We have rich stores of iron that run higher in per cent of iron than
those of the Birmingham district, and very few people know its value. I
understand the State of Georgia supplies three-fourths of the asbestos
output of the United States. Our marble speaks for itself in monuments
like that beautiful capital of Minnesota. Our granite speaks for itself
in buildings like the federal building in San Antonio, Texas, and other
buildings which I could point out. Our rich stores of bauxite many of
you know about, but, there are numerous other things of this kind, Mr.
Chairman, which I could mention, but I don’t care to dwell on them at
this time. The main thing that we are here to discuss is the conservation
of soil fertility, the conservation of agricultural resources. We of the
South are an agricultural section. You take away from us our agriculture,
and while we are rich in minerals and various other things, in a measure
we would be helpless. It is the only spot on earth, you might say, that
has a monopoly on the greatest crop on earth, and that is the cotton
crop. This I consider by far the most interesting, the most valuable
phase of conservation. The people of the South, while their soil is
extremely fertile, or was in the beginning, have allowed the rain to
wash it down in the valleys, and it has washed into the sea. They had
thousands and thousands of acres of land that would produce anywhere from
25 to 100 bushels of corn per acre, and from one to four bales of cotton
per acre, if it was simply cared for in a proper way. I have visited
the spot which holds the record for the greatest cotton yield on earth,
which produced four bales per acre. In the beginning it was the poorest,
reddest soil you ever saw in your life. It was taken over by a man who
knew his business, and in the course of three or four years he had it
up to a point where it produced almost anything. And there is another
thing, Mr. Chairman, we have a section there that will produce almost
anything under the sun in the way of crops. There is only one other state
in the union that can compare with Georgia in that respect, and that is
California, and, as the gentleman has just stated, they have not water.
Our sections, from blue grass to oranges, will produce all of the various
things in between.
Mr. Chairman, we of the South have got the biggest problem on earth
to solve, as I see the problem. The problem of conservation of soil
fertility, the conservation of agricultural resources in general, are
undoubtedly among the important questions confronting this Congress,
but we have the biggest part of that problem. Why? It is because of the
much discussed negro problem of the South. There are a thousand and
one solutions of this offered, but the question remains unsolved, and
will pass on to future generations. As long as we have the negro we
are deprived of having other classes of labor, which you have here in
the North. (Applause) Because of his presence, we, of the South, are
dependent on the negro, and he knows it. We have got to get along in the
very best way we can, but we need a better class of labor. I don’t know
what we are going to do. That is the reason that this is such a grave
matter to the people of the South. Mr. Chairman, I see I am taking up too
much time here, but I do want to get back to Georgia, and the part she is
playing in conservation. (Cries of Go on. Go on.)
Since the Congress met one year ago, at St. Paul, the South has had a
conservation congress, and I think I can say that it was a success.
There are a number of speakers on this program that were there and
noted the interest that was manifest in this meeting. Following that
meeting the Georgia Conservation Association was organized, and it is
taking up a number of these problems which we are so anxious to solve.
The president is a distinguished man in Georgia, Judge John C. Hart.
He is a man who went before the Supreme Court of the United States and
presented on behalf of the State of Georgia one of the most famous
cases in its history. The State of Georgia filed an injunction against
an immense copper plant in the northern part of the state, which was
responsible for a great deal of destruction of property, of vegetation
in general. This company had, at an expense of millions of dollars, put
in this plant, and I understand it is the largest of its kind in the
world. At that time copper was the plant’s main output and the state
filed an injunction requiring these people to consume the fumes that
were destroying vegetation. The case was carried to the Supreme court,
and the injunction sustained, and at a cost of five millions of dollars
the Ducktown copper plant put in a consumer from which they produced
sulphuric acid, and, today, it is one of the largest sulphuric acid
plants in the world. There is one of the solutions to the problem which
your able president presented this morning in the fact that you have,
throughout the West, as well as the South, to fertilize. Georgia, as a
result of that injunction, saved two million dollars last year in its
fertilizer bill. The representative of the State of Georgia Conservation
Association framed a bill creating a state conservation board, not a
commission, but a board that was to be created by special act, taking
up all lines of conservation. This bill was unanimously passed by the
senate, and unanimously recommended by the committee of the house, and
will come up for passage at the next session of the legislature.
We passed a bill protecting bird life, and wild life generally in the
state, a very strict law, which we have needed for many years. The state,
as a result of the conservation work, has enacted a drainage bill, which,
I think, will result in great good to the people in the southeastern
part, in the drainage of swamp lands, which will make perhaps the
greatest agricultural land on earth.
Mr. Chairman, I cannot go into details on any of these problems. Other
states in the union, every state in the union has agencies working
for conservation. In the first plant, the United States Department
of Agriculture is working wonderful results in the different states,
along lines of agriculture. The state colleges of agriculture are doing
great work; the experiment stations are doing great work; the various
state departments of agriculture are doing great work, but there is a
certain class of work which these agencies cannot do. There is a great
work for the independent organizations, such as the State Conservation
Association in the different states, and I would urge each state that has
not organized to get busy at once, and begin to take up these problems.
(Applause)
Chairman HADLEY—Instead of a statement of the resources and developments
in the various states, I would suggest that this call of the roll is
particularly designed to accomplish a statement of what is being done
by public or official organizations in dealing with the question of
conservation in the several states. I think it is a very satisfactory
indication of the modern trend of conservation that this work is now
being done by the people of the several states instead of the national
government. It is an indication that the people do not intend that their
state governments shall sink to a lower level of efficiency. They intend
to exercise every power which they possess under the federal constitution.
Recording Secretary GIPE—Idaho.
Chairman HADLEY—I have the pleasure to introduce to you Mrs. Holland C.
Day, who will speak for and represent Idaho.
[Mrs. Day’s paper will be found in Supplementary Proceedings.]
Chairman HADLEY—I am very glad indeed in listening to the interesting
speech of Mrs. Day to note what a serious attraction a state might have
for a woman by reason of having woman suffrage and caused her to transfer
her allegiance to the Governor of Idaho. I would suggest, however, that
she should not, in her enthusiasm for the horticultural possibilities
of the State of Idaho, forget that she still belongs to a state that is
distinguished as the state of the “Big Red Apple.”
MRS. DAY—I will also say that the female suffrage movement is going right
straight along in Missouri. (Applause)
Chairman HADLEY—I do not want to start a discussion right now. This,
being a conservation congress, is a peace conference. I will now call on
Col. Isham Randolph, who will speak for the State of Illinois.
[Col. Randolph’s speech will be found in Supplementary Proceedings.]
Chairman HADLEY—I am certain that every person interested in the general
question of Conservation, and particularly the state ownership of its
water power, is interested in Colonel Randolph’s statement as to what
they are doing in the State of Illinois. And I know that all of you, and
all other friends of Conservation, will be glad to have Colonel Randolph
convey to Governor Deneen the best wishes of the Congress. I would
suggest that on account of the fact that there are a number of speakers,
and Judge Lindsay, whom you are all anxious to hear, that the speakers
will please confine their statements to the official activities of their
various states in dealing with this question of Conservation.
Recording Secretary GIPE—Indiana.
Chairman HADLEY—Mr. Harry Everitt Barnard, chemist Indiana state board of
health and state food commissioner, will speak for Indiana. I now have
the pleasure of introducing to you Mr. Barnard.
[Mr. Barnard’s speech will be found in Supplementary Proceedings.]
Recording Secretary GIPE—I have a telegram from the Mexican Ambassador:
“Washington, D. C.—Accept sincere thanks for kind invitation.
Regret exceedingly that official duties here prevent me from
accepting hospitality; would thank you greatly for minutes of
meeting. Gilberto Crespo, Mexican Ambassador.”
The next state is Iowa.
Chairman HADLEY—I would suggest that the representatives of the several
states yet to be called come up on the platform.
I have the pleasure of introducing to you Mr. Thomas H. MacBride, who
will speak for the state of Iowa. Mr. MacBride. (Applause)
[Mr. MacBride’s paper is to be found in Supplementary Proceedings.]
Chairman HADLEY—I am certain that the representatives of all of the
states present appreciate Mr. MacBride’s not speaking of the resources
of the state he represents; although he did plead guilty to having a
legislature up there, which practically all the representatives of the
other states have to plead guilty to.
Recording Secretary GIPE—Kansas.
A. W. STUBBS (Kansas City, Kansas)—Missouri has elected from our state,
a native of our state as its mayor, and has also elected a native of our
state as its governor, and Kansas has therefore as its representative, to
speak for it, a most distinguished educator, formerly of Missouri, now
president of the state agricultural college. Kansas has elected today
Professor Waters as representative of that delegation, as president. And
we would like to hear from him.
Chairman HADLEY—During the sessions of this convention you will have the
pleasure of listening at length to a paper by Dr. Waters, but at this
time, on the call of the roll of the states, Kansas has selected him to
speak for her, and I am advised that during his short residence of a
little over one year in that state he has learned to speak the Kansas
language. (Applause)
[Dean Water’s paper will be found in Supplementary Proceedings.]
Chairman HADLEY—I am glad to see that Dean Waters with a few slight and
one noticeable amendments is able to effectively use the speech he used
to use about the State of Missouri when he lived here, and spoke to the
State of Kansas.
Recording Secretary GIPE—Kentucky.
Chairman HADLEY—I have the pleasure to introduce to you Col. M. H. Crump,
of Bowling Green, Kentucky.
COL. CRUMP—Mr. Chairman. I am simply here this evening to say that the
president of the University of Kentucky is not here. He will be here
tonight, and I will state that he will tell you tomorrow what we are
attempting to do in Kentucky. We started the conservation movement there
some thirty years ago with Professor Shaler of Harvard, when he was state
geologist. He wrote the first paper I know of in attempting to take care
of forestry. It is found in his report of 1873, about the time I came to
the state. We are, through the university, through the state colleges,
and through the geological survey, making some efforts along that line,
and we are doing all the state can do in that way. But there is a subject
there that we think is too large for the state to undertake. I picked up
a circular when I came in here, which says that an effort is being made
to take care of and preserve the forests, and the soil at the head of the
Green river. This paper states that some 32,000 acres of timber land,
2,000 of which is virgin forest, the last of a great forest which once
covered the Green river, and in the center of which is Mammoth Cave, we
ask that the Nation come forward and help to take care of that, because
it is too large for Kentucky, and heretofore nothing has been too large
for Kentucky to do. (Applause) That is all I have to say. (Applause)
Recording Secretary GIPE—Louisiana.
Chairman HADLEY—Mr. Fred J. Grace will speak for Louisiana.
[Mr. Grace’s paper is to be found in Supplementary Proceedings.]
Chairman HADLEY—I know that all true conservationists will be glad to
know that Louisiana is looking after the conservation of her shrimps and
oysters, and we will all be glad to hear whether Maryland is interested
in her terrapin and canvas backs.
Secretary GIPE—The next state is Maryland.
Chairman HADLEY—I have the pleasure of introducing Hon. Bernard N. Baker,
president of the first Conservation Congress. (Applause)
MR. BAKER—Fellow delegates. I will only detain you a few minutes. I know
you are all waiting to hear Judge Lindsay. The governor limited us to
what we were doing to preserve the oyster. Maryland is doing her duty
in that respect, and if you will do your part, we shall all enjoy them
in using the oyster when it is opened. I know you want to hear Judge
Lindsay, and I am going to only speak a word. I thank you for this, and
we will wait for Judge Lindsay.
FRED J. BREEZE of Indiana—I move that the report on the call of the
states be laid over until tomorrow.
The motion was duly seconded.
Chairman HADLEY—I think the Chair will declare that motion carried,
and on tomorrow morning where there is an order on the program for the
response of chairmen of organizations concerned in conservation there
will be statements of the representatives of the several states. It
is important in the consideration of this question that we should not
lose sight of the fact that conservation is a means and not an end,
and the real end is the formation and promotion of the happiness and
welfare and prosperity of the people. Consequently the most important
question of conservation is the question of the conservation of human
health and life. There are various phases of this question before the
American people today that are of commanding importance; the immense toll
that modern industry makes upon its workers amounts to ten every sixty
seconds; the number of deaths from unhealthful occupations has presented
a record as tragic as any that was ever written in times of war. There
is another phase of this question, of conservation of human life, in the
manner in which society deals with its deficient and dependents. Any
system devised for the prosecution of crime and the protection of society
against its enemies that deals only with the question of punishment
and revenge is a mistaken system, and does not accomplish anything of
permanent results in its benefits to society. They talk of the system
in the conduct of penitentiaries and jails and eleemosynary institutes,
but unless they send those they heal out into the world better men,
women or children, physically, intellectually or morally than when they
received them, that system is a mistaken and misguided one. One of the
most distinguished representatives of a modern system in the enforcement
of our criminal law for the conservation of human life and character is a
man who I now have the pleasure of introducing to you, Judge Ben Lindsay,
of the State of Colorado, and of the City of Denver, (Applause) who will
speak on the subject of the “Country Child vs. the City Child.” Hon. Ben
B. Lindsay.
JUDGE LINDSAY—Governor Hadley and delegates, ladies and gentlemen: I am
sure it is a great honor to have the privilege of appearing here at this
National Conservation Congress to consider some phases of the problem
of the child. I do not know whether at past congresses the subject of
the child has had a part in the program, but I do know that upon this
occasion I feel a great deal as I think a particular boy friend of
mine must have felt once in a little episode that happened in my own
court nearly ten years ago. We found that when we made an appeal to
the loyalty, even of the street boy, the state might find a helper and
defender instead of an enemy. I recall when a certain policeman could not
capture a certain little rascal of the streets. He went by the nickname
of “Moochy.” He came in one day to say to me that another little imp of
Satan, as he was supposed to be, by the name of “Mickey,” knew where
“Moochy” was, and if he could enlist the services of “Mickey” in the
capture of “Moochy” he thought he might save this little citizen. It
was with some difficulty that I had to explain to “Mickey” that we were
trying to save “Moochy,” in order to get him to tell me where “Moochy”
was. When he found we had come to save, to help, and not to hurt, that
loyalty for his chum turned to loyalty to the state, and he said,
“Judge, I know where the kid is, and I will get him.” In about fifteen
minutes down in the wing of a cheap theater in our town there was a
howl and a growl that somewhat disconcerted the audience. And when they
investigated they found it was “Micky” pinching “Moochey,” as he called
it. With some difficulty my little gamin friend succeeded in getting
the delinquent to the court house, coming in to say to me with more or
less disgust, “that the kid didn’t seem to want to be saved nohow.” A
newspaper reporter happened to come along to write a story based upon
this episode, to be called “The Pinching of Moochey by Mickey.” It was
not complete, in his estimation, without a picture of the two, and he
lined them up outside to take their pictures, when “Mickey” balked. He
would not stand to have his picture taken. And I was somewhat puzzled,
for I rather feared the outcome of this situation when “Mickey” came in
followed by the newspaper reporter, to explain. He said, “Do you tinks I
want to get my pictur took wid de little giek,” as he pointed to “Moochy”
outside? “No,” he said, “I don’t; I got out of his class two years ago.”
Then he said, as he pointed to the newspaper man, “If that guy wants to
take my picture let him take it alongside of you, put both in together,
and I don’t kick.”
CHILDREN, THE BIGGEST CROP.
When the Conservation Congress wanted to put the child in its work I am
certain I am not going to kick, but I am here to avail myself, as best I
can of this honor and this privilege. For after all this conference has
needed no apologies for including in its proceedings the problem of the
child, for there is not any problem that does not, in a measure, have
some bearing, some relation to the home and the child in the home. These
children are our best and our biggest crop. Without a proper conservation
of their welfare there will never be anything else worth conserving.
There should be a bond of sympathy between the problem of the child
and the conservation of our natural resources because of the rather
interesting fact that the systematic work being developed for both has
had most of its growth and development during the past decade, and when
the history of the first ten years of the twentieth century shall be
finally written the two great revivals recorded will be those concerning
conservation and the child. It becomes more apparent each year that the
children are the most important factors in whatever the future may hold
in store for us.
Another significant fact is that the growth of popular interest in the
problems of the children has been almost identical with the amazing
growth of urban population for the past two decades.
[Illustration: PROF. E. LEE WORSHAM, Chairman of the Executive Committee]
CONGESTION PROBLEMS.