So much for a bare outline of the six years of effort in Congress. This book is not the place for a full story of work, with its many interesting ramifications. For the benefit of those who are interested in the actual chronology of the events in this unique struggle, Appendix No. 12 gives a tabloid story of the successive happenings. But it will perhaps be a useful contribution to the basis for an answer to the question as to what sort of laws the people really want, to give the reader some extracts from the mass of recorded material about this Congressional campaign; to turn the search-light upon certain significant bits of it, with a view to utilizing the experience of the past as a guide for the demands made upon Congress in the immediate future. The aim of the writer is to put the reader in a position to determine whether the trouble is with the bill, or with the way the Congressional mind reacts to the bill, and what factors there may be that have aggravated the situation so as to produce such an absurd incongruity as that a body of men who have themselves achieved family limitation and who represent constituents who likewise have to a great degree achieved family limitation, should fuss around for six years over the simple act of removing a statute that does not represent American life “as is.” The facts submitted in this survey of some of the high spots of the campaign in Congress are for the most part gleaned from the writer’s personal experience in Washington, in direct conversation with the members of Congress. Where otherwise it will be so stated. Being director of the work for the entire six years gave an opportunity for first-hand observation of the vital factors in the situation, and especially of those that were behind the scenes. The outstanding characteristic notable throughout the whole period has been a general acknowledgment of the reasonableness of the bill, coupled with fear to act. This fear has been occasionally admitted frankly, but has mostly been covered over with all sorts of “rationalizing.” And it has been almost as evident among the men in Congress who were for the bill as among those who have opposed it, or those who have stayed on the fence. Thorough-going opposition to the bill has from the very beginning been almost nil, that is, in the sense that a man believed in the prohibition of contraceptive knowledge enough to want it applied to _himself_. No such member of Congress has yet been discovered, though there have been a few found who have said they thought the law as it stands is eminently suitable for application to _other_ people.