No. 7. DEPARTMENT OE AGItKT'LTIRE. 337 



lute platfoiiu. For tliis reason 1 have been taking up in one of 

 my topics some things which come to the farmer as a duty. Some 

 of these duties come to him as a farmer in his relationship to other 

 farmers; some of tjiem come to him as a citizen in his relationshi]) 

 to his felJow-men. He has no right to sliirk these duties. Their 

 number is great. I shall mention but a few of them. 



First, though not most important, it is his duty to interest him- 

 self in the subject of farmers' organizations. These are of various 

 classes but I will mention first co-operative organizations. These 

 may take different forms; first, that of co-operative production, rej)- 

 resenting in many phases, from the simple ownership of an implement 

 or a sire by two neighbors to the co-operative com])any which owns a 

 creamery or a canning factory. The result of these organizations 

 has not always been satisfactory, sometimes due to one cause, some- 

 times to another; but often, in the case of creameries and canning 

 factories, the plant has been established at the solicitation of a 

 jjromoter concerned not with the success of the undertaking but 

 with securing the greatest possible price for the equipment furnished. 

 At other tim^s failure has resulted through the lack of good business 

 management. When established on a proper financial basis, with 

 men of good business sense in control, the results have usually been 

 good. 



A second form of co-op-erative organizations is represented by co- 

 ojjerative selling, best illustrated ])erliaj)S by the first-shipping asso- 

 ciations of the far West. This form of organization is less imjjortant 

 io us in the Eastern states owing to our closer j^roximity to mar 

 kets and the better opportunities offered for individual sales. Yet 

 this brings us face to face with the great problem of distribution, 

 one which has called for more attention than it has yet received 

 from farmers and those interested in agricultural welfare. One 

 of our leading agricultural journals has for some time been discus- 

 sing Ihis matter and has arrived at the conclusion that under average 

 conditions the farmer receives about 35 cents out of the dollar which 

 tlie consumer ]>ays for his products, the remainder going to the 

 carrier and the handler. Recently President Yoakum, of the Frisco 

 l.ines, in discussing these problems, has cited .some definite in- 

 stances which serve well as illustrations. He says that the Florida 

 truck grower receives |!2.25 for a crate of beans; the railroad re- 

 ceives no cents for the 800 mile haul to the New Y^'ork market; the 

 dealers receive $3. (55 and the consumer pays $6.40. In other words 

 35 per cent of this price goes to the grower, 8 yjer cent, to the rail- 

 road and 57 ])er cent, to the dealer. Is this distribution equitable? 

 During the last winter eggs have sold in Arkansas and Missouri for 

 15 cents a dozen; freight to New York is 2 cents a dozen. The con- 

 sumer pays :U) cents for the eggs and the dealer receives 13 cents 

 of that amount. The rice farmer of the (Uilf states receives 24 cents 

 a pound for his rice; the railroad receives ^ cent for the haul to 

 New Y'ork; the dealer receives 7 cents a jiound for handling and 

 the con.sumer pays 10 cents a pound. These may be exceptional illus- 

 trations, 3'et they represent in a general way conditions as they 

 exist. The middleman is a necessary ]jart of modern business; he 

 cannot be eliminated, yet the ])roblem of a more equitable distribu- 

 tion of returns needs study and solution. 



22—7—1910 



