Evening star., 1932-09-14

II FIEAl5hR II, 1872.
tial specifications Of q workable plan.
In determining the details necessary to
the solution, Of so vast a problem 1t
goes without saying that many minds
must meet and many persons must
work together.
Such cooperation must Of necessity
come from those who have had the
widest experience with the problem and
who enjoy to the greatest degree the
confidence Of the farmers In this coun-
try. Without in any sense seeking 20
avoid responsibility, shall avail my
self of the widest possible range Of
such assistance. My willingness to do
this Is fully attested by the extent to
which the development of our agricul-
tural program in New York has been
brought about through the assistance
given to me on a non-partisan, nom
paid basis by the leaders Of agriculture
In the State Of New York. This CO.
operation and advice which received
in New York came not only from those
directly interested in agriculture, but
from the leaders in the Legislature as
well. There were there, as there are
in the Congress Of the United States,
farsighted and patriotic servants, Re-
publicans and Democrats, who are will
ing to put the welfare Of agriculture
and of the country as a whole ahead
in all parties shall look for guidance,
good will and support.
After all, the farmers hope for the
tbe snrIt ui1 in Wc hp6h hfs
cred. His problem Is one Of difficulty.
It is for him to decide whether he wants
the solution Of this problem to be COM
mitted to leaders who are determined to
relieve the inequalities which have
caused his distress, or to leaders whose
record clearly shows that they are de-
termined to preserve staggering sub
sidy for industry. but to give agriculture
only measure Of words and more
words. The essence CT this question
comes down to a matter of keeping faith
with American agriculture. On my part,
can stand on my own record and on
the policies have just set forth.
On the opposite side, you have the
long record Of the present administra-
ton.
In setting forth that record you knew
better than I that the farmers hope
has had to rest upon the policy and
spirit in which his case was considered
| the policy and spirit of the present ad-
ministration. 1t runs back a lcng time,
because those leaders have held public
ONCE before. In those Offices they have
had ample opportunity TO demonstrate
their attitude toward agriculture.
Charges Belittling by G. O.P.
When the depression in agriculture
began in 1921 Republican leaders first
sought to belittle the plight of agri-
culture. They claimed that the old
familiar tariff remedy would suffice, and
they offered the Fordney- McC Cumber
tariff act. passed (Gcd save the markD
under the ironic label of farm relief
The Republican leaders in positions of
national responsibility at that time
and, this, Of course, includes the then
sSecretary Of Commerce-either did not
or would not realize the change in in
ternational conditions due to inter-
national debts. They closed their eyes
to the outstanding economic fact.
Prior to the war We had paid our in
terest on our debts 10 Europe by means
OF agricultural exports. After the war.
because we had changed to a creditor
and Europe was in debt to us, it was
necessary that we demand either goods
or gold in return. The F'ordney-
McCumber tariff barrier shut of the
normal tide Of trade. Europe could not
pay. so she could nct buy. Specifically
she began to stop buying our surplus
farm products
To of1se. the harmful effect of this
tariff situation, intelligent and respon-
sible farm leaders worked out, in 1922
what they called a program for equal
1ty Tor agriculture. Plans to achieve
this equality for agriculture were
brought before members of the Presi-
dents cabinet at that time. They
moved in the direction of the Republic
an agricultural conference to con-
slider 1t. The conference met. It took
the amazing position that production
should be reduced to the demands of
the domestic market by the cheerful
means, 1t appeared. of starving out"
the farmers who had formerly exported
TO Europe. It Is matter of common
knowledge that the President. then the
Secretary OF Commerce, was not without
influence in the determination of this
result.
Attacks Hoover Policy.
In fact. the conclusions of that grim
agricultural conference were strikingly
similar to those voiced subsequently
by the Secretary of Commerce him
self. In 1925. for example, he said
continuance Of overproduction means
surplus. and that can only be cor
rected by prices low enough to make
production Improbable for some of the
acreage OF use" In plain English this
meant lower the price; starve out one
third Of the farms; then see what hap
pens Throughout the whole agricul-
tural agony Of the ensuing three years
the Secretary Of Commerce set him
self adamant against all relief pro-
posals. Farm leaders suggested segre-
CATION of export surplus from the do
mestic market. With marked acerbitv
he stated in a letter that such a step
would "subsidize the British Empire"
The McNary- -Haugen legislation called
forth violent and abusive veto mes
sages. There was, to put it mildly. no
protest from the then Secretary of
Commerce.
The Secretary of the Treasury In 1926
hn OF