Feb.. 1927] PROGRESS OF ACiRICl^LTURAL EXPERIMENTS 5 



of the Office of Experiment Stations, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 

 says in a jiaper presented before the Association of Land-Grant Col- 

 leges: 



"The resi)onsibilities of the States in relation to this supplementary 

 legislation have been referred to quite definitely on a number of 

 occasions, but in the interest of clear understanding it may be de- 

 sirable to again call attention to this matter as having a fundamental 

 bearing on the success of the enlarged enterprise. 



"The Purnell Act, like its predecessors, is not conditioned on similar 

 contributions from the States. In this respect it will be recognized as 

 a departure from recent legislation in which the Federal Government 

 has joined with the States in promoting various measures of jniblic 

 interest. The advisability of incorporating such a contributory pro- 

 vision was considered at the time the legislation was being framed and 

 again when it was being advocated in (^ongress; but, on the strength 

 of the arguments i)resented by representatives of the Association of 

 Land-Grant Colleges and the record of nearly forty years, such a 

 requirement was omitted from the Act as passed. The absence of it 

 will evidently make it important to avoid any seeming departure from 

 the tacit undei'standing implied. 



"In his address at the Conference of Agricultural Colleges and 

 Exi)eriment Stations at St. Louis in 1925, soon after the passage of 

 the Purnell Act, the Secretary of Agriculture called attention to the 

 fact that in effect the nuuntenance of experiment stations 'always has 

 been a cooperative enterprise between the Federal Government and 

 the States. The Hatch Act, which supplied the initiative for the na- 

 tional system, did not undertake to carry the whole l)urdcn. It was 

 designed, as the opening sentence stated, "to aid" in attaining the 

 objects sought in the establishment of these institutions.' He pointed 

 out that 'in advocating this latest legislation nuich emi)hasis was laid 

 on what the States are now doing, and on the fact that it was not 

 designed to relieve them but rather to stinndate and further extend 

 their efforts.' And again, that the Purnell Act 'is not designed to 

 transfer these obligations to the Federal Government, but to enable 

 the latter to join more liberally with th(> States in the maintenance of 

 investigation at these institutions. It is the confident expectation, 

 therefore, that the individual States will continue to bear their part.' " 



Changes in Personnel 



In order to initiate the work in agricultural economics with an eye 

 to actual needs and conditions in the state, Mr. H. C. Woodworth, 

 extension farm management specialist, was placed in charge of several 

 of the projects in this field at the beginning of the year. Mr. L. B. 

 Lincoln was secured to assist in the state-wide economic . survey and 

 resigned at the close of this work. Dr. Max F. Abell of Massachusetts 

 Agricultural College has been ai')pointed assistant agricultural econ- 

 omist. Miss INIary E. A. Pillsbury has been appointed specialist in . 

 home economics to take charge of the investigations in human nutri- 

 tion. Mr. G. P. Percival has been appointed assistant chemist to take 

 care of the increased chemical assistance necessary in the soil fertility 

 work and other projects. Dr. F. R. Clark, assistant botanist, resigned 



