APPENDIX 245 



An account of the German experience, from which the following excerpts 

 are taken, is printed in the Monthly Review of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 

 Washington, May, 1917. 12 



"The recommendations of the Eltzbacher Commission for the reduction of swine and 

 cattle were carried out during the first four months of 1915. Approximately one-third of the 

 swine and 10 per cent of the milch cows supposedly about a million and a half were killed. 

 About the time when the killing of the swine was under way, in March, an inventory of the 

 potato stocks led to the official statement that these were low. Since the potato in Germany 

 was one of the staple swine feeds, it was decided to kill rather more than the denominated 

 number of swine in order to meet the loss in potatoes. Two months later another potato 

 inventory was taken, revealing the fact that the previous inventory had been in error and 

 that the killing of the additional swine had been entirely unnecessary, since the potatoes 

 were available; and these potatoes were thrown upon the market at a huge loss in price and 

 to a large extent underwent decomposition. 



" No oxen were killed, and the killing of calves was not in excess of the usual number; 

 the slaughter did not extend to sheep and goats, which, on the contrary, were conserved 

 with foresight. The presence of such huge amounts of meat upon the market unquestionably 

 resulted in increased consumption during the first six months of 1915. According to the 

 plan, by far the largest portion of the meats thus obtained was to be conserved for future 

 use, and should have represented a very large stock of conserved meat. The processes of 

 conservation were, however, carried out very inefficiently, with the result that a large 

 portion of this meat underwent decomposition and became a complete loss . . . 



"In the autumn of 1915, within six months after one-third of the swine and a million 

 and a quarter of milch cows had been killed, two meatless days (Tuesday and Friday) and 

 two fatless days (Monday and Thursday) were introduced by decree. Maximum prices 

 were decreed for retail sales, but without correlation and usually without result. 



" Gradually* the lines became drawn between cities and industrial districts, on the 

 one hand, and the country districts, on the other. To protect themselves the country 

 districts prohibited export. The authorities attempted, in a half-hearted manner, to oppose 

 such regulations and to reestablish the flow of foodstuffs in the channels of trade by increas- 

 ing the maximum prices. A maximum price, once established, became, of course, the only 

 price. As opposed to the regulations of the cities and of the imperial authorities, the regula- 

 tions of the smaller districts were naturally more effective. Restrictive regulations spread 

 over the entire land, each community looking out for its own interests, and it was soon 

 apparent that the industrial cities were at a disadvantage. 



Establishment of the War Nutrition Office. " Control over the food supply of the 

 Empire was, up to June, 1916, vested in the imperial department of the interior (Reichsamt 

 des Innern), of which von Delbriick was secretary. Dissatisfaction with the measures taken 

 by this department became general during the second year of the war. 



"The worst mistake of the Delbriick regime was in trying to regulate the sale and 

 use of food without knowing how much food existed. The food-card system in particular 

 evoked the severest criticism, this criticism being caused not so much by the rationing of 

 food as by the long waiting in front of shops for the sale of foodstuffs. The food-cards, with 

 the exception of the bread cards, did not carry any guarantee, but merely gave the holder 

 the right to stand in line for hours and take the chances. When the supply for the day was 

 exhausted the remaining shoppers were turned away. Disturbances of the peace were 

 frequent, and it was felt as a grievous injustice that by this waiting in front of shops the 

 women were withheld from household duties for hours. 



"When Delbriick resigned, a separate department called the war nutrition office was 

 created directly under the Chancellor. The president of this office was given absolute police 

 powers under martial law, with a standing committee of experts representing the producers, 

 transporters, middlemen, consumers, and the army. The new system was installed on 

 June 1, 1916, with Adolph von Batocki as president of the war nutrition office . . ." 



Control of the Potato Crop. "Late in January, 1916, scarcity of potatoes developed 

 in the cities. An inventory showed that only 18,000,000 tons remained, from which the 

 seed had still to be reserved, leaving only 11,000,000 tons to last for .six months. Thereupon 

 potato cards were introduced, and the attempt was made to limit the feeding of potatoes 

 to live stock. When the authorities attempted to uncover and seize the stock of stored 

 potatoes unexpected losses by decomposition became apparent. Von Batocki, on assuming 

 office, June, 1916, promptly prohibited any feeding of potatoes to live stock. The potato 

 cards introduced earlier in the year were not guaranteed, and in the large cities the intake 

 for each person during the spring months was often as low as a quarter of a pound a day. 

 Then the crop of summer potatoes came upon the market with a rush, as the maximum 

 prices were high and scaled downward to increase the offerings. Early in August the cities 

 were flooded with potatoes in carload lots. The poor, however, because of the announce- 

 ment that prices were scaled to fall, bought only from hand to mouth. As a result thousands 

 of tons decomposed and were lost." Nevertheless, even at this time the potato card and the 

 prohibition of feeding to swine were not suspended. Two weeks later the cities were again 

 empty of potatoes. The growers had ceased to harvest potatoes when the prices fell; they 



12 United States Department of Labor, Monthly Review of the United States 

 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Vol. IV, No. 5, May, 1917, pp. 710, 711, 712, 716, 

 717, 718. 



