AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 
679 
Unless 1t 18 intended to make the tariff apply to the benefits of 
agriculture, and to prevent world prices and world conditions from 
establishing our prices 1n staple commodities, there is no need for 
legislation as far as a great many of the most important Crops are 
concerned. 
When you talk about establishing a board to deal with these 
problems, without providing a sound and dependable source of funds 
to take care of losses incurred in maintaining a market in this coun- 
try above world prices as we operate now, it is pure nonsense. 
To set up another agency to go into the market to buy at a low 
price and sell at a higher price, would be ridiculous. We have too 
many agencles operating on that basis now—so many that to main- 
tain them all forces a wider margin than is justified between what 
the farmer receives and what the world market will pay, in order 
that those engaged in that business can make a living. The more 
agencies there are operating on that basis the less the farmer receives 
in the long run. 
In the case of wheat we look up the Liverpool quotations, deduct 
26 cents or so, depending on the part of the country you live in, for 
freight, add a little for overhead expenses, estiinate what can be 
gained by the mixing process, then the price is fixed and quoted, and 
that almost invariably establishes the price of all the wheat that 
changes hands in this country regardless of where it is used or con- 
sumed. The result is that instead of selling at world price plus 
tariff, we who grow wheat in this country get world price minus 
transportation. The result is that the wage earners of Europe 
generally pay around 26 cents a bushel more for wheat than the wage 
earners of America, although the European laborer receives only 
about a third of the wage that is paid in this country. 
This condition continues throughout the year and from year to 
year, as long as there is an estimated surplus in this country. It 1s 
not only a real surplus existing that does the harm, but an estinated 
one has the same effect. At the end of the year we find there has 
not been too much wheat, but that it has all been consumed, except 
the normal carryover and if that is a little larger than average by 
the end of the next year it is all gone and the world is better off by 
having it, everyone except the farmer himself. 
The world is not producing too much wheat or corn or hogs or 
cattle or cotton. The world production of these crops is all consumed, 
and yet at times millions go hungry and are poorly and insufficiently 
dressed. 
I hope we can get at the problem, that is to provide the means 
whereby prices can be meintained that will give to the farmer their 
cost of production plus a reasonable profit. We can only do that by 
maintaining a price ecuitable with prices of all other commodities, 
which are maintained by artificial means such as tariffs and 1mmi- 
ration laws. } . 
© If this brings a problem of overproduction—which I do not believe 
it will—let us meet that problem when it appears. Just a glance 
backward over the years that we produced too much, as has been 
argued, should suffice. Where hast all gone to? Where is it to-day?