64

AGRICULTURAL RELIEF
anybody else?”” Now he insists on having his surplus handled out of
the equalization fee, and the question arose with me whether that
would be operated or not, so long as there was anything of the
equalization fee left to operate it. Had you thought of that at all?

Mr. Gray. We have discussed that.

Mr. Apkins. You know human nature. We can not change
he Have you thought about that or discussed that at all?

r. Gray. We have.

Mr. Apkins. Do you think it would ever be operated while there
was any of the fund left?

Mr. Gray. It is a hard question to answer. It would depend,
Congressman Adkins, upon the attitude and the decision of the board
of directors of the cooperative organizations.

Mr. Apkins. I am asking you a practical question now. That is
the thought I had in mind. I said myself that I would be willing to
try it out on one thing, but I would not want to give the other fellow
the privilege of using the fund while I was trying it out on this fellow.
That works a little like the fellow that had a remedy for measles and
got scared of it, and they had a simple boy in the family and they
finally decided they would try it out on John, and if it didn’t kill him
then the rest of the family would use it. In other words, the thought
I had in mind was, Will we debar the other fellow from access to the
stabilization fund until such time as some group decides to try it out
because I question very much whether the corn growers in my neigh.
borhood—and I think we have pretty loyal cooperative elevator com-
panies—that if our companies would join with others to say “Here
we want an operating period on corn, and we want you to estimate
the size of the fee that will be needed to take care of this loss, and we
will take it.” I do not know whether our membership might disin-
tergrate on that proposition or not, and say, “That is a pretty thing
bo hand fo the corn growers, and stabilize other people’s surplus out
or one . easury. N ow you are imposing it on us.” Have you

Mr. Gray. Yes; and that is one of the reasons for our organiza-
tion standing against any farm relief bill that holds primarily and
fundamentally the danger of disintegrating loyalty to the coo, era
tive organizations, for the simple reason that a man does not Heed
ip ney cooperator in order to get the benefit of this hand-out by
eral lreasury; and i i
yours, and we dou oy oo have been discussing that for several
Mr. Apxins (interposing). Wh i ind i i
¢ . t1h
of putting thot oa om w 61 ad in mind is as to the widsom
r. KINCHELOE. id}
in hs bill, hror Why do you want to put the McNary provision
r. Gray. Because, if you will read b i
nary s pl, you will find that those Jitu tn sain 8 pf Seay
wo ul d call ox derly mar oti” Those loans can be used for what I
Mr. K .
i mers da LO. They can get that under the Haugen bill that
Mr. Apkins. Y i
die provisions of os Nan orderly marketing of the surplus, under
keting of all - oes not pertain to the general mar-
g _ our commodities, domestic use of the ¢ di
understand it, but this other feature that we ar OThIND ity, as 1
e speaking about, if