Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1907-06-22

Editor Times Republican,: In your
1 issue of June 13 you publish on first
page a lengthy article entitled The
Iowa Farmer Stands the Loss" IT
| YOU will permit me I would like to
show you how the Iowa farmer sees
| the rule to sell cows and heifers sub
ject to inspection.
I have been very friendly with this
cooperative commission company.
| give them all due credit for what they
have done for the farmers and ship
| pers Of live stock. I believe they are
organized with a view Of benefittng
those who ship stock to them, but
| they undoubtedly have taken an I'M
popular view of the present controv-
ersy between commission men and the
American Meat. Packers association.
Farmers and shippers of the state of
| Iowa do not wish the packer to lose
any condemned meat. Nor do we think
| they do, or have. They buy our stock
| just as cheaply as they can. If the
| run is large they buy them off, owing
altogether to the size of the run. If
the run is light they advance the
| price, which stimulates another big
run. thus buying the big end of their
supplies on the lower market. If they
would buy our stock at what it is
really worth to them, as our co-opera-
| tive friends would have you think
| they do, prices would not fluctuate Csc
per hundred in single day. as they
often do. The fact is, they can buy
them just as low as they can get them.
regardless of the profit to them; but
to% ipL q
a loss. Refrigerated meats are con-
trolled by whom?
understand there Is more profit In
condemned animals at the prices they
are supposed to pay for them, than
those which pass inspection.
1t is left entirely with the packer
to say what the hide and tallow is
worth. Mr. Shipper does not even have
his commission man to intercede for
him. Again, all animals are inspected,
some are good others not SO good,
and others bad, there must be a line
drawn between those fit for human
consumption and those not. Under the
old rule the only party interested in
the deal is the packer, and it is to his
interest to have all pass, consequently,
| is he not given the benefit of the
doubt? Now under the new rule the
only party present is the same packer
with the man really financially inter-
ested probably on his way home to the
country figuring if there is a possible
chance to come out even on his ship
| ment. Not being near to challenge the
decision Of the inspector, who will get
| the benefit of the doubt? Now don't
think mistrust the honesty or judg-
ment of the government men, but you
will all agree with me that there must
| be a line drawn somewhere.
Now since it is to the interest of the
packers only to have cows and heifers
sold subject to inspection, would it not
be to their interest to have steers and
hogs sold the same? Once they should
get this rule established it would only
| be a short time until they would force
all animals sold for slaughter under
the same rule and why not? If it is
good for this class, why not good for
all? The fact is this rule would bene
fit only the few packers to the detri-
ment of the whole producing public.
I must notice one more statement
before I pass on to some suggestions
|
above mentioned article you will find
| the following: 1.-The course of the
farmer is perfectly clear If he has
cows and heifers for sale he should
ship them to market and order his
commission man to sell them subject
| to inspection. He should tag them. If
none are rejected he will know that
he has no tuberculosis in his herd and
he can feed his milk in safety to his
children" What do you think of that
kind of argument? Who ever heard
of all of one herd being affected alike:
The fact is you may own herd of lou
cows and only one or small part OF
them be infected 1 could refer you to
a herd in Marshall county where, upon
| inspection one animal showed a very
bad case of tuberculosis, while not
another showed any whatever. Conse-
uuently a man might retain at home
| for family use just the COW that was
| infected.
Now let us have our stock sold under
the old rule: "settle for all stock at
the scales" Let us establish a thor
ough state inspection law requiring
every animal of the cow kind to be
inspected once each year. every animal
brought into the state to be Inspected
before being removed from the stock
yards. Under such conditions tuber-
culosis cannot exist once the cattle
are rid of the disease. The first year
selling of hogs will entirely clean out
the herds Inasmuch as it Will be some
time before the legislature meets, am
in favor Of the board of supervisors es-
- the
line above mentioned, and pay for the
same out Of county funds. Many who
read this will say II do not own
COW and pay big tax No. let those
who have cattle pay it themselves; l
am not interested" Is there person
in Marshall county who is not inter-
ested in his health? If he does not own
cattle he is buying milk and butter OF
some one who does own cattle. Would