AMEND CERTAIN ACTS TO INCLUDE POULTRY

9.

Mr. PURNELL. How long could that old tobacco referred to be kept on hand without spoiling?

Mr. GILBERT. Indefinitely. Tobacco, after it is redried, will keep indefinitely.

Mr. PURNELL. What percentage would you say of the total supply would that worthless tobacco constitute?

Mr. GILBERT. That is the purpose of this bill. It would probably be a guess on my part. I do know there are great quantities of it, Mr. PURNELL. Would that be 2 per cent or 5 per cent?

Mr. GILBERT. My guess is that it represents 20 or 25 per cent. That is merely a guess, however.

Mr. PURNELL. Enough to really mislead and cause some damage? Mr. GILBERT. Yes, sir. Mr. Kehoe, the agent of the Burley Tobacco Growers' Association, testified here that he knew one warehouse in which there were thousands of hogsheads of tobacco more than 6 years old, and that the tobacco they were buying from the growers. they were shipping immediately to the factory every bit they were buying they were shipping directly to the factory, which he seemed. to construe to mean that they were actually in need of tobacco, although the reports showed they had quite a surplus on hand.

Mr. PURNELL. Is this old tobacco worthless for any commercial purpose?

Mr. GILBERT. I think so. It might be used for mixture in cheap tobacco. But it is practically worthless.

Mr. MENGES. It says:

No publication shall be made by the Secretary of Agriculture whereby the data furnished for any particular establishment can be identified, nor shall the Secretary of Agriculture permit anyone other than the sworn employees of the Department of Agriculture to examine the individual reports.

Does not that exclude the publication of the data?

Mr. GILBERT. Oh, no; it is the publication of the individual reports; that there shall be no publication by the Secretary of Agriculture whereby the data furnished by any particular establishment can be identified. In other words, we are not permitted to know how much R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. or Lorillard has on hand, but we are entitled to know how much all of them together have on hand.

He said, “If you know just how much of each kind you have on hand, then you will know our secrets of manufacture, because you will get the proportions in which we use the different kinds of tobacco."

I claim that you could not, any more than by a baker saying how much flour, salt, and sugar he had on hand could we know how he made his bread. But you gentlemen decided against me on that.

Mr. MENGES. The reason I am asking the question is, I come from a section where we grow quite a large amount of tobacco.

Mr. GILBERT. Most of the gentleman's tobacco is for cigars.

Mr. MENGES. Yes, sir; and my people object to that, the very statement of it. That is why I asked the question.

Mr. GILBERT. Yes.

Mr. ADKINS. What is their objection to it?

Mr. MENGES. The objection they have is that that can be construed in such a way that they can know how much tobacco of their type is on hand.

Mr. GILBERT. But the gentleman is a little narrow in his statement. They can know the amount of each particular kind on hand, but they do not know who has it. They do not know whether one concern or another has it. But they do know how much of it is on hand in the country.

Mr. MENGES. They object to stating the amount.

Mr. GILBERT. I thoroughly agree with the gentlemen, but Congress is entirely out of harmony with us on the proposition and we can not get that through.

Mr. FULMER. I would like to ask Mr. Menges whether he speaks for the growers or the manufacturers.

Mr. MENGES. The growers.

Mr. GILBERT. The do not object so much. They would like to have it; we would like to have it.

Mr. MENGES. They want the information.

Mr. GILBERT. But they will never get it. I am thoroughly in accord with the gentleman.

Mr. ASWELL. You will remember the trade objected to the public being permitted to know how much they have on hand.

Mr. FULMER. I think that is a good amendment, that last amendment.

Mr. KETCHAM. If this information is of value, it would seem as if they ought to be given authority for the Department of Agriculture to go back, say, for instance, in 1920.

Mr. GILBERT. That is provided.

Mr. KETCHAM. So as to have a comparative statement. You know possibly these statements are not of any great value unless you can draw comparisons between the communities in the crop this year and some previous year. Is the language broad enough to enable them to do that if they choose?

Mr. GILBERT. We had that in view and aimed to cover it, and I think we have. Agreed here:

The statistics shall show the quantity of tobacco in such detail as to types and groups of grades as the Secretary of Agriculture shall deem to be practical and necessary for the purposes of this act, and said statistics shall show the stocks of tobacco of the last four crop years, including therein the production of the year of the report, which shall be known as new crops separately from the crops of previous years, which shall be known as old crops," and shall be summarized as of January 1, April 1, July 1, and October 1 of each year.

66

66

Mr. KETCHAM. That will give you sufficient background with which to compare the present crop with past crops.

Mr. GILBERT. Yes, sir; and to see whether the production is increasing or decreasing. It is identically the same bill that you gentlemen unanimously passed last session and which passed unanimously the House last year.

The CHAIRMAN. I think the bill had better be referred to the department before action is taken upon it by the committee.

Mr. GILBERT. May I ask the chairman, without being presumptious, to give as much acceleration as convenient?

Mr. PURNELL. Have you talked to the Secretary about it?

Mr. GILBERT. Not this year.

Mr. PURNELL. I mean the bill with the amendments.

Mr. GILBERT. As I said before the gentleman came in, the Depart

ment of Agriculture prepared this bill.

AMEND CERTAIN ACTS TO INCLUDE POULTRY

Mr. PURNELL. Just as it is?

Mr. GILBERT. Absolutely.

11

Mr. SWANK. It is the identical bill which passed the House last year, is it not?

Mr. GILBERT. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the bill introduced by Mr. Gilbert will be referred to the Secretary of Agriculture.

Mr. GILBERT. Thank you very much.

(Thereupon, at 10.40 o'clock a. m., the committee proceeded to the consideration of other business.)