DeKalb Boy Wins Essay Contest 



/ 



HAIL 



|y." Hail 



what it 



or when 



isurance 



rorst yet 



je done. 



ou very 



policies 



farmers 



ortunate 



[sily de- 



at your 



against 



long — at 



Bureau County Lad Takes Second; Marshall- 

 > • Putnam Girl Third 



HARVEY SCHWEITZER, Jr. of 

 DeKalb county was awarded 

 first prize, a 17- jewel gold wrist 

 watch, by the state judging committee 

 for writing the winning essay in the 

 state lAA-Farm Bureau calendar 

 contest. He won first among a group 

 of nearly 500 entered in 26 County 

 Farm Bureau contests. The two best 

 essays from each county were entered 

 in the state contest. 



Young Schweitzer of Malta, DeKalb 

 county, chose for his subject "Co-op- 

 eration." Second prize was awarded 

 to Charles Norton, Neponset, Bureau 

 county, on his essay "The Reversal of 

 the AAA — A step Toward Organiza- 

 tion." Third prize went to Ruth Robin- 

 son, a student in the Sparland high 

 school of Marshall-Putnam county. 



The second and third prizes are a 

 leather traveling bag and a fountain 

 pen and pencil set respectively. 



Honorable mention went to Lulu 

 Bair, age 13, McLean county; Wayne 

 Johnson, age 13, DeKalb county; Vi- 

 vian Wolfram, Lee county; Charles 

 Certley, Stark county and Arman 

 Gaulrapp, Whiteside county. 



Won In County 



Writers of winning essays in county 

 contests entered in the state contest 

 are as follows: Earl Leng, Knox coun- 

 ty; Merle Payne, Wabash county; 

 Elizabeth E. Bussell, Marshall-Putnam 

 county; Elizabeth Ellen Risley, Wabash 

 county; Elvira Lois Stralow, White- 

 side county; Arthur Welsh, Clark 

 county; Gordon E. Thompson, Peoria 

 county; Aileen Primm, Menard coun- 

 ty; Daniel McNeff, Brown county; 

 Greta Anderson, Henry county; Ernest 

 Schottman, Effingham county; Emil 

 Welsh, Clark county; Dorothy Schu- 

 macher, Effingham county; Eileen 

 Bowton, Peoria county; Dorothy Pat- 

 terson, Winnebago county; Harry 

 Stonecipher, Marion county; Tracy 

 Snyder, Marion county; Bill Strahan, 

 Lake county; Guilford Fasse, Taze- 

 well county; Glenna Griewe, Brown 

 county; Helen Laboy. Kendall county; 

 Loran Gebhards, Menard county: 

 Daniel Moore, McLean county; Walter 

 Schultz, Macon county; Neil Reinerd, 

 Macon county; Frances M. Powell, 

 Moultrie county; Charles L. Johnson, 

 Edwards county: Marjorie Ruth Cow- 

 ling, Edwards county: Yvonne M. At- 

 kins, Winnebago county; Dale O. Smith, 

 Stark county; Mildred Howarter, Knox 



MAY, 1936 ■'■■^;/-^'-'M'v-.';;: VV-- '■"■' 



HARVEY SCHWEITZER. JR. 

 "He Wrote A Good Essay." 



county; William Edward Perisho, Edgar 

 county; Gene Heneberry, Moultrie 

 County; Pauline Metz, Ford county. 



Brown County Farm Bureau re- 

 ceived the most essays with the num- 

 ber totaling 74. Moultrie County Farm 

 Bureau was next with an entry of 52 

 essays. Commenting on the contest, 

 Farm Adviser E. H. Garlich, Brown 

 county, writes: "We feel that the con- 

 test was very much worth while. We 

 should sponsor another one next year." 

 Farm Adviser R. J. Laible, McLean 

 county, said: "We feel that the essay 

 contest which is sponsored every year 

 is quite worth while. We are glad to 

 co-operate." 



The essays were judged on original- 

 ity of thought and expression; ad- 

 herence of subject matter to chosen 

 subject; clarity, directness, choice of 

 words; accuracy of diction, effective- 

 ness of sentence structure; and neat- 

 ness and legibility. The source of ma- 

 terial was the 1936 lAA-Farm Bureau 

 calendar. 



The first prize essay follows: 



Co-operation 



By Harvey Schweitzer Jr., DcKalb 

 County. 



THE farmer of today is confronted 

 with a great problem: a problem 

 new to us, but one that has been 

 known ever since the creation of the 

 lowest creatures. The wolf, finding 



that game could be secured better by 

 the pack than by the individual, solved 

 this problem of cooperation or organ- 

 ization. This spirit of co-operation 

 caused the savage Indian to live in 

 tribes, our Pilgrim fathers to settle to- 

 gether, and our modern industries to 

 form companies. 



The progressive farmer has sensed 

 the importance of co-operation, and is 

 squarely facing the issue. Farm Bu- 

 reaus and similar farm organizations 

 have been formed to co-operate with 

 the farmer in solving the problems of 

 the day. These organizations have 

 firmly established the fact that co-op- 

 eration is the watchword of the "new" 

 farmer. 



These new farmers have gone one 

 step farther. They have found that co- 

 operation aids not only in their political 

 influence, but also in their financial 

 and social affairs. The chief indication 

 of this new policy is the appearance 

 of co-operative markets, such as farm- 

 er-owned creameries, elevators and 

 hatcheries throughout the state. Just 

 what is gained by these co-operative 

 markets? In the first place, the farmer 

 can buy his supplies at a lower cost. 

 The secret of this lies, not in inferior 

 quality, but in bulk. By co-operating 

 and buying feed by the carload, farm- 

 ers can cut the cost materially. Second- 

 ly, by controlling the quality of their 

 produce, they can obtain premium 

 prices by selling to reliable distribu- 

 tors. Besides these commercial gains, 

 co-operation gives the farmer a voice 

 in public affairs and enriches his life 

 by social fellowship. 



Is It Not Practical? 



Unfortunately, however, a vast num- 

 ber of farmers either do not know 

 about co-operation or are not inter- 

 ested. But is it not pract'cal? Has it 

 not been proved over and over that 

 co-operation is essential in every in- 

 dustry? Imagine how far a manufac- 

 turing firm could go if employers and 

 emplovees refused to co-operate. In 

 my opinion, pick a farmer who upholds 

 a co-operative system, and you have 

 a man who will succeed when other 

 men faiL Look at this man's system of 

 farming, his buildings, his land, his 

 produce, and I think you w'll find them 

 sui>eriQr to those of the non-co-opera- 

 tive man. 



What does all this mean? Simply 

 that times are changing, consumers' 

 demands are different, new problems 

 are arising, and we. the farmers of 

 America, can meet these new condi- 

 tions if we cooperate. •: . •• . 



