I believe it would be profitable to every dairy industry in America. If I read correctly, Senator Lenroot's State is one of the most prosperous States in America. We have not heard anything about a farm-relief plan from Wisconsin. And I think that is largely because of your dairy industry, Senator Lenroot, that your farmers have been so successful, and I think if we could carry out that idea throughout the Nation everybody would be benefited. The CHAIRMAN. Senator, I think the reason that Wisconsin has taken such strides is because of the law Wisconsin has passed governing the sanitation of production. Senator RANSDELL. I do not know the details, but I know that it is prosperous and that its prosperity is largely due to the dairy industry. The CHAIRMAN. But I have no doubt that many of the farmers object to the regulation, but I think Wisconsin is rather a model. Senator RANSDELL. I have not any doubt of it, and I wonder if we could not benefit the agricultural, industry of America if we could get those ideas spread throughout the land. The CHAIRMAN. They get certificates there, and I think that if the milk and cream that was sent to New York City had been properly protected according to the Wisconsin regulations, there would be no complaint, and I have no doubt that that Wisconsin certificate will be accepted anywhere, and when a State once gets that kind of a certificate they will get that kind of a reputation. Senator RANSDELL. I believe it, and I believe they will all benefit by it. The CHAIRMAN. I was not criticizing the advertising of milk. I believe that is a good idea. Mr. PARKER. Can I put Mr. Haskell on? The CHAIRMAN. We only have 10 minutes. Mr. TABER. May I make a statement, Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Mr. TABER. I have heard Mr. Parker state some of the objections to the bill. The only specific objection that I have heard is the 70 per cent score on the barns. This bill, as far as I had anything to do with it, was designed to prevent the importation of impure milk. As I understand it, your people in Boston desire to bring in only milk that is fit to be used in the Boston market according to the Boston sanitary requirements. If there are any ways in which this bill's requirements exceed the Boston requirements in such a way as to be embarrassing, I would like to have you explain that to the committee. I think it would be a matter of very great interest. The CHAIRMAN. I think it would, Congressman. Mr. PARKER. That is the only suggestion I had to make as far as the substantive proposition was concerned, excepting this: This is a piece of machinery set up by the Federal Government. If that piece of machinery can apply interstate as well as to cream imported into the United States, I will be perfectly satisfied, and I will not kick at any requirements you put in there, as far as I am concerned. Some of my friends may feel differently. The objection we have to the bill, if I may answer Representative Taber, is this: That you are setting up a requirement that depends upon an inspection to be made by the United States Government with a machinery by which we should delegate somebody else to make the inspection. You have failed to make any adequate appropriation to carry it out, and you are providing that the same shall take effect in 90 dys, and it is a physical impossibility with any appropriation that you get to put this legislation in force and to make your tests within that time. Therefore, the effect of this bill is to place an embargo upon the food supply that we need in Boston and that we are perfectly satisfied is adequately protected at the present time, and that the city of Boston is satisfied is adequately protected at the present time. Mr. TABOR. What is your information as to what the cost would be to provide an adequate inspection of just this particular thing? Mr. PARKER. I would rather some of my witnesses would testify to that, because I am not an expert in sanitation. The CHAIRMAN. All right. We will adjourn. Senator LENROOT. May I read a letter from the Secretary of Agriculture that I received this morning? The CHAIRMAN. All right. Senator LENROOT (reading): Senator IRVINE L. LENROOT, THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Senate Chamber, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR LENROOT: The Massachusetts dairy farmer is very much interested in Senate bill 4126 because it offers relief from outside competition that seems to be unfair. Our farmers are compelled to produce milk under very strict State and local health regulations, which adds to the cost of production and makes a profitable business very difficult to maintain. The ever-increasing cost of producing milk on Massachusetts farms is a handicap that is forcing the farmer either to reduce his herd or to go out of business entirely. The number of dairy cattle in Massachusetts has been steadily decreasing in recent years. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts is spending $200.000 a year in the work of tuberculosis eradication. A very large proportion of the cities in Massachusetts that are receiving foreign milk or cream have a regulation requiring that milk be produced from tubercular-clean cows or be Pasteurized. These cities do not have funds sufficient to permit their inspectors to go to Canada and inspect Canadian dairies. A large number of consumers in Massachusetts prefer milk from a near-by source that is both fresh and safe. This supply should be protected. Sincerely yours, A. W. Gilbert, Commissioner. (Whereupon, at 12 o'clock noon, the hearing was adjourned to Friday, May 21, 1926, at 10.30 o'clock a. m.) TO REGULATE THE IMPORTATION OF MILK AND CREAM FRIDAY, MAY 21, 1926 UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY, Washington, D. C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10.30 o'clock a m., in Room 326, Senate Office Building, Senator George W. Norris presiding. Present: Senators Norris (chairman), Norbeck, Deneen, Sackett, Ransdell, and Ferris. Present also: Senator Lenroot, of Wisconsin, and Representative Taber, of New York. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be in order. Senator LENROOT. Mr. Chairman, I want to occupy five minutes of the committee's time, as I have to go to another committee. The CHAIRMAN. All right, Senator Lenroot. STATEMENT OF HON. IRVINE L. LENROOT, UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN-Resumed Senator LENROOT. I want to say a word on this question of interstate commerce as distinguished from foreign commerce as showing that it is a very common practice to make one rule with reference to imports from other countries that do not apply to interstate commerce, and I would first like to put into the record the law with reference to the importation of adulterated seeds, which apply to imports from foreign countries but which restrictions do not apply to interstate commerce. Section 8186 of Barnes Federal Code, the law provides with reference to the importation of adulterated seeds: The CHAIRMAN. That is not long, Senator. I wish you would read that into the record and we will not have to look it up. Senator LENROOT (reading): From and after six months after the passage of this Act the importation into the United States of seeds of alfalfa, barley, Canadian bluegrass, Kentucky bluegrass, awnless brome grass, buckwheat, clover, field corn, Kafir corn, meadow fescue, flax, millet, oats, orchard grass, rape, redtop, rye, sorgum, timothy, and wheat, or mixtures of seeds containing any of such seeds as one of the principal component parts, which are adulterated or unfit for seeding purposes under the terms of this Act, is hereby prohibited. I think that is all I need to read. The CHAIRMAN. When did that pass? Senator LENROOT. That was passed in 1912. The CHAIRMAN. Senator, what are you reading from? Senator LENROOT. Barnes Federal Code. The CHAIRMAN. That is the section of Barnes Federal Code, then? Senator LENROOT. Yes; I said that. The CHAIRMAN. Do you know where we would find that in the statutes? Senator LENROOT. Thirty-seventh Statutes at Large, page 506. The CHAIRMAN. Anyone looking it up would naturally look it up in the Statutes at Large. Senator LENROOT. Yes; then you have the citations. The CHAIRMAN. Read that section that you have just cited. Importation of neat cattle and hides.-The importation of neat cattle and the hides of neat cattle from any foreign country into the United States is prohibited: Provided, That the operation of this section shall be suspended as to any foreign country or countries, or any parts of such country or countries, whenever the Secretary of the Treasury shall officially determine and give public notice thereof, that such importation will not tend to the introduction or spread of contagious or infectious diseases among the cattle of the United States; and the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and empowered, and it shall be his duty, to make all necessary orders and regulations to carry this section into effect, or to suspend the same as herein provided, and to send copies thereof to the proper officers in the United States and to such officers or agents of the United States in foreign countries as he shall judge necessary. Thirty-eighth Statute at Large, page 195. The CHAIRMAN. Senator, we do have a quarantine law, do we not, on that subject that also gives the Secretary the right to prohibit the shipping of those prohibited cattle? Senator LENROOT. I do not know as to that. The CHAIRMAN. I think we do. Senator LENROOT. I am coming to one with reference to diseased animals where we do not, I am sure, have such a law. The next one is with reference to convict labor, Thirty-eighth Statutes at Large, page 195: All goods, wares, articles, and merchandise manufactured wholly or in part in any foreign country by convict labor, shall not be entitled to entry at any of the ports of the United States, and the importation thereof is hereby prohibited, and the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to prescribe such regulations as may be necessary for the enforcement of this provision. That is Thirty-eighth Statutes, page 195, passed October 3, 1913. Now, that is on all fours with this case so far as unfair competition is concerned, because that was the only basis for that legislation, and, as the chairman knows, at every Congress there have been efforts made to pass that same provision with reference to interstate commerce, but none of them has ever passed. The next one is with reference to diseased animals: The importation of neat cattle, sheep, and other ruminants, and swine, which are diseased or infected with any disease, or which shall have been exposed to such infection within sixty days next before their exportation, is hereby prohibited. Twenty-sixth Statutes, page 416. Now, we have no like prohibition in interstate commerce at all. For instance, cattle having tuberculosis may be freely shipped and slaughtered at the Chicago stockyards, provided they originate in this country. The next one is the phosphorous-match provision: On and after January first, nineteen hundred and thirteen, white phosphorous matches, manufactured wholly or in part in any foreign country, shall not be entitled to entry at any of the ports of the United States, and the importation thereof is hereby prohibited. Thirty-seventh Statutes, page 83. Now, we have no similar prohibition with regard to interstate commerce, but, as the chairman knows, we have a tax provision applying to domestic production. Now, just one other word with reference to why interstate commerce is not included in this bill. If it were practical, I think everyone would be in favor of including it, but we have a very different situation with regard to interstate commerce than we have in regard to foreign commerce, and I speak of it at this time so that you gentlemen may consider that phase of it. With regard to foreign commerce, every import must be entered with a Government official. It is very easy to provide for the carrying out of this law as applied to foreign countries. When we come, however, to our interstate commerce, here are farmers right along the boundary line of every State, perhaps shipping their milk just across the line to some little town in another State, and to apply the principles of this bill interstate would require every farmer in the United States who lives along the border of a State to secure such a license as here provided. There is no such difficulty in regard to foreign commerce, because the importers are very few in number and it is very easy to take care of that. And when we do come to make some provision with reference to interstate commerce it is clear that we will have to provide some other means, because, in the first place, the cost would be so very, very tremendous to apply it to every farmer living along the border line of every State. For instance, the chairman's own State of Nebraska with its thousands of miles of boundaries and farmers living along those boundaries, I do not think anyone could be in favor of applying that provision to those farmers at Government cost, and yet I am hopeful that we will be able to devise some plan in the future that will enable us to apply the protective features of this bill to interstate commerce, but it is not practicable at the present time. The CHAIRMAN. All right, Mr. Parker. Mr. PARKER. I will call Mr. Haskell. STATEMENT OF WESTON B. HASKELL, AUBURN, ME. Mr. PARKER. Will you give your full name? Mr. PARKER. And your residence? Mr. HASKELL. Auburn, Me. Mr. PARKER. And what is your position and business? Mr. HASKELL. General manager of the Turners Center System. Mr. PARKER. Will you tell what the Turners Center System is? Mr. HASKELL. The Turners Center System is a cooperative organization dealing in dairy products with its principal office in Auburn, Me. It has sales agencies in the principal cities of New England, |