GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 867 



to this great international syndicate. Jesse H. Jones of the Reconstruction Fi- 

 nance Corporation called together a group of businessmen and suggested that the 

 group be organized. Chester C. Davis was vice chairman of the research com- 

 mittee. 



The research committee also included such men as Eric A. Johnson, president, 

 Brown-Johnston Co., Spokane, Wash., and president, Chamber of Commerce 

 of the United States: Thomas W. Lamont, vice chairman of the board, J. P. 

 Morgan & Co., director. United States Steel Corp. On the advisory board was 

 William I. Myers, head, department of agricultural economics, Cornell University. 



In its literature, the Committee for Economic Development stated: 



"If you need any additional information, you may write to the Committee for 

 Economic Development, Field Development Division, room 3311, United States 

 Department of Commerce Building, Washington, D. C." 



This committee also stated: 



"Its program and its aims have been discussed with officials of the National 

 Association of Manufacturers, the United States Chamber of Commerce, and also 

 wit>i such governmental groups as the State Department, Federal Reserve Board, 

 National Resources Planning Board, the Board of Economic Warfare, and the 

 War Production Board." 



This committee further stated: 



"The prospects are both agonizing and inspiring: but the vigorous support 

 promised b}- private organizations, plus the active interest and cooperation offered 

 by the Department of Commerce and other Government agencies, has given rise 

 to a growing confidence that the contemplated program can contribute substan- 

 tially to the maintenance and development of a free, dynamic economy." 



The committee's research advisory board was composed of representatives 

 from America's leading universities. Among these are: Prof. Sumner Slichter, of 

 Harvard University, chairman. According to Who's Who, Professor Slichter 

 was a student of Munich University in 1910. He was a member of the American 

 Association for Labor Legislation and a member of the National Consumeis 

 League. Another member of the research advisory board is Prof. Theodore C. 

 Yntema, who has a long background of association as an economic adviser both 

 to governmental agencies and to American industries such as United States Steel 

 Corp., the Association of American Railroads, Liggett & Myers Tobacco Co., 

 Inland Steel Co., United States Gypsum Co., Armour & Co., and others. His 

 name does not appear in Who's Who. 



The Committee for Economic Development asked its members this question: 



To what extent are we maintaining the necessary contacts abroad (where 

 possible) and with Government to assure having the best available information 

 on questions concerning tariffs and foreign trade policies so we shall stand the best 

 chance of securing our share of participation in world markets. 



The American farmer has been sold down the river as ruthlessly as any slaver 

 ever sold Negroes from Africa to the settlers of New England. 



Why was Mr. Prentiss Brown appointed as Director of the Office of Price 

 Administration? Because he was defeated by the voters of his home State in 

 1942 due to his antiagricultural record. 



Why was Mr. Henry A. Wallace named to serve as President of the Senate? 

 Because he created the "antiagricultural department." 



Why has the administration so relentlessly, persistently, and unalterably 

 pursued a policy of starvation prices on farm products? Because only in this 

 Avay can the great international scheme for world empire be carried out. 



Now. Mr. Chairman, I will take up this other statement. 



Special trade agreements were not war measures. The act of Congress pro- 

 viding for special trade agreements was first passed in 1933 — I believe that it is 

 1934, but it was the same Congress. Any attempt to claim special trade agree- 

 ments as a war measure was simply an effort to prevent meritorious arguments in 

 opposition to this scheme to lower Ainerican agriculture to the level of other 

 ■countries. 



It is impossible to consider adequately the question of special trade agreements 

 aside from the general question of tariffs generally. 



The question of special trade agreements, as well as the broader question of 

 tariffs in general, is no longer a party question. Indeed we no longer have a 

 political party in this country which in any sense represents the views and tradi- 

 tions of its founders. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party alike, 

 as we have known them in the past, existed on sectional questions and differences. 



Protective tariff, as it has operated, was simply the use of governmental power 

 for the industry of the East to levy a tribute on agriculture of the South and West. 

 As we all know, the protective tariff which was originally the child of the Republi- 



