Henderson daily dispatch., 1936-03-05
OTHERS VIEWS
THE TOBACCO SITUATION

, KOAD1AOOO OH
To the Editor:
The conference called to meet in
Washington by Governor Peery, of
Virginia, of the governors of the to-
bacco producing area and held in the
House Ways and Means Committee
room in the New House Office build
ing, last Tuesday, February Is, liked
to have been wrecked by Governor
Ehringhaus, of North Carolina, in the
outset, for he had hardly been declar-
ed chairman of the conference before
he shot the searching, though all i'm
portant, question as to what protec-
!! ton could be given the growers in
the compact-covered territory against
production from the outside.
Well, that did look like the whole
State compact system for tobacco pro-
duction control was headed for the
rocks, for there was no positive and
conclusive answer that could be Civ
en- to that question. AS one had pin
ned much faith to this method of
production control and had given the
subject much though, 1 offered three
ways to overcome the handicap in
herent in the State compact system,
which are as follows:
CD That the Congress, as in the
case of the oil compacting states,
enact supplementary legislation for
bidding the shipment interstate COM
merce of tobacco in excess of the
quota allowed the producing state.
(2)That the compacting states be
protected against the shipment there
in of tobacco grown in free, or non
compact, territory as was done in the
case of dry territory under the Webb
Kenyon Act.
80 That the Congress change it's
bounty basis from that of the states
to that of the commodity basis and
make the bounty for tobacco avail
able only to those growers who are
within the compact-covered produc-
ton area.
AS to the first suggestion, I was
forced by the North Carolina gov
ernor to admit that I did not think
Congress could extend such protec-
ton to the compact-covered area, for
that Congress could not allot any
quota nor could it exclude from the
channels of interstate commerce to-
bacco produced in free, or non-com-
pact covered, areas. The oil linita-
ton statute has not been CHALLENGED
yet.
But 1 do have considerable faith
in the second suggestion, and so as
serted at the conference. Later Gov
ernor Peery expressed considerable in
terest in this plan and intimated that
l should follow it through in my
thoughts and investigation.
Now, bright-flue-cured tobacco is
grown in Virginia, North and South
Carolina, Georgia and Florida, with a
little in Alabama; but the bulk of this
type of tobacco is manufactured in
North Carolina and Virginia. If Con-
gress can do for North Carolina and
Virginia as production controlled area
what it did under the Webb-Kenyon
statute for dry territory, there is
way of affording substantial prOtec-
ton to the grower in the contact-cov-
cred area. Of course, in our think
ing of the way to obtain the desired
protection, we must remember that
tobacco is not thought of as being
quite in the class with intoxicating
liquors., though it is a luxury and us
ually kicked and cuffed around by the
taxing and police powers of the states
about as are intoxicating liquors.
This question, however, may soon
be cleared up by the U. S. Supreme
Court. It now has under advisement'
the case having been argued, the
question of the validity of a Federal
statute protecting states which have
banned prison-made goods from their
territory. In this instance, there Is
nothing inherently obnoxious about
the quality of the commodity barred
The question is what protection may