AGRICULTURAL RELIEF

565
this is a marketing problem, not a tariff problem; and that the
thing which can be done is to get for the farmer during a crop year
and over a series of years the economic value of his crop, whatever
it is, and in my judgment that is all that can be done.

Mr. Jones. You would simply undertake to solve the problem of
marketing only and leave the tariff, in so far as this particular meas-
ure 1s concerned, untouched.

Mr. AnpersoN., Except as it would be affected by the better
organization you would create behind the market.

Mr. Jones. Just one more question on the problem of artificial
prices. If such artificial prices are created and maintained by the
tariff, is not the matter of equalizing it the main issue before the
committee?

Mr. ANpERsoON. I do not regard it as such.

Mr. Jones. You think the whole farm movement has been mis-
taken in the idea that the prices of all the products they buy have
gone up about 75 or 100 per cent in the last 10 years?

Mr. ANpERsON. I am not disputing the facts, whatever the facts
may be. The indexes of level of prices of industrial commodities
rs compared with the index of prices of agricultural commodities
does show and has shown for several years a disadvantage to the
agricultural producer, taking those indexes as the basis for measuring
the relative price position.

Mr. Jones. What did cause that if the manufactured articles
have not been increased by virtue of the tariff? Those fellows who
are the victims of the tariff must be mistaken about its increasing the
price of the products they buy. What do you attribute that un-
balanced condition to if it is not the tariff?

Mr. AnpersoN. I think it is due to a great many factors. Jt is
due in part to the fact that we have increased our acreage in the case
of wheat and at times it has been due to the fact that we have in-
creased our acreage in the case of cotton; and it is due to the fact
that there has been a marked increase in the cost of distributing all
sorts of commodities, not only industrial products but manufactured
food products, and that this as well as the tariff has contributed very
materially to this disparity between the price of raw materials and
the price of manufactured products.

Mr. Jones. If the cost of distribution has increased in so far as
manufactured products is concerned, as well as to farm products,
bag Wald not cause any disparity—that might cause increased cost
to both.

Mr. ANDERSON. It has increased relatively more.

Mr. Jones. It has increased relatively. Then if the farmer has
increased production the criticism that some have made, that he has
not worked, is certainly not correct?

Mr. ANnpERrsoN. No. }

Mr. Jones. Thet criticism I have heard, and I will state to the
gentleman he has never made that statement, but I say it is heard
occasionally. Then your plan does not undertake to make the tariff
effective in so far as the farmer is concerned?

Mr. AnpERsoN. It does not purport to give the farmer a stimu-
lated price in the sense of a price above the economic level which the
crop ought to bring in the market.

R6160—28—sER BE. PT T——— ¢