Senator LA FOLLETTE. Have you the figures there, or did you give them, of the other sources of butter supply, of other countries that are exporting butter to this country?

Mr. BRONSON. No; I just gave you the Canadian figures.
Senator LA FOLLETTE. Have you the others?

Mr. BRONSON. I have not. I think probably some of the witnesses have.

I have a few telegrams here from some of the organizations-the State grange, the Farm Bureau Federation, and other organizations of a similar nature-supporting the position that this organization has taken.

(The telegrams referred to are here printed in full, as follows:) MERIDEN, N. H., January 9, 1921.

RICHARD PATTEE,

51 Cornhill, Boston, Mass.

Quote me in favor of adequate protective tariff, especially dairy products. F. A. ROGERS, Master State Grange, New Hampshire.

RICHARD PATTEE:

51 Cornhill, Boston, Mass.

CONTOOCOOK, N. H., January 8, 1921.

New Hampshire farm bureau federation unable to send man to Washington. Executive committee approve your action and favor emergency tariff to safeguard dairy interests.

We favor tariff on dairy products and net oils. Can not attend hearing.

GEO. S. E. STORY,

Worcester County Farm Bureau.

R. PATTEE,

51 Cornhill, Boston, Mass.:

AUGUSTA, ME., January 8, 1921.

Protective tariff for dairy products imperative. Prices below cost of production, causing reduction of dairy herds.

WHITE, Chief of Division of Markets.

AUGUSTA, ME., January 8, 1921.

RICHARD PATTEE,

51 Cornhill, Boston, Mass.:

A protective tariff equal to difference in cost of production absolutely essential to save the dairy herds of Maine.

30422-21-16

H. M. TUCKER, Chief Division of Animal Industry.

If you are going to send a strong man to represent your association, the Vermont Dairyman's Association is willing to back him up in the cause. S. L. HARRIS, President.

You are authorized to quote me in favor of tariff. Do you want me to wire and committee members? E. B. CORNWALL, Middlebury, President Vermont Farm Bureau Federation.

Mr. FARRELL. I believe the next speaker on the list is Mr. O. M. Camburn.

Senator MCCUMBER. The committee will be very glad to hear from Mr. Camburn.

STATEMENT OF MR. O. M. CAMBURN, REPRESENTING STATE AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT OF MASSACHUSETTS, BOSTON,

MASS.

Mr. CAMBURN. Mr. Chairman, in the past Massachusetts has endeavored to produce enough milk for the Boston market. That was some time ago, to be sure. As time has gone on Massachusetts producers have felt competition from men to the north of them; and that process of the milk wave, so called, has continued northward, until a time arrived when Massachusetts was producing for the Boston market somewhere in the neighborhood of 7 per cent of the milk used on the Boston market. The tendency seems to have been for cheese territory to become creamery territory, for creamery territory to be shipping cream, the cream territory then becoming milk territory. That continued until we began to see, as has been pointed out, the tendency for cream to come in from Canada. Is there not there a possibility of the cream territory tending to become milk-shipping territory, that being a hardship on Massachusetts producers, as well as on New England producers? And might not consideration be given to something along the line of butter fat in milk and cream as well as for manufactured products? I realize that there are other men whom you wish to hear, so I shall not take any more of your time.

Senator MCLEAN. You say that only 7 per cent of the milk consumed in Boston is produced in Massachusetts?

Mr. CAMBUKN. Yes, sir.

Senator MCLEAN. Where does the other 93 per cent come from? Mr. CAMBURN. It would run approximately 22 per cent from Maine, 14 from New Hampshire, 55 per cent from Vermont, 7 per cent from Massachusetts

Senator MCLEAN. What does Massachusetts do with her milk?

Mr. CAMBURN. Well, Massachusetts dairy cows, you know, have declined. Starting in 1860 with 145,000 cows, their cow population, so-called, wavered up and down, with a cow population in 1890 of about 200,000. Since then it has declined until last year, 1919, is was about 148,000. That has come back a little bit in 1920.

Senator MCLEAN. Have you the changes in transportation costs? Mr. CAMBURN. Yes. And the other men, with cheaper labor and without the competition of industry near-by, have more reasonably priced pasture land. It is also a matter, possibly, of better pastures.

They are producing milk and sending it in at a time when the price of milk looks more inviting than the price of butter. The cooperative creameries do consider the milk market as a market when the price of butter is not sufficiently inviting to put their product into butter. For instance, almost a carload of milk went from Providence, R. I., across to New Bedford. That came from a creamery which presumably, at least in the past, had been making butter. If the price of butter were inviting enough they would continue to

make butter.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. What breed of cows do the Massachusetts farmers have on their dairy farms? The same as in Vermont?

Mr. CAMBURN. Why, yes. There might be a larger percentage of Jersey and Guernsey cattle to the north of us. Many men consider that that might be true. I would not say positively that it was, but some men look at it from that standpoint.

Senator MCCUMBER. The committee is very much obliged to you, Mr. Camburn.

Mr. FARRELL. May I answer Senator La Follette's question as to importation? The importations of butter for the 11 months closing in November were 33,440,992 pounds an increase of 24,359,189 pounds, or 268 per cent.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. In what year?

Mr. FARRELL. This butter comes principally from Denmark, a little from Holland, some from Canada, Argentina, and New Zealand.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. That is an increase over what year?

Mr. FARRELL. During 1919, and that is what is raising havoc with the milk producers, because the great bulk of this price paid to the producer is based upon either milk or cheese.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Have you, Mr. Farrell, the comparative figures of production costs in Denmark and in this country?

Mr. FARRELL. We do not have them here; we have at home on the files a cost that has been running, in butter fat, from 9 to 14 cents a pound, depending on the seasons, the kind of food handled, and the prices.

Senator NUGENT. How much duty do you ask on cheese?

Mr. FARRELL. We are going to have a cheese man here—a Member of the House. There is 20 per cent ad valorem on that now.

Senator NUGENT. Is that sufficient, in your judgment, to protect the cheese manufacturer?

Mr. FARRELL. I think it is more than the butter people are getting at the present time; it is a greater protection.

Senator NUGENT. Have you any particular knowledge of the probable influence of that on the cheese manufacturer, so far as a protective tariff is concerned?

Mr. FARRELL. The importation in 1920 was 14,213,691 pounds. That is an increase of 4,364,000 pounds over last year. Now, the point there, Senator, is this: There is no part of the industry that will come back as quickly as the dairy industry, and those people over there are broke. Consequently they are going to come back with dairy products, and they are going to try to get a foothold here when our prices are good, because they will produce cheaper than we can.

Senator NUGENT. I understand that; I am only interested in ascertaining your views with respect to the rate of duty that should be

imposed which would be sufficient to protect the people engaged in these different business enterprises.

Mr. FARRELL. I should say on cheese, 20 per cent ad valorem, the way it is in the present schedule in this emergency measure. However, Congressman Snell is supposed to handle that for the cheese people.

The next witness is Hon. J. M. Hackney, ex-Senator, and vice president of the Holstein-Friesian Cattle Association of America, of St. Paul.

STATEMENT OF HON. J. M. HACKNEY, ST. PAUL, MINN., VICE PRESIDENT HOLSTEIN-FRIESIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA.

Mr. HACKNEY. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, as vice president of this national association, I have been sent here to speak to you for a few moments on this question. I represent a membership of 25,000 dairymen located in every State of the Union. I come from Minnesota, the greatest butter-producing State-not the greatest dairy State, because Senator La Follette's State leads in all kinds of dairy products and we come next in Minnesota. We hope we will beat him in a short time, but we have not yet.

I wish to speak to-day especially with reference to the dairy cow; I am here for that purpose. The Holstein-Friesian Association of America is the largest breeding organization in the world. We spent last year $125,000 in an extension list; we are trying to get the American farmer to see that he can do with one cow what heretofore he has been trying to do with five or ten.

On my farm at St. Paul I have raised wheat and I have raised dairy cows, so I have been able to prove it. I have raised other kinds of crops that farmers raise and have had the actual experience, and I know what the dairy cow means. These men back of me would not be here to-day talking about cheese and butter if it were not for us fellows that have a few cows somewhere out West or in some other parts of the country.

I have on my farm 30 cows that have produced for three years an average of over $1,000 per cow per year for their milk, to say nothing of the calf, whatever that is worth. Pure-bred cattle are worth a good deal, depending upon the market.

In Minnesota, and in every State in this Union-I presume every State would show about the same average, but I have statistics here from our agricultural department in Minnesota to show that the average cow, of which we have 2,000,000 in Minnesota, including scrub cows and everything else we are only started in this pure-bred business; only about 5 per cent of our cattle are pure bred; only about 2 per cent of the dairy cattle in America are pure bred-the average cow in Minnesota produces about 150 pounds of butter in a year and about 4,000 pounds of milk.

What I propose to show you gentlemen in the few words I want to present here is that so far as the present situation is concerned the man who is engaged in dairying, wherever he may be in the United States, is carrying on his dairy at a loss. That may sound strange, but Senator McCumber knows that the average wheat farmer in the Northwest has been carrying on his farm at a loss. They may

make it up in other ways. I know a man in St. Paul that has a building that brings him a certain income, but it does not pay him anything on his investment; it simply gives him some money from month to month that does not pay insurance and taxes and upkeep, but simply gives him something to get along with while he is working at something else. It is the same way with the dairymen.

There are not many dairymen making a profit, and that is why I am sent down here to say to you that we believe that if you are going to consider a protective tariff on farm products there is no reason under the sun why we should not be included. Dairy products in this country amount to something-over three billions of dollars a year. That is more than twice what our wheat crop amounts to.

As I said a moment ago, I figure that our dairy cows in Minnesota will give an average of 150 pounds of butter a year. If we can increase that 1 pound on the average, at the price of butter at this time, it would mean $600,000 in the pockets of the farmers of Minnesota. If we can increase the average production of the cows of Minnesota 10 pounds, it would make $600,000. If we could increase their production 100 pounds, it would mean $6,000,000 in the pockets of the farmers of Minnesota, and then the average cow would only be giving 250 pounds of butter a year, as compared with many cows in Minnesota and other parts of the country that are giving from 600 to 1,000 pounds of butter in a year.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. May I ask what your herd produces in pounds? You have stated it in dollars per cow. Just take that herd of 30 that you spoke of.

Mr. HACKNEY. I just picked out 30 of my best cows. I have more than that; I have about 150 animals in all on my farm, but these 30 produced an average of 33,000 pounds of milk a year. That must be compared with 4,000 for the average cow in the United States. There are 8 pounds to the gallon, and that makes 3,000 gallons of milk in a year.

So. the point I want to make is that this great Holstein-Friesian Association and this American Jersey Cattle Club and the Guernsey fellows and the Ayrshire fellows, the four leading dairy breeds, are opening the way to get the American farmer to realize that the purebred cow is an economic factor in his prosperity as the means of putting him on his feet and keeping him on his feet. You go through the Northwest to-day. Senator McCumber knows-you do not know so much about it unless you have traveled in North Dakota, Senator La Follette.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I have, some.

Mr. HACKNEY. But when you see what the black rust has done. for the farmers of the Northwest and when you stop to realize what the dairy cow means in so many ways to the prosperity of the farmers of this country-take the State of New York. Look at what the dairy cow has done for the depleted farms of the East. We are fearful of that in the Western and Central States and are preparing for the future. We are trying to get the dairy cow where 10 cows will do as much as 20 are doing now.

Senator MCLEAN. How much would a New England farmer have to pay for one of your 30 cows?

Mr. HACKNEY. Fortunately, the New England farmers, a good many of them, have as good cows as we have out there. Wherever