But, gentlemen, it will not always do to talk back. Actions speak louder than words, even though they do not make as much noise, and Solomon was right when a few centuries ago he remarked that “A soft answer turneth away wrath.” We must always maintain a courteous, gentlemanly, dignified attitude. We must never for a moment allow our sympathies for the deserving unfortunate ex-service man to become in the least weakened, and we must continue to give him the benefit of the doubt in border-line cases, and finally we must maintain our equanimity under the most trying circumstances.

And now that we have you here, we are going to ask you some more questions, and I hope you know the answers, because I don’t know the answers to some of these questions myself, nor do I intend to answer them.

In passing, I might remind you of the fact that in times past we have spent money very freely on our hospital program, and that while we still desire to give our beneficiaries what is perhaps a little more than reasonable medical and surgical care and treatment, at the same time we must be able to show Congress that we are operating economically under present conditions, and certainly, when not in conflict with the patients’ rights or interests, the question of economy of administration must be considered in admitting, transferring and discharging. Are we giving this question of economy of administration the proper consideration in performing these functions, and if not, what are the reasons? We want to know. This I will label “Question No. 1,” and let you think it over for a while. It is perhaps not the most important question I shall ask but it is important.

Now, having delivered myself of this question, and not having answered it, I suppose you are ready for Question No. 2. Well, I am not. I want to talk a little before I spring the next question. Of course we all know that the primary object in placing a man in a hospital is to give him a chance to get well, or as nearly well as possible. This, however, is not the only thing to be accomplished in the hospitalization of patients of the Veterans’ Bureau, and, if I may speak frankly, I may say that, while theoretically, hospitalization, rehabilitation, and the awarding of compensation ought to dovetail into each other without any overlapping or getting in each other’s way, as a matter of fact they won’t do it,—at least they haven’t done it so far; but, nevertheless, we’ve got to make the best possible connection between these functions.

Let us hark back to Regulation No. 57 of the old Bureau of War Risk Insurance, which gave temporary total disability to the beneficiary whose disability showed Service connection, together with compensation at this high rate as soon as the man entered the hospital, and which cut down this compensation anywhere from $80 per month to nothing at all as soon as the beneficiary left the hospital. Although this Regulation has been somewhat modified recently, it is still a very strong incentive for men to seek hospitalization. It takes an unusually patriotic citizen to take $30 to $60 a month or less when he can get $80 a month and board and lodging if he can remain inside of a hospital.

Apropos of this provision, I recall the circumstances of a young man who came to me quite some time ago, having left the hospital at Fort McHenry. He presented himself in a courteous, dignified way, was perfectly serious and absolutely frank. He began the interview by handing me the card of a U. S. Senator. Then he told me his story, and it was a good story. I shall try to recall it as nearly in his own language as possible. “Doctor”, said he, “I have just left your hospital at Fort McHenry. I do not like it. I realize that the Public Health Service is not to blame for conditions which I found there. It is not suited for a hospital. It is badly located. There are odors which it seems impossible to overcome. The walls and floors are dingy, and while they are clean, they cannot be made to look clean.

“I was shot through the stomach by a machine gun. Here are the scars. If I do not work hard I feel fairly comfortable, and yet I am not well, I receive $30 a month when I am outside the hospital, I receive $80 a month and my board and room when I am in the hospital. Personally I would much prefer to remain at home, but when I work hard enough to make a living I break down. I have seen so many men in the hospital who are receiving their board and lodging and their $80 a month who are not as deserving of this as I am that I do not propose to remain at home and work on my present compensation, and I would just like to see you keep me out of a hospital. And furthermore, I demand to be sent to the hospital of my choice. What are you going to do about it?”

I replied, “Young man, you have been unusually frank in what you have said. I shall be equally frank with you. If I had been wounded as you have, and if I had the information which you have gained from your stay in different hospitals, I should probably make the same demands. You can have your transportation whenever you want it.”

I saw this young man later at No. 38 in New York and he told me that he was about to get what he considered a satisfactory rate of compensation, and that as soon as he could get it he would go home.

Question No. 2. How many men are there in our hospitals today who would voluntarily leave if we did not, by providing total disability rating and compensation while in the hospital, place a premium on their remaining there? How many of those who would leave really ought to leave? What can be done to correct the defects in the operation of Regulation No. 57, modified as it has been? Perhaps you think I am giving you several questions in one, but we will still label if “Question No. 2.” I am not alone in desiring to know the answer to that question.