NINETEENTH ANNUAL YEAR BOOK— PART VII 403 



wished he would introduce it aad push the legislation siniilar to the char- 

 acter of that contained in the bill. 



The Secretary of Agriculture also has decided views in regard to the 

 legislation necessary. At our meeting last week, at Denver, when he 

 came to the question of legislation, he said the need of legislation on this 

 subject is so obvious that he was not even going to discuss it. The ques- 

 tion is, he said, what kind of legislation we want at this time. In his 

 annual report, he says: "The restoration and maintenance of conditions 

 which will justify confidence in the live stock markets and meat packing 

 industry are the greatest single need in the present meat situation in the 

 United States. It seems desirable, therefore, that the necessary legis- 

 lation be enacted at the earliest possible moment." 



He also publicly stated that in his opinion the Kendrick bill fur- 

 nished the best basis for legislation on this matter which had yet been 

 presented to congress. I will quote from the Denver paper in regard to 

 Mr. Houston's views: 



"We do not want the distribution of meat from the time production- 

 is planned on the range until the finished product is delivered to the 

 consumer, left in the hands of a few men. The packers tell us that they 

 are more efficient, and can do this work better than anyone else; but that 

 is what paternalists always have said. For my part, I want less of 

 paternalism and more freedom." 



Senator Kendrick, who introduced the Kendrick bill, made a splendid 

 address out there. He has personality and magnetism, and a great many 

 qualities which have endeared him to the west and southwest, and they 

 look to him for leadership, and the v/est seems all ready to fall in behind 

 Kendrick. I think Colver hit the nail on the head when he stated in re- 

 gard to the Kendrick bill: "Senator Kendrick is one of you; he thinks 

 just as you do; his interests are identical with yours; he speaks your 

 language. I believe anything Senator Kendrick thinks is right in the 

 way of legislation." It looks as if the chairman of the Federal Trade 

 Commission was willing to get behind and help on the Kendrick bill. 



I will give you an idea of the fundamental difference between the two 

 bills. They both accomplish the same thing, only in different ways. But 

 the Sims bill gives the President very broad discretionary powers. It 

 authorizes him — that is, he may, it is not mandatory — it authorizes him, 

 if he sees fit, to acquire certain of these market facilities, the stock yards, 

 also the facilities for distribution, like the refrigerator cars and stock 

 cars which the packers own, and storage plants and branch houses, and 

 after acquiring them he may operate them, if he so elects, thru such 

 agency or agencies as he desires; or if he does not wish to do that, he 

 may lease those various facilities and operate them that way. As inter- 

 preted by the Federal Trade Commission and by Sims, the ideal is, the less 

 drastic feature of the bill should be put in operation first; that is, that 

 these various facilities should be licensed, and in case that fails, then 

 the more drastic provisions of the bill should be brought into effect. 

 Unfortunately, in connection with that bill, there is a very large amount' 

 of money authorized, the appropriation of $500,000,000. That, of course, 

 is an amount of a staggering size. The Sims bill is unpopular because 



