AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 651 and that it 1s a disgrace that the man willin ; get the opportunity to work. & to work for it can not Mr. Kercuam. I subscribe to your views along that line most heartily. Mr. WaLLace. I am glad of it, and I wish the business interests of the country would see it also. Mr. Forr. Mr. Wallace, you and I, I guess, are the two who strictly represent the consumers? Mr. WaLrack. I think so. Mr. Fort. You feel as I do, do you not, that the consumers of this country would not object to a reasonable increase in the cost of living if it were necessary only to give the farmers fair treatment? Mr. WaLrace. That has been the burden of my testimony. Mr. Fort. I say that, because I am so often accused here of representing the consumer, as though the consumer’s attitude were necessarily antagonistic. It is not, is it? Mr. WaLLace. It should not be, and it is not. Mr. Fort. Well, it is not, is it? Mr. WaLrace. Not those consumers that I come in contact with. Mr. Fort. Neither is it with those I come in contact with. Mr. WaLLace. But, Mr. Fort, there is this exception: There are some people representing the consumers who kick mightily when something is suggested that would bring a cure, and we are not kicking against a cure. We are not objecting to a cure. Mr. Fort. Neither am I. Mr. FuLmeRr. That was one of the objections of the President, was it not, Mr. Wallace? Mr. WarLrace. I do not know. Mr. FuLmEeR. That it would increase the price to the consumer? Mr. WarLace. Well, I do not agree with him, if he said that. Mr. Fort. There would be an objection, Mr. Wallace, to any increase in the cost to the consumer unless the farmer got the benefit of it. Mr. WaLrace. Oh, absolutely. The men in between the farmer and the consumer are very well able to take care of themselves. Mr. AswerLL. I think two such distinguished consumers as you and Mr. Fort should be appointed a committee to fix up this bill. Mr. Kercuam. Just a little time ago I understood you to say that you were here favoring this particular McNary-Haugen bill because, as you understood it, it was theonly plan that had yet been presented that would seem to be capable of doing the business; and then 1 thought I heard you say that if any other plan could be devised that would do the things that you generally favor here in behalf of the farmers that you would not be opposed to that proposition? Mr. WaLLace. Let me answer in my own langauge. I have come to the conclusion that the great problem of the farmer is his surplus. [—class selfishly again, or representing the workers—do not want to reduce that surplus because I consider that our margin of safety. Now, if some plan can be presented that will take care of that sur- plus without it being an incubus on the backs of the farmers that plan would meet with our approval just exactly. Mr. AsweLL. That is what we are trying to reach; that is what this committee is undertaking to do. Mr. Apkins. I would like to ask the gentleman a question.