• s '■ 





■ . /• 



J 



L<l N OIS 



>Ah ASSOCIA 



To advance the purpose for which the Farm Bureau was or- 

 ganized namely, to promote, protect and represent the busi- 

 ness, economic, political and educational interest of the 

 ■farmers of Illinois and the nation, and to develop agriculture, 



Ge«rffe Thlem, Editor 

 John Tracy, AsHlstant 



Published monthly by the IlliDois Agricoltural ▲ssooiation at 165 So. 

 Ifais St., Spencer, Ind. Bditor«al Offices, 006 8. Dearborn St., Cbicaso, 

 111. Entered at second clasB matter at post office, Spencer, Ind. Accept- 

 ance for mailing at special rate of postage prorided in Section 412. 

 ' Act of Feb. 28, 1926. authorized Oct. 27. 1926. Address all communications 

 for publication to Editorial Offices, Illinois Agricultural Association Record, 

 •06 So. Dearborn St.. Chicago. The individual membership fee of the 

 Illinois Agricnltural Association is five dollars a year. The fee includes 

 payment of fifty cents for subscription to the Illinois Agricultural As- 

 sociation RBCORD. Postmaster: In returning an uncalled for, raissent copy, 

 please indicate key numbir on address as is required by law. 



OFFICERS 



President. Earl C. Smith .t*,,.^. .. ••«• t««* • • ^I^troit 



Vice-President, A. R. Wright .^r. ......:.. ..*. Tama 



Secretary Geo. E. Metager ._. . « * Chicago 



■Treasurer, R. A. Cowles Bloomingtoa 



BOARD or DIRECTORS 



..-,., \ •[!< . (By Congressional District) 



iat to 11th..... . , .t B. Harris, Grayslake 



12th. .: * . . . .E. B. Hongbtby, Shabbona 



18th C. E. Bamborough, Polo 



: Mth . . . . • . ; i Otto Steffey, Stronghurst 



16th M, Kay Ibrig, tioiflen 



16th Albert Hayes, Ohillicot<>e 



17th E. D. Lawrence, Bloomington 



18th Mont Fox, Oakwood 



19th Eugene Curtia, Champaign 



20th K. T. Smith, Greenfield 



21st Samuel Sorrells, Raymond 



22nd A. O. Eckert, Bellerille 



28rd W. L. Cope, Salem 



24th «. Charles Marshall, Belknap 



26th R. B. Endicott, Villa Ridge 



;^'>^ ^ DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS 



(^>oBiptroller . .•..........,.........••»...••••••••••••••••••••*• **• iveiK"r 



Dairy Marketing • «.«.'• • • • J* B. Oountiss 



Finance R. A. Cowles 



Fruit and Vegetable Marketing H. W. Day 



Information George Thiem 



Legal Donald Kirkpatrick 



Live Stock Marketing Ray B. M'Uer 



Office C. B. Johnaton 



(organisation ..••..•••.....•....••..•••.#..•...••»••.«•.•.•••▼• •' ■hiii*«m 



Produce Marketing F. A. Gongler 



Taxation and Statistics J. C. Watson 



Transportation Div'n G. W. Baxter 



ASSOCIATED ORGANIZATIONS 



Country Life Insurance Co L. A. Williams, Mgr. 



Farmers Mutual Reinsurance Co. \* J. H. Kelker, Mgr. 



Illinois Agricultural Auditing Ass*n F. E. Ringham, Mgr. 



Illinois Agricultural Mutual Insurance Co A. E. Richardson, Mgr. 



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



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



Illinois Grain Corp Harrison Fahrnkopf , Mgr. 



Illinois Livestock Marketin^r Ass*n Ray MlUer, Mgr. 



Illinois Producers Creameries. .F. A. Gongler, Mgr., J. B. Cointfss, Sales 

 Soybean Marketing Ass*n J. W. Armstrong. Pre*. 



?,.-". ■ ■ 









V : ? Vote for the Bond Issue ' ; > 



THE Board of Directors of the Illinois Agricultural 

 Association meeting in Chicago June 15 unani- 

 mously adopted the following resolution which is 

 of vital interest to all Illinois farmers and taxpayers: — 



In the election next November, the voters of Illinois 

 must choose between two methods of financing present 

 expenditures by the State for unemployment relief. One 

 is an additional State tax of $38,000,000 already levied 

 •n property, all payable in 1935. The other is an addi- 

 tional diversion of about $50,000,000 in gasoline taxes 

 from their proper use in financing much needed local 

 highway and street improvement and employment there- 

 for, such diverted funds to be used in retiring a proposed 

 State bond issue of $30,000,000 and paying interest there- 

 on. Approval of the proposed bond issue is the only way 

 of preventing the heavy additional State levy on property. 

 ;The Illinois Agricultural Association regards either one 

 of these methods of financing unemployment relief as 

 highly objectionable. In holding this position the As- 

 sociation is not opposed to, but favors proper measures 

 for relief of needy persons and for providing the means 

 therefor. It believes that every county and every commu- 

 nity alike should be enabled and required to use its own 

 resources reasonably before it is entitled to ask for as- 



sistance from the State or Federal government. In its 

 belief, any other system of unemployment relief will tend 

 inevitably to produce pauperism and to create a perma- 

 nent dole. Holding these views, the Association opposed 

 various relief measures in the regular and special sessions 

 of the present General Assembly and offered the Lantz 

 bills in lieu thereof. In particular it opposed the additional 

 State tax levy and bond issue bills enacted by the first 

 special session of the General Assembly last fall. It is 

 these measures between which the voters of the State 

 must choose next November. 



These measures having become law, the Association 

 was forced to choose between the two highly objection- 

 able alternatives. Its position was declared by the fol- 

 lowing resolution adopted by the delegates at the Dan- 

 ville annual meeting last January: 



"We commend the efforts of the legislative com- 

 mittee of the Illinois Agricultural Association in op- 

 posing legislation before the First Special Session of 

 the Fifty-Eighth General Assembly providing for an 

 increase of Thirty-eight million dollars ($38,000,000) in 

 the State tax levy upon property, coupled with the sub- 

 mission of a bond issue to the voters next November. 

 We are forced to recognize that this legislation has 

 been enacted and that unless the bond issue is approved 

 by the voters at the polls, the property taxpayers of 

 the State will be forced to meet and pay an increased 

 tax of $38,000,000 in 1935. We, therefore, favor the 

 passage of this bond issue when submitted but serve 

 notice that in the future, bond issues of this or a 

 similar character will have the determined opposition of 

 this organization, at least until such time as the Gen- 

 eral Assembly imposes equal and uniform responsibility 

 for poor relief upon every community and county of the 

 SUte.*' 



In accord with the provisions of the above resolution, 

 the Board of Directors authorize and request the officers; 

 of the Association, the Public Relations Committee and 

 the Department of Taxation to take such measures as may 

 seem necessary to secure the favorable votes of agri- 

 cultural people for the proposed bond issue. We further 

 authorize officers of the Association to cooperate with 

 representatives of other organizations in a State-wide 

 campaign to place these measures properly before the 

 people, reserving the right to explain our opposition to 

 enactment of these measures by the General Assembly. 



Acreage Reduction and Drouth 



THE "I-told-you-so" attitude of certain metropolitan 

 newspapers seeking to discredit the crop adjust- 

 ment program because of the drouth is not im- 

 pressive, to say the least. Little as most Chicago people 

 know about agriculture, they appear to be more intelli- 

 gent on this subject than some editorial writers. It is 

 obvious that the more acres planted in a year of crop 

 failure, the greater the loss to the farmer. Moreover, those 

 producers who signed contracts will receive benefit pay- 

 ments regardless of whether or not they grow anything. 



Such payments may be all the cash income many farm- 

 ers will have. The crop insurance feature thus becomes 

 a most valuable adjunct of the reduction program. 

 ' In sections of normal rainfall total production is not 

 seriously hampered because of a 15 to 20 per cent cut. 

 Such farmers will receive more dollars for the smaller 

 total crop than for a larger one anyway. Thus part, if 

 not all, the shocking disparity between farm and non- 

 agricultural prices may be removed. The critics of pro- 

 duction control fail to offer any plan to prevent crop 

 surpluses from impoverishing farmers. Apparently they 

 have no interest or concern in solving this mighty prob- 

 lem which is at the bottom of the depression.' 



r. 



o ■, 



8 



I. A. A. RECORD 



i \ 



' . •' :* • * 



