288 RURAL MICHIGAN 



defined herein is declared to be unlawful, against 

 public policy and void." ^ 



These restrictions have been irksome to farmers as 

 to others who desire to secure better prices through 

 restrictive arrangements and cooperative selling. A 

 gubernatorial candidate, in the primary campaign of 

 1920, who claimed to represent the agricultural in- 

 terests, emphasized the need and desire of farmers to 

 enter into agreements for the purpose of enhancing 

 prices. "The state of Michigan," he said, "should 

 ffrant to the farmer the right to collective sale of his 

 products or collective buying of necessaries that he 

 may require for the farm. ... If two or more 

 farmers. in the neighborhood should meet and agree 

 to ship their potatoes together in a carload lot to 

 some buyer and agree upon a price that they would 

 demand for their potatoes, they could be sent to jail 

 for conspiracy. When the farmer shall be given the 

 right to do this so-called collective bargaining, it 

 will prove a great benefit to both farmers and con- 

 sumers in this country." In effect, farmers have 

 found a method of obtaining the advantages of coop- 

 erative selling within the law, through the establish- 

 ment of agencies whereby they deliver their products 

 to a common organization which disposes of them 

 on such terms as it deems best for the producer. Act 

 number 171 of the legislative session of 1903 pro- 

 vides that "any corporation organized under this act, 

 the purpose of which is not primarily or principally 

 for net pecuniary profit, but the objects of which re- 



' Compiled Laws of 1915, Sec. 15013. 



