70 
AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 
House or REPRESENTATIVES, 
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, 
Saturday, February 25, 1928. 
The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10 o’clock, a. m., 
Hon. Gilbert N. Haugen (chairman) presiding. 
Present: Representatives Haugen (chairman), Purnell, Williams, 
Thompson, Ketcham, Hall, Fort, Menges, Andresen, Adkins, Clarke, 
Aswell, Kincheloe, Jones, Swank, Fulmer, Rubey, and McSweeney. 
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Sexauer, we will hear you. 
STATEMENT OF FRED H. SEXAUER—CONCLUDED 
Mr. ANDRESEN. Mr. Sexauer, I wanted to ask you a question or 
two. I represent a dairy industry, and I wanted to see if you have 
the same understanding that I have on the situation of the surpluses. 
A great many dairy farms in my district were opposed to the McNary- 
Haugen bill on the theory that it would raise the prices of feed prod- 
ucts and other agricultural commodities of which they were the 
consumers and not the producers. 
But they have changed their opinion to a great extent on the sur- 
plus proposition, fearing that unless something was done to help out 
the grain and corn farmer and the cotton farmer, that dairying would 
be extended to such an extent that we would soon have the same 
situation in the dairy industry as we now have in grain, cotton, and 
corn. We are selfish enough to want to look out for the future of 
our own industry. You stated yesterday that probably in a year or 
two we would reach the point where we would be producing a surplus 
of dairy products. Now, my support of the bill and I take it your 
contention on this McNary-Haugen bill is this, that we want to try 
and prevent the same situation in the dairy industry as we now have 
in the other surplus agricultural products? 
Mr. SExauver. That is right. 
Mr. ANDRESEN. So that we will have to be frank to admit that 
even though we would have to pay a greater price for the feed we 
aave to buy on the dairy farms and the other agricultural commodi- 
ties that we are selfish enough enough to be looking out for our own 
Future in order to protect ourselves. = 
Mr. SExaukr. That is right. 
Mr. ANDRESEN. And that any direct benefits to grain, corn, and 
cotton farmers to-day is going to be an indirect benefit to us, even 
though we have to pay more for those commodities. 
Mr. SExAUER. That is right; yes. 
Mr. CLARKE. Is there not an economic law after all that, in the 
long run, rules in the country—that is, if there is any one commodity 
n- whieh: there is more money for a little time that there-is a tem- 
porary: stimulus. that goes along with the production of that com- 
modity and people rush in and after awhile a surplus occurs, prices go 
down, and they turn again to some other thing? So that after all 1t 
is an economic balance that is going on with agriculture? 
Mr. SExAUER. That is true. 
Mr. CrLarke. Has not that been true since the organization of 
the Government? | 
Mr. SExAUER. That is correct, Mr. Clarke, that so long as the 
economic balance presumes to bring about a condition where agoTi-