« AnteriorContinuar »
shipments: 184,854,015 pounds, or 92,427 tons, valued at $8,000,000. Just why we should ever have permitted that amount of tin, or the copper, either, to get out of the country has been more or less a puzzle to me. How did we get paid for that?
Secretary HULL. You and I were old friends and colleagues. Why didn't you come to my office and talk to me about it, if you were so concerned?
Mr. REED. You don't run around-
Mr. REED. I raised the question on the floor, as did some others at the time.
Secretary HULL. The truth is that back there when Japan and Germany, and before, when Germany and Italy, went into the alliances, they had been working together for some time. We knew that. They were saying so publicly. Anybody who read the papers was put on notice that during those late years leading up to the war they were getting ready for general conquest, and there they sat during those last years you were talking about, with a finger virtually on the trigger, ready to go on this movement of invasion, with Germany urging them to go. And somebody came to us saying “Half of your Navy is going into the Atlantic, but that makes no difference; you go over there and take Japan by the collar and pay no attention to her fleet, and put an embargo on these things."
Mr. REED. Well, since they got those exports
Secretary Hull. That is about all the help I got and the President got.
Mr. REED. As early as the first year she invaded China, we will say, there was enough steel scrap and copper to build up a navy and air force to enable her to strike at Pearl Harbor.
Secretary HULL. We were all put on our notice all the way through, and nobody who read the papers during those years was not. Frankly I am a little surprised, unless there is some purpose in this and I don't know what the purpose is, because the fact is that the amount of scrap and the amount of gasoline that got to Japan during that period was virtually nominal compared to what we ourselves were consuming. It was all virtually nominal, compared to our own production and consumption. But back of that there were a number of other considerations.
Mr. REED. We sent over scrap.copper during those years to the amount of 36,695,740 pounds. We just about stripped this country at that time. It is rather an unusual thing, if those figures had been thoroughly advertised at the time. I know I protested against those shipments because it looked unreasonable that a country like Japan should have all of those things. Some of us mentioned a two-ocean navy and were called stupid.
Take this tin plate that I read, 184,000 pounds going out of this country, where we don't produce any tin.
Secretary HULL. The whole truth is that everybody was thinking about his affairs at home, and nobody seriously followed the matter. I don't mean that literally, but that was the case all over the world, and that is why the world is in this situation.
Mr. REED. Of course I am not here to criticize now, but I know that the President came into my district and spoke in his Chautauqua speech and everything seemed to be rosy in the world, and all these quantities of raw materials were going out to these countries that we are now fighting, and we are now getting all those things back in the South Pacific.
Secretary HULL. What would you have done in the situation ?
Mr. REED. I believe the same as Churchill does: Tell the truth, so the people know, and know the facts. I think when you give the people the facts—and I think that is true now; I think if the people knew the facts they would take them, and you would have no disturbances anywhere. You would have production right up to 100 percent in every industry in the country, if we knew the facts.
Secretary HULL. The facts were never so fully poured out to the public during this period, and they were the actual facts, but the only reply was the usual argument, “Stay at home and mind your own business. Keep out of other people's wars.” And those very attractive, plausible slogans were the only reply we got, as a rule. And I must take exception to your making a statement so strong in the light of what really took place.
Mr. REED. You don't claim that the trade-agreement program will increase or can possibly increase exports and imports during the war period, do you, except as conditions of war dictate?
Secretary HULL. They are still of very considerable help, and will be of very great importance at the end of these abnormal conditions.
Mr. REED. For instance, at the present time, in view of the socalled shortage of meat, will your trade agreements assist in bringing in large quantities of meat from Argentina and those countries where they have a supply?
Secretary HULL. Well, I would rather refer the details of that that came up not so long ago—to my associates, who will be here for the purpose of giving you anything you want in the way of detail.
Mr. REED. Most of these so-called war materials, food or otherwise, will be handled, I suppose, under lend-lease, without very much regard to trade agreements.
Secretary HULL. I don't know about that.
Mr. REED. I will be perfectly frank with you, Mr. Secretary. Of course I am open-minded about it. If it will advance the cause of winning the war, that is one thing, but I really can't see where there is any great advantage in extending this trade agreement for so long a time. I think we should have a forum of some kind in which the people can really be heard. I may be a pettifogger and I may lack vision, and I may be a little old fashioned. I still believe in the Constitution of my own Government. That is old fashioned, I know. But after all, I believe it is just as well, from my point of view, to just extend this for a much lesser time, and see what develops. Congress is always here, or at least I hope it will be, and you can make a case, and I think when you make your case Congress will be with you on both sides of the aisle.
Secretary HULL. Of course I realize from your statement that you adhere to your old line of ideas, which may be complimentary to you, and I am not questioning that at all. I am just sorry that we can't see it a little more nearly alike.
Mr. REED. I have the most profound respect for you. We were old neighbors in the House. I have known you many years. I admit I am still quite old fashioned. I still believe more in my own country than I do in any other, and for that reason I think I would proceed cautiously in time of war. I know that these other countries will cooperate to the extent of their taking everything that we will let them have. They have got the world markets, all but about 7 percent, and if they can get that and then take a slice of ours, they ought to recover and be pretty good neighbors.
Secretary HULL. What I am trying to visualize is what actually happened back in the former period.
Mr. REED. I remember very well our experience after the other war. I remember after the last war.
Secretary HULL. I beg your pardon; what I had in mind was back some time, some decades before the last war. All the nations were sitting around by themselves. They weren't making any particular progress, either at home or abroad, when England and France entered into a trade agreement with the favored-nation policy made a part of it, and then it was that by degrees trade began to spread. People became interested in it, first in one country and then in others, and during the 50 years that followed, the whole commerce of the world was built up. That was started by resolute action of just two or three countries.
I think there is room in the world for vastly more consumption on the part of its two billion people than they are consuming now. Unless we do bestir ourselves and start a general forward movement in which people will go out resolutely looking for markets, helping to build up market situations of a mutually desirable nature, then we are going the other way.
Mr. REED. May I ask you a question right there? Just how much, approximately, of our market would you hand over to the rest of the world in order to create foreign markets for them, in order to bring up the standard of living?
Secretary HULL. Well, of course, that is a relative question, and one that you can construe in different ways. For example, during the World War period we had immense imports of manufactures, semimanufacturers, raw materials, and agricultural products. Those would have staggered the average person, just looking at them. They were enormous. But on the other hand, as I said this morning, we were exporting $9,700,000,000 more than even that large volume of imports. That is what I mean.
Mr. REED. Of course, that was a very abnormal situation, and it will probably be a long time before that will occur again, in view of the character of this war.
Secretary HULL. It depends on our trade policies. Mr. REED. But we have had a tariff policy in this country for about 150 years or so, and certainly there is no country in the world, so far as I know, that has made the progress in every line that we have. Certainly the standard of living is the highest. I would not want to just suddenly give most of it away.
Secretary HULL. I want to emphasize this, and by repetition say that somebody made a colossal mistake during the 20 years leading
up to this war all over the world, or we would not be in it. Are we going to shut our eyes and go right down the same dark road, without looking out to see what went wrong and who is responsible for it? I tell you, this is a serious time.
Mr. REED. Yes; that may be; but I don't see where the trade agreements are going to help that, Mr. Hull.
Secretary HULL. Of course, the economic affairs of the world are all-important to any stable political condition in the world, as well as peace condition.
Mr. REED. I had a controversy with one of the heads of a big company before the war, and I was asking which he would rather have, all the foreign business—and they do a large foreign business-or the business of one county in Pennsylvania, which they could get if they wanted to spend the same amount of money in promoting it that they do foreign trade, and they wouldn't be taking the great risk of establishing factories abroad, and after giving it some thought he said he would rather have the home market.
Secretary HULL. That is what we did for 20 years and we led into this holocaust. Everybody was staying at home and it was not working out.
Mr. REED. Go back through our history and you can find statements from the leading men of the time that we abandon all hope. We went ahead, and we probably will again. I don't think we want to tie our system in too tightly with the foreign countries, as I say, on the basis of an experiment. I don't mind going part way, going a little way at this time, but to tie ourselves up for a period of timethere was no question as to what happened after the last war, right after the war, until we did get some protection. Our markets were absolutely flooded, and people of the South came here at the time begging for things to be done to stop the excessive inflow of agricultural products in order to get them on their feet again.
I think our first duty is to our own country, and I think we should move with some deliberation on this question and not tie ourselves up to the limit here so far, so that you can come here and give us the facts. We still represent the people, or we try to, at least, and if you were to come here and present the facts as they develop, then we can see whether we want to extend it or go even further than we are now. Perhaps we would want to wipe out all tariffs.
Secretary HULL. I don't have those kinds of notions, myself. I cannot anticipate or foresee anything like that.
Mr. REED. That is just the point, Mr. Secretary. We cannot foresee, in the great holocaust we refer to now. We do not know what is coming out of all this war, except we expect we are going to win.
Secretary HULL. We can foresee that if we pursue the same course we did following the other war something awful will happen to us again.
Mr. REED. At least we covered 10 years in which we paid a billion dollars on the national debt and reduced taxes five times. We did that, at least, until the backwash of the World War came in, and that is something.
Secretary HULL. What happened to us after that?
Mr. REED. Just temporarily. Now we have gone into an emergency and we are kept in an emergency all the time.
Secretary HULL. I hope, in any event, that you will not blame all of these supposed tariff dangers and tariff injuries-if every country sits back and says “We might have serious tariff injuries here; we must put up our safeguards against outside imports"-just as we did for 20 years recently. If every country does that, then nobody has any exports nor imports either. The trade agreements program, after 9 years, does not justify any imputation of injury to domestic industry in any material way.
Mr. REED. Of course I can't agree with you, Mr. Secretary, on that. Industry, so far as agriculture is concerned, I think has been greatly injured, unless you possibly include the large amounts of large checks that have been paid for not producing anything, which is not helping us very much now and certainly did not keep us out of war, as it was encouraged that it would if the agreements were adopted.
Secretary HULL. I tried to make that clear today, but what I did say you seem to forget. I made that statement today, exactly what we tried to do, and just how far we had gotten.
Mr. REED. We are a little dense, I guess.
Secretary HULL. I think it was accurate. Anyhow, I don't think we get anywhere if we can't possibly see our way going in somewhat the same general direction.
Mr. REED. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. ROBERTSON. I ask unanimous consent that the Secretary of State may have the privilege of inserting at the conclusion of his testimony official figures relating to the imports and exports of farm products. I would like particularly for him to put in the figures from table 659, page 706, of the Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1941, the percentages compiled by the United States Tariff Commission on the amount that the cash income of farmers has increased every year since we have had trade agreements, and when he does that he can also point out, as our distinguished friend from California and Dr. Coulter failed to point out, that in dealing with those farm products known as tea, coffee, bananas, and rubber, no farmer has ever charged that he was injured by letting those products come in. And he can also point out, as Dr. Coulter did not point out when he gave us his statement three years ago, that when you list 1934 as a trade agreement year, we had only one trade agreement, and that was with Cuba, in 1934; and in 1935 we had only four trade agreements, and most of them were not negotiated until near the close of that year.
Mr. REED. Would you include the farm benefit payments?
Mr. ROBERTSON. Yes; I would like for him to include that, so we can see the whole picture, with official figures, and present it so we laymen can understand it.
(These data were subsequently furnished by the Department of State, as follows:)