Milford chronicle., 1957-07-05
MIR Farmers Vote
70 Retain Govt. Control

continued from page one)
pension, but ali testimony was
against it,
DR.. James E. Honan, assistant
manager Of Interstate Milk Pro-
Iucers' Cooperative, which protest.
ed suspension of the Order 81 on
behalf OF it's several thousand
members, said that the Secretary
3f Agriculture fixes only minimum
prices and that nothing IN the Mar
Keting Agreement Act, or the in
.ent % Congress, indicates that the
policy of the Act is not being ef-
.lectuated il producers, through bar
gaining or state orders obtain
prices above these minimums.
DR.. G. w. Pierce, marketing
specialist of the Pennsylvania
state University, testified that dis
orderly marketing conditions could
0e expected to develop if the fed
eral order were suspended, and
suggested that a committee be ap-
pointed to study the problem and
attempt to determine a reasonable
compromise on prices, terms of or
ders, and a method for keeping CO.
Ordinated orders in effect in the fu-
cure. recommendations of such a
committee, he said, would NOT be
binding on either the Pennsylvania
Commission or the U.S.D.A.
J. Collins McSparran, master OF
the Pennsylvania State Grange,
said the proposal to suspend Order
81 lis the most ridiculous, ILL
timed, and baseless proposal /
have ever heard. If this order is
suspended, Pennsylvania producers
will face either a drastic cut in the
price they receive for milk or the
complete loss of their markets for
milk, neither of which is warrant
ed, reasonable, or necessary"
DR.. George M. WorrilOw, Dean of
Agriculture at the University of
Delaware, and DR.. @. NJ. Beal, Pro-
fessor of Agricultural Economics
at the University of Maryland,
both testified as to- the probable
adverse affects on producers in
their states of any suspension of
Order 81 and urged continued fed
eral control of the Philadelphia
market, in which many producers
in their states sell their milk.
AL SaylOr. of the Pennsylvania
+ a r. m s Association; Harry
Rhodes of United Farmers, Ches-
ter County; and w. P. Sadler,
manager of Maryland Cooperative
Milk Producers and who was pre-
viously administrator of Order 81
flor II years, following II years
work as milk marketing specialist
of U.S.D.A., also testified in favor
Of retaining Order 81.
Mr.. AicSparran also objected to
the fact that although Depart
ment Of Agriculture hearing to
amend Order 81 ended in February,
1857, there has been no indication
of forthcoming decision, and said
II find it difficult to explain to
dairymen that the non-action of
the Dairy Division to amend Order
81 pricewise and areawise is not
part OF a master plan to either
force Order 81 into a market pool,
rather than a handler pool, or to
make it part of Order q, in the
New York Metropolitan area"
Lee H. Bull, deputy secretary of
agriculture, in Pennsylvania, point
ed out that dairy farming really is
~big business in Pennsylvania" :"
with 38 percent Of the 1856 farm
income coming from milk produc-
tion. He said his department made
NO Recommendation but asked
that any diversion from present
marketing practices be given very
careful consideration.
A. r. Marvel of Easton, Md, IN
ter-State president, declared the
suspension of Order 81, would be
very backward step in the mar
keting of milk in Philadelphia, and
1 see no reason why it should even
be considered"
DR.. Honan in his testimony said
that 20 percent of the milk used in
Philadelphia originates on farms
outside of Pennsylvania, with
about 1450 producers involved at
IA receiving stations owned and
operated by six Philadelphia deal
ers.
"Thus the facts which existed
when Federal milk marketing regu-
lation was established in 1941 are
present today" he said. There is