<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0">
  <teiHeader>
    <fileDesc>
      <titleStmt>
        <title>Agricultural relief</title>
      </titleStmt>
      <publicationStmt />
      <sourceDesc>
        <bibl>
          <msIdentifier>
            <idno>183193440X</idno>
          </msIdentifier>
        </bibl>
      </sourceDesc>
    </fileDesc>
  </teiHeader>
  <text>
    <body>
      <div>AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 
187 
Mr. Keno. To stabilize his product, the man on the outside, 
whether he joins the organization or not, under the equalization fee, 
will bear his share of the burden. Yes. 
Mr. CLARKE. We all grant that. What I wanted to get was your 
reason as to how it would develop your cooperatives. 
Mr. Kenor. I have been interested in cooperative marketing for 
the past five years; I have been giving my time to it, not because I 
wanted to be connected with the cooperative oroanization—I do not 
think there is anybody engaged in farming that cares to be con- 
nected with any kind of an organization that takes his time. And it 
has taken 75 per cent of my time. 
Mr. CLarkE. I have been a member of this cooperative for years 
because it was the only answer, as far as I am concerned, and we have 
been doing for the last year’s business between %60,000.000 and 
$70,000,000 per year. 
Mr. Kenok. Yes; and vou could do it with equally honest officials 
and half the membership. The membership of a cooperative will 
cut no particular item if you have equlization fee. And if a man 
does not care to join that will be all right. Ten per cent of the 
people engaged in the industry could operate the cooperatives. 
The scle purpose of the cooperatives would then be to take the 
surplus off of the market and intelligently market it. It is not so 
much a question of certain organizations as it is of results. 
The greatest trouble that the cocperatives row have is to get a 
hundred per cent nembership in and to hold them and to please 
them and to satisfy every member. 
Mr. Care. Do you not believe if you had a membership, for 
instance, in your Burley tobacco organization of 65 to 70 per cent, 
with the proper financing of the thing, that you could handle the 
situation? 
Mr. Kenor. We had 60 or 70 per cent. 
Mr. CLarkEe. Had you? 1 thought you said 50 per cent. 
Mr. Kenoe. No, sir; at the finish we had 50 per cent, but we had 
over 70 per cent to start. We could borrow money at 414 per cent; 
we could borrow it cheaper than I could do myself, individually, and 
cheaper than most businesses could do. We established our credit 
thoroughly; there was no question about that; there was no com- 
plaint about our operation. But we could not change human nature, 
by organization. It takes law to get people, all of them, to do the 
same thing. 
Mr. Care. It does not seem to, according to the eighteenth 
amendment. 
Mr. AsweLL. Mr. Kehoe, may I ask one question? 
Mr. Kenok. I think the gentleman from Michican desired to ask 
a question. 
Mr. Kercuam. If I got your idea correctly, it was that with the 
establishment of the equalization fee, so far as Burley tobacco is 
concerned, that the difficulties you had in getting all the peonie to 
bear the burden of the loss, will be solved and the energies of your 
cooperatives may be restricted to the processing and assembling and 
financing and the problems that relate to 1t, and that other side; 
1s that your idea? 
Mr. Kenoe. I would extend a little further, Congressman. and 
say all commodities as well as Burley tobacco.</div>
    </body>
  </text>
</TEI>
