Evening star., 1940-01-12


~ the familiar cry
of save the
Charles G. Ross. farmer. In the
fight against the trade agreements,
enough crocodile tears have already
been shed on his behalf to float
all the battleships of the expanded
Navy It's like being back in the
old days of 1880 when the Hawley-
Smoot tariff-which Jim Watson
said would restore prosperity in
side of 80 days-was being framed.
Anybody who may be tempted to
write to his Congressman against
the Hull policy, on the theory that
it is hurting the farmer, ought first
to read the statement in which
Secretary Hull defended the trade
agreements this week before tho
House Ways and Means COMMITTEES.
There is space here for only two
or three of the points made by the
Secretary in answering what he
called, with complete justification.
"a flagrant and unscrupulous sup
preston and misuse of facts" on the
trade agreements issue.
Farm Income Declined.
Secretary Hull recalled that by
the end of 1882, after two and a
half years of the Hawley-Smoot
Act, farm cash income had declined
from s11 200 O0o, ,O0G to s4,7O0, 900 900.
BY 1888, after four years of the
trade agreements program, it had
gone UP to $500, 900 900, not count
ing benefit payments. He gave sim
liar striking figures on the cattle
and dairy industries to .refute "reck-
less claims" that they have been
damaged by the trade policy. The
income of each has risen steeply
from the low point to which it fell
in 1882.
Some light is shed on the present
situation" said Secretary Hull, by
the fact that many of those who
are now insisting upon advising
American agriculture in opposition
TO the reciprocal trade policy, which
has demonstrated its benefits to
agriculture, were among the identl-
cal persons who advised the farmers
in 1880 that the Smoot-H Hawley Act
would bring them permanent pros
perity, whereas under such advice
the farmers of this Nation we're
piloted into unprecedented bank
ruptcy.'
The writer's memory runs back to
the year and half required for the
framing and passage of the Hawley-
Smoot Act. President Hoover in a
message to Congress had called for
a limited" revision of tariff rates
as means of giving the farmer
equality with industry. Lobbyists
for the benefit-seeking interests
sWarmed into Washington. Such
locust plague of them had never
before been seen in the Capital. Out
of the logrolling that ensued - the
pooling Of interests by different
groups-came a broad general revi-
sion of the tariff that hiked the rate
structure. as opponents of the bill
estimated, 20 per cent above the
Fordney-McCumber Act The bill
got by the Senate by majority Of
only 2, its passage made possible
by the detection of five Democrats
who saw in it special benefits for
their States.
Western Democratic Opposition.
Today it is the opposition of GER
tain Western Democrats-largely on
the ground of the farmers supposed
interest-that endangers the Trade
Agreements Act in the Senate.
After the passage of the Hawley-
Smoot Act there was considerable
doubt whether President Hoover
would sign it. 1t violated completely
his call for limited" revision.
Hopes of its opponents rose when
1000 economists of all shades Of
political opinion joined in petition
to the President to veto the bill. It
would bring, they said, retaliatory
action throughout the world-a pre-
diction that was soon to be abun-
dainty fulfilled.
Mr.. Hoover signed the bill, accom-
panying his approval with a state
ment that its inequalities-which he
admitted-could be cured within a
reasonable time through the use Of
the flexible provisions of the meas
ure. These provisions, he said, gave
great hope Of taking the tariff away
from politics, lobbying and log
rolling"
But the Hawley -Smoot Act was
not only impotent to bring back the
prosperity that remained always just
around the corner; to the contrary.
through its deadening effect on
world trade, it contributed to the
widening and deepening of the world
depression. The Trade Agreements
Act is no cure-an; in the chaotic
state of the world today its achieve
ments have necessarily been mod
est; but it has reversed disastrous
trend and has paved the way for
further gains, perhaps conducive
to the peace of the world, after the
war. Not only this, but it has ended
the shameful secret dealing and log
rolling that have marked the pass
age Of tariff bills through Congress
and that inevitably will be resumed
if we 60 back to the old methods.
Has the farmer been hurt? Mr..
Hulls figures are persuasive evidence
to the contrary. 1t is noteworthy
that although the National Grange
is opposing the Hull program, two
other large farm organizations, the
Farm Bureau Federation and the
Farmers Union. have consistently
upheld it.
Mr.. Hull has a good cause and it Is
a pleasure to see the determination
with which he is fighting. Repeal
of his trade policy, particularly at
a time when the world stands in
need Of all the conciliatory forces
that can be mustered, would be. q
tragically backward step.
Takes Office Both Time.