Agricultural relief: Agricultural relief

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1831932415

Document type:: Multivolume work

Title:: Agricultural relief

Place of publication:: Washington

Publisher:: Gov. Pr. Off.

Year of publication:: 1928

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Volume

Identifikator:: 1831934884

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-232132

Document type:: Volume

Title:: Agricultural relief

Volume count:: Pt. 6

Place of publication:: Washington

Publisher:: Gov. Pr. Off.

Year of publication:: 1928

Scope:: III S., S. 429 - 520

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

AGRICULTURAL RELIEF STATEMENT OF XENOPHON CAVERNO—Resumed 171 Mr. AsweLL. Mr. Caverno, when you were on the stand on Fri- day, you said toward the end of your statement, referring to Senator McNary—I am reading from the record—‘We had a conference last summer and again in December,” you left him with the understand- ing that he would not introduce a bill with the fee in it; and then you went on, you said you did not speak for the Senator, but you knew what he meant, that a bill with a fee in it vetoed “would be just as valuable as any bill that the same people would allow to be passed.” Did you mean that? Mr. CaverNo. Senator McNary told our group last December that if he could find any other bill, proposed by the administration or anybody else, that would give the farmer a measure of relief, and if it did not contain the equilization fee he wanted to serve notice on us that he would feel obliged to support that measure. And then I said when Senator McNary introduced a bill with the equalization fee in it—this is what I intended to get across—that it meant that he had not had anything proposed to him that would benefit the farmer any more than the McNary-Haugen bill with the equalization fee in it, vetoed. Mr. AsweLL. But then you followed that up—— Mr. Caverno. I distinctly said I did not speak for Senator McNary. Mr. AsweLL. You followed that up with this statement addressed to me “I will say this, that you have proposed a bill that would help cotton and would not help anybody else, and, being a cotton farmer, if you will pass that bill I will go home and put my whole farm in cotton.” You said that would help cotton and be such a good bill that you would go into the cotton business wholeheartedly. Do you think that is better than a vetoed bill? Mr. Caverno. Oh, yes; Senator McNary was not speaking about cotton. Mr. AsweLL. Well, but you said at that time that this bill was such a good cotton bill that you wolud go home and put your whole farm in cotton? Mr. Caverno. Well, Doctor, you know just about what I meant. Mr. AsweLL. No; I want to know what you meant. Mr. Cavervo. I will not go home and put my whole farm into cotton. But I simply wanted to bring out that that kind of a bill would help cotton but it would not help northern crops; and I do not think it would help cotton very much. Mr. AsweLL. You said you would go home and put your w ole farm in cotton. Mr. Caverno. I tried to see that thing fairly, and I took occasion to drop into Mr. Ketcham’s office Saturday and ask him if he could figure out how the northern crop.would be helped by the Aswell bill. I wanted to go to a man interested in northern crops and see if IT was reading this bill straight. If any of you gentlemen can explain to me how the Aswell bill will help wheat or any of the northern crops I shall be glad to learn, because I do not see it now. Mr. WirLiams. Will it not work exactly the same way with the equilization fee, up until such time as the revolving fund is exhausted? In other words, it will work exactly the same for at least two vears.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Agricultural relief (Pt. 6)

Multivolume work

Volume

Table of contents

Download

Volume

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation