Evening star., 1926-06-15

losses shall be made by the board un.
less the purchase IL made at q price
which, In the opinion OF the board, Ia
not IN excess of a fair and reasonable
price; and no sale shall be made in re-
spect of which a. loss would be sis
tanned unless such sale Is authorized
by the board. Furthermore, 1t Is pro.
vlded that advances by the board shall
be payable on demand whenever the
board hnds that the market price In
the principal markets OF the United
States for the basic AGRICULTURAL com.
modify. Or its food products. in respect
of which the advance Is made. is in
excess OF fair and reasonable price.
Bureaucratic Control Seen.
Under these provisions 1T would he
necessary for the board 10 enter into
or approve a vast number Of con.
tracts, necessitating the employment,
of an enormous bureaucratic star Of
Government lawyers, auditors and in
spectors. From q practical standpoint,
l am unable 10 see how any boa I'd. no
matter how able or efficient, could DOS.
sibly arrive at a proper determination
OF fair and reasonable price and
the many other complex questions as
signed to them. This is particularly
true in view OF the variety i'm quality
and standards Of products which must
be dealt with under the terms of this
bill.
The purchasers and professors OF
farm commodities are to be REIN.
hursed for any losses, costs and
charges sustained In removing the
surplus from the market and main.
tanning in this country q price in ex.
cess of world markets. This is In eff.
feet a guarantee by the Federal Gov
ernment against loss from storage ct
home or sale abroad. AS our past
average exports alone Of the hve ba sic
agricultural commodities has been
about 81 500. .000, 900 per annum. it Is
possible to get some idea OF the extent
OF financ liza ability which the Farm
Board Or the Government will incur
under the guaranty provisions Of this
bill
I'm the end IL seems to me that the
bill Will defeat the very purpose which
obstacle to farm prosperity is avowed.
ly the disposal of the surplus. The
peyment Of a subsidy or the levying
Of an equalization fee or the artificial
increase in any other way Of the price
of farm commodities will inevitably
result both in stimulating further pro.
dlction on the part Of the farmer and
In decreasing consumption on the part
Of the buying public. thus bringing
about still greater surplus of prod
ucts. Furthermore. If q subsidy or
this kind is given to FIVE agricultural
the Government could
not logically refuse to give the sam
treatment 10 the textile. boot and
shoe. coal and other Industries. which
are finding some difflculty in dspos-
ing of their surplus products.
IN general, a surplus Is taken care
of bv a decrease in production or by
an increase in consumption. The nat
ural result OF the proposed bin will
be to increase productions through
higher prices fer the particular com
the same reason to decrease demand.
an economic condition by ignoring
two Of the most powerful economic
laws. which in the long run must
control. 1t seems to me that we ca n
adv ance further in aid to the farmer
IL we try to work with and not
against the teachings of experience.
"A WAY out Of the diff1culties lies
in the elimination OF waste between
the producer and the consumer. SO
that the farmer may receive higher
net price, and Vet the ultimate con
sumner may not have 10 pay more.
This purpose can be approached
more orderly marketing and
The second way ia 10
increase the demand for our surplus
and thus raise the price. not 10 our
consumers alone. but to the world"