18 CIRCULAR 10 0, TJ. S. DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE 



An association should, however, have control over an appreciable 

 portion of the crop produced in a given area. This is necessary for 

 economical operation and in the interests of collective bargaining. 

 The dominant position of the large manufacturing companies in the 

 market makes this essential, especially if it is found difficult to estab- 

 lish friendly relationships between the cooperative organizations and 

 the companies. If any association does not have control over an 

 appreciable portion of the crop, it is in a weak bargaining position. 



The attitude and expectations of the members with regard to price 

 are indicated by results of a study of the membership of the asso- 

 ciation made in 1928. Over 700 members of the association were 

 interviewed, and the answers from 643 questionnaires were tabu- 

 lated. The number of members visited in each county was approxi- 

 mately in proportion to the number of producers from that county 

 who belonged to the association. Practically every county in the tri- 

 State area where the association had any appreciable number of 

 members was included in the survey. The interviewed growers were 

 asked, "What was your main reason for joining the association?" 

 314 replied, " To get better prices." To the question, " What should 

 govern the price which cooperatives try to get for tobacco ? " the 

 reply from 108 growers was, " Set prices and hold for these prices " ; 

 1T2 replied, " Cost of production plus a profit," and only 93 answered, 

 " Supply and demand." As this study was made after the failure of 

 the association, it is evident that the idea of monopoly control was 

 thoroughly ingrained in the membership. This study also showed 

 that comparatively few of the members believed that the association 

 had obtained increased prices for the members. In reply to the ques- 

 tion, " What benefits do you think resulted from the operation of the 

 association ? " 45 answered, " Better prices at first " ; 156 answered, 

 " Raised tobacco prices generally " ; 38 replied, " Gave members better 

 prices than if there were no association " ; while 350 believed that it 

 raised the prices to nonmembers, but not, presumably, to members. 



TYPES OF MEMBEES 



Little discrimination was shown during the membership campaign 

 in the selection of growers who would prove good members of the 

 organization. This resulted, first, in the inclusion of a number of 

 persons who were not tobacco growers and in inflation of the quantity 

 of tobacco which was expected to be available for delivery to the 

 association. It resulted also in the inclusion of many who because 

 of crop mortgages and landlord liens could not deliver their tobacco, 

 and of many more who because of their economic condition or lack of 

 understanding of the movement were a liability rather than an asset. 



Not enough consideration was always given to whether a man 

 actually grew tobacco or not. In some sections the aim seemed to be 

 to get as many members as possible, irrespective of their occupation, 

 whether they had ever grown or would ever grow tobacco, or had 

 any financial interest in a tobacco crop. Many nongrowers joined 

 merely out of sympathy for this farmers' movement. This class 

 inflated the membership and gave the officials and management a 

 false basis upon which to judge the strength of the association and 

 to estimate the amount of physical equipment and personnel neces- 

 sary to handle the expected receipts. 



