Evening star., 1926-01-24
JARDTNE HOLDS FARMER
FAILS TO GET FULL SHARE
Secretary Believes Conditions Have
Improved, But Are Still
Unsatisfactory.

! ton in part to the highest degree or
efficiency in the orSaniZa tion ana
opera ton of the individual farm. and
in part to the reduction of overhead
costs such as taxes, interest and the !
like MANY Of our present farm prom
lens are economic in nature. ana
propose to strengthen the research
work Of the department. particularly /
in the field of agricultural economies
and co-opera tive marketing.
Q. Do YOU agree that the farmer
gets only one third of the consumers
dollar for the products he sells To him
A General statements of this KIND
often are miSlea ding. As matter OF
fact. the farmer gets 100 cents OF
the consumers dollar when he sells
his products nom a roadside stand.
On the other hand. there are times
when he doesn't get a cent Of the
consumers dollar on products con
signed 10 market. In other words.
the amount of the consumers dollar
absorbed in the distribution of asrl-
cultural products varies widely 10
Illustrates: SiXty-fOUr per cent OF the
Chicago consumers dollar for Wis
consin potatoes in the season or
1929 was absorbed in wholesale,
jobhing and retail costs within III"
city The combined iobbiuc and re
tail margin for Il important fruits
and vegetables in New York City IN !
1923 amounted 70 about A. per cent of
the final retail price. In general. it is
true that a large part Of the con
sumer's dollar goes to defray costs "t
distribution and does not reach the
farmers pocket.
system of Distribution.
O. Do you condemn the present sys-
tenn of distribution rs the worst
system of mark citing in the world
a. our system Of distribution. with
out doubt needs oVerhauling, but | !
can't think that il is the worst in
the world" In some respects it is eX
ceedincly efficient. On the other hand, ,
there are marked Weaknesses in our
methods of marketing. as. for eN-
ample the sale of products in crop J.
lots" which must he graded before
they are suited to the needs of con-
slimers: the shipment Of low grade
products to markets where there is /
no demand for them: the dumping Of !
products in quantities much in excess
Of the demand. thus producing mar
ket glrItS: and then. of course. there
are many unSa tiStactorN retail .
methods which add to the waste and .
cost Of distribution. /
q. What Improvement could he ef
feCted in the system?
u
made but II is my opinion that more
can be accomplished through the de-
Velopment of We'll mana ced farmers
cooperative associations than in any /
other way. Such organization can
assist their members better Ia adjust
their production to meet marker
needs. help improve the quality of
farm. products and promote their
standardiza ton. develop methods of
the better utilization Of low grade
products an6 bring about the distri-
button of products To those markets
where most needed. All Of these serV-
ices Will tend To decrease the wastes
and costs in our present distribution
me hods There may he some doubt.
however. that the preset; high cost
of retail distribution car he greatly
reduced so long as con 'umsrs con
tinue to demand such y'tce range Of
Ser' ices az at present.
No Danger of Trust
@ If the farmer develops CO.
operative organization for 1he market
ing Of his product. Will this lead to a
restriction of production and pos
sihle farmers trust? That has tecp
the tendency of all organizatio that
have united in common interest
A. | can see no danger of Co-opera-
tive associations unduly enhancing
prices by the restriction of production.
The Capper-N olstead act gives the
Secretary of Agriculture power to
deal with such a stu" ton If it should
arise. But T feel con tident that eco
nomic forces VIII serve as an auto
matte check on any tendency OF this
kind. Although 800. 600 farmers are
now members of cooperative market
ing associations. il must he remem-
hered that they are producing as indi- !
Viduals. Does il seem reasonable Ia
suppose that more than 5000 600
farmers in the United States could !.
ever come together on program of
restricting production to the point
where prices would he unduly en-
hanceG?
This suggestion of q farmers trust.
! suspect DR.. .Iardine said in con-
clusion. grew out of an erroneous
comparison Of agriculture with in /.
dustrN. IT is possible for compare
lively few men to regulate the pro-
duction of an industrial commodity.
No such control is possible in agri-
culture. The plans of AT least 5000
GEO farmers affect the wheat crop and
the natural hazards OF weather. in
Sects and diseases are additional fac
tors Of uncertainty with which in
dustry does not have to contend
Furthermore The farm is not only
producing plant. but home The
farmer cannot close it up' and move
away. and so long as he is living on
the land he will tend to keep the farm
producing To its capacity. As A mat
ter OF fact one of the most effective
means of restricting production is low
prices for agricultural products Con-
! tnHed low prices will not only bring
about q reduction in acreage but
: lower fertility OF farm Ia nds. depreci-
alton IN farm buildings and eo,lip- ,
i ment. all of which mean lowered pro +
duction. 1t should he obvious that CO. !
operative associations are working for
the opposite results"