The public ledger. [volume] (Maysville, Ky.) 1913-1968, 1921-09-12
OPEN LETTER IS
WRITTEN ON Weed
ORGANIZATION plan
To Messrs. James N. Kehoe and
Stanley Reed:
Gentlemen:

: Gentlemen.
see from the newspapers that yo'
opened the precinct campaign for tn
; Burnley Cooperative Marketing Com
pany Saturday evening at 0rangeburl
in the Christian church. II so happens
that ] own III acres OF land In thu
, Orangeburg precinct; and am, there
fore, in common with other tobacco
growers, interested in a correct solu
tion Of the important problem nov
confronting the farmers Of Masor
county.
If the North Carolina corporation
which you represent offers that solu'
ton, 1t Is a good thing; and, In that
event. we should all have part in It,
But If II does not offer a correct solu-
ton, It is a bad thing; and, In that
event, should any of us want to have
anything to do with It?
Now. think | know something OF
the sentiment Of my neighbors and
friends in that precinct; and while
they see the advantages of cooperation,
! hey want to be assured that the CO.
! operation which you advocate Is law
full. In other words, they believe. for
example, that two men can lawfully
combine to save a life, but not to cut
a throat
Waving the much talked of ques-
tions as to lucrative positions in the
proposed company, advantageous sales
of warehouses, monopoly of bank de-
pcsits with respect to the proceeds
from the sales of the combined crops,
the length of time such deposits are
to be held before the grower gets his
own. and the old, old question of po-
litical preferment; it will, in my opin-
ion. be of help to the cause you ad-
vocate IL unequivocal and satisfactory
answers can be given us to the fol-
lowing questions:
First. Regardless of what the other
banks of Mason county may or may
not do, will your bank, the Bank OF
Maysville, pledge itself to endorse
bankers acceptances to the extent OF
fifty per cent. of the valuation OF the
tobacco fixed by the company for any
of the Mason county growers, whether
he or she be landlord or tenant, wheth-
or he or she be now depositor in your
bank or not, if the grower will con-
tract to deliver his or her crops for
five years to the company?
Second. II it will not endorse bank
ers acceDtances either for the grower
or for the company, will your bank
then pledge itself to lend out of its
fund before the crops are sold fifty
per cent. of the company's valuation
or any other sum to the growers on
their tobacco certificates; If so to
how many? To some or to all?
Third. If this North Carolina cor
poration's plan and method of business
is not in conflict with the antitrust
laws of Kentucky, why, then, is IT
necessary to wait until the next Leg
islature meets to get legislation to en-
able this foreign corporation to oper-
ale in Kentucky, or a similar Kentucky |
corporation to be organized?
Fourth Is it not a fact that the IT,
5. Supreme Court in the case OF
Thomas Malone VS.. Commonwealth, on
appeal from the Mason Circuit Court,
pa L. S. 500, Messrs. J. NJ. Collins
md E. l.. Worthington being counsel
'cr. Malone, in effect held that the
amendment to the Kentucky antitrust
laws attempting TO exempt the Burley
Tobacco Company from its provisions,
was in conflict with the Federal Con-
and has not the Kentucky
Court of Appeals in the case of Gay VS..
Brent 166 KY 1893, reserved its pre-
vious decisions and since then fol-
owed the decision in the Malone case!
Fifth. If, on the one hand, the pur-
,nse of the proposed company be not
to fix the price OF tobacco
or the grower then what advantage
loes 1t have over the present situa-
ion? But if, on the other hand, the
purpose of this foreign and proposed
domestic corporation is artificially to
TX for the grower the price of tobacco
" withdrawing from the market and
storing in its warehouses the excess
-aised each year, why is such COM
jination not a criminal conspiracy
Measured by the present law, both
tate and federal; subjecting both the
corporation and its officers and all in
connection with or aiding or abetting
: to severe penalties?
Sixth. If, then, the purpose OF this
enterprise be artificially to fix the
,rice Of tobacco, and it is, therefore, a
criminal conspiracy; how can it and
hose aiding and abetting ii escape
prosecution under the Federal statute
my more than Mr. sapiros California
2asin Trust, which was attacked as
UGH by the Wilson Administration and
5 still under fire?
Seventh. If, therefore, such be the
ature of this enterprise how can
here be any reasonable hope that the
'ederal Government either by means
its War Finance Coporation or its !