New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1919-04-02
THE DRY MILK. PROPOSITION.

In the presence of the report of the
Commercial Club published in last
weeks issue of the Brown County Jour
| nal, in fairness to personal work squarely
| executed to this Club, and in behalf of
general interests involved, these I'M
deniable statements are brought before
the attention of the Citizens of New Ulm
and farming community. The Jersey
Dry Milk and Creamery Co. of New
Ulm was Incorporated under the laws
of the State of Minnesota on Dec. 18th,
1918. Application was made and duly
filed with the State Securities Com
mission to secure it's approval and license
to do business in New Ulm All the
details of this application We're given
careful and thorough consideration by
the Commission, their relationship to
local interests, creameries included, not
being overlooked, and involving person.
al visit of a member of the Commission
to this town. In it's arrangements the
Commission supervised the appointment
of a capable, practical, and well re-
commended man to superintend the
manufacturing Of the products involved
and also appointed a trustee in the person
of Louis II. Joss of the law firm of Joss
q Gilman, Minnesota Loan & Trust
Bldg. Minneapolis, to control the vote
of the common stock issued and sanction
ed by the Commission, and to submit
each and every development proposed
for the betterment of the business for
the Commissions approval. The Com
mission then passed on this application
and granted the license to the Company
for the sale of $4,000 Of its preferred
stock
l personally appeared before the Com
mercial Club of New Uln in the interests
.: this corporation and after describing
the general nature Of the business ex-
pressed the desire Of the company to
take its place tremendously, if possible,
in the midst of local general interests.
The one and only request l made in be-
half of the Company was that the club
might satisfy itself upon the statements
| advanced relative to the advantages
of such business to town and its
! farming community by its own investi-
cation of similar plant in this state.
At later meeting the club appointed
the Industrial Committee to select two
men to make that investigation which
| it did the same week, and the written
report Of these two men was later SUBJ
mitted to the Industrial Committee.
At meeting of the directors of the club
| this report was read, and it is now com
mon knowledge that this report was
| favorable. Yet the club returned a
i mo Decision" verdict on this one and
only issue involved in my work with
/ the club With reference to the club s
report as it stands in public print |
desire to add the following in the in
terests OF my personal representations
made to this club.
1st The statements relative to
tactics used etc. made a convenient
1S.camouhage" Of words to obscure the
real decision involved, viz. whether the
report in the hands of the Industrial
Committee was favorable or unfavorable.
Being personally responsible for the
tactics used" challenge any person
to come out in the open and prove them
other than right and legitimate in my
dealings with the club.
End. That the Jersey Dry Milk &
Creamery Co. was not as a corporation
resp for the business transactions
1 of two private individuals or their sup