EDITORIAL 



■ 



reflects changes in the price level, changes in the quantities 

 purchased, and changes in the average size of farm," the 

 report explains. 



It would be incorrect to say that farmers did not make 

 money in 1943, but it is equally false to consider gross in- 

 come and fail to make allowances for increased costs of 

 production when a fair estimate of farm income is being 

 made. 



Victory After the War 



THE highest duty of American farmers, next only to con- 

 tinued production effort for victory in war, is to do all 

 that is humanly possible to prevent a postwar agricul- 

 tural disaster. 



The glorious exploits of our sons and daughters in 

 France and other war theatres are bringing the victory 

 of farms nearer with each day. History is repeating itself 

 in the desertion of Germany's allies, and in the signs of a 

 crackup of her once great military machine. Farmers have 

 contributed mightily to this result through all-out food pro- 

 duction. That, too, is a repetition of history. 



Will history as enacted in 1919, 1920 and 1921 also 

 repeat itself? Will a farm debacle, such as occurred then, 

 take place in a greater or lesser degree.' That is something 

 for farmers not only to think about, but to plan against, 

 and to take positive action to prevent. 



Victory after the war can be achieved only through or- 

 ganization. Farmers must be strong enough, during the re- 

 conversion period, and during the years of adjustment that 

 follow, to insist upon fair hearing and fair treatment at the 

 hands of government and governmental agencies. Sound 

 price policies, production adjustment policies, wage poli- 

 cies, employment policies, relief policies — all these and 

 more must be had if an agricultural depression is to be 

 avoided. 



Adequate farm representation at Washington and 

 elsewhere depends upon just one thing: the strength and 

 militancy of farm organizations. If the duly constituted 

 leaders of agriculture can speak with the voice of millions 

 of individuals behind them, they will be in a position to 

 obtain sound policies and sound administration of them. 



It is encouraging in thinking of this problem to note 

 that the American Farm Bureau Federation's Million Mem- 

 ber drive is making real progess. 



It is encouraging also to note that in Illinois, home of 

 the largest state farm organization, with over 105,000 

 members, County Farm Bureaus in every section of the 

 state are working for still greater membership. 



The long range goals set last winter and spring by all 

 97 Illinois County Farm Bureaus will, when achieved, 

 bring membership in Illinois over 118,000. That these 

 goals will be reached is evident from the vigorous efforts 

 now being made, and others now being planned, for this 

 fall and winter. 



The loyal, conscious, informed Farm Bureau direc- 

 tors, volunteer workers, and other members could make 

 no greater contribution to a stable, prosperous postwar ag- 



26 



riculture — and thus to a stable, prosperous post-war na- 

 tion — than to achieve these membership goals before an- 

 other September has gone. 



Let's have not only victory in war. 



Lets go "all out' for VICTORY AFTER THE 

 WAR. 



Surplus War Land 



RECENT proposal of the government to sell some 3449 

 acres of Sangamon Ordance plant land brought farmers 

 face to face with the first reconversion problem in the 

 agricultural field. 



As the matter now stands, the proposed sale has been 

 postponed until Congress has fixed a policy of disposal of 

 surplus war real estate. Such postponement was brought 

 about largely by the failure or the refusal of surplus war 

 property officer of the Office of War Mobilization to 

 offer these lands first to their former owners at the price 

 paid by the government for respective parcels of land, ad- 

 justed only to cover any damage or benefit to the property 

 during the period of ownership by the government. 



First reports of the proposed sale of land in July in- 

 dicated that it would be advertised for sale on a basis of 

 sealed bids without any prior rights for former owners. 

 The Farm Bureau strenuously objected to this procedure 

 and asked that former owners be first given an opportunity 

 to repurchase their land and that the government develop 

 a constructive, long-range policy on the disposal of all 

 such land. 



The surplus war property officer then adjusted the 

 proposal to provide for offering the land to former owners 

 at federally appraised values and if not purchased by Aug. 

 1 5 to call for sealed bids on the land. This resulted in much 

 dissatisfaction as in many cases the federally appraised 

 value was substantially in excess of the amount paid by the 

 government for the land even though improvements such 

 as fences had been removed and in some cases the land 

 seriously affected by the manner in which it had been 

 handled. 



At the present time Congress is working on a pro- 

 gram for the government sale of war surplus land, and the 

 Farm Bureau has made two recommendations which it be- 

 lieves should be the basis for any adequate legislation gov- 

 erning such sales. 



These recommendations are: 



( 1 ) That the land first be offered for resale to the 

 former owners from whom it was purchased at the price 

 paid by the government, adjusted for any damage or value 

 of added improvements. (This provision is included in the 

 Colmer bill which has passed the House of Representa- 

 tives. ) 



( 2 ) If the former owner does not exercise this oppor- 

 tunity to repurchase, then the land to be advertised and sold 

 at public auction within the country where located in eco- 

 nomic units on which a family can make a reasonable liv- 

 ing, with preference being given to qualified farmers or 

 war veterans in such sales. 



' L A. A. RECORD 



< ' 



608 S 



