GRAZING FEES GTJAEANTY PRICE OK WHEAT. 27 



Mr. Clement. There were less than 6,000,000 bushels in the prin- 

 cipal points of accumulation. Of course, there was some wheat 

 scattered around over the country. 



Mr. TisrCHEE. I mean in the hands of the producers. 



Mr. Clement. Oh, I do not know how much there was in the 

 hands of the producers. Mr. Smiley, of Kansas, is a statistician, 

 and he can tell you more than I can. You are talking about wheat 

 of the 1916 crop ? 



Mr. TiNCHER. Oh, no ; I mean the 191T crop. 



Mr. Clement. Oh, that was all in their hands. 



Mr. Tin CHER. What was the amount of wheat produced? 



Mr. Smiley. There were 663,000,000 bushels produced in the 

 United States in 1917. 



Mr. Tin CHER. There was a certain portion of that in the hands 

 of the mills that was sold on the basis of this market ; that is, before 

 the Government confiscated the wheat for war purposes ? 



Mr. Clement. Exactly. 



Mr. Tin CHER. I want to know this : What reason can there be, what 

 reasonable excuse can the Government offer now, having assumed the 

 attitude it did assume with reference to other war transactions that 

 you have so nicely enumerated to this committee, for not reimbursing 

 every man who had property in the form of wheat, that being the 

 raw material that they confiscated for the purpose of winning the 

 war ? It would cost less than a quarter of a billion dollars to reim- 

 burse all of them, every man whose wheat was confiscated. 



Mr. Clement. Our losses will aggregate, we think, $5,000,000. 

 You mean, including the farmers? 



Mr. TiNCHEE. Yes. 



Mr. Clement. We anticipated that you would ask that question, 

 sir 



Mr. TiNCHEE (interposing). Well, they confiscated his wheat. 



Mr. Clement. Well, there was no way to tell whether or not he 

 would have received that price for his wheat if he had waited dur- 

 ing the year. I am frank to say to you that I believe he would have 

 received $5 for his wheat, absolutely. But here is the point: The 

 farmer has been compensated by reason of the guaranties for the 

 subsequent year. 



Mr. TiNCHER. He has had a price under the guaranty for the en- 

 suing year, as it turned out, of a little less than the cost of produc- 

 tion. But here is a cold fact : A farmer has a bushel of wheat. The 

 Government, by placing a certain power in the hands of certain 

 men, reduces the market price of that "wheat 60 cents. I do not 

 know how we could spend a quarter of a million dollars with any 

 more merit in the whole proposition. And I can not distinguish 

 between the farmer who? has a bushel of wheat, when the Govern- 

 ment comes along and says, " You have to take 60 cents off the 

 market price of that wheat," and any one else that has a bushel of 

 wheat. You both came by it honestly. You are both engaged in a 

 necessary occupation for the success of the Government. 



Mr. Clement. I will agree with you there, and I think the fixing 

 of the price of wheat at less than the market was indefensible. If 

 they did not think the price ought to go higher, then they ought to 

 have fixed it at the market value. As I have said, I do not believe it 



