AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 
Mr. Stewart. I should say that certainly in extreme cases the prin. 
ciple would have to be granted absolutely. Other principles may 
prevent its being followed as the sole criterion. The principle to 
which you refer seems to me a basis for guidance in the graduation 
of rates. 
Mr. Fort. In part? CL 
Mr. Stewart. In part. I would not overuse that principle. 
Mr. Fort. Any legislation, then, with which we attempt to deal 
with the resultant effect of these discriminations should be drawn, 
bearing in mind that fundamentally we are raising some commodities 
for which we have no real need and that those are not entitled to the 
same consideration from the Government—I am not saying they are 
entitled to no consideration, but they are not entitled to the same con- 
sideration from the Government—in the handling of this problem 
that those things are entitled to for which the American people pro- 
vide a real market? 
Mr. Stewart. I think I can agree. 
Mr. KercaAM. I have six questions I want to ask, and they can all 
be answered yes or no. I know it is hard for an economist to answer 
questions yes or no. It is pretty hard to give a categorical answer. 
But these are the vital things we men have to answer 1n the ordinary 
discussion of this bill. Will you please answer these questions? 
In the first place, is this any radical or new departure from our 
traditional system ? 
Mr. StewaRT. I think that it is amply founded upon precedent. 
Mr. KercHAM. Second, is it constitutional, in your judgment ? 
Mr. Stewart. It is. 
Mr. Kercaam. Third, is it economically sound ? 
Mr. Stewart. It can be administered so that it will be consistent 
with the welfare of producers and consumers. 
Mr. Kercuam. That is what you mean by “economically sound”? 
Mr. Stewart. That is what I mean. 
Mr. KercaHAM. In the fourth place. in vour judgment. is it prac- 
ticable ¢ 
Mr. Stewart. It is workable. 
Mr. Kercaam. That is what I want. 
Mr. Stewart. And it should be consistent with the resources of the 
Federal Government. 
Mr. Kercram. That is what I want exactly. Now, will you say 
whether or not in your judgment this leads to dumping ¢ 
Mr. Stewart. In my judgment, it is not of that species of practice 
which would be classified by other countries as “ dumping.” 
Mr. Kercaam. Now, last; in your judgment, are the penalty pro- 
visions against overproduction carried in this bill as direct and spe- 
cifically applicable as they are in any other proposition that has been 
presented to us? 
Mr. Stewart. That is a harder question to answer. I should say 
that you can make it so, if it is not that way. 
Mr. Keroram. One further question: In contrast with any other 
plans, do you regard this as the simplest and the least free from 
machinery ? : 
Mr. Stewart. Perhaps because I have'studied it most. it is to me 
the simplest.