Velwme 37 



Number S 



May, 1949 



The hmw 



OmCIAL MIBUCATION 

 THE lUINOIS AGRICULTURAL ASSOCIATION 



To advance ihe purpose jor which the Farm Bureau was organized, namely, 

 to promote, protect and represent the business, economic, social and educa- 

 tional interests of the farmers of Illinois and the nation, and to develop 

 agriculture. 



OFFICERS 



CHARLES B. SHUMAN. Sullivan. President 



FLOYD E. MORRIS 

 Vice-President 



PAUL E. MATHIAS 

 Secretary 



ARTHUR F. SCHUCK 

 Treasurer 



GEORGE E. METZGER 

 Field Secretary 



CLARENCE C. CHAPELLE 

 Comptroller 



DONALD KIRKPATRICK 

 General Counsel 



BOARD OF DIRECTORS 



Lyman Bunting, Ellery ; Thomas H. Lloyd, Girard ; Lester S. DiTiioa, 

 Minonlc ; Homer Curtiss, Stockton ; J. King Eaton, Edwardsville ; C. J. 

 Elliott, Strcator ; John T. Evans, Hoopeston ; Edwin Gumm, Galesbuig ; 

 Earl M. Hughes, Woodstock; Chester McCord, Newton; Russell V. 

 McKee, Varna ; K. T. Smith, Greenfield ; Otto Steffey, Stronghurst ; 

 Frank L. Simpson, Farmer City ; and Alt>ert Webb, Ewing. 



• DIVISION HEADS 



George E. Metzger, Organization & Information ; L. L. Colvis, Market- 

 ing ; 1. E. Parett, General Services ; Paul E. Mathias, Building, Records, 

 and Personnel ; Arthur F. Schuck, Treasurer's office ; C. C. Chapelle, 

 Comptroller's office; and Donald Kirkpatrick, General Counsel. 



DEPARTMENT HEADS 



Frank M. Atchley, Research ; O. D. Brissenden. Oragnization ; G. W. 

 Baxter, Transportation-Claims ; John K. Cox, Rural School Relations ; 

 C. J. Foster, Publicity ; R. E. Gish, Soil Conservation Activities ; Geor^ 

 H. Iftner. Grain Marketing ; Roy P. Johnson, Special Services & Office 

 of the Building ; C. E. Johnston, General Office ; Donald Kirkpatrick, 

 Legal ; Ellswortn D. Lyon, Young People's Activities ; Judson P. Mason, 

 Dairy Marketing ; CuUen B. Sweet. Rural Road Improvement ; S. F. Rul- 

 sell. Livestock Marketing ; W. E. Scheer, Personnel ; and Bert Vanderviiet, 

 Property Taxation. 



ASSOCIATE COMPANY MANAGERS 



C. H. Becker, Illinois Farm Supply Company ; Sam L. Hassell. Illinois 

 Grain Terminals Company; Forrest C. Fairchild, Prairie Farms Creameries; 

 Darrell L, Achenbach, Country Mutual Fire Company ; Judson P. Mason, 

 111. Milk Producers' Assn. ; R. S. McBride. Illinois Fruit Growers Ex- 

 change; Howard McWard, 111. Grain Corporation; C. F. Musser, 111. 

 Farm Bureau Serum Assn.; J. L. Pidcock. 111. Co-op Locker Service; A. 



E. Richardson, Country Life Insurance Company; Dale Rouse. Illinois 

 Wool Marketine Assn. ; C. E. Strand, Illinois Agricultural Audit- 

 ing Assn. ; H. W. Trautmann. Illinois Livestock Marketing Assn. ; and 



F. V. Wilcox, Country Mutual Casualty Company. 



EDITORIAL STAFF 



Cteston J. Foster 

 Editor 



James C. Thomson 

 Ass't. Editor 



Editorial Office 



43 East Ohio. Chicago 11 



The Illinois Agricultural Association RECORD is published monthly 

 by the Illinois Agricutural Association at 1501 W. Washincton Road, 

 Mendota. 111. Editorial Offices. 43 East Ohio St., Chicago 11, 111. Ent^ed 

 as second class matter at post office, Mendota, 111., Sept. 11, 1936. 

 Acceptance for mailing at special rate of postage provided in Section 412, 

 Act of Feb. 28, 1925, authorized Oct. 27, 1935. Address all com- 

 munications for publication to Editorial Offices, Illinois Agricultural 

 Association RECORD. 43 East Ohio St., Chicago. The individual mem- 

 bership fee of the Illinois Agricultural Association is five dollars a year. 

 The fee includes payment of fifty cents for subscription to the Illinois 

 Agricultnial Association RECORD. Postmaster; Send notices on Form 

 3578. Undelivcrablc copies returned under Form 3579 to editorial offices, 

 43 E. Ohio St., Chicago 11, 111. 



THE STATE FARM BUREAU PUBLICATION 



Legislation 

 Against Efficiency 



1 



C. ■. ShiMnon 



By Charles B. Shutnan 



PresitienI, Illinois Agricultural Association 



NEW farm program proposal is born! The prod- 

 uct of the fertile imagination and thinking of the 

 U. S. Department of Agriculture's Washington 

 "office farmers" is indeed revolutionary. It pro- 

 poses to stabilize farm income at the 

 highest level in history and at the 

 same time lower the cost of food to 

 consumers. Certainly an interest- 

 ing idea if we could avoid the re- 

 sponsibility of thinking about its 

 workability or the probable total 

 cost. This new proposal, as en- 

 dorsed by the secretary of agricul- 

 ture, would junk parity price as a 

 standard of equality for agriculture 

 and substitute, therefor, a subsidy 

 check drawn on the U. S. Treasury. These payments 

 would total billions of dollars annually. 



I LMOST fertainly the cost of this program would 

 I tend to increase each year as larger subsidies would 

 be paid to keep farm income up and reduce food 

 costs to the consumer. The taxpayers would pay the 

 cost. With 82 per cent of our total population in occu- 

 pations other than agriculture, it is reasonable to as- 

 sume that greater emphasis would be given to provid- 

 ing cheap food rather than satisfactory farm income. 



11 HERE is another more sinister suggestion in the 

 new plan that every farmer in Illinois should know 

 about and understand. Income and price supports 

 would be limited to so-called family size operations of 

 1800 units. At fi^st thought this suggestion does not 

 sound unreasonable as the definition of a unit is fairly 

 liberal. However, production above 1800 units in sur- 

 plus years would go into the market without benefit of 

 support price or subsidy at such a huge discount that 

 farmers would probably be forced to reduce their op- 

 erations to the prescribed size. If surplus food pro- 

 duction continued to pile up, the tendency would be 

 to reduce the maximum number of units per farm. In 

 eflFect, we would turn over to politicians and social 

 planners an eflPective device to control the size and effi- 

 ciency of our farming operations. 



IT IS not my intention to defend large-scale corpora- 

 tion farming. However, every farmer recognizes the 

 importance of an efficient farming unit. He knows 

 that government action to control production by reduc- 

 ing the size of his family farm operation will result in 

 decreased efficiency an3 higher production costs. This 

 proposed law grants powers that could be used to 

 gradually roll back all agriculture to a subsistence level. 



IF WE are to resort to legislation against efficiency 

 as a means of controlling agricultural production, 

 it would be simpler to prohibit the use of fertilizer 

 or hybrid corn or three plow tractors! 



MAY. 1949 



