Mr. O'DONNELL. What was your feeling in connection with this situation going on down in Oklahoma? Mr. WOLFE. My feeling was very much in opposition to it. The State committee had expressed their opinion very forcefully a number of times when we discussed it with them, informally and formally, and they felt like it certainly was a scheme and a device, and they wanted to be no party to it nor did they want to see the cotton leave Oklahoma under those conditions. Senator CURTIS. I want to ask there, was their opposition limited to the fact that they wanted to hold that allotment in Oklahoma! Mr. WOLFE. Not necessarily; no. Senator CURTIS. As you saw that operate, and some of these contracts would be called to your attention, and other information would come to you, did you have a feeling that the transactions themselves were essentially fraudulent and illegal, and there was no way they could write a regulation that would make them valid? Mr. WOLFE. We felt like, under this particular scheme, the transfer of this cotton was to be used, that is the cotton acreage was to be used by someone other than the original owner, and under that scheme we just could not feel like it was within the intent of Congress when they passed the legislation. Senator CURTIS. Because the allotments are not transferrable; isn't that correct? Mr. WOLFE. That is right. Senator CURTIS. And every one and all of the agricultural offices, from the smallest county to Washington, has known that for years: isn't that true? Mr. WOLFE. As far as I know, they sure have. They have discussed it with us. The CHAIRMAN. All right. The committee will recess and will reconvene promptly in room 318, the Caucus Room, for public hearings. Thank you, gentlemen. (Thereupon at 3:08 p.m., the committee recessed to reconvene in room 318, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.) DEPARTMENT POOLED OF AGRICULTURE HANDLING OF COTTON ALLOTMENTS OF BILLIE SOL FRIDAY JULY 13, 1962—Continued AFTERNOON SESSION The subcommittee reconvened at 3:30 p.m., Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be in order. (Members present at time of reconvening: Senators McClellan and Curtis.) The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Godfrey, please come forward. TESTIMONY OF HORACE D. GODFREY-Resumed The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Godfrey, you had some material this morning to place into the record. Mr. GODFREY. Yes, sir; this is a report on House bill 1022. Mr. GODFREY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. It may be filed and made exhibit 54 for reference. Mr. GODFREY. I was asked about certain safeguards that were recommended. The CHAIRMAN. Does it speak for itself? Mr. GODFREY. It speaks of safeguards, and I would like to read them, if you have no objection. The CHAIRMAN. Let those safeguards as numbered be printed in the record at this point. (Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 54" and follows and may also be found in the files of the subcommittee. See also exhibit No. 50.) Hon. HAROLD D. COOLEY, EXHIBIT No. 54 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives. DEAR CONGRESSMAN COOLEY: This is in reply to your request of March 14, 1961, for a report on H.R. 1022, a bill to amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 to provide for lease and transfer of tobacco acreage allotments. The bill provides that the owner and operator of any farm for which a tobacco acreage allotment is established may lease and transfer, on an annual basis, any part of such allotment to any other owner or operator of a farm in the same county. This Department would favor the enactment of the bill if it were amended as hereinafter suggested. The Department favors the transferability of allotments and quotas for to bacco and other commodities under conditions which will protect and enhance the position of family farmers. Transferability of allotments will reduce the production costs and improve the income of small producers who desire to continue to produce by permitting them to acquire additional allotments without the heavy costs involved in buying additional land. It will make it easier for those who do not wish to continue the production of the affected commodity to transfer their resources into some other enterprise. The Department believes that the sale of allotments, or their leasing for a period of years, would be preferable to leasing on a year-to-year basis. The permanent transfer of allotments would make a more substantial contribution toward establishing stable family-sized economic units of production, which will, in turn, result in more efficient production. In addition, the administrative expense and difficulties would be substantially less than handling transfers on an annual basis. The Department, therefore, believes that H.R. 1022 should be amended to permit permanent transfers and leases for a period of years as well as transfers on an annual basis. Further, the Department would prefer legislation applicable to all marketing quota commodities which would permit such transfers of allotments, subject to appropriate limitations and regulations. There is no reason for discriminating against the producers of any of these commodities in this regard. Certain safeguards should be established, either in the legislation or by regulations thereunder, applicable to any transfers whether permanent or temporary. These include (1) Adjustments of allotments and history acreage when transfers are made to farms which have a substantially higher yield per acre; (2) Reasonable limits on the size of the resulting allotments on farms to which transfers are made both in terms of number of acres and in relation to the cropland on the farm; (3) Appropriate adjustments in crediting of allotments and acreage histories for the farms from which and the farms to which transfers are made; (4) Appropriate restrictions on the establishment of new allotments, and appropriate changes in minimum acreage provisions, for farms from which allotments are transferred; (5) Administrative provisions to assure that transfers will be made in an orderly manner and adequate records kept; and (6) Appropriate restrictions upon the geographical limits within which transfers may be made. This Department will be glad to assist your committee in drafting appropriate amendments to accomplish the changes suggested herein. The Bureau of the Budget advises that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the administration's program. Sincerely yours, (S) ORVILLE L. FREEMAN, Secretary. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Godfrey. Mr. Dill, would you please come forward? Be sworn. You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give before this Senate subcommittee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Mr. DILL. I do. TESTIMONY OF RUSSELL E. DILL The CHAIRMAN. State your name, your place of residence, and your business or occupation. Mr. DILL. My name is Russell E. Dill, I live at Clinton, Okla., 1205 Orient Street. I am presently unemployed. The CHAIRMAN. What is your previous employment, the most rece Mr. DILL. County office manager of ASCS, Clinton, Okla., Custer County, Okla. The CHAIRMAN. Are you the Mr. Dill referred to here this morning by the witness Mr. White? Mr. DILL. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. I believe you worked together in assisting certain people in procuring cotton allotments by means of a land purchase and leaseback arrangement. Mr. DILL. Yes, sir. I would like to state that this way, that we worked together helping them to obtain land. The CHAIRMAN. Helping them to buy land? Mr. DILL. From Texas and New Mexico. The CHAIRMAN. Helping them buy land out in Texas and New Mexico? Mr. DILL. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. How many of them moved to the land out there that they bought, do you know? Mr. DILL. No, I don't. I don't know whether any of them did or not. The CHAIRMAN. Do you rather think none of them did? Mr. DILL. That is right. Senator CURTIS. Did you regard them as bona fide sales of land at the time? Mr. DILL. At the time I did, yes. Senator CURTIS. They were going to take possession and use that cotton allotment themselves? Mr. DILL. Not that they would take possession, but that they would be bona fide owners of the land. Mr. O'DONNELL. What was your annual salary while you were with ASCS? Mr. DILL. The last was $7,525 per annum. Mr. O'DONNELL. Did you hear the testimony of Mr. White this morning? Mr. DILL. Yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. Did you agree with everything he said as to your operations? Mr. DILL. Yes, I did. Mr. O'DONNELL. Did you contact farmers after making arrangements with Dr. Maddox, Mr. Chandler, Mr. Thorp, and Mr. Gray, and after you had lined up the farmer for a potential purchaser, did you then contact Mr. Maddox, wherever he was, and advise him? Mr. DILL. Yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. Did Mr. Maddox and Mr. Chandler and so forth come to the area in order to talk to the farmer? Mr. DILL. Yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. Did they negotiate the sale? Mr. DILL. Yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. Did you have anything to do insofar as participating in that sale? Mr. DILL. No. Mr. O'DONNELL. Were you present on at least some occasions, although you did not say anything, while the negotiation was in process? Mr. DILL. Yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. Are you a notary public? Mr. DILL. No. Mr. O'DONNELL. Did you have anything to do with the signature put on any document by a displaced farmer? Mr. DILL. No. Mr. O'DONNELL. After the investigation was conducted by Agriculture, and I am talking about the C. & I. investigation of July 5, 1961, were you in fact interviewed in connection therewith? Mr. DILL. Yes, I was. Mr. O'DONNELL. Were you interviewed in connection with the particular situation we are discussing today? Mr. DILL. Yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. Did you come to the conclusion that you undoubtedly had done something wrong? Mr. DILL. I came to the conclusion from what I learned there from the C. & I. investigation that there was possibly something wrong, yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. Did you make a determination, along with Mr. White, to refund the money to the people who gave you the money? Mr. DILL. Yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. Did you in fact, receive the following sums of money: From Dr. Truett L. Maddox, $600? Mr. DILL. Yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. From Dr. Lyndol Barker, $50? Mr. O'DONNELL. From Joyce Gray, $443.75? Mr. O'DONNELL. From O. A. Thorp, $1,250? Mr. O'DONNELL. From Fred Chandler, Sr., $1,765? Mr. DILL. Yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. Did you in fact refund this money by various checks dated October 21, 1961? Mr. DILL. Yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. I show you these checks and ask if you will identify them for the record. I then am going to request the chairman to put photostats of these checks in as exhibits. (The documents were handed to the witness.) Mr. DILL. Yes, these are the checks. The CHAIRMAN. Very well, photostatic copies of the checks will be received and marked as "Exhibit 55 A, B, C, D, and E." (Documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 55 A, B, C, D, and E" for reference and will be found in the appendix on p. 788792.) Mr. O'DONNELL. And the sums of money mentioned in those checks is identical with the sums of money I have just expressed to you? Mr. DILL. Yes. Mr. O'DONNELL. I hand you another document, which is captioned "Affidavit," consisting of 12 pages, and I ask you to identify it. (The document was handed to the witness.) Mr. DILL. This is the affidavit that I signed. This affidavit was prepared by Mr. Arthur G. Kaplan, investigator for the subcommittee here, and was read and corrected by me. |