The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1923-04-20
MARKETING Plan
URGED IN INDIANA
New Cooperative Scheme
Favored By Governor
AFTER NEW MODEL
State EYecIItiue Vetoed Meas
State Executive Vetoed Meas
ure, Not Felt Would Help
The Farmers
ASSOCIATED Press Dispatch. ]

indianapolis, April 11.-Governor
Warren r. McCray of Indiana hopes
that out of this state may come the
model cooperative marketing law
for farmers of the middle west. He
vetoed a measure, known as the CO.
operative marketing act, which was
passed by the Indiana legislature,
recently adjourned, and now pro-
poses a committee to draft model
cooperative marketing law.
Governor McCray owns and farms
5000 acres of Indiana prairie land
and in explanation Of his veto, de-
clared that the bill would hurt those
intended to be helped. Half OF the
provisions Of the bill were singled
out by the governor as objection
able" and furthermore u. 5. Lesh,
attorney general of Indiana, declar-
ed the bill, as a whole, unconstltu-
tional
Committee Practical Farmers
The governor proposes a commit
tee OF practical farmers, agricuItur-
al experts, legislators and authori-
ties on constitutional law to create
the model law. He suggests that
enough farmers be on this commit
tee to give them the deciding voice.
The farmers of the middle west"
declared the governor, need a law
first that is fair to them, and hope
to have such a bill ready for the
next legislature in time for every
one to have an opportunity to study
It, and know what 1t contains, so
that no one need be captlvated by
the title as was the case in the one
just vetoed
az am a farmer and | favor the
principle of cooperative marketing,
properly safeguarded, but | know
only too we'll some Of the past eX-
periences Of the farmer, such as
that with elevators a decade back;
with the scoop shovel corn move
ment that followed, and with some So
called cooperative marketing agen-
cies that seem to have disappeared
after the farmer paid his fee to the
promoters. AS a farmer I know that
farming has been profitable to some
one other than the farmer.
Il firmly believe il the drastic
provision Of the proposed act had
been incorporated into law that true
cooperative marketing would have
been set back. at least twenty years.
AS between those who might con-
der it, and the producers entering
into the marketing contract with
such associations, there was no ball
ance between the powers conferred
and the obligations imposed. Three
persons or more, according to the
proposed law, might form an asso-
citation with or without capital stock;
the producers entering the associa-
ton might be tied to 1t for ten years
and everything he produced would
go to the association for marketing.
Has Jail Sentence
"a farmer joining with an associa-
ton and later failing TO market all
he produced through 1t could not
only be fined, hut sent to Jail. There
was no limit to the amount of debts
which the association might incur,
and for the payment Of which the
marketing members farm rs) might
be made liable. On the other hand,
there were no obligations imposed on
the associations to account to the
marke citing members for their just
and equitable share Of any profits
that might be derived from the sale
of their products. Anyone now in
business dealings with farm products
could not under the proposed law.
even offer to buy the products of
farmer who belongs to an association
without being subject to jail"
Apparently Governor McCray's
program for drafting the model law
will not have the support Of the In
diana Farm Bueau Federation
which backed the bill he vetoed.
President W. H. Settle, Of this or
ganization. has announced that he
would not confer with the COVER
nor to arrange for drafting new
bill. The farmers, according to Mr..
Settle are "disgruntled' by the
veto. He said the bill had the ap
prevail of recognized national farm
bureau men