w s.^ New York State College of Agriculture At Cornell University Ithaca, N. Y. Library n Cornell University Library HD 1753 1920k Agricultural conference.Hearings before AGRICULTURAL CONFERENCE e: HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SIXTY-SIXTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON '■Sf-' //./^-^ H. RES. 332 FEBRUARY 20, 1920 ,^'#->».*-Si»'^ I LIBRARY FEB 5 1946 DEPT. OF ACRIC." ECON. WASHINGTON «^ . (JOVEENMENTJ PRINTING OFFICE '^ J /' !l920 vt''t% y X- '-■} if, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. HotrsE OF Representatives. GILBERT N. HAUGEN, Iowa, Chairman. JAMES C. MCLAUGHLIN", Michigan. SYDNEY ANDERSON, Minnesota. WILLIAM W. WILSON, Illinois. CHARLES B. WARD, New York. WILLIAM B. Mckinley, niinois. BLUAH C. HUTCHINSON, New Jersey. FRED S. PURNELL, Indiana. EDWARD VOIGT, Wisconsin. MELVIN O. McLaughlin, Nebraska. CARL W. RIDDICK, Montana. J. N. TINCHER, Kansas. WILLIS J. HULINGS, Pennsylvania. J. KUHIO KALANIANAOLE, Hawaii. GORDON LEE, Georgia. BZEKIEL S. CANDLER, Mississippi. J. THOMAS HEFLIN, Alabama. THOMAS L. RUBBY, Missouri. JAMES YOUNG, Texas. HENDERSON M. JACOWAY, Arkansas JOHN V. LESHER, Pennsylvania. JOHN W. RAINEY, Illinois. L. G. Haugen, Clnk. 0^'f^ o 7 ,1 . <--'. V. ■^'"u, \X O CONTENTS. statement of — Page Hon. R. E. Evans 5 J. W. Batcheller..., 9 A. M. Loomis 25 Hon. H. B. White 26 Hon. L. J. Dickinson 32 3 Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924014537892 AGKICULTURAL CONFERENCE. Committee on Agkicultuee, House of Representatives, Friday, February 20; 1920. The committee this day met, Hon. Gilbert N. Haugen (chairman) , presiding. The Chairman. The committee has met this morning to hear rep- resentatives of farmer organizations who desire to present their views on certain matters, more particularly on House resolution 332, pending before the committee, introduced by Mr. Dickinson of Iowa, which provides — That the President of the United States is hereby requested to call a conference, at such times as he may deem advisable, to be attended by delegates representing agricultural labor and capital, which shall inqlude all cereal producers, stock raisers, including producers of wool, cotton raisers, etc., representatives interested in the manufacturing of food products, representatives of all dealers in food products, and representatives of the consuming public. We wUl be glad to hear you on your resolution, Mr. Dickinson. Mr. Dickinson of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, Judge Evans of Nebraska, would like to make a statement to the committee, and I will be glad tQ give way to him at this time, inasmuch as he has another com- mittee meeting to attend. The Chairman. We will be glad to hear Mr. Evans. STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT E. EVANS, A REPRESENTA- TIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEBRASKA. Mr. Evans. Mr. Chairman, I have a meeting in session now, so all I desire to do at this time is to testify that I am in favor of the reso- lution which has been introduced by Mr. Dickinson. I would suggest for your consideration whether or not it would be wise with reference to this resolution to include also among those who should be invited to this conference, the representatives of labor, whether organizeed or unorganized, because one of the questions which is vital just now, as I view it, and which is involved in this resolution, is the high cost of hving. Maybe the statement which I make will be disputed, but I think it will be borne out by the facts, that the tenant farmer and the farmer who labors himself is receiving a lower rate of wage than any other laboring man. I have in mind when I make that statement the following facts. His hours are longer and he does more kinds of work than any other man, and therefore does not have the advantage which comes from a division of labor. His wife and practically every other member of his family, in most instances, are working without any limitation on their hours of labor. 6 6 AGEICHLTtrKAL CONFERENCE. These facts brought to the attention of those who are contending: for short hours and for division of labor ought to bring a realization of the fact that the farmer to-day is not being paid what he ougiit to be paid, and that if he were paid at the same rate as those who labor six and eight hours a day, and he refused to do any more than that in a day the high cost of living would be very, very much in- creased. There is also to be considered the question of distribution of products, which was called to the attention of those who were present at the meetino; last night. Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan. What meeting do you refer to ? Mr. Evans of Nebraska. At the meeting held at No. 1731 I Street, at the home of the Farmers' Union, at which a number of Senators spoke. I think when we take into consideration the importance of these questions and also the condition of our country to-day, that that would warrant the calling of a conference of these people even more strongly and more emphatically than any other of the con- ferences which have been called. I would like to say more, but I must go to another meeting. I only wish you to understand that I am in favor and the district I represent is heartily in favor of the adoption of this resolution. My district is entirely an agricultural district, except such transporta- tion lines as assist in taking our products to the market. Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan. Did you suggest an amendment to the resolution a moment ago ? Mr. Evans of Nebraska. I suggested this fact for consideration, that labor, which is not mentioned as being invited, I think ought to be called into the conference. Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan. The resolution says, "To be at- tended by delegates representing agricultural labor." Mr. Evans of Nebraska. Organized or unorganized labor not en- gaged in agriciilture. It might be there would be objections to that, but it seems to me that both of those classes ought to be at the con- ference, at least so that they might be enlightened as to the situa- tion. I have found this to be the claim expressed so many times, that the farmer has been living off of the fat of the land. If he has made anything in the last three or four years it has been because he has worked harder and longer than any other class of laborers, and the members of his family have worked harder and worked longer hours than anybody else, and the people do not appreciate that fact. Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan. What do you understand by the word "capital"? Mr. Evans of Nebraska. It might be used more broadly; but I understand that in calling in capital it was largely with reference to the capital that is associated with the labor on the farm. Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan. You mean in connection with the operations on the farm and farm products 1 Mr. Evans of Nebraska. Yes. It might be that Mr. Dickinson in presenting the resolution meant capital generally, although the relations between farm labor and combinations of capital that do not touch the farm are not very intimate. Mr. Wilson. Are you in favor of the President calling another conference ? Mr. Evans of Nebraska. I am in favor of this resolution, whether the President calls the conference or not, or whether the Secretary of AGRICTJLTUEAL CONFERENCl!;. 7 Agricultiire calls it. That is a matter which I would leave entirely with the committee, and let the committee settle that question. 1 listened last night to a short conversation with reference to that and I think the Secretary of Agriculture will probably be able to get a better conference, that is a conference of men more closely associated with the agricultural interest than if the President were to call it unless he called for suggestions from the Secretary of Agriculture. Mr. TiNCHER. What was the idea expressed at that meeting, to have this conference recommend some legislation ? Mr. Evans of Nebraska. I did not hear anything of that kind while I was there. Mr. Tin CHER. The idea of the resolution was to have the con- ference recommend some le^slation ? Mr. Evans of Nebraska. This resolution was not discussed at that conference. This resolution was offered last summer and has not been called up for consideration since it was offered, except by Mr. Dickinson himself in private conversations with members of the committee. Mr. TiNCHER. I was wondering whether the resolution contemplates some legislation, and if that is so, why it would not be a good idea to have the members of the Committee on Agriculture act as conferees and report out such legislation as was desired. Mr. Evans of Nebraska. Mr. Dickinson would be better able to answer that question than I. Mr. Wilson. Do you not think the Committee on Agriculture would be a more representative body than a conference that would be called by our distinguished President ? Mr. Evans of Nebraska. I have intimated what I think with reference to the President's selection. I do not wish to distinguish between the members of the committee and members of a conference whom the Secretary of Agriculture might select. If the Committee on Agriculture had the time to put on that work, it would be perfectly satisfactory to me, although I have understood from some remarks made by some of the members of the committee on the floor of the House that they did not have any surplus time. Mr. Anderson. I was wondering whether the fundamental con- ception of this conference was based upon the idea of getting the facts with relation to agricultural labor and its relation to agricul- tural capital and the cost of living, or whether it was assumed that these facts were established and the purpose of this conference was to suggest some action which might be taken, either by Congress or by the interests involved, on the basis of the facts already developed. Mr. Evans of Nebraska. I would rather have Mr. Dickinson answer that. I have my opinion upon it, of course. My thought is this, with reference to the conference. Of course, as you gentlemen know, agriculture is scattered over the entire country to-day and the condi- tions that obtain in one section are not the conditions that obtain in another section. The principle that underlies this matter and the relief which is sought will be the same in all cases and the conference will bring those people together for that purpose. There are places wherein agricultural interests are shelved for other interests which in my opinion take the cream, a portion of it, at least, which the farmer ought to have, and those interests and the farmers' interests ought to get together on that question; it does touch labor, and it does touch 8 AGKICULTURAL CONFERENCE. capital, orgamzed labor and combinations of capital. If those people would all get together and confer about those things there would be legislation proposed for the relief of conditions which are now inter- fering with the agricultiu-al interests and agricultural progress. , Mr. Anderson.. I do not know whether I get exactly what you mean. Ts it the idea of those who favor the conference that it would deal with the relations between agricultural labor and agricultural capital and the different men who deal with the agricultural prob- lems? Mr. Evans of Nebraska. It'would probably do that. But the sources of investigation or subject of investigation would, of course, be within the control of the conference as to details and would be generally suggested by the calling of the conference. Mr. AisfDERsoN. Of course, there is always an advantage in people getting together and discussing their problems. But if the conference is going to arrive at any definite results, my observation has been that there must be present a sort of elaborate stipulation as to the facts and an agreebient as to what the facts of the problem are; and what I was trying to arrive at was whether the purpose of this conference was to arrive at the facts, or whether it was assumed that the facts were established and that this conference was going to pass^upon the facts without any further investigation and propose a remedy. Mr. Evans of Nebraska. My thought is that they would find or investigate the facts and then suggest some such remedy as to them seemed wise. Mr. Anderson. If they are going to investigate the facts, then they would have to have machinery such as is not provided for in this resolution. It might be that the men who attend the conference would have the facts in mind. But, even then, you have to establish, before your conference can arrive at anything like a concrete result, a basis of agreed, facts, or substantially agreed facts. That is what we have to do in this committee before we ever get anywhere with a piece of legislation. We have to arrive at the facts substantially or have an agreement as to what the facts are, and we have to have a long discussion after that to determine what is the consensus of opinion. I am' trying to get at the scope of this conference. If it is going to get the facts and investigate the situation to establish the ba,sis of facts upon which it is sub,sequently going to act, then you will have to have more machinery than is provided for here. Mr. Evans of Nebraska. What I have in mind, and what I think was intendend is this: Yoiir witnesses will be members of the con- ference called as delegates, because they will be called on account of their peculiar knowledge and the logical manner in which they reason. In that way the facts will be presented in a way that will scarcely be questioned. That is my own thought about it, and I do not think the author of the resolution intended or contemplated the caUing of witnesses to investigate as to disputed questions of fact. A conference such as is proposed in this resolution acts upon facts which, from their joint knowledge would be taken as established facts. I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen. The Chairman. We are grateful to you> Mr. Evans. Mr. Dickinson of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, this resolution was sug- gested by the fact that there was a considerable amount of attention AGKICULTUEAL CONFEEENCB. 9 given to the fact that agriculture had no representative on the former industrial conference which was called to meet here in October, and it is further suggested now by the fact that there is unrest among the farmers as to their condition, as is shown by the recent inquiry sent out by the Post Office Department, in the course of which some 40,000 letters were sent out and answered. I think people are coming to realize more and more that in order to get their demands satisfied they have to at least make them known. I would like the committee now to hear Mr. Batcheller, of Yankton County, S. Dak. Mr. Batcheller is a farmer and represents the Farmers' Union of that State. The Chairman. We will be glad to hear Mr. Batcheller. STATEMENT OF MR. JOHN W. BATCHEIIEE, OF MISSION Hill, S. DAK., PRESIDENT OF THE FARMERS' UNION OF SOUTH DAKOTA. The Chairman. Kindly state your full name, address, and occupa- tion. Mr. Batcheller. My name is John W. Batcheller; my address is Mission Hill, Yankton County, S. Dak. I had not come to Wash- ington with the expectation of appearing before any congressional committee, but since the opportunity has been offered me, I shall endeavor to set forth the Adewpoint of the farmers with whom I am constantly in touch and as one of their number trying to serve them. I do not wish to be understood as being pessimistic or in any way^ a calamity howler because I object to the treatment the farmer is receiving during this reconstruction period. If I mention discrimina- tions, it is only that we may correct and prevent them. On October 3, 1918, 1 was chosen president of the State" Farmers' Union in South Dakota, and during the first year my time was divided between the union and the farm. Since October last, however, my time has been fully occupied with union work. In nay work for the Farmers' Union I am meeting thousands of farmers over the State of South Dakota and endeavoring to assist in the establishment of cooperative enterprises and the general work of the union. I know I am ofl' the subject immediately before the committee, but I am getting to it, that is, this question of calling this conference. Mr. Wilson. As an officer of the Farmers' Union, are you affiliated with the American Federation of Labor ? Mr. Batohellor. We are not. I sent out a questionnaire to the over 300 locals in the State about a month ago. Among the 18 ques- tions I asked, one was this, "What attitude do you favor our union taking toward organized labor," and as a result of that questionnaire, I can state that our organization can not take any position on that question. Some of the members said fight it; some said federate, and some said leave it alone. Then some others refused to answer the question at all. I have no authority, as an officer of the union, to go in with any body of organized labo - and state what we wiU do. I have no authority to pose as a dictito -. Mr. Candler. The farmers' organizations were invited to partici- pate in some meeting which was supposed to be held by the organized labor forces in Washington about two months ago, and they declined to enter that conference at that time. The papers so stated. 10 AGRICULTURAL CONFEBENOE. Mr. BItcheller. I have no information regarding such an invi- tation and 1 think that so far as our organization is concerned I would have no authority to state' the union's attitude toward organ- ized labor. Personally, I would state that in some ways our interests are parallel, in others opposed. The Farmers' Union, which is a business organization, is endeavoring to do for the farmer what organ- ization has done for capital and labor. In regard to this matter of getting together, we are showing results, and the accusation that farmers can not organize is being refuted by facts. I consider that we have made wonderful steps forward in the last'few years.. It is only three years since I first heard of the Farmer's Union, and up to that time I knew of no way wherebyvthe farmers of the Nation could get together. Now we are mingling, with delegates from foreign countries— like Messrs. Plunkett and Barbour, from Ireland, and Mr. Sorenson, from Denmark. We are now planning an international conference and are finding that distance is not the handicap it once was and that the mails and the cables wiU carry for us as well as for others. We are beginning to study problems such as we never stud- ied before. We find that agriculture, studied from the ,inside and businesslike way, has an outlook in possibilities that can be wonder- fully interesting and be an inducement to the young men of the future. The main drive of the country has always been for heavier produc- tion, with the idea that heavier production is the solution of the problem. But the Agricultural Department has statistics showing that the big crops have not been profitable crops for the farmers. We have been up against this argument, that it is good for the country, and therefore it is good for us. The thing which the Farmers Union and all these business organ- izations of farmers are working on is profitable farming. I want to say if we go out to buy a farm, we can see by the increase in the price of the land that farming has got to be more profitable than in the past. You can also see how the mortgages have increased. In our State I am somewhat familiar with the condition of indebted- ness and have frequently been where the farm loans were being made. One of the directors of our union in South Dakota is looking after the Federal loan business in his district and the call is constantly for more money. The increase in the value of land has helned the farmer who doesn't care to sell only so far as to increase his taxes and enable him to borrow more money on his land. Something very decided in favor of agriculture has got to happen to make it attractive then the matter of abundant production will take care of itself. Now, I want to refer to this matter of getting together. At our former farmer's conferences in Washington I have held aloof from these national offices and for one, will state that I felt that we were not wanted. The colleges and imiversities from which they come have little interest in and no sympathy for the farmer. The cities are considered the flower of civilization with the farm simply a feeder both as to population and the necessities of life. In fact the cities have drawn tremendously from the farm imtil now production is begging while distribution is top heavy and in danger. "There is a further significance, this robbing of the farmer has necessitated that AGRICULTURAL CONFERENCE. 11 he be a robber of the soil which points to further trouble in the future. No matter how many merchants there are, they are supposed to have the right to exist, and if they are not prospering as well as the farmer, there is supposed to be some fault with economic conditions. From the cities the farmers' organizations have met persistent opposition. This brings up a question. In an agricultural State, which should dictate, the city or the country? The cities concede to themselves the right and carefully monopolize it. This has resulted in a political unrest which they are now endeavoring to control. What the farmers of my State need is to have their con-. Udence in the Government, as regards getting a fair deal, restored, ' and I am satisfied that conferences in which they are fairly repre- sented would be of inestimable value. The cities have no welcome for organized farmers. Does out national Government ? Mr. TiNCHER. In Kansas you will find that they throw the lights on the welcoming arch for the farmers, and welcome farmers to conventions. Mr. Batchbllek. That is good. Mr. Candler. The city of Memphis, Tenn., maintains an organiza- tion to which the people in Memphis and the surrounding country contribute large sums of money, and that is for the benefit of the farmers in Arkansas, Tennessee, and Mississippi, and they cooperate absolutely with the farmers and send speakers to their meetings and discuss with them various agricultural questions, and there are no people in any section who cooperate more closely with the farmers, and in my part of the country, down in Mississippi, we think that agrictdture is the greatest industry in the world. Mr. Rainey. I come from a big city. Have you looked over the membership of the House to see where most of the Members come from ? Mr. Batchellek. I understand they are practically all from the cities. Mr. Rainey. I want to ask you just one other question. Any time the farmers are involved in legislation, so far as their vote is concerned, have you observed the result of the roll call, as to whether the farmer's interests are neglected in the House of Representatives ? Mr. Batcheller. I will say I have not. I have not placed much stress on the political program. I have been of the opmion — I will not say it is a fair conclusion — but I have been of the opinion with the farmers of my country that we are not to receive or not to be taken into consideration at the national headquarters, and that the deals to be put over would finally be put over in a way that would cause us to pay the taxes and somebody else to reap the profit. Mr. TiNCHER. You are a leader in your State organization of farmers, at the head of a big union ? Mr. Batcheller. Yes. Mr. TiNCHER. There are some of us in Congress who are farmers. You say you come to Washington, and that this is your fmu-th trip in 13 months, and you come here with that impression. Just to illustrate to you the attitude of the House of Representa- tives toward the farmers, let me cite this illustration: You will remember the legislation for the repeal of the daylight-saving law. Wlien that matter came up before the House of Representatives 12 AGEICULTUEAL CONFEEENCE. the farmer had a two-thirds vote in the House. Every member of this committee, either from the city or from the coimtry, will assure you that the. doctrine that you are teaching out in your State, that Congress is against the farmer is wrong. Mr. Rainey comes from the most congested center in the United States, and as he says to you, the lower House of Congreee is, by a two-thirds vote, taking care of the farmers' interests. Mr. Batchelee. This matter which I am stating to you represents the opinion I have in common with others held but does not con- stitute a large part of my discussion in our organization, Mr. TiNCHEE. But you hold the most important and most promi- ■ nent position in your organization, and you ought to be informed, and your organization oilght to be informed that instead of looking upon Congress as your enemy, controlled by the city, the lower House Congress especially is controlled by the farmers, and the Members ought to be treated as your friends, and you ought to consider the Members as your friends and come to the committees and tell them what your troubles are. Mr. Rainey. I just want to add there that, coming from the city, and knowing but very little about farmipg, no member of this com- mittee, which is made up largely of men who have been interested in agricultural pursuits — no member of this committee has more con- sistently favored legislation beneficial to the farmer than the gentle- man now talking to you, who comes from the city. Mr. RuBEY. Let me say in that connection that the gentleman from Chicago is, I might say, an exception along that line, and if you will examine the record and the speeches made you will find that practically every speech made in Congress antagonistic to the farmer has been made by some man from the city. Mr. Batheller. Just a word on that. We have had statistics on these matters, but it takes a man in the business to glean out those things from' the great mass of press material. I am the editor of our union paper, that goes out weekly to about 6,000 members of our organization, and if we had this material in our paper, going before our membership, which the mass of the people is in touch with, then we would know something about these things. But that informa- tion does not get to us. The popular press could probably explain why, and since there is a gulf not only between the farmer and the city, but between the farmer and his Government a general con- ference to which a large number of actual farmers would be called and wherein causes would be explained for the drop in prices of farm produce and increase in that of finished product, could not help but be beneficial. Last year I was on a committee of 25 representing 25 States, which endeavored to get larger representation in the capital and labor conference, but nothing came from that. Mr. Andeeson. I would like to get my own mind clear about this resolution. I think we all recognize that it is a good thing to get together, and that conferences very frequently have very splendid results, both in a social and economic sense, and we all believe in them. But here is "a resolution which requests the President of the United States to call a conference. That is a resolution which it is expected to be passed by the Congress of the United States. That gives the AGKIOULTUBAL CONFERENCE. 13 conference a very high degree of importance. It seems to me if you are going to ask the* Congress of the United States, the highest legis- lative body in the United States, to ask the President of the United States to call a conference, that conference ought to be called for a more or less, and I will say a rather definite piu-pose, because such a conference has an official standing, and if it arrives at any results, those results will have an official standing. So it is important that the scope of a conference of that kind should be pretty well understood. Have you discussed, or will you discuss what you think a conference of that kind ought to consider ? Mr. Batciiellee. For one thing, I will say, from the farmer's standpoint, there is the matter of the cost of production and the labor problems on the farm, and on the other side there is the cost of distiibution and the enormous spread between raw and finished products, and those things ought to be explained in order to arrive at a conclusion as to the whys and wherefores of market prices. Those would represent probably the most important items. I have no hope right now, as I see it, of reconciling the elements that are in conflict — 1 am not going to make a positive statement about, it — but take the labor interests; we will say they are trying to demand unreasonable prices in the labor market and short hours, and we will say we are unreasonable and demand too high prices and profits for our produce, and the man in business wants to look after his mterests. I do not see how they can be parallel interests, but they can sit at the same table and abide by certain rules in the game. There has got to be rules in the game and we shall have to be allowed to play in it before we can feel that we are being treated fairly. At the present time we feel that we are not recognized as factors in business and government, but simply self -propagating tools of production. Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan. Is there not a danger that the con-^ ference might represent so many interests, naturally selfish and jealous of theii- rights, so that it might be impossible to get them together and reach any definite results ? Mr. Batcheller. 'The psychological effect upon the country if the farmers are recognized in such a conference, with the attendant publicity through the press, stating that such a conference had been called and see to it that the conference is made up of members of the various interests, not by professional lobbyists. I^et the farmers, .packers, etc., get their feet under the same table. Such a conference would, I believe, have an ameliorating effect. Mr. Tinchee. Coming back to the proposition of getting prmier recognition from the press, no committee can regulate that. You have said something which I am glad you stated to the members of the committee. The press gives the impression pretty generally that this Congress is unfriendly to the farmer, does it not? Mr. Batcheller. It is so considered. Mr. TiNCHER. If that is not true, would there be any more prospect of getting a true report in the press by having a conference such as you suggest, than by dealing with the Committee on Agriculture direct ? Mr. Batcheller. I think so. In saying that you suggest to me some of the things which we have considered against us. One is the money power, in all its ramifications; commercial clubs; the Asso- 14 AGKICULTURAL CONFERENCE. ciated Press; a system of trade laws, which guarantee profits to the distributor within the territory and place us at his mercy. We are supposed to take our medicine and keen our mouths shut; and the impression is becoming quite general that the Government of the TJnited States is being "used by the money power of the country as a tool. It seems to some of us that democracy has disappeared, and we are striving through organization and cooperation to try to work out some kind of a salvation. Mr. McLaughlin of Nebraska. I am satisfied that such an impres- sion that has gone out to the country is a result of unfair publicity, and in addition to what Mr. Tincher said relative to the test on the daylight saving proposition, which would show that. more than two- thirds of Congress is favorable especially to the interests and desires of the farmer, attention should also be called to the fact that in tests in every instance here where laws bearing upon the subject of profiteer- ing have come up the farmers have been exempted by this Congress and the preceding Congress right along. The fact is that Congress has discriminated in favor of the farmer. I am a farmer, and I have found out that this unfair impression has gone out to the country. But the fact is that Congress has dis- crimmated in favor of the farmer rather than against hun. Mr. Batcheller. With this information I feel that in the attitude I have taken, and in the light of the information I have received, like apologizing to this committee regarding that matter. In those very matters — — Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan (interposing). I hope you will not feel like apologizing. We want to know the facts. We want to find out what the matter is. Mr. Batcheller. If I have misjudged and misrepresented the attitude of Congress I feel that an apology is due. ' Mr. Rainey. The best proof of that would be to have your organiza- tion subscribe to the Congressional Record and follow the votes in which the farmer's interests are at stake, and you and your organiza- tion will then reahze that in any question where the agricultural inter- ests of the country are under consideration the lower House of Congress has always taken good care of them. Mr. Candler. And you can say that the Government is not against the farmer; the Government is for the farmer. Mr. Batcheller. I think you will appreciate the fact that I am appearing before a body that is working on matters in connection with legislation of which I have not made a special study. This matter has come to me in a casual way. I have been studying matters in connection with cooperation and the exchange of com- modities, and we are exchanging thousands of carloads throughout the United States through our organization, and we are developing a head exchange here where we shall have an information bureau; there will be agents of our organization appointed throughout the Nation and possibly in other countries, and there will be a reporting system, and there will be an inventory kept of supply over the country so that we can exchange commodities such as, for example, peaches for peanuts, or corn for some other commodity, etc., etc. Already in the little South Dakota town of Mission Hill we have shipped in over 50 carloads under this cooperative system of buying, and we have saved as high as 12,000 on a car of twine. It may be AGRICULTURAL CONTERESTCE. 15 said by those representing the business interests that we are stepping into a place where we have no business, but we feel that it is our business and our right to protect ourselves and take hold of this ^.uying proposition. Already with our cooperative enterprises we have become informed and know costs, discounts, and rates the same as the business man. Mr. Young. That is a cooperative organization; you have your buying organization through which your people buy these different products, and you look out for the market and you bring those products there, and you save money by that ? Mr. Batcheller. Yes. Mr. Young, Have you also got a cooperative system by which you sell your products of which you have a surplus ? Mr. Batcheller. We have our elevators, creameries, mills, prod- uce stations, etc. We also operate exchanges where we handle farm implements, automobiles, tractors, trucKs, and such things; also harness. We also have a few general stores where we handle a full line of general merchandise. I would not be personally so much interested in this cooperative movement if the distributing machine were functioning as we believe it should, but it has so abused its privileges and usurped our rights that it is now in danger of being replaced. The pendulum has started back, even though the farmers are still moving to town. Mr. Young. What are they going to do ? Mr. Batcheller. Hire out to the International or the Standard on. Possibly they wiU come back again. Mr. Tinchek. Most of them are up against the trouble in getting help? Mr. Batcheller. Yes. Mr. TiNCHER. And the prospect of getting help is a httle discourag- ing, as long as so many people that hire help are going to be content with six hours or less work a day. Mr. Batcheller. Yes. Mr. TinCher. Any organization that has for its purpose the short- ening of the hours oi labor, to some extent, interferes with the opera- tion of farming ? Mr. Batcheller. I might say that organized labor does not come in, to any great extent, on the farm. Mr. Tincher. If John Smith's boy can go to the city and get a job working six hours a day he is not going to stay out on the farm and work for you ? Mr. Batcheller. That is true. Last year I went into town and there were 8 or 10 men sitting around. I was asking for corn buskers. They asked me how much the corn would run to the acre, if it stood up well, if I had good wagons and teams and an elevator. After replying, as I thought favorably, they stated, " Well, bring in your cornfield and let us look at it, and if we Mke the looks of it we will go out and go to work." The Chairman. I understood you to say j'our Farmers' Union does cooperative buying. You were speaking about large shipments ? Mr. -Batcheller. That might be considered the object of it; but I consider that as a means rather than an end. The Chairman. It is a question of distribution ? Mr. Batcheller. Yes. 16 AGBICTJLTUEAL CONFERENCE. The Chairman. To what extent is this work done in connection with the Department of Agriculture? I want to ascertain what effect the efforts of the department have had upon this work, and to what extent it has been connected with it. The department has taken a great deal of credit for organizing organizations throughout the country. It is generally understood by the people in the country that they can take care of this organization work themselves, with- out the assistance of the people who are being sent out from the Department of Agriculture. Mr. Batcheller. You are correct. Unless we can organize our- selves we shall expect no benefit. Leave the matter of organiza- tion to us. What we prefer — the only organizatioii we have con- fidence in is the one we put across ourselves without help from the Government or from the cities or any of these agencies. We con- sider those rather a detriment than a help. The Chairman. In other words, you prefer to deal with your own organization, rather than to have those matters dealt with by the Department of Agriculture ? Mr. Batcheller. Yes. The Chairman. In reference to this resolution, has it been indorsed by your organization or others, to your knowledge? Mr. Batcheller. I would say it has not. I have just casually been brought in touch with it, being an old acquaiatance of Mr. Dickiason. The Chairman. It has been suggested that the farmers have been overlooked in the calling of conferences in the past. Would it be humiliating to them now to ask that a conference of this kind be called? Mr. Batcheller. No; I think not. Mr. Heflin. You do not think they were overlooked in the past, do you? They were asked about the farm-loan act. That has been very beneficial to them, has it not ? Mr. Batcheller. Yes. The Chairman. I did not have reference to legislation. Mr. Batcheller. That would not restrain them from a willing- ness to ask again, the fact that they have been turned down. The Chairman. Have the farmers asked ia. the past and been turned down ? Mr. Batcheller. They asked and were turned down in the matter of equal representation with labor, in that former conference between capital and labor. The Chairman. You were denied representation ? Mr. Batcheller. Nothing came from it. Our request was ignored for proportional representation with labor. Mr. Heflin. What reply did you receive when your request was presented ? Mr. Batcheller. They said it was very proper and reasonable, and that there was no question but what the representation we de- sired would be secured. But that was the end of it. Mr. Heflin. This was a controversy between capital and labor and you wanted to get into it ? Mr. Batcheller. It was a controversy between capital and labor, and we represent both. AGRICULTURAL CONFERESTCE. 17 Mr. Heflin But you were not told you could not participate, were you ? Mr. Batcheller. No. The Chairman. You were speaking about the prevailing sentiment in the country as to the treatment that farmers received from Con- gress. I presume you had reference to this committee. I desire to say that representative farmers and representatives from farm organizations have been invited time and time again to appear before the committee. They have appeared at times, not as often as the committee would like, however. I am sure every mem- ber of the committee would be pleased to have more suggestions from farmers and farm organizations. But it is also a fact that a number of people have appeared before this coftimittee claiming to be representatives of the farmers, and upon cross-examination we have found that they advocated measures more beneficial to boards of trade and other organizations than to the farmers. There is a clear distinction between the real represen- tatives of farmers, those who represent the actual farmers, and those who, under the guise of reptesenting farmers appear before us claim- ing to represent the farmers, but who, in fact, represent somebody else. This' committee is always especially glad to welcome the real farmers and the real representatives of farmers who have suggestions to offer in the interest of farmers. ' ' Mr. Candler. There was a suggestion made recently by Senator Capper that if the farmers would tell just what they want and why they want it. Congress would give it to them. The Chairman. They have never been turned down by this com- mittee. Mr. Dickinson. That is what this proposed conference is for, to get suggestions. Mr. BATCHELLtR. I havc attended meetings and heard statements made and have seen the people who made those statements since quoted in the press, the statements appearing in the press being as far from the truth as they could possibly get, and being meant to produce a certain effect. I have had some experience in trying to get publicity through the popular press but that agency controlled by advertisers has in the main ignored us and is evidently trying to eliminate us with silence. . . All kinds of publicity can be secured for the most trivial matters, and they will use big type. But when it comes to assisting the f armei in buying and selhng there are but few papers that are willing to look from the farmers' viewpoint. But I am not going to continue on this line because you might con- sider that I am a calamity howler. I am determined, regardless of results or treatment to maintain an optimistic tone, both for my own sake as well as for others. • , ^ x Mr Candler. You are not the only ones who have a right to com- plain about the tone of the press . We see ho w we are misrepresented every day throughout the country as to the positions which we ta-k© here in the House. It is a common complaint, and it is a complaint which is justified in a great many instances. ^i.- rri. Gettinc- back to your cooperative proposition. Jet me say this: ihe Governmrat is aiding that work very materially throughout the 166763—20 2 18 AGRICULTURAL CONFERENCE. country. I know in my part of the country they give a considerable amount of attention to the question of distribution. In other words, they help the farmers by getting their products together, securing markets for them, shipping them by the carloads, getting them the best pnce that can be obtained, and naturally increasing their profits. In that way throughout many counties in the United States the Gov- ernment of the United States is aiding very materially in the dis- tribution. Mr. Batchellee. I wanted to ask this question: How is it that oui efforts, whereby we endeavor to help om-selves are so persistently opposed by commercial interests, and that these same interests are willing to finance an agency which they claim wiU do this same work for us ? Mr. TiNCHEE. Do you have county agents in yom* State ? . Mr. Batchellee. Yes; and we have some of them working with us to good advantage, even though said agency was promoted by commercial clubs and other interests and forced upon us as an emer- gency measure. I came here to Washington in January and was invited to the Eastern Shore of Maryland to introduce the Farmers' Union there. Before going a request was wired to a county agent requesting him to get the courthouse and advertise a big meeting, the nature of the meeting being carefully described. He replied: "We can not do anything for you." He said: "We have strict instructions from headquarters to have simply nothing to do with these strictly farmers' organizations." That is the reply that came across the wire. Other opposition could also be cited. Mr. McLaughlin of Nebraska. The committee has always, as far as I am able to learn, been ready to cooperate with the farmers' organizations in any way it could help. Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan. You will notice, too, that in cases where legal proceedings have been brought againgt any of these organ- izations of the producers, those proceedings have been under State laws and not under Federal laws. They have been aimed against collective bargaining whereas this committee has written into the law permission for collective bargaining so far as the Federal law can. Mr. Batchellee. Production and distribution are big subjects, but I think the more we can mix and get acquainted with each other the better understanding there wiU be and more that will be brought out. The results of this war after conditions have become settled will, I believe, be beneficial, especially if we profit by the lessons and make proper use of what we have learned. It is a big problem that we have to solve, to make our Government and our form of govern- ment a success, but the farmers of this country want to cooperate with you and take suggestions from you and guard against those things that are questionable and refuse to agitate something that is foing to be dangerous. We do resent the discrimination that has een practiced against us such as where our cooperative associations could not get cars while old line companies seemed to experience no trouble. Mr. TiNCHEE. Do you want us to turn the railroads back? Mr. Batchellee. I could only speak personally on that. Mr. TiNCHEE. Have you any suggestions ? Mr. Batchellee. Having no instructions, will say no. AGEICULTURAL CONFERENCE. 19 Mr. TiNOHER. What do you think the action of this Congress should be ? Congress has got to decide this. We have all got telegrams both ways on our tables. Some fellows say that if the roads are turned back that it will mean ruin, and another telegram from some one else says that if the roads are not turned back it will mean ruin to the farmers of the United States. You represent the farmers of the United States ? Mr. Batcheller. I am one of them but I can not say that I repre- sent them on that question, because on that we are divided; we have one faction that is strong for Government ownership and another class that is against it and want them turned back right away. It would take a vote to decide that, although I have my opinion, as I have stated. Mr. Hutchinson. Mr. E. F. Owen, representing the farmers, said that the roads should be turned back almost at once. ' Mr. Batcheller. I have addressed meetings where that sentiment was expressed. I think I have already consumed more time than I was entitled to. I appreciate the opportunity of coming before you, and it wiU do me good whether it will you or not. The ChaxemAn. You have stated that justice is not being meted out by the Government, and when you refer to the Government in this instance, I take it that you refer to Congress and this committee. I want to call your attention to the fact, as has been stated here, before this comjnittee, that we have enacted much legislation con- cerning the farmers, without their coming before this committee. We passed the repeal of the daylight-saving act, the food-contro- amendments permitting collective bargaining, the pure-food amend- ments, the cold-storage bill, and other bills, while in few instances the farmers appeared before us, although they were invited. We have a number of important bills pending before the committee — the feed bill, the fertilizer bill, the meat-packer bill, and other bills on which we would like to have the cooperation of the farmers. It would assist us materially. It seems to me that unless they appear and make suggestions when invited to do so that they should not, criticize the work that is being done by this committee and by Congress. To the contrary, they should come here or inform us of their wishes, and opinions. The farmers meet in Washington from time to time to discuss matters, but usually fail to come before this committee, although we would very much like to have them do so. We do not know they are in town imtil we see it in the press. That is the first notice, and the last, that we get. We would be very gkd to have them come before the Committee on Agriculture of the House so that we might have their views and suggestions. Mr. McLai?&hlin of Michigan. I have been a member of this com- mittee since I first came to Congress in December, 1907, and during all of that time I do not know of one member of this comrnittee, and we have had some from the large-cities, who have been in any way whatever unfriendly to the farmers' interests. And, we have always given, them very careful and very full consideration to all of these problems, and I think the other members of the committee will bear me out that no lother committee in this House ever had a better standing before the House and before Congress than this Committee on Agriculture. ' It is considered an honor to be a member of this 20 AGRICITLTUEAL CONFEBENCE. committee, and so far as we know we take good care of legislation pf any character relating to the benefit of the farmer. Although there is sometimes some difficulty where a suggestion is made of legislation to this or any other committee, and a difficulty where legislation is solely in the interest of one class. I do not tmnk it is the duty of any committee to give attention to any one class to the detriment of others; but if any of the people out in your country have any idea that this committee has ever been unfriendly in any respect whatever to the interests of agriculture," I hope you will do your part to remove that impression. Mr. Young. I want to say just a word Mr. Batchellok (interposing). Could I have just one or two min- utes before — — Mr. Young (interposing). Just a moment. Let me make this sug- gestion: Until a few years back our banking laws, as everybody recognized, were not what they ought to be. Credits were controlled largely by the financial centers. So we changed our banking system a few years ago and passed what is known as the Federal reserve act. I represent an agricultural constituency, and I understand their condition, and I can speak for them just as you can for those whom you represent. The average farmer had not paid any attention to the banking laws. He takes things as a matter of course, as the average merchant who had paid no attention, and the average, busi- ness man had paid no attention to the banking laws; but when we made a completely new banking system under the Federal reserve bank act, we said that there were to be 12 centers of power. In other words, 12 Federal reserve banks, and that these should be located according to the geography of the country. It was a very wise pro- vision that was written into the law. That was for the purpose of having banking institutions that would take care of agricultural interests. For instance, you represent an agricultural section. You have got a bank out there. I represent an agricultural section, and they also have a bank down in my section. In framing this Federal reserve bank act they agreed that there should be a bank to take caxe of your section, and also one down in my section to take care of the agricultural interests there, as well as other interests, and so on that theory the country was divided into 12 sections. Now, in that act we specifically provided for the recognition of agriculture by saying that prime agricultural paper would be entitled to the rediscount privilege in the Federal reserve banks. Now, whether your farmers know it or not, that one act relieved the strangle hold that the great banking system under the old laws had on all of the rest of the country. Now, that takes care of agri- culture, and I say that as a man that represents an agricultural dis- trict and is interested personally in agriculture. So when you go back to your country call that to the attention of the farmers. Now, I think in your coimtry, as in mine, the tenant class has grown v.ery fast. One reason for it was that when a young man who was raised on the farm became a man his father had a little farm. This boy started out, got married, and he wanted to farm, so he had to become a tenant. If he imdertook to borrow money in order to own his farm, he had to borrow it from these great life insurance com- panies and great farm-loan organizations, and he had to at that time pay from 12 to 15 per cent interest. When he got his loan, it was AGRICULTURAL CONFERENCE. 21 for not to exceed five jears, so that if he had a crop failure, as you said you had a crop failure last year, and he could not meet his pay- ment, his farm was sold imder foreclosure proceedings. That has probably happened in your part of the country many times, as it has happened in my part of tne country mahy times. And another thing, Congress enacted the farm loan bank act, by which a young man, or any man who has got any ambition at all can now buy and own a farm, at a low rate of interest, 5i per cent, and he has 40 years' time in which to pay back that money. The 5i per cent not only pays the interest, but it pays the principal, so that any man now can own a farm of his own. That Was passed in the interest of agriculture and in order to get the people back on the farm. Those are two very important acts, and when your people complain that Congress has not done anything, I think you forget those things and you should recall those fundamental and important laws that nave been enacted, mostly for the benefit of agriculture. I think this as I am from an agricultural district. Now, there is another thing that I want to say in passing. In speak- ing of agriculture, I do not want the farmers to ever get to a point where they are going to come here and ask for class legislation. That is a problem that is confronting us and is confronting us when we have classes seeking for special recognition as we have now when we have a certain class of people coming here seeking class legislation and saying, "If you do not give it to us, if you do not meet our demands, we are going to beat you at home." The farmer is the last man in the world to adopt that kind of procedure, because he can not organize as other classes can organize and he must stand back as the great bulwark and say that he does not ask for special privileges, but ask that everybody be treated, in a governmental way, in a fair way and not recognized as a class, as demands are being made to-day. The Chairman. Blow many witnesses have you ? Mr. Dickinson. Mr. Loomis is here and I would like to make a statement before the committee, but I do not want to take up too much time. Mr. Gandy. Will you please note in the record that Congressman Gandy of South Dakota was present but had to attend a meeting of the Committee on the Public Land. Mr. Batcheller. There are just two or three things I would like to say. This gentleman has criticized us for not coming before the comttiittee and presenting our case, and this gentleman for coming up and trying to get class legislation. Now, my idea is that we have simply been ignoring this office, or this committee and the agricul- tural department, generally feeling that increased production was its only consideration. Mr. Young. I was not criticizing the farmers for attempting to get class legislation, because they have not done so, as far as I know. I said I hoped we would never reach a position where the farmers would want class legislation. Mr. Batcheller. The meat-packers case is coming on, this inves- tigation. There is something that is of vital importance to the farmers. Now, all farmers that bought stock to feed did so with the thought in mind that live stock was going to stay up if other commodi- ties and finished products did. We consider that the treatment we 22 AGKICXILTUEAL CONITBEENCE. got from the packer trust is indefensible. If it can be justified, a conference is due them. There is another naatter which I would like this committee to clear up, since I find it not only friendly but endeavoring to serve us in absolute fairness. We have been pretty generally informed that our Department of Agriculture was closely linked to and being used as a tool by one of the greatest trusts in the country, and we nave even been informed that money from that great interest has been used through the Agricultural Department in order that they might camouflage their movements throughout the Nation. Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan. A few years ago they did receive a large amount of money from the Kockefeller fimd, but it was written into the law that they should not receive anything from them any longer, and I took a part in having that put into the law and know what I am talking about. Mr. Batchellee. I remember that it was taken but, but at the same time we understood that the Secretary was very antagonistic to its removal. Now, another matter. We have been under the impression that the department under Mr. Houston, after looking into the matter of cost of production on the farm, refused to make public those findings since they would advance rather than lower prices, and that Mr. Houston stated that the farmer has no business to know what his cost of production is ; that his business is to produce and to produce more. Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan. Your mind ought to be relieved of that thought, because the Department of Agriculture itself has rec- ommended that large sums be appropriated for the purpose of inves- tigating the cost of production. So you are misinformed as to the facts. Mr. RuBEY. They asked this year for $600,000 to investigate the cost of production. Mr. Batchellee. Then we were informed after the investigation was made the cost was found to be higher than was believed, than was to the benefit of the consumer, and that they ordered it sup- pressed. The Chaieman. Let us get this cleared up. The department did not estimate for the work, but Congress made an appropriation. The next year the department did estimate for an appropriation. This year it is asking an appropriation for ascertaining the cost of pro- duction. Let us get that into the record, particularly since you raise the point. It did not ask for appropriation then, but it is now asking for appropriations. Mr. McLaughlin of Mich^an. And another thing, you want to learn to distinguish between flie Department of Agriculture and the Agricultural Committees of the House and Senate. Mr. RxjBEY. And you want to make a distinction between the things you hear and the actual truth, because you- can not depend on the things you hear. You have said yourself that you can not get the newspapers of the country to fairly represent farmers' interests. In the same way we and the Department of Agriculture can not get fair representation throughout the press of the country, and we have got the same complaint you have got about what your organization is doing. AGRICULTURAL CONFERENCE. 2'3 Mr. Batcheller. Then this bill, if this country does not have the simreme power to dominate any factor within it, this Government is inefficient; this Government is not controlling itself or the whole of itself if it is the tool of some great financial agency, and is simply under some great financial domination. Mr. RuBEY. Well, the Government of the United States can not, unfortunately — ^I do not know how you are going to go about it. Congress, the House, and the country in general is under the domina- tion of a certain particular organization of the press of the country and they are dependent upon that organization for what goes out over the country. The Associated Press absolutely controls the news of this country, and I do not see how, I do not know how we are going about getting around it or how it could be done, but they absolutely dominate the news of the country and send out what they want to see go out. Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan. I do not believe that we are under the domination of any big financial agency here; in this committee, composed of 22 men, we represent Congress, and there is absolutely no domination of that kind upon us. I know there is not any domi- nation over Congress or upon the Government. Conditions sometimes are such that the facts are stated or may be twisted so as to make it appear that something had been done at the dictation or in the interest of these financial institutions, these large financial concerns. You were speaking of your cost of production. Your idea was that that investigation was stopped because prices were found to be so high that the discontinuance of the investigation would be agreeable to the financial interests. Mr. Batcheller. Yes. . Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan. There is nothing of the kind what- ever, and just as far as the Department of Agriculture can carry on a plan to ascertain the real cost of production, this committee will recommend, and its recommendation will be considered, too, by Congress, any reasonable appropriation for carrying on that kind ot work regardless of what the effect will be upon anybody. Mr. Batcheller. Dr. Spillman Mr. McLaughlin of Michigan (interposing). I know he got into an argument and issued some kind of a statement. Mr. Jacoway. Have you ever read a bill that has come out of this committee — been reported to the House ? Mr. Batcheller. I will say that I have not, and I will further call attention to the stateinont I made at the opening of this hearing, that I, through the years past, have not been looking to our national Gov- ernment for help, and therefore have taken little interest in the pro- ceedings here as regards agriculture. Mr. Jacoway. Have you ever read any of the hearings on bills before this conunittee ? Mr. Batcheller. I have not. Mr. Jacoway. The reason I ask those two questions is this: If you will read one of the bills and read the hearings and you could suggest to the committee anything that the Department of Agriculture could do and is not doing to help the farmers and the men who are pro- ducing they would appreciate it. Mr.- Batcheller. Could I suggest something they are not doing ? Mr. Jacoway. Yes. 24 . AGRICULTURAL CONFEEENCE. Mr. Batcheller. There are some suggestions. One would be to correct some of the abuses of the press as to market reports. Mr. TiNOHER. You are an editor of a paper? Mr. Batcheller. Yes, sir. Mr. TiNOHER. What kind of a law would you want passed about your paper; you are an editor; what kind of Government dommation would you want? . . ,. Mr. Batcheller. We would not want any. Ours is simply a little trade union sheet going to our members. We are trymg to benefit ourselves through cooperation. . Mr. TiNCHER. Well, you are entitled to your private rights. Ihat is what we do here, we just go ahead and pay no attention at all to what is said from that standpoint. Mr. Heflin. I think a good deal can come from this. The farmer is not understood by the public. The problem that has to be solved is a problem of labor, cost of production, and other difficulties, and getting at this niatter of the handicaps and hindrances, the farmer as got no way of getting his side of the problem to the public through the press. I think a good deal of- what has been said, I know a good deal of it is true with reference to Congress. Let anything happen that affects the prices injuriously, and the bears will throw up big headlines on all of the papers throughout the country, and let something happen that boosts the price and they will not say a word about it through the associated press. I know .that myself. I think a great deal of good cfn come out of this conference. The Chairman. You said you were a farmer in South Dakota and that you had over a hundred acres in wheat. Mr. Batcheller. I had 200 acres in small grain, over 150 acr^s of wheat and about 50 acres of rye. The Chairman. You said you had mUls — or that your society had mills. Mr. Batcheller. Yes. There are two mills owned by local Farmers Union organizations in South Dakota. They are both small, one grinding 25 barrels of flour daily and the other, probably twice that size. The Chairman. Were you before the Senate Committee yesterday ? Mr. Batcheller. No, sir; I have never been before any committee of this kind before. The Chairman. Did you read any of the testimony ? Mr. Batcheller. I- did not. The Chairman. You know that the Goveminent passed the wheat guarantee act. Did it benefit the farmers of your State ? Mr. Batcheller. It is not generally so considered. The Chairman. Have you or the farmers not benefited by it ? Mr. Batcheller. I think not. I know of no benefit coming from it. Our part of the country suffered a terrible loss in wheat. Mr. Hutchinson. Don't you know that if the guarantee of the Government is repealed, if the Gronna bill is passed that the price will come down just as it has already come down about 50 cents a bushel. Plave you any ideas with regard to that ? Mr. Batcheller. Probably a juggling of the market to make the farmers release the little they hold. I was on a committee to draw up a resolution on that matter at a recent farmer conference and the AGRICULTURAL CONFEREBTCE. 25 consensus of opinion seemed to be that owing to the shortness of time up to the close of the guaranteed period and the very few benefits possible from its immediate repeal, it was better to leave it alone, but personally I should say I would just as soon see it go, I can't conceive that it has ever been a source of benefit. You asked me if I were present at the hearings yesterday. I mis- understood you. I was present. I did attend that hearing on the Gronna bill and I heard those discussions. I beg your pardon. Mr. Hutchinson. So you have heard that the farmers were holding their wheat for higher prices and also that the banks are taking the wheat as collateral Mr. Batoheller. The only place where that is true that I know of is in Kansas where they have not been able to get cars and where they have been forced to hold it. It was not because they wanted to hold for higher prices but because they were not able to get cars. Mr. Hutchinson. Are they not holding it for higher prices ? Mr. Batcheller. No. Mr. Hutchinson. That is aU. Mr. Rainey. r think you have been laboring under a misapprehen- sion, and that you have not been able to obtain the correct informa- tion as far as the Government is concerned, and that you have a wrong impression relative to the attitude of the Government and the members here of this committee. The members of this committee have suggested to you that at any time the farmers are interested in legislation they are forceful enough in the House and Senate to obtain a two-thirds vote to carry those things that are of benefit to the farmers, and I think that your organization ought to be a sub- scriber to the Congressional Record and that you ought to follow the procedure here in Congress. If you do that you would not be misin- formed in these things and I think you would change your attitude, and that your organizations would change their attitude toward the representatives here of the Federal Government. The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Batcheller. STATEMENT BY MR. A. M. LOOMIS, SECRETARY TO PROF. T. C. ATKESON, WASHINGTOIT, D. C. The Chairman. Kindly give your full name, address, and occupa- tion. . Mr. LooMis. A. M. Loomis, secretary to Prof. T. C. Atkeson, Washington, D. C, representative of the National Grange, 307 Seventh Street. I just came up here at Prof. Atkeson's suggestion, because he could not come, and because I know he is interested in this particular matter, and to say that if there is any chance for him to be heard on this he would be very glad to be heard in favor of this resolution. Now, there are two other matters that have come to my attention since the hearings started and I will just take a moment to speak of them. The suggestion has been made that these farmers read^the Congressional Record. There has been a suggestion that I have seen lately that the Congressional Record should contain the reports of the committee hearings. In merely readirg the Corgressional Record one does not find what is required in this particular matter and if there was any chance, or any chance of an approval so that 26 AGBICXTLTTTBAL CONFERENCE, all organizations would have some method whereby they could obtain the reports of Congressional hearings, I would like to put that into the record here. The Chairman. I might state that we have been sending out copies of all of the hearings as far as they are available, but our supply is limited. Mr. LooMis. I appreciate that perfectly, Mr. Chairman. I try to read every hearing of this conmiittee. The Chaieman. The conmiittee has distributed them as soon as they are printed. Your organization is getting a copy of them. Mr. LooMis (interposing). I see to it that we get a copy. Mr. Rainey. The gentleman that preceded you did not know that the farmers had so many friends in the House. He was of the opinion that the membership of the House and the Senate were against the farmers. Mr. LooMis. I can say from my years of experience down here and particularly my experience in. the daylight savings matter, they have many friends. The other suggestion I wanted to make was with reference to this particular conference which is provided for in this resolution now before you. My chief was a member of the industrial congress by appointment of the President, and he realizes, I am sure, perhaps as much as any of you — as much as the members of this com- mittee — the necessity of the consideration of all of these fundamental underlying agricultural conditions in any industrial conference. The public is very much misinformed as has been suggested here many times. So far as the conference with farmers represented being able to make a definite move to accomplish a dfinite result, it is a large question in our mind, but so far as public information may be had and so far as the farmers and the public are concerned 1 think it is a very important thing to do and I am sure that would be the position which Prof. Atkeson will take when he discusses it. I know as a newspaper man, with 25 years' experience, that is my position on it and that is the reason that I would like to see the conference myself. Mr. Hutchinson. Do you think we could get any better results with another conference than we did from that one ? Mr. LooMis. By results you mean definite governmental action ? Mr. Hutchinson. Yes. Mr. LooMis. No; I do not. I do not think this matter can be solved by the Government alone. It is a matter of public education, and that is the only result I believe could accomplish it. Mr. Hutchinson. You said your chief; who do you represent? Mr. LooMis. Prof. Atkeson, of the National Grange. The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Loomis. STATEMENT BY HON. HAYS B. WHITE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KANSAS. Mr. Dickinson. Would you care to make a few remarks, Mr White ? ' The Chairman. The committee will be glad to hear you Mr White. ' Mr. White. Yes; I can talk to the committee for five minutes m a general way. I will be glad to do so if Mr. Dickinson desires. AGRICULTURAL CONFEEElirCB. 27 Mi-. Dickinson. Go ahead, and I will follow. I desire to say a few ■words to the. committee ; talk for a few minutes. Mr. White. Mr. Chairman, I think the suggestion made in the public meeting of the Federation of Farm Boards that was held here last night by the incoming Secretary of Agriculture was very pertinent. I merely state the substance of what he said. Some one suggested that he get 20 farmers together to discuss the situation — the farmers' condition. He said, no; but if they would get 20 business men, commercial men, he would match them with 20 farmers and let them talk it over. Now, as to this conference, I think it might result in bringing out. more concrete information on the subject of farm production and marketing of farm products, but I agree with the statement of the fentlemen preceding me that these great questions can not be solved y legislation alone. I will state, gentlemen, that I am a farmer and have been a farmer all of my life. I have never done anything else in my life but farm and run for things. But as to the farm, I nave been a farmer all of my life. I was born on a farm and I was raised on a farm and went to Kansas when I was a young man, or thought I was a young man,. 19 years old, with my wife, and we lived in a dugout and we farmed, and I can not look, Mr. Chairman, on the gloomy side of the picture. I am not built that way. I think the farmers, on an average, in the Middle West, are probably as prosperous and contented a people as any equal number of persons in the United States in any other line of business. I know all about the precarious conditions of farming. I am not going to talk for a very long time because I know this committee is pressed for time and I think I can finish in 10 minutes. I have no dreams; I have no chimeras; I am intensely practical. I would not destroy any agency until I thought I had a better one. I know how painful and slow progress is and has been. I have been a deep student of all of these things all of my life and I have had practical experience. I think, gentlemen, that the one problem that challenges the investigation and study of the American people,. the consumer and also the producer, is the question of distribution. Now, as to production, I think the Agricultural Department has done a^reat thing for the farmers in the issuance of those bulletins. The Secretary brought that out last night. I know the demand there is for them; I send them out by the thousands to my people. The farm departments of our newspapers and especially our farm agents are contributing to the improvement and the advancement of our agriculture. I think, however, gentlemen, that in the war against the high cost of living that the farmer got the worst of it. In the troublous times of the reign of James II of England when the people were quarreling about their religion— I do not know how much they had— there was rioting, and at one of these riots a man threw an overripe egg at the archbishop, but it missed him and hit a peer ot the realm. The offender was very profuse in his apologies. He said, ' ' Your lordship, I am very sorry that I hit you ; the egg was intended for the archbishop." "Well," said the lord, ''I am very sorry that you did not aim it at me and hit the archbishop.' Now, the high cost of living fight has been directed against the profiteer, but it seems to have hit the farmer. I think it would have been better for 28 AGRICULTURAL CONFERENCE. US farmers if it had been directed against the farmer and had hit the profiteer. I claim this, that the stabilization of production on the farm, so far as raising stock is concerned is more efficiently done to-day than it ever can be done by the Government of the United States. I do not know whether my brother here, Tincher, who is a farmer, would agree with that, but I'U take the responsibility for my statement. Now, when we send our cattle to market we have there men, the very best-trained men it is possible to obtain, on both sides of the fence. You have the seller, and he is an expert in the business, he has had years of training. Usually he is a man who has been in the live-stock business in the country. And the packer employs the best men he can get, and those two fellows get together and one sells as high as he can and the other buys as cheap as he can; does he not ? Now, gentlemen, that has been going on through all of the ages. I tell you that the farmer is a shrewd man in a business way and knows the quality and value of his products. I have had a theory as to business all of my life, and I have not been able to work up to it successfully. I have always tried to buy as cheaply as possible and sell as dear as possible, but the other fellow has got the same idea I have. Therefore, there is a maxim in business that the greatest profit is the most exact justice. The average farmer is a good judge of stock and the average buyer is a good judge of stock. I am convinced, gentlemen, that this Government of the United States is not as capable as an organization to do business as the packers or the farmers in the nation. They know more about their business than the Government does; they are more competent, they are more capable, and they have had practical experience. Now, we learn by experience. We try to advance, and I want to say here that I thiak probably if this conference coxild be called, and if the farmers, manufacturers, commercial men coidd get together and discuss the subject it would bring out a good deal of information which I thiak would be of great benefit to all. In my opinion, the most diSicult problem is distribution. I do not beheve that this conference can solve it entirely. I do not know whether they intend to try. Now, I have not prospered at farming as I should have liked to. I think I ought to be vforth a miQion. f am not worth that, but I am just comfortable. Mr. TiNCHEE. Now, don't you think if you as a seller of live stock had had as much to do with the fixing of the price of cattle as the packers have when you ship cattle to them at Chjcago, if you had as much to do with the price as the packers do, don't you think you would be worth a little bit more ? Mr. White. Yes; I think cattle might be worth a dollar a pound now. I have always sold as high as I could and I have no remorse of conscience about it. Mr. Eainey. May I ask you a question. Is it your belief that the packers in Chicago can estabhsh or fix the sale price of cattle, set a certain price and really make the market ? Mi-. White. Yes ; to a great extent. The report of the Federal Trade Commission was that they were not able to discover any con- tract organization: but the statement is, in effect, that they had ah understanding and did control prices. AGBICULTUEAL CONFEEENCE. 20 - Mr. Rainey Does not the report of the Federal Trade Commission set out live different ways ? Mr. White. They do. Mr. Rainey. I am very much interested in this discussion, because I come from Chicago, and you are about the only witness I have heard make any suggestions. The other witnesses who have come here seem to be absolutely prejudiced and biased. Mr. 'V^iTE. I would like for you to read a speech of mine delivered in the House on the cold-storage bill, which sets forth my views more clearly, wheiein I stated what I believed to be the situation and I would like to have you read that. ' Mr. Rainey. I would be very glad to have it. The Chairman. If this conference is to be held, what should be its coinposition?. Mr. White. I do not kn^w. I have not thought about that. I have no suggestions to make. I would Ilk like to discuss, Mr. Chairman, this proposition a little further. Here is what I really regard as a situation that is more detrimental to the live-stock man than anything else. He sells his product at the end of the road. He takes them to a market where he must sell them at the price he can get. Now, he has a competent man and he pays him, and he pays him too much for the work that he does. They have an organization — that is, the live-stock ex- change — which is organized for the. discouragement of hospitality and for the accumulation of dividends. I speak advisedly, because if one of those fellows takes a customer to dinner he is liable to a fine of $50. Now, if the farmer, Mr. Chairman, could sell his cattle at the corral— of course, they can; but the buyers have been burned so many times that they do not care to buy any more that way and there is scarcely any market of that kind — that would equalize the situation to some extent if that could be done. Now, practically every man ships his own stuff to the market. When he starts to market on Monday morning after a good market on Friday, and on Tuesday or Wednesday when he gets to market there is a run of 40,000 cattle in Chicago, and they put those cattle djwn 50 cents. Now, the packers do that arbitrarily. They put those cattle down $5 a head, and it means $200,000 in a single day. Now, when a man starts to market with his stuff he starts on a market that will make him $4 a head, and when he reaches the market he finds a market that means a loss to him. This is not a square deal for the stockman. I do not know how you can fix that by fixing a standardization of those products at the first point of concentration. I have no faith in that. Now, gentlemen, I am a member of the Farmers' Union and I am not going to discuss that question. We have tried to do a little co- operative business. We are laboring under many difficulties. I want to call your attention to one of the things that I regard as one of our evils of the economic system of this country. Here in Washington there are eight or ten hundred purveyers of meat in this city. Well, they are selling meat within 50 steps of where they buy it from the packers at from 20 to 30 cents a pound more than thev pay for it. I will let that go in the record. We do not understand that that is a 30 AGEICUIiTTJEAIi OONrEEEKrCE. fair deal either for the producer or- the oonsTiiner. If the consumer could buy his meat at 10 cents a pound cheaper, the producer would sell more and there would be a bigger demand. The people of this country probably could eat a little' more meat without injury to their health. Now, I think there might be some way, of com-se, out of that, but I believe it is through organization. I do not believe it will be through legislation. Ml". Rainey. Isn't it a fact that the distributers, the local butchers, get such high prices for their product that if the packers? profits were eliminated that tTie consumer could hardly notice it. The local butcher, as you have just now suggested, is selling his meat for 20 or 30 cents more a pound than he pays the packers for it. Mr. White. Do not attempt to get me on the side of the packers. I am against them for two reasons, which I will not state. Mr. Rainey. I do not want to get you on the side of the packers. Mr. White. I have stated my position. I am going to make this statement for the record. If a system of distribution could be worked out and put into operation that was anything like as efficient as the packers have developed in the manufacture of meat products, and the sale to the jobbers or retailers, that system would be denoimced inside of a week by thousands of its competitors as a monopoly. The packer claims he makes less than a cent a pound on his meat net profit. He makes this statement. Mr. TiNCHER. Where did you.see that statement ? Mr. White. I saw that in Mr. Armour's annual statement that is on your desk and on mine. Mr. TiNCHER. Isn't it in every newspaper in the country every week? _ Mr. White. Yes. The packers should be required to obey the law. ' They can not misstate the facts of the case to the Government of the United States and they understand it clearly; but they are entitled to their day in court. A gentleman said to me last night, "I was in favor of taking the grocery business out of their hands, and" he said, "I believe we have made a mistake." But the packers have come up and said that they are going to obey the law; that they are going to comply with the order of the Department of Justice. Now gentlemen, I want to make another statement, if the profit of the packers on dressed beef was divided among the American people It would be so small that you would not know it. It would not amount to a great deal. Swift paid a dividend of 8 per cent and thev paid -^ Mr. Tincher. On what ? Mr. White. On their invested capital. On this Mr. Tincher (interposing). They paid a dividend on their mvest- ment, but you Mr. White (interposing). On theh- surplus and capital stock Mr. IINCHER. On their surplus and capital stdck. That might make a big difference. ^ Mr. White. It certainly would. Mr. Tincher. You are talking about something I am very much interested m. Do you know what dividends they paid on their msurance stock? You know they conduct theu- own insurance com- panies. Do you know what dividends they have paid on their AGEICtTLTUKAl, CONFEEENCE. 31. various companies; do you know whether that was a dividend just on Chicago, or on their different organizations « Mr White. I think the statement is plain. I have not read it carefully. The Chairman. Do you know Morris & Co. paid 263 per cent on the $3,000,000 capital stock outstanding for the fiscal year ending November 1, 1917? ^ Mr. White^_ No, sir ; I did not. They are probably guilty of all the crimes and injustices with which they have been charged, and should be prosecuted in every instance, but I desire to discuss distribution. I feel that we should have a system of distribution just as efficient as. the packers have. I do not know how we can get it or whether the idea suggested in this bill here will help. I know that these organizations are being operated in the city of New York and in the city of London with very fair success. Mr. Candler. They have got community buying here in this city. Mr. White. Again as to the packers, t want it understood that I am merely takmg then- statements made for the record, their own statements. ' Mr. Rainey. Well, they are subject to governmental investigation and they have submitted statements.- Mr. TiNCHEE. The Government investigation; they should be prosecuted. They are using the profit to work hardship on the pro- ducers and on the consumers. They have done more harm than any organization in the United States and they are doing so right now. Mr. White. Well then they should be prosecuted, and I see no reason why they should not be. Mr. Rainey. Th«y have been, but every time they have been prosecuted they have not been able to prove the wild-eyed assertions such as Mr. Tincher has just made. Mr. TiNCHER. Whether or not they have been prosecuted, I do not know. I know that they have been able to agree with the Depart- ment of Justice to what they call a journal entry of a judgment," which amounted to an admission of their guiltiness with which the Federal Trade Commission has charged them. That is the reason that the committee proposes to take testimony, with a view, I under- stand, of enacting legislation to stop that kind of thing. Mr. White. They ought to be made amenable to the law; but here is the proposition: I do not think that we ought to overthrow or destroy an organization that has been built up through 50 years of time, unless we are certain that in so doing we could substitute some- thing better in its place. We can control and supervise these things by law, absolutely; but should we lay aside this packing industry, which is one of the most efficient organizations in the world to-day, for some untried experiment? They have established their lousiness all over the country. If it has been brought out in testimony that they have abused their privilege — that is one of the very fine results of this publicity that we have had during the last year or two. Mr. Tincher. Now, it was brought out, according to my under- standing, that they have surely eliminated competition wherever they determined to do so. I do not like to interrupt you, but I have been reading this testimony off and on all sununer and I do not want to be put in the attitude of indorsing that kind of a statement. Mr. Rainey. I think it would be more just to say, Mr. Tincher, that they have been able to eliminate competition wherever competition 32 4GKIC!ULTUEAIi CONFERENCE. was not as efficient as they have been. Now, the facts are that they have not been able to eliminate a great number of independent con- cerns and small concerns. Do you think the Government, by Gov- ernment ownership or through a system of licensing by the Govern- ment, could conduct these packing houses as efficiently as these pri- vate owners ? Mr. White. I have made my statement. I am not in favor of Government ownership of the packing houses. I have stated that I do not believe that the Government can conduct the packing business as efficiently as it has been conducted. I do not believe that the Government, from the precedents established and from the examples that we have had is an economical business agency. The less Gov- ernment ownership we have the better. I am in favor of returning the railroads to their owners. There is one more proposition that I want to lay down. T am a practical farmer and have been, as I have said, all of my life. There is one feature of this situation that a great many persons lose sight of or never have had called to their attention, and that is this: That one of the great propositions that confronts the resident of the city is his daily bread or sustenance. That is a proposition about which the farmer thinks very little from the beginning of his career to the end. He takes little account of it. He lives very largely from the products of his own farm, and that which costs the dweller in the citj^ the city resident, a large part of his income from day to day, the farmer takes little accoimt -of. It does not enter largely into has bookkeeping. It is not very important with him, but it helps the farmer to keep down his expenses, and it does not worry his mind at all. Now, I am speaking from experience. I have lived on the farm practically all of my me, and this is a great question, a great social question, and a great economic question, and I think there have been other influences that have operated to influence prices in the past. I think that there has been an overproduction of agricultural prod- ucts in the past. It was the natural business of the people of this country and it was overdone. And now the trend toward the city, of course, has as manufactures have developed and as they have cre- ated a demand for labor in the city has lessened the farm population. The introduction oi farm machinery makes it possible for a less num- ber of persons to carry on the farm work. As I said in the beginning, the war-against high prices was directed at the profiteer but hit the farmer. Our live stock alone has declined in value in an amount in excess of two and one-half billions of dollars during the last six months, while almost everything the farmer buys has advanced in price, and the farmer feels that this situation is greatly to his disadvantage. The Chairman. We are very grateful to you, Mr. White, We will hear Mr. Dickinson next. STATEMENT BY HON. I. J. DICKINSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IOWA. , Mr. Dickinson. Now, Mr. Chairman, as to the necessity and the reasons for the calling of this conference I would like to make a brief statement. The first is that there is an impressipn among the agricultural people of this country that they are not getting as much AGRICULTURAL, CONFERENCE. 33 attention as they ought to get at the hands of our Government and the legislative end of our Government. Now, we are doing everything possible for the Agricultural Depart- ment; there is no question but what they are doing wonderful things for them; but we fmd there are other things outside of the mere increase of crop production that they are interested in. That has given rise, I think, to a great many organizations and a great many impressions, some of which have been expressed here before this committee to-day. Now, if the impression expressed here to-day is out ^nerally, some remedy should be provided. I want to say here in behalf of Brother Batcheller, that he is a man I have known for a great many years. He moved to Dakota soon after he gradu- ated from college, and I have not seen him since 1897, after he took his degree m college, until I met him last night, and I had a talk with him and told him I would like for him to come before this com- mittee and express to this committee the idea that was prevalent in South Dakota, which is one of the agricultural States of this Union. Now, if this impression is prevalent, would not a conference of this kind called by the President, or called by the Secretary of Agriculture, or, if you want, called by the Secretary of Agriculture in conjunction with the governors of the States or by whomever you desire to call it, but call it so it will be truly representative of the actual farming interests, be a good thing ? That is what I suggest in this conference and I want them to sit down at a table and talk with representatives from the packing district in Chicago, and from the milling interests at Minneapolis and St. Paul, and from the milling interests at Kansas City, and the packing interests there, and see if there can not at least be friendly negotiations started tending to solve the present estrange- ment. You will find here on this committee representatives of different districts of different States, that there is not a mutual agreement and understanding. They do not believe that there is a harmonious, equit9,ble working relation. Now, if it is known that this thing exists, why should not we make an effort to at least assure the farming element of this country that this Government is looking toward their interests by asking the representatives of- 55,000,000 of the people in this country be called here in conference, and that their interests will be considered and protected, if possible. Now, you say why don't the Farmers' Union, and the friends of these different farm organizations, do this very thing that is suggested here. I will answer that very briefly. They are working from their own point of view, and their own point of view only is considered. They come here and hold their conferences but do not come up here and visit, or appear before your committee. Mr. Batcheller says he has been here four times and after an acquaintance in school of four or five years, I did not see him until I happened to run into him. He was attending a meeting down here and I happened to acci- dentally meet him. Now, we want a better understanding all along the line and if we do not get it, I believe that we are going to have some unrest that will work against agricultural production. Now, let us go as far as we can to get these impressions removed. I do not want to see only the farmers here; I want to see the meat men here; I want to see the millers here; and I want to see the oatmeal men here. I think that it is a fact that they do not quite understand each other. 166763—20 3 34 AGRKUJLTURAl. (!ONFERENC«. Mr. Jacoway. What do you think of getting business men, manu- facturers and others here to meet with them ? Mr. Dickinson. I have that in mind also, to invite the manufac- turers of food products. That means every business man whether he is a cereal man, or whatever he may be. Now, you say, ' ' Well, the thing isn't going to amount to anything." I want to tell you that I don't believe this committee ever meets but what every member, every man in this committee, goes away from the meeting of this committee with some new suggestion that he did not know of before he came to the meeting. If you do not get benefits out of the meetings, your meetings are not worth while. Now, if we establish machinery for this conference, I think the conference will do the very same thing that these committee meetings do. I think that Mr. Tincher is fairer here, because he serves on this committee with Mr. Kainey and they represent two different interests, which they have just been discussing, one representing the meat-packing district and the other the farmer. J think that Mr. Rainey is fairer by serving on the committee with Mr. Tincher for the very same reason. Now, if this conference is called, if these representatives could come together, would there not be some benefits gained by the farming interests of this country ? I want to discuss that just a minute. We raise a lot of sugar beets out in our country, and the sugar men will come the 1st of February and say to the farmer that he will give him $10 a ton at the depot in Algona on the 1st day of October or harvest time for his beets. That man, the producer of sugar beets, knows that he is going to get SIO a ton and he can fight against the elements for the purpose of raising beets at that price and he is wilUng to take the risk and he goes into the game. Do you know whether the Quaker Oats people ever contract ahead to pay for their oats, six months ahead? They do not. They pay what the oat market demands that they must pay at the time that they want to buy the oats. Js there any reason why there should not be a parallel between the buyer of oats and sugar beets,, and does not the Quaker Oats people know what they are going to sell their little package of oats for, about a certain amount? You have been buying them two packages for a quarter, now 15 cents straight, for years. And, is not the same thing true in the packing industry ? Are they not able, and should they not make an estimate as to what they can give the producers, so as to be able to give them some ideas as to what they can pay for a hog when you have raised it and fed it for eight or nine months on your farm? Js there not some means by which we can get at this subject, and isn't the suggestion worth trying ? Why, you have labor and capital and you do not think any thing of this Government calling a conference down here where there are only 4,000,000 laboring men involved in the whole business; and we do not think anything of calling that here and going over before the Appropriations Committee and askmg for a deficiency appropriation of^$25,000 to pay the expenses of the conference. If that is worth while with regard to labor isn't it worth while with regard to farmers ? If we can do that for 4,000,000 men, can we not try it out for the benefit of 50,000,000 ? They are dissatisfied as shown by the results of information recently sent out by the Government showing the AGKICXJLTTJRAL CONFERENCE. 35 unrest among the farming element. The question is asked what can be done m this conference? The resolution itself provides for that: Whereas in order to increase said food production, it is necessary that a working understanding openly arrived at, must be reached between thl food proTuceTs^ the labor employed in the production of food, the food manufacturer^ The food dealer, and the food consumer: Therefore be it i-"^ luuu Resolved That the President of the United States is hereby requested to call a con- ference, at such time as he may deem advisable, to be attended by delegates repre- senting agncultuial labor and capital, which shall include all cereal producers stock raisers, including producers of wool cotton raisers, and so forth, representatives interested in the manufacturing of food products, representatives of all dealers in food products, and representatives of the consuming public. That says that it is necessary that a working understanding be arrived at. Well, now you say that they can not do anything. I want to say that if the agricultural interests and the milling interests, and the meat producers, and the cereal producers, and the other food pro- ducers all get together, that they will work out a poUcy that will satisfy a lot of people in this country that they are not being imposed on by the other fellow and that is what we want. Mr. TiNCHER. I want to ask if you have ever thought about the proposition in the resolution which you have just read — now, I have no objection to the conference in the world — I wonder if you have ever thought about the seriousness of permitting one who considers agriculture in the United States of a secondary importance to select the reraesentatives for agriculture. Mr. Dickinson. I wish to say to you that if I were introducing the resolution I would not introduce it in the form that I had intro- duced it. I would say that the Secretary of Agriculture should call this conference in conjunction with the governors of the States. My reason for stating it that way is this : At the time this resolution was introduced I did not think that the then Secretary of Agriculture stood well with the agricultural organizations of this country. I did not think that they would be satisfied with his calling of the confer- ence. Mr. TiNCHER. At that time, I do not think that the President had gone on record as considering agriculture as of secondary importance ? Mr. Dickinson. He had not. Mr. Candler. Has he done that ? Mr. TiNCHER. He so expressed himself in the veto of the daylight- saving bUl. Mr. Candler. I do not think that that is just to the President. Mr. TiNCHER. That is what he said in his veto measure. Mr. Candler. I do not think that is just. . That was just one little line. I do not think it is fair to the President to say that he considers agriculture of secondary inaportance in the activities of this great Government. Mr. TiNCHER. All I know is , that we have it over his signature. That is all of the information that I have. Mr. Dickinson. Now, there is another thing that I want to suggest and that is that there has been a showing here to-day that the press has not been fair to the various agricultural conferences and are not giving them proper publicity and giving proper publicity to their discontent. Now, let me say this, that if this conference should be called by our Government, the press is going to see to it that they get 36 AGKICULTUEAL CONFERENCE. due publicity. They can not afford to not give it to them. This certainly will remedy any criticism which has been presented. I appreciate the fact that it is a long step forward to ask at the hands of our Government, but we have been doing things like this. We have had a precedent established and there is no reason why all of the agricultural interests should not have exa,ctly the same con- sideration at the hands of our Governmient that other interests have had. Now, if this feeling is prevalent that they are not having that same consideration, I know of nothing that would tend to relieve that feel- ing of the different interests more than to have the various States to be represented here, say, send representatives in to Washington for the purpose of presenting their views. It would be a good tning f or agriculture to have these men come here from Minnesota, Oregon, South Dakota, Louisiana, from Pennsylvania, from Illinois, Ohio, and those men would come here for the purpose of trying to work out some of these problems. Is there any reason why our Government should not cooperate and invite them to come here, and invite the manufacturers and other people? They could compare the condi- tions in their localities, and I think that would do a great deal of good. Mr. Candlee. When a resolution is presented, just suppose for a minute that you were chairman of a committee to draft a resolution, what would you suggest that that resolution should contain ? Mr. Dickinson. That would depend entirely upon the discussion and the facts which were developed at the conference. I would want to see a committee outliae a cohstructive program, and I would want ,to see them work out something -that they felt would be of interest to agriculture and other people c^led in the conference, and they could then consummate such plan. I have not gone that far in the matter. I do not have any suggestions or resolutions that should be considered. I would want to see them go ahead and outline what they thought would be proper. Mr. Jacoby. Don't you think under all this, that this loaniiig of money on what we call chattel mortgage at high rates of interest, don't you think that is the first thing the farmer has got to think of ? Mr. Dickinson. It is one of the important things. Mr. Jacoby. Don't you think it is one of the most important ? Mr. Dickinson. No, I would not say that I think it is. The mar- keting of their produce is the most important thing I would like to see them consider. Mr. Jacoby. Well, if they have a mortgage on their produce they can not market it. Take cotton. I have that in mind. The men raise a crop, and it is mortgaged before it is raised. Wlien it matures they can not markfet their crop unless they pay the mortgage. In other words, one of the first things that the farmer should do is to stay out of debt. Mr. Dickinson. That would be one question to consider. Mr. Candler. This is just simply a House resolution ? Mr. Dickinson. Yes, sir. Mr. Candler. This is not a joint resolution ? Mr. Dickinson. No, sir. Mr. Candler. This is going to cost something. Don't you suppose we will have to have an appropriation ? AGRICULTURAL CONFERENCE. . 37 Mr. Dickinson. My impression is that if it is favorably considered we can go before the Appropriations Comnaittee for an appropriation or go before this committee. Mr. TiNCHER. I understand that Mr. Meredith addressed the meet- ing last night. I am sorry I was unable to attend. I had a previous engagement that I had accepted prior to my invitation to attend this conference. Mr. Dickinson. I have a copy of his statement here that I am gomg to put m the record, Mr. Tincher, for the information of the committee. Mr. Candler. Was this meeting at the headquarters of the farmers' organization here last night ? Mr. Dickinson. Yes, sir. Mr. Candler. I had an invitation. I am very sorry that I could not go. I was sick last night. The Chairman. What, Mr. Dickinson, is the specific purpose for this conference? Your resolution states, "Whereas, on account of the high cost of living and the decrease in the supply of food products, an urgent necessity exists for increase in all food production." The farmer looks upon production the same as anybody else. If the law of supply and demand regulates the price, increased production would reduce the price. Mr. Dickinson. I would not say that an increased production decreases profits. If you raise 200 bushels of wheat and make 5 cents a bushel, you have made the same profit as though you may have raised but 100 bushels of wheat and made a profit of 10 cents. So, the income is the same. The Chairman. You have not considered the additional cost of raising 200 bushels in your illustration. Of course, it costs more to raise 200 than 100 bushels. As a result it would not only increase the cost of production but also bring about a decline in the price. Mr. Dickinson. That is not my understanding of the farmers' organization. I understand that they take the position that they do not want to curtail production in order to increase the profits. They say that they have ,been compelled to curtail production on account of the lack of labor, high prices of labor, high prices for fertiUzer, and so forth. The Chairman. Don't you believe that the fact that hogs have dechned several dollars a hundred, that live beef-cattle have decluied from we will say four to six dollars a hundred in the last year, while shoes and clothing, farm implements and many other things that are used on the farm have not dechned but in many instances have increased very materially, is one of the causes for discontent ? Mr. Dickinson. Absolutely. The Chairman. It does not look right to the farmer. Mr. Dickinson. It does not look good to the farmer, I don't think there is any question about that. The Chairman. In order to decrease the cost of living is it not necessary to overcome the shortage ? Mr. Dickinson. Yes, sir. The Chairman. How are you going to reduce the cost of living ? It has been suggested that if we have an overproduction, it vfill bring the prices down. Mr. Dickinson, I would suggest that you be more specific as to the purpose of the conference. 38 AGRICULTTJKAIi CONFERENCE. Mr. Dickinson. I would say that you ought to let the conference come here and take up all of these suggestions and work out the prob- lem they think most important. Farmers will come here from Wiscon- sin, and farmers are going to come here from Illinois, and from North Dakota, and the problem of the man from North Dakota may be entirely different from the man from Alabama. They can meet and discuss these matters and when they have, outlined a definite plan they can present it to this "committee if it involves a legislative remedy. Mr. Eainey. After the conference they can draft a bill or a reso- lution to clarify the situation. Mr. Dickinson. Yes, I think after the conference was over they could do one of two things. They could formulate some policy that was mutually understood that would be beneficial and possibly they could make a number of suggestions that could be formulated into legislation. Mr. Dickinson. I think that the Government is as anxious to do something to reduce the cost of living to the farmer as it is for the man living in the city. The Chairman. This committee was on record as advocating things that would help the farmers rather than handicap them. Mr. Dickinson. I believe that the farmer has a different point of view on that high cost of living paragraph of that resolution from what you are atttiburing to it. Now, I submitted it to a number of the organizations and not one of them took the viewpoint expressed by the chairman. The Chairman. Has Mr. Batcheller approved of it? Mr. Dickinson. Mr. Batcheller was not in the conference where that resolution was approved. That was about two weeks ago. That was a meeting of the representatives of the grange. Mr. Batcheller was not at that conference. Mr. Chairman, with the consent of the committee, I would like to put in the record a state- ment made by Secretary Meredith at the national meeting on farm organizations last evening in which he discusses the conference herein proposed in the form suggested in the resolution, in the fol- lowing language. The Chairman. We will be glad to have you insert with your remarks anything reasonable. (The matter referred to is as follows:) Address of Hon. E. T. Mekedith, Secretary of Agriculture. Secretarjf Meredith. There is much to say arid to think about and there is much to do in this country in agriculture. It has been said here and we all have, realized that agriculture is the fundamental activity. Without agriculture in America, America is gone. Every civilization that has ever gone down has gone down because of the failure of agriculture, and we must here, as truly patriotic American citizens, every one of us, no matter whether we are on the farm or in the factory or in the counting house or what our activity is, we must have an interest in agriculture, or, as was suggested, we are not the best type of citizens. I believe that firmly and sincerely. 1 said to a friend of mine who recently came to see me at my home and wanted me to get together a crowd of farmers. I said: "What for?" He said: "To talk production." I said: "No, if you will get rail- road men and factory men, large manufacturers, and wholesalers and retailers together, 20 of them, I will match them with 20 farmers, men as broad and as keen and as patriotic and men as intelligent as your 20 business men. Then the 40 men Will sit down and go into this question of the high cost of living as a mutual problem. He thought production on the farm alone settled it. AGEICULTURAIi CONFERENCE. 39 The following is a letter from President J. R. Howard of the American Farm Bureau Federation : I have been thinking over carefully your plan for an agricultural conference, as outlined in your bill, and have two or three suggestions to make. The first is that such a conference must be absolutely free from any political bias. The second is that unless the delegates were very carefully chosen the real hard-handed farmer would not be there, and a conference of the noncalloused farmers wouldn't get very far. My third suggestion is that there is an immense possibility in a properly delegated and programed conference. It should consider carefully the entire future of agricul- ture rather than the present. A thorough analysis of European conditions should be made. The status of Argentine and Brazil should be carefully considered. I am reliably informed that capitalists are now arranging to promote a systematic system of railroads into these rich South American countries, looking toward the develop- ment of their agriculture through immigration from Europe, which an insistent de- mand is being made to keep out of the United States, and that by thus building up the agriculture of these countries a ruinous competition to our own farm products will be developed. The matter is of interest to every transport man, manufacturer, mer- chant, and consumer in the whole country, and if considered at all, must be on a very broad and very thorough basis. Let me suggest again that you confer with Mr. Atkeson of the Washington Grange, and I would especially commend the advice of Mr. Marquis of the Country Gentleman. I will give the matter further thought myself, and when again in Washington will endeavor to see you. Yours, very truly, J. K. Howard, President, In further support of the necessity for the calling of this confer- ence, I desire the committee to note the response to the letters recently sent out by the Post Office Department to which 40,000 replies were received which indicated a wide spread spirit of unrest among the farmers of the country and the same has Been noted by the Farm, Stock and Home, located at Minneapolis, Minn., in their issue of February 15, 1920, in the following words: Waking up at Last. An Associated Press dispatch from Washington dated January 30, said: "Indication of a wide-spread spirit of unrest among farmers of the country, so threatening as likely to disturb the existing economic structure, is considered by Government officials to be revealed in 40,000 replies to a questionnaire recently sent out by the Post Office Department." Now, Washington, get this if you can: It is not the spirit of unrest that is likely to disturb the existing economic structure, but the causes of that unrest. In the plain terse language of the street: "Get busy." Haeey N. Owen, Publisher. The further necessity for this conference is shown in a statement quoted in a letter from S. C. Landis, a Kansas farmer, as follows: We are the most submissive of any industrial class. We take what we get for our products and have no price-fixing authority of our own, and when we want to buy anything some one else fixes the price for it. We never go on a strike and stop pro- ducing, and now, while nearly all other industrial classes are striking and restless, we are going on preparing our wheat ground for another crop * * * with lower prices staring us in the face on account of the great cry against the high cost of living. For further proof as to the feeling of the farmers that the legisla- tive bodies have not given farmers the proper recognition in former conferences, called at the suggestion of the legislative or |^jtfJ|^gto©Y tive branch of our Government, is shown in a statement by Unasrs. .1 FEB 5 1946 riccrr nP 40 AGBICULTUEAL CONFEEBNCE. Barrett, president of the National Farmers' Union, in the following words : I am among those who believe that the farmers have not been dealt with in a fair, open manner. They have not been treated as an integral, important, and necessary part of industry. The fact that agriculture is basic, fundamental, and essential to the life of the world has either been ignored or given scant notice. The attitude of Government toward agriculture is that of an irate parent toward a naughty, irrespon- sible boy. Agriculture has been treated by the Government as something that ought to be governed rigidly, but should never have any part in government. Other groups have behaved as though agriculture were a side issue having no rights that should be fully regarded and not entitled to be consulted on the mighty issues of the day. Govern- ment has lu-ged it to produce food and cotton and other essentials, but it has never apparently given thought, or at least serious thought, to the reward that it should receive for its investment of money and manual energy. When will the other two great members of what ought to be a governing triumvirate recognize the fact that agriculture is the most important of all; that nothing can be settled without the assent of agriculture; that nothing can be made permanent for the permanent good of humanity withoiit the active cooperation of agriculture? To, attempt to settle the grave questions now agitating us without the assistance of the farmer is like trying to put Hamlet on the stage with the hero left out. It is not my desire to be hypercritical or cry wolf until I at least see the tracks of the animal in the snow. But I would' like to ask why has agriculture been given such scant notice in connection with a conference fundamentally so important? Why were only three men as representatives of the greatest industry in the world invited to participate in these momentous deliberations? What is responsible for the fact that agriculture is not given a place commensurate .with its importance and on a footing of equality with the other two members of the mighty triumvirate? With further reference to this subject, I desire to insert a quota- tion from Col. Theodore Roosevelt shortly before his death in which he gave utterance in a m^agaziae article to the following words: The farmer, the workingman, and the business man are, of course, the three people upon whose welfare the welfare of all the rest of us and of the country depends. With the farmers what is especially needed is that we shall accept their own best leader- ship and best thought about telling us what to do. * * * What we need is to have men of this stamp set forth the farmers' viewpoint, and the rest of us must intelli- gently appreciate this viewpoint, and so far as possible embody in legislation what men of this stamp regard as the salient needs. * * * The farmer is emphatically the producer. He has not had a square deal. He has hot been put in the position to which he is entitled. The further necessity for such a conference is plainly set forth by Senator Capper in his address before the Senate under date of October 22, 1919, in the following words: Mr. President, if in this glance at the great industrial problems that confront us I have emphasized the farmer's side of the.caee, it is becauuse I feel that he has not been sufficiently considered heretofore, and because I am firmly of the opinion that agri- culture lies at the base of all propsperity in this country. Unless the farmer can con- tinue to thrive, we all must suffer. In the reconstruction problems before us it is im- portant that we start right. We must act broadly and with decision. But what I wish to emphasize particularly is that it will not do to seek to pacify and satisfy capital and labor, employer and employee, and leave out of the accounting the great basic industry of farming. Gov. Sproul, in his address at Harrisburg, Pa., under date of January 20, 1920, urged agricultural aid in the following language: A well-developed, prosperous agriculture is the greatest asset of any nation. Our railroads, our commerce, and industry will prosper and develop only in proportion to the development and the prosperity of our agriculture. It is high time that thiis industry received the recognition that its importance demands. For not only is agri- culture the basis of our economic life, but the farmers are the greatest stabilizing force of the nation. The farmers of this country are entitled to and should have recognition of national and State commissions dealing with great public questions and politics, AGRICULTURAL CONFERENCE. 41 T '^^ 'i^'^a'i^s of the farmer were set forth in a declaration by J. Vy. Coverdale, secretary of the Iowa Federation 6f Farm Bureaus, m his address before the State Federation of Farm Bureaus before 1,600 farmer delegates, as follows: If capitalistic monopoly wants enough food produced that it may be feasted, if organized labor wants enough food that it may be fed, if the do-nothing dawdler wants food produced so he may eat, let them all stand forth at this time when the farmer must determine his 1920 food-production program and declare by deeds— cutting out of prohteenng m goods and wages; by going honestly to business; by going honestly to the job of doing a full day's work for a full day's pay— their willingness to cooperate with us, the producers. Farmers are gradually realizing the necessity for legislative aid and feel that the legislative bodies of our country have responded to the demands of labor and. capital by reason of their organized effort along legislative lines, and for this reason we find many demands for organization in the great agricultural sections of our country. This IS shown by the report in the Farm Bureau Magazine, published at Algona, Iowa, under date of October 16, 1919, from which I quote the following paragraph: The time is also past when a farmer is independent. He is dependent upon the manufactured products of his city neighbors, for which he gives in exchange his raw food products. He takes his gram and stock to market and for this money he buys food for the table, clothing for the family, and machinery to run the farm. These things have been prepared and manufactured and transported by combination of hundreds and thousands of skilled workmen. But this is what the farmer should notice: Are the packers and railroads content to sit down and calmly let le,e;islation pass which they think might curtail their busi- ness? Do the millers lower the price of flour when wheat goes down? Did the price of farm machinery go down when the excessive demands for munitions ceased? These institutions, with a great many others, are organized to meet the situation. They get the best men they can find to study their problems and look after their interests. Further substantiating the claim of the agricultural interests of the country and the fact that their interests demand greater recog- nition on the part of the legislative bodies of this country, I quote from the President's message delivered to the House of Eepresenta- tives in 1919, as follows, to wit: ' During the war the farmer performed a vital and willing service to the Nation. By materially increasing the production of his land, he supplied America and the Allies with the increased amounts of food necessary to keep their immense armies in the field. He indispensably helped to win the war. But there is now scarcely less need of increasing the production in food and the necessaries of life. I ask the Congress to consider means of encouraging effort along these lines. The importance of doing everything possible to promote production along economical lines, to improve market- ing, and to make rural life more attractive and healthful, is obvious. I would urge approval of the plans already proposed to the Congress by the Secretary of Agriculture to secure the essential facts required for the proper study of this question through the proposed enlarged programs for farm-management studies and crop estimates. I would urge, also, the continuance of Federal participation in the building of good roads under the terms of existing law and under the direction ot present agencies; the need of further action on the part of the States and the Federal Government to preserve and develop our forest resources, especially through the practice of better forestry methods on private holdings and the extension of the publicly owned forests; better support for country schools and the more definite direction of their courses of study along lines related to rural problems; and fuller provision for sanitation in rural districts and the building up of needed hospital and medical facilities in these locali- . ties. Perhaps the way might be cleared for many of these desirable reforms by a fresh, comprehensive survey made of rural conditions by a conference composed of representatives of the farmers and of the agricultural agencies responsible for leader- ship. 42 AGRICULTURAL CONFERENCE. It is also well to note that there is now engaged in agricultural pursuits in this country about 30 per cent of our population, while 70 per cent of the population are consumers of farm produce. This to some extent has assisted in giving rise to the food shortage and plainly shows that either the 45,000,000 to 50,000,000 people engaged in agriculture must produce a great deal more or the consuming public will not be supplied. It would seem to me that this conference would plainly bring before the country the facts heretofore suggested showing the necessity for people to reengage in agricultural pursuits, the necessity for transportation in rural districts, the necessity for stability in markets in order to encourage men to plant crops and raise hogs and cattle, the necessity for overcoming the unrest which now exists among the agricul- tural people everywhere and to reestablish confidence among the agricultural people. To-day this Government is making every effoit to function along^ every line that will render material assistance, encouragement, and benefit to the people upon whom this entire country are dependent for their daily bread. The seriousness of the situation is shown by a cHpping from the Washington Post through a report of the Department of Agriculture, indicating that men are^ flocking to the cities and a remedy must be forthcoming. The particular item has reference to New York State, but also concludes by a' paragraph showing that the same condition exists throughout the agricultural districts of our country. The most definite of these reports come from New York State, the department's an- nouncement said, where records of the population on 3,775 representative farms on Pebruai-y 1, this year, and February 1 a year ago were made by Federal and State workers. It was disclosed that during the past year the number of people on these farms decreased nearly 3 per cent and the number of hired men decreased more than 17 per cent. If the same ratio holds for all farms in the State about 35,000 men and boys left farming to go into industries, while only about 11,000 have changed from other indus- tries to farming. This is a more rapid movement from the farms to other industries than took place in the early part of the war. The same conditions in varying degrees exist in all sections, according to the Federal Bureau of Crop Estimates, although they are not so acute farther from industrial centers. The assertion that farmers can not pay the high wages demanded in competition with other industries and make a profit on their products is frequently made. Many farmers also declare it is unfair to them to be under the necessity of working 10, 12, or more hours a day, when the tendency in other industries is toward a shorter working day and a decreased output. If the passage of this resolution is to be of any benefit for the year 1920, it should be immediately reported by this committee and I trust that the same will have the favor- able and immediate consideration at the hands of the committee. I also wish to express my thanks to the committee for the time given me and the consideration given this resolution. The unrest in the agricultural pursuit is based upon three separate distinct causes: First. An inadequate return for the labor performed. Second. The long hours and tedious duties. Third. The isolation of the employment. A great deal is now being done to direct the young people of the day toward the farm, but we will never succeed in domg this imtil we make farming profitable as well as enjoyable. This demand is upon our Government for the reason that we are the one country that is presenting to the world an agricultm-e program requiring the people to live on the farm they till. We notice in studying the agri- culture in European countries that all of the farmers live in small villages where they can associate and mingle together; the early church was formulated on the basis of the people living in a village. This gave rise to the early masses in the foundation of the early Christian Church. AQEIOXJI.TTJBAL CONFEEBNOE. 43 So much attention has been given to this matter by men in public affairs and by leaders of thought everywhere that I feel justified in placing in the record the following item from the New York Times •under date of October 12, 1919, headed "Farmers want pay based on long day." Several of the farmer delegates are of the opinion that a national farming conference ■will he called after the industrial conference has adjourned, and that settlement of their troubles is not within the scope of the gathering now in session. However, they expect to take an active part in the discussion of the high cost of living question with the intention of showing that the blame can not rightly be laid to the farmer. The Chairman. We are very grateful to you, Mr. Dickinson, and to all the gentlemen who have appeared with you. The committee will now adjourn. (Thereupon the committee adjourned.) X LITHOMOUNT PAMPHLET BINDER Manufactured by I 6AYLORD BROS. loc. Syracuse, N. Y. Stockton, Calif. sm^vi -^-....ij/ ^: '■^i P