AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 305 back to every subordinate grange in the Union and there is the lec- ture hour the decisions of the national body are made tovics of con- sideration. { am mentioning that only to indicate that snap judgment is not very often taken by the organization, and its conclusions and its con- victions usually translate into resolution form the best collective judgment of the membership. I am saying that because I want to discuss our attitude on farm relief in order that there may be no misunderstanding. The Grange has tried to be constructive and helpful; it hopes not to be destructive. In the farm relief situation it is not new with us. We commenced the fight in 1868. We were active in the seventies, the eighties, and the nineties, and down through the years. We have tried to support the propositions that would favor agri- culture as a whole. In this particular instance our organization has not opposed legislation upon which there was a strong farm organiza- tion movement, and I am only going to ask one favor of this com- mittee, and only one: I do not want this committee to attempt to put me in the attitude of opposing some particular piece of legislation that other farm organizations honestly in their best judgment favor. The Grange wants team work and cooperation, we hope that the rommittee will not question and will not require us to point out why we do not favor legislation urged by other groups. We want to present to this committee the reasons why this organization believes that our program is a program that should be adopted, and along that line we shall try to direct our attention. Coming directly to the legislation pending, I will say frankly that our organization has not favored the legislation that has received the endorsement of this committee. That the record may be clear and we may be understood, will state that our executive committee in 1924, in the emergency that then appeared, went on record favoring the passage of the then McNary-Haugen bill. That matter was re- ferred to the National Grange at its Atlantic City session, and the action of the executive committee was not sustained. - I am mentioning that in order that our position may be clear. It has never been obstructive; we have not sought to inject our program or to interfere with some other program, but we have endeavored to do something that would relieve the agricultural inequality. Mr. Kixcurnoe. Has the executive committee endorsed the Me- Nary-Haugen bill? Mr. Taser. Grange law provides that between session of the Na- tional Grange the executive committee is the legislative body for the National Grange and acts for it on matters on which the grange has not gone on record. Our organization has never gone on record for or against the principles of the McNary-Haugen bill. There has been introduced in the last Congress by Mr. Adkins what we might call the rough draft of the export debenture idea. There has been introduced in Congress by Mr. Jones—and I want to pause to say that our distinguished friend from Texas has shown a more sympathetic appreciation of the basic problems affecting agriculture, as we understand them, than many Members of Congress, and there Is much in the bills he has introduced. And I notice, Mr. Jones, that you have a still further improved copy of your bill.