Metropolis weekly gazette. (Metropolis, Ill.) 1???-19??, 1922-01-20

that they be placed on an equal foot
Ing with the buyers Of iii cir products
and with other Industries?
-
II
Let rs, then, consider some OF the
farmers grievances. and see how far
they are real. In doing so, we should
remember that, while there have been,
and still are instances of purposeful
abuse. the subject should not be ap.
preached with any general imputatlon
to existing dlstributiye agencies OF de-
liberately intentional oppression, but
rather with the conception that the
marketing OF farm products has not
been modernized.
An ancient evil, and persistent
one. Is the undersrading Of farm prod
nets. with the result that what the
farmers sell as OF one quality is re.
Sold as Of higher. That this sort OF
chicanery should persist on any I'm
portant scale In these days OF bust.
ness integrity would seem almost In
credible, but there Is much evidence
that II does SO persist. Even as
write, the newspapers announce the
suspension of several firms from the
New York Produce Exchange for ex-
porting to Germany as No. > wheat a
whole shipload of grossly inferior wheat
mixed with oats, ehaff and the like.
Another evil Is that Of inaccurate
weighing OF farm products, which, 1t
is charged, Is sometimes matter Of
dishonest intention and sometimes Of
protective policy on the part of the
local buyer, who fears that he may
weigh oft" more than he "weighs in
greater grievance is that at pres.
ent the field farmer has little or no
control over the Tine and conditions
Of marketing his products with the
result that he Is often underpald for
his products and usually overcharged
for marketing service. The differ
cDee between what the farmer re-
celges and what the consumer pays
often exceeds all possibility Of justi
hcatlon To cite n single illustration
Last year, according to figures attest
ed BY the railways and the growers
Georgia Watermelon.ra lsers received
on the average rs cents for a melon,
the railroads got 12.7 cents for carry
ing II 10 Baltimore and tie consumer
paid one dollar, leaving 79S cents for
the service Of marketing and its risks,
as against 20.2 cents for growing and
transporting The hard annals Of
farm-life are replete with such com.
mentaries on the crudeness of pres.
ent practices.
Nature prescribes that the farmers
goods must be finished within two
or three months of the year, while
financial and storage limitations gen.
orally compel him to sell them at the
same time. AS a rule, other Industries
are In a continuous process of finish
Ing goods for the markets; they dis
tribute as they produce, and they can
curtail production without too great
injury to themselves or the commit.
nifty; but II the farmer restricts his
output 1t Is With disastrous conse.
quences. both to himself and to the
community.
The average farmer Is busy with
production for the major part of the
year, and has nothing to SELL The
bulk of his output comes on the mar.
ket at once. Because of lack Of sfor.
age facilities and of financial support,
the farmer cannot carry his goods
through the year and dispose of them
as they are currently needed. In the
great majority OF cases. farmers have
to entrust storage-in warehouses and
eleyators--and the financial CARRYING
OF their products to others.
Farm products are generally mar.
keted at time when there IS con.
gestion OF both transportation and
fnance--when cars and money are
scarce. The outcome, In many In.
stances, Is that the farmers not only
sell under pressure. and therefore at
a disadvantage, but are compelled to
take further reductions In net returns,
in order to meet the charges for the
service of storing. transporting, financ.