The Washington times., 1935-03-22

weather in fix.
Lewis Haney ing wheat acre.
age. The menacing cotton sur.
plus, and the loss of the foreign
cotton market come to mind.
But no. The AAA merely
changes its front. It's failures in
direct control over production are
now to be carried into indirect
control over marketing.
The most important part Of
the new bills seems to be
scheme to license" all process
sorS, handlers and distributors of
agricultural products and their
derivatives.
All elevators. warehouses, mills,
factories, wholesalers and retail.
ers, which have anything to do
with preparing or marketing any
agricultural product, would be
subject to the complete and arbi.
trary control of the politicians
at Washington.
In all, this would probably in.
clude at least million con.
Germs.
Note. too, that it would apply
not only to direct farm products,
but to things made from them;
also to things which compete
with them as substitutes.
The idea is abroad that far
merS are to be relieved of Ii.
cenSing. But, / ask you, what
good is farming apart from
marketing? Is there any strong
er way to control the farmer
than to control the outlets for
his products?
Under these bills, the Secre-
tary Of Agriculture can rule that
professors and merchants shall
not buy any wheat or cotton or
hogs from farmer who does
not sign such contract as he,
the Secretary, may prescribe.
Think what he could do to the
thousands of small milk produ-
GERS, by controlling butter manu-
facturerS.
AS one intelligent commentator
says, IF purchasers of farm COM
modities are restricted by licenses,
it necessarily follows that the pro-
ducers have also been restricted
in precisely the same degree and
just as effectively as if they had
been directly licensed"
Furthermore, farmers them.
selves do some processing and
marketing. To that extent they
would be subject to license di-
rectly.
Of course, the measure covers
the farm cooperatives.
Under these bills, the Govern.
ment can distribute benefits" to
farmers in the shape of various
farm products in lieu of cash.
1t can unload its surplus cotton
on farmers! Aside from other
questions, you note that this
would put the farmer more than
ever in the position of marketer
of miscellaneous farm products
handed back to him by the Gov.
ernment.
I am inclined to think that
the whole thing may be a
scheme to force all farmers into
a huge system of government.
controlled "cOOperatives."
These bills give practically alb
Solute and autOCratic power to the
President and the Secretary Of
Agriculture. Without even the
consent of a majority of the pro-
cessors, dealers, etc. (and with no
effective appeal, one or two men
are empowered to control the
whole distriputive machinery, and
therefore the farmers.
They propose another abandon
ment of legislative function, for
there is no real legislative de-
termination or definition Of Fur"
pose. The powers granted may be
used to make effective any market.
ing agreement the Secretary ap"
proves, or any plan approved by
the President and the Secretary.
The powers Of the States over
intra-state commerce are infringed.
While Mr.. Wallace goes around
talking about America must
choose" etc., the Secretary OF
Agriculture backs sweeping
scheme of RECOMMENDATION which
would put farmers markets under
Federal control, and subject
every consumer of food and
clothes to the whims of two politb
clans.
We are getting rid of NRA. Now
I guess we will have to deal With
the AAA.