ments of beef, specifically permitted the continuance of such shipments to be carried out on a percentage basis so as to prevent gluts and scarcity. But that point has never been passed upon except in the 1912 decision of the courts, and this was a factor-one of the things that the court decided on, and decided it was not a combination in restraint of trade.

Mr. MARSH. Mr. John Barton Payne was one of your lawyers at that time?

Mr. WELD. I think he was.

Mr. CHAPLIN. Yes; he was.

Mr. MARSH. Mr. Weld, how long have you been with Swift & Co. ? Mr. WELD. A little over two years and a half.

Mr. MARSH. Were you a member of that committee on marketingconference on marketing held in Chicago in December, 1917, if my memory serves me correctly?

Mr. WELD. Was this the thing that Mr. Lyman brought up?
Mr. MARSH. I do not know.

Mr. WELD. I was a member of some kind of a committee that was supposed to have those conferences in charge, and I took no active part, however, after I went to New Haven. I had attended one or two conferences when I was with the University of Minnesota, but I took no active part and did not attend the conferences after 1915. Mr. MARSH. You were not a member of that committee then? Mr. WELD. I think I was carried on the letter head, but I never had anything to do with it.

Mr. MARSH. You did not have anything to do with the resolution adopted at Chicago?

Mr. WELD. No, sir.

Mr. MARSH. Mr. Weld, would you rather invest in the stock of the big five packers or in the stock of an independent cooperative packing plant?

Mr. WELD. I would rather invest in the five large packers.
Mr. MARSH. Why?

Mr. CHAPLIN. Would you care to say which one you would rather invest in?

Mr. WELD. Yes; I would rather invest in Swift & Co., as I have done.

Mr. MARSH. Why?

Mr. WELD. Because I have faith in their ability and efficiency. Mr. MARSH. In other words, I think you are just making clear what I was trying to bring out before. The independent concern is going to suffer under a handicap in going into competition with the big concerns.

Mr. CHAPLIN. The independent concern is not going to suffer any more than any other business man suffers if he enters the business. If he knows the business from the ground up and has character, ability, experience and adequate capital he can make a success of it.

Mr. WELD. And a proper supply of raw material and the markets that he can reach.

Mr. CHAPLIN. And uses good judgment?

Mr. WELD. He will not be hampered in any way by the large packers, at least by Swift & Co.

Mr. CHAPLIN. There is no reason why a man of that kind who uses good judgment in choosing his location can not make a success at the present time.

Mr. MARSH. Mr. Weld, you know something about legislative procedure at Washington?

Mr. WELD. Not very much; I have not had much experience in that.

Mr. MARSH. What construction would you put upon this procedure: In the Senate draft of the railroad bill it was specifically stated-of course they used legal phraseology-that the term transportation shall be deemed to include "refrigerator cars;" that is, the railroads were to provide them, if I am correct in understanding that phraseology. If those words, "refrigerator cars," were stricken out, why do you think it would be, and what would it

mean?

Mr. WELD. If it were stricken out and the phrase, "special equipment," was in the bill, it is perfectly evident that the words "refrigerator cars" is superfluous, and the words "special equipment occurs in the bill, it would make no difference, because special equipment car means "refrigerator car" or "tank car or "live-stock car" or "fruit car."

Mr. MARSH. Of course you are sufficiently experienced to know that there is no need for striking these two words out, that if that was the intention of the bill they could very well put in those two words. You do not object to its being done, as I understand, to this bill.

Mr. WELD. I say the words "special equipment" includes that, and that therefore the words "refrigerator cars" is not necessary, and that to insinuate any ulterior motive in taking the words "refrigerator cars" out is absurd.

Mr. MARSH. A great many absurd things occur in Washington, you know.

I wonder if you would mind, Mr. Weld, stating how large the legislative fund of Swift & Co. has been within the last two or three years and how it has been spent.

Mr. WELD. I do not know. We have not any regular legislative fund.

Mr. CHAPLIN. What do you mean by "legislative fund"?

Mr. MARSH. That you use to get legislation through, employing lawyers and lobbyists, or whatever you want to call them-legislative representatives, and so on.

Mr. WELD. We have no fund for that purpose. We do not do it in any regular and systematic way. Sometimes some of us come down here when our interests are threatened. I might come down myself. I have sacrificed my other duties that I wish I could be working on.

Mr. MARSH. All of us have to work overtime if we are to hold down or really do our job. But you used to have a joint legislative fund. I read some of the figures about it, in my testimony, into the record. Do you mean to say that Swift & Co. has no legislative fund?

Mr. WELD. It has no regular legislative fund. You probably refer to one time when the packers maybe employed a man to come

down here to look after our interests in connection with oleomargarine legislation.

Mr. MARSH. What do you spend, then, on legislative campaigns? Mr. WELD. I do not know.

Mr. MARSH. Is there anybody in Swift & Co. who does know? Mr. CHAPLIN. We do not spend anything as a corporation.

Mr. MARSH. The proof of the existence of joint legislative funds is in the record. I can not refer to the page of the record of the Senate hearings, but it is in there-I won't say of "Swift & Co.," but of the big packers.

Is it the custom of Swift & Co. or of the joint legislative fund of the packers to contribute toward the election of Congressmen and members of the State legislatures?

Mr. CHAPLIN. I know nothing about it. There is no such fund on Swift & Co.'s books.

Mr. MARSH. No such fund on Swift & Co.'s books?

Mr. CHAPLIN. No, sir.

Mr. WELD. There is no such fund at all?

Mr. MARSH. Do you contribute to political parties?

Mr. WELD. I do not know whether we ever do or not.
Mr. MARSH. Who would know in Swift & Co. ?

Mr. CHAPLIN. I do not know who would know.

Mr. MARSH. I wonder if Mr. Veeder would know?

Mr. CHAPLIN. I think he would, if there was any such fund.
Mr. MARSH. IS Mr. Veeder going to be here?

Mr. CHAPLIN. Yes; Mr. Veeder is going to be here.

Mr. MARSH. On the stand?

Mr. CHAPLIN. I am not sure.

He is going to be here to-morrow. Mr. MARSH. I want to ask Mr. Veeder several questions. You believe in betting your money on a winning horse, do you not? Mr. CHAPLIN. Do you bet at all, Mr. Weld?

Mr. WELD. No; I do not.

Mr. MARSH. Do you think there would be much encouragement to the Cooperative Packing Plants organizations to learn that you prefer to invest in Swift & Co. and other big packers rather than in their concerns? [Laughter.] I know just what I am getting at with all these questions, Mr. Weld.

Mr. WELD. I would just as leave have them know, especially if I could have a chance to tell them why.

Mr. MARSH. It would be going over the same statements you made before; I do not want to ask you to repeat it.

Mr. WELD. Oh, practically.

Mr. MARSH. You will admit that Congress should naturally legislate for as nearly as possible 100 per cent of the people as it can? Mr. WELD. Yes.

Mr. MARSH. Do you not think we have about reached the limitation of aggregation of great capital, and that it is about time to begin to give small concerns a chance through cooperative organizations?

Mr. WELD. Small concerns have a chance. I do not believe there is anything in that restriction on aggregations of capital except in so far as they combine or have monopoly power.

166762-20-PT 278

Mr. MARSH. There is always potential monopoly power in any concern which has increased its capitalization and surplus earnings as fast as Swift & Co.

Mr. WELD. No; not as long as that concern handles 15 per cent of the live stock output of the country.

Mr. MARSH. Which one do you refer to?

Mr. WELD. Swift-the largest.

Mr. MARSH. What is the balance of power, do you say? Would not your 15 per cent plus the percentage of the other five packers, which is a constant factor, be pretty nearly the balance of power, or the determining factor?

Mr. WELD. I do not get you.

Mr. MARSH. Can you folks who are handling the admitted percentages of the live-stock production of the country deny that you do have some influence on prices?

Mr. WELD. We have some influence only as one individual competitor in our buying and our selling might have. We have no artificial control at all.

Mr. MARSH. What would you think of the plan outlined by Mr. Bissonette, president of the Iowa State Union of the American Society of Equity, for staggered shipping, so to speak, of the live stock to packers; that is to say, they find out what the demand is on the market and then advise that the cattle be shipped in so that there will not be a glut?

Mr. WELD. I think it would be a pretty dangerous thing. I think something like that zone system during the war might possibly do something toward evening the receipts during a week. But when it comes to exercising any arbitrary power as to when the packer may be permitted to ship his stuff to market. I doubt if it would work out; I doubt if it is a practicable suggestion. I think it would be fine if something of that kind could be done. But you know a man fattening hogs or cattle arrives at a time when that stuff is just right, and if he keeps on feeding any longer he loses money, and he has practically got to ship his stuff to market at that time. Also, if he figures he can reach a good market and the prices look pretty high, and somebody tells him he can not ship now, that he has got to wait two or three weeks while a certain number of others are shipping at that time, he is apt to be pretty sore. I do not think the thing would work out practically. I wish something could be done to stabilize receipts of live stock.

Mr. MARSH. It has got to be done. Farming is in a chaotic condition; the farmers are taking risks that can not be borne. The Farmers' National Council has asked for a commission to study the whole question of putting our agriculture on a nongambling basis. Mr. Weld, the producers of America are starting and they are only making a start-to organize cooperatively so that they can meet at the city gates an organization of consumers organized cooperatively. What do you think about that plan?

Mr. WELD. I doubt if they can perform the marketing function any more economically than it is being performed now, and I doubt if you will get enough customers to go to the city gates to warrant very much of a business being done.

Mr. MARSH. They are doing it out in some of the States in the West on quite a large scale.

Mr. WELD. There is something in that for a certain amount of local marketing, Mr. Marsh. I have always been in favor of cooperative shipping associations, etc. I made quite a study of that in Minnesota, and was quite enthusiastic about it, especially cooperative creameries and cooperative live-stock shipping associations, and I think they are a fine thing. Cooperative elevators in many cases are very successful and doing good. I have never felt very keen for cooperative retail stores, because we can not save enough to make it worth while for people to take the time for proper management or assume the responsibility.

Mr. MARSH. I just want to get your view upon that because of its relation to the packing-plant proposition. Then you think it would be better to have the farmers' cooperative concern or producers' cooperative concern limit themselves to local business?

Mr. WELD. With such exceptions. I think, for example, the citrusfruit stores out West have been amply justified in expanding their cooperative organization and marketing process to the eastern markets.

Mr. CHAPLIN. I think in the cooperating packing houses they ought to work into it gradually and not try to do long-distance business all of a sudden. I think that is where some of them make a mistake.

Mr. WELD. If you happen to know of cooperative packing houses wanting to get started, I do not know but what we would be glad to help you, if there is any way we can.

Mr. MARSH. Do you remember something about the statements "I fear the Greeks, even bringing gifts"?

Speaking about the packers' relations to certain farm organizations, do you know of the organization called the Federation of State Farm Bureaus, Mr. Weld?

Mr. WELD. I do not know very much about it. That is that new one, is it not?

Mr. MARSH. That is the one of which J. R. Howard is president, and they have been keen on conferences with the packers. They recently have come to advocate legislation. We know a good deal about the reasons therefor.

Mr. WELD. I remember one conference Mr. Howard wanted and I was summoned to it, and Mr. Howard never showed up.

Mr. MARSH. Mr. Howard has just been given a salary or has been voted a salary of $15,000, the highest-paid farm leader in the United States, as far as I know. Mr. Wilson addressed the meeting in Chicago recently of this Federation of State Farm Bureaus and tried to suggest cooperation between the federation and the packers. Was that done personally, do you know, or on behalf of all the packers? Mr. WELD. I do not know. Was that just recently? Mr. MARSH. Yes; within two or three weeks.

Mr. WELD. I do not know anything about it; I have not been in Chicago for nearly four weeks, and I have not heard anything

about it.

Mr. MARSH. In conclusion, then, do I understand that Swift & Co.-leaving out the other packers are going to oppose having the railroads acquire the principal and necessary stockyards and all refrigerator cars?