COOPERATIVES, 1920-32 305 



sternation of the Farmers' Union, sought to dominate the cooperative 

 livestock-marketing trade regardless of the older agencies that already 

 were in the field. When the Farmers' Union houses refused to merge with 

 it, complications developed. 



This opposition did not stop the Committee of Fifteen from sponsoring 

 its producers' system with vigor. Its first energies were directed to the 

 East St. Louis market as early as August, 1921, three months before the 

 livestock plan of the committee had been ratified. No cooperative com- 

 mission firm had yet been established on this market, the only important 

 unorganized one, but the Missouri Farmers' Association had been prepar- 

 ing to do so for quite some time. The Missouri Farmers' Association had 

 perfected such a plan as early as 1920, but withheld it until legislation was 

 passed that would permit cooperative terminal associations to disburse 

 patronage dividends. When the legislation was finally passed in 1921, the 

 Missouri Farmers' Association decided to carry out its plan to erect an 

 East St. Louis agency; and when the Farm Bureau Committee of Fifteen 

 announced its intentions, both the Farmers' Union and the Missouri 

 Farmers' Association took exception and proceeded to organize their 

 firm, which began operations on November 16, 1921. 



The producers' house, sponsored by the Committee of Fifteen, began 

 its business activities on the same market on January 3, 1922. This in- 

 evitably led to an exchange of harsh words, but in due time it was found 

 out that an ample supply of livestock was available for both firms. By 

 the end of the sixth week, the producers' house was one of the most impor- 

 tant firms on the East St. Louis market. 



For the remainder of 1922 the producers' group concentrated its atten- 

 tion on its East St. Louis house. A period of five months elapsed before 

 another agency was established. The reasons for the delay were to permit 

 the controversy between the Missouri Farmers' Association and the pro- 

 ducers' association to cool off, to place the East St. Louis house on a suc- 

 cessful footing, and to consider carefully all other markets before another 

 location was selected. 



The fears of the older organizations, however, were not stilled. William 

 Hirth, the president of the Missouri Farmers' Association, charged that 

 the producers' group contemplated entering the Kansas City, Omaha, 

 Denver, and St. Joseph markets, places in which the Farmers' Union had 



