The Waterbury Democrat., 1936-08-12

GAbeMtNtAtR " y ~ - va
Farm Product Imports
Big Rise Since 1892 :.
But Value Of Foreign Pur.
chases Is Far Below 1929.
Washington, Aug. i2-The admin
istFation Is seriously werried by the
extent TO which farmers are resent
ing the increase, under the New
Deal, Of agricultural imports.
Evidence that some Of the large
western farm states are veering to-
ward LRndon Is attributed In large
part 10 republican success In publi-
cixing recent statistics. Six months
ago II was commonly believed that
benefit payments and higher farm
prices would deliver nearly all these
states 10 Roosevelt.
OHlclals are meeting In secret
huddles 20 determine The best way
Of convincing the farmer that the
import figures are merely an lndl-
catlen Of his increased prosperity
and not Of q diab0llcal plot 10 en-
compass his ruin through "plan-
ned scarcity"
AAA men Insist they have q
good argument, but that It's DIM
cult 10 translate into an emotional
appeal.
Tho present drouth makes the
imports question important aside
from Its political aspects, since II
SENS bound 10 result In further
increase OF purchases of farm
products abroad, although the i'm
port curve this year has been
generally downward.
Imports on Rise
What bites the farmers Is that
competitive agricultural imports In.
creased from a value OF $2O0, ZOO, 900
In 1899 10 1898 ,000,0 In 1885 (this
includes about 80 millions In Rlco-
holic beVerAges); cattle imports
from $4,000 head In 1884 TO $4,000
In 1898. canned beef from 1885, 900
pounds In 1891 TO 70,203, 900 In 1885;
wheat from 5000 bushels In 1882 TO
~ 900, $4,000 In 1888; corn from
100000 bushels IN 1888 10 1921 900
IN 1895; and butter from 100000
pounds In 1889 TO 22,875,00 In 1885.
Many farmers feel that these
and other considerable quantities
Of imported f0d should have been
raised and bought In the United
states. They are being told that
II Ia all n direct result Of PLANNED
scarcity"
The New Deal IL In no position
10 say that its agricultural adjust
ment programs had nothing 70 do
with the reductions In food sup.
plies which preceded the big rises
IN imports, except IN u may point
out that there were no ourtallment
programs for such commodities IN
cattle, dairy products, and eggs.
OF the drop In wheat production
In the l034-36 crop year from nor
nal, about $40 million bushels Ia at
tributed 10 drouth and 81 millions
TO acreage reduction,
In corn the proportions were |
I ,003, 000, 900 bushels below normal As
n result OF gdrouth and l82,000,000
because OF the AAA,
Drop From 1928
On the other hand, imports In
most cases are lower IN quantity
than In various depression years.
AZ against $4,000 imported head OF
cattle In 1895, about $4,000 head
were imported In 1923,
i Ma an .....aA h,,AAa. has hAa,s
imported M In 1898 since 1923 and
wheat and corn imports have
reached new highs. But oOmpetl-
tive agricultural Imports were
valued nj Sl,OI7, 10000 In 1890, Ms
against S023, 100000 In 1898.
Imports always rise when
American prices are high and de-
cline when they're low. Higher
consumer purchasing power also
stimulate imports and, more I'm
pOrtant 10 the farmer. farm I'M
ports and farm income tend 10
rise together.
Thus, while competitive farm i'm
ports went up from 400 millions 10
023 million dollars IN value from
1899 10 1895, farm income rose from
1897 millions TO $40 millions,
IN pre-depression years, imports
OF that type ran around billion
dollars year and national farm
income between II and II billion.
Wheat was selling here for only
~ cents In 1892, when only 5000
buHhels were imported; In 1898,
when ~ million bushels were i'm
ported, the price averaged 80 cents
Percentage Is Low
Percentages OF imports last year
In relation TO average national pro-
duction were: Corn, ~; wheat, 80;
beef 80; pork, Of: butter, IL; eggs
0,B; cotton, or; and cheese, 10.
Corn imports were only 81 per
cent Of the drOuth loss In corn,
wheat imports but as per cent,
and the $4,000 head Of cattle I'm
ported last year compared with n
reduction Of 100000 head m q
result Of drOuth.
Economists also say that imports
seem TO rise In relation TO general
prosperity, which brings improve
ment In domestic demand. Thus,
from 1892 10 1895 the index of In
dustrial activity rose from 80 TO
90 and the index Of competitive
farm income rose from % TO 90.
The question Of farm exports Is
another story. The big drop there
came prior TO 1888 and farm cx-
ports have subsequently somewhat
increased, But the Job OF explaining
the imports Increase Is exclusively
one for the New Deal
Copyright 1896, NEA Service, Inc.)