Evening star., 1925-07-24

Why did the farmers reject the elab-
crate cooperative system of Chicago's
S26 900 900 Grain Marketing Corpora
ton? Lack Of faith in the leadership
of Chicago bankers and dealers Is the
answer given by most Of the comment
from the grain-growing sections. Other
observers think high prices make the
farmer too complacent.
Perhaps" suggests the Little Rock
Arkansas Democrat. "the fly in the
butter was the natural suspicion that
the average farmer has for a project
which apparently Is devoted entirely
to his welfare. Perhaps the farmer
made a study of the natural law Of
supply and demand, looked over pro-
duction figures for the Canadian wheat
crop, took q further look at some or
the salaries to be paid leaders of the
project and decided that instead Of
putting his money in such a plan
he would keep it in the old woolen
sock" a
The Akron Beacon-Journal declares
that in leaderships the movement was
too close to the Chicago wheat pit and
to the grain and beef companies to
inspire much confidence from the
prairies, and in the same vein the
Great Falls Tribune says:
"The farmer, we believe, was inclined
to look out Of the corner of his eye
when large grain firms and bankers
sat down to arrange a solution. While
there was considerable farmers sup
port for the proposition, it didn't have
enough general appeal. We think the
grain firms and the bankers who were
trying to arrange this matter did not
have the proper advance agent. The
plan that may finally succeed will
have to originate somewhere else
Evidently the project did not ap-
peal to the grain growers themselves
as an attractive investment or as an
industrial experiment, is the Judg'
ment Of the Kansas City Journal. In
! Indiana, according to the Lafayette
Journal and Courier, "the scheme was
branded officially as unsound hnanc-
| ing, and the same verdict in other
States prevented the promoters from
reaping the harvest Of dollars that had
been anticipated"
~ * X
Blame is placed upon politics by the
Sioux Falls Argus-Leader. Literally
all kinds of politics." asserts the Sioux
Falls paper, were mixed up in the
scheme from the first A agricultural
politics, banking politics. board of
trade politics and plain everyday poll
tics. The advice frequently given in
these columns for farmers to learn
how TO cooperate still holds. 1t in
cludes not merely the ability to get
along harmoniously with neighbors
and other co-workers, but 1t demands
a high degree of intelligence in pick
ipc ipsDired leaders" ."
"It is to be feared" suggests the
Lansing State Journal, that the grain
farmers as a class have the excessive
| ly human falling of being much ex-
cited over their affairs when things
are not going right and rather com.
placent when all is well. If wheat
| had not sold at an extremely satisfac-
tory figure last Winter and did not
show fair promise for the coming crop,
it might have been easier to interest
| the farmers in the management OF
their own grain concern. Evidently
| the process Of education must be con-
tinued, because it is extremely doubt.
| full whether the unjust spread OF
prices between that secured by the
original grower and that paid by the
ultimate consumer can be so quickly
cured by any other method as by CO.
| operative marketing. But to get its
help they must show that they are
willing to help themselves" The
Christian Science Monitor contends
| that the collapse of the plans for or
ganizing an independent cooperative
| association. to, be operated for the
benefit Of the grain growers instead