Mr. ANDRESEN. Do you believe if we would fix a limitation of $5,000 for each complete farm unit, that that would cover the cost? Dr. GEE. I believe, sir, it would be most unwise to fix any limit of that nature. Mr. ANDRESEN. You think that that would have to be left to the discretion of the board? Dr. GEE. I think that these matters would depend upon the individual family, size of the family, and conditions in different sections of the country, and the strength of the land. Those matters ought to be left to the administration of the bill. Mr. BOILEAU. Now, the bill provides that the tenant shall be selected, live on the land for 5 years, and pay during those 5 years 25 percent of the original cost of the land and, if he does so, he gets title to the land or a contract on the land to purchase it for the balance. Do you think that scheme is wise or that the tenants could comply with that requirement? Dr. GEE. I think that the probation period is a good provision. Mr. ANDRESEN. Suppose a farm costs $10,000. You want no limitation on it, but suppose that the complete farm costs $10,000. That will mean then that the tenant in addition to taxes has to pay $500 a year in order to meet the requirements. Can the average tenant do that? Dr. GEE. Well, assuming your figures, and assuming that it is a cotton farm, of the size which $10,000 would represent; and assuming 13 cents a pound for cotton, I think he could. Mr. ANDRESEN. What is the price of cotton now? Dr. GEE. Thirteen cents is about the average price of cotton in the Southeast this year. Mr. ANDRESEN. And do you assume that that would mean a bale to the acre? Dr. GEE. I think that one of the tenants on my place could make the payments. The CHAIRMAN. The average farm probably would not produce that much. Mr. TOBEY. Your remarks during the last 30 minutes would indicate that you have lost sight of the work in our agricultural committee during the last 3 or 4 years in connection with supply and demand. I am glad that you have brought that to light again. I want to ask if you do not consider that it would be love's labor lost to do anything of this kind, without putting the farmers on a sounder basis. That is, this will stimulate production and thereby result in an overproduction, and do you not think that it would be unwise for us to do this and not guarantee the farmer a fair return for his product? We passed, this week, a $50,000,000 bill for small loans to the farmers, for those who are above the relief class, at 4 percent. I sent word of that to my constituents in New Hampshire and asked them for comments on that legislation and the answers came back from some, "Why give us loans at 4 percent on $400, when if we raise a crop we cannot get a fair price for it?" They say, here we are selling our product for 25 percent of what it costs to produce it. "Don't give us any more of that kind of legislation. Give us something which will fix the price level and control supply." Now, that seems to me to be horse sense. We should devise some plan which would give the farmers a fair return for what they raise and we have got to give them something which will control supply and demand, legislation which will improve the prices which they receive for their products. I would like to get a little line on what you say about that. Dr. GEE. Yes, sir; I have the highest regard and the greatest commendation for the work of this committee along that line, and I know you people are thoroughly conscious of that problem, and in spite of certain obstacles in the way that you are going to find some way to work it out. Mr. TOBEY. You said that tenancy was increasing at the rate of 40,000 per year, and that there were 2,800,000 tenants or sharecroppers in this country. So that what is provided in this bill before us now would hardly reduce tenancy, would it? Dr. GEE. It is a measure that is projected, in my opinion, along sound lines. It is a start which we have not made and which we should long ago have made toward attacking a problem that, in my opinion, the growth of which threatens fundamentally free institutions of a free people, and if we start it on a limited scale it can be put on a sound conservative basis and be added to, and that is the best way to do it. The CHAIRMAN. We desire to thank you, Mr. Gee, for a very intelligent presentation. I think it would be well not to start with another witness at this time. The committee will stand adjourned until 10:30 o'clock tomorrow morning. (Thereupon, at 11:55 a. m., the committee adjourned until 10:30 a. m., the following morning, Thursday, Jan. 28, 1937.) FARM TENANCY THURSDAY, JANUARY 28, 1937 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The committee was called to order at 10:30 o'clock a. m., Hon. Marvin Jones (chairman) presiding. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order, please. We are proceeding with the hearings on the subject of farm tenancy this morning and will begin by having Secretary Wilson, the Under Secretary of the Department of Agriculture, as our first witness. STATEMENT OF MILBURN L. WILSON, UNDER SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON, D. C. Mr. WILSON. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I shall try to address my suggestions, in conformity with the chairman's request, directly to the provisions of the bill. I am impressed, as we study the problem, with the enormity, the size of it, the very great variation from section to section and State to State. It seems to me that the thinking in the Department of Agriculture at this time is that an act of this kind should be related to the whole of the agricultural program and that it should be concerned primarily with the landless people, or that group of people in agriculture which is below what I would call the level of those who can receive benefits from the Farm Credit Administration. Relative to such suggestions as I might make in connection with the bill, as it stands at the present time, I think the Department of Agriculture would be pleased to have the administration of it placed within the Department of Agriculture, making the Secretary responsible therefor, with a corporation, possibly, of which the Secretary would be a member. An argument for this is that if we consider this whole problem one of agriculture and agricultural peoples below the level of those who are owners and those who can avail themselves of the institution of the Farm Credit Administration such a program will have to be coordinated with and make use of many of the agencies and many of the programs within the Department of Agriculture. Such action as might be contemplated under this kind of a bill should be coordinated with the general type of thing which is covered in the Soil Conservation Service and is covered by the Agricultural Adjustment Administration which is seeking to maintain balance in agriculture as a whole, in stabilizing of prices, with the extension work, (35) which is attempting through educational methods to give a whole program to the farmers of the country. This would be a part of this national agricultural program which would deal with the landless people and with the people below the Farm Credit Administration level. An agency of this kind could be a very effective agency to implement the whole agricultural program in all of its phases with this group of people. And next I might mention, with reference to the committee which is suggested in this draft of the bill: I think the tendency of the direction of the efforts of the Department of Agriculture is toward greater coordination of State programs within the counties, and also the development of the democratic processes in connection with these programs in order that the people of the county will have a great deal to do with the forming of agricultural programs for that county. I should, therefore, like to see the appointment of the committee, this county committee suggested in the bill which is to have the administration of the program, left rather free so that that committee might be coordinate with and in the main used as a part of the existing county committee within the counties which have to do with the administration of the program. Mr. LORD. Would you care to answer a question? The CHAIRMAN. Would you rather conclude your statement before being interrupted?. Mr. WILSON. It makes no difference to me, Mr. Chairman. Mr. LORD. My question related to the point you have just mentioned: Take the counties in New York State: We have farm bureau agents who are acquainted with the farms in these counties, and it seems to me that a man who has this knowledge should be one of this committee. Do you think that he should be one of the committee? Mr. WILSON. Well, I would think that the extension agent, and members of the committee having to carry on the work of rehabilitation and who have worked with these people in this class up to the present time should assist and would assist a great deal, of course. But I am not certain that they should be a part of that committee. I rather think that the committee should be formed, perhaps, of people who are not connected with the Government, but that the committee should avail itself of the knowledge and the service and everything of that kind which the extension agent can give it. Mr. LORD. Owing to the fact that they are paid by the Government, State, and by the counties is one reason why they should be on that committee? Mr. WILSON. I think they could render a great deal of service, but it seems to me that the duties of this committee relate themselves more to the question of policy, and I think it would work a little better if it is made up of citizens of the counties that are not on a Government pay roll. Mr. LORD. Thank you. Mr. WILSON. Then the next suggestion that I might have to make with reference to the bill-and I am not sure that this needs to be incorporated as a section in the bill. In dealing with this problem of tenancy, and because the rehabilitation of people, and so forth, |