Whereas the present Federal statute which requires that all flour which is a mixture of wheat products shall be controlled by the Internal Revenue Department and pay a special tax to the United States Government is an unfair discrimination against corn and the growers thereof and is not necessary to protect the consumer, as the present pure-food laws, both Federal and State, insure adequate protection by virtue of honest labeling; and as a flour composed of wheat products and corn products is a wholesome and nutritious food; and as the repeal of this Federal statute would have a tendency to reduce the cost of living by rendering attractive to millers the marketing, under proper control, of a mixed flour at a less price than that necessarily demanded for wheat flour: Therefore be it Resolved, That it is the sense of this board that the Federal statute referred to should be repealed at the next session of Congress. CHAS. DOWNING, Secretary. Mr. LANNEN. A letter from A. R. Corey, secretary of the Department of Agriculture of the State of Iowa. (The letter referred to is as follows:) Mr. ROBT. GOULD, IOWA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, New Willard Hotel, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SIR: I have your letter of January 22, and I wish to say that we are to have a meeting of our board on February 9 and 10, at which time I will present your letter, and I do not think there is any question but what our board will be only too glad to pass a resolution in accordance with your suggestion. We will also be glad to take the matter up with Senator Cummins and Senator Kenyon, as I understand they are greatly interested in having this tax removed. Yours, very truly, A. R. COREY, Secretary. Mr. FORDNEY. Are those letters addressed to you, Mr. Lannen? Mr. LANNEN. They are addressed to the association, or to Mr. Gould, or some of us here. A letter from Jewell Mayes, secretary of the State Board of Agriculture of the State of Missouri. (The letter referred to is as follows:) Mr. ROBERT GOULD, MISSOURI STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE, American Manufacturers' Association of Products from Corn, 1236 First National Bank Building, Chicago, Ill. KIND FRIEND: In reply to your general communication of the 24th day of November, permit me to say that as I understand the proposed legislation as introduced by Senator Cummins and by Congressman Rainey, in the Sixty-third Congress, I am personally positive that some legislation should be passed to amend the mixed-flour law, for as it now stands upon the books it is unfair to the greatest American crop, the vegetable gold of the North American continent. Yours, truly, JEWELL MAYES, Secretary. Mr. LANNEN. A letter from Edward van Alstyne, director of farmers' institutes, Department of Agriculture, State of New York. (The letter referred to is as follows:) Mr. ROBERT GOULD, NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, American Manufacturers' Association of Products from Corn, 1236 First National Bank Building, Chicago, Ill. MY DEAR SIR: I beg your pardon for failure to acknowledge your favor of November 24 with the inclosed speech of Mr. Rainey on "Corn in Commerce." My time has been so thoroughly taken up until this week that I have not had the opportunity to give it the careful study that it demanded. I certainly indorse what he has said. I am, as you surmise, interested in the speech and the bill. We shall be very glad to give you any cooperation in our power. Very truly, yours, EDWARD VAN ALSTYNE, Director of Farmers' Institutes. Mr. LANNEN. A letter from Mr. Walter Smith, president of the Farmers' Educational and Cooperative Union of America, at Vincennes, Ind. (The letter referred to is as follows:) FARMERS' EDUCATIONAL AND COOPERATIVE UNION OF AMERICA, Mr. R. G. GOULD, New Willard Hotel, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: I certainly am in sympathy with the Rainey bill. Discrimination against corn should be removed. I may see you at the New Willard the 7th or 8th. WALTER SMITH. Mr. LANNEN. A letter from Mr. A. J. Meyer, in charge of agricultural extension, University of Missouri. (The letter referred to is as follows:) AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION, New Willard Hotel, Washington, D. C. (Attention Mr. R. G. Gould.) UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI, DEAR SIR: I have not been able to analyze in detail House bill 9409. The purpose of the bill, however, is a good one, and it is hard for anyone to understand how a statute placing a special tax on mixed flour could have remained on the books as long as it has. The pure-food laws furnish all the protection that is needed or desired. If people want to use wheat flour which has been mixed with corn flour, and use it knowingly, they should most certainly have the privilege of so doing without paying a special tax. Very truly, yours, A. J. MEYER, In Charge of Agricultural Extension. Mr. LANNEN. Telegram favoring the Rainey bill from Mr. E. D. Funk, president of the National Corn Association. (The telegram referred to is as follows:) R. G. GOULD, BLOOMINGTON, ILL., January 30, 1916. New Willard Hotel, Washington, D. C.: In response to your letter of January 24, and your telegram, just received, you may say to the committee that the officers of the National Corn Association are in favor of the repeal of the Federal statutes on mixed corn flour, and are in favor of the bill introduced by Mr. Rainey. E. D. FUNK, President, National Corn Association. Mr. LANNEN. A letter from Len Small, president of the Illinois State Agricultural Department and a resolution of the State Board of Agriculture of Illinois, favoring the repeal of the tax. (The letter and resolution referred to are as follows:) FORTY-NINTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY, ILLINOIS SENATE, Kankakee, Ill., January 19, 1916. AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION, PRODUCTS from Corn, 1236 First National Bank Building, Chicago, Ill. (Attention Mr. Gould.) MY DEAR SIR: Replying to your favor of sometime ago regarding the mixedflour law and Representative Rainey's bill, I would say that the Illinois State Board of Agriculture, at its annual meeting last week, unanimously passed the resolutions presented in favor of corn. You are doing good work in favor of an- economical, wholesome food, and one of our great agricultural products. Success to your efforts. Yours, very truly, LEN SMALL. [Copy.] Whereas the present Federal statute, which requires that all flour which is a mixture of wheat flour and corn flour, shall be controlled by the InternalRevenue Department and pay a special tax to the United States Government, is an unfair discrimination against corn and the growers thereof, and is not necessary to protect the consumer, as the present pure-food laws, both Federal and State, insure adequate protection by virtue of honest labeling; and as a flour composed of wheat flour and corn flour is a wholesome and nutritious food; and as the repeal of this Federal statute would have a tendency to reduce the cost of living by rendering attractive to millers the marketing, under proper control, of a mixed flour at a less price than that necessarily demanded for wheat flour: Therefore be it Resolved, That it is the sense of the Illinois State Board of Agriculture that the Federal statute referred to should be repealed at the next session of Congress; and be it further Resloved, That the members of this board use all honorable means to influence Members of Congress to vote for the repeal of this discriminatory tax on corn products. Mr. LANNEN. A letter from Mr. H. Q. Alexander, president of the Farmers' Educational and Cooperative Union of America, from Matthews, N. C. (The letter referred to is as follows:) MATTHEWS, N. C., December 1, 1915. AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION OF PRODUCTS FROM CORN, Chicago, Ill. BRETHREN: I am in full sympathy with the purpose of the Rainey bill to remove the discrimination against corn. A mixed flour of four-fifths wheat and one-fifth corn ought to be cheaper than an all wheat flour and certainly would be more wholesome. I will probably be in Washington sometime during the winter or early spring and will render any assistance possible in securing the legislation. I am, yours, fraternally, H. Q. ALEXANDER, President North Carolina Farmers Union. Mr. LANNEN. A letter from C. G. Williams, agronomist, Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station, Wooster, Ohio. (The letter referred to is as follows:) OHIO AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION, R. G. GOULD, American Manufacturers' Association of Products from Corn, DEAR SIR: My attention has been called to H. R. 9409, known, I believe, as the Rainey bill, the object of which is to repeal an existing law taxing mixed flour. I know of no reason why a mixture of wheat flour and corn flour should be subject to a Federal tax. I believe that the best interests of both the producer and consumer will be conserved by the repeal of such law. Very truly, yours, C. G. WILLIAMS, Agronomist. Copy of letter sent Hon. R. C. McCulloch, M. C., Ohio. Mr. LANNEN. Letter from Mr. E. J. Watson, commissioner of the department of agriculture of the State of South Carolina. (The letter referred to is as follows:) SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Mr. ROBERT G. GOULD, Secretary, COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, Columbia, S. C., January 25, 1916. New Willard Hotel, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: I am in receipt of yours of January 22 in reference to the Rainey bill (H. R. 9409). I regret that I will not have time, owing to the pressure upon me just now, to write to Senators Tillman and Smith, as requested by you, or to our Congressmen, but I have no objection to your making use of this letter in assuring them that I am in hearty sympathy with the provisions of this measure. Very truly, yours, E. J. WATSON, Commissioner. Mr. LANNEN. A letter from Mr. R. A. Moore, secretary of the Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Association, Madison, Wis. (The letter referred to is as follows:) Mr. ROBERT GOULD, WISCONSIN AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT ASSOCIATION, American Manufacturing Association, 1236 First National Bank Building, Chicago, Ill. MY DEAR SIR: Yours of recent date came duly to hand, and I have read over the bill with much interest. I feel this bill is all right and along the proper lines and should be passed. I certainly would be glad to do anything in my power to assist in having sensible legislation instead of some old, antiquated system that is out of date. Sincerely, yours, R. A. MOORE, Secretary. Mr. LANNEN. A letter from Mr. John A. McSparren, master of the Pennsylvania State Grange. (The letter referred to is as follows:) PENNSYLVANIA STATE GRANGE, PatronS OF HUSBANDRY, AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION OF PRODUCTS FROM CORN, Mr. R. G. GOULD. 1263 First National Bank Building, Chicago. DEAR SIR: Your letter received. As I understand this proposition, the bill to which you refer allows the manufacturer of wheat biscuit to manufacture without tax and the toasted-corn flake manufacturer has to meet the distiller regulations. Your communication uses such general terms that without giving the matter some study I am not sure of the import of the measure or of your contention. I would appreciate an explanation of the details of the matter and will be glad to assist in creating a sentiment in favor of the unrestricted use of corn as a human food. Sincerely, yours, JOHN A. MCSPARRAN. Mr. LANNEN. Letter from Mr. T. L. Calvert, chief of dairy and food division, Ohio State Board of Agriculture. (The letter referred to is as follows:) OHIO BOARD OF AGRICULTURE, Mr. ROBERT G. GOULD, New Willard Hotel, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Your favor of the 22d ultimo, addressed to Hon. W. R. Dunlap, has been referred to me for attention and answer. Will say that our State laws are so that they will take care of mixed flour very nicely. The manufacturer, of course, will be required to place on the package a statement giving the percentage of ingredients contained therein, and I see no reason why there should be a tax imposed upon this mixture by the Federal Government. Of course, I am speaking only from Ohio's viewpoint, as there may be some other States that do not have a law covering this question, and, without looking the matter up, I think most of them do. I do not see why there would be an unjustified objection from consumers or anyone else, as long as this is labeled correctly. Yours, very truly, T. L. CALVERT, Chief of Division. Mr. RAINEY. Just file those with the stenographer. Mr. FORDNEY. Mr. Chairman, I wish to state that I have a great wad of letters and telegrams protesting against the repeal of the existing law and the passage of this bill. I would not incumber the record with them, but would simply make the statement to go along with that record, that we have a much greater volume than that we could file. Mr. LIND. I wish to ask Mr. Lannen a question. We shall not occupy any time filing letters or to ask Mr. Lannen to explain the contents of these letters. It is presumed that they are all in favor of the repeal of the present revenue act. Are you content to have the present revenue act repealed and have flour and cornstarch under the operation of the pure-food act as it now stands, or are you not? You have never answered that question, but I want you to answer it before this committee adjourns. Mr. LANNEN. The question is whether we are willing to have the old revenue law wiped out and place the mixed cornstarch and wheat flour under the pure-food law the same as all other foods? Mr. LIND. Yes. Mr. LANNEN. The best answer I can give you to that, Governor, is the fact that we fought for this very proposition last spring, and put a bill of that kind through the Senate and tried to get it through the House. Mr. LIND. Is that what you want now? Mr. LANNEN. We would be content with that if it would govern the exportation of wheat flour, but it won't, and you people complained about it. Mr. FORDNEY. Then, you are not in favor of it? Mr. LIND. You are not in favor of the repeal of the revenue act, remitting all of these food products to the pure food and drugs act as it now stands on the statute books? That can be answered by yes or no. Mr. LANNEN. I would be in favor of such a law if it can be gotten. through the Congress of the United States. But the opposition to the bill has been on the part of everybody I have talked to about it, "Are you willing to state percentages on your label?" I doubt very |