12 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



Most of the re^ilatory laws administered by the Depart- 

 ment of Agriculture are based on the power of Congress, 

 imder article 8, section 8, generally known as the "com- 

 merce clause." Several of these acts have been passed 

 upon by the courts, and, for the most part, they have been 

 upheld. The validity of the food and drugs act has been 

 specifically recognized by the Supreme Court." 



Another factor which seems to have been of considerable 

 importance in retarding the granting of full recognition to 

 agriculture was the feeling, or perhaps, the fear, that when 

 this step was once taken, there was no definable limit beyond 

 which this new type of governmental activity might not go. 

 If the farming interests of the country were to be per- 

 mitted to have a representative in the President's Cabinet, 

 would it be possible to deny such recognition to commerce, 

 to mining, to manufacture, or to labor? And if all these 

 were to be given seats at the President's Council table, would 

 not that body become so large and unwieldy as to render 

 it inefficient as an aid to the President ? That this fear was 

 not wholly unfounded is shown by the subsequent establish- 

 ment of the Departments of Commerce and of Labor. 



There was, moreover, a rather general feeling, particu- 

 larly among those not directly interested in agriculture, that 

 the very favorable natural conditions with which that in- 

 dustry was surrounded in this country, made government 

 aid or other artificial stimulus entirely unnecessary, if not 

 undesirable. 



Early Agricultural Legislation 



In the eighteenth century, the ideal colony was the one 

 whose products did not in any way compete with those of 

 the mother country. In their economic pursuits, mother 

 country and colony were to be mutually complementary. 

 "The aim was to create a self-sufficient commercial empire, 

 which, while independent of competing European powers, 

 would be able to make them dependent on it."" 



» Hipolile EKg Co. v. United .States, 220 U. S. 45. 



"G. L. Beer, British Colonial Policy, 1754-1763, p. 134. 



