The dispatch-news. [volume] (Lexington, S.C.) 1919-2001, January 25, 1922, Image 6
I : Some Aspec
i I ? Farmer
f | wgw
_ By BERNARD
W r
i > *
r I
i , 4 (Reprinted from 1
;
TBI "whole rami world is In a ferment
of unrest, and there is an un|
paralleled volume' and intensity of determined,
if not angry, protest, and an
ominous swarming of occupational con
f Iterances, interest groupings, political
movements and propaganda. Sach a
turmoil cannot but arrest our attentto,
Indeed, it demands our careful
study and examination. It is not likely
that six million aloof and ruggedly
independent men bare come together
p and banded themselves Into active
: - union*, societies, farm bureaus, and so
forth, for no sufficient cause,
p - Investigation of the subject conclu
- - _ /3-v
lively proves that, while there is mucxi
overstatement of grievances and misconception
of remedies, the farmers
I are right In complaining of wrongs
Jong endured, and right in holding that
It Is feasible to relieve their ills with
hv__ benefit to the rest of the community.
?Titls being the case of an industry
thar contributes^^ the raw material
farm alone, about one-third of the nah
tkmal annual wealth production and
Ja the means of livelihood of about 49
per cent of the population, it Is ob-!
f: yious that the subject is one, of grave
concern. Not only do the farmers
make Op; one-half of the nation, but
L the well-being of the other half deI
pends upon them.
I So long we have nations, a wise
I ' politclal economy will aim at a large
' ~ degree of national self-sufficiency ant! >
?" ?? " r??#?I1 I
WMfWyiBlllllieuu ltwiuc icu n ucu Uic
food supply was too far removed from
|||r the belly. Like her, we shall destroy
ytT~~ ' our own agriculture and extend our
r * sources of food distantly and. precariously,
If we do not see to it that onr
farmers are well and fairly paid for
their services. The farm gives the
" nation men as well as food. Cities 1
te-r-- aenve uteir vnmuy uuu aic avictw
B renewed from the country, but an im>
poverlshed countryside exports intelligence
and retains unintelligence.
, Only the lower grades of mentality
I and character will remain on, or seek,
I the farm, unless agriculture is capable
I &X'. 'r of being pursued with contentment and
t adequate compensation. Hence, to emI
bitten and impoverish the farmer is to
[ dry ujtn and contaminate the vital
| sources of the nation,
f -v convincingly how
H ^ I t?i.' n n-tion te--on tbe-full
h^^^oductivity of the farms. Despite
HB^^^herculean efforts, agricultural produc^
w tion kept only a few weeks or months
ahead of consumption, and that only
1-& by Increasing the acreage of certain
^ staple crops at the cost of feduclng
jfe^ that of others. We ought not to forget
that lesson when we ponder on
pvi the fanner's problems. They are truly
f ' common problems, and there should
be no attempt to deal w4th them as
it they were purely selfish demands
of a clear-cut group, antagonistic to
A the rest of the Community. Rather
should we consider agriculture Ih the
? light of broad national policy, just
K: as we consider oil, coal, steel, dyeJp
stuffs, and so forth, as sinews of nap,
tional strength. Our growing p^iulatlon
and a higher standard of living
demand increasing food supplies, and
more wool, cotton, hides, and the rest.
With the disappearance of free or
jL .j cheap fertile" laud, additional acreage
and increased yields can come only
fP - from costly effort- This we need not
expect from an impoverished or unlumnv
rural nonulation.
v; t ?
It will not do to take a narrow view
" * of. the rural discontent, or to appraise
' jt from the standpoint of yesterday,
v/ v ( This is peculiarly an age of flux and
i v change and new deals. Because a
| thing always has been so no longer
* means that it is righteous, or always
- shall be so. More, perhaps, than ev^r |
before, there is a widespread feeling
that all human relations can be improved
by taking thought, and that it
f is not becoming for the reasoning ani\
ma! to leave his destiny largely to
chance and natural incidence.
? Prudent and orderly adjustment of ''
production and distribution in accord
since with consumption is recognized
as wise management in every business
bnt that of farming. Yet, I venture .
to say, there is no other industry in I
P which it is so important to the pub- i
lie?to the city-dweller?that produc- I
tion should be sure, steady, and in- |
creasing, and that distribution should j
be in proportion to the need. The un- !
organized farmers naturally act blind- !
Jy and Impulsively and, in conse- j
rfmonre. surfeit and dearth, accompa- i
T - 7- -
nled by disconcerting price-variations, j
harass the consumer. One year pota- [
toes rot in the fields because of excess j
I production, and there is a scar ky of i
the things that have been displaced j
to make way for the expansion of the l
potato acreage; next year the punish- j
ed farmers mass their fields on some t
other crop, and potatoes enter the j
ri?ss of luxuries; and so on.
Agriculture is the greatest and fun- j
damentally the most important of our <
American Industries. The cities are !
' but the branches of the tree of na- !
tlonal life, the roots of which go deep j
ly Into the land. We all flourish or :
decline with the farmer. So, when we
i'of the cities read of the present universal
distress of the farmers, of a
; slump of si>: billion dollars in the farm !
lvalue of their crops In a single year, J
y&ic? - *y
*
f
?mm- *
:ts of the
s' Problems
M. BARUCH
.7 *
?. I
*
Atlantic Monthly)
of-their inability to ineet mortgages or
to pay current bills, and how, seeking
relief from their ills, they are planning
to form pools. Inaugurate farmers'
strikes, and demand legislation
Abolishing uraln exchanges, private
cattle markets, and the like, we ought
not hastily to brand them as economic
heretics and highwaymen, and hurl at
them the charge of being seekers of
special privilege. Rather, we should
ask If their trouble Is not ours, and
see what can be done to Improve the
situation. Purely from self-Interest,
If ,for no higher motive, we should
help them. All of us want to get back
.M i i. U
permanently to "normalcy; uui is
reasonable to hope for that condition
nniess our greatest and most basic industry
can be put on a sound and solid
permanent foundation? The farmers
are not entitled to special privileges;
but are they not right in demanding
that tliey be placed on an equal footing
with the buyers of their products
and with other industries?
- J ?
u
Let us, then, consider some of the
farmer's grievances, and see how far j
they are real. In doing so, we should
remember that, while there have been,
and still are, instances of purposeful
abuse, the subject should not be approached
with any general Imputation j
to exisung aistriouuve agencies ui uclibera
tely intentional oppression, but
rather with the conception that , the
marketing of farm products has not
been modernized. An
ancient evil, and a persistent
one, is-.the undergrading of farm products,
with the result that what the
farmers sell as of one quality is re
sold as of a higher. That this, sort of
chicanery should persist on any Important
scale In these days of business
Integrity would seem almost incredible,
but there is much evidence
that it does so persist. Even as 1
write, the newspapers announce the
suspension of several firms from the
New York Produce Exchange for exporting
to Germany as No. 2 wheat a
whole shipload of grossly inferior wheat
mlrwl trlth Ante nhnflP onrl thp lil-p
Another evil is that of inaccurate
weighing of farm products, which, It
is charged, is sometimes a matter of
dishonest intention and sometimes of
protective policy on^ the part of the
local buyer, who fears that he may
wetgn out" more man ne "weigns in.
A greater grievance is that at present
the field farmer has little or no
control over the time and conditions
of marketing his products, with the
result that he is often underpaid for
his products and usually overcharged
for marketing service. The difference
between what the fanner receives
and what the consumer pays
often exceeds all possibility of justification.
To cite a single Illustration.
Last year, according to figures attested
by the railways and the growers.
Georgia watermelon-raisers received
on the average 7.5 cents for a melon,
the railroads got 12.7 cents for carrying
it to Baltimore and the consumer
paid one dollar, leaving 70S cents for
the service of marketing and its risks,
as against 20.2 cents for growing and
transporting. The hard annals of
farm-life are replete with such corn
inentaries on the crudeness of pres
ent practices.
Nature prescribes that the farmer's
"goods" must be finished within Two
or three months of the year, while
financial and storage limitations gen
erally compel him to sell thent at the
same time, as a ruie, oiner inuusmes
are in a continuous process of finish
ing goods for the markets; they dis
tribute as they produce, and they can
curtail production without too great
injury to themselves or the community";
but if the farmer restricts his
output, it is with disastrous consequences,
both to himself and to the
community.
The average farmer is busy with
production for the major part of tiie
year, and has nothing to sell. The
bulk of his output comes on the mar
ket at once. 3ecause of lack of sior
age facilities and of financial support.
t. _ C-. MM aA .1..
nit; luriutri vuitj ins |
through the yearytnd dispose of them
as they are currently needed. In the
irreat majority of cases, farmers have
to entrust storage?in warehouses and j
elevators?an.! the financial carrying
>f their products to others.
Farm products ure generally marketed
at a time when there is a con
restion of !>?th transportation and
finance?when cars and money are
<c;is *e The ontcome, in mnry In
stances, is that the farmers not oniy
seii under pressure, and therefore at
a disadvantage, but are compelled to
take further reductions in net returns,
;n order t.o meet the charges for the
sendee of storing, transporting, financ
iru, and ultimate marketing?which
charges they claim, are often exc?s
sive. bear heavily on both consumer
and producer, nr.il are under the control
of those performing the services
It is true tij.it they are relieved of
the risks of a changing market byselling
at once; but they are quite wiJl
r+z....
-- ^ :? ' >- *
V . ...".
.!3g to take the unfavorable chane^
If the favorable one also Is theirs and
they can retain for themselves a part i
of the service charges that are unl- |
form, ia good years and bad, with
high prices and low.
While, In the msin, the farmer must
sell, regardless or market conditions,
at the time of the maturity of crops,
he cannot suspend production in toto.
He must go on producing if he is to go
on living, and if the world is to exist.
The most he .can do is to curtail production
a little or alter its form, and
that?because he is in the dark as to
the probable demand for his goods?
may be only to jump from the frying
pan Into the fire, taking the consumer
with him. \ . r
Even the dairy farmers, whose" output
Is not seasonal, complain that they
Hnrl Hiomaolrc^ ur a vrjntirrft In
I UUU UIVM??/V? ? vw U U?<IUV* 1 MMbUQV ?, ? f
the marketing of their productions,
especially raw milk, because of the
high costs of distribution, which they
must ultimately bear.
Ill
Now that the farmers are stirring,
thinking, and uniting as never before
to eradicate these inequalities, they
are subjected to stern economic^ lectures,
and are met with the accusation
that they are demanding, and are the
recipients of, special privileges. Let
oa see what privileges the government
has conferred on the farmers. Much
has been made of Section 6 of. the
Clayton Anti-Trust Act, which pur-ported
to permit thein to combine with
Immunity, under certain conditions.
Admitting that, nominally, this exemption
was In the nature of a special
privilege,?though I think it was so In
appearance rather thau In fact.?we
find that the courts have nullified It
by judicial interpretation. Why should
not the farmers be permitted to accomplish
by co-operative methods what
other businesses are already doing by
co-opera tlon In the form of In corpora
tion? If it be proper for men to form,
by fusion of existing corporations or
otherwise, a corporation that controls
the entire production of a commodity.
or?a large part of It, why is it not
proper for a group of farmers to unite
for the marketing of thein, common
products, either in one or in several
selling agencies? Why should It be
right for a hundred thousand corporate
shareholders to direct 25 or 30 or 40
per cent of an industry, and wrong for
a hundred thousand co-operative
farmers to control a no larger proportion
of the wheat crop, or cotton, or
any other product?
The Department of Agriculture is
oftep spoken of as a special concession
to the farmers, but in its commercial
results, It is of as much benefit to the
hovers and consumers of agricultural
products as to the producers, or even
more. I do not suppose that anyone
opposes the benefits that the fanners
derive from the educational and research
work of-the department, or the
help that it gives them in working out
improved cultural methods and practices,
in develppiug better yielding va:
rieties through breeding 2nd sel^ctioni
in introducing new vnreL
mote parts of the world, and itd^ptihg
them to oufr climate and economic condition,
and in devising practical measures
for the elimination or control of
dangerous and destructive animal and
plant diseases, Insect pests, apid the
like. All these things manifestly tend
i to stimulate and enlarge production.
and their general beneficial effects are
obvious.
f It Is complained that, whereas the
law restricts Federal Reserve banks
to three months' time for commercial
paper, the farmer is allowed si*
months on his notes. This Is jnot a
special privilege, but merely such a
recognition of business conditions as
makes it possible for country banks
to do business with country people.
The crop farmer has only one turnover
a year, while the merchant and
manufacturer have many. Incidentally,
I note that the Federal Reserve
Board has just authorized the Fed|
eral Reserve banks to discount export
paper for a period of six months, to
conform to the nature of the business.
The Farm Loan banks are pointed
to as an instance of special governraent
favor for farmers. Are they not
rather the outcome of laudable efforts
to equalize rurq^ and urban conditions?
And about* all the government
does there is to help set up an administrative
organization and lend a
little credit at the start. Eventually
the farmers will provide all the capi_.1
-? ?11 Oio 15nh?HtIes them
I Ifll 21UU Cttl I ^ CI** vuv
I selves. It Is true that Farm Loan
bonds are tax exempt; but so are
bonds of municipal light and traction
plants, and new housing is to be exempt
from taxation, in New York, for
ten years.
On the other hand, the farmer reads
of plans for municipal housing projects
that run into the billions, of hundreds
of millions annually spent ou
the merchant marine; he reads that |
the railways are being favored with j
increased rates and virtual guaranties
of earnings by the goverir-^nt, with
the result to him of an '?<. ased toll
on all that he sells and all that he
buys. He hears of many manifesto
tions of governmental concern for particular
Industries and interests. Rescuing
the railways from insolvency Is
undoubtedly for the benefit of the
country as a whcle. hut what can be
of more general benefit thar. encouragement
of ample production of the
principal necessaries of life, and their
even flow from contented prouueers to j
-satisfied consumers?
While it may be conceded " that j
special governmental aid may be tiec- |
essary in the general Interest, we must |
a'l agree that It is difficult to see why j
agriculture and the production and dis- !
tribmion of farm products are not accorded
the same opportunities that are
provided Vor other businesses; especially
lz the enjoyment by the farmer
I of such opportunities would appear to
' be even more contributory to the gent
i
1 eral good than in the case of ether,
industries. The spirit of American
democracy is unalterably opposed,
alike to enacted special privilege and
to the special' privilege of unequal op*
portunity that arises automatically
from the failure to correct glaring
economic inequalities. I am opposed
* - Al f ? 5 ~ ! * * ?*v?fAi?nmAnr I ry tA j
CO I lit? I IlJt'CU Uil Ul JjUVCIIiUicui 1.11V I
business, but I do believe that it is an j
[ essential function of democratic government
to equalize opportunity so
far as It is within its power to do so,
[ whether by the repeal of archaic
j statutes or the enactment of modern
ones. If the anti-trust laws keep the
farmers from endeavoring scientifically
j to Integrate their industry while other
industries find a way to meet modern
I conditions without violating such star
UiCS. men i: VVUUK1 SCC.JI uawna??.
to find a wa.v for the farmers to meet
them tinder the same conditions. The
law should operate equally in fact. KeI
pairing the economic structure on one.
I side is no injustice to the other side,
j which Is in good repair,
i We have traveled a long way from
j the old conception of government as
merely a defensive and policing agency;
and regulative, corrective, or equnliz|
Ing legislation, which apparently is of
j a special nature. Is often of the most
I general beneficial consequences. Even
the First Congress passed a tariff act
that was avowedly for the protection
of manufacturers; but a protective
O..CAP olwope hoe hoon Hpfpndpd aS fl
LOl LIL a I Tf ttj ?UC M<"VU www?
means of promoting the general good
through a particular approach; and
the statute books are filled with nets
for the benefit of shipping, commerce,
and labor.
rv
Now, what Is the farmer asking?
Without trying to catalogue the remedial
measures that have been suggested
in his behalf, the principal proposals
that bear directly on the im
provement of his distributing and marketing
relations may be summarized as
follows
First: storage warehouses for cot
-1 ~ t
ton, wool, juid tooaeco, ana eievuiur?
for grain, of sufficient capacity to meet
the maximum demand on them at the
peak of the marketing period. The
farmer thinks tlfat either private capital
must furnish these facilities, or the
state must erect and own the elevators
stnd warehouses.
Second: weighing and grading of
agricultural products, and certification
thereof, to be done by impartial and
disinterested public inspectors (this Is
already accomplished to some extent
by the federal licensing of weighers
and graders), to eliminate underpaying,
overcharging, and unfair grading,
and to facilitate the utilization of the
stored products as the basis of credit.
Third: a certainty or creciit suniciem
to enable the marketing of products
in an or3erly manner.
Fourth: the Department of Agriculture
should collect, tabulate, summarize,
and regularly and frequently publish
and distribute to the farmers, full
information from all the markets of
tho world so that rhev shall be as well
JaCpxga^d of their ^selling position as
buyers now are of their,buying position.
Fifth: freedom to integrate the business
of agriculture by means of consolidated
selling agencies, co-ordinating
and co-operating in such way as to
put the farmer on an equal footing
with the large buyers of his products,
and with commercial relations iD other
industries.
When a business requires specialized
talent, it has to buy it. So will the
farmers; and perhaps the best way for
them to got it would be to utilize some
of the present machinery of the largest
established agencies dealing in
farm products. Of course, if he wishes,
the farmer may go further and engage
in flour-milling and other manufactures
of food products. In my opinion,
however, lie would be wise to stop
short of that. Public interest may be
oil fnfroorrnHnns hut
vppuocu IV AU ^ 1 14>1V0? MV*V*W v
In justice, should they be forbidden to
the farmer and permitted to others?
The corporate form of association cannot
now be wholly adapted to his objects
and conditions. The looser cooperative
form seems more generally
suitable. Therefore, he wishes to be
free, if he finds It desirable and feas-"
ible, to resort to co-operation with his
fellows and neighbors, without running
afoul of the law. To urge that
the farmers should have the same liberty
to consolidate and co-ordinate
their peculiar economic functions,
which other industries in their fields
enjoy, Is not, however, to concede that
any business integration should have
' * -* t -*v ovnr/>5 CO rtiAnon_
ItfJjlSlil LI V C SillH HUH HI CACiviot uiunvjr
olistlc power. The American people
are as firmly opposed to Industrial as
to political autocracy, whether attempted
by rural or by urban industry.
For lack of united effort the farmers
as a whole are still marketing their
crops by antiquated methods, or by no
metho Is at all, but they are surrounded
by a business world that has been
modernized to the last minute and is
tirelessly striving for efficiency. This
efficiency is due in large measure to
big business, to united business, to Integrated
business. The farmers now
seek the benefits of such largeness, union
and integration.
The American farmer Is a modern of
the moderns in the use of labor saving
machinery, and he has made vast
strides In recent years In scientific
tillage and efficient farm management
but as a business in contact with other
j businesses agirculture Is a "one horse
j shay" in competition with high power
: automobiles. The American farmer is
; the greatest and most Intractable of
individualists. While Industrial production
and all phases of the huge commercial
mechanism and its myriad accessories
have articulated and co-ordinated
themselves all the way from natural
raw materials to retail sales, the
business of agriculture has gone on in
much one man fashion of the backwoods
of the first part of the nine*whnn
thft farmor was
i " ^? ~
self sufficient and did not depend upon,
or care very much, what the great
world was doing. The result is that
the agricultural group Is almost as j
much at a disadvantage in dealing with j
other economic erouDs as the ja3' farm
er of the funny pages in the hands of
sleek urban eontidence men, who sell
him acreage In Central Park or the
Chicago dty hall. The leaders of the
farmers thoroughly understand this,
and they are intelligently striving to
Integrate their Industry so that it will
be on an equal footing with other bus:
nessea.
As an example of integration, fake
the steel industry, in which the mode'
is the United States Steel Corporation,
with it3 Iron mines, its coal mines, its
take and rail transportation, its ocean
vessels, Its by-product coke ovens, its
blast furnaces, its open hearth and
Bessemer furnaces, its rolling mills, its
tube mills and other manufacturingprocesses
that are carried to the highest
degree of finished production com
patible with the large trade it has
built up. All this is generally conceded
to be to the advantage of the con
sumer. Nor does the steel corporation
Inconsiderately dump its products on
the market. On the contrary, it so
acts that it is frequently a stabilizing
Influence, as Is often the case with other
large organizations. It is master of
its distribution as well as of its pnw
ductlcn. If prices are not satisfactory
the products are held back or production
is reduced or suspended. It is no.'
compelled to send a year's work to the
market at one time and take whatever
it can get under such circumstances.
It hns one selling policy and its own
export department. Neither are the
grades and qualities of steel determined
at the caprice of the buyer, nor does
the latter hold the scales. In this single
integration of the steel corporation
Is represented about 40 per cent of the
steel production of America. The rest
Is mostly in the hands of a few large
f/imnnnips Tn nrdinarv times the I
steel corporation, by example, stabilizes
all steel prices. If this is permissible
(it is even desirable, because stable
and fair prices are essential to solid
and continued prosperity) why would
It be wrong for the farmers to utilize
central agencies that would have similar
effects on agricultural products?
Something like that fs what they are
aiming at.
Some farmers favored by regional
compactness and contiguity, such as the
citrus-fruit-raisers of California, al?
ready have found a way legally to
merge and sell their products integrally
and in accordance with seasonal
and local demand, thus Improving
ftiQin niwifinn and rpndpriTl<r the COI1
HlV.il ^/VU*V*Vil ??UV? ? .. ^
sumer a reliable service of ensured
quality, certain supjply, and reasonable I
and relatively steady prices. They
have not found it necessary to resort
to any special privilege, or to claim
any exemption under the anti-trust
legislation of the state or nation. Without
removing local control, they have
built up a very efficient marketing
agency.' The grain, cotton^ and tobacco
farmers, and the producers of
hides and wool, because of their numbers
and the vastness of their-reginns.
and for other reasons, lupve founa
integration, a more difficult ^ task;
1 ?"v At** aawa n/1a
rnougn intic ar?r jvyiuc nn.'u..'i.nv..j .
of farmer's co-operative elevators,
warehouses, creameries, and other enterprises
of one sort and another, with
a turn-over of a billion dollers a year.
They are giving tiie farmers busine^
experience and training, and, so f^r
as they go. they meet the need of
honest weighing and fair grading; but
they do not meet the requirements of
rationally adjusted marketing in any
large and fundamental way.
The next step, which, will be a pattern
for other groups, is now being
~ k.. 5ti.rothronirh
prcpaicu uj ?.nc bl'm+" * - othe
establishment of sales media which
shall handle grain separately or collectively,
as the individual farmer may
elect. It is this step?the plan of the
Committee of Seventeen?which has
created so much opposition and Is
thought by some to be in conflict with
the anti-trust laws. Though there is i
low before congress a measure designed
to clear up doubt on this point,
the grain-producers are not relying on
any immunity 'from anti-trust legislation.
They desire, and they are entitled,
to co-ordinate their efforts Just
05 effectively as the large business interests
of the country have done. In
connection with the selling organizations
the United States Grain Growers.
Tvirnrnorated is drafting a scheme of
financing instrumentalities ami auxiliary
agencies which are indispensable
to the successful utilization of modem
business methods.
It is essential that the farmers
should proceed gradually *lth these
? - * . m
plans, and aim to avoid :no error or
scrapping the existing marketing machinery,
which has been so laboriously
built up by long experience, before
they have a tried and proved substitute
or supplementary mechanism.
They must be careful not to become
enmeshed in their own reforms and
lose the perspective of their place in
the national system. They must guard
against fanatical devotion to new doctrines,
and siiould seek articulation
with the general economic system
rather than its reckless destruction as
it relates to them.
V
To take a tolerant and sympathetic
v*ew of the farmers' strivings for better
things is not to give a blanket
endorsement to ar?f specinc pian, an<i
still less to applaud the vagaries of
;?wne of their leaders and groups.
Neither should we, on the other hand,
allow the froth of bitter agitation,
false economies, and mistaken radicalism
to concexil the facts of the farmers'
disadvantages, nr.d the practicability
of eliminating them by weil-cor.
sldered measures, ft may be that the
farmer,* will not ?liow the business j
S>iZii? and (leveton the wise leader-1
ship to carry through sound plans; but'
that possibility does not Justify the
9
~ T~" j
obstruction of their ypward effort?.
We, as city people, see In high and
speculatively manipulated prices,
spoilage, waste, scarcity, the result*
of defective distribution of farm products.
Should it not occur to us that
we have a common interest with the
farmer in his attempts to attain a degree
of efficiency In distribution corresponding
to his efficiency in production?
Do not the recent fluctuations
In +1%a ama! A? ? ??
111 me wucai uyuuu, ayyareuuy
unrelated to normal interaction of
supply and demand, offer a timely
proof of the need of some such stabilizing
agency as fhe grain growers have
in contemplation?
It Is contended that, if their proposed
organizations be perfected and
operated, the farmers will have in
their hands an instrument that will be
capable of dangerous abuse. We are
told that it will be possible to pervert
It to arbitrary and oppressive pricefixing
from its legitimate use of ordering
and stabilizing the flow ef farm
products to the market, to the mutual
beuefit of producer and consumer. I
have no apprehensions on this point.
In the first place, a loose organization,
such as any union of farmers
must be at best, cannot be so arbitrarily
and promptly controlled as a
great corporation. The one is a lumbering
democracy and tbe other an agile
autocracy. In the second place, with
all possible power of organization, the
farmers cannot succeed to any great
prfpnr or for nnv onnsirlprahlp
of time, In Axing prices. The great
law of supply and demand works in
various and surprising ways, to the
undoing of the best laid plans that
attempt to foil it. In the third place,
their power will avail the farmers
M/wf lilnr# J P mL lv a i k K i (< ail T n a?i w f t m<i
iiuttliu^ IL 11 uc auuscu. 111 VUl I'UIC
and country power Is of value to Its
possessor only so long as it is not
abused. It is- fair to say tiiat I have
seen no signs in responsible quarters
of a disposition to dictate prices.
There seems, on the contrary, to be a
commonly beneficial purpose to realize
a stability that will giv; an orderly
and abundant flow of farm products
to the consumer and ensure reasonable.
and dependable returns to the producer.
In view of the supreme importance
to the national well-being of a prosperous
and contented agricultural population.
we should be prepared to go
a long way in assisting the farmers to
get an equitable share of the wealth
they produce, through the inauguration
of reforms that will procure a
continuous and increasing stream otf
farm products. They are far from getting
a fair share now. Considering
his capital and the long hours of labor
put- In by the average farmer and his
family, he Is remunerated less than
any other occupational class, with the
possible exception of teachers, religious
and lay. Though we kno* that
the present general distress of the
farmers is exceptional and is linked
with the inevitable economic readjustment
following the war, it must be
remembered that, although represent-. .
Jmfone-third of 'the Tndustriafl-ppwtiet
arid half the total population of the
nation, the rural communities ordina^ily
enjoy hut a fifth to a quarter of
tiie net annual national gain. Xotvvithstanding
t!ie taste of prosperity that
the farmers had during the war, there BIH|
Is today a lower standard of living
among the cotton farmers of the South
thanln any other pursuit in the country.
In conclusion, it seems to me that the
fanners are chiefly striving for a generally
beneficial integration of their
business, of the same kind and character
that other business enjoys. If it
should be found on examination that
the attainment of this end requires
methods different from those which
otUer activities have followed for the
same purpose should we not sympa
thetically consider the plea for the
right to co-operate, if only from our
own enlightened self interest, in obtaining
an abundant and steady flow of
farm products?
In examining the agricultural situation
with a view to its Improvement,
we shall be most helpful if we maintain
a detached and judicial vtewpoint,
remembering that existing wrongs may
be chiefly an accident of unsymmetricai
economic growth Instead of a creation
of malevolent design and conspiracy.
We Americans are prone, as Professor
David Friday well says in his
admirable book, "Profits, Wages and
Prices," to seek a "criminal intent behind
every difficult and undesirable economic
situation." I can positively assert
from my contact with men of
large affairs, including bankers, that,
as a whole, they are endeavoring to
fulfill as they see them the obligations
that go with their power. Preoccnpied
with the grave problems and heavy
tasks of their own immediate affairs,
they have not turned their thoughtful
personal attention or their construe-""' v
tive abilities to the deficiencies or agri- ^
cultural business organization. Agriculture,
it may be said, suffers from
their preoccupation and neglect rather
tiian from any purposeful exploitation
by them. They ought now to begin to
respond to the farmers' difficulties,
which they must realize are their own.
On the other hand, my contacts with
the farmers have filled me with respect
for them?for their sanity, their parhpir
balance. Within the last
I V..V- ,
year, and particularly at a meeting
called by the Kansas State Board of
Agriculture and at another called by
the Committee of Seventeen, I have
met many of the leaders of the new
farm movement, and I testify in all
sincerity that they are endeavoring to
deal with their problems, not as promoters
of a narrow class interest, not
as exploiters of the hapless consumer,
not as merciless monopolists, but as
honest ment bent on the improvement
of the common weal.
We can and must mm such men
and s'nch a cause half way. Their
business is oar business?the nation'*
business.
?
i;. J