19 



The 1920 crop was the basis for estimating the members' prospec- 

 tive production. This crop was unusually large, and the association's 

 officials were led to expect more tobacco than would be produced 

 during an average year. Many solicitors estimated the expected 

 member delivery by multiplying the signed acreage by 1,000 pounds — 

 an average far too high, especially for flue-cured tobacco. In other 

 instances the owner and tenant were each signed up for the same 

 tobacco, or two or more members of the same family were each given 

 credit for the total acreage. The contracts of some farm owners 

 included the tenant's share of the crop as well as their own, when the 

 tenant was not a member and was privileged to sell his tobacco as he 

 saw fit. 



It has often been stated that as a rule the better and more influen- 

 tial farmers did not join the association. This may be true of some 

 farmers who, because of their friendship with warehousemen and 

 buyers, had benefited by higher prices under the auction-floor system 

 of selling, and who would not willingly risk this advantage over their 

 less fortunate neighbors through a change in the system of market- 

 ing. Other farmers who produced a high quality of tobacco were 

 satisfied with the prices received for their product and feared the 

 loss of this premium if they joined the association. Many such 

 farmers not only refused to join the association but later used their 

 influence to encourage disloyalty on the part of the members of the 

 association. These farmers failed to realize that by incurring dis- 

 loyalty among the members of the association they would eventually 

 harm themselves. 



On the other hand, included in the membership of the association 

 were very many well-known farmers whose loyalty and support of 

 the association was unfailing in spite of almost certain losses to 

 themselves. In the membership study it was found that the better 

 and more intelligent farmers were the most loyal members, chiefly 

 because they realized the difficulties under which their association was 

 laboring. They often had been securing good prices for their tobacco 

 at auction-floor sales but joined to help their less fortunate neighbors. 

 In signing up tenants and share croppers, little attention was given 

 to the difficulties which would arise in securing delivery of their 

 crops. 



THE INTERNAL ORGANIZATION 

 DIRECTORS 



The board of directors consisted of 25 members who were elected 

 annually. Of these directors, 22 were members actually residing 

 and growing tobacco in the respective districts from which they were 

 elected. The other three were nominated in writing, one each by 

 the governors of the States of Virginia, North Carolina, and South 

 Carolina. When elected, these three men had full authority as di- 

 rectors, but they represented primarily the interests of the general 

 public in the conduct of the association. For the purpose of electing 

 directors representing the members, the three States were divided 

 into 22 voting districts each of which had approximately the same 

 estimated sign-up of tobacco. Counties within each district, how- 

 ever, were held intact. This division of the area was for the pur- 

 pose of giving all members equitable and proportionate representa- 



