692 
AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 
(d) ‘That for such insurance cooperative associations be required to pay a 
premium adequate on the average to cover the risks involved. 
(¢) That an insurance agreement which provides that insurance payments may 
be made out of the stabilization fund for the commodity during any marketing 
period, may be entered into by the board only in case the board determines that 
the effect of such an insurance agreement will be to enable such cooperative 
association to stabilize the market substantially in the interest of producers 
whether or not they are members of the cooperative association insured. 
It is recognized that over a period of years and in most of the years during 
the period, the market price for a commodity which is capable of being stored 
and held with safety will average higher during the period from the end of one 
harvest to the commencement of the hext, than it does during the harvest or 
delivery period itself. This must be true or those agencies which purchase 
and store commodities for later resale could not remain in business. But there 
are seasons which are exceptions to this rule and it is against those exceptional 
seasons that the cooperative associations are seeking the insurance which this 
section would provide. 
VI. Cooperative associations (new section): As a precautionary provision a 
new section is recommended substantially as follows: 
“Nothing in this act is intended or shall be construed to repeal or modify 
any provision of the act entitled ‘ An act to authorize association of producers of 
agricultural products,” approved February 18, 1922.” 
VII. Procedure if enjoined: The language of the act as drawn specifically 
requires the board, whenever certain findings of fact have been made, to put 
into effect marketing agreements provided in section 7 that will secure the objects 
set forth in section 1, and to finance the agreements by equalization fees. It 
might well be that under certain circumstances produced by litigation, as, for 
instance, the enjoining of the collection of the equalization fee in substantial 
amounts, the board would find it a wise policy to suspend entirely the collection 
of the fee upon the commodity. It may be that the present language of the bill 
does not deprive the board of discretion in such a contingency. In that event, 
however, it is determined that the board is not vested with such discretion, it is 
suggested that the committee consider the desirability of the inclusion of a 
specific provision upon the subject. 
Pursuant to your suggestion, we are cooperating with the legislative counsel 
in drafting the foregoing recommendations as amendments to H. R. 7940, for 
the committee’s consideration. 
We wish to take this occasion to thank your committee for the interest it 
has shown, and for its courtesy during the extended hearings upon this measure. 
Respectfully submitted. 
American Farm Bureau Federation, by S. H. Thompson, its president; 
the Corn Belt Committee, by William Hirth, its president and 
py F. M. Murphy, chairman of its legislative committee; Indiana 
Farm Bureau, by W. H. Settle, its president; Central State 
Soft Wheat Growers Association, by W. H. Settle, general 
manager; North Dakota Wheat Growers Association, South 
Dakota Wheat Growers Association, Minnesota Wheat Growers 
Association, Minnesota Council of Agriculture, by F. W. Mur- 
shy, their legislative representative; North Central States 
Agricultural Conference, by Forge N. Peck, its chairman; 
Nebraska Farm Bureau, by C. B. Steward, its secretary; Com- 
mittee For Agricultural Service, by Chester C. Davis; Illinois 
Agricultural Association, by Earl C. Smith, its president; Amer- 
can Cotton Growers Exchange, by B. W. Kilgore, its chairman 
-egislative committee; Burley Tobacco Growers Association, by 
J. N. Kehoe, its vice president; Dark Tobacco Growers Asso- 
-iation, by Reams D. Farmer, its secretary; Mississippi Staple 
Cotton Cooperative Association, by its president. 
H. R. 7940 OVERWHELMINGLY INDORSED BY FARM ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS 
During the first session of the Seventieth Congress H. R. 7940, known as the 
McNary-Haugen farm relief bill, has been indorsed by the farm organizations, 
a partial list of the indorsements of the bill, including the equalization fee, filed 
with the committee during the present session of the Seventieth Congress, includes 
the following besides thousands of individuals from all parts of the United States. 
especially from the South and West: