The New York herald., 1922-07-01
McCumber COnfesses on the
Floor Agricultural Group
Forced Raise.
IN OPEN FOR FIRST TINE
Duty of Is Cents a Bushel in
House Bill Jumped to 20
Cents a Bushel.

Special Dispatch to THE NEW YORK HERALD.
| New York Herald Bureau,
Washington, ID. C., June 80.
In the face Of widespread protest
against the increases in the tariff
duties on the necessities of life. the
Senate Finance Committee raised the
rate on corn in the McCumber- Ford
ney tariff bill to-day from Is cents a
bushel to 20 cents a bushel. The ac-
ton was the direct result of pressure
from the agricultural bloc.
In reporting the bill to the Senate
the Finance Committee adhered to the
House rate of Is cents busheh The
this was one Of the very few items or
which the tariff bloc was turned down
in committee. The bloc continued it's
fight, however, and to-day Senator
McCumber. in charge of the bill, made
the change.
Senator McCumber, half-heartedly
defending the rate, admitted in the
debate that the rate was fixed at the
demand Of the tariff bloc. He gave
such an explanation for the first time
after Senator Pomerene (Dem., Ohio)
had asked why, in all the circum-
stances. the rate had been increased.
"All I can say" Senator McCumber
laughed. 'is that something or other
they call the agricultural tariff bloc
had hand In It,"
Admitted at Last.
This was the first time that the real
influence of the tariff bloc, composed of
twenty-five Senators from farming
States, has been admitted by the finance
committee, although in the writing of
the bill the tariff bloc obtained 80 per
cent. of all the rates demanded. which
invariably were higher than the House
rates.
This is nothing more nor less than
a paper duty" declared Senator
Walsh (Mass.). Dem, who led a fight
to keep corn on the free list. This
illustrates perfectly the attempt made
in this bill to deceive and mislead the
people Of this country.
This Is being done so candidates for
office can tell the farmers of their
States that they are being given pro-
tection."
Senator McCumber resented the
charge. He said Senator Walsh should
withdraw his statement that the duty
was written into the bill to deceive the
people. adding that If any one did de-
sire to mislead the people as to its
effect he would say:
IT do not think under ordinary con-
ditions that this duty will help the
farmer one penny II will not help him
or do him any harm as long az we are
raising such big crops as we are now.
But should conditions obtain that did
in 1913 and 1914, when he had short
crops, and imports from the Argentine
caused a lowering of prices, then It will
serve to keep prices up"
Figures on Production.
Production figures show that the
United States in 1920 raised $685. ,367,-
600 bushels of corn. which would mean.
IL the tariff did apply, that a total of
S640, 900, 900 annually could be added to
the nations corn bill. The corn crop is
in so many hands. however. that control
Of prices is out of the question. accord
ing to students of the market. who say
the single effect of the duty will be the
keeping out of the country of the hand
full of corn that comes in, for the most
part, to make up a one way cargo for
a steamer primarily in some other mis-
sion.
The 1920 American corn crop was val
ued at S2,1s9.721, 900 or ST. cents a
bushel. as the price paid to the farmer.
The imports of corn amounted to 10,229.'
! 249 bushels in 1920. the average price
being 81 bushel. The exports amounted
| to 14,446,560 bushels, at the rate of
$3.50 a bushel. Eighty per cent. oi
American corn Is consumed on the farm
on which Il IS raised, chiefly for the
| feeding of cattle.