/• 



other causes beyond the control of pro- 

 ducers. . ." 



The more recent history of the Federal 

 Farm Board which came into being as 

 a result of the Agricultural Marketing 

 Act sponsored by President Hoover and 

 his Administration is still fresh in our 

 memories. Our organization did not de- 

 sire this legislation nor did it oppose the 

 measure. We were willing to give the 

 Administration the opportunity it asked 

 to solve the farm problem through the 

 organization of cooperative marketing 

 associations and the stabilization corpora- 

 tion. 



You know something about the enor- 

 mous yields of wheat and cotton in 1928. 

 1929 and 1930. You know that even in 

 those years export outlets for surplus 

 wheat, cotton, livestock products and 

 other farm commodities were seriously 

 declining. You remember how the prices 

 of cotton and wheat started on the tobog- 

 gan in 1930, and then how Secretary of 

 Agriculture Arthur M. Hyde and the 

 Chairman of the Federal Farm Board, 

 Alexander Legge, determined that the 

 only solution to fast-falling farm prices 

 was a drastic reduction in acreage. 



Legge and Hyde Said 



Again let us look at the record. I 

 quote from a Washington, D. C. dispatch 

 published on July 4, 1930: 



"Adjustment of production to the 

 domestic demand offers the only com- 

 plete answer to the farm price prob- 

 lem, farmers were told today by Chair- 

 man Alexander Legge of the Federal 

 Farm Board and Secretary of Agricul- 

 ture, Arthur M. Hyde . . . Chairman 

 Legge and Secretary Hyde talked over a 

 nation-wide radio hook-up. . . Their 

 addresses were supplemental to the 

 world wheat outlook report issued 

 yesterday by the Department of Agri- 

 culture, and marked the beginning of 

 a speaking campaign in the heart of 

 the hard winter wheat belt in the 

 west." 



Again on July 7, 1930 in a speech at 

 Hastings, Nebraska which opened the 

 Farm Board's campaign to secure a 

 wholesale wheat acreage reduction, the 

 Associated Press quoted Chairman Legge 

 as follows: 



"It is our conclusion that a net reduc- 

 tion in production is essential if you 

 are going to obtain a reasonable price 

 for that which you produce. And the 

 program I wish to recommend is a 

 gradual slowing down with the object 

 of eventually balancing domestic pro- 

 duction with domestic consumption. 

 If and when this is done the tariff of 

 42 cents a bushel will become fully 

 effective." 



2500 AT PEORIA MEETING 

 Left to right. Speakers Donald Kirk- 

 patrick. Earl C. Smith, George E. Metzger. 



On August 12, 1931, a Washington, 

 D. C. dispatch told of an all-day meeting 

 of the Federal Farm Board attended by 

 Secretary of Agriculture, Arthur M. Hyde 

 and former Chairman Alexander Legge 

 (Mr. Legge had resigned in March). 

 Chairman James C. Stone telegraphed 

 the Governors of fourteen cotton states 

 of the South urging them to mobilize 

 every available agency to induce pro- 

 ducers to plow under every third row of 

 cotton. The government estimate showed 

 a production of 15,584,000 bales of cot- 

 ton that year and a carry-over of 9,000,- 

 000 bales which had resulted in the low- 

 est price in thirty-one years, 6.75c a 

 pound for cotton for October delivery. 



It's Conclusive Proof 



I cite all these references as conclusive 

 proof that the principles of adjusting 

 agricultural production to demand at fair 

 and reasonable prices — and I believe 

 the principle to be a sound one — was 

 initiated during the '20's, that this prin- 

 ciple of surplus control has enjoyed the 

 support of leaders in both Republican and 

 Democratic administrations for more than 

 a decade. I cite them also to show that 

 the Federal Farm Board Act, sincerely 

 and aggressively administered as it was, 

 was powerless to bring about any ade- 

 quate and permanent solution to the prob- 

 lem of crop surpluses and parity price 

 maintenance. 



Would it not be well for the Farm 

 Bureau leaders of Illinois to bring these 

 statements to the attention of some of 

 our present-day partisan friends when 

 they criticize the program of organized 

 agriculture ? 



But we have more evidence than the 



(Continued on page 20) 



IVearly 3300 at 



Peoria and Salem 



VJ^^^ARM Bureau leaders from the 

 ^"■;^^ 97 county organizations in the 



^Jj state who met at Salem and 

 Peoria, Sept. 20 and 21, not only voted 

 unanimously to aggressively support the 

 AAA program in the coming year, but 

 also made specific recommendations for 

 improvement of the Act and its admin- 

 istration. 



The 900 leaders who attended the 

 Salem meeting and the 2500 at Peoria 

 heard a vigorous presentation of recent 

 economic and political history with facts 

 about the AAA, by President Earl C. 

 Smith. 



The public forum on the AAA follow- 

 ing President Smith's address brought 

 forth recommendations, many of which 

 were enthusiastically applauded. Some 

 of them are as follows: 



Promptness in getting out individual 

 farm allotments of basic soil depleting 

 crops for next year before Jan. 1, 1939; 

 the establishment of greater equity in in- 

 dividual allotments between farms with 

 more attention to tillable crop acres and 

 fertility on each farm and less attention 

 to crop history; consideration of corn 

 and wheat as a single commodity in 

 measuring crop compliance; elimination 

 of the two-thirds majority rule in voting 

 on marketing quotas in favor of a sim- 

 ple majority; amendment of the Act to 

 put wheat and corn in the same market- 

 ing classification and thus remove the dis- 

 crimination against corn. (Under pres- 

 ent provisions of the Act wheat growers 

 are permitted to dispose of their surplus 

 wheat above the quota amount by feed- 

 ing. Corn farmers feel that wheat sur- 

 pluses should not be allowed to compete 

 with corn in this manner). 



Donald Kirkpatrick, legal counsel said 

 that Illinois leads all other states in the 

 number of farmer cooperatives. These 

 organizations, which last year marketed 

 $175,000,000 of farm products and han- 

 dled $25,000,000 of farm supplies, have 

 developed along two lines. First, to give 

 the farmer better bargaining power in 

 the sale of his products, and, second, to 

 reduce cost of farm supplies of guar- 

 anteed quality through cooperative pur- 

 chasing. All these cooperative services 

 he said have been coordinated with the 

 Farm Bureau for greater safety and 

 service to members. 



George E. Metzger, field secretary, ex- 

 plained some of the duties of Farm Bu- 

 reau leaders in forming policies and in 

 getting them administered. Directors 

 should direct policies and leave admin- 

 istrative matters to the management, he 

 said. No director should accept respon- 

 sibility as a member of the board unless 

 prepared to give attention and thought 

 to his job. 



FESTIVAL C 



L A. A. RECORD 



