Going back now, Mr. Chairman, to the act of 1949, it made available or authorized $275 million for farm-housing purposes. About onethird of this amount was actually made available. There was a curtailment due to the fact of the Korean war, and that curtailed the general-housing program not only in the rural areas but throughout the country.

In 1954, there were made available $19 million, and as the gentleman from North Carolina has just stated, there were unexpended some $3 million.

Now, over 19,082 farm families have benefited from the amounts that have been made available through this program. There has been a phenomenal program in this sense, Mr. Chairman, that less than 5 percent of all accounts are delinquent. Over 35 percent of the loans made are in advance of their due date-that is, payments have been made in advance of the time that they were due.

A farm-housing program is unique in that it takes into account the orderly and proper management of a farm unit.

The home, on a farm, is unique in that it serves as a home, his workshop, his community center, and, Mr. Chairman, there is no American home that serves as a greater citadel of democracy than the farm homes, where our people, residing in those homes, are sound and safe in their thinking, and their influence on the democratic way of life is a bulwark that we must recognize.

And so it would seem to me that it would be a wise and sound policy for the Government to continue to give opportunity for people to create for themselves, and fashion for themselves, a better way of life, to increase their economic income, to increase their usefulness, to increase, Mr. Chairman, their pride in home ownership. And I hope that this committee will see fit to continue this program, a program that has been demonstrated, time and time again, to be successful-and I mean completely successful.

I could give a breakdown of these figures, but I know that the committee is just as familiar with them as I am, and I hope that we will have a continuation of this program to provide decent, safe, and sanitary living conditions for our farm people.

Thank you.

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I have a breakdown of the activities of the Farmers' Home Administration, and the loans that have been made by States to the various persons. I would like to have that incorporated following Mr. Jones' statement.

The CHAIRMAN. It may be incorporated at this point.

(The information is as follows:)

FARMERS' HOME ADMINISTRATION, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Farm housing program data from inception of program through Dec. 31, 1953

1 This number includes 108 individuals who also received loans reported in column 1.

Mr. JONES. There is one additional point I would like to bring to the attention of the committee, and that is that before the enactment of title V in the 1949 act, there had been an insured loan program for rural housing.

As long as that program was available to our farmers, we found that it was not being used nor employed by them, the simple reason

being that the farmer is not the articulate fellow that our businessman is, and so when he gets a certificate and carries it to a bank or lending institution and he finds that money is not available, he immediately loses heart, and therefore does not prosecute his possibilities under the insured loan program.

The first year of this program, more money was loaned than was loaned in any 5 preceding years under the insured loan program. So if we talk about rural housing, if we expect to continue to carry out a rural housing program, we need not kid ourselves by thinking that an insured loan program will succeed. It never has succeeded, not only with the housing program, but any other type of insured loan program for the farmer.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Brown.

Mr. BROWN. I wish to state that the gentleman has made a splendid presentation of his views. I certainly see the need, the continued need for building these houses in the rural areas. I want to congratulate the gentleman on his efforts throughout the years on behalf of the farmers and people who reside in the rural sections of the Nation.

Mr. JONES. Thank you. I had the pleasure of being with Mr. Brown in the first rural housing loan to be made in the State of Georgia, and I was impressed with the dramatic accomplishment that was made by that farm family, by taking them out of a little shack, and placing them in a respectable, decent home, and I am quite sure that those in the State who have been the beneficiaries of this program are making a contribution to the community and cultural life of his State.

Mr. BROWN. I want to say that on the occasion referred to the capable gentleman from Alabama made one of the most eloquent and interesting speeches I have ever heard.

Mr. JONES. Thank you.

Mr. PATMAN. I, too, want to congratulate the gentleman, Mr. Chairman, for his interest in rural housing. Over the years he has been in the forefront of this work and has been very helpful to the Nation as a whole.

Mr. MULTER. Mr. Chairman, may a city boy get his word in here? The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Multer.

Mr. MULTER. We, too, appreciate your work. We know that the farmers of the country appreciate your work, and for this city boy, I want to tell you I think I understand your problem, and you will be assured of my cooperation in helping bring about the very fine purposes you have in mind, and which you have had in mind through the years.

Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Chairman, in view of Mr. Multer's statement, I want to take this opportunity to commend the members from the cities, generally, like Chicago and New York, for their support of the rural programs. I suspect that if you were to examine the record, you would find members from these city districts who have a better voting record for the farmers than some members from the farm districts. I know they have to carry a burden, as their opponents, whether Democrats or Republicans, will certainly use it against them. but they certainly can defend themselves by showing that it is to the interest of the country to help the farmer.

I am not picking out any political party. There are members of both parties from these great cities who have in the past, and are now, supporting the rural programs, whether housing, support prices for farmers, or anything else, because they realize it is in the interests of the entire Nation.

Mr. SPENCE. Most of these loans which have been made under the Farmers' Home Administration could not have been made under the Bankhead-Jones Act, isn't that true?

Mr. JONES. Yes, sir, that is true. There is one provision in the bill that provides for additional acquisition of acreage, provided, of course, that it is necessary to secure a sound investment for the construction of the farm dwelling or farm building.

These loans are supervised, Mr. Spence, by the local representative of the Farmers' Home Administration, and unless there is a pursuance of a sound farming program on this farm, then he cannot qualify for a loan.

So it is unlike other types of loans. There is continuous supervision and help to the borrower, because it is in the interests of the Government to see that he improves his economic status to the point where he can make his repayments in due course.

Mr. SPENCE. Well, if this act is not carried on, there is no legislation on the books at all that would supplant it in any way or furnish the relief to the farmers that this has furnished, isn't that true?

Mr. JONES. That is true. And I might add that there has been, under the Bankhead-Jones Act a general curtailment of the acquisitions of farms for the tenants due to the fact that the inflated cost of land has been so excessive that there has been a feeling, in the administration, both in this administration and prior administrations, that we should not put the farmer at a greater handicap, and therefore, that we should not have the same enthusiasm for placing the farmer in a position where he cannot discharge his obligation.

Mr. DEANE. Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Deane.

Mr. DEANE. I wonder, Mr. Jones, if we are not passing through a change in philosophy, so far as rural housing is concerned. I don't believe that we have had before our committee a representative from the Farmers' Home Administration on this subject.

The CHAIRMAN. We will have one this morning, Mr. Deane.

Mr. DEANE. But as I study the law, the Bankhead-Jones Act is basically for the tenant farmer. The submarginal tenant farmer who has been unable to get financing. Is that true?

Mr. JONES. That was the philosophy embraced in the BankheadJones Act, and, of course, the administration has kept that foremost principle alive by giving loans, or making loans, available to those who show aptitude and willingness to better themselves as farmers by farm ownership.

Mr. DEANE. Under the proposed amendments to the BankheadJones Act-I am reading now from a statement that I saw coming from the Farmers' Home Administration, made before the Senate committee, that one of the principal reasons for the lack of loan volume under title I of the Bankhead-Jones Farmer Tenant Act has been the reluctance of the private lenders to provide capital at the existing interest rate of 3 percent to the lender.

In other words, we are increasing the interest rate to approximately 5 percent under the Bankhead-Jones Act, with the expectation that the private lending market would come in and give this housing.

Do you feel, Mr. Jones, that the proposed amendments to the Bankhead-Jones Act will bring needed rural housing to your Sate?

Mr. JONES. I don't think any insured program is going to be successful with the farm program.

Mr. DEANE. I understand the principal objection to the extension of title V has been that city dwellers are the folks who are profiting mainly by title V.

I can't speak for other sections other than my own district, but the first loan made under title V was in my congressional district, and I know that while this individual may have had part-time work in a mill, or may have worked in the town, the loans have been made to individuals whose basic livelihood, in the main, was on the farm. And I would like your comment, because I think here we have the key reason why title V has not been extended.

Mr. JONES. Mr. Deane, it is my opinion, based upon the observation of the operation of the program, that the Farmers' Home Administration has been very wise in not making loans to part-time farmers. We tried to make that requirement in the original bill, of setting certain standards that we expected of the farmers, and if his income was to be derived from sources other than farming, then he would not fit into this type of program.

Mr. DEANE. The Department of Agriculture recommends amendments to the Bankhead-Jones Act, not only involving the increase in interest rates, but that the act be amended to provide for second mortgages.

What do you think of that procedure?

Mr. JONES. I wish that I could give some considered judgment about it, but I have not studied the situation, and I am not familiar enough with the proposal to say.

Mr. DEANE. Well, as a general policy.

Mr. JONES. As a general policy I am against the increase of the 4 to 5 percent, because the 4 percent has worked out satisfactorily. I know of no objection to the 4 percent figures.

If we couldn't get 4 percent, and we would lose the program, why naturally, it would be better to take what little you can get.

Mr. DEANE. Mr. Chairman, I, too, want to commend Mr. Jones for his interest in the farmers.

Mr. JONES. Let me say, to the question that you have been pursuing, Mr. Deane, the great need, on a comparative basis, of housing in this country, is on the farm. Only 1 out of 12 houses on the farms of this country, only 1 out of 12, has indoor toilets and running water.

The average loan made under this act, as I recall, is about $6,500. We are getting a better house, we are getting a cheaper house, in an area where slums really exist, and that is on the farms of this country.

I wish that we had more study of rural housing. As far as I know, the University of North Carolina, the University of Wisconsin, and Cornell University are the only institutions that have made any study whatsoever of farm housing.

In the study of Cornell University, in 1949, it was found that in the Northern States the average home was 76 years old.