is to be apportioned among the other farms. I admit that it will reduce the number of acres, and it will reduce the quota of the large producer, because the sinall man will have his part of the national marketing quota applied to his 7½ acres; but it merely gives him no more than what his family must have.
When we talk about reducing a family in the Cotton Belt to below 7½ acres, we forget entirely the human element that must enter into this question, and therein lies the injustice of our entire farm program.
I for one would like to see the amendment of the Senator from Mississippi adopted.
Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, I believe that the purpose of the proviso in this section is misunderstood by some of the Members of the Senate. The reason for the proviso is to limit the cotton acreage of those farmers who till less than 5 acres. It is not intended to affect a farmer who cultivates 25 or 30 acres of tilled land. It matters not how much cotton the farmer with more than 5 acres planted to cotton last year or the year before; under the bill, whether he planted 5 acres or 6 acres or 2½ acres, he gets the minimum fixed in the bill. A town lot farmer or one who tills less than 5 acres should not expect to plant more than he planted to cotton in either of the past 2 years. In order to clarify this proviso, I suggest the following amendment: On line 23, after the word "acres". insert "of tilled land", so that the proviso will read as follows—
Beginning on page 35, line 22:
Provided, however, That the number of acres allotted for any family cultivating less than 5 acres of tilled land during either of the two preceding seasons shall be the larger of the number of acres that was cultivated 1n either of such seasons.
Thus it will be noted that only such farmers who have but 5 acres of tilled land will be affected under this provision. As to all other farmers who have in excess of 5 acres, the general provisions of the bill will apply to them.
I believe that the modification of the amendment as I have just suggested will meet the objections complained of by the junior Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Bilbo] and the junior Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Miller].
Mr. BANKHEAD. I wish to inquire if consideration has been given to the idea that under the program 2,300,000 cotton producers are eligible: with a 7-acre exemption, which makes around 16,000,000 acres. Under present conditions it is thought that probably 25,000,000 acres, or certainly not much more than that, will be the total acreage included in the plan. So if 7 acres are permitted to every sharecropper, every tenant and every farmer, regardless of what he has ever produced in the past—regardless of whether he has produced half a bale, or a bale, or two bales—this amendment shall be adopted we shall automatically allocate 16,000,000 acres out of 23,000,000 acres that have heretofore been given the opportunity voluntarily to produce only a very small proportion of the total production of cotton.
Mr. BILBO. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. ELLENDER. I yield.
Mr. BILBO. I am sure the Senator and I wish to accomplish the same thing. We desire to do justice to all of these farmers. My reason for offering the amendment is to take care of the small farmer who has been discriminated against under the former control program.
Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. President. a great many of these men are not small farmers. Many of them are large farmers who produce voluntarily a small quantity of cotton.
Mr. BILBO. The Senator wants to encourage the farmer who heretofore was satisfied to plant 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 acres. Then will the Senator agree that instead of putting in this proviso the words "During either of the two preceding seasons" we put in "five preceding seasons"? That will carry us back to the time when there was not any control program, and in that way the Senator can eliminate the class he desires to eliminate.
Mr. BANKHEAD. I have no objection, if the Senator is not trying to take the acreage away.
Mr. BILBO. Very well. If we put it back 5 years, we will take care of the class that the Senator's proviso will eliminate. At the same time we will save the fellow who is discriminated against under the control program.
Mr. BANKHEAD. I will accept that.
Mr. BILBO. I am satisfied to leave it at 5 years.
Mr. BYRNES. Mr. President, is any amendment pending?
Mr. BANKHEAD. My understanding of the agreement reached by myself and the Senator from Mississippi is——
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair understands that the Senator from Mississippi withdraws his amendment.
Mr. BILBO. No.
Mr. BANKHEAD. He moves to strike out "two" and insert "five" in line 23.
Mr. BILBO. Of course, it is understood that we shall have to change "five" in the proviso to "seven and one-half" to correspond with "seven and one-half" in the first part of the section.
Mr. BANKHEAD. The Senator raises it up a little.
Mr. BILBO. No; if you allow 7½ acres for the individual unit, then the same figure should appear in the proviso. It should read:
That the number of acres allotted for any family cultivating less than 7½ acres—
If seven and a half acres are provided for the individual unit. then we must make this seven and a half.
Mr. BANKHEAD. What does the Senator from Louisiana say about that?
Mr. ELLENDER. That amounts to the same thing. If the number in line 19 should be changed to 7½, it would be proper to change the 5 to 7½ in line 23.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair suggests that some Senator offer an amendment in order that we may proceed.
Mr. BILBO. I offer an amendment to strike out the word "five" in line 23 and insert "seven and one-half."
Mr. BANKHEAD. I understand that that amendment is simply substituting "seven and one-half" for "five" in line 23.
Mr. BILBO. Yes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated for the information of the Senate.
The Chief Clerk. On page 35, line 23, after the word "than", it is proposed to strike out "five" and insert "seven and one-half".
The amendment to the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. OVERTON. Mr. President. a parliamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it.
Mr. OVERTON. Should not the amendment be voted on as a whole? I understand it is the purpose of the Senator from Mississippi to modify his amendment by not only substituting "seven and one-half" for "five", but also by substituting the word "any" for the word "either", in the same line.
Mr. HAYDEN. The Senator changed the word "two" to "five", in line 23.
Mr. OVERTON. The Senator changed "two" to "five." I think it all constitutes one amendment, and ought to be voted on as a whole. I understand, Mr. President. that the proviso will then read as follows—
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will state that the amendments will have to be offered to the text. The Senator could not modify his amendment in such a manner as suggested. The Senator has offered one amendment, which has been agreed to.
Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it.
Mr. BARKLEY. Will the Senator from Mississippi withdraw the original amendment which he offered to strike out the whole proviso? It should be done in order that these matters may be taken up.
Mr. BILBO. I will do that.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has withdrawn that amendment and offered one amendment which has already been agreed to, in line 19 and in line 23, to strike out "five" and insert "seven and one-half."
