One of the outstanding achievements of the year was the calling of the National Defense Conference in Washington, D. C., with the Daughters of the American Revolution, in which 31 patriotic women's organizations participated. The conference was addressed by prominent men and women who spoke authoritatively on the necessity of adequate national defense as peace insurance, and was far-reaching in its influence.

The auxiliary voted $500 a month to the Legion child welfare program. Under the auxiliary poppy program 5,000,000 poppies were made by the dis abled service men and women in hospitals, and over $60,000 was paid them for their work.

Over $600,000 was raised through the poppy sale to be used for welfare work among service men and women and their families.

Twenty-five thousand dollars was raised for flood relief and sent to departments in the flooded areas.

In every way the American Legion Auxiliary has tried to advance the program of the American Legion as it has carried forward its 1927 banner of achievement.

NATIONAL ORIENTAL COMMITTEE

FRANK N. BROOKS, Washington, Chairman

Fred E. Kiddle, Oregon; Samuel S. Arentz, Nevada; Fred F. Bebergall, California; Harold W. Brangham, Utah; Winford H. McMains, New Mexico; Dr. Harry T. Southworth, Arizona; Pearce C. Rodey, New Mexico.

No communications whatever have been referred to our committee during the past year.

We believe that the laws already on the statute books have been adequate to properly handle the situation. We recommend that no change whatsoever be advocated with reference to the present laws without most careful consideration.

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL REHABILITATION
COMMITTEE

WATSON B. MILLER, Chairman

A. G. GRAUPNER, Vice Chairman

I. H. HORTON, Secretary

C. C. BROWN, Service Officer

GENERAL MEMBERS

Area A.-Dr. Estes Nichols, Maine, chairman; Leo M. Harlow, Massachusetts, vice chairman; Maurice F. Devine, New Hampshire; James Brown, Vermont; Henry T. Sampson, Rhode Island; Clarence C. Scarborough, Connecticut.

Area B.-Herbert H. Porter, Virginia, chairman; Charles Hann, jr., New York, vice chairman; Frank A. Mathews, jr., New Jersey; Louis McK. Crumrine, Pennsylvania; A. Raig Peacock, Delaware; Ralph Emerson Barnes, Maryland; Dr. Joseph M. Heller, District of Columbia; A. E. Haan, West Virginia.

Area C.-Rudolph J. Weinmann, Louisiana, chairman; Dr. I. Thurman Mann, North Carolina, vice chairman; G. Heyward Mahon, jr., South Carolina; R. C. Thompson, Georgia; Charles A. Sloane, Florida; Ira B. Thompson, Alabama; F. J. Block, Mississippi; Dr. David Townsend, Tennessee; Dr. Samuel G. Boyce, Arkansas; Dr. Hugh Scott, Oklahoma; Dr. M. W. Sherwood, Texas.

Area D.-Robert L. Black, Ohio, chairman; Dr. E. T. Boquist, Minnesota, vice chairman; Clifford Payne, Indiana; J. M. Dickinson, jr., Illinois; James D. Sory, jr., Kentucky; Paul A. Martin, Michigan; James F. Burns, Wisconsin; Dr. R. J. Laird, Iowa; Henri Warren, Missouri; Jack Williams, North Dakota; Wright Tarbell, South Dakota; Leo B. Bozell, Nebraska; Dr. W. A. Phares, Kansas.

Area E.-John C. Vivian, Colorado, chairman; John A. Sinclair, California, vice chairman; George R. Drever, Washington; E. K. Oppenheimer, Oregon; A. H. Christianson, Idaho; Lew M. Meder, Nevada; Hilliard T. Brooke, Arizona; Clarence Baird, Utah; Charles E. Pew, Montana; Albert B. Tonkin, Wyoming; Jose G. Rivera, New Mexico.

Advisory members. Dr. Kennon Dunham, Cincinnati, Ohio; Dr. Hugh Young, Baltimore, Md.; Robert E. Bondy, Washington, D. C.; J. M. Dickinson, jr., Chicago, Ill.; Dr. Hugh Scott, Muskogee, Okla.; Dr. William Le Roy Dunn, Asheville, N. C.; Dr. Charles W. Kofoid, Berkeley, Calif.; Royal C. Johnson, Aberdeen, S. Dak.; Dr. B. C. MacNeil, Washington, D. C.; Dr. William F. Lorenz, Mendota, Wis.; William F. Fox, Indianapolis, Ind.; Mrs. Rose Spencer, Winona, Minn.; George Mathers, Bennington, Vt.; Judge Frank M. Dineen, Omaha, Nebr.

Field secretaries.-Percy J. Cantwell, Boston, Mass.; Patrick E. Fox, New York City; Thomas V. Dowd, Philadelphia, Pa.; Robert M. Tolson, Washington, D. C.; Fred E. Leister, Birmingham, Ala.; John L. Moore, New Orleans, La.; John A. Hartman, Chicago, Ill.; G. H. W. Rauschkolb, St. Louis, Mo.; William T. Kroll, Fort Snelling, Minn.; John C. Keene, Denver, Colo.; James P. Mulcare, San Francisco, Calif.; Norman W. Engle, Seattle, Wash.; P. L. Forbes, Dallas, Tex.

FOREWORD

The national rehabilitation committee has continued during the year now closing the altered field set-up which was made necessary during the year 1925-26 by the revised system of field administration then put into effect by the United States Veterans' Bureau. The committee is now composed of five area committees, upon which serve as members the State members for rehabili127

76735-28--10

tation. The area chairmen and vice chairmen are chosen from the general membership of the area groups, and these area officers compose the executive committee of the whole committee, which, together with the national chairman and vice chairman, are responsible for the progress of our rehabilitation work in a national sense between conventions.

The field secretaries of the committee continue to operate at important points, and particularly wherever there is an appeal board of the Veterans' Bureau there is stationed a man for permanent duty in the matter of service to the State departments of the Legion with respect to cases or issues proceeding from the regional offices of the bureau on appeal to these superior groups. Five of the secretaries are so stationed; the remaining eight secretaries continue with station at points where are centered considerable relief activities of the Federal Government where they handle routine or special matters relating to the interests of disabled veterans. They are also available for special assign. ments within their general territories whenever occasion arises.

Under the direction of the national executive committee two of the field secretaries will be separated from the service not later than September 1, 1927.

The advisory staff of the national rehabilitation committee has undergone no change as to character, and these professional men have been of vast assistance to the solution of our problems, particularly, of course, in the matter of diagnoses and treatment.

The general set-up of the committee in the field at present is not as satisfactory or as compact as was the old "14 district" set-up, but in view of the administrative contour of the Veterans' Bureau no immediate change is suggested. It seems quite likely, however, that as time goes on there must be a change in the working set-up of the full-time associates of the committee, particularly with reference to those now employed in the field. Recommendation as to what changes should be made will be forwarded to the national executive committee or to the next annual convention of the American Legion. The committee, both in Washington and in the field, has continued its cooperative contact between the veteran and the Veterans' Bureau. Members of the committee have visited all of the hospitals, clinics, dispensaries, and offices of the Veterans' Bureau during the year and have also canvassed those institutions operated by the Army, Navy, and Public Health Service. The conclusions developed by these visits of inquiry have reached the Director of the Veterans' Bureau in the form of suggestions, many of which have been carried out to the betterment of those whom we seek to serve.

The Director of the Veterans' Bureau continues to strive earnestly with his exceedingly difficult position. As your chairman has reported before, the work does not always proceed as rapidly or in those channels which the committee would like. The administrative organization of the central office of the Veterans' Bureau in Washington has undergone a number of changes but it is not yet, in the opinion of your chairman, in that shape where the most efficient progress can be made or where the dividing lines of authority can be clearly outlined. The director continues to effect changes where experience indicates their desirability and it is probable that as time goes on all of the working processes of the central office will be made much more convenient and exact than they appear to be at the time of the writing of this report.

This committee reported last year that the organization tables of the Veterans' Bureau hospitals did not permit of sufficient nurses, attendants, and certain other employees in some of the institutions, and while increases have been made during the year it is felt that additional nurses and attendants are necessary in certain of the hospitals for tuberculous patients, since the load from year to year is composed more and more of exceedingly sick veterans, i. e., the so-called infirmary cases.

Generally speaking, the clinical service in the hospitals continues to improve. The general medical and surgical, and tuberculosis loads show marked diminution and, as in past years, the neuropsychiatric, or mental, load is markedly increased. More hospitals are being erected and others will be under way so soon as funds now authorized but not yet appropriated by Congress are available.

The Washington office of the national rehabilitation committee has in its files 39,000 individual cases of disability, death, dependency compensation, adjusted compensation, etc. This means that the Washington headquarters has had contact with at least this number of individual claimants, either personally or by correspondence. Some member of the Washington staff handles all of these cases before the appeal group, or the advisory group on appeals of the bureau,

located at Washington. The individual cases continue to be more difficult and remote for service connection as time goes on, and it is sometimes necessary to request the rehearing or reconsideration of cases a number of times before decisions are secured which parallel the ideas of the committee as to what constitutes their equities. Sometimes this phase of the work becomes discouraging, particularly since it often happens that the opinions of the advisory group on appeals, which canvasses the case and makes recommendations to the director, whether they are negative or affirmative, seem to have no finality until they have been canvassed by several other services in the central office. To some extent this is the fault of the committee. If the director approves a denying recommendation which the committee thinks is unsound it is our representations to the director which send the case on through the legal, coordination, or medical services. In many instances where an affirmative opinion of the advisory group on appeals is approved by the director, which would result in the payment of considerable sums of money in a certain class of cases, or where the medical question can not be exactly determined, the case is sent to the services mentioned by the director apparently in an effort to be as certain as possible before payments are made or discontinued payments are resumed. This tendency to present the conclusions of the advisory group on appeals to other services of the bureau before final approval or disapproval results, in the opinion of the committee, in some discouragement to the advisory group itself, and of course results in unfortunate delays in case adjudication. This is a matter of administration, and it is thought by the committee that the personnel of the advisory group on appeals should be increased by the addition of the proper type of medical and legal officers so that all appealed cases may have studious and mature consideration, and any missing or possible additional evidence secured, to the ultimate end that when a recommendation proceeds to the director it will carry sufficient logic and accurate conclusion to enable the Director of the Veterans' Bureau and the American Legion to accept it without delay. This, of course, would be an ideal situation, and it is not hoped that it could be developed to an absolutely perfect point. It is thought, however, that considerable improvement may be made in the important matter of the thousands of cases which are annually appealed to the director personally.

The committee finds no fault with the director or his principal assistants personally. The delays in securing the production of administrative regulations, the determination of individual legal points, and in case handling sometimes lags, but it is felt that the officials of the bureau are exerting themselves in the direction of facilitation of progress of all of the activities of the bureau. Prompt action and effective cooperation is likewise accorded the committee by most of the general members of the bureau staff. Hundreds of these men and women are trying their best to put the job across to the satisfaction of all concerned.

Gen. Frank T. Hines has adopted an open-door policy so far as this committee is concerned. He considers seriously all of the suggestions preferred by the committee and makes available all information within the bureau which is necessary to the development of the cooperative effort between the Legion and the Government. Your chairman has reported before the great respect of the committee for General Hines as an individual and as an official, and as time goes on this feeling is not d'minished. He has in the opinion of the committee, a most difficult situation to handle, and if the bureau activities do not proceed with the dispatch and accuracy desired by the American Legion it is seldom the fault of the director.

In former years the national rehabilitation committee has held betweenconvention conferences at Washington for the purpose of considering, with offiIcials of the Veterans' Bureau and with the members of the House Committee on World War Veterans' Legislation, our joint problems, and these meetings have resulted in improved and progressive understandings between the members of this committee and the officials of the Federal Government. No such conference was held during the calendar year 1927, due to the fact that Congress held only a short session and it seemed unlikely that any considerable legislative extensions or clarifications could be hoped for during the period of sitting. The conferences have been generally attended by many State service officers and other members of the American Legion interested in the rehabilitation of disabled veterans, and sometimes at their own expense.

It is urgently recommended that at least one such conference be held during the early spring of 1928, particularly in view of the fact that there will probably be an extended session of Congress, and of the additional fact that it

will be unlikely that a majority of the general and advisory members of the committee will be present at the sessions of the Legion in Paris during September of the current year.

While the American Legion, through its national rehabilitation committee and State organizations, has tried to give proper attention to all phases of the rehabilitation of disabled veterans, too much credit can not be accorded to the American Legion Auxiliary for its special work in looking after the welfare of hospitalized veterans. Mrs. Adalin W. Macauley, national president of the auxiliary, has visited practically every Government hospital in the country during the past year, investigating conditions and making suggestions of a helpful character, many of which have been carried into effect, and Mrs. Rose Spencer, chairman of the auxiliary's national rehabilitation committee, has cooperated to the fullest extent in forwarding the Legion's general program in the interest of disabled men and women veterans and their dependents.

LEGISLATION

The chairman and advisory members of the national rehabilitation committee, together with certain of the State members of the committee and other officials of the Legion, appeared before the appropriate committees of the House and Senate in advocacy of the legislative proposals of the American Legion, and particularly with reference to the necessity for providing funds with which to erect additional mental hospitals. No detailed report of this effort will be rendered for the reason that it will be fully covered by thereport of the national legislative committee.

CLAIMS ADJUDICATION

Rating schedule.-Prior to June 7, 1924, the Veterans' Bureau schedule of disability ratings was based upon the average impairment of earning capacity resulting from injury or disease considering industry as a whole and without regard to the particular pre-war occupation of the veteran. The provisions of the World War veterans' act of 1924 necessitated a schedule of disability ratings based so far as practicable upon the average impairment of earning capacity resulting from injuries similar to the war-incurred injuries in civil occupations similar to the occupation of the injured man at the time of entrance into service. The committee reported last year that the preparation of this schedule had required so great a research and investigation into and evaluation of functional requirements in many thousands of occupations, and that it represented the largest constructive task of its kind ever undertaken by any public or private agency. The new schedule became effective January 1, 1926, and all new cases are now rated under the new theory. In addition, more than 92 per cent of the quarter million disability cases have been rerated, with the result that increased money awards are shown in 43 per cent of the cases, decreased awards in about 26 per cent of the cases, and a continuance of the existing award in something like 31 per cent of the cases rerated. In fine, the new schedule made possible a marked increase in the money value of the monthly compensation being paid to disabled veterans. For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1924, the total value of disability awards represented a monthly payment of $6,648,000. The monthly payment on account of disability compensation is now $12,800,000. This is not an accurate comparison when considering the effect of the new rating schedule because much of this increase has been occasioned by liberalized legislation, and of course the number of compensable veterans has increased measurably. However, the average monthly payment per disability claim in 1924 was $37.18, and is now $44.55. Experience has shown that in a number of occupations as related to disease or disability the variants or percentages are not correct, and since the last report of the committee the bureau has instituted a rating schedule board of medical, occupational, and legal specialists, continuously engaged in the study, revision, and interpretation of the schedule. This board is now at work upon the first general revision of the new schedule. Some minor revisions have been published but it is expected that this general revision will be effective before the end of the present calendar year.

At the time of the promulgation of the new disability rating schedule no provision was made by general order or regulation for a review of the serviceconnected cases then rated as less than 10 per cent or in other words noncompensable-the bureau desiring to review other types of cases first. Be