AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 
penture, unless we did some unwise things, and we have checked 
this danger in our bill. 
I have taken more of your time than I intended. I want to cover 
one or two points about the test of farm-relief legislation. The first 
test is, can it be passed—and I say * passed ” not in the terms of 
veto, but in the support of Congress. We believe that a proposition 
of this kind is so fair, so simple, brings new sources of support, 
brings new forces that it can be passed by this Congress and become 
a law. 
The second is, will it work? There has been no complaint any- 
where, no charge made by anyone that the export debenture idea 
would not raise price levels. It brings the farmer under the pro- 
tective system, whether tobacco or wheat, to the extent of the amount 
of the debenture, and raises general farm-price levels. No one denies 
this. We want to be absolutely frank about it. We know it is going 
to cost the Government something. But if the Government in its 
wisdom has built up a legislative and commercial fabric that dis- 
criminates against one group, it is the responsibility of the Govern- 
ment to remove as much as it may those inequalities. 
The third test, is it constitutional? The drawback provision of the 
tariff, to which this is very similar, has been tested in the highest 
courts of the land. It has been in operation for generations. The 
remitted tariff-duty provision has had congressional approval year 
after year, and has had Supreme Court interpretations. And I 
pause to remind you that in the last 5 years, under the drawback 
provision of the tariff, we have paid back to the American munu- 
facturers sums varying from $14.000.000 to $35.000.000 per year. 
And I call your attention to the fact that under the remitted taritf- 
duty provision we have remitted on the last 5 years on Cuban 
sugar alone $135,000,000; in the last 19 vears we have remitted on 
Cuban sugar $375.000.000. 
Mr. Pcryewn. I suppose you have made a rough estimate as to 
how much money this would keep out of the Treasury? 
Mr. Taper. I just stated it would be $146.000.000 based on the last 
>-vear average under the rates of the bill, according to the ficures 
f the Department of Agriculture. 
Mr. KincueLoE. Speaking of this drawback, have you got statistics 
to show how much drawback the millers have on their products on 
wheat that came from Canada? 
Mr. Taper. We have that worked out. but it is long and com- 
plicated. 
Mr. KixcueLoe. I thought probably vou had it there. 
~ Mr. Taser. I have not it in my papers here. But we can get it, 
if you want it. 
Mr. Aswerr. Mr. Taber, I did not quite see how you arrived at 
that sum. We exported 11,000,000 bales of cotton, and at $10 a 
oale that would be $110,000,000. 
Mr. Taper. I am talking about the last 5-vear average. 
Mr. CLargE. All these figures ought to be in the record. 
Mr. Taser. I am putting them in the record, and we will be glad 
ro work out any special table you desire. 
Mr. KincHELOE. I wish you would put in that miller proposition. 
Mr. Taper. All right. I will ask our statistician to work out the 
drawback on flour and put it in the record. 
321