The midland journal. (Rising Sun, Md.) 1885-1947, 1933-03-10
FARM BUREAU SAYS FARM
ERS- ARE MISLEADING
THEMSELVES

4tA-AAO1 me = eAAA fVeNAAAA9 tOOOA OSe~AJ
Treasurer OF The Maryland
F Issues Warning Again
st Movement To Elimi-
nate County Agents
Aroused to what he believes
to be a mistaken idea of econ
omy on the part of the county
tax relief committees in advo-
eating, among other things,
the removal of the office of
county agricultural agent,
Miles H. Fairbank, Secretary
Treasurer of the Maryland
Farm Bureau Federation, is
sued a warning this week to
the farmers in Maryland to
consider carefully all angles
before endorsing a program
that provides for the elimina-
ton of the Office of the county
agricultural agent.
Certainly" stated Mr.. Fair
bank, latter the campaign the
Farm Bureau conducted in the
interest of tax relief for the
farmers in Maryland. which is
now being successfully cul-
minated at Annapolis, no one
can question my sincerity or
the sincerity of the organiza-
ton l represent, in our endea-
vor to get real tax relief for the
farmers of this state. But, /
must confess, / am at a loss to
understand how any county,
Interested in the welfare of it's
farmers, can recommend the
adjustment of the office of the
county agent without consider
ing the several angles involved
and the very fractional effect
such a saving would have on
the county tax rate"
"The Extension Service" he
continued, "has an educational
junction and it is on that basis
chat many farmers and county
leaders have permitted them
selves to believe it could be dis
pensed with in thtse distress
sing times with no conse-
quence or inconvenience to the
farmers. But this is only part
truth. The county agent rep
resents a service" which the
farmers need today whether
they realize it or not. This
need would become distressing
ly apparent if the service in its
entirety should be removed.
Farmers should not forget that
the consuming public has de-
veloped unusual demands with
in the past few years. Cities
are demanding milk produced
under highly sanitary condi-
tons, from tuberculer tested
cows. They are demanding in
spected meat, graded fruit,
sprayed apples, etc. The farm
er had nothing to do with the
development of this demand,
but he has to recognize it re-
CARELESS. And yet the only
service that he has, at the
present time, to help meet
these problems is through the
county agent.
Nor has nature been kind to
the farm in recent years. We
have plant diseases, insects and
other natural problems that
were unknown to our fathers.
Every county agent has been
working on these in his coun-
ty and there are farmers who
may not have a speaking ac-
quaintance with the county
agent ana yet are Delng mater
tally benefited by the work he
is doing. But this is not the
S trong st argument. The
strongest argument is that, in
agreeing to this movement, the
farmer is simply carrying out
his age-old policy of letting the
other fellow get his, while the
farmer stands in the back
ground.
No one will deny that the
county agent is a government
service. But is not the farmer
entitled to some service from
the government for his partic-
ular problems as are other in
dusrties? Consider this for a
moment. Eighty per cent of
all tariffs are applicable to
non-agricultural products and
when a farmer buys a pair Of
shoes or piece of farm machin-