628 AGRICULTURAL RELIEF every dollar’s of tariff they paid when manufactured and exported? They only paid $46,841.33 to the Treasury. I would like for some of you fellows who are great advocates of the tariff on wheat to tell me why the big millers of this country should only pay 1 cent a bushel tariff for the wheat that is brought into this country from Canada, when they bring it in and mix it with 30 per cent American wheat and export it, and yet the little miller or any other American citizen who wants that wheat must pay 42 cents a bushel on it. Since 1922, the six years under this Fordney-McCumber tariff bill, with that tariff on wheat—first 30 cents and then 42 cents— with the big miller having the valuable privilege of drawing down 99 cents on the dollar of every dollar of tariff they pay after they pro- cess and export it, whereas they should have paid if they had paid like the little fellow who imports his wheat, to the Federal Treasury in the last six years of $23,126,163, when, as a matter of fact, he did not pay but 1 per cent of it. As I say, it is alarming when you see the advantages they have, and the principal importers of wheat are the big millers who pay 1 cent tariff, and the American farmer or the little fellow who brings it in for domestic consumption pays 42 cents tariff. Yet there are a few fellows running over the country and trying to tell the farmers that the tariff on wheat is for the benefit of the American farmer. If those fellows did not have that privilege, instead of going out and paying 42 cents a bushel on 11,000,000 bushels of wheat, as they did last year, they would take 11,000,000 bushels of wheat from the American farmer. That is what would benefit them. But be- cause they pay only 1 cent a bushel tariff and get 11,000,000 bushels of wheat from the Canadian farmer; and then we are trying to get ——— of the surplus. I want to put these in the record. The CrAIRMAN. Have vou stated from what source the statistics come? Mr. KincaerLoe. This is a statement prepared by the United States Tariff Commission, statistical division. The CuairMaN. And it gives the percentage of mixtures? Mr. KincaeELOE. Oh, no; the law gives that. The CuarrMAN. To what extent was it mixed with domestic wheat? 1 believe you said 30 per cent. I am interested in those figures. “Mr. KincaLoe. I am giving the total number of bushels of wheat imported into this country since 1922, by years. The CuareMaN. I understood you to say it was mixed with domes- tic wheat and exported. Mr. KincarLoE. I will state this, under the flexible provision of the tariff on wheat of the Fordney-McCumber tariff law, the American miller, as I say, who imports wheat into this country and mixes as much as 30 per cent of American wheat with it, grinds it inte flour and its by-products and exports under that law, that miller has the right to go back to the customhouse and draw back 99 cents out of every dollar of tariff paid. So this gives the number of bushels of wheat and this gives what he should have paid to the Federal Treasury if he had paid like the little fellow; and this is what he did not pay. Mr. AsweLL. How are you going to correct it? I was wondering if the Haugen bill would correct that.