The Ward County independent. [volume] (Minot, Ward County, N.D.) 1902-1965, 1915-08-05
COUNTY AGRICULTURAL
AGENT TURNED down
MANY FARMERS EXPRESS THEM
SELVES AT MEETING OF THE
BOARD SATURDAY - PROPOSE
TON VOTED DOWN.


opinion from them upon which to base
their action with reference to the ap-
preparation for the Better Farming
throughout the county for the past
George Murray Of Plaza led in the
discussion, stating that while he be-
lieved in the better farming movement
he was opposed to raising the funds to
be applied for this purpose by taxa
ton, but made no suggestion as to
how the expense was to be met. He
characterized those who inaugurated
the movement as having Interior mo-
tives in doing so, being bankers, or
probably as having some connection
with the Chamber of Commerce He
asserted that the best way to help the
farmer was to control the price of
their products, that the farmer knows
the cost Of production. Taxing the
people to maintain experts in agricul-
ture was violation Of Section 1856 of
the State Constitution.
He was followed by George Smith of
Plaza, who stated that the farmer was
ever the down trodden class and never
the ruling class. His remarks were
somewhat foreign to the immediate
matter under consideration but he was
listened to with close attention.
J. H. Burkhart of Berthold was the
next speaker and in a carefully pre-
pared address refuted many of the
statements of the speakers who pre-
coded him, and stated that economic
production was the prime object of the
better farming movement and not the
equalization of production and distri-
button. His remarks showed that Mr.
Burkhart was thoroughly conversant
with the subject in hand and close
student of economic questions, having
for the past sixteen years been con-
nected with the Equity society, found
ed by A. G. Evers, a newspaper man,
by the way. He stated that the func-
ton of the general and state govern
ments was to educate the public from
the cradle to manhood and woman
hood, and paid fine tribute to W. A:
| Peck, as one having especially fitted
himself by careful preparation for this
special work.
A. j. Anderson of Mckinley town.
ship was asked why he signed the pc
tition against the employment of a
better farming expert and said that
his object was to get business for the
Equity.
Commissioner Lokensgard arose to
remark that it was an easy matter to
get petitions signed and that the
Board did not place much stress upon
petitions, and that they were conse-
quently not taken seriously, remind
ing the assembly that their remarks
should be confined to the matter under
discussion.
Mr.. Simmons of Foxholm proved an
interesting and entertaining speaker.
Commenting upon his early struggles
to maintain commercial existence
through the early days, sacrificing
his homestead and other property in
his endeavor to carry a heavy load of
credit accounts, and had it not been
for the wholesale houses who backed
the small dealers at that time the
country could not have survived the
lean years of the past. He had the
highest praise for Mr.. Peck and said
that Ward county should have rs
Pecks.
Moved by Peck supported by John
Bjorn of Maryland township, that the
farmers be called upon for three min
ute talks. Carried.
D. T. Dierdorff of Surrey said it was
not wise to refuse the advice of ex-
perts. He was in hearty sympathy
with the movement.
C. D. Lambert: In favor of better
farming.
N. D. Welty: Heartily in favor.
A. T. Hegreberg: Well satisfied with
Peck.
H. Melos: Can farm without help |
from experts.
J. F. Thomas: Good thing.
Jim Shaw of Logan: County agent |
convenient for consultation when alb
+ struse problems confront the farmer.
A. ]. Anderson: In favor of the
movement.
D. M. Shorb: To abandon the
movement would be step backward.
Frank Linha: Favorable to the
movement
S L. Beechler: In favor of every
mans doing his own farming. OPP
posed.
Mr.. Peck here explained that in
some instances where objections were
made to him the party had never ask
ed him to call.
D. F. Mckee: Endorsed the move
ment.
J. H. Cover: Heartily in favor.
I. r. Pence: Believe in advancement
and progress.
w. S. Young: In favor.
H. C. Kuchenbecker: Favorable. =
C. F. Weed: Heartily endorsed the
movement. Received much benefit
from the aid given in poisoning goph-
ers.r ....
VIM. Kemper: In favor.
w. E. Mohler: Will get along with
out aid. ..
C. w. Humphrey: In favor, the
gopher poisoning alone pays the ex-
pense. ..-
J. j. Brand: In favor.
T. Elarth: The club in his township
decided that the benefit was not COM
mensurate with the expense.
Ole Den: Favorable.
Herman GEM: Opposed decidedly.
C. E. Sherman: In favor.
John Wallin: Favorable.
August Eckmeier: Opposed. Would