p. 4 (last ¶) the implication is that the Association was the leading force in the passage of the Sheppard-Towner Act whereas it was of course the womens organizations which really won the battle. (2) I am surprised at the claims on p. 5 that it was the association which made the unemployment hearings of 1914-15 and of 1920-21. I had thought (& still think) that the first was conducted by the B.L.S. and the Metropolitan ↑Life↓ Insurance Co while [illegible] through investigations of the later period was that work by Dr. [illegible] of the Nat'l Bureau of Economic Research for the President's Conference on Unemployment.
(3) [illegible] Page 7 seems to elevate itself to a rosy-colored picture of the Association's general publicity activities. [page 2]
[To] sum up, I think the worst sting could be [drawn?] from the article by (1) restating the passage circumstances attending the passage of the Sheppard-Town Act ↑(p. 4)↓ (2) Omitting the sentence on p. 5 relating to the unemployment surveys. (3) In several other places, notably those dealing with vocational rehabilitation (p. 4) and old age pensions & one day of day of rest in seven (p 5) rewording the paragraphs so as to emphasize the passage of those measures as the important feature rather than the association's part. This is the case of old age pensions, the Eagles have been the real driving force. (4) By omitting the conclusion beginning with the first line on page 7 (ie "continually") & running from them on, & substituting in its stead -- a statement of your own.
Comments