'•^--Sfe!!- 



. I. 1938, 



,1 Reinsur- 



1 cease to I 



insurance 



basis and 



[n, guaran- 



classes of 



lard rates for 

 t be increased 

 ossible climin- 

 ispection fees, 

 larged for fire 

 if ear policy is 

 r the old plan, 

 r the five-year 

 in advance, is 

 the cost under 

 :hedule. 

 tten for terms 

 e years. The 

 nore than one 

 ntial reduction 

 annual rate. 



Cooperative 



> 



Uc 



lutual setup o 

 ined under the 

 lolicy will be to 

 serves for the 

 icvholders and 

 the accumula- >, 

 )lus, after prop- jj 

 n set aside, the 

 or the payment 

 turn of any ex- | 

 the experience ., 

 warrant. Po • 1 

 company w'» , 

 ASSESSABLE i 

 ATING. Thu' 1 

 , closely that 

 „e among oth ' 

 hed hy the m- 

 ;ociation. 1 "*•( 





TlCCA "-'^ .■ ■■■■■.■■', ' . ^, ..■.,.;..... :f. . . 



\/.lCo-l7 



THf ILLINOIS AGRICULTURAL ASSOCIATION RECORD 



^^flMiw 



rm\ 



To advance the purpose for which the Farm Bureau was organized 

 namely, to promote, protect and represent the business, economic, political 

 and educational interests of the farmers of Illinois and the nation, and 

 to develop agriculture. 



JANUARY, 1938 

 VOL. 16 NO. 1 



\^ Published monthly by the Illinois Agricultural Asso- 

 X ciatioa at 1)01 West Washington Road, Mendota, 111. 

 /V<) Editorial Offices, 606 So. Dearborn St., Chicago, III. 



Entered as second class matter at post office. Mendota, 

 ^ Illinois, September II, 1936. Acceptance for mailing 

 Xat special rate of postage provided in Section 412, Act M 

 . Feb. 28, 1925, authorized Oct. 27, 1935. Addresa all 

 -^fommunications for publication to Editorial Offices, Illinois 

 . ; Agricultural Association RECORD. 608 So. Dearborn St., 

 . Chicago. The individual membership fee of the Illinois 

 r^ Agricultural Association is 6ve dollars a year. The fc« 



includes payment of fifty cents for subscription to the 

 ^X Illinois Agricultural Association RECORD. Postmaster : 



Send notices on Form 3578 and undeliverable copies 



returned under Form 3579 to editorial offices, 608 S. 



Dearborn St., Chicago, 111. 

 Editor and Advertising Director. E. G. Thiem ; Assistant 



Director and Ass't. Editor. Lawrence A. Pottex. 



Illinois Agricultural Association 



Greatest State Farm Organization in America 



OFFICERS 



Preiident, Earl C. Smith Detroit 



Vice-President, Talmage DeFrees Smithboro 



Corporate Secretary, Paul E. Mathias Chicago 



Field Secretary, Geo. E. Metzger Chicago 



Treasurer, R. A. CowLES Bloomington 



Ass't Treasurer, A. \ Wright. _...Varna 



BOARD OF DIRECTORS 



(By Congressional District) 



1st to 11th E. Harris, Grayslake 



12th E. E. Houghtby, Shabbona 



13th Leo M. Knox, Morrison 



I4th .Otto Steffey, Stronghurst 



15th M. Ray Ihrig, Golden 



16th Albert Hayes, Chillicothe 



17th C. M. Smith. Eureka 



18th Herman W. Danforth, Danforth 



19th Eugene Curtis, Champaign 



20th K. T. Smith, Greenfield 



21st Dwight Hart, Sharpsburg 



22nd A. O. Eckert, Belleville 



2}rd Chester McCord, Newton 



24th Charles Marshall, Belknap 



25th August G. Eggerding, Red Bud 



DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS 



Comptroller R. G. Ely 



Dairy Marketing _ Wilfred Shaw 



Field Service _ Cap Mast 



Finance R. A. Cowles 



Fruit and Vegetable Marketing. H. W. Day 



Legal and General Counsel Donald Kirkpatrick 



Live Stock Marketing Sam F. Russell 



OflTice. C. E. Johnston 



Organization G. E. Metzger 



Produce Marketing F. A. Gougler 



Publicity. George Thiem 



Safety. _ C M. Seagraves 



Soil Improvement John R. Spencer 



Taxation and Statistics J. C. Watson 



Transportation-Claims Division G. W. Baxter 



Young Peoples Activities - Frank Gingrich 



ASSOCIATED ORGANIZATIONS 



Country Life Insurance Co Dave Mieher, Sales 



Manager; Howard Reeder, Home Office Mgr. 

 Farmers' Mutual Reinsurance Co.. .J. H. Kelker, Mgr. 



Illinois Agr. Auditing Ass'n F. E. Ringham, Mgr. 



Illinois Agr. Mutual Ins. Co.. .A. E. Richardson, Mgr. 



Illinois Agr. Service Co Donald Kirkpatrick, Secy. 



III. Farm Bureau Serum Ass'n Ray E. Miller, Secy. 



Illinois Farm Supply Co L. R. Marchant, Mgr. 



Illinois Fruit Growers' Exchange... .H. W. Day, Mgr. 

 Illinois Grain Corporation.. Harrison Fahrnkopf, Mgr. 



III. Livestock Marketing Ass'n Sam Russell, Mgr. 



Illinois Milk Producers' Ass'n Wilfred Shaw, Mgr. 



Illinois Producers' Creameries.. .-F. A. Gougler, Mgr. 

 J. B. Countiss Sales Mgr. 



lANUARY, 1938 



.•us'^.r,: 



GEORGE THIEM, Editor 



i^ /7T seems to us that the 

 Ui future of the packing 

 V_>/ industry and in fact the 

 welfare of the American livestock 

 producer lies in reducing the cost 

 of production for the two-fold pur- 

 pose of supplying domestic consum- 

 ers with the quantity of meat which 

 they need to maintain their health 

 and strength at prices they can af- 

 ford to pay, and to enable us again 

 to compete in foreign markets. With 

 present livestock costs neither of 

 these objectives can be attained." 



So remarked Robert H. Cabell, 

 president of Armour and Co. in de- 

 livering his recent annual report. 

 Mr. Cabell would not have American 

 farmers make less profit; "on the 

 contrary we would like to see them 

 make larger profits and we believe 

 that if more study is given to the 

 matter of cost and if the results of 

 these studies are widely applied it 

 will be possible for our livestock 

 producers to increase their profits 

 while reducing the price level of 

 livestock," he continued. "A survey 

 in one of our corn-belt states showed 

 that hogs were being produced and 

 marketed at costs ranging from $4 

 per cwt. to $l4 per cwt." 



Mr. Cabell's plea, of course, is for full 

 capacity production of livestock on Amer- 

 ican farms which means much higher pro- 

 duction of feed grains and forage, too. 

 More livestock would give the packers 

 greater volume, increased profits (assum- 

 ing that they operate efficiently as the 

 farmers are urged to do) more employ- 



1 U9bbb3 



ment for labor, and lower price levels. 

 And the catch in this program is the last 

 mentioned, lower price levels. 



Now low price levels for farm products 

 may look desirable to the processor who 

 has far greater control over his costs of 



operation and selling prices than has the 

 livestock producer. And low prices would 

 look all right to farmers, too, if the fixed 

 charges and prices of things farmers buy 

 were down on a level of fair exchange 

 value. But — and this is a very large 

 but — the farmer is surrounded by a 

 wall of fixed artificial prices, protective 

 tariffs, rates, fees, commissions, taxes, 

 rents, interest, fixed wage scales, 40-hour 

 weeks and what not. All of these things 

 enter into the farmers' cost of production 

 and all of them are largely beyond his 

 control. 



So when the livestock producers are 

 urged to cut their costs of production and 

 become more efficient so as to reap great- 

 er profits, they are up against the same 

 problems as the packers; in fact they can 

 understand the language of G. F. Swift, 

 president of Swift and Co. who said in 

 his report: "We had expected to make 

 a much better showing than this but 

 higher operating costs due to increased 

 wages, higher livestock and other raw 

 materials costs made satisfactory profit 

 margins difficult." Farmers can't control 

 many of their costs and even the best 

 producers, in spite of all precautions, 

 lose pigs, lambs and calves and feed crops 

 from disease, drouth, floods, too cold or 

 too hot weather, and the like. 



This doesn't mean that there isn't 

 plenty of room for reducing the cost of 

 producing livestock on many farms. Il- 

 linois farmers have made notable progress 

 in this direction through swine sanitation 

 and better methods of feeding. It is 

 doubtful if Polish or Argentine farmers 

 are as efficient as the rank and file of 

 American farmers. But to expect all hog 

 growers to produce pork on the hoof at 

 $4 a cwt. is asking the impossible. One 

 top notch producer may do it one, two, or 

 even three years — and then blooey, in- 

 fection gets into his herd or flock, and 

 the jig is up. 



Farmers are willing to go ahead on a 

 12-hour day, seven-day week, JO-day 

 month, and 365-day year, farming to 

 capacity. But will industry and labor 

 match his effort, submit to free and open 

 competition with the world, let down the 

 immigration bars to foreign labor, level 

 the industrial tariff wall, break up in- 

 dustrial and labor monopolies, destroy 

 arbitrary price fixing, and get down on 

 a free for all level with agriculture? 

 Don't all speak at once. — E. G. T. 



