58 
AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 
Now they are talking about getting a bill through that the Presi- 
dent will sign. Mr. Purnell said that was the practical question; 
that we are sure if we pass a bill with the equalization fee and revolv- 
ing fund in it he will not sign it. We do not know whether the 
President would sign it or not. If I understand it, you people are 
standing for a certain definite policy. 
Mr. Gray. We are. 
Mr. KincaELOE. Whether we agree with you or not, and because 
a bill fails in Congress or is vetoed by the President I don’t presume 
has much effect on changing your ideas about fundamental prinei- 
ples, and if I understand you, not only your organization but all of 
them that Mr. Thompson read here the other day, are still for a 
farm bill with an equalization fee in it. 
Mr. Gray. We are. 
Mr. KincHELOE. And you are not for any bill that does not carry 
an equalization fee? 
Mr. Gray. We are not. 
Mr. KiNncHELOE. So you would be satisfied, if I understand you, 
with the original Haugen bill that is now before the committee, 
where the board was appointed directly by the President, instead of 
being recommended by the farmers, as in the bill we passed. 
Mr. Gray. Yes. The bill as introduced, in regard to the make-up 
of the Federal farm board, is satisfactory to us. You are referring 
to H. R. 7940? 
Mr. KincHELOE. Yes. I say you would be satisfied with a bill 
where the board is appointed directly by the President instead of 
being appointed upon recommendation of the farm organizations 
of the country, as it was in the original bill that was passed at the 
last session of Congress. 
Mr. Gray. That is satisfactory to us. 
Mr. KincueLok. Do you know any farm organization of this 
country that is against the McNary-Haugen bill? Well, I will say 
that is against the principle of the equalization fee, except perhaps. 
the Grange? 
Mr. Gray. That is on record against the principle of the equaliza- 
tion fee? 
Mr. KincuELOE. Yes. 
Mr. Gray. I donot know that any organization has gone on record 
specifically on the negative side of that question. I do not recollect 
that even the National Grange has gone on record negatively against 
the equalization fee. They have their program, which is a debenture 
plan, and which I am not, of course, in position to explain or criticize, 
so far as that goes; but these farm organizations are working very 
congenially together. They differ sometimes on projects, but that 
does not harm or sever our relationships; but I am here representing, 
and these other groups are here representing our judgment in behalf 
of our program. If some other group has some other program, their 
judgment will lead them to try to persuade you to do that. 
Mr. KincueLoE. That is the reason I am asking you if it is true 
that the farm organizations of this country are practically a unit in 
favor of the McNary-Haugen bill with the equalization fee in it. 
Mr. Gray. It seems so. 
~ Mr. KiNCHELOE. And you are not going to sacrifice that principle 
lust because the President vetoed the other bill? Am I rieht in that?