that opens a large field, I realize, Mr. Husted, but to give my answer briefly, the conditions are so dissimilar that the same rule should not be and can not be applied to the manufacturer and the farmer. Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Barbour, as I understand it, one of your reasons in favor of this bill is that it will increase production?

Mr BARBOUR. It has increased production, Mr. Morgan-organization has.

Mr. MORGAN. The question is, would that really always work out in that way? For instance, I was in the South last April and I noticed all through the papers there that they were carrying on an agitation to organize the cotton farmers, not for the purpose of increasing the production of cotton, but for the purpose of decreasing it. That is apparently what they were using their organization for. Now, isn't there danger that if the farmers in general, the wheat farmers, the corn farmers, the live-stock producers, each organized separately, and each one has an organization, isn't there danger that they would understand that principle that reduction of production would give them more profit?

Mr. BARBOUR. I don't think so, Mr. Morgan, for this reason: If we are producing, say, raisins-that are produced in my district— and the farmer is getting a good price for those raisins, there is no way of keeping other farmers or other individuals from planting vineyards. They may have as many organizations or as strong an organization as they can, but there are thousands and hundreds of thousands of outsiders who would see a chance to make a profit, and you can't prevent them from setting out vineyards.

Mr. MORGAN. That was the argument of the trusts, you know. They claimed that if the trusts made big money there would be other trusts organized, and in the end it would greatly help the people.

Mr. IGOE. Under this bill, as I understand it, the producers might be shareholders in a large organization, and anything then that the producers would do, or the managers would do, would be outside of the law. Now, might it not be likely that the effect would be that those who are not in such associations would be at a disadvantage in the same way that in the manufacturing industry those who are not in the combination or trust are at a disadvantage?

Mr. BARBOUR. I don't think so. I think the organization would stabilize the price of the product, so that the outsider would, and our experience has been in California that the outsider has profited more than the insider.

Mr. IGOE. But this is a very large proposition and extends into the whole field of production and it practically compels everyone to join, because it goes to the marketing and to all the processes that may be necessary between production and final sale to the consumer, no matter how many different steps may be necessary to bring it to the point where it can be consumed.

Mr. BARBOUR. But I think our experience in California answers your question. The organization each year fixes a price to the grower members, you see, that it is going to pay them for their product. Now, there are a lot of fellows skirmishing around on the outside, many of them with large capital, who are packing and marketing raisins. They go out and attempt to keep a certain number of men out of the organization, because the growers contract

with the organization provides that they shall deliver their crops to the organization. They go out and one of their methods is to continually offer a little higher price to the outsider in order to keep him out of the association. There is competition of the most strenuous kind between the organization and the outsiders, and really the outside fellow, if he stays out, while he brings down on his head a certain amount of unpopularity in the community, nevertheless if he has got the backbone to withstand that, he makes more for his product than the man on the inside. That has been our experience out there during six or seven years of organization.

Mr. IGOE. All you have to do is to organize an association big enough and give each fellow a share of stock, and you can manipulate production to your heart's content, or you can let it go. Under this bill there is nothing in the world to prevent this association from doing everything it pleases that might be criminal under the regular statutes, and it might be just as extensive and more extensive than any combination that has ever been formed.

Mr. BARBOUR. I think the conditions in farming are such that it is impossible for that situation to result.

Mr. GARD. I suppose the conditions in farming, general farming, the production of grain, wheat, and corn are not similar to the conditions pertaining in the growing of raisins, are they?

Mr. BARBOUR. No; I will say this-and I want to be perfectly frank with the committee-that nature has given practically to the congressional district that I represent a monopoly of the raisingrowing industry; not an entire monopoly, but the great percentage of the raisins produced in the United States are produced right there. But there are lying idle and vacant out there to-day thousands and thousands of acres that can still be planted to raisin vineyards. There is no limit almost to the amount of raisins that we can produce in this section of the country.

I started to say something a moment ago in regard to the increase of production.

Mr. GARD. What I have in mind is whether your proposition presents conditions of local application or general application to the entire farming industry.

Mr. BARBOUR. Well, I will confess I am not-I don't feel competent to discuss the situation from the standpoint of a general farmer, because I am a lawyer. While I am familiar with the raisin situation and know it pretty thoroughly, when it comes to wheatgrowing in the Middle West and dairying in the East, there are other gentlemen here who can probably discuss that much more intelligently than I could.

Mr. STEELE. Under the phraseology of this act, would it be your hought that a corporation organized under its terms would be still under the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission as to unfair competition?

Mr. BARBOUR. I think so.

Mr. STEELE. The language seems to be so general as to exclude it from the operation of the law.

Mr. BARBOUR. The purpose of the legislation is to give the farmer the opportunity simply to organize and sell his product collectively. Now, if he puts on an unconscionable price or an unfair price, there ought to be some Government authority that will prevent him from

charging such unfair price. That is only right and honorable and honest, and the farmers of my district are not asking for the privilege of charging unfair prices. They want a fair price and they never did have it until they organized. They were the prey of the packers out there. And, as I started to say, when they organized, there were 116,000 tons of raisins produced annually in California, and to-day, six or seven years later, with a crop 25 per cent short, they are producing 175,000 tons of raisins, and the president of the association stated to me when he was in Washington last month to appear before the Department of Justice, that they could sell 50,000 tons more if they had produced them. They had orders for that many more and could not fill them.

Mr. HERSMAN. The next witness will be Mr. Miller, and he will tell you who he represents. He represent a large deputation of eastern farmers. Then after that I will ask you to hear Mr. Sapiro, who represents eight cooperative associations, and will present to you his ideas.

STATEMENT OF MR. JOHN D. MILLER, REPRESENTING THE NATIONAL BOARD OF FARM ORGANIZATIONS, WASHINGTON, D. C.

The CHAIRMAN. Please state your full name and just whom you represent, Mr. Miller.

Mr. MILLER. My name is John D. Miller, and my Washington address is the office of the National Board of Farm Organizations, 1731 I Street NW. My home address is Susquehanna, Pa. Send messages to 303 Fifth Avenue, New York City.

Mr. MORGAN. Excuse me just a moment there who are the officers of this national organization?

Mr. MILLER. The National Board of Farm Organizations?

Mr. MORGAN. Yes, sir

Mr. MILLER. I have here a letterhead of that organization which I will be glad to file, if you care to have it. There is a long list of them.

Mr. MORGAN. I would like to have that filed.

Mr. MILLER. I will be glad to file it.

Mr. MORGAN. Can't you tell us something about what this organization is?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir. The organization is not one that has individual members. It is an affiliation of organizations.

Mr. MORGAN. Now what organizations are affiliated?

Mr. MILLER. It is an affiliation of great farm organizations. Among the organizations there are some 14 or 15 of them, which appear on the letterhead.

Mr. MORGAN. What are some of the leading ones?

Mr. MILLER. Among the leading ones are the Farmers' Union, the great farm organization of the South, and extending up through the West. They have, as I understand it, now, a membership of about 800,000.

The next larger in number, perhaps, is the Milk Producers' Federation, which is an affiliation of milk producers' organizations, a national one, that has about 400,000 members, all of those being

heads of families, of course, they represent a population of five times the number.

The Farmers' Equity Association, the Pennsylvania State Grange

Mr. MORGAN. Now, that is just simply the Pennsylvania State Grange?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. MORGAN. It doesn't include the National Grange?

Mr. MILLER. The National Grange is not affiliated with this national board, but at my left sits Mr. Atkeson, the Washington representative of the National Grange, who is here in thorough cooperation with our organization and with us in asking for this legislation. Mr. MORGAN. Now, there is some other organization here, I think Mr. George P. Hampton is the president of it-that is not in your organization?

Mr. MILLER. That is not connected with this organization in any way, shape, or form.

Mr. MORGAN. The farmers, then, have these two organizations here. How many do they represent?

Mr. MILLER. I can't tell you, Mr. Morgan, how many farmers are represented by Mr. Hampton's organization. I believe I can tell you who I represent.

Mr. MORGAN. Well, I think it is always well before committees to understand just who men represent.

Mr. MILLER. Yes, indeed. I believe that it is fair to say, Mr. Chairman-it may be accurate to say-that the different representatives here of farm organizations perhaps represent more of the farmers of America than have ever been represented before any congressional committee before.

Mr. WALSH. What is the purpose of these various organizations? What are they organized for?

Mr. MILLER. Which organizations are you referring to?
Mr. WALSH. Any of these that you mentioned.

Mr. MILLER. These that I have mentioned? The National Board of Farm Organizations is simply an association in which the other national farm organizations may affiliate for concerted effort. Now, these member organizations are organized for different purposes. Mr. WALSH. What are some of them?

Mr. MILLER. The Milk Producers Federation, for one, are the different associations of milk producers that supply milk to most of the cities of the Union-the larger cities. The farmers union of the South is both an educational and, in a sense, a commercial organization, seeking to make collective sales of the farm products of their members.

The grange is largely an educational and also a social organization, but in some of its activities it engages sometimes the local or State granges, at least in buying and selling collectively. So that the organizations that are affiliated with this national board are of different types, and in the whole fairly represent the different types of farm organizations throughout the country, I believe.

Mr. MORGAN. I would like to ask you another question. Is this National Board of Farm Organizations a corporation?

Mr. MILLER. No, sir; it is purely a voluntary association:

Mr. MORGAN. Have you a constitution and by-laws?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. MORGAN. Would you object to filing a copy of those with your statement?

Mr. MILLER. I would be very glad to do so, if you desire it.

Mr. LYMAN. Will you see that we have that, please?

Mr. MILLER. Yes.

Mr. MORGAN. What position do you occupy? You say you represent this board; what position do you occupy?

Mr. MILLER. I am one of the directors, and by authority of a resolution of the board of directors I am here representing the association. Mr. MORGAN. Now, do you belong to some of these are you a member of one of these subsidiary organizations?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. MORGAN. What one?

Mr. MILLER. I am the vice president and general counsel for the Dairymen's League, an organization of 77,000 dairy farmers, who supply milk to the city of Greater New York and the entire metropolitan district.

Mr. MORGAN. Are you an attorney by profession, or a dairyman? Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. MORGAN. Are you an attorney by profession?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir; and I have been a dairyman for 35 years. I live on a farm where I have lived for 35 years, and manage it. Mr. MORGAN. And you are a lawyer, besides?

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. CURRIE. Your association, you say, delivers milk to these great municipalities?

Mr. MILLER. We furnish it. We deliver to the dealers, the middlemen.

Mr. CURRIE. That is what I was going to inquire. Now, is there another federation or organization which attends to the distribution of the milk?

Mr. MILLER. Yes; there is-in New York, you mean?

Mr. CURRIE. You mentioned New York. Now, what is your notion about that, as to whether does your organization which produces and furnishes to this secondary, or second organizations, the milk-do you contend for a different plan, or are you satisfied with having those two organizations, one to produce and deliver to the other, and the other to attend to the distribution to the consumers?

Mr. MILLER. In answer to that question, there is such a feeling of hostility between our organization and the organization of dealers that I am somehow reluctant to discuss their activities. I sometimes think that I stand up so straight that I lean over backwards in that respect.

Mr. CURRIE. I am asking for a definition of the policy of your organization.

Mr. MILLER. What our organization is now doing largely, in a smaller way-a few farmers are proceeding in another way, but what our organization is largely doing is selling milk to the dealers, who take it at a receiving station in the country, near the farms, transport it to the city and there distribute it. There are a few in