Norwich bulletin. [volume] (Norwich, Conn.) 1895-2011, 1915-05-29
GOOD TRADING ABILITY HELPS THE FARMER

CWdtten Specially for The Bulletin4)
In recent issue The Connecticut
Farmer discusses intelligently and for
chilly the lack of trading ability on
the part OF farmers, taking them as
they run.
For a long time agricultural writers
have been dwelling, more or less urg-
entity. this subject. THE farmer
must be a good business man to sue
reed,'' is the burden of the cry-the
text of the sermon.
My friend of The Farmer writes;
"The average farmer is a mighty
poor trader Ten farmers know how
to produce-yes, do produce--hiSh-
grade commodities, and on the aver
age, only one Of the ten know how
to market to the best advantage. The
ability to trade is Just as important
as the ability to produce. Unless the
farmer is a trader his profits are d.
vided in such a way that the other
fellow-the fellow who buys OF him
makes as much out of the transaction
as the original producer. The ma
tority of farmers are content when the
crop is harvested or the commodity
produced. But the farmer who allows
his business to drift with the tide from
this point lacks the one great req ulsite
of a successful business, the ability
10 trade"
This is all true. Owing to this very
thing, the lack of business or trad
ing ability on the part of most farm
ers, these who have it and who buy
his products Of him not only make
as much out of the transaction as the
original producer" but, as frequently
collected statistics have repeatedly
shown, make very much more. The,
truck raisers and fruit and berry grow
ers of New Jersey and Long Island,
for example, get, on an average, 80
cents for every dollars worth OF their
goods The traders who handle the
goods and pass them on to consumers
get the other SIS cents-almost twice
what they pay the producer. Fur
thermore, it costs the producer like sin
to grow those crops His receipts are
not all profits. 1t is seriously to be
doubted if one-tenth of these receipts
are profits. The rest is eaten UP in
growing expenses.
So YOU see the situation Is really
Fery much worse than my friend the
Hditor of The Farmer states it.
He is, moreover, well within reason
able around when he assumes that
ten farmers can raise good crops TO
one who can sell his crop with ad-
vantage.
Such amateur advisers as Railroad
President Hill and Banker Vanderlip
and Merchant Wanamaker are not
we'll informed as to actual facts and
conditions when they undertake to tell
us that our remedy lies simply In pro-
ducing more crop on the same ground
That is certainly a good thing to do
If you can sell the increased crop for
enough more to pay the extra cost OF
producing it But when, as is the case
with many farmers, all they can get
for the crops they do raise is not
enough to pay profits on them even
when production-coSt is kept down TO
the very lowest minimum, it is hard
TO see how the large increase in pro-
duction expense necessary to bring
about increased crOppage can become
3 source of great profit.
If it costs me a dollar to raise $1.0S
worth of crop, you may be perfectly
sure that it will cost me more than two
dollars to double the crop on the same
ground, j. e. to raise $2-06 worth. 1t
Is almost always possible for almost
anyone of US to double his production,
acre for acre. But no one has tried to
DO it will be apt to dispute the asser-
hon that it usually costs more than it
comes to,-unless better than ruling
prices can be had for the increased
crop.
Which brings US right back to our
starting point.
According to Webster, a farmer is
zone who is devoted to the tillage of
the soil'
That, certainly, is what most of US
have been brought up to consider the
farmers first work and chief vocation
al end. He is a tiller of the soil, for
the purpose of raising crops To so till
the soil as to grow good crops is
something of a trick. At least, it is
here in New England. 1t keeps an or
binary mans hands full and calls for
ri attention 9hnITt all the
time. Moreover, it takes a certain spe-
.cio1 ahilitr- II ren11iras the farmer. I q