practicable and possible, we would like to have money for that purpose. Measures looking to extermination mean large expenditures, but not so large as might appear at the outset. The Laguna district is a very circumscribed area. It is a big mountain basin, or the bed of an ancient lake, surrounded by mountains. It is in the heart of Mexico and is surrounded by a vast, more or less barren, country outside of its encircling ring of mountains. It is intensively cultivated to cotton. The cotton lands in this area are in the hands of large ranchers, who are intelligent men. Many of them are Americans or have American antecedents. Some of them are Germans and others of other nationalities. They are men who are posted on the literature relating to cotton insects. They realize the danger that they are in, and they have indicated that they will cooperate in a most thoroughgoing way with this Government and with the Mexican Government in any attempt at extermination. It is quite a different proposition, therefore, from attempting to exterminate such an insect under ordinary conditions in Mexico where the cotton might be in the hands of thousands of small planters.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it confined to that district?

Mr. MARLATT. It is confined to that district, so far as we now know. We have no knowledge of its occurrence outside of that district, but we have the fear that it has been distributed outside of that district, because it is possible that seed from that district has been taken to other places. All of those points will have to be looked into. The survey that is proposed is to determine its possible distribution outside of this district, and also the practicability of exterminating it in the Laguna and elsewhere

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). I understood you to say that that was the original plan that you have just outlined, but that you have modified it?

Mr. MARLATT. Yes, sir. The plan that was originally outlined was indicated in the Secretary's letter, and that plan has been modified only to this extent, that, as a result of the conference yesterday, it appears that there is no law in Texas which will enable the State to enforce an absolutely cotton-free zone. In other words, the State of Texas will have to legislate before it can do its full part in the establishment of such a zone. The Secretary of Agriculture has the power to establish a quarantine which will prohibit the interstate movement of cotton from such a zone, but under the plan originally proposed the State of Texas would have to pass some law giving it the power to prohibit movement in the State or to prohibit the growth of cotten within such circumscribed district in the State. We are advised by the State commissioner of agriculture and other representatives from Texas who were appointed by the governor of Texas to confer with us that there is no question at all about getting such legislation when the State legislature shall be again in session, and that the necessary steps will be taken at once to secure such legislation. The modification I referred to simply takes that into

account.

But we can do this: We can now, with the promised cooperation of the State of Texas and of the planters of the region covered, create a cotton-free zone along that strip substantially as originally planned. The commercial cotton planting, or the cotton production

4400-17-9

that amounts to anything, is confined to three counties at the very end of the strip opposite Matamoros, but the great stretch of country westward to El Paso grows no or little cotton. There may be a small cotton patch here and there, and where the traffic from Mexico crosses there has been more or less scattering of seed and there may be some volunteer cotton. It is proposed to divide the cotton-free zone into a series of districts and police those districts and destroy all volunteer cotton. In the counties referred to, where cotton is commercially grown, the same clean-up of volunteer cotton could be made. By volunteer cotton I mean the cotton that in those southern regions lives all the year around and does not die down in the winter as it does farther north. It is our purpose to clean up such volunteer cotton and any wild cotton and to keep a close inspection of all the existing fields of cotton in this district, so that if any cutbreak should occur we could take prompt measures to stamp it out. The planters of this district will cooperate with us and are willing to restrict or even abandon the growth of cotton. They were here in the conference yesterday and expressed themselves as willing to sacrifice their entire cotton crop for the benefit of the whole country if such step should become necessary. That would mean to them a loss of some 24,000 acres, based on the planting of this year, which, however, is much more than is ordinarily planted.

Mr. GILLETT. Can they grow anything else on that land?

Mr. MARLATT. Cotton is the money crop with them, and that is the crop they are used to growing. The department can aid them by establishing an experiment station there and thus assisting them to grow other crops.

Mr. GILLETT. I presume you have already prohibited the importation of cotton from Mexico?

Mr. MARLATT. Absolutely; yes, sir; since last November. What I have outlined might be called a modified cotton-free zone-to be free from cotton throughout the area where cotton is only an incidental crop or a very occasional crop, and to greatly restrict and carefully supervise the commercial plantings in the two or three counties. Ă very thorough-going cleaning up is proposed in each of these three counties where cotton is grown commercially, and thorough inspections, frequently repeated during the growing season, of the existing fields in this district.

If the pink bollworm has not yet reached our border-and possibly it has not-this will probably do as much good at the present time as though we established an absolute cotton-free zone, and it will have the additional advantage that it will not take from these people their present money crop. If we are able to keep the pink bollworm from our border under the plan of inspection and cleanup on the other side of the border already outlined, we may postpone the need of an absolute cotton-free zone for many years. I have an estimate here of the cost of maintaining such cotton-free zone, showing the cost of supervision, labor, implements, supplies, etc.. for the inspection, cleaning up, and eradication of cotton. It is estimated that the establishment of a cotton-free zone will cost $160,000. That covers the area from Douglas, Ariz., to Brownsville, some 1,500 miles. miles.

Mr. GILLETT. Is the weevil any more apt to attack the volunteer cotton than any other?

Mr. MARLATT. They feed on any cotton plant that is available. Mr. GILLETT. Then it is as likely to attack one as the other? Mr. MARLATT. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you authority to destroy any cotton? Mr. MARLATT. We have no authority to destroy any cotton. The CHAIRMAN. What authority have you over the mills? Mr. MARLATT. We have only the persuasive authority which comes from the recognition by the mill owners and the cotton interests of Texas, the Cotton Association of Texas, and all concerns interested, of the great desirability of taking any measures possible to eradicate the insect. We have found thoroughgoing cooperation on the part of all such men. As an illustration of the way this work is being aided, one company near Eagle Pass had planted 500 acres of cotton on some land on the Rio Grande.

This cotton was up, and the outlook was most promising, but when told by us of the risk of this big cotton area right at the border to the whole country they promptly plowed it all up and destroyed it and accepted the loss themselves, with no question of payment. The millmen have been equally helpful. They have helped in the cleaning up and have given us every facility to clean up about their mills. That spirit of cooperation and helpfulness has been manifested throughout. As I remarked a moment ago, these men who come from the counties that would be affected in Texas, while they urged the postponement of the establishment of this zone, if such action could be postponed, yet they were willing to accept it if necessary; they were willing to have the zone established and give up the growth of cotton.

The CHAIRMAN. What is it proposed that the State shall do. Is their legislature to meet?

Mr. MARLATT. Their legislature, unfortunately, has had its session and adjourned and will not meet again until the expiration of the two-year period, in 1919.

The CHAIRMAN. Can they not be convened?

Mr. MARLATT. They can be called into extraordinary session by the governor, but I understand there are certain political conditions. down there which make it improbable that that action will be taken. The CHAIRMAN. In view of this great menace to their crop— Mr. MARLATT (interposing). Well, sometimes a personal menace is even greater.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to know, as a matter of record, whether the State of Texas

Mr. MARLATT (interposing). I would prefer to have the Texas representatives give an answer to that question.

The CHAIRMAN. But your information is that it is improbable the Texas Legislature will meet.

Mr. MARLATT. That is the information we get from the representatives from Texas.

The CHAIRMAN. So that so far as Texas is concerned there will not be any cooperation or any additional legislation; at least, for two years, in all probability.

Mr. MARLATT. There is a possibility, of course, that the conditions may change in Texas and a special session of the legislature may be called sooner than that.

Mr. SHERLEY. Have the counties of Texas any power to act?

Mr. MARLATT. No; I should say not.

Mr. SHERLEY. Do you say no just on general theory, because in my country the counties would have a good deal of power, or do you say no upon information?

Mr. MARLATT. On general theory, Mr. Sherley. Mr. Ayers is one of the inspectors in Texas and probably can answer that question.

Mr. AYERS. The counties have no quarantine laws and the quarantine laws are all by the State; in fact, we can condemn disease types, but under the present arrangement can not quarantine an area; and largely what we would have to do along that line would be through voluntary cooperation; but about 95 per cent of the work can be done in that way.

Mr. SHERLEY. Have the counties power to subscribe moneys for carrying on this work?

Mr. AYERS. I am sure they have, because they have assisted in other work.

Mr. SHERLEY. What are they willing to do in that regard?

Mr. AYERS. It has not been brought up to the counties, because most of the counties that would be concerned would be the great losers and it would be pretty hard to ask them to contribute.

Mr. MARLATT. If I get the drift of the question, it is whether-
Mr. SHERLEY (interposing). There is never any drift to my ques-

tions.

Mr. MARLATT. Whether the State of Texas would assist in this work.

Mr. SHERLEY. It is just a question of what they are willing to do. The CHAIRMAN. You have stated that the representatives of the State are here and that the original plan could not be carried out because there is no authority to enable the State to do what was proposed; and that is why I inquired whether it was contemplated to convene the legislature in order to consider the question of whether or not that authority would be given; and your statement is because of the peculiar personal and political fortunes of some individual or individuals, the material welfare of the State must suffer. I will accept responsibility for the particular way of putting the statement.

Mr. GILLETT. You could not have a closed zone without the cooperation of the State, could you?

Mr. MARLATT. Probably not, except by the exercise of such drastic action which, while it might be warranted as a last resort

Mr. GILLETT (interposing). What drastic action could you take? Mr. MARLATT. Under the plant quarantine act the Secretary of Agriculture is empowered by Congress to declare such quarantine as may be necessary to protect one part of the United States from another.

The CHAIRMAN. You could quarantine against the State of Texas? Mr. MARLATT. The entire State of Texas could be placed under quarantine and the movement of all cotton out of Texas prohibited. Mr. GILLETT. Or certain sections of it, say, a 50-mile area. Mr. MARLATT. Yes; or certain sections of it.

Mr. GILLETT. How could you destroy all the cotton in a 50-mile tract?

Mr. MARLATT. The idea is this: If we carried out the full cotton-free zone, we would give due notice. The crop of this year would be

gathered and harvested and no further crops would be planted. There would be no occasion for the destruction of cotton.

Mr. GILLETT. Would they be obliged to obey you? Suppose they should plant cotton?

Mr. MARLATT. That we could not prevent directly. We would prevent it in an indirect manner. The control is an indirect control. We have here a strip and we declare a quarantine under Federal authority, saying that no cotton grown in this strip shall move out of the State of Texas. That would not be any hardship to those people, because they could move it out of that strip into some other part of Texas and sell it and we would have a great deal of difficulty in following up that cotton and preventing it from eventually getting out of the State of Texas. That would be impracticable. The State of Texas would have to cooperate with us and say to the people in this strip," You shall not move out of this strip into other parts of Texas any of the cotton grown therein or the products therefrom." There would be no point then in growing cotton in that district, because they could not move it out.

The CHAIRMAN. And the only way to get Texas to do that is to do the other thing?

Mr. MARLATT. By tying up the entire crop of Texas for the benefit of the whole United States. In a State like Texas, which has not got the insect in it at the present time, I do not think we would be justified in doing that, even as a matter of coercion. I think Texas would resign from the Union of States.

The CHAIRMAN. You would be justified if it was necessary to protect the cotton crop of the United States; you would be justified in tying up the crop of any particular State if the State officials declined to attempt to exercise the authority they have.

Mr. MARLATT. I say we have authority to do that; I think we have under the wording of the act.

The CHAIRMAN. You have stated it would cost $160,000 for this particular work. Is that because of this modification of the estimate of $300,000?

Mr. MARLATT. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. The work would be of a different character and would not require the same organization?

Mr. MARLATT. It would require a less organization. We have cut the organization in half.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, as to the proposed work in Mexico.

Mr. GILLETT. Before we go into that I would like to ask a question. I may be obtuse, but I confess I do not understand how you propose, even with the cooperation of the State, to have a 50-mile zone where there will not be any cotton cultivated. How are you going to enforce that, provided we give you the money?

Mr. MARLATT. That is taking up the absolute zone and not the modified zone which we are now recommending.

Mr. GILLETT. Yes. Suppose you have the cooperation of Texas, how would you do it?

Mr. MARLATT. The State undoubtedly, under its police authority, can enact laws which will empower it to prohibit

Mr. GILLETT. Is that your purpose? That is what I wanted to

know.