All we are asking the committee in Congress is to let our tobacco program stay right where it is.

I am a dirt farmer. My neighbor came by to get me this morning and I did not have time to dress, didn't even have time to shave. I was out milking the cow, so I changed my overalls and came on down here.

I am glad I am here, glad I met you gentlemen and these gentlemen up here to hear us on these points.

I do not argue. I do not argue on anything; I do not even argue with my wife because I lose when I do argue.

If you will check your records when you come to setting a program, new program-our program has to be revised after 1954-let our tobacco go on just as it is. It is not costing the taxpayers any money. It is costing us some money, but just let it go on 90 percent parity that has to be guaranteed.

Thank you. [Applause.]

STATEMENT OF A. J. SINGLETARY, OF EARLY COUNTY, GA.

Mr. SINGLETARY. Mr. Chairman, I have only two points I would like to emphasize. They have been brought up but I feel that more emphasis is well worth while at this time.

Due to the falling farm population in the United States and the increasing population in the United States and the world, I am optimistic over the possibilities of agriculture for the long-range future. I just hope that you gentlemen will keep us a bridge to get from here to there. [Applause.]

I think that in the long run we will be all right if we can just get over this period of the next few years. I firmly believe that the two possibilities that are foremost are research in farm production, research in farm marketing, research in farm processing.

If we can produce a good product, process it well, and deliver it to the consumer in good condition I believe he will buy it, and I think that will solve lots of our problems.

The second one is along that same line, and that is with regard to making it possible to export by changing the tariff laws and some other regulations to keep us from importing. I believe if we could get enough of our exports across, and we have got to let them pay for them with something, so let them pay for them with imports. I believe every man in this audience would like to use some imported goods that he is not able to buy today if he could just ship some of his cotton, peanuts, or cattle across the water to pay for them.

Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr. WINGATE. Mr. Chairman, unless you want to ask some questions, that concludes our witnesses except I would like to close with this remark: I made the brief statement that we very strongly were in favor of soil-conservation payments, and that has been brought out from here, but I would like to throw this in.

Gentlemen, our population is going up very rapidly, with our soil fertility coming down, the two will cross somewhere and when they cross it is entirely too late.

They are talking about the $250 million a year we have been spending for soil-conservation payments. I ask you this question: Last

year we appropriated right at $60 billion for defense. We spent approximately 5 billion on our program.

It is a long-range process. We are vitally interested in that part of the program. I just wanted to close with that remark, and thank you very much, gentlemen, for this opportunity.

Chairman HOPE. Thank you very much, Mr. Wingate.
The next witness will be Mr. J. Ď. Miller, Jr.

STATEMENT OF J. D. MILLER, JR., VICE PRESIDENT,

KELLY NUT CO.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Chairman and members of this committee, I am vice president of the Kelly Nut Co., general manager of the Miller Pecan Products Division, which is pecan-shelling plant. I am a grower of pecans, having over 1,000 acres. I am a member of the advisory council of the control committee of the pecan-marketing agreement. I was instrumental in getting this marketing agreement for the pecan growers and processors. I am a member of the Southeastern Pecan Growers Association, a past president and a director of the National Pecan Shellers and Processors Association, a member of the fruit and tree nut committee of the RMA account. I am opening my own plant October 1.

I am appearing for three reasons. We need a change in the marketing-agreement law which will permit seizure to make pecans come within compliance of the act. At the present time the only method we have is to appear before a grand jury after locating the violation, and get an indictment, maybe get the case tried in 2 or 3 years; Pure Food does not have the right of seizure inasmuch as the pecans can be below the quality permitted under the agreement but still fit for human consumption.

We have had a great deal of overproduction in the past. There have been many methods tried for relief of surplus back in 1936 or 1937, there was a stabilization corporation formed for a subsidy program export of pecans. This failed along with a major cooperative that handled it, which was set up similar to the Walnut Growers Association.

I have seen pecans grow since I went in business in 1928 from 40 cents a pound down to 8 cents a pound, and go back to 40 cents a pound. This year I am afraid we may see them at 8 cents a pound again.

The growers were sold on the idea in 1948, after the disaster, for them to enter into this marketing agreement. It covers 6 States, North and South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi, which produced more than 90 percent of the papershell pecans, and it covers only the papershell pecans for distribution as unshelled pecans.

Any sheller throughout the Nation can get pecans of any quality from this area. We need that very badly. We are having more violations as the program gets further along. We have increased the consumption of unshelled pecans from less than 5 million pounds in 1948 to 12 million pounds in 1951.

I have been told by the Department of Agriculture in Washington the only way the right of seizure can be secured is by a change of law, and I would like to urge that that be done.

It may not affect any other industry but pecans. It is a small industry, but it is a livelihood for quite a few people.

Secondly, I am very much interested in the stabilization of supplies to cut out the peaks and valleys in price support for the consumer, the end user, and most important of all, the farmer.

Research has now developed that at low temperature pecans can be stored for more than 1 year. Pecan production goes into a 2-year cycle, not more than a 3-year cycle. I am sure at 28° or less pecans can be carried as much as 3 years.

We are in the marketing end and have trouble with the peaks and valleys financially, and we have to buy our markets back every 2 to 3 years. That costs the farmer money.

I am interested in some type, some means of financing the biggest crop ever made this year for pecans at a reasonable price to the grower, the processers, and shellers, who have had 5 bad years out of the last 7. They cannot do it alone. They do not have the money to do it.

If there could be some setup for quick relief—it has been suggested we might use a small, new setup, taking the place of RFC. I doubt seriously that that can get in operation in time to do any good for this year. I understand that the CCC does have a method that we could-they could buy these pecans and sell them back to us at cost, plus 5 percent.

I am sure that the major portion of the industry desires to cut out these peaks and valleys of supply so that we can do a decent job of marketing. We need more research in the pecan industry on all three phases: Production, marketing, and utilization. I hope to be one of those selected to appear before your Appropriations Committee asking for funds this year, and I understand that we were unsuccessful in getting them.

We are wasting some money, I think, in administration of research. We have people in the pecan industry who are specialists doing laborers' work. I think something should be done about it.

I have been in this industry. I have seen it climb from a laboring job to a machine job. In the twenties, early thirties, there was not more than 25 people in the business. Today there are over a hundred. We can market more pecans at a fair price to the farmer if we can get rid of these peaks and valleys. We can go to banks I am sure, once we can show them that we can handle marketing. We must do that and show a profit for our companies before we can get the help needed from them. There is not enough money in any one company or in the few that desire to do this to handle the situation. We must have some help from somewhere.

I talked to a sheller last week who normally buys 2 to 3 million pounds. He said, "Well, I remember 1947 I bought 3 million pounds at 20 cents a pound and 2 weeks later I could have bought them for 15 cents. It liked to have ruined me. I'm going to wait for them to be 15 cents before I buy them."

Last week there were some pecans which are known to be 5 cents under papershell pecans sold in Louisiana by a dealer at 15 cents a pound, from this crop that is just ready to harvest, harvested from this crop, and that meant that the farmer got 12 or 13 cents.

Many of the shellers think the farmers should not get but 8 cents this year. The cost of harvesting is approximately a nickel.

Congressman HOEVEN. What does the retailer get?

Mr. MILLER. What does the retailer get? About 19 cents.

That is all I have to say, gentlemen. I would like the privilege of filing the report. I did not know I was going to speak until this morning, and I would like to file a report later with you if I may. Chairman HOPE. With reference to your suggestions to legislation, the Chair suggests that you write a letter to the chairman of the committee with those suggestions in it and additions to those you made in the record here.

Mr. WINGATE. What is the situation with reference to surplus at this time?

Mr. MILLER. There is no surplus whatsoever. There was a program, a surplus program in 1940 and 1941 removing those nuts that had been in storage 2 or 3 years under the old stabilization corporation that were used in the school-lunch program.

There have been two other occasions since that time that the Government offered a support price in which they did not buy a nut. Then in 1951 the Government bought 3 million pounds of shelled pecans for the school-lunch program, and we do not wish that.

I am not speaking for the grower. I am speaking for myself, my company, and those that follow me and my thinking on marketing. We can market these pecans. We can market bigger crops than we have this year if we can just cut out our peaks and valleys, but we must get our manufacturers accustomed to a constant price, and we can do it with some help.

Chairman HOPE. Thank you very much, Mr. Miller.

Now, the time has come for the members of the committee are getting hungry and no doubt that is true of those of you who are sitting out in the audience. We will not be able to use the theater this afternoon because it is required for other purposes, and so the meeting this afternoon will be held in the courthouse just across the street, in the courtroom. We will recess at this time until 1: 30 and reconvene there at that time, and the first witness we will hear then will be Mrs. Harry W. Bennett, of Gainesville, Fla., who will be followed by Mr. Clifford Hardy, of South Carolina.

We have about 7 or 8 witnesses on the list to be heard this afternoon, and we hope you will all come back to the courtroom.

At this time I want to sincerely thank the management of this theater for making it available to us for this morning meeting. We understand he has made it available without any compensation. We certainly appreciate that. We are very grateful indeed for this courtesy. Unless there is something further on the part of the members of the committee, we will recess until 1: 30 in the courtroom across the street. (Whereupon, at 12:30 p. m., the committee adjourned, to reconvene at 1:30 p. m., the same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

(Whereupon, at 1: 30 p. m., the committee reconvened, in the courtroom, Lowndes County Courthouse, Valdosta, Ga., Thursday, 24th of September 1953.)

Chairman HOPE. The committee meeting will come to order.

As announced before the committee recessed, the first witness to be heard this afternoon will be Mrs. Harry W. Bennett, of Gainesville,

Fla., in regard to assessing the price supports and other farm programs.

STATEMENT OF MRS. HARRY W. BENNETT, REPRESENTATIVE OF THE TUNG INDUSTRY, GAINESVILLE, FLA.

Mrs. BENNETT. Mr. Chairman, honorable members of Congress, friends and neighbors, I am in a group of gentlemen, and being the only lady in the group they are permitting me to speak. I am a tung grower. My husband, the late Harry W. Bennett, was a pioneer in the tung industry in the years 1929 and 1930. My husband circled the world, and while he was in China he went up the Yangtze River and studied the tung industry on the banks of the river and its tributaries. When he returned to America he came to Gainesville, Fla., to begin his operations. There Mr. L. P. Moore, a friend, had already planted large acres, and there were several other plantings at the same time.

This makes this industry for which I am speaking one of the youngest in our agricultural family. The first importing of seed from China was less than 50 years ago. These trees were first used as ornamentals, and then in the late twenties and early thirties, the seeds from those trees were taken and the tung industry was started for commercial plantings. By 1931 the Alachua Tung Oil Co., owned by Mr. L. P. Moore, shipped the first tank car of oil, the first tank car of oil ever shipped in the world. By the following year other cars of oil were shipped by my husband, and then soon followed by

others.

As this pioneering spread, this spirit spread, it followed the 30degree parallel of latitude from Gainesville, Fla., westward through Georgia, west Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. There are huge plantations in all of those States, but in particular in Mississippi and Louisiana.

These men were pioneers in other ways, for in the true American fashion they got the scientific help of the University of Florida and later by the Government established tung laboratories at Gainesville, Fla., Cairo, Ga., and Bogalusa, La. With these scientists they found out things, water range, the variety of trees within the family of tung that produce the finest and the largest quantity of nuts, the nuts with the highest oil content, the importance of the mineral deficiencies that were in the soil, the importance of fertilization.

Each summer on our plantation scientists take leaves from trees and test them, and from them the fertilization, fertilizer formulas for the coming year are made up. And so scientists marched with the tung industry. Great strides were made and I would like to call attention at this particular time that during those years, at the request of the Department of Agriculture and/or the Department of State, my husband and I were asked to entertain visiting men from other countries, Russia, Rhodesia, Australia, China, South Africa, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, so on.

We entertained them and they saw how we in America were raising tung. Now, sirs, from a tank car of oil and a few owners, the industry spread to large holdings, small holdings of a few acres, and even miles of hedgerows. This was all done by the private capital without

38490-53-pt. 3- -9