Can you give us any assurance today that the farm machinery situation will be sufficient to take care of the farmers' needs this year? Secretary WICKARD. Well, that is awfully hard to answer by a "yes" or "no" reply. Many things depend, if we have large harvests, and unfavorable weather at harvest time, as we did in the case of soybeans last fall, our farm-machinery supply will not be adequate to take care of the harvest.

If we have favorable weather, at harvest time, why the situation will be entirely different.

Now, the farm-machinery situation has improved in the last few weeks, first because we are getting enough steel to take care of repairs and we hear very little complaint now about there not being repairs available for farmers to keep their machines operating.

We are getting more steel and getting it at an earlier time than was the prospect a few months ago. I, however, am not completely satisfied that we are getting the quantity that we ought to have to be safe.

Now, I know farmers are going to put out this year a good crop; indications are from the intentions of the farmers, as reported by the Department of Agriculture, that our agricultural production this year with average weather will exceed the record-breaking production of last year.

.

Now, we will not have as much machinery as we would like to have, of course, to harvest that kind of a crop. Perhaps if we all work diligently together and make the best use we can of the machinery, there will not be very much of the crops go without harvesting because of the lack of farm machinery, but it is impossible for me to say that we will have all we should have for that purpose.

Mr. CARLSON. Well, I was much disappointed and I know you were, when this LD-170 came out, using 1941 as a base year and allowing only 20 percent for 1943.

Secretary WICKARD. That was quite a shock, yes sir; I agree with

that.

Mr. CARLSON. I was further disappointed when I noticed that we increased our exports of farm machinery. I happen to have here the table for the first 9 months of 1940 and I have here the table for the first 9 months of 1941 and I have the figures for 1942 which are confidential. It is not very encouraging to one to note these figures on farm machinery, where we increased the exports of a large number of these items. I am not going to take time to put them in the record or to read them into the record; I am going to ask permission to put them in the record at this point and if there is no objection. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, that will be done.

(The tabulation referred to is as follows:)

United States exports (domestic merchandise) of specified commodities, JanuarySeptember 1940 and 19411

1 Comparable statistics for 1942 are confidential.

Includes old and used tractors in 1940, not separately classified prior to 1941.

Not separately classified prior to 1941.

United States exports (domestic merchandise) of specified commodities, JanuarySeptember 1940 and 1941-Continued

Source: Compiled by the U. S. Tariff Commission from Monthly Summary of Foreign Commerce of the United States, September 1940 and 1941.

Mr. CARLSON. It is discouraging to those of us who know the situation in this country when we see this condition prevailing.

I want to go to another subject here.

I noticed from your statement this agreement with Great Britain, that through the concessions on pork we received some favorable concessions on wheat and flour.

Are we exporting any wheat to Great Britain at this time?

Secretary WICKARD. No, sir.

Mr. CARLSON. What about our wheat exports generally?

Secretary WICKARD. They are negligible; we are sending some flour under lend-lease to Russia, but Canada is supplying practically all of the United Kingdom requirements.

Mr. CARLSON. What about our exports of flour to South American points, and island points in the southern section?

Secretary WICKARD. There is some of that; I don't believe that I have the figures at hand at the present time.

Mr. CARLSON. Maybe you can put them in the record here.

Secretay WICKARD. We have been exporting some wheat to Mexico and some to the Caribbean area, and flour to the Caribbean area. Mr. CARLSON. What is the present exporting subsidy on flour at the present time?

Secretary WICKARD. It is equivalent to about 30 cents a bushel on wheat.

Mr. CARLSON. We can put it in the record correctly, if you will. In other words, despite your statement here about getting these concessions on wheat and flour, they are largely on paper, are they not?

Secretary WICKARD. Under war conditions, and I think that that is a wise thing, because if Canada can furnish the flour for the United Kingdom, that is to our advantage.

Mr. CARLSON. Well, now, just on that point, it just happens to be that flour is being milled today in Buffalo, transported across the United States and loaded at Gulf ports, and shipped to Cuba and other points, while some of our millers in the wheat sections of Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas are clamoring for space.

I happen to know because I have taken it up with the board down. here that deals out shipping space within the last week.

Now, do you think that that situation is conducive to the best interests of agriculture, especially wheat-producing sections?

Secretary WICKARC. Well, it is my opinion that it is a great blessing that we have all of the wheat that we have in the country at the present time. We not only need it for flour, we need it for feed and for the production of alcohol and we need it as a reserve for future use.

Now, the situation that you referred to, that is one that came to my attention recently, and one on which we ought to give some study, perhaps, from the standpoint of transportation. It might be that we could work out some sort of arrangement whereby we could take some flour from the Midwest down the Mississippi and export it to the Caribbean area; I do not know whether that is possible or not but it is something that might be done.

Mr. CARLSON. As a matter of fact, we are using our transportation services, both rail and water, transporting flour across the United States and loading it on vessels when there is wheat marketed and milled at Houston, Tex., and points in Oklahoma, and points in Kansas within 300 to 700 miles of the ports and to me that just does not make good sense.

Secretary WICKARD. I think the situation should be examined.
Mr. CARLSON. I wish that you would go into that.

Now, let us get right down to this extension of these reciprocal trade agreements on this basis:

Would the Secretary favor an amendment to the reciprocal trade agreements which would provide that none of these competitive farm products could be imported at less than parity?

Secretary WICKARD. I have not given that matter any consideration. I do not know that there would be so great objection to that, because when we brought in corn, we brought it in because corn was high priced in this country and we do not very often import such products unless prices are high. I think that I would want to study further my answer to your question. I am sure, however, that the possible effect of duty reductions on farm prices has been carefully weighed in the actual operation of the program and that, when necessary, safeguards have been used to prevent harmful price effects.

Mr. CARLSON. Now, under the tariff act, it provides that these products must be brought in on the basis of cost of production but the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act that is now in effect specifically states in the act that that act shall not apply to imports, so all that we would have to do would be to go back to the old act itself, to the tariff law itself, and remove this restriction and it seems to me that that is a fair and reasonable request.

Now, I wish that you would give some thought to that, because I think that it is something that we should seriously consider.

What do you have in mind in regard to the greatly expanded farm production in this Nation as soon as the war is over? Are you making post-war plans for this greatly increased dairy production, cheese production, pork or livestock products?

Secretary WICKARD. Well, I think that perhaps the demand for American agricultural products may even increase right after the armistice. I do not know how long that demand will continue, but I think that quite a little depends on the kind of peace that we have and the kind of agreement upon international trade, as to whether it will continue for a long time. There is no question but that there is going to be a great demand from all over the world for American products, particularly some dairy products that you just mentioned; whether we are going to be able to supply that demand or not, I do not know. I question that we can fully supply that demand.

But if we can have the kind of international trade we should have, then I think the American farmer ought to find a ready market for most of his products.

Mr. CARLSON. Well, if my figures are correct, we have about 78,000,000 head of cattle in the United States at the present time.

Secretary WICKARD. The greatest number that we have ever had. Mr. CARLSON. And under normal conditions, Mr. Secretary, how many cattle should this Nation produce for regular consumption?

Secretary WICKARD. With good industrial employment in this country, with people having ability to buy cattle and buy beef, I would think that we ought to produce about as much as our ranges, and our pasturage will permit us to feed and protect those ranges, that we can find a market for nearly all of that in this country.

Mr. CARLSON. Of course, the cattlemen are always concerned about the importation of live cattle and also the processed meats from other nations, especially Argentina.

Now, these trade treaties, I think that I am correct in this statement, that Argentina after we entered into this agreement immediately reduced the value of their peso, their money standard, to a value that was not at all considered when we went into the agreement, and I think that you will find that that is true of all of the countries where we entered into agreements, and the importation of cattle from Mexico, I noticed the average value per hundred pounds of cattle shipped from Mexico was $2.80 per hundredweight.

Now, we cannot raise cattle for anywhere near that price in this country.

Secretary WICKARD. Of course, they were not high quality.

Mr. CARLSON. That is true, but they were cattle and they came in in a fairly large number.

There are many other questions, but I know it is too late, Mr. Secretary, and I am going to quit.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary, just asking for information and not for argument, when have cattle ever been as high in this country as they are now, and especially young cattle and the medium and unfinished cattle?

Secretary WICKARD. The unfinished cattle have rarely been as high as they are now.

The CHAIRMAN. I have never seen anything like the price they bring now and it is difficult to get them in the country where I live.

86405-43-10