Imperial Valley press., 1922-01-25

borrow on short time notes. His
turnover is rapid, and the money viii
come back in time to meet his short
term obligation. The merchant fin
ances his operations in the same way
But the farmer is in different case
His turnover period is a long one
his annual production is small COM
pared to the amount Of investment.
The need of better financial facil-
tiles for the farmer must be appar-
ent on the most casual consideration
of the profound divergence between
methods of financing agriculture and
other industries. The farmer who
owns his farm is capitalist, exccu-
tive and laborcr all in one. AS cap
! italist he earns the smaller return
on his investment. As executive, he
is little paid, and as laborer he is
greatly rnderpaid in comparison to
labor in other occupations.
In the matter of what may be called
fixed investment capital, the disad-
vantage of the farmer so strongly
impressed public opinion that a few
years ago the federal farm loan
bosrd was established to afford
better supplies OF capital for plant
investment and to insure moderate
interest rates. But while inquest
ionably farm finance has benefited,
the board has thus far not extended
its operations to the provisions of
working capital Cor the farmer as
distinguished from permanent invest
ment in the plant. There should be
developed thorough code of law and
business procedure, with the proper
Of finance, through some
agency to insure that the turnover
capital shall be as generously sup
piled to the farmer and on as reas.
enable terms as to other industries.
An industry, more vital than any
other, in which nearly half the ma
tion's wealth is invested can be relied
upon for good security and certain
returns.
The lines or which financial sup
port Of agriculture may be organized
are suggested in TIE plan of the
Federal Farm Loan Board and in
those rural finance societies which
have been so effective in some Euro
pean countries. The cooperative
loaning associations of Europe have
been. effective INCENTIVES to anitad
actions by farmers and have led them
directly into cooperation in both
production and marketing, which have
contributed greatly to the statiliza.
ton and prosperity of agriculture.
1t cannot be too strongly urged
that the farmer must be r,ady to
help himself. This conference would
do most lasting good if it would find
ways to impress the great mass of
farmers to avail themselves of the
best methods.
By this l mean that, in the last ar
alysis, legislation can do little more
tnan give the farmer the chance to
oraanize and help himself.
Take cooperative mark t ng,
American farmers are asking for: and
it should be possible to afford them
ample provision of law under which
they may carry on in cooperative
fashion, those business operations
which lend themselves to that method,
and which, thus handled, would bring
advantage to both the farmer and
his consuming public.
But when We shall have done this,
the farmers ,,lust become responsible
for doing the rest. They must learn
organization and the practical proceed
ures Of cooperation. These things
We cannot do for them, but we can
and should give them the chance to
do them for themselves.
With proper finan,<l support for
agriculture, and with instrumental
ties for the collection and dissemina
ton Of useful information, group of
CO. operative marketing organizations
wocld be able to advise their men,
bers as to the probable demand for
staples, and to propose measures for
proper limitation Of acreages in par
ticnlar crops.
The certainty that such scientific
distribution Of production was to be
observed, would strengthen the credit
Of agriculture and increase the secur,
ity on which financial advances coulc
be made TO it. The disastrous effect.
which arise from over production arr
notorious.
IL is apparent that the interest o,
the consumer, quite equally with tba
nf tho prOdlcer fonoanJc n,oac1Ires