The Logan Republican. [volume] (Logan, Utah) 1902-1924, 1917-01-30

hope, plan and work for a good sea-
son and bumper beet crop.
The Report.
Your committee to whom was re-
ferred the pulp question beg to re-
port as follows: That as officers of
Cache County Farm Bureau we have
received information on the $500
fat rate for 1917 beets question
from State Farm Bureau officers
which induced us to take up this
matter with the sugar company Of
ficials as well as the pulp question.
With respect to the $500 fat
rate for 1917 beets we find there is
a Misunderstanding among farmers
as to the wording of the intended
contract, which misunderstanding
originates with the statement pub
lished by the State Farm Bureau
committee and not with the sugar
company. That the sugar company
explained to the State committee
the 1917 contract as ii is now be-
ing offered to farmers that 1t was
equivalent to a $500 fiat rate. in
asmuch as all districts in which IL
circulated were capable of produc-
ing Is per cent beets. The State
committee accepted this as $500
fat rate and put the matter up to
the County bureaus to accept or re-
ject. The-sugar people have never
promised anything except what is
embodied in the present contract,
and are therefore not to blame for
any misunderstanding. Utah Coun-
ty, Salt Lake County and Weber
county have accepted the beet con-
tract just as 1t is being offered to
us. Mr.. Quincy of the Amalgam-
ated Sugar company informs us
that so far as he is concerned he
would just as soon reprint the con-
tracts and make it q fiat rate for
Is per cent beets were it not for
the fact that the sugar companies
now operating had agreed on a uni
form contract which is the same as
they are now offering to farmers
and he could not put in different
contract in Cache County without
seriously disturbing the counties
that have already accepted the pre-
sent contract, thus making trouble
kfor the other sugar companies. He
is no question about the Cache
lcounty beets testing an average OF
15 per cent, therefore farmers will
get $500 for their 1917 beets, in
fact he makes this statement in q
letter to us over his own signature
which is attached to this report and
made part hereoof. In view OF
these facts we believe farmers will
receive $500 for their beets where
they make an effort to produce good
sugar beets.
AS to the pulp question we find
the sugar company is just as anxious
for the beet growers and farmers ia
have the pulp as the farmers them
selves.
Upon explaining the action of our
last meeting to the sugar officials
; they ACCUSED in most all we said
and in all we want. The sugar PEG.
pie are willing to turn the whole
pulp problem over to the farmers OF
farm bureaus to work out to the
best advantage of all Concerned. II
the farmers will agree to take all
the pulp and make their contracts
SO as to prevent speculation in It the
sugar company is willing to have the
> stock company vacate, turn over
Q both silos, SO as one can be ripen
! ing while the other is being filled
or hauled away. put in separate
scales for weighing pulp. and do ev
erything in their power to help tn,
farmer get his pulp In the most sat
isfactory way. They are also Willing
to let farmers get their pulp at thu
factory nearest to them. The pull
question therefore is directly up t
the farmers. The price Is to be so,
per ton. We recommend that tn,
beet growers be given the privileg,
Of contracting for all the pulp the!
want to feed on their own place, ant
not resell, that then the farmer
who are not beet growers, livint
most adjacent to the factory be givel
| the privilege of contracting for al
the pulp they want and are willini
to feed on their own places, ant
a not resell, in case there is pull
enough to sunDly them Should