The CHAIRMAN. Of course, you may discuss any bill before the committee.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. Chairman, if these gentlemen are going to reserve the right to have anything to say about the Williams bill, after we have presented our matter, they should say it in advance. I think it is unfair to the cooperative interests for them to have a bill introduced here and then wait until they have heard what we have to say before they present their position on the bill.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not understand it in that way.

Mr. BOYD. In reply to the gentleman's statement that we might attempt to be unfair to him, let me say that we are simply following the suggestion made by the chairman yesterday. In doing that I do not think we have shown any intention to be unfair. If the bill (5944) comes up here for consideration on its merits, we will be prepared to discuss it, but in view of the situation we will not present anything to-day.

Mr. WILLIAMS. It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, in fairness to everybody, that I should say this: I know of quite a few people that have come here opposed to the bill, and if it is laid aside now there should be some understanding that it will not be taken up again. Is that your idea, Mr. Boyd?

Mr. BOYD. No, sir; that was not the idea. My idea was based on the suggestion by the chairman that the Department of Agriculture be given an opportunity to consider the provisions of the bill, and so far as I know the department is not prepared to give a statement with regard to it now.

The CHAIRMAN. They might suggest some changes.

Mr. BOYD. We anticipate that they will then say that they favor or disfavor the bill or may suggest changes.

The CHAIRMAN. At any rate, the matter is now under consideration by all of you.

Mr. BROWN. If these gentlemen are willing to leave it to the department, I think we are. It is our understanding that the department was to take under consideration and to get together the people that were interested in the bills before the committee on yesterday, and not all of these bills.

The CHAIRMAN. I suggested all the bills.

Mr. BROWN. I would say that we have not been called into conference by the proponents of this bill or by the Secretary.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not know that anybody has been called in; but it was understood that they should get together with Mr. Campbell, and he would give consideration and anything that they suggested.

Mr. BROWN. As I have always understood it, when you are con-. sidering a bill the first people to be heard are those in favor of the bill The CHAIRMAN. You are right about that.

Mr. BROWN. If the proponents of the bill do not see fit to present their side at this time, then I think that they ought not to be permitted to do so at a later time.

Mr. SINCLAIR. It would be very unfair to withhold consideration of the bill at the present time, when those opposed to it are here and are ready to go on, and then take the bill up at some later time when they are not here and it will be a matter of large expense for them to come here.

Mr. PETERSON. We came all the way down here from Minnesota. We are very much interested in this bill, and if the bill is going to be considered we would like to have it considered now, while we are here.

The CHAIRMAN. While I agree with you that the proponents of the bill should go on first, they say they have nothing to suggest at this time.

Mr. BROWN. If we present our views in a general way we can not help but refer to this bill, because so long as it is before the committee we think that it should be given consideration, and we must refer to it in a general way when we are presenting our views.

It seems unfair to us that they should ask us to go on first when this bill is before the committee.

Mr. SINCLAIR. You might be able to say something in a very short time that would kill the bill.

Mr. BROWN. And I might say something that would cerate discussion that would take a day, if we went into it, if they are going to reserve the right to answer us on the bill.

The CHAIRMAN. I don't understand that they propose to go on at all this morning.

Mr. BOYD. So far as this morning is concerned that is correct. The CHAIRMAN. You gentlemen, of course, appreciate the fact that the committee has no power to compel anyone to testify?

Mr. BROWN. If they are not going to appear on the bill why should we take it up at all?

The CHAIRMAN. Of course, you are at liberty to discuss any of the bills before the committee.

Mr. BOYD. It is understood, I believe, that after this matter has had consideration by the department that the proponents of the bill will be given a date on which to be heard.

The CHAIRMAN. That is for the committee to determine.

Mr. BOYD. I mean to say by that that it is understood we have not waived our right to be heard.

The CHAIRMAN. That is for the committee to determine. If it determines to give a hearing at a later date, of course, that can be done. I can not say just when. That is for the committee to deter

mine. You may proceed, Mr. Brown.

STATEMENT OF MR. JOHN T. BROWN, MONON, IND.

Mr. BROWN. I am president of the National Livestock Producers' Association, with headquarters in Chicago. What I have to say will be rather in a general way in giving information relative to the operation of the cooperative livestock commission business.

At the present time there are some 24 or 25 cooperative commission companies operating upon the various markets of the country. The Farmers' Union, a farmers' organization, was responsible for putting into operation the first cooperative commission business companies that were ever inaugurated upon the Omaha, St. Joseph, Sioux City, and Kansas City markets. They were put into operation some five six years ago. They were severely handicapped, but are now very successfully operated. The Farmers' Union has 10 agencies. We have an agency known as the Michigan Livestock Exchange Cooperative Agency operating in Detroit; there is one operating in Mil

waukee, put in operation and now being operated by the Milwaukee (Wis.) Farmers' Equity. J. J. Lamb is president. Mr. Reno and Mr. Watt are here representing the 10 marketing agencies of the Farmers' Union. Mr. O'Mealy, of Michigan, was here but had to return home. He represents the Detroit agency and is also a director of the Buffalo Producers' Board.

Mr. J. J. Lamb has authority to represent their organization. The National Livestock Producers' Association is an organization to put into operation and to operate cooperative livestock commission companies as conditions warrant. The initial step of that movement was taken some four years ago by some representative livestock and farm organization representatives on a committee to work out a program and a permanent plan. They took some two years in their work and, in conference with commission men, stockyards companies. and packers, after nearly two years of work, they promulgated a plan which was later ratified by a general conference of livestock and farm organizations of the country.

The organization of which I am president is now operating and has put in operation in the last few years 14 cooperative commission companies. That is operated in this way: They first had a board of directors of nine, appointed two years ago last January. They automatically retire as the agencies are organized annually, and a director from each terminal agency is selected by the board of directors of the so-called terminal agency to represent that agency on the national board. Within another year the entire organization will be in control of marketing agencies represented by one director on each board. To represent that organization we have with us Mr. Crandall, president of the Central Cooperative Commission Association of St. Paul, a director on the national board, and Mr. Riggs, of Indiana, who is a director of the Indianapolis Producers Board, and also a director of the national board. One of the reasons why they have not representation here in fact, we have authority and we will assume responsibility for representing these organizations. You all know the financial condition of the farmers, and we did not think it advisable to bring them down here to Washington at great expense. Then there is another reason. We farmers get away from home and sometimes we run out of money, and because of the publicity that is given it might sometimes give Congressmen some embarrassment if they came to you to get some money to return home on, because their reputation is not very good.

The combined business of these cooperative agencies in 1923, the volume of business done, amounts to over $200,000,000. The combined savings on commissions alone by these agencies amounts to over a million dollars. That saving goes back to the farm member in proportion to the amount of business that he does with the agency. We represent a round million individual members. I want to say here that eight of these agencies have been put into operation within the last year, and have not been functioning a full year. You can see by that that the movement is very substantial. These directors are substantial livestock men and business firms, not only at the terminals, but the national, men of mature years and conservative in their views.

I do not want to take up too much of your time, but I wanted you to see how this movement is progressin. The development

of the cooperative movement is somewhat alarming to the people that were naturally in opposition to it. If we were depending on saving commissions alone, I question whether it would be worth while, while in the aggregate that amounts to a lot of money. But the ultimate aim is to work out an orderly marketing program and stabilize prices, in order that we might get, through cooperation with the packers, this stock onto the markets where they need it, without a lot of unnecessary shipments and unnecessary congestion of one market as against a shortage in other markets.

Now, there are a hundred commission firms in round numbers in Chicago. If there are 90,000 hogs in Chicago to-day it means that there is at least a 20,000 surplus if you go out and dump that 90,000 all on the market. The primary purpose of the commission man is the commissions they get and the primary purpose of the packer is to buy as cheap as he can; the primary purpose of the cooperative agency is to get the most they can for their stock, without throwing the entire amount on the market, which has but one effect, that being a ten to thirty cents lower market. We want to avoid that and put the stock on the market when and where it is needed. The old law of supply and demand does not operate as it once did. You must remember that we are living in an age of organization and specialization, so the common law of supply and demand in competition does not operate as it once did. We are organizing to better our condition largely and to prevent unfair competition. We have specialized so that we may be better able to do the business, the profession or occupation that we are following. Many interests are to-day so organized that they can abuse their power and prevent fair competition, and I believe that one of the causes of our economic condition is the abuse of power by organized business for personal interests, which has brought on, instead of individual competition a class competition. That has been a detriment to progress because it has been carried too far. Now, in looking over these matters, gentlemen, let us look well into the motives of the different interests that come before you and give the thing very sober thought and consideration before anything is done.

This law that we are having this dispute about was considered several years before it was enacted, and you men who have been in Congress during that time know as much about it as any of us. It is very unpopular. It was opposed by different interests, and has been carried to the courts to determine its constitutionality. It was put into operation and the administration of the law has been seriously handicapped by some of the opposing interests. There is a great deal of criticism relative to this law and the administration of it. We are willing to admit that this law is not 100 per cent right and has not been administered a hundred per cent efficiently. We have this thought, we wonder if they have not done very well, considering the conditions under which we have had to work since this law has been in effect, and the economic condition of the farmer. They have been clamoring to improve their condition, and the other interests have been endeavoring to maintain the position that they have held. The Secretary of Agriculture appointed a lot of people to enforce the administration of this law. He has put a supervisor in the different markets and assistants, etc. Now, it has been impossible for him to get first class, efficient men in every

particular. He has had to go into the different markets at different places and select those men. The law has not operated exceeding two years, and I think the department is to be congratulated that they haven't made more mistakes than they have made.

Now, in the administration of the law, as I said a while ago, we are finding many defects. We have found in the last two years that there are some amendments needed, nothing very material, but simply something to give the Department of Agriculture a little more authority than it has had. We men who have had experience in putting into operation these cooperative commission companies realize that, and we are willing and are here to-day to back up the Secretary in the amendments that he has offered, with maybe some slight modifications that we think are necessary.

Now, it is very natural that when any Federal law is enacted, which is as unpopular as this one seems to be, that there will be conflict with the State laws and conflict with the operation of agencies both for and against the measure. As I stated yesterday there were hundreds of shipping organizations operating before this law was enacted. There were different cooperative commission companies operating before this law was enacted, on a more or less different plan or different method than what they should be operated on, but when it comes to unifying all of these into one system, it is going to take some time to adjust ourselves to the satisfaction of all concerned. Instead of amending this law to conform to the methods of operation of all these agencies, including the old-line commission companies, the packers and the stockyards companies, it is up to us to be conservative enough to respect this law enough to try to change the operation of our agencies more nearly to conform to the Federal law. It is going to take some time. The cooperative agencies and the farmers' unions and the producers have not been at all times in accordance with the rules promulgated by the department, but I am going to say that they have been very willing and have shown a very willing spirit to confer with us from time to time and to work out some way that would be more practical, and that is particularly what has brought about the request for some amendments here, because it was impossible for them to promulgate rules and regulations as the law now is. Legislation will not cure all of these veils.

Mr. KETCHAM. Mr. Chairman, I would like to aks the witness a question there.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. KETCHAM. You used the expression "unpopular." You said the law was unpopular and you repeated that two or three times. I think you had the thought in mind that it was generally unpopular. With whom was this law unpopular?

Mr. BROWN. Unpopular at the beginning. We haven't heard any serious complaints coming to us from the packers or stockyards companies or commission men or exchanges or dealers in general of the old type in the yards.

Mr. KETCHAM. I wanted to clarify that, because I thought possibly your remarks might leave the impression that it was a very unpopular measure with the shippers and producers and people of that sort. Mr. BROWN. No; not in the least.

Mr. KETCHAM. I knew that and I wanted that corrected.