Representative HAUGEN. Then it does not amount to anything. Mr. CROPLEY. Then it would not show up protein or its fat. To get your protein you have got to have good goods in them, otherwise it will not analyze them as we represent them to be.

The CHAIRMAN. You say you have got to have good feed to have protein?

Mr. CROPLEY. No; I say if those ingredients that were put in our mixture of feeds do not contain the necessary protein, fat, and fiber when they are blended together it would not come out in its final analysis.

The CHAIRMAN. We are very much obliged to you and also to Judge Carlin for having you come here. We will now hear Mr.

White.

STATEMENT OF MR. C. R. WHITE, DEPARTMENT OF FARM AND MARKETS, ALBANY, N. Y.

Mr. WHITE. The testimony here yesterday showed that as a rule in nearly every State the members of the Manufacturers' Feed Association had complied with the law. If that is the case, when they comply with the law when enacted, I do not see why anybody should be so exercised. If those people are not willing to comply, that is up to the Federal and State authorities. The question comes up about the State of New York in regard to the production of milk. We think that we can not produce milk in New York State economically if we are to be forced to use low grade materials that we do not need. We have in the State a surplus of hay carried over from last year. I can go to a number of counties and find you baled hay in the barns. We are producing a very considerable quantity of alfalfa in some parts of the State, and it is being sold to go outside of the State in some parts to the Quartermaster's Department. We have an extremely large crop of oats and barley. We have all of that kind of material we want.

Representative LEVER. Why do you not use it?

Mr. WHITE. We do.

Representative LEVER. Why do you propose that we adopt this

thing?

Mr. WHITE. We do not propose to do so, if we can avoid it. They come in the high grade feeds, and we can not get the high grade constituents without buying them.

Representative LEVER. You require this here inferior stuff to mix with your own hay and materials?

Mr. WHITE. No, sir.

Representative LEVER. Why was that?

Mr. WHITE. Because they are not offered for sale in our part of the State. The stock feeds are sold mainly by small dealers, and they can not carry the large number of constituents which should enter into a stock feed. We do not object to buying mixed feeds and prefer to use mixed feeds. A gentleman was here yesterday testifying that he has never, outside of seven or eight cars a year, bought for his herds any mixed feeds, but that he would buy mixed feeds and be willing to pay more at the present time if he could get it entirely free from objectionable material.

Representative LEVER. Do you think this amendment cures that? Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir.

Representative LEVER. How?

Mr. WHITE. Because it shows what is in them.

Representative LEVER. Suppose they do not sell it to you.

Mr. WHITE. If they do not sell it to us, we will get along without it.

Representative LEVER. That is the trouble now, they do not sell it to you?

Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir.

Representative LEVER. Does this cure that trouble?

Mr. WHITE. If they sell mixed feeds.

Representative LEVER. Well, you say you don't want this mixed stuff sold.

Mr. WHITE. I didn't say I didn't want mixed feed. We do want mixed feed, but we want to know what is in it. We want to know the amount of ingredients in it.

Representative LEVER. I thought your proposition was somewhat like Mr. Lasater's, that the farmers there in New York had plenty of roughage.

Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir; and we say that we prefer them not to ship that stuff into this State. It is an economical loss to us, and I think I can show you

Representative LEVER (interposing). I agree with you. But how are you going to remedy the proposition? Will this amendment do that?

Mr. WHITE. If it is prohibited from being shipped in the mixed feeds, it will be.

Representative LEVER. Your proposition is Mr. Lasater's, to prohibit the shipment of all this stuff in interstate commerce?

Mr. WHITE. In mixed feeds; yes. And another thing we wish to bring in is the economic loss in the transportation of these materials. Oat hulls contain 3.4 per cent of protein and 0.6 of 1 per cent of fat. Digestible fat protein is only 1.3, or 26 pounds to the ton. Cottonseed meal contains 37.6-I am taking this from Henry's works on Feed and Feeding-37.6 per cent of protein and 9.6 per cent of fat, or 47 per cent, 47 pounds to the hundred of digestible nutrients. Now, I want to call our attention to this fact, that it will require 36 cars of oat hulls to contain the same nutrition that is contained in one carload of cottonseed meal; that the transportation charges on a $5 freight rate costs $1.92 per pound for digestible nutrients, while in cottonseed meal it costs 0.53 of 1 cent a pound.

In gluten feed there are 21.3 per cent of digestible protein and 2.9 of fat, and the freight rate is 1.06 cents per pound. It would require 19 carloads of oat hulls to equal one carload of gluten feed, of feed that is claimed by some is no better than oat hulls, as wheat bran, which contains 12 per cent of digestible protein and 3 per cent of fat, or 300 pounds to the ton. Taking the cost of transportation at $5 per ton, on that rate it would be 1.66 cents freight rate per pound. It would require 11 carloads of oat hulls to equal 1 ton of wheat bran.

We claim that it is an economic loss. It means thousands and thousands of cars are used-I am not speaking of what may be in Texas or some other drouth-stricken region where those oat hulls

may be shipped as roughage economically, but to transport them into the State of New York where we have roughage that will go down in the barnyards, and thousands of tons in the shape of good straw, enormous quantities of hay-the largest hay-producing State in the Union-with alfalfa, too, that the farmers don't want it. They have no use for it. It is simply coals to New Castle, bringing material that we already have.

Representative LEVER. Your proposition is, Mr. White, as I understand it-and you make a very fair witness and a very intelligent statement-your position is that because the buying of these mixed feeds by the farmers of New York is uneconomical, that therefore we ought to pass this legislation to prohibit the interstate shipment of mixed feeds at all.

Mr. WHITE. Containing certain ingredients.

Representative LEVER. Containing certain ingredients which in themselves are not deleterious to health or dangerous, and which in themselves contain somewhat of a feeding value?

Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir.

Representative LEVER. You would inhibit the shipment of these ingredients in interstate commerce because you have a situation in New York where your farmers with plenty of hay on hand for some reason or other prefer to buy these mixed feed. Is that your proposition?

Mr. WHITE. They do like to buy mixed feeds; yes, sir.

Representative LEVER. Now, then, to educate the farmers of New York you would prohibit the farmers of Oklahoma from selling their alfalfa meal as a mixture.

Mr. WHITE. No, sir. It was in the State of New York where this measure originated, and it was not the purpose of the State food commission to include alfalfa meal. It was not the intention that it should include hay.

Representative LEVER. Did I understand you to say that this amendment originated in New York State?

Mr. WHITE. The amendment did not, but I think some of the material did before the New York Food Commission after an investigation of some two months in which we took 115 samples of feed.

Representative LEVER. Now, just what do you mean? Your farmers in New York, you say, have plenty of hay, plenty of straw, plenty of oat chaff or whatever you call it, that you could burn it and still have plenty of it left, and you object to the shipment of these mixed feeds into New York, because you think your farmers ought to consume their own roughage in connection with these unmixed ingredients?

Mr. WHITE. We certainly do.

Representative LEVER. Is that your position?

Mr. WHITE. I think as a war measure it is exactly what ought to be done.

Representative LEVER. I think you are exactly right, and for that reason you would prohibit the farmer of Mississippi or Texas or Kansas, who has corn cobs or cottonseed hulls to sell that your farmer in New York wants-you would prohibit your farmer from buying and the Mississippi and Kansas farmer from selling it?

Mr. WHITE. No; we have no objection to his selling stuff for exactly what it is.

Representative LEVER. So you come to the Federal Government and ask the Federal Government to take a big stick and knock some ordinary common economic sense into the heads of the farmers in New York. Is that your proposition?

Mr. WHITE. No, sir; we do not.

Representative LEVER. Well, I can't get your point.

Mr. WHITE. There is no reason why products that we have in the State of New York should be shipped into the State of New York in a condition where we can't detect it.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you object to the farmer in Mississippi and Oklahoma selling anything he has got to anybody who wants to buy it, representing it as just what it is?

Mr. WHITE. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you object to the farmer in New York or anywhere else buying anything he wants to buy from anybody on earth if he knows what he is buying?

Mr. WHITE. No, sir.

Representative LEVER. Yes; the gentleman does.

Mr. WHITE. The point right here, Mr. Lever, is that the gentlemen who oppose this measure are taking the ground and have taken it in in the State of New York before a hearing, that if the order of the State's food commission was made which compelled them to put the amount of these so-termed adulterants upon their bags it would absolutely exclude their products from the market. In other words, they admitted that the farmers wouldn't buy the feed if they knew it contained these materials.

Representative LEVER. Have you got authority to do that in your State law now?

Mr. WHITE. That measure is pending. Hearings are to be held on it the 5th of October. I will say this that when the State's food commission adjourned that meeting, or deferred the action of that order it was done temporarily, awaiting what might be done here in Congress, and the statement was sent out that it was postponed indefinitely, but I think I can assure the gentleman that it was postponed very indefinitely and for very definite purposes.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. White, if you will pardone me, I will remind you that there is an hour allotted to your side. I don't know what your arrangements are. Someone told me your were to talk 5 minutes and I think your have been talking 15. Of course you can use the whole time, so far as the committee is concerned.

Mr. WHITE. I answered the question, Senator Gore, that was all. Representative HAUGEN. Just let me ask you one question. My understanding is that your objection is to the corncob masquesrading under false colors?

Mr. WHITE. Absolutely.

Representative HAUGEN. So that if the Secretary should find that corncobs or whatever it may be these shells and these different things that have been enumerated here-have no value as feed, he would prohibit the use of mixing or mixing of these worthless and useless articles.

Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir. We have full confidence in the Secretary of Agriculture as being capable of determining those things as the authority.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, whom will you have next?

Mr. WARD. I think we will close with a few remarks that I have been asked to make upon this matter.

Now, in behalf of these dairy and milk producers' organizations, Senators and gentlemen, I desire to say that we don't think, and we don't want any antagonism long drawn out and to exist between the feed manufacturers and the milk producers. There isn't any necessity for it. It isn't in the nature of the business as legitimately and rightfully conducted. We went along for a great many years growing milk and dairy products in the State of New York, supplying them with the foodstuffs and grain and by-products produced in the West and South, and there was no trouble. There was no mistrust and there was no wholesale frauds perpetrated upon our people who bought these products. Then came in this mixed-feed-compounded-feed-proposition. Now, I know-and I have had considerable experience with it-that 50 per cent of the men who manufacture compounded feeds manufacture a good staple article that can have its name posted on every package of it with perfect freedom and confidence. Gradually the percentage has crept up so that the other 50 per cent has got to be mistrusted. There isn't any question-and we don't complain that the Quaker Oats people sold for dairy food 300,000 tons of oat hulls. We are glad they sold them. We don't ask the Federal Government to do a thing that will prohibit their being sold in New York or anywhere else. All we ask of the Federal Government is that they be labelel "oat hulls." Now, that is all we ask, that when a farmer drives up to the feed store and the dairyman says to him, "Here is a fine brand that will produce a lot of milk, and it is made so and so," that if there is 10 pounds or 20 pounds or 30 pounds or 50 pounds of straw in that package the label shall so appear on it.

It seems that the discussion has gone along on other subjects here, something else than the real point contained in this measure. We don't care how much money the Quaker Oats people make. I want to call the attention of the committee to the fact that if this 300,000 tons of oat hulls were sold to the dairymen in this country who were producing milk at $50 or $60 a ton, that the consumer ultimately pays that price. And that wasn't right. Milk that the consumers use and that is necessary for them to live on should not be produced on a straw material which costs the dairymen, becase of the negligence of the lawmaking power, the cost of high-value feeds.

Now, this is not a new subject. In 1913 Senator Owen introduced in this Congress the exact bill that you have got there now-Senate bill 8177. Section 5 treats of the interstate transportation of adulterated foodstuffs. Section 6 reads:

For the purposes of this act the feeding stuffs shall be deemed to be adulterated if it contains any sawdust, dirt, damaged feed, rice hulls, chaff, peanut hulls, crushed corncobs, oat hulls, oat clippings, or any foreign matter whatever.

There is the same thing. That bill died in the Senate committee. Now can it be said that it was not widely known and has not been in all these years, when the dairymen were seeking relief-can it be claimed that these things were not widely known that this was a fraudulent thing, an imposition upon not only the farmers of this

81413-18- -9