614 
AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 
through the cooperative organizations of farmers, for the purpose of 
handling the surplus, regulating acreage and controlling production. 
Mr. KincaeLOE. 1 am just asking for information. = Of course, all 
these bills provide that, giving the board created under them thé 
right to coordinate any other branches of the Government for the 
purpose of information .or working this; and they provide for an 
appropriation our of the Treasury, a revolving fund like this does? 
Mr. Hare. Yes. 
Mr. KincaELOE. In other words, under the curtis-Crisp bill they 
would have the power to coordinate these agencies? 
Mr. Hare. I think probably they would have the power, but they 
would not have the direction and the specific instructions as provided 
for in this bill. 
Mr. Apkins. Would you figure on covering the losses by appropria- 
tions from the Government, whenever you had a loss? 
Mr. Hare. I take this view, that any legislative program that 
does not enable a surplus to be sold at a sufficiently high price or 4 
sufficient increase in price to take care of the expenses, then that 
legislation will sooner or later fall to the ground. 
Mr. Apkins. You will never get any of that kind. 
Mr. Hare. Then legislation for taking care of the surplus will not 
amount to anything. In other words, if as the result of legislation fair 
prices are not to be maintained, and if the surplus is not to be sold at 
a price equal to or above the cost of production, then that legislation 
will not serve the purpose for which it was enacted. 
Mr. KincaeLoE. Your idea is that over a term of years the surplus 
will be sold and not any loss? 
Mr. Hare. Yes; I think if the surplus can not be sold over a term 
of years at a profit, then any legislative enactment will not be worth 
a penny, because if the surplus must be sold at a loss over a period of 
years and the remainder at Jess than a fair price you do not aid agri- 
culture but you are placing an added burden upon the farmers and 
tying a millstone around their necks, because there is going to be 
some costs, and unless there is a profit there will certainly be a loss, 
and hence no benefit to the farmer. 
Mr. Apkins. Do you know there has never yet been any nation- 
wide commodity organization that has not been 100 per cent failures 
up to date? 
Mr. Hare. I am not prepared to make that statement. 
Mr. Apkins. I make it; I make it for the record. 
Mr. Hare. I think there are some commodity organizations that 
have been quite successful. That 1s, they say they have been 
successful. 
Mr. Apxkins. But I am talking about nation-wide commodity 
organizations. xr 
Mr. Hare. I do not think that the gentleman gets the purport of 
my remark. What I mean by commodity organization is that there 
should be unity of action, that every organization should have a head 
to which it should look. As I tried to illustrate at the beginning 
for instance, we have a cooperative cotton organization in my State 
of South Carolina; North Carolina has one; Texas has one; Okla- 
homsa has one; Alabama has one; and probably the other cotton- 
erowing States all have one; and they all have their overhead charges 
to take care of, and the cost must come out of the members of the