Milford chronicle., 1928-10-12

ted States.
am not one of those who believe
that there is no farm problem
There is a farm predetermined il
is more than a farm problem. II is
a great national problem growing
out of the agricultural situation, 1t
involves the interest, the material,
economic and moral welfare of the
whole people.
l want to say, lest l omit it later,
that while there may be those who
have been willing, and are willing
to play politics with this question,
the able men who presented this
matter to the Committee on Plat
form did not play politics with it..
They were men of deep convictions,
or extraordinary ability, and repre-
senting a cause in which they most
sincerely believe. l acquit my col
leagues on the Platform Committee
of anything more than the earnest
presentation of a great national is
sue.
There is a farm problem, but be-
fore we come to the immediate pro-
position which seems to divide us,
let me call your attention to some
features of that problem with which
we have to deal, and with which we
are proposing to deal.
The American farmer at the close
of the war was paying One-third of
his entire income, less other eXpen-
ses, for taxes. He was paying from
8 to 10 per cent more of a ratio of
taxes than any other member of the
community.
The farmer is the most heavily
taxed individual of the American
community today. In 1922 to 1924
and 1925 the farmers tax burden
euualled the entire worth or value
of his wheat crop. That is one of
the first problems with which We
have to deal, for under this creeping
paralysis no industry can survive
unless it is relieved. No scheme can
save the farmer if he must carry
this super-human burden.
Who has fought more intelligent
ly, more persistently, more courag-
eously, and sometimes more lonely
for the reduction of taxes upon all
classes of people, including the
farmer, than Calvin Coolidge?
The next great problem in this
agricultural question is to enable
the American farmer to reach the
American market without being rob-
bed on the way. In 1922, emitting
one or two articles, consumers or
American products paid twenty-five |
billion five hundred million dollars |
for the products of the farm. Out |
of this the farmer gOe only seven |
billion five hundred million dollars. |
$14,50O, 100000 was taken up some |
where on the way between the time |
it left the farm and the time it |
reached the ultimate consumer.
Experts who have studied the |
question say that at least seven TO
eight billion dollars are wasted in |
the present system of marketing |
the farm products, which under d
proper system ought to go into the
pockets of the American farmer
There is now pending in Congress
of the United States a bill suggested
and endorsed by the Secretary OF
Commerce, introduced by a Republi-
can Senator, reported by a Republic
can Committee, and now ready for
passage, which undertakes to deal
with this problem.
If the American farmer could have
a fair and just marketing system,
outside of one or two products, the
entire farm problem would be set
tied. And the Republican party is
r11o IN |
has already begun to deal with the
subject.
Again, Mr. Chairman and ladies
and gentlemen of the Convention.
the American farmer is not properly
and sufficiently protected in the
home market. In 1926 and 1927
there was imported into this coun-
try from the cheap-labor countries
abroad two billion five hundred
million dollars worth of farm pro-
ducts. The home market built up
by the American protective system |
belongs exclusively to the American
farmer. He should not be compelled
to share his efforts with those
abroad who pay from one-third
down to One-fourth the amount
which he pays for labor. In this
platform is the specific pledge that
the Republican party will give the
home market exclusively to the
American farmer.
am believer in the protective
system. 1t protects American
standards and American wage earn
srs. Let me say to my Republican
friends in the great East-it must
be extended to give equal and abso-
lutte protection to the farmer by
giving him the home market which
we are building up. These three
questions, taxes, reaching the home
market, enjoying the home market,
Ire fundamental and lie at the basis
If a proper solution of this immin-
INT and appealing question.
Now the only difference between
he majority and the minority re-
ports is that of how to dispose of
he surplus, covering principally
cotton and wheat and one or two
)ther products of which we still
produce a surplus. The majority of
he committee stood ready and did
grant to the minority everything
lsked for save and except the power
If a bureau at Washington to levy
! tax or an equalization fee upon
he American farmer. There are
10 differences in this debate except
he differences which are organized
lround what is known as the equal
cation fee.
There are two objections to it.
The first is that it cannot be done.
there is no authority under the
Constitution Of the United States
which permits a Congress to dele
ate to twelve men the power to