COOPERATIVES, 1920-32 297 



and the secretary $12,000. Loud protests arose and in due time downward 

 revisions were made. 



The membership of the organization grew, but so did its expenses and 

 problems. Money was borrowed from farm bureaus, country elevators, 

 and other sources. Practically everything that was accomplished was the 

 result of a compromise between the conservatives, who favored a slow and 

 economical progress, and the radicals, who wanted a large-overhead organ- 

 ization. Expense was a secondary matter to the latter group. The conserva- 

 tives felt that the resources of the organization were being dissipated, while 

 the radicals were critical of the lack of progress. 



At the first annual meeting of the United States Grain Growers, these 

 differences flared into the open. When the conservatives saw the un- 

 used office space and the list of unpaid employees to whom the company 

 owed thousands of dollars, they demanded an explanation. A group of the 

 dissatisfied delegates and their friends held a meeting the night before the 

 convention was to assemble and formulated plans. Board members were 

 called in and questioned; a determination to clean house followed; men 

 who were responsible for the "extravagant" policies were not to be re- 

 elected. 



During the convention little was heard about cooperative grain mar- 

 keting; it was a political affair, with most of the time being spent on 

 securing control of the convention. When the treasurer's report was com- 

 pleted, events came to a head. A deficit of $102,524 was shown; doubtful 

 assets were listed as $141,000; current liabilities totaled $336,080; the mem- 

 bership stood at about fifty thousand. 24 



To many it had become apparent that too much time had been spent 

 in compromising. One faction led by the Illinois Agricultural Associa- 

 tion notified the president of the company that the funds borrowed from 

 the association had to be repaid at once. It was further evident that a new 

 board of directors would have to be elected "in whom everyone would 

 have complete confidence," and that a sales agency would have to be 

 established soon if the company was to be saved. President C. H. Gustaf- 

 son was re-elected and his supporters, who won control, promised to have 

 the sales agency in operation in ninety days. 25 



24. Filley, Cooperation in Agriculture, pp. 152-55; Steen, Cooperative Marketing, 

 pp. 220-23. 



25. American Farm Bureau Federation Weekly News Letter, March 23, 1922, 



