The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1919-05-27
Let Us Keep the Extra Daylight
Hour.

Hour.
Anti.daylight saving legislation.
which was avoided In the closing
hours Of the Sixty-fifth Congress only
by the failure of the agricultural APP
preparation bill, has been proposed
again in Congress, and 1t Is asserted
in Washington that it has good
chance of success because the farmers
favor 1t.
When the repeal of the daylight
saving law was proposed last winter
THE Sun said that II setting the
clocks ahead In the sprlngtime worked
real hardship to the farmers their
complaints were entitled to respectful
consideration. We received number
Of letters on the subject from farmers,
some of whom wanted to have the
law erased from the books, while
others were Indifferent toward the
proposal. None of the contentious put
forward by dissatisfied farmers
seemed of sufficient weight to out
balance the great benefits derived
from the operation Of the law by mill
ions Of citizens, and some were Of
trivial or farcical nature.
The principal objection Of the farm
ers to daylight saving as our CORE
spondents set 1t forth was that farm
ers, who got up at daybreak under
the old standard time, were compelled
to rise an hour earlier when the
clocks were set ahead in order to be
in time with train departures, shop
openings and the like, but that they
could not begin field work an hour
earlier than before because conditions
were not right for 1t.
In answer to this IL should be
pointed out that daylight saving is
not an enterprise of the United States
alone but n worldwide reform which
has never been abandoned by any
country which adopted it. 1t was in
troduced In Germany in 1915, to take
effect on May 1, and within three
months twelve other countries had
adopted the practice. Summer time"
was put in effect in Germany, Hol-
land, Austria, Turkey, England,
France. Norway. Sweden, Denmark,
Italy, Switzerland, Spain and Portu-
gal. Nova Scotia introduced the prac-
tice on this continent. At that time
l nf 90
Importance in Europe. and the expert
ence of these countries was so salts
factory that In the following year the
new time was again adopted, France
going so far as to change the clocks
| on March "a In order to reap the full
benefit of its adjustment. In 1917
Australia and Iceland conformed to
the new practice.
We thus have the experience of n
number of countries, widely separated
| and affected by utterly different local
| conditions, TO guide us, and we have
not heard from any Of them that
farmers found II impossible, or even
difficult, to arrange their work In 4
| way to relieve them from real hard
ships under daylight saving. 1t would
be strange indeed II In the United
States n different situation should
arise and the farmers should find
themselves seriously handicapped by
circumstances which do not put bur-
den on farmers In other countries.
| The benefits derived from daylight
saving by persons not engaged In
| farming are positive and numerous
Great sums of money are saved In
| lighting bills. the coal saving being
estimated at $4,000. 900 a year. Office
and factory workers are enabled TO get
an evening hour for outdoor exercise,
garden making, sport, they would not
otherwise enjoy. Opportunities for
wholesome recreation are increased,
and no loss or inconvenience is occa-
stoned to anybody.
Under all the circumstances 1t ap-
pears to be the duty of Congress to
retain daylight saving on the national
statute books. Certainly the reports
OF the agricultural authorities of the
States and the nation do not indicate
that the change in the position Of the
hands on the dials Of the clocks In
jured farmers financially, and 1t IL
not suggesting too much to say that
they should cooperate with the rest
Of us in perpetuating what has proved
| to be a great boon.