six or seven experts. The travel will have to be more or less by motor, because there is no possibility of going through that country any other way with any speed. Thirty thousand dollars will cover the salaries and travel of these six or seven men for that work. If these men find any points of infestation in the course of their work, such infested fields ought to be cleaned up under their supervision. We have assigned $50,000 for such clean-up work. That may not be spent, but it ought to be available. That is for work near the border. The general survey of the Laguna district and the points of distribution of seed therefrom will be done in part by the same six or seven men, some of them being detailed to the work. We have not put any cost there for men, but we have left the balance of the $500,000, viz, $260,000, for possible use in cooperation with the Government of Mexico in eradication work that may be necessary to be undertaken right away. This sum should be available, but may not be spent at all. That makes the total the same as before, but is a different alinement of work. You will note that of these sums the first two we expect to spend, viz, $160,000, for the clean-up work in Texas and establishment of a practically complete cotton free zone and $30,000 for the surveys in Mexico near the border.

The fund proposed for the clean-up work in Mexico near its border, $50,000, may or may not be spent, but it should be available. Similarly, the fund for the general eradication work in Mexico, $260,000, may or may not be spent, but should also be available. In other words, under this present schedule we expect to spend $190,000, and we may need to spend a portion or all of the balance, and this balance should be available, because if it is not available the opportunity may go by to stop the insect.

The CHAIRMAN. Has any attempt ever been made to exterminate this insect where it has been, and, if so, what has been the success? Mr. MARLATT. The attempt to control it has only been made in one country, Egypt. Cotton growing in Egypt is comparable to our own, and it is an important industry of the country. They have failed in their attempt to control it except in this, that by safeguarding the seed and by disinfecting the seed before planting they have somewhat reduced the loss. The increased percentage of infestation given by Mr. Hunter would indicate that they have had poor success. To exterminate it in Mexico would necessitate the stopping of the growing of cotton in the area affected. This other measure of disinfecting the cotton seed and keeping on with the growth of cotton in the infested districts would fail. Therefore, the extermination of the insect in Mexico, I regret to say, seems now unlikely, but if there should be such a possibility, in view of the enormous loss that would ultimately otherwise be entailed, it would be worth trying. The CHAIRMAN. How large a territory in the Laguna district is infested?

Mr. MARLATT. The Laguna district is about 40 or 50 miles in diameter, and a great deal of its area is devoted to cotton. The actual acreage in the Laguna district under cultivation and devoted to cotton is about 80,000 acres.

The CHAIRMAN. It is a good cotton country?

Mr. MARLATT. Fine.

The CHAIRMAN. So there would not be much likelihood of the farmers stopping the cultivation of it.

Mr. MARLATT. I do not know about that. As I remarked at the opening of my statement, these men are willing to do anything to get rid of the insect, and if they though that it was necessary for the elimination of this insect I think they would be willing to stop growing cotton for three or four years.

The CHAIRMAN. If they stopped growing cotton in the infested. district for one year and adopted the cleaning up and other measures you have suggested, would that eliminate the pest in that locality? Mr. MARLATT. One year?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. MARLATT. I should be afraid to risk one year. I should want at least two years, and preferably three or four years.

The CHAIRMAN. What I had in mind was the loss to those engaged in the production of cotton that you would have to contemplate. Mr. MARLATT. It would be a very enormous loss.

The CHAIRMAN. How much would that be?

Mr. SCOFIELD. They could under the circumstances at the present time substitute other crops which are very much needed in that country. They could do that at a relatively small loss, because in the last four years they have had to lose much of two of their cotton crops because of revolutionary activities. They are more reconciled. to the readjustment to growing other crops in the place of cotton than might be the case otherwise.

Mr. MARLATT. In other words, in this district in Mexico they have lost a good deal of their crop in the last two years. They could grow other substitute crops, and Mr. Scofield, the cotton expert of the department, thinks their loss would be materially reduced by that means, those substitute crops being also needed in Mexico.

The CHAIRMAN. So that from one standpoint, at least, the revolution in Mexico may be a blessing to the United States?

Mr. MARLATT. We would not under any circumstances contemplate payment for any losses in Mexico of that kind, but I am confident that those planters, if they saw any likelihood of the elimination of this insect, would be willing to accept that loss and join us in that movement. So our cost there would be for the supervisor and clean-up work, which we would expect to do in cooperation with the Mexican Government and their planters.

Mr. SISSON. What percentage of the cotton produced in this Mexican district is produced by Americans who own land there?

Mr. MARLATT. I think most of that cotton-producing area belongs to foreigners. It belongs mostly to Americans and to Englishmen. Mr. SISSON. My information is not accurate, but I understood that about one-third of it belongs to American planters.

Mr. HUNTER. It is in the hands of Americans, Englishmen, Germans, and Frenchmen.

Mr. SISSON. Practically all of the cotton cultivation in that section, then, is by foreigners, and the Mexicans do not engage to any material extent in the production of cotton?

Mr. SCHOFIELD. About half of those cotton growers are Spanish. The CHAIRMAN. What organization would you require for this work?

Mr. MARLATT. The details of the organization are given in the memorandum which will be submitted.

Mr. SISSON. I was not here when you made your first statement. Does the record show the manner in which this pink bollworm affects this cotton?

Mr. MARLATT. Yes, sir; that has been gone into.

Mr. SISSON. When does the Texas Legislature meet?

Mr. AYERS. It meets in January.

Mr. SISSON. And there is no chance of having a special session? Mr. AYERS. It is very remote.

Mr. MARLATT. It might be well to add this much in relation to the State of Texas, and that is that this protection is for the benefit of the entire South, and we can not expect Texas to pay more for her protection than we would expect Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama to pay for their protection.

I

The CHAIRMAN. But I think this is true: You can expect the State of Texas, where the protective measures are essential, to do everything that it can do under the powers of the State to assist, particularly when that State can do some things under the police powers of the State that the Federal Government can not do. do not believe that one State is justified in a matter of this kind. where vast interests of its own people are menaced, as well as the interests of the people of the rest of the United States, to urge the United States Government to exert all of its powers to accomplish a beneficial purpose and decline to exercise whatever power it might be able to exercise, simply because the political fortunes of some individual might be affected one way or the other. That is the most indecent kind of political manifestation.

Mr. MARLATT. The State proposes through these representatives who have come to Washington, and we have had similar assurances by letter and telegram from prominent agencies of the State, that an active effort will be made immediately to ge this legislation. This effort will be backed by the commisioner of agriculture, by the experiment stations and colleges of the State, by the farmers' organizations of all kinds-a dozen different ones have been enumerated— by the planters' organizations, etc. All of these are backing the effort. I would rather you would get from some of the Texas Representatives present a statement as to any other reasons which might prevent immediate action by the State.

Mr. SISSON. Has any effort been made to get a gentleman's agreement that no legislation would be enacted if the legislature was called in special session by the governor of Texas except this proposed legislation? If there was a gentleman's agreement that when the legislature is called together they will enact only this legislation for the protection of the cotton crop of Texas

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). Under the constitution of the State of New York the legislature, when it is called in extraordinary session, can only consider such matters as the governor proposes.