572 
AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 
Mi. SExAUER. I agree with that. But I do not believe that they 
have gone quite far enough back in that discussion to arrive at the 
basic things which have caused those. I would think that the things 
which caused increased cost of distribution are mostly costs of labor 
and costs of material; which, again, are costs of labor; and costs of 
labor, perhaps, are brought about by competitive conditions in labor; 
and then you can trace back, as did the Business Men’s Commission, 
to certain immigration laws, which were passed for Americanization 
purposes, that artificially stimulated the demand for labor or de- 
creased the supply of labor in this country; and, consequently, those 
costs have increased farmers’ costs. Probably certain other legisla- 
tion which has been passed for the purpose of protecting other 
branches of industry have also added to the cost, if not directly, at 
least indirectly. 
Mr. Kercaam. Labor, as I understand your statement, is the 
very largest factor in the situation. At the present time the labor 
index is 228. 
Mr. SExAUER. Is what? 
Mr. Kercaam. The idex is 228 for labor. 
Mr. SExaUER. I make this statement that the largest portion of 
the cost of anything, except basic raw materials, when you finally 
analyze it back to the final point, is labor. The cost of machinery 
is plus the cost of every part of machinery, plus cost of mining it, 
plus all the other labor costs, which extend back through all of its 
I piilextions is not the only factor which may cause the high cost of 
abor. 
Mr. Kercaam. I am not interested particularly in naming the 
measures, excepting I wanted to get, if I could, the principal factors 
in your own mind that cause the present farm situations 
Mr. SExavERr. I agree that increased taxes, etc., do make farmers’ 
costs higher. But I think that the things which cause those things 
which Warren, Faris, and Burnett I refer to, and who also state 
that the taxes are pretty much all labor. So it traces back to things 
which are more fundamental than thoes rather superficial things as 
taxes. 
Mr. Kercaam. If I recall the figures of Warren and Pearson they 
run something like this, in expressing the ratio of these various factors 
that enter into the high farm costs: They place interest as 1, they put 
local taxes as 2. But they put the costs of distribution at 6; in that 
same ratio, calling interest 1, taxes 2, and costs of distribution in 
which index, labor is an important factor, they put costs of distribu- 
tion as 6-6, 2 and 1 express the index among various items that they 
put into their explanation as to high costs. 
Mr. SExaUER. The increased costs of interest comes about there, 
again, because by fundamental debts which have created other 
indebtedness. So that, again, is not fundamental. It is a factor 
which appears at the present time, but there is something back of 
that which has caused that increased cost of interest. For instance, if 
a man owned a farm free and clear, and because of agricultural 
depression found it necessary to put a mortgage on it to pay taxes 
and pay for his living, his interest costs would be increased, but his 
costs would not be increased because of interest, but because of some 
other factors back of that which caused his interest costs to be 
increased.