TABLE NO. 2.-Age distribution of adult population of prisons and reformatories, jails, and workhouses, 1880 to 1923*

1 Compiled from published reports of the U. S. Bureau of the Census.

? Excluding population under 18 years of age and population, age unknown. Estimated for last six months of the year.

Excluding commitments for nonpayment of fine.

'Not including persons committed to institutions for juvenile delinquents.

Mr. OLIVER. In reference to the $7,500 appropriation the committee gave you last year, how was that expended?

Miss ABBOTT. You will remember, when I was before the committee last year, that I said that in view of the increased cost that we would not be able to publish more than 200,000 copies of Infant Care, and we have spent all of that additional $7,500 which you gave us last year, and more, in the purchase of Infant Care. So that we have already ordered this year 350,000 copies instead of 200,000 copies of Infant Care.

Mr. OLIVER. You spent not only the amount that had been allocated for that purpose, before you came to the committee, but the $7,500 which we gave you?

Miss ABBOTT. Yes, and a little more than that.

Mr. OLIVER. What was your publication this year?

Miss ABBOTT. This year we have already ordered 350,000 copies of Infant Care. That item of $7,500 is not included in this year's estimate for printing.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I was going to ask you in connection with the subject of commitments and releases on parole, does not the extension of the parole laws tend to a great extent to diminish the number of cases put in the category of commitments?

Miss ABBOTT. Of course, in the juvenile courts they do not use parole very much. They use probation primarily instead of commit

ment.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I mean probation.

Miss ABBOTT. Of course, when the juvenile court laws were first passed children were brought in and children were committed who would never have been committed under the old system, because the offenses were pretty slight, and it was felt that it was not fair to the children to have a regular jail commitment against them. Consequently, a great many children that needed oversight and need control and direction had nothing done for them at all under the old system.

Ten, with the juvenile court law, great numbers were brought in and the apparent numbers of delinquents went up very rapidly. Then in a good many jurisdictions, they began to say, "Well, after all, this is not good for the children, even coming in unnecessarily to the juvenile court." Social workers and teachers have hesitated more and more about bringing them in court. Then, some courts have developed a system of informally hearing a good many minor complaints and never making a record of it at all, just carrying them informally under the supervision of a probation officer.

So that our percentages are not comparable with one another. The percentages in the principal cities differ enormously. In one city the percentage may be three or four times as much as in another, where there is no more delinquency than in the first. It is a difference in treatment.

It is for that reason that we would like to get and are getting with some of the courts, some uniform method of designations and terms. so that we would get something that was comparable.

Mr. GRIFFIN. The tendency of the court to-day is to put children on probation instead of committing them?

Miss ABBOTT. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I asked that question because in answer to Mr. Tinkham's question you stated that there was a marked decrease in the number of delinquency cases among children.

Miss ABBOTT. There is. The census to which I referred, which the Bureau of the Census took, and the Children's Bureau prepared the report, was a census of children in institutions for delinquents and in penal institutions.

Mr. GRIFFIN. That covered only commitments?

Miss ABBOTT. That covered only commitments, and they took them up to the older age groups, that is, between 16 and 18 and between 18 and 21. It referred only to commitments. That showed a very distinct decrease, taking into consideration population growth. That is undoubtedly due in part to a change in policy with reference to the treatment of children.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Putting them on probation instead of committing them?

Miss ABBOTT. Yes; and due to other ways of treating them instead of committing them. So far as juvenile court statistics go, the number shows a decline. Also in cases of children brought before courts, there is a decline. I can put some of those figures in, if you are interested.

They will show differences from city to city. I would like to put them in for two or three different cities, because you really can not judge very much by them from only one city.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Have you those figures for all of the principal cities of the United States?

Miss ABBOTT. We have them for a number of cities in various parts of the United States; yes; and over about a 10-year period, so that you can gather something of the trend.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I think that those figures might be interesting in view of the prevailing opinion that delinquency among children is increasing.

Miss ABBOTT. It is largely a matter of new forms of delinquency.

Mr. TINKHAM. What have you to say about the effect of "movies" upon children?

Miss ABBOTT. Of course, children are devoted to the "movies." There is no question about that, and there is no question but what they attend them more than they should for their health, to say nothing of their morals. It is a poor form of passive recreation that is substituted for active recreation. There is no question but that there are better films for children now than there used to be, but there are still a great many demoralizing films.

Mr. GRIFFIN. In the statement that you are to furnish in answer to Mr. Oliver's question, will you give the source of your information in giving those figures?

Miss ABBOTT. On the question of delinquent children?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes.

Miss ABBOTT. I will be glad to do that.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I take it that your bureau has not enough agents scattered throughout the United States to get all that information at first hand.

Miss ABBOTT. No, sir; we have gotten it from reports and from the courts themselves. They are their figures. We can give you those figures, with footnotes about the loopholes in those figures that we know about.

SALARIES, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Mr. SHREVE. The first item under the Children's Bureau is on

page 411 for salaries. Your current appropriation for salaries is $110,000 and your estimate for 1927 is $105,000. I presume this reduction is due to a decrease in the force.

Miss ABBOTT. Well, this is one of the reductions that we have had. We have had several reductions on this roll, as you can see. It has been decreased from $117,000 down to $105,000. Practically what has been done is to take from us all the increase under the reclassification and the bonus which was added to this appropriation when reclassification went into effect and $1,040 in addition. The total loss in three years on this roll has been nine positions. This is the general salary roll of the Bureau on which 56 employees are carried. Mr. OLIVER. The nine positions that were lost were clerical positions, were they not?

Miss ABBOTT. It is hard to get a picture of the personnel from any one salary roll, because the personnel is carried on this roll, plus the child welfare roll, and the temporary employees on the general expense roll. We shift them about from one roll to the other, without much reason for it, except that we have usually carried certain ones on certain rolls, and we continue to do that. In the past two fiscal years and the present year the net reduction has been 12 permanent positions, and of those 12, 6 were in the professional grade and 6 in the clerical grade. That was not on just the salary roll, but on the other rolls also.

INVESTIGATIONS AND REPORTS PERTAINING TO THE WELFARE OF CHILDREN AND CHILD LIFE

Mr. SHREVE. Your next item is:

To investigate and report upon matters pertaining to the welfare of children and child life, and especially to investigate the questions of infant mortality, including not to exceed $125,000 for personal services in the District of Columbia, $135,000.

That is the amount of your current appropriation. You may explain the reduction of the limitation on personal services in the District of Columbia from $130,000 to $125,000, if you please.

Miss ABBOTT. We have never spent up to the limitation of $130,000 there previously, and the amount was changed to $125,000, I think, to conform to the percentages they usually carry in these limitations. I do not think there was any other reason for that change from $130,000 to $125,000 in the limitation.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Your estimate seems to be for $135,000.

Miss ABBOTT. Yes, sir; that is the total appropriation. The total appropriation is $135,000, with a limitation that not more than $125,000 shall be available for personal services in the District of Columbia. The estimate is the same as the appropriation for this year. On this appropriation we have not only salaries, but a good many other items, such as certain kinds of supplies, equipment, rental of temporary field offices, telegraph, telephone, express, and freight charges, etc.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How far have you progressed in the investigations which are provided for in this paragraph, particularly investigations on the subject of infant mortality?

Miss ABBOTT. Well, the bureau issued last year a further report, or a consolidated report, on its studies of infant mortality. We have kept steadily at work on that problem, and we have two or three forthcoming reports that deal with it. Of course, we have been making very great progress in the reduction of infant mortality after the first month of life, where we get into the feeding problem, deaths from respiratory diseases, but we have made very little progress as to the deaths during the first month of life, and we are planning through the coming year to do some intensive work on the problem for the first month of life.

Mr. TINKHAM. Where does the United States stand now in 'the matter of infant mortality, or what is its relative rate?

Miss ABBOTT. We are about fifth now in the infant mortality rate. Mr. TINKHAM. What are the first four on the list, or which are the lowest?

Miss ABBOTT. The lowest in New Zealand with a rate about half of ours. There is no State in the United States that has as low a rate as New Zealand. The next lowest rate is that of Australia, and then one or two of the Scandinavian countries-Norway and Sweden-have lower rates than we have. The Irish Free State also has a lower rate.

Mr. TINKHAM. What is the explanation of that?

Miss ABBOTT. Well, so far as New Zealand is concerned, it was due to very early and intensive work in the prevention of infant mortality, I think, and they had a comprehensive system which

included child welfare centers covering the entire nation, so that a very large percentage of the children have been reached. Mr. TINKHAM. But there are practically no cities there.

Miss ABBOTT. It is largely rural; but still we have rural States. with relatively low rates.

Mr. OLIVER. Do you attribute any of it to pure milk?

Miss ABBOTT. Pure milk is a factor; but, on the other hand, we find that the rate is lower among breast-fed infants.

We find that they are less apt to die than the others, and we are active in the advocacy of breast feeding.

Mr. TINKHAM. In other words, it is keeping close to nature.

Miss ABBOTT. Yes; if you know what nature is; but we get to such an artificial stage in life that we need more than nature can supply.

Mr. GRIFFIN. What ages do you consider in connection with your studies of infant mortality?

Miss ABBOTT. Well, of course, infant mortality rates are calculated on the basis of the first year. We take up to the preschool period, or the general infancy period in our work.

Mr. GRIFFIN. That would be up to what age?

Miss ABBOTT. Up to about 6 years of age; but when I speak of infant mortality rates, I mean during the first year of life.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Those figures you have quoted apply to the first year of life.

Miss ABBOTT. Yes, sir; to the first year only. We have had quite a substantial drop in our own rate during the last year, which indicates a new and lower level than we had before. Of course, that fluctuates from year to year, and the question to be considered is the trend and the level around which the rates fluctuate. In 1924 we apparently reached a new low level. As I have said, the rates fluctuate around a level.

Mr. TINKHAM. Is that true of foreign countries, also?

Miss ABBOTT. Yes; the rate fluctuates, but you get a level that it fluctuates around. The New Zealand rate was always below ours, but we are at last below the rate for England and Wales, I am happy

to say.

Mr. OLIVER. Are you able to separate the figures you get from the cities from the figures you obtain in the rural communities?

Miss ABBOTT. The rate for 1924 showed a drop for both rural and urban communities. For a considerable period of time the urban rate went down because of the health activities in the urban communities, while the rural rate was stationary. The rural rate, except in isolated communities, is usually lower than the urban rate.

Mr. OLIVER. Our rural rate is also greater than that of New Zealand or Australia?

Miss ABBOTT. Yes, sir; I think it is. I have not looked at this for the rural communities alone, and at their rural figures recently.

TRAVELING EXPENSES AND PER DIEM EXPENSES

Mr. SHREVE. The next item is on page 414, as follows:

For traveling expenses and per diem in lieu of subsistence at not exceeding $4 of officers, special agents, and other employees of the Children's Bureau; experts and temporary assistants, to be paid at a rate not exceeding $8 a day, and inter