LEST WE FORGET. . . 



By EARL C. SMITH 

 continued from page G 



\ 



1 



•i 



to tlic- .ulmiiiistraticni ot the rcsp(.(.ti\c 

 coinmotlity pio^rams as aiitliorizcti by the 

 Act. Corn and hous bein^ comniodities 

 ol major interest to tlie farmers of Iowa 

 as \\ell as Illinois. I shall confine my re 

 marks iarijely to this adjustment pro^cram. 



Only a few weeks after the passauc of 

 the Auritiiltiiral Ailjiistment Au. Secre- 

 tary Vi'allace, by public pronouncement, 

 asked the farmers of the res]xctive corn 

 belt states to assemble in mass meeting.' 

 and to select from their number a com- 

 mittee which would later be called into 

 session with committees from the other 

 states of the corn belt, lliesc meetinus 

 were held. 1 he respective states were 

 each requested and authorized to select a 

 committee in number in such proportion 

 as the production of corn and hoijs of 

 each state bore to the total production 

 of the 1 2 north central states. 



These committees met in the city of 

 Des Moines in July of l9Si. After con- 

 sideration of the possibilities under the 

 Act, this general conference selected what 

 was termed "The National Corn Hog 

 Executive Committee" consisting of 2°) 

 men representing each of the states. The 

 corn-hog adjustment programs of 193-1 

 anil 1935 were the outgrowth of this 

 committee's deliberations and recom- 

 mendations. This committee was also 

 responsible for recommending to the ad- 

 ministration the so-called pig killing pro- 

 gram which resulted in the removal from 

 the market channels of the coimtry, six 

 million pigs from the spring crop of 

 1933. 



What factors prompted the committee 

 in recommending such a radical departure 

 from the age-old practice of hog pro- 

 ducers.' First, the tremendous increase 

 in pig production which had been for 

 years increasing, finally resulted in an 

 average price level for hogs in 193- of 

 $3.'>9 per hundred. Second, a serioLis 

 drought in the north and northwest caused 

 a totally inadecjuate supply of feed to de- 

 velop tlie pig crop of that region. These 

 pigs were finding an outlet in the markets 

 of the northwest, particidarly St. Paul 

 at around Si. 25 per himdred. Such im- 

 heard of prices were insufficient to pay 

 transportation and commission charges. 

 The farmers of that region were destined 

 to realize nothing from either feed or hog 

 production that year. It seemed that 

 two birds could be killed with one stone. 

 Firvt. by adequately comptns.itini; the pij; 

 pruJuCcTS (if that region and Mime otlicr 

 spcittnl re.uiiins of the drou.uht .iiea, farmers 

 could bf supported in their desire to refrain 

 from askin.i; otlier .governmental assist.ince. 

 Second, by pl.uin^- poorly fed or starved ani- 

 mals in the soap or crease kettles, market 

 channels could be relieved of an ever-increas- 



irm K.irish influence upon hoi; price levels 



Hecju>e this partriiiKir effort lias been so 

 seriously criticizcfl and is now beini; revived 

 h\ dem.if;oi;ues (in the pl.itform. and because 

 I happen to have been eli.ijrnian of the \a- 

 tton.il Corn-Hoe; C^ommitlee th.it made this 

 reeommend.ition to the n.itional administra- 

 tion -- I would not discharge my duty. I 

 coulil not even retain my sell -respect, did I 

 eiintinue silent, wliile- the uninformed or tliost 

 intentionally altemptin.e; to deceive, continue 

 to brand this proLT.un as .m iiisulious attempt 

 to destroy needol human food. 



If this pr(ii;ram was unmerited, then the 

 ,\.itional Corn-Ho.i; Committe-e should bear 

 Its |ust portion of the responsibility for its 

 rteommendation to Secretary W'.ill.ue and 

 I'resulent Ronsevelt. 



If the pro.uram v\as just or merited, then 

 the National Cairn-Hei.i; Committee tos;ethei 

 with those administerinc the prouram are 

 eleser\inp of a divided creelit 



It was ehartfil in the early fall of I')s.s that 

 by killini; six million little pi.cs. pork would 

 be so lii.i;!) the followini: winter that workinp 

 people- couKl not av.iil theniseKes of this meat. 

 What is the reconl? The price level of hoes 

 not only continued low throue'hout the winter 

 of 1933, but Continued low throu.cliout l')s). 

 tlie aver.me- farm price level of hous beinc 

 SI. 38 per hundred. Little attention was then 

 .uivcn by critics of the pip killinc program to 

 the real reason why workin.t; people or rather 

 those out of work could not buv me.rt. The 

 real reason as I will later discuss is that farm- 

 ers had so lon.i; been expcriencini; low re- 

 turns for the products of their labor, including 

 ho.cs. that their income and resultant biiyinc 

 power was so low they could not buv the 

 products of American labor ane! industry. 



Whv was so much concern piven to the kill- 

 ing of these "poor little pips?" It would 

 seem that Christianlikc or statesmanlike studv 

 and response to fact wduld have resulted in 

 more interest in determininc the cause of mil- 

 lions of human beinps be-ins; out of work 

 rather than so much concern over killinp six 

 million pips at sixty to ninetv d.iys of .ipc 

 rather than six to nine months. 



We arc yet hearinc that the cnm-i.ir.itivelv 

 hiph price for hops in recent months is the 



NOTICE 



Illinois Agricultural Association 

 Election of Delegates 



Xoti,c is licrcliy pivcn t!iat in eiinne. tion 

 eviTii the annu.il mcctiniis til all fnunty 

 I-.irm Bure.ius t<i be lick! Jiirinc the montli 

 lit Xove-mhcr. l')3^i. 3t the hiiur .ind pl.iee 

 to be- de*tcrminnl bv the Bo.in! nt Direitors 

 lit e.u ii respettixe Ciiuntv r.um Biirc.iu, the 

 members in i;iio(! st.lndint; of suth Cmintv 

 r.lrm Burc.lvi. aiul whii ire ;iUi» qii.llitlcii 

 votinc members of Illinois A;;rii iiltur.il As- 

 siui.ition. slull elcit .1 tfeie;:.itc or <ieIcR.itcs 

 to reprtsent suili nunibeis ot Illinois Auii- 

 iultur.il .AssiKMtion .in,! vote on .ill m.ittcrs 

 before the next :innu.ll meetin;; or any speti.il 

 meetini: ot ttit' Assoi i.ition. inejtulini: the 

 eleition of offiicrs .mil e'iie-rors as proviMei! 

 for in the Bv-Liw-s ot the .^sso. i.ition. 



Durint: Xdvember. .innual mecrincs will 

 he held in Bond, Brown. C^l.iy, CMnttin. 

 Cf.i1l.uin, I awrcnec, I.opjn. >t.ieoupin, Mad- 

 ison. Marion, Schuyler. St. Clair and Wil- 

 liamson Counties. 



(Signed I Paul E. Mathias. 

 Corp'iratc Seeretary, 

 SeptemlxT lC,.19i(,. 



result of the pip killinp propr.im I le.ne 

 foi any intelhpeiit audience of farmers to 

 eietermiiK the accuracy of such statements. 



I come h.iek to the record. Previous to 

 the adiustment propr.im, the .iverape price of 

 c "in in 1'>~>J in the cornhilt was IS cents per 

 bu-hel. In I'H>. It was 35 cents, a larpc 

 pmtion of iIk- incie-,ise beinp due to the corn 

 lo.in piopiam which was started late in that 

 ve.ir. In l')s(. it was ^8 cents; in I')3S. "■?' . 

 Cents. The averape hop price was $3 59 per 

 hundred iit 19S2; Ss68 in 19<;; $ i ;s m 

 193 1. to whieh should be added approxmiatelv 

 SI so from benefit paviiients or Ss SS per 

 hundreel; .ind in lo^s. SS SO per hundred 



^X■|th wheat, the record discloses an aver- 

 ape price of 35 cents in 193^; ~A cents in 

 I')^s; Ri) cents in l>.isi .and 8,8 cents in 

 lOsS. These- commodities were under adiust- 

 ment and the fipures ilisclose an approximate 

 increase of .(00 per cent in the price of Corn, 

 160 per cent in the pric« of wheat and I 10 

 per cent in the price of hops. Because of the 

 action of orpani/ed milk producers, milk was 

 not placed under adiustment. Vi'liat is the 

 reeord as to price level.' In I9'2. milk was 

 Sl.^1) per hurulrcd; in 1933. Si 5~ and in 

 I''s5 Si 8i> per hundred, or an increase of 

 ■111 per cent. 



These conimoifities beine the four basic 

 products ol cornbelt apriciiltme present imer- 

 estinp studies as to the effect of adiustment 

 versus nonadiustnunt Similai^ results throuph 

 3el|iistnunt have been obtained in other aieas. 

 I refer particularly to cotton and tobaeco. 

 Wh.it has been the result nationally' I t..|d 

 you the national ne-t income of farm pc-ople 

 in 19s2 was S2.5-9.()()0.n00 or 5 38 per fe-nt of 

 the n.itional income In I9ss, jt was $3.. 

 KS-v(i(li>.ii(ii> or 8 s~ pcT cent: in I93t. $).. 

 fi'iS.iidii.ddi) or S.fiU per cent: and in I9s5. 

 •?l.-S(),(i(io.()()0 or 8.>>r> per cent "of the na- 

 tional income. 



This tw(i ;ind one-quarter billion dollars 

 increased income iminediatelv found its wav 

 into the market channels of the countrv It 

 has placed an impoit.mt part itl such economic 

 improvement as we have h.id One has onlv 

 to note tile improvement in the apiicultural im- 

 plement .iiid automotive field as proof of this 

 st.itemcnt. 



In an effort to undermirx? the support and 

 lonfidenee of farmers in the principles of ad- 

 iustment. opponents are attemptinp to con- 

 vince f.irmers that bv reducinp produetioii thev 

 :nvite foreipn farnieis to come into the Anier 

 ;(.in m.iikit and enioy the results of Aneiiean 

 I. lime is' (ooperation Time apain will not 

 permit anv Icnptln discussion of the ques- 

 tion of imports and exports. But there is one 

 phase of (Hir opponents' st.itements that need 

 .insvveiiiii;. Great iiuphasis is beinp placid 

 bv them upon incie.isirip import. ition of f.iim 

 pioducts 



Theie has reeeiitly appealed in i!ie press 

 a comparison of the value of aciicultiiral iiii- 

 poits in 19^5 with those of 19^2 Is this a 

 f.iir comparison' 



It IS tiue tll.lt. imports of aprieulli.ii.il pi.i.l 

 net- were .it their lowest point in I'lSJ. |l,e 

 tnfil value of these iinpoits beinp ?f>l 1 .AS.s;.. 

 000. 



It is tine tli.it the v.ilue of aerieiiltni im- 

 ports ineie.ised in I'l^S >.i S 1 .08 1. 1 1 l.ooO, 



But vvlu" vvere inipriits so low" in Ii.is2' 

 Was It because of n.itioiKil pohev vr vv.li it 

 because ot the domestic piiec leveN ot f.irm 

 products ' 



How Could coin he- imported into America 

 in 1932 over a tariff wall of 25 cents when 



OCTOBER, 193G 



31 



