116

AGRICULTURAL RELIEF
between the board and cooperative agencies, you should not put
the board in the money-lending business any more than you have to.
I think the best plan is to assist the cooperatives to get the money
to carry the surplus instead of putting the board in this business.
That is my opinion of the proposition now before you.

Mr. Apkins. Now, then, if I get from your general statement
there, and there has been a good deal of talk and agitation proposed,
all in good faith, of course, of taking this revolving fund and lending
it to the cooperatives, or to some corporation operating under the
direction of this board, or permit one big handler to hold it and loan
the money and go ahead and merchandize the surplus—in other
words, before you could operate, you would have to organize a cor-
poration of cooperatives on a big scale and lend them the money to
operate on that scheme. I have always been opposed to that on the
theory of permitting the cooperatives or these corporations handling
it that way. What is your opinion about that?

Mr. BLEDSOE. I know how the cotton cooperatives generally handle
cotton. Now, if I were in the money-lending business, I do not
know exactly what kind of an arrangement I could make with the
present cooperatives, but I do not believe I could settle this surplus
problem by loaning them money. In other words, you want to set
up in this bill, or you propose to set up, a corporation, a cooperative
association, and you propose that that corporation go out in the
market and buy cotton—I refer to cotton because I don’t understand
wheat or corn or any commodity, I just have a general knowledge of
them. I know about marketing cotton particularly, although I
confess that I am finding out some new things every fow days.

When you set up this corporation for these cooperatives, you are
asking a cooperative association to assume the function of actual
buying merchants. But merchants have two systems; the big cotton
merchants have a special system for buying cotton, and another
system for selling it. On the other hand, cooperatives are simply
selling agencies. For example, in my organization we are cotton
sellers. If the board were to attempt to operate under your buying-in
plan, I would think a long time before I would be willing to enter into
ap opo . ion that is likely to be not exactly right. A cooperative is

ying organization, it is a selling organization. Remember
that. Do 1 ag myself plain?

I. Apkins. You have; b i |
o wk rou Ea ut before I get through with you, I want
r. BLEDSOE. I think that under the insurance feature we have
proposed, Jad wiih dll pf these other provisions, the cooperatives
handle a fa aro ively. If cooperatives were enabled to
with the costs of surplus control operationss - re Se Pe
commodity, they could do the job  mioally then in any
other wav. F the job more economically than in any
o! al iq er example, in cotton, you have four big items of cost
the loss 8 Va ooo: The cost of producing, the cost of selling,
fourth what is kno In carrying a nonperishable commodity; and,
prilvadd ied i. WD in cling as the difference in premiums and dis-
You are asking the undred different kinds of cotton to handle.
ful man to ear it Sooperative to carry the surplus—and the right-
armer—but when we relieve the farmer of