W* RURAL NEW-YORKER 
The Problem of Labor Exchange 
Draw a line on tlie face of the earth from the 
north to the south pole. Place all farmers on one 
side of this line, aud all other people on the other 
side. The great bulk of the basic trade of the world 
will be back and forth across this line. Farmers 
will produce the food and raw materials, and send it 
over the line to supply and feed the workers and 
idlers in the other part of the world. The laborers 
in the factories and shops and on the railroads will 
live on the food and move and wort over the raw 
material into new forms and send the manufactured 
products back across the line to supply the needs 
of the farmers. Farmers will buy back enough to 
pay for the food and raw material they send across 
the line, and no more. If the trade is fair and value 
for value the amounts both ways will be even. T.et 
us assume that there is no money in the world and 
that all trade is conducted as barter. That is to 
say, a unit or measure of the farm products is ex¬ 
changed directly for a unit or measure of the manu¬ 
factured product. When the farmer and the shop 
man meet at the line to make an exchange they will 
barter out between themselves a bargain of substan¬ 
tial justice to themselves. P.ut if the goods on both 
sides of the line were stored for the convenience of 
the people, and the business of exchange were left to 
salesmen, so that the workers could continue their 
production, SOlne standard of value would need to 
be adopted so that the exchange could be made with 
justice to both sides. 
There being no money in use, the goods could not 
bo marked in dollars or francs or pounds sterling. 
The simple and natural standard of value would be 
the amount of labor required to produce therti. and 
the goods would be marked with the hours or days 
devoted to the production of them. In that case the 
traders would find that a measure of wheat was pro¬ 
duced in two days on the farm. A pair of shoes 
would be marked as produced in four days. Hence 
two measures of wheat would go in exchange for the 
shoes. That would he a fair and equitable system 
of exchange. Then, if it were decided to introduce 
gold as money for greater convenience in making 
the exchange, they would first find the weight of 
gold that would be produced in an hour, and this 
measure of gold would be the unit of value for the 
purposes of exchange. It would be the dollar. If 
the goods were then marked in dollars it would in 
no way change the merits of the exchange. Whether 
marked in dollars or in hours the result of the ex- 
change would be the same. 
As a matter of fact, the important trade of the 
world is conducted in this way between farmers and 
the rest of the world, just about the same as if the 
people of the world were divided into two great 
groups by a longitudinal line, and required to trade 
back and forth across it. Our present system is. 
however, more complex. The separation of the 
traders into speculative and middleman systems, t - 
gether with the use of money as a medium of ex¬ 
change, has made it possible to obscure the veil 
standard of exchange and to create fictitious values 
for favored products. The speculators and middle¬ 
men have all been on the city side of the line, and 
in consequence the manipulation of values in terms 
of money lias favored their side at. the expense of 
the farmer, until it now requires from three to 10 
days of farm labor to pay for an article or a service 
that can be produced in one day on the other side 
of the line. The correction of this groat economic 
and fundamental injustice is the great farm problem 
of the present day. 
Many of us can yet remember when the farmer 
drove to town and sold liis produce to the tradesman 
or exchanged it with the shoemaker, the carpenter, 
the wheelwright and the blacksmith for their ser¬ 
vices to him. These tradesmen were then glad to 
exchange a day's work for the product that required 
a day's work to produce on the farm. Since then 
the small shops have been closed. The organisation 
of capital created the factory in large centers, and 
the small tradesmen were forced to close their shops 
and seek employment in the factories. Concentra¬ 
tion of employes gave opportunity for conversation, 
conference and combinations. Labor unions result¬ 
ed. The farmer could no longer deliver food at their 
doors. It came long distances, by rail. The railroad 
employes formed unions, too. Middlemen were need¬ 
ed to take food from the farmer and hand it to the 
consumer. They saw speculative possibilities in 
their field and formed combinations of their own. 
Then came the politician. He was and is anxious 
to please large groups of voters. He could appeal 
to them in their meetings. No jolly or soft talk 
satisfied them. They wanted real, definite things. 
They demanded them, and got them. The manufac¬ 
turer was given a protective tariff. The railroad 
was given grants of land and increased rates. Labor 
was granted higher wages. The farmer was given 
a jolly and an appropriation to educate him to pro¬ 
duce larger crops to he sold at lower prices. This 
system makes it cost 65 cents to deliver 35 cents’ 
worth, of farm food products to the city consumer. 
Through all those influences the cost of Lying in the 
city increased, and then demand was made for 
higher city wages to match the high cost of living 
that they created. This demand is still made. Logic¬ 
ally it may go on climbing. If the argument were 
good, the cost of living and wages would go on 
climbing indefinitely because cost of living is 
wages. The reasoning is unsound and the policy 
is impossible in permanent practice because you can¬ 
not standardize anything in terms of itself, and that 
is just what politicians and labor committees have 
undertaken to do when they fix city wages on the 
basis of costs of living in the city. 
Values are comparative. The value of one thing 
is the other thing that you must give in exchange 
for it, and the basis for the exchange is the amount 
of labor necessary to produce each of them. No one 
has yet claimed that an hour of honest skilled work 
on a farm is worth less than an hour of skilled work 
in a shop. We simply insist on the principle of 
equal pay for equal work. It does not matter 
whether the dollar price is high or low. .Standard¬ 
ize wages on the basis of agricultural values and 
everyone will get what he earns. 
I.et us construct this line from pole to pole in mur 
minds and get the principle clearly fixed in our 
own minds, and then put the problem squarely and 
bluntly up to our agricultural bloc in Albany and 
Washington. 
Is there any good reason why the product of an 
hour’s skilled labor on the farm should not exchange 
even for the product of equal time aud skill in the 
factory or shop? 
The Soldier Bonus Legislation 
After a long struggle over the question of “sol¬ 
diers' bonus" the Republican party in Congress has 
finally come forward with a definite proposition. 
Many schemes were proposed, but they were promptly 
killed by public opinion. Never before in the history 
of the country has there been anything quite like the 
way the public has directed this legislation. The 
present Congress has practically no leadership in 
either political party, and Congressmen are listen¬ 
ing to what their people say as never before. The 
Republicans are under obligation to provide for the 
soldiers, as they agreed to do in their platform. 
They cannot or dare not dodge the issue. The Dem¬ 
ocrats made even a stronger hid for the soldier vote, 
hut lost it; now they are standing aside to watch the 
Republicans get into trouble. 
The first thing to understand is that the great ma¬ 
jority of our people are in favor of providing for 
the soldiers in some way. There is no question 
about that, for most of the States have voted on the 
question. New York voted for a soldiers’ bonus by 
a great majority. Many of the newspapers oppose 
any bonus, but they do not represent popular opin¬ 
ion in the matter. It is evident to anyone that with 
its present debts and complicated finances this nation 
cannot afford to pay out any lai-gc amount of cash. 
Taxes are now ruinous: the public simply will not 
stand for an increase. The sale of bonds to meet 
bonus payments is not practical. Such bonds could 
not he sold except at a discount. The farmers and 
most consumers are opposed to a tax on sales. No 
money from our foreign accounts is in sight. Yet 
bonus legislation lias been promised and will be 
driven through Congress. 
To meet this situation a bill lias been introduced 
to take care of the soldiers by giving them an option 
on the following: 
1. A government certificate of a 20-year paid-up 
insurance, such certificate being made negotiable at 
national banks. 
2. Vocational training, with payment for the days 
spent at it 
3. Farm and home aid—which means a payment 
for the purpose of improving a farm or a home. 
4. A grant of public land for settlement, with 
work for the government in fitting the land. 
The bill carries many details, which cannot all ho 
presented here. No suggestion for raising revenue 
is made with the bill. The certificates of insurance 
may be used as security for hank loans, thus shift¬ 
ing the burden of raising the money upon the banks. 
We shall discuss this feature a little later, but it is 
safe to say that under such a scheme the banks and 
the money lenders would control most of these cer¬ 
tificates long before 15*42. when they mature. Many 
419 
of us are opposed to any such bonus scheme at this 
time, but we might as well make up our minds to 
the fact that sooner or later this plan, or something 
like it. will go through. Whenever any State bonus 
has been put before the people it has been carried 
with a rush. Politicians will cater to the “soldier 
vote” just as those of a past generation catered to 
the veterans of the Civil War. 
Comparative Costs of Food 
The United States Department of Labor reports 
that the cost of living in 15 representative cities of 
the United States decreased for the year ending 
February 15, 1922. from 7 to 12 per cent. 
The increase in the same cities for the retail cost 
of food for the nine-year period from 1913 to 1922 
ranges from 37 to 51 per cent, with an average of 
44 per cent. The increase in New York was 47 per¬ 
cent over 1913 prices. 
The comparative. wholesale price quotations to 
producers for a. number 
follows; 
of staple farm 
products 
Butter, per lb. 
Feb.. 1922 
Feb.. 1913 
_ £0.39 
£0.35 
Cheese, per lb. 
22 
.17 
Milk, per 100 lbs. 
1.91 
Eggs, per doz. 
.03 
.29 
Fowls, per lb. 
.26 
.14 
Chickens, dressed, per lb.. 
.... .39 
.24 
Calves, best, per lb. 
.19 
.15 
Beans, marrow, per lb..,. 
.05 
.05 
Apples. Baldwin, per bbl.. 
- 5.00 
2.00 
< ahbage. per ton.... . 
- 40.00 
19 00 
I'otatoes. per 180 lbs. 
.... 3 50 
1.75 
Hay, No. 4> . per ton. 
_ 24.00 
19.00 
1\ heat, per bu. 
_ 1.25 
1.01 
Corn, per bu. 
.66 
.55 
Gats, per bu. 
.46 
.37 
Bran, per ton. 
_ 26.25 
23.00 
Linseed meal, per ton. 
- 52.50 
32.50 
Hominy, per ton. 
_ 26.00 
22.00 
Another Milk Speculator 
Your article on “A Notorious Milk Speculator,” in 
March 4 issue, prompts me to report a similar experi¬ 
ence here in Connecticut with Dwight W. Beebe. He 
had worked in several dairies and in the New England 
dry milk plant in Hawleyville, Conn., for some time. 
He resigned and told some of the farmers if they would 
sell their milk to him he would pay them more than the 
plant was paying, and would wholesale it in Bridge¬ 
port. lie got about 12 or 15 cans a day to start with, 
and paid for it. After a while he got about 50 cans, 
and told the. farmers he was doing well and making 
good. After about three months his checks started to 
go to protest, and he dragged along with his payments, 
saying he had to pay part on his machinery and bot¬ 
tles. When he owed the farmers about £8,000 he told 
them a dealer had taken his business, and his lawyer 
wohld settle with the farmers and pay about 40 cents 
on the dollar. That was the last of November. He 
went into bankruptcy and the farmers found out the 
dealers owed him about £1,000. The machinery and 
bottles were taken back, as he had paid very little on 
them. He certainly got che milk, but the farmers can¬ 
not get the money. His case is now in the Bridgeport 
court, and he is also held for a protested cheek. We 
now hear that he worked this same plan in another 
town some years ago. 
If milk swindlers got their dues they would be behind 
the bars. a victim. 
New York State Jottings 
I have been in Ulster. Orange. Washington and Al¬ 
bany counties, N. Y.. recently, and l believe there is a 
marked note of optimism among farmers. When in 
Ulster County I found the men vitally interested in 
financing an apple packing house. The way they went 
about it certainly showed some change in the methods 
of two years ago. They have raised approximately one- 
half enough from stock sales among their members, and 
are raising thp balance of $2,000 on a demand note 
given by the association, as such, and not by the joint 
signatures of the in lividual members. This is the way 
the W estern New York men are doing, and. more than 
that, the bank seems to be willing to finance them in 
this way. This brings up the question of the change in 
attitude by the banks. The Rochester banks have al¬ 
ways been favorable to co-operative effort. Recently the 
Syracuse banks have swung into fine, and now. after a 
long pull, some of the Buffalo banks lire coming. 
Orange County is doing a great piece of work among 
the Polish people on the muck lands. They have been 
bothered a great deal by onion smut, so this year the 
Bureau is conducting demonstrations in English and 
Polish as well. 
In Washington County there seems to be quite a ten¬ 
dency for Guernsey cattle to replace scrub Holsteins. 
There has recently heeu formed in Washington County 
a Guernsey County Club. 
I was interested in seeing the comparative forms of 
niarkets for local farmers in Schenectady. Watervliet, 
Troj and Albany. In Schenectady the market place is 
sold outright ti> the Farmers’ Market Gardeners’ Asso¬ 
ciation. who rent the stalls for one year to individual 
farmers. The control of the market is entirely in the 
hands of the farmers’ association, so by this method 
they can exclude any undesirable hucksters. It also 
gives a farmer protection in not having his stall taken 
by someone else. In Albany the market place is owned 
by the city, and the first come is first served. Tr is nec¬ 
essary. therefore, for men to come in the middle of the 
night in order to get a good location. In Troy there is 
a great mixture of hucksters and farmers. Some of the 
farmers became disgusted and pulled out of the Troy 
market, and purchased a market site of their own at 
Watervliet and control it themselves. They erected a 
concrete platform so that the place is cleaned off every 
day. aud certainly presents a very clean appearance foi 
displaying vegetables and fruit. a. e. 
