^he RURAL NEW-YORKER 
557 
A Revised Wicks Bill at Albany 
Little if any Change in Principle 
Last week an attempt was made to devise a 
new Wicks bill. A conference for the purpose w^as 
held at Albany under the leadersliip of Elon R. 
Brown. In the proposed measure, some of the 
worst features of the Wicks bill were believed 
to be eliminated, thougli the wording of some of 
the provisions left the suspicion tlnit even the- 
worst features of the original bill might be read in 
this new measure. At all events, the prime motive 
behind the Wicks bill was yet preserved in the 
proposed measure. 
The proposition still is to coml)ine the Depart¬ 
ments of Agriculture, Foods and Markets, and 
Weights and Measures into a commission—the duty 
of the commission being to perform the service here¬ 
tofore performed by the different individual com¬ 
missions. It is proposed that this commission be 
appointed by tlie Governor; one member from each 
Judiciary district, and one at large, and one ex- 
officio member from New York City. It is also 
proposed that this board should appoint a Secretary 
of Agriculture and a Secretary of Foods and Mar- 
ket.s, and other employes with headquarters for 
the commission at Albany and branch offices in 
other places throughout the State. After the ap- 
iwintment of the first board it is suggested that 
the Legislature vote their successors. In this trans¬ 
fer the old laws of the Departments would remain 
as they are. 
The discriminating reader will realize that for 
all practical i)urp()ses this nnich-discussed change 
will leave us virtually as we were before. The 
only reason yet advanced for the change is the as¬ 
sertion that it will rake the Department of Agri¬ 
culture out of politics. The Governor now has the 
appointment of the Commissioner of Agriculture. 
He will have the appointment of the first board, 
and it is difficult to see how the appointment of 
nine or ten members by the Governor is to be any 
less political than the apptnntment of one head by 
the Governor. There is not now, and there never 
has been, any political embarrassment between the 
Administration .and rhe Foods and Markets De¬ 
partment. While the term of the present Commis¬ 
sioner does not expire for four years, the appoint¬ 
ment of a successor has been optional with the 
Governor for two years past. Frequent changes are 
made by the Legislature from commissions to in¬ 
dividual heads of departments, and from individual 
heads back to commissions. If the present Legisla¬ 
ture should create this commission, the next or fu¬ 
ture Legislatures may change if back again. 
While to get the Agricultural Department out of 
politics, it is asserted, is the reason of this change, 
the conviction has found place in the minds of the 
peojile that the object of the change is to make 
room for political favorites, and this fact has 
aroused more opposition to the proposed bill even 
than some of the most dangerous principles car¬ 
ried in the measure. From all over the State, far¬ 
mers are asserting that they are tired of pretense 
and )iolitics. They want practical measures of 
relief. It was under their own inspiration and 
initiative that the Department of Foods and 
Markets was organized. They have seen it 
assailed and opposed openly and covertly by the 
big interests. They have seen the Department dis¬ 
couraged and hampered by indifference and oppo¬ 
sition, and want of financial support, but in spite 
of all these drawbacks and discouragements, they 
liave become more and more convinced of the pos¬ 
sibilities of good to themselves in working out their 
greatest problems of distribution through it, and 
more and more they are determined to preserve 
what they have; not to allow one fraction of the 
power that the Department has to be withdrawn, 
and they have become more and more determined to 
develop it to its full i»ossibilities in the future. 
This determination has taken the form of a de¬ 
mand for more farm representatives at Albany. 
This suggestion and demand comes from farmers 
widely distributed through all parts of the State, 
and from men who have had no means of communica¬ 
tion with one another. If the party in power per¬ 
sists in its opposition, either openly against the 
Department or covertly in favor of the large in¬ 
terests, that Work will only hasten the organization 
of farm representatives in the L(‘gislature at Al¬ 
bany, and when the time comes these representa¬ 
tives will be men who milk cows and hold plow 
handles. 
As a matter of fact there tire i^enators and As¬ 
semblymen representing farm sections today at Al¬ 
bany in full sympathy with farm measures. They 
are, however, overpowered and out-generaled by the 
leaders in the Legislature, and there is no organ¬ 
ized farm representation there. This will not be 
so in the future. The men representing farmers in 
Albany will be an organized body working together 
in the selection of leaders and in the advancement 
of legislation. When that organization is effected 
agricultural interests will begin to get the con¬ 
sideration their importance merit.s. Up to this time 
they have not had it. It is true that certain agricul¬ 
tural measures of a nature peculiar to the farm may 
be adopted at any session at Albany, but when one 
of these measures affects the large interests, such 
as the railroads, financial or large distributors, it 
is sidetracked and defeated. I'ropose any measure 
for the protection of agriculture where these large 
interests are concerned, and you are always sure of 
meeting a jiroposal of revision or change that W’ill 
make it entirely harmless to the interests affected, 
and if you refuse to consider the revision, the bill 
is pretty sure tp remain a dead letter. 
There is a disposition to discuss the needs of the 
proposed new measure as if it w’ere something en¬ 
tirely new, and as if we had no means now to cope 
with distribution problems. There is an effort in 
this discussion to ignore the law on the Depart¬ 
ment as it now stands. The facts are, howev’ei% 
that the laws on the proposed bill of both depart¬ 
ments would remain virtually as they are now, 
and that there is ample law for carrying out the 
purpose of both departments. What the Marketing 
Department needs is recognition and support at 
Albany, and an appropriation sufficient to organize 
it and develop the work. 
The tendency of the political leaders, however, is 
revealed in the frequent attempts to apologize for 
what are alleged to be the functions assumed by 
the Department. Senator Brown revealed this de¬ 
cision in the conference last week when he assumed 
to apologize for Commissioner Dillon, or at least 
to excuse the extent of his activities in the milk 
war, on the ground of the extreme need and the 
hardship of the milk producers at the time.. While 
the sentiment of Senator Brown was worthy and 
appreciative, it shows a lack of comprehension of 
the functions of the Department. There is no 
apology needed for this work. The Department 
was organized for this particular purpose. There 
is no other excuse for its existence. If it cannot 
be useful in hel])ing farmers make a market and 
get a price for their produce, it is no good. It 
might as well be abolished at once, and for our 
part unless it be permitted and encouraged to do 
this very work which Senator Brown and others 
seem to think exceeds the authority of the com¬ 
mission, then we would wish to abolish it. 
In all of these di.scussions and attempts of legis¬ 
lation we have detected one consistent policy on 
the part of the opposition both at Albany and 
other jiarts, and that policy is to limit the au¬ 
thority or the work of the Department, to make it 
merely iterfuncti)ry. and to do nothing that would 
invite the oiiiiosition of produce dealers or the 
milk trust, and if this cannot be done through di¬ 
rect legislation the intimation seems to be pretty 
clear that the same thing could and would be ef¬ 
fected through administrative influences. 
Whether a revised Wicks bill will really mate¬ 
rialize is not 3 'et known. The rather select con¬ 
ference at Albany favored it in the majority. The 
representatives of the Dairymen’s League and a 
few general farmers only objected. It is our judg¬ 
ment that no such measure can pass the Legislature 
at this session. Senators and Assemblymen from 
all parts of the State in re.sponse to the farm de¬ 
mand have expressed themselves against it. If the 
bill should materialize and come up for vote we 
propose to have the names of the voters for and 
against it, so that farmers will know' the record.s. 
In the meantime they should make their demands 
clearly understood before the votes are cast in the 
Legislature. * 
Now for the Towner-Smith Bill 
The most important farm measure before the 
Legislature now' is the Towner-Smith milk bill. No 
other farm measure has been so strongly opposed; 
no other measure in years has received such an 
emphatic and united support from farmers of the 
country and consumers of the city, because it is in¬ 
tended to benefit both, and the benefits are large 
and important in compari.son with the amount of 
expen.se involved. It is also important because of 
the principle involved, quite as welt as because of 
the direct .saving involved. 
The bill is intended to enable the Deiiartment of 
Foods and Markets to establish a milk market and 
pasteurizing plant in the City of New York. Dairy¬ 
men who wish to sell cream and keep the skim-milk 
at home to rai.se pigs and chickens or for other 
purposes would have a market foi ihe cream. 
Dairymen who had no way of selling in the coun¬ 
try except to a large dealer w'ould have another 
means of making a .sale, and neighborhoods which 
had no pasteurizing plant w'onld find a sale through 
this market. If surplus occurred in excess of the 
city demand, this surplus could be easily converted 
into butter or cheese. When prices were low' in 
the city, the returns would be low, but this is for 
a short period at best. The demand in the city 
ea.sily exceeds the snpplj', and the prices are high 
accordingly. The benefit of these high prices would 
go to the producer, and the law of supplj’^ and de¬ 
mand would at all times be in operation to benefit 
both pi-oducer and consumer. 
In the ea.se of refusal by the milk trust to meet 
the dairymen at a fair general price, the' plant 
w'ould be in operation to furnish milk to the babies 
in hospitals that we heard so much about during 
the October strike, and for this reason it ought 
to recommend itself to the dealers and officials who 
were at that time .so much eonceimed about starving 
children. 
Aside from this, for the next three months the 
farmer will receive approximately 4i/^ cents per 
quart for milk containing 3.4% butterfat, and this 
is above the average butterfat contained in all milk 
sold in the City of New York. The average w'ill not 
exceed this percentage during the months of April. 
May and June. For this milk the dealers charge 
lie delivered at the homes. In other w'ords, the 
farmer gets 4^/^ cents per quart for producing and 
the dealer gets cents for distributing. With the 
proposed plant, milk could be distributed in bottles 
pasteurized to grocery stores at seven cents per 
quart, and the stores are anxious to deliver to the 
families at a profit of one cent, so that many fam¬ 
ilies could have milk at eight cents for which they 
now pay 11 cents. 
The small storekeeper, (he laboring i»eople, the 
club women and the settlement workers of New 
York are all in favor of this bill. They are all de¬ 
manding it. Forty thousand dairymen through the 
State are unanimous in the demand for it, and 
3 ’et the bill has not been voteil out of committee in 
either the Senate or the As.sembl.v. Some vigorous 
work wlil have to be done now to get it through, 
but the zenith of time in the fight is still on. We 
want j'ou to helji. The following are the names of 
the members of the Senate Finance Committee in 
charge of this bill: 
Henry M. Sage 
Chas. .T. Hewitt 
.1. Henry Walters 
.Tas. A. Emerson 
Geo. II. Whitney 
George F. fifiiompson 
Wm. H. Hill 
Rnbert 
Geo. L. Thomp.son 
Ggden L. Mills 
Geo. A. Slater 
John D. Stivers 
Elon R. Brow’ll 
Samuel J. Ramsperger 
.1. Cullen 
F. Wagner 
The bill has now Iieen referred to the Rules Com¬ 
mittee of As.semldy and the members of this com¬ 
mittee are: 
Thaddeus C. Sweet John G. Malone 
Simon Adler Jos. M. Callahan 
Henry E. II. Brereton Daniel F. Farrell 
II. Edmund Machold 
In writing the Senate Committee, this bill should 
be referred to as Towner Bill 475 and to the As¬ 
sembly as Smith Bill 042. 
There will be no hearings on this bill, but every 
farmer can afford a postage stamp for a letter to 
the heads of the.se committees, and also to his 
own representative on the committees. Let us make 
it clear that w'e w'ant this bill voted out of the com¬ 
mittees and given a fair chance for a vote in the 
I.egislature. Let us make it clear also that with¬ 
out regard to party affiliations we will hold every 
member accountable for his vote on this bill. We 
believe there are votes enough to pass it in both 
branches of the Legislature if it can be gotten out 
of the committee.s, and we should make our de¬ 
mands upon the members of these committees strong 
and uncompromising. We count our friends when 
we count the votes. 
Canadian Fruit Prices 
QUEBEC.—No. 1 Spies (.scarce) .$8 to $9, Ben 
Davis and Baldwin .$0.50 to .$7; No. 2’s .$1 less. Mar¬ 
ket slow. Potatoes .$2.50 to .$2.75 for 80-pound bags. 
About 2,200 barrels of apples in common and cold 
storage. 
MONTREAL.—Apple market brisk. Auction prices: 
No. 1 Ontario Spies .$7.75 to .$7.80, No. 2’s .$5.65 to 
.$5.i)0, No. 3’s .$.5.20 to .$.5.45; No. 1 Baldwins (On¬ 
tario) .$5.S5: No. 1 Nova Scotia Baldwins $4.50 to 
$4.65; No. 1 Nova Scotia Nonpareil $5.30, No. 2’s 
.$.5.10. Aj)i)le.s in common and cold storage, ,5,2tK) 
barrels, 6,7.50 boxes. 
