The Waterbury Democrat., 1932-05-26

The proposal of the three In. cornufAtors of the Farmers Na- tIorinl. Inc, of Norwich, to organ. ige fhe dairy farmers Of Connecu- cut and all states east Of tho MS. .l.slnni River on the basis Of a jabor union to demand higher pricen for milk, is drawing consid- erable criticism from Commits nIoner of Agriculture &. Mclean BucklnRham, of Wntertown. anu other agricultural leaders.
 Commissioner Buckingham finds that efforts to organize farmers unions have been economically un- sound and history has proved them to be q failure. Hc urges all ue'Iy farmers to communicate with ,he,r Farm Bureau, tho Extension sorv, ice of the Connecticut AgricuIturn' uieta information about tho new orennixation before parting with any hard earned money for mem bership fees.
 The most recent Announcement of the policies and claim ot tne Fnrmers National. Inc. has come from the Economies Department of Connecticut Agricultural COT loge. The statement shows No completely tho fallacy of this ven. turo that 1t Is printed in full aS follows: n.
 "An organization is being pro- noted among dairy farmers, par. tIcuinrly in the eastern part or tne state. tho stated object of which is to enabio farmers to secure what ever price for their milk they con. sider to bo fair and sufficient to cover the costs of pr2duction anu yield n fair profit to farmers. VT der tho plan proposed, hs ou.. lined in meotings which nave peem hold. n large proportion of all dairy farmbra in twenty-six states east of the Misslssippi River aro to be enrolled and their representatives are to set the price which VIII DC uniform price for all farmers due allowance being given to vary. ing costs of production In different regions. a m new plnn of merchandising, mas outlined no provisions for handling surniuH other than those exIBtinR nt present and no surplus price poll. ~. Rather it proposes to arrive at n common price by agreement among the producers. lt states thnt it will depend for tho mnln- tenance of this price upon tho ao. tlon of individual producers who arc expected to refuse to sell bciow tho stated price.
 aFarmer sentiment and tho no' operation of labor unions weIu cited as two of tho means to De ,,sad 10 keen cut.price milk off the market, If the higher prico re' ducos the consumption of milk. faVrrsrs are to Do expected 10 thtpw away their surplus milk, to utiifke 1t for other pfirposes or re- dlfoo their production. Tho plan IN essentially ono of making price Dy ngrecmcnt depending on tho com. plute cooperation of the hundreds or3thousnnds of dairy farmers in ,nairtnining the price,, Farmers n nx expected to pay smem bershlp feae of sii to gain this consldern- ton and s5.000 annual dues thorc- after.
 sTf the history of farmer exper,;, lefsce in cooperation since tho Clvll WAT to tho present time means anything, n plan such as this can nok be expected Co succeed or nave any significant effect on the pr'co of milk. ,..
 "It mhTkeuIy UbBuV' p'S" y. milk were established, not only would farmers now in business cer. talnly produce more milk, but new farmers would enter the business and largely increasing volumes ot surplus would tend to create sit. nation even worse than tho present one, This tendency would Do nc. ccntuated by the relatively low prfcen of nlI other farm productb' There, is no apparent probability, however, that such prices can DO established. TO establish them would require tho cooperation or hundreds of thousandss Of dh'ry- men. each of whom would have to dektroy or use for butter. cheese, or cream, large quantities Of mix which presumably would he com nandlng n high price on the mar
 T'To expect farmers 10 do this Is contrary to ali experience. TWO thirds of a century Of American experience in farmer organization in the United states shows tho fu- tliity and disaBtrous effects upon the farmer of all serious attempts tolmaintain tho prices of any farm product nt q higher level than the economic price. that ls, the price growing out of the facts or me supply. .demand conditions mat prevail.