The Dominion. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1933. THE AMERICAN FARMER

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 37, 7 November 1933, Page 8

The Dominion. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1933. THE AMERICAN FARMER

It is not surprising that President Roosevelt should have rejected the scheme of once-fixing put forward by certain State governors on behalf of the farmers. Any Government that has had any previous experience of the pitfalls and complexities of price-fixing, as many had during and after the War, would naturally wish to avoid such an econom | g P c]ear P from messa ges published in the last few days, and from mail advices, that the President has the agricultural interest very much on his hands. The “new deal” produced what appeared to be a powerful suit for the farmers but in play they have: been put-trumped. Hence their demand for price-fixing or foi stiaight°Ut Vi view oTwhat'the United States Government has already done on their behalf, their clamour savours almost of ingratitude. Yet ?t do“ nol so much matter what has been done; tte effectiveness is what counts. On paper the farmers’ position should be'better■,■ n fact they are much where they were, hopelessly becalmed in the economic doldrums, because costs have kept up with or outpaced the advance in PriC< lf the White House Administration were dismayed at the negative result of its planning, it could fairly be excused. For it has dealt m colossal figures. Thus one-fourth of the entire cotton acreage has been destroyed, the planters being reimbursed by grants ot ±25 million in cash bonuses. A . ' In the case of wheat sowings have been reduced by 15 per cent, and the compensation to growers will amount to £2B million, of which £l6 million should already have been paid out. _ The remainder is to be distributed in the spring upon proof of curtailed acreage. A sum of £6 million has been devoted to buying up surplus butter and withdrawing it from the ordinary marketing channels. . , Other schemes provide for regulating the production, of milk, tobacco, rice and, more recently, maize. A sum of £lO million was set aside for curtailing the output of pig products. In every case the principle was the same—restriction of production in the expectation that shorter supplies would realise a larger aggregate price. In some cases the theory was to be backed by a direct tax on consumers to reimburse producers. In addition several schemes for easing farmers finance are in operation, quite apart from the general effort to raise, purchasing power and so secure the readier Sale of their commodities. Even so the farmers have not been saved and they are again threatening direct action. In the end, will the United States and other Governments be forced to abandon the attempt to prop up and to allow farming and other industries to find their natural level?