AGRICULTURAL RELIEF

25

argument would be very forcible; but in addition to the conditions
laid down in the first part of subdivision A, the board must also find
some things, and the same things that it must find in the pending
bill in reference to the other requirements for its operation. The
board must not only have the action, according to the amendment,
of 50 per cent of the entire commodity, but the board must also
find, first, that there is or may be a surplus, etc., and, second, that
the durability, the conditions of preparation, processing, and pre-
serving, etc. Even when the advisory council has taken action,
under the proposed amendment the board must find these other con-
ditions also to be true. In other words, the board would still have
the veto power of an operative period on that commodity.

Mr. Apkins. Do you believe the statement Mr. Jones just made
is correct?

Mr. Gray. I was conversing with Congressman McSweeney and
did not catch it.

Mr. Jones. Let us assume your amendment is adopted. The ad-
visory councils in wheat, we will say, representing more than 50 per
cent of that commodity, have met in the respective districts and
have taken action favorably, then the board may still veto action
on every other condition that is laid down; that 1s, numbers 1 and
2 here, or they may veto action under the other rovisions in this
section, if they do not want to go into that commodity. They would
still have that authority.

Mr. Gray. Yes; but as I said a while ago, Congressman Jones,
with the make-up of these councils and recommendations represent-
ing in the aggregate more than 50 per cent of the commodity being
operated upon or to be operated upon——

Mr. JonEs. I realize the persuasive force of that.

Mr. Gray. There is a persuasive force which the
Board would be very much embarrassed to disregard.

Mr. Jones. But the other condition is not binding.

Mr. PurneLL. Certain other conditions must be found to exist
by the board. Even then they may ignore the recommendations
brought up to them by the councils.

Mr. Gray. I have said so.

Mr. Fort. Mr. Gray, there is one point in there that I want to
ask you about. As I said before, the section as originally drawn
made it necessary for the board to find as a fact that the commodity
councils favored it, and that a substantial number of cooperatives
representing the producers of the commodity favored it. That was
the old language, was it not?

Mr. Gray. Yes.

Mr. Fort. That was a finding of fact the board had to make.
Now, by changing this, you have eliminated that as a necessary
finding of fact by the board. They have nothing to say as to whether
a substantial number favors or not. It is not for them to determine,
and that will be a legal question as to when that has happened.

Mr. Gray. That position is testified to by 50 per cent or more of
the commodity producers being represented in these recommenda-
tions.

Mr. Fort. I want to bring out whether this is your purpose. As
you have now drawn it you have said when the advisory councils
representing 50 per cent of the producers. representing districts