606 AGRICULTURAL RELIEF Mr. Yoakum. I am just calling your attention to one thing. "It is published and advertised and heralded through propaganda throughout the country—even our President once referred to it— that marketing cooperation was making great progress; that this last year they handled $2,500,000,000. Mr. Apkins. I understand all that. Mr. Yoakum. Hold on. It does not make any difference if they handled $12,000,000,000. It is not in handling. It is the money they make. ‘That two and a half billion dollars is to-day banked in all the country in spots. Why? Because they have not one great power, one controlling power to establish and maintain prices for this two and a half billion. If they had they would have been rich men to-day. Mr. Apkins. The point I am trying to get at—you do not under- stand my question. Mr. Yoakum. I think I do. Mr. Apkins. The point I am trying to get at is this: Under the law—we have all sorts of Federal and State laws, enabling laws for cooperation. But I can not conceive of any sort of either national or local organization, that is, if the wheat producers of the country wanted to organize and operate as you suggest, they did not have authority of law to do it. The point 1 want to get at is, what sort of legislation or what sort of authority you want to give the Federal Government that would assist those fellows, that they have authority of law to do now in working out their schemes? That is the point Mr. Yoakum. Give them a Federal charter, with authority to maintain the rates or pass upon all shipments, interstate or foreign, and you have got it solved. Mr. Apkins. The thought I had in mind, Mr. Yoakum—— Mr. Yoakum. We are talking of wheat. Mr. Apkins. That is just to illustrate. Mr. Yoakum. Wheat is only 10 per cent. Mr. Apkins. They can do that now. But the point I had in mind is, what enabling legislation we would have to have that would be of any assistance to them in doing that; for instance, the wheat pool of Indiana, the wheat pool of the Northwest could get together an almost nation-wide wheat pool. They attempted it once in this country and failed on it, I think. The point I had in mind was what you have studied out now that will enable them, whether compulsory or how, to enable them to do that. They have au- thority of law to do it now; for instance, if they should want to organize a nation-wide organization—and that seems to be a popular idea and virtually what you have in mind—controlling the wheat production of the country. They would not get enough farmers voluntarily to sign up. Here is an association in Indiana, a number of them in Illinois, one in the Northwest. Thus far their carrying charges have been high. The point I had in mind now is this: They can undoubtedly get together and do the things you are stating. What authority have you in mind in a law that would be of assistance to those fellows in carrying out the very thing you advocate and the very thing they are trying to do? The point I do not get clear from your talk is the character of legislation that will help them, where they have authority of law now to go ahead and do things to help them. I just can not see