The introduction of the bill was during the short session of Congress with the usual congested Calendar. There was fairly definite reason to believe that a majority of the Judiciary Committee to which the bill was referred were in favor of it, but they were unwilling to vote it out, that is they evaded voting on it. The session ended without action. The bill was reintroduced by Senator Cummins in the next Congress on January 24, 1925 and on the following day it was introduced in the House by Congressman William N. Vaile of Colorado. (Congressman’s Kissel’s term of office had expired with the previous Congress, hence the need of a new sponsor in the House.) The bill this time carried an additional section providing that no contraceptive instructions or means could be transported by mail or by any public carrier unless they were certified by at least five lawfully practicing physicians to be “not injurious to life or health.” The full wording of the entire bill is given in Appendix No. 11. Two Hearings on the Bill were held on April 8 and May 9, 1924, before joint meetings of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees. As in the previous year, there was probable majority in both Committees in favor of the bill, but as before there was great hesitation to act; the few opponents were not aggressive enough to want to have the measure reported out adversely; they merely wanted it pigeon-holed in Committee. And those who favored the bill or who took a tolerant attitude about it were not sufficiently energetic to do anything except to acquiesce in the pigeon-holing of the bill. Some progress was made however during the next session, the last one of the sixty-eighth Congress. For on January 20th the Senate Sub-Committee of three decided to report the bill to the full Committee “without recommendation.” Senator Norris was and always has been unqualifiedly in favor. Senator Overman has always heard the arguments for the Bill with sympathy and seems to have no objection to it, other than a lingering fear that access to knowledge may encourage immorality. He did not wish to hold back action on the Bill, and therefore stood for reporting it “without prejudice.” Senator Spencer when first interviewed regarding the Bill expressed his general approval of its aim. Later he brought up various points about which he had reservations. He decided, however, that they should not prevent him from joining with the other two members in a report that would make procedure possible. But no report was made by the full Committee before Congress adjourned on March 4, 1925. The bill died, as do all pending bills which are not enacted when the last session of a given Congress adjourns.