Pullman herald. [volume] (Pullman, W.T. [Wash.]) 1888-1989, 1920-03-12
A CONVINCING ANSWER

marketing of wheat to the growers.
At first the organization committee
of the Wheat Growers association
thought it best to ignore Mr.. Man
chester's letter but, as they have re-
ceived a number of inquiries regard
ing it. they decided to issue the fol-
lowing answer:
"Inasmuch as B. T. Manchester has
seen fit to issue an open letter, criti-
cizing and disappearing the meth
DDS of the committee appointed to
work out plan for the cooperative
marketing of wheat for the states of
Washington, Oregon and Idaho,
which letter has been given wide
circulation through the press, we
deem it our duty to give the public
the exact facts in the case.
MIR. Manchester attended the
state convention of the Farmers
Union held in Spokane December g.,
10 and II. He listened to the pre-
sentation of the cooperative market
ing plan, Joined in the discussion of
the plan and voted in favor of es-
pousinG it.
"He served on the committee of
Is. appointed to work out the de-
tails of the plan for presentation to
the wheat growers throughout it's
sessions. He was present when the
compensation to be paid Mr.. Sapiro,
Mr.. Gilmore and Mr., Langner for
their services in helping to present
the plan and sign up the wheat grow
ers was determined and asquiesced
in the decision. These gentlemen,
whom he charges with having ar
ranged to secure large fees whether
the plan succeeds or not, first Of
fered their services without COM
pensation, except the payment of
their expenses. Believing that the
committee declined to accept this
generous offer. They then offered
to work for fixed salaries or on a
contingent basis, their compensa-
tion to be determined by the results
attained in the signup campaign.
The committee decided that the lat
ter proposition was the safest and
fairest. If Mr.. Manchester was op-
posed to the compensation agreed
upon, why did he not say so at that
time?
When the final details of the plan
had been worked out and several
minor changes made at the last mo-
ment to satisfy his views. Mr.. Man
chester expressed himself as satisfied
and proved it by signing his name
to the contract with the other wheat
growers present, thereby agreeing to
sell all of his wheat to the associa-
ton for a period of six years. The
contract, with the signature attached,
is now in possession of the organiZa-
ton committee
ION the 21st day of January Mr..
Manchester went to Mansfield and
unqualifiedly advocated the adoption
of the plan at a meeting of farmers.
Such was the attitude of Mr.
Manchester prior to going to Seattle
and Portland, where he presumably
yielded to some hostile influence and
issued his open letter.
I'm that letter it will be noted that
he does not attack the plan itself
but criticizes the methods of those
who are backing 1t. The plan is not
being promoted or forced upon the
wheat growers by any outside parties
or influences. 1t is a wheat growers
movement pure and simple 1t il
true that we have employed Mr.
Sapiro, Mr.. Elmore and Mr.. Lang
ner to do certain work in which We
consider them TO be experts and We
have given them free hand to carry
on that particular work as their ex
perience and judgment may dictate
We have not delegated to them the
power or authority to perform an!
of the functions entrusted to tn
committee.
TO the best of our knowledg,
and belief no one has asked or beer
refused the right of access to tn
minutes of the committee meeting
which are in the possession of w. j
Robinson of Pomeroy, the secretar.
of the committee. Nor has the posi-
ton of general manager of the asso
citation or any other position bee
offered to C. W Nelson by any com
petent authority. as alleged in MI
Manehester's letter.
While we deeply regret the atti
tude which Mr.. Manchester has as