Mr. STONE. Yes. Senator NORBECK. In what line? Mr. STONE. Well, in various manufacturing lines, and also, for instance, in the production of wheat it continually increased in those four countries during that period. Senator NORBECK. I think that statement is too narrow to portray the picture correctly. Would you be willing to put in the record here what our exports of wheat have been for a period of 20 or 30 years? Mr. STONE. Yes. Senator NORBECK. It will be quite illuminating. I contend there has been no recent increase in the export of wheat. You can get that out of the Agricultural Year Book, which is an official publication. Mr. STONE. What I had reference to, Senator, was not any one of those particular four countries as individual units. The production of wheat and the exportation of wheat in those countries did increase during that period. The CHAIRMAN. It is now 12 o'clock. The session will be closed at 12 o'clock. If you are not through with Mr. Stone, at the request of any member we will ask him to come back. Are you through, Senator Norbeck, with your questioning? Senator NORBECK. I would be through with him in two minutes if I could go on. If not, I want him to come back for two minutes this afternoon. Mr. STONE. I would rather have the Senator take these two minutes right now, if you will. The CHAIRMAN. The session will be recessed until 10 o'clock to-morrow. Senator FRAZIER. Mr. Stone, I want to ask a few questions in regard to this bill, S. 1197. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Stone, we will be glad to hear you again to-morrow. Senator FRAZIER. Mr. Chairman, I want to put in the record four telegrams I have here bearing on S. 1197. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection the telegrams are made a part of the record at this point. Senator LYNN FRAZIER, Washington: ST. PAUL, MINN., April 26, 1932. Convey to the Agricultural Committee that the Minnesota Farm Bureau Federation is desirous of passage of the Frazier bill. This in our judgment would do much to relieve the stress now so tense upon us. Farmers should be given the opportunity to retain their farms. If no aid is given, ownership will pass out of their hands. A low rate of interest is imperative at this time. A. J. OLSON, President Minnesota Farm Bureau Federation. ST. PAUL, MINN., April 26, 1932. Senator LYNN J. FRAZIER : Passage of the farmers' farm relief bill in its present form of greatest importance to all classes of people. No raising of interest rate should be permitted. Measure will not only save agriculture but will solve most of Nation's ills. People from all walks of life are for this measure. R. A. TROVATTEN, Secretary Agriculture of Minnesota. ST. PAUL, MINN., April 26, 1932. LYNN J. FRAZIER, Your bill is the best relief measure offered yet, and should be passed at once. The international bankers were taken care of, why not the farmers. And by all means don't raise the interest rates beyond 11⁄2 per cent. ADAM A. LEFOR, Banker, of Dickinson, N. Dak. FARGO, N. DAK., April 25, 1932. Senator LYNN J. FRAZIER, Senate Office building, Washington: Majority of the people in this section of the country are 100 per cent back of the Frazier farm relief bill. Farm indebtedness ought to be refinanced at not to exceed 12 per cent interest, and we urge that you do everything in your power to pass the bill without amendment. A. T. LYNNER, Mayor. Senator SHIPSTEAD. There is one more which might be put in the record. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection it is also made a part of the record. Senator CHARLES L. MONARY, IVANHOE, MINN., April 23, 1932. Chairman Senate Agricultural Committee, Washington, D. C.: Grief and sorrow is nation-wide over loss of homes through mortgage foreclosure. Thousands writing me to explain to Congress. My plea in behalf of our members is: Don't forsake us on Frazier bill, S. 1197, and Thomas-Swank marketing bill. My personal appeal to you: Read telegram to your committee; recommend bill without further amendments. Awaiting the final day, Tuesday. In the meantime my prayers in behalf of agriculture are: My God, my God, why should Congress foresake agriculture? C. R. LUNDBERG, Secretary-Treasurer Minnesota Farmers' Union. (Whereupon, at 12.05 o'clock p. m., an adjournment was taken until Thursday, April 28, 1932, at 10 o'clock a. m.) FARM RELIEF THURSDAY, APRIL 28, 1932 UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY, Washington, D. C. The committee met at 10 o'clock a. m. in room 324 Senate Office Building, Senator Charles L. McNary presiding. Present: Senators McNary (chairman), Capper, Norbeck, Frazier, Thomas of Idaho,_ Townsend, Kendrick, Thomas of Oklahoma, McGill, Bankhead, Bulow, Caraway, and Shipstead. Also present: Senators Howell, Brookhart, and Nye. Others also present: John A. Simpson, president National Farmers' Union, Oklahoma City, Okla.; A. W. Brown, Washington representative of the National Farmers' Union; Fred Brenckman, Washington representative of the National Grange; Edward A. O'Neal, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, Chicago, Ill.; Charles E. Hearst, vice president American Farm Bureau Federation. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. Mr. Stone, will you take the chair at the head of the table? STATEMENT OF JAMES C. STONE, CHAIRMAN FEDERAL FARM BOARD, WASHINGTON, D. C.-Continued The CHAIRMAN. I am advised that there are some additional questions that members of the committee desire to propound to you, Mr. Stone. Senator Norbeck must leave shortly, and he wants to ask you a few questions. Senator NORBECK. We were talking about this problem when the committee adjourned yesterday, and there were only one or two questions that I wanted to ask for the benefit of the record. I do not think it is anything on which we disagree at all. I had reference especially to the supposed increased production in wheat from decade to decade and from year to year. Is it not a fact, Mr. Stone, that the per capita production of wheat has fallen off? That while the total bushelage has increased we raise less wheat per capita than we did some years ago? Mr. STONE. The consumption per capita has decreased from about 5 bushels down to 4 and a fraction bushels in the last few years. Senator NORBECK. The consumption has? Mr. STONE. Yes. Senator NORBECK. Now, what about the production? Mr. STONE. You are speaking now of the United States? 89 Senator NORBECK. Yes; of the United States. Mr. STONE. This record shows that our largest production was in 1915, which was 1,025,801,000 bushels. Senator KENDRICK. Pardon me, Mr. Stone. Will you speak a little bit louder, please? There is so much noise outside it is difficult to hear you. Senator NORBECK. And in one of the years near that year the production was only about half that, was it not? Mr. STONE. I will repeat what I said, Senator Norbeck, for Senator Kendrick's benefit. Senator KENDRICK. Yes, if you will, please. Mr. STONE. Our largest production of wheat in this country was in the year 1915, when we produced 1,025,801,000 bushels. The net exports that year were 239,591,000 bushels. In 1916 the production dropped to 636,318,000 bushels, and the exports were 181,067,000 bushels. Senator NORBECK. Was there any particular difference in acreage in those two years? Mr. STONE. The acreage in 1915 was 60,469,000, and it dropped from that figure in 1915 to 52,316,000 acres in 1916. Senator NORBECK. There was about a 12 per cent drop in acreage and about a 40 per cent or 50 per cent drop in production? Mr. STONE. No; about 35 to 40 per cent. Senator NORBECK. In 1915 it was over a billion? Mr. STONE. 1,025,000,000. Then in 1917 the acreage dropped to 45,089,000 acres, and the production remains the same as in 1916. In 1918 our production went back to 59,181,000 acres, and we produced 921,438,000 bushels. In 1919 the acreage was 75,694,000, and we produced 967,979,000 bushels. Senator NORBECK. Yes. I think that answers my question, Mr. Stone. I will appreciate it if you will place that table in the record so that it may speak for itself. That is prepared from official sources, is it not? Mr. STONE. Yes. From 1900 to 1931, inclusive. (The table presented by Mr. Stone is here printed in the record in full, as follows:) Wheat, all: Acreage, production, and net exports, United States, 1900-1932 Senator NORBECK. And is it not a fact, Mr. Stone, that the great variations are due mainly to weather conditions? That is, the great variations in total production Mr. STONE. In production, that is true. Senator NORBECK. You also said yesterday that you would place in the record the exports for different years. Mr. STONE. Those figures are contained in this table. Senator NORBECK. Very well. And is it a fact that the export of wheat has not increased of recent years? Mr. STONE. It decreased. Senator NORBECK. It decreased, yes. I wanted that in the record as an answer to the statement that our wheat market condition was due to increased production. I wanted that in order to show that the cause of our wheat condition was not due to an increased production. I think at a previous time, Mr. Stone, you gave some very important testimony here that I wish we could get into this hearing also, and that was the relative value of the grain crop and of our meat products. Have you that handy? Mr. STONE. I do not know whether I have that or not. Mr. STONE. Yes. Senator NORBECK. You will put that in the record? Mr. STONE. I will be glad to put that in the record, Senator. (A statement showing the relative value of the grain crop and meat products will be furnished by Mr. Stone and placed in the record at this point.) Senator NORBECK. My reason for speaking of that is that the thought has been that it does not help us any to reduce our wheat acreage if we are going to put our meat products on the American price basis. Our conclusion has been that we must maintain our wheat production if for no other purpose than to protect our beef and mutton market. Would you care to make any comments on that view of it? Mr. STONE. NO; I have nothing to say on that right now. I have not been thinking along that line. Senator NORBECK. I thank you very much. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other members of the committee who desires to ask Mr. Stone any questions at this point? Senator Brookhart desires to have Mr. Ewing take the stand before he is required to go to another committee. If you will just step aside for the present, Mr. Stone. Senator BROOKHART. I will ask Mr. Ewing to take the place at the head of the table. STATEMENT OF CHARLES A. EWING, DECATUR, ILL., PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL LIVESTOCK MARKETING ASSOCIATION, CHICAGO The CHAIRMAN. Will you give the committee your name, address, and occupation? Mr. EWING. Charles A. Ewing, Decatur, Ill. President of the National Livestock Marketing Association, located at Chicago. |