Evening star., 1935-10-21
SLOAN D|SSECTSlI
n. R. A. D|S|LLUS|ON
Relates Experience in Warn.
ing Against "Haphazard"
Handling of Problems.
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.

BY DAVID LAWRENCE. ...--
George A. Sloan was so sympa.
thetic to the New Deal, as expressed
in the N. r. A. in 1893, that what
he says about his experience and
what he advocates for the future as
an agricultural policy for the Nation
take on much more importance than
the views Of some one who has been
politically opposed to the Roosevelt
administration.
Mr.. Sloan, moreover, as former
president of the Cotton Textile Insti-
tute. has had an opportunity to see
at first hand the problems of gov
ernment without becoming in any way
victim Of the political viewpoint
which blinds so many observers to
the truth and causes them to exag-
gerate virtues and minimize faults.
Today Mr.. Sloan has written q
speech for delivery before the Ameri-
can Bakers Association In Chicago.
He thinks the bakers and the textile
men have much in common, because
they both made substantial contribu-
tions to employment and wages, both
are burdened with processing taxes.
both have experienced destructive
competition and both were among
the first to embrace the N. r. A., and
both. he adds regretfully, "have suf-
fered accordingly"
Many Subscribed to Principle.
MANY business men," he says, "in-
cluding myself. were in sympathy with
what we understood to be the under
lying purpose Of N. R. A. as originally
conceived. That was to promote ma
tional recovery through industrial self
regulation with appropriate govern
mental supervision. We not only sub
scribed to the principle. but hundreds
Of business men from all over the Ma
ton vent to Washington and kept
going to Washington to help put it
into practical operation"
Then Mr.. Sloan describes the period
Of his disillusionment. He speaks Of
Intelligent cooperation" being given
at first, but this later changed to gov
ernmental indifference to the textile
tndustry'S real problems. He remarks:
1T was about this time. in the Sum-
mer Of 1884. that many business men
came to the conclusion that the part
nership relation, the very corner stone
Of every code and the whole N. r. A.,
was being brushed aside. sss
Il shall always believe that q few
strong words from the administration
at that time, as to the right to work
and as to the fundamental impro-
priety Of attempting to amend a Fed
eral code by strike, would have pre-
vented much hardship and suffering.
Executive Order Changes.
"Then came the increasing ten
dency to impose changes by executive
order and less inclination on the part
Of the administration to listen to the
recommendations of industry. In
stead of the industrial self-regulation
we had envisioned, we found ourselves
houndering in bog of bureaucracy.
During the last year Of the code
investigation followed investigation.
Demand and employment began to
drop, export markets dwindled, i'm
portations OF low-coSt competitive
goods increased at an alarming rate
and meager profits turned into sub
stantial losses"
Mr.. Sloan's recital Is interesting his
tory. The textile code was No. l on
the list and a model for all others
But what the former head Of the
textile code says about the A. A. A.
processing taxes is even more inter-
esting:
"It was only a few years ago that
a proposal for general sales tax
amounting to only az per cent was
rejected by Congress. That proposal
specifically exempted staple food prod
ucts and other necessities. Yet to-
day the American public Is paying
IN the form Of processing taxes what
amounts to q huge sales tax, in the
case of cotton of 10 per cent or Is
per cent. and these processing taxes
are for the most part confined to
those necessities Of life completely
exempted under the earlier proposal.
Incidentally the processing tax in
1884 amounted to approximately 40
per cent Of the total wage bill OF
the cotton textile industry.
I'VE have heard lot lately about
taxes soaking the rich but what
about the total processing tax Of ap-
proximately $500, 100000 a year col'
lected by soaking the poor through
invisible taxes on such items as thf
bread they eat and the cotton overalli
and work shirts they wear?"
Disposes of Argument.
Mr.. Sloan disposes of the argument
that the processing tax is nothing
more than a tariff by pointing out
that the tariff is imposed for the
revenue of the Government. while
processing taxes are imposed for the
revenue of a special group In our
population. He adds that none Of the
duties collected on their products are
given to manufacturers, but are used
for general expenses and for the gen.
eral welfare of the entire population.
He declares that the tariff Is intended
to enable the industry protected to
have freedom of production. but the
processing tax is restrictive Of pro-
duction.
Another difference cited by Mr..
Sloan is that the processing taxes
reduce the total buying power Of the
taxed consumer to exactly the same
extent that they increase the total
buying power of the comparatively
few receiving benefit payments"
A glance at the tariff schedules will
reveal that it is mo easy matter for
a foreign competitor to sell an agri-
cultural product which Is produced
here in any substantial quantity"
and, for this reason, Mr.. Sloan doesn't
think the farmer wants the tariff sys-
tenn regarded as benefting only the
industrialist. f
Conclusions Reached.
It Is In the conclusions reached by
Az A1~ Ia aktAxS