the officials of the Farm Security Administration paid little or no attention to the provisions of said act of Congress, but continued to pursue the programs and projects theretofore undertaken, and in devious ways circumvented the clear intent and meaning of the provisions of said act.

The clear intent and meaning of the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act was to encourage individual farm-home ownership and to aid and assist in the rehabilitation of destitute farm families on individual family-size farms rather than on resettlement projects such as had been theretofore created. The will of Congress in this regard was clearly expressed in language which was free from ambiguity. The Corporation which Congress sought by said act to create and clothe with authority was neither used nor permitted to function. The act of Congress was apparently soon forgotten and the programs of the Farm Security Administration were carried on and expanded, in many respects in direct violation of the views of Congress as expressed in said act.

By legal interpretations placed upon certain language contained in the several appropriation acts providing funds for the agency, the officials of the Farm Security Administration continued to operate an ever-expanding land-acquisition program under which it illegally acquired title to and possession of hundreds of thousands of acres of farm land, a very large part of which is not now occupied or in cultivation. Funds which were appropriated by Congress for the purpose of providing loans for needy farm families, to be used in the cultivation and harvesting of crops, were used in the purchase, through corporate devices and schemes, of approximately 2,000,000 acres of farm and ranch lands. At the time this investigation was undertaken by the committee, the Farm Security Administration, through the corporations and cooperatives and other projects which it has been responsible for having created, apparently owned and controlled more acreage of cultivated land than any other public or private agency in the Nation. Moreover, the Farm Security Administration is the Nation's largest landlord and is conducting farming operations on a larger scale than any other individual or corporate farm owner in America.

The most distressing and disappointing things about this landacquisition program are the manner in which it has been carried on, the intent with which such lands were acquired, and the use to which such lands have been subjected. Obviously those responsible for having acquired such large tracts of land and such a large number of acres intended that the Government should have the ownership and retain the legal title to such property in perpetuity and, by such program, intended to prevent the return of the title to private ownership under fee simple deeds and conveyances. In this land-acquisition program, the Farm Security Administration, instead of starting lowincome farm families on the road to home ownership and financial independence, has operated it in such a manner as to prevent actual home ownership and force tenants to remain tenants. Thousands of those whom the agency has ostensibly undertaken to aid are still tenants, working for the United States Government or an agency thereof, under contracts which in many instances are even more harsh and far more exacting than ordinary contracts between landlords and

tenants.

FAMILIES COLONIZED AND REGIMENTED

Families have been colonized, regimented and supervised to an extent which cannot possibly be justified. It has been insisted arbitrarily that they keep records which many of them have found impossible to keep and maintain. They have been told what crops to plant and how they must be cultivated. They have been told from whom they must purchase and to whom they must sell. Their bank accounts have been completely controlled and kept under joint ownership by the Government, and they have not even been permitted to select their own work stock and other equipment. Supervisors of the Farm Security Administration have insisted upon discussing with members of the family the most intimate relationships. Especially on resettlement and rural-rehabilitation projects, members of the family have been subjected to physical examinations which should not be required. The heads of the families have been given gratuitous advice as to the number of children they should have. On many of the projects, tenants, or clients, as they have been called by officials of the Farm Security Administration, have not been advised fully as to the rights and privileges which they should be free to exercise under contracts and agreements which they have made with the Government. They have been required to pay money without being informed of the purposes for which it was being paid. Their contracts and agreements have been frequently changed in accordance with the ever-changing wishes and desires of the officials in charge of the affairs of the agency. These factors have caused great uncertainty and confusion in the minds of these unfortunate farm families.

The kind and extent of supervision given, as indicated above, was another instance of the Administrators of Resettlement Administration and Farm Security Administration going to extremes. The Federal agency making loans to low-income farmers should be authorized, where necessary, to give sensible supervision to the farmers and their families. But this supervision, if that is the proper designation of the services in question, does not necessarily have to be furnished to every borrower, and the nature of it should be limited by the needs of the particular farmer. It should never be carried to the extreme of dictating the plans for the entire social, community, and family life of the borrower. It should be limited to reasonable and practical suggestions and advice in farm and home planning and management. Obviously, supervision of the character discussed in this paragraph is vastly different from requiring the borrower arbitrarily to keep voluminous records, demanding that he buy from or sell to certain designated persons, and keeping all of the income from the farming operations under strict supervision and control of a Government official. Moreover, in all the transactions between borrowers and the agents of the Government furnishing the service, the borrowers should be dealt with fairly, should be fully informed of their rights and privileges, and their ideas and preferences for doing things should be given full weight by the Government agents. Pursuant to the Executive orders hereinbefore referred to, the Administrators of the Resettlement Administration and the Farm Security Administration, having colonized and regimented destitute farm families as above stated, exercised the authority conferred upon them with great liberality as well as with extreme prodigality.

They established, maintained, and operated communities and villages in rural and suburban areas, built and maintained streets, roads, and highways; shops, stores, and warehouses, hotels and inns, recreational halls and community houses and playgrounds, and other places of amusement. They built power plants and water systems. They built hospitals and rest homes, sewage-disposal plants and irrigation systems, creameries and canneries, packing plants, and factories for the manufacturing of numerous articles, including pants for men and full-fashioned hosiery for women. They built and financed dairies and grain elevators, cotton gins, potato houses, and other storage facilities. They provided modernly equipped homes, with all conveniences and facilities. They made loans and grants of Federal funds according to their own wishes and desires and for just about everything from marriage licenses to burial expenses. They provided funds for the payment of lodge dues and poll taxes, for work stock, tractors and plows, and for farm implements of every kind and description. They furnished money with which to buy cows and sows, and bulls and boars, and with which to pay for family subsistence and for feed, seed, and fertilizer, and for the harvesting and marketing of crops. They provided funds for the purchase of stock in corporations and for the payment of dues in cooperatives.

Rural slum clearance is, of course, "a consummation devoutly to be wished," but in the prosecution of an undertaking of such great magnitude, proper consideration should be given to the human elements involved. We cannot lose sight of the fact that Americans of today were born in a land of freedom and though they may be poor, they are still devoted to the communities of their nativity and to the township or county in which their fathers and mothers have resided and in which they were born. The efforts of the Farm Security Administration to colonize unfortunate American families, most of whom were poor, but all of whom had a pride of ancestry and a love of their native communities, encountered many unsurmoutable obstacles and in most instances, in its efforts to colonize such families, the agency met with dismal failure.

Americans still love the friends, the schools, the churches, and the other institutions which they knew and cherished in their childhood. In its efforts to transplant American families in places located at remote distances from the scenes of their early life, the Farm Security Administration apparently attached slight importance to the natural instincts of the individuals it sought to aid and assist. The families were inspired by the hope that they would soon be on the road to home ownership and financial security. They were reminded of their low standard of living and of the hardships which they were constantly encountering. They were tortured by stories of intolerant and mercenary landlords, who were exploiting them and depriving them of the better things of life. They were intrigued by stories of electric lights and bathtubs, refrigeration, pressure cookers, modern equipment and the arts of good farming on fertile soil, and they were assured of a better environment and the comforts of a better home.

With great confidence and mental comfort and satisfaction, and relying upon the faith they had in their Government, they moved to Government projects in search of "the promised land," in many instances only to find desolation and disappointment which they

had not theretofore known. After moving on the Government projects, many of these families waited for long months for their homes to be built and for water with which to irrigate the parched lands upon which they were supposed to earn a livelihood. They waited in vain, while inexperienced engineers tried to build irrigation systems which, even now, are not functioning properly. Many families were induced and persuaded to move upon lands which the officials of the Farm Security Administration knew, or in the exercise of ordinary good judgment should have known, could not possibly be profitably cultivated. On many of these projects, there was not even a house that was fit for human habitation, and many of the families were forced by the necessities of their situation to live in hog houses while waiting for the Farm Security Administration to provide better dwelling places. With lands unfit for farming and houses unfit for human habitation, these families waited and continued to wait in vain for water and for homes. During all of this time, the Farm Security Administration provided the families with loans, which both the borrowers and the lender knew could not be paid at maturity. As a consequence of this short-sightedness and utter lack of good business judgment, the officials of the Farm Security Administration have been responsible for many worthy farm families being hopelessly burdened with debts which they cannot now possibly pay, debts which never should have been incurred, but which now should be adjusted, so that these worthy and unfortunate families might be relieved of financial burdens which they should not longer bear and which they may never hope to repay. Families living on resettlement farm units have had no way of knowing when or whether they would be eligible for home ownership, and consequently they have gone on from year to year hoping that they would be given a deed to the tract or parcel of land in their possession, and be permitted to execute notes for deferred payments, to be secured by a deed of trust or mortgage. In the opinion of the committee, many of these families have even in great adversity demonstrated their competency, are worthy of home ownership and, upon a proper adjustment of their financial obligations, would be eligible for deeds to the property they are now occupying.

On the other hand, many of the families now occupying units on resettlement projects are not now and probably never will be eligible for home ownership, because of physical incapacity or mental incompetency to engage profitably in farming. Many of them were physically and mentally handicapped at the time they moved on resettlement projects and from the very start had little or no chance to succeed as farmers. Instead of aiding such families in finding more remunerative employment, the Farm Security Administration has continued to make loans upon loans knowing that in all likelihood such loans would never be repaid. By keeping such families on resettlement projects, the agency has prevented the occupancy of such units by persons who might have succeeded as farmers and might have attained economic and social stability within a reasonable time if they could have received the funds which Farm Security Administration continued to give to those whom it apparently considered as permanent beneficiaries of the funds appropriated for loans and grants.

REHABILITATION LOANS AND GRANTS

The rural rehabilitation loan program constitutes the major portion of the Agency's activities in dollars expended, in loans granted, and in supervision and assistance rendered.

Through this activity of the Farm Security Administration the Agency has made loans to more than 950,000 farm families, most of which families have also received farm and home management supervision. Through this activity, the Agency has actually relieved distress and human suffering in many stricken agricultural areas of the Nation, and through grants the Agency has actually rehabilitated many destitute farm families and has brought welcomed relief to thousands who were made to suffer on account of drought, floods, and other catastrophes over which individuals had no control.

Much of the money was expended at times when the relief rolls in the rural areas of the country were more heavily burdened with unfortunate families than at any other time in the history of our Government. In the building of resettlement projects, much of the money was paid to Work Projects Administration workers and thousands of families were taken from the relief rolls while in a destitute and demoralizing condition. Many of them were undernourished and in poor health and were not experienced in the arts of farming. During the great economic depression, therefore, the Farm Security Administration was called upon to make loans to low-income farm families under most unusual and extraordinary circumstances which arose out of the depression and such major catastrophes as have been mentioned. The Farm Security Administration has flagrantly abused the discretion vested in it by the various acts appropriating funds for loans and grants for the rehabilitation of needy farmers. "Rehabilitation" has been taken by past Administrators of Farm Security Administration to be synonymous with "habilitate" and that, in turn, appears to have been considered as authority for raising the living standards of its clients to somewhere near the highest prevailing in a community. Grants have been made to Farm Security Administration "clients" who could well have been required to repay a portion of the funds, instead of reserving this type of assistance for those acutely in want. Grants have also been made to correct administrative errors in judgment by Farm Security Administration personnel, such as errors in farm planning and construction costs of buildings and facilities. The investigation reveals that too many loans in excessive amounts have been made to individuals who have grown progressively worse from year to year and seem to be allergic to all thoughts of rehabilitation. Too many borrowers have been kept on the program for too many years. In some instances loans have been urged upon individuals who were financially able to finance themselves and their farming operations. Thousands of families who have received financial assistance from the Farm Security Administration are now much more heavily involved in debt than they were at the time they were taken on the program. Many came on the program owing nothing and are now involved to the Government to the extent of $7,000 or $8,000 and have no chance whatever of paying the loan now or at any future date.