548

AGRICULTURAL RELIEF
i
tion that presents itself to the great Middle West there, as to why itis.
And if they were asking the Government to give it or if they were
asking the miller to give it and somebody else to pay the fee, then it
would be understandable. -

Mr. AnpErsoN. Oh, but you are asking the railroad to pay and
you are asking the miller to pay.

Mr. Apkins. In what way?

Mr. ANDERSON. I will get to that thing in a moment. I would
prefer to develop it in my own way.

Mr. Apkins. The people in the country have some doubt now as
to just why this particular feature is opposed and why all this talk
about the equalization fee, and that seems to be the “fly in the
ointment,’’ and I would like to get your reaction into the record as
to why all this opposition to it. Why not let them try it, and unless
it does work to the disadvantage of the miller and the public gener-
ally, let it go along?

Mr. AxpERsoON. Our solicitude is due entirely to the fact that we
think it will not work, and that if it does not work it will not only
hurt the farmers but it will hurt us. Let me make this perfectly
clear.

Mr. Apkins. I am asking the question in good faith, so far as I
am concerned.

Mr. ANpERsoN. I make no claim to representing any farmers at all.

Mr. ApkiNs. Oh, no; I understand that.

Mr. AnpersoN. Perhaps I should say I want to be entirely frank.
I represent here what you gentlemen might consider a selfish interest.
If this bill works—if it works I think it would help us just as much
as it would help the farmer, because it will provide an export market
for flour as it will provide an export market for wheat, on a basis
which will enable us to operate on a higher domestic level and on a
lower foreign level.

Mr. ApkiNs. Yes.

Mr. ANDERSON. So that if I thought this bill would work I would
be here favoring it, not opposing it; because if it will work it will
work in our favor as well as it will work in the farmer’s favor.

‘Mr. Apkins. Ishould think so. If that is true, then here is another
vital question in this matter: If all the disasters that are said to fol-
low the attempted operation of this, where will it hurt the miller?
Who will be hurt outside of the farmers? Maybe we can get together
on this proposition.

Mr. ANpErsoN. I think that the inevitable result of legislation of
this kind is to break down the regular commercial channels—break
down the ordinary flow, the regular flow in commercial channels of
commodities. What this does is practically to set up a new channel
of commerce, does it not?

Mr. Apkins. Yes.

, Mr. ANpERsoN. If we should find ourselves at the end of a period
of operation with a failure of this business to work, then we would
have to reestablish all of the structure which has been broken down
in consequence of this operation, and that means losses to us as well
as to the farmer.

Mr. Apxins. Now, suppose we go to operate on wheat, and that is
what your organization is interested in; I do not think any farmer
wants to break down the milling industry, if he knows his stuff.