RURAL NEW-YORKER 
1059 
An Independent Farm Movement Needed 
I X their conflict with the Legislature of 1917, 
file fainners of New York State won and lost. 
But there was honor in the flnal defeat. The 
eucniy carries some scars, and when the roll is 
again called at the capital, some of the “winners’’ 
will be missing. When farmers killed the Wicks 
liill they had the enemy Avhipped. If farm com¬ 
mittees had stood fast ^ to principles, and to the 
instructions from the farms, no legislation could 
be enacted this year. But the legislative leaders 
offered allurements. Tlie form committees lis¬ 
tened. hesitated, lost. It was a time for uncon¬ 
ditional surrender, but the victors did not rec¬ 
ognize it. They had rallied in a common cause, 
but they had no organization to Avithstand the 
craft and allurements of an organized body of 
legislatoi's. They Avill do better the next time. 
To say otherwise would be to accuse them of 
.stupidity, not to s'ay treason. 
It must be plain to farmers, however, from this 
experience, that they lose everything and gain 
nothing from a habit of voting the party ticket, 
whether Lemocratic^ Republican or any other. 
Party members in the Legislature protest against 
objectionable bills, and promise to defeat them, 
but for the most part, when the “organization” 
commands, they fall in line and forget the prom¬ 
ises made to farm constituents. They knoAV they 
could never right themselves with the “organiza¬ 
tion" if they bolted the party caucus, and they 
trust to the poor memory and party habit of the 
farmer to escape pxinishment. Sometimes they 
trust in vain. This is likely to be one of the 
times. 
But to change from one party to another, Avhile 
ftetter than a strict regular party vote, is not a 
complete remedy. Selflsh party leaders make deals 
among them.selA'es, and laugh at the partisan loyalty 
of the A'oter. What the farm needs is a platform, 
a party and a ticket of its own. With such an 
organization it ought to have 100 farm members 
ill tin* Legislature. With 25 members pledged to 
stand together’, it could influence a wholesome leg¬ 
islative policy for the State. 
This .vear, Avhether right or wrong, farmers pro¬ 
tested against the appointment to oftice over their 
affairs of one man. Whether their distrust of Mr. 
Perkins is justified or not, no one questions the 
sincerity of It. They have protested against the 
]iersistent legislation devised to make a place for 
him. They have seen the legislation enacted 
against their protest by the men thej’’ sent to Al- 
b.iiiy and the party they put into poAA’er. They Avill 
see the man they distrust put into power oyer their 
affairs. They have no present power-to prevent it. 
The.v tried and lost. Their remedy is an independ¬ 
ent farm organization in the New York Legislature, 
'riiere are more men in favor of it to-day than ever 
before in the history of the State. 
The State Food Control Bill 
THE nOVERNOR’S POWER.—The ’much dis¬ 
cussed new law creates a State Food Commission of 
three members appointed by the Governor, who also 
designates the president of the commission. The Gov¬ 
ernor may dismiss and replace any one of them or 
all of them at any time. The new law abolishes 
the State Food Supply Commission of nine members 
and confers its duties on the new commission. 
POWERS GIVEN.—The law makes it possible for 
the commissioners to hold other State and city oflices. 
Thi.< provision Avas inserted -to permit Mr. George 
W. Perkins to accept a place on the commission 
Avithout re-signing from the Interstate Park Com- 
ini.^sion. It Avould also enable him to serve as city 
market commissioner. The life of the commission 
is limited to one year after the close of the present 
war with Geianany. 
A WEAK LAW.—While the law contains some 
aitparently drastic proAdsioms, they are indirect, 
cumbersome and lumbered Avith conditions to retard 
enforcement. From a practical administration vieAV. 
the Ihw is weak in the extreme. The principal pro¬ 
visions are: 
(1.) To recognize a public concern in the pro¬ 
duction, and distribution of food and accessories in a 
time of war that does not exist in time of peace. 
We believe this to be an error. War conditions em- 
pluisize the abuses in distribution, but the abuses 
exist in times of peace and a Avise provision for 
regulation in time of peace Avill serve equally Avell 
in time of \A’ar. 
12.) It is made unlaAvfuI to destroy or AA'aste or 
to permit deterioration in food, or to combine or 
agree to withhold or limit production or distribution 
of food in order to enhance the price. Under this 
provision it AA’ould be unlaAvful to plow under cab¬ 
bage when it would not sell for the freight, and it 
would be equally unhiAvful for two dairymen to re¬ 
fuse to sell milk to a dealer at less than the cost 
of production. 
(.3.)- Hoarding of food is made unlawfxil. but 
farmers and co-operative as.sociations of farmers are 
exempt from this proA’ision. This provision is 
particularly complicated and dilatory. It is so in¬ 
volved with Federal provisions and court proceed¬ 
ings as to be of doubtful value. 
(4.) Probably the most effective section is that 
Avhich authorizes the commission to .seize food v/hich 
is hoarded or held for speculative purposes; bxit this 
provision is also involved in legal technicalltie.s. 
First the Federal Government must have a three 
days’ notice. Action must be brought in the su¬ 
preme court, and either party may demand a jury 
trial. The commission may order a discontinuance 
of the hoarding by corporation and if refused, the 
Attorney-General may bring suit in the name of the 
State, and on conviction the charter of the corpora¬ 
tion may be annulled. The commission may, when 
an emergency exists, cau.se an appraisal to be made 
of hoarded necessities, seize and sell the goods at 
public auction. If dis,satisfied with the appraised 
price the oAvner may appeal to the State Court of 
Claims, or the commission may adju.st the claim. 
The idea behind this section is good. It Avas first 
suggested in a draft of a bill submitted to Sen¬ 
ators Brown and AVicks by Mr. Dillon, but the legal 
machinery created in the ncAV bill to put it in exe¬ 
cution is so involved there is little hope of ever 
getting it in operation. But even as it stands it 
should have a good moral effect on the trade. 
(5.) In ca.se of emergencies the con>mi#sion may 
license persons and firms to manufacture, store and 
distribute food. Again farmers and retailers are ex¬ 
empt from this provision, and again it is so depen¬ 
dent on Federal ])roA’isions and so involved in its 
OAvn proA’isions that little, if any, use may be anti¬ 
cipated of this section. 
(0.) Cities are authorized to buy and sell food. 
This is a new provision, and a departure from 
previous conservatiA’e notions. Cities may or may 
not avail themselves of the privilege. If they do, 
they Avill buy in the cheapest market. They Avill 
have no interest in developing the farm interests of 
the State. The city may buy potatoes in Michigan 
or Canada, and store them. By putting a portion of 
these on the market at a low price the city could 
regulate the price of NexA’ York State potatoes and 
put the price Ioav. If the authority to purchase 
and distrilAute AA’ore entru.sted to the State, the city 
interests would be equally well protected and at 
the same time the farm interests of the State 
could be developed. 
(7.) The commission is given poAver to make rules 
and regulations for the production, storage and 
distribution of food, and these rules are given the 
foi’ce of laAA'. Fines of from $500 to $1,000 and im¬ 
prisonment for one year are imposed for violations. 
These three commissioners ax’e clothed Avith legisla¬ 
tive poAvers. They may ci’eate and enforce their oavh 
luAvs like divinely appointed king.s. 
(.S.) A ncAA’ chapter is added to the farm and 
mai’ket law to pi’ovide for public mai’kets in cities, 
one-half the cost of sxxch markets to be paid by the 
city and the other half by the State. It is not 
possible to read into this jxxmble of AA’ords a sincere 
pux-po.se to establish city or tei’ininal markets. It is 
iixA’olA’efl in a labyidnth of “ifs” and “provisos,” 
and all initiative is left to the cities conceimed, 
and no money lu-ovided to pay for the max'kets 
even if cities expressed a wish to go ahead with 
them. The State Avould pay one-half the cost, and 
receive one-half the net I’cvenue, if any, but the 
management, title and control Avould be wholly in 
the city. Thei’e is no guarantee of a xxnifoi’m 
system of operation, and no provision AvhateA’er 
for a modei’n market control. It is AA'ell known 
that the dealers have sti’ong influence in city af¬ 
fairs, and a mai-ket under city control would hold 
oiit no promise of better i-eturns to the fai’mer or 
cheaper food for the city consximei’. The condi¬ 
tions that noAV discriminate against the farmei’s 
of the State woxxld continue. The Depai’tment of 
Foods and ^Markets has a much better laAV for the 
establishment of tei’ininal markets. We have the 
tAA'o kiAvs noAV authorizing terminal mai’kets and 
no money to build them under either laxv. 
AN INDIRECT I.AW.— The provisions of this 
bxAA' are not dii*ect, but if the administi’ator takes 
short cuts to reach re.sxxlts the people in their 
pi’esent temper Avill sustain him. The one test 
of the laAv Avill be ta take food from the farm 
Avhere it is produced and carry it to the door of 
the city consumer at a less cost for disti’ibxxtiou 
than heretofore. We doubt if this elaborate sys¬ 
tem of classification of crimes and fines and im- 
Iirisonments Avill do it, bxxt we may hope that 
the need of the people and of the country will 
stimulate the commi.s.sion to make the most of 
the hxAv, and if it does not do all Ave could wish, 
we may at least hope for impi’ovements in pi’es¬ 
ent conditions. There, hoAvever, is little proposed 
here that could not be done under the Depart¬ 
ment of Foods and Markets. The iieAv Iuav dupli¬ 
cates many of its provi.sions; and fails to sup¬ 
plement that iRAv where revi.sion is most needed. 
The Department can attain direct and prompt re¬ 
sults to benefit both producer and consumer that 
are not contemplated at all in the nexv hxAV. But 
in one feature the neAv laxA’’ has the Department 
beaten to a frazzle. The Department’s appropria¬ 
tion is $24,500. The nexv commission gets $1,- 
000,000. 
Friends of the Farmer 
Late last week the Legislature passed the Food 
Control bill, about Avhich so much has been said 
recently. It was not thought that a decision Avould 
be reached so soon, but Avhen the members of the 
Legislature came back to Albany they promptly got 
together, and after a hot debate in the A.ssembl.v 
put the bill over. 
The vote in the Assembly was 99 in favor to .31, 
against. In the Senate the votes stood 43 in favor 
to three opposed. The three Senators Avho refused to 
vote for the food bill are named below. 
Morris S. Halliday, Ithaca, N. Y. 
Chas. B. NeAvtoii, Gcneseo, N. Y'. 
.Tames A. Towner, Towners, N. Y. 
Three Senatoi’s Avei’e absent, Avith tAvo not voting. 
In the Assembly the folloAving members voted 
against this Food Control bill: 
Post Office County 
.Tames C. Allen Clinton Corners Dutchess 
•Tames F. Allen Ea.st Branch Delaw’are 
Wm. BeAvley Lockport Niagara 
A..T.Bloomfield Richfield Springs Otsego 
Wm. F. Brush Newbui’gh Orange 
Robert P. BxishHorseheads Chemxmg 
J. M. Callahan New York City 
.T. P. Donohoe Garrison Putnam 
A. Ellenbogen New York City 
Wm. S. Evans New York City 
Casper Fenner Ludlowville 
M. M. Fertig New York City 
H. S. Fullagar Penn Yan 
Bert P. Gage 
TI. L. Gi'ant 
P. J. I-Iamill 
E. B. .Tenks 
P. H. Larney 
F. II. Lattin 
.T. F. Mahony 
Chas. L. Mead 
S. Merritt 
E. H. Miller 
G. A. Parsons 
Wai’saw 
Copenhagen 
New York City 
Whitney Point 
New York City 
Albion 
New York City 
Middletown 
Woodbourne 
New York City 
Sharon Springs 
Tompkins 
Yates 
AVyoming 
Lewis 
Broome 
Orleans 
Orange 
Sullivan 
Schoharie 
farmer 
farmer 
manufacturer 
hotel-keeper 
auctioneer 
doctor 
lawyer 
real estate 
lawyer 
lawyer 
fai’mer 
lawyer 
farmer 
farmer 
cheese 
clerk 
lawyer 
printer 
doctor 
clerk 
laAvyer 
sale.sman 
lumber 
farmer 
S. E. Quacken- 
bush Corning 
.Tohu J. Ryan New York City 
A. I. Shiplacoff New York City 
H. Showers Tannersville 
G. F.Wheelock Leicester 
.T. A. White- 
horn. New York City 
D. P. Witter Berkshire 
Stexiben real estal 
lawyer 
secretarj 
Greene civil engi 
Livingstonfarmer 
laAvyer 
farmer 
Tioga 
Give the Farmer a Chance 
I have been a subscriber to your paper for the last 
six years. I have been drafted and passed for the 
selective army. I am a young progressive farmer. I 
have been farming for the last seven years, and when 
I moved upon my farm it Avas considered one of the 
Avorst farms in Clermont County. It had been 
abandoned for years, as too poor to raise any crops. 
But being a greener about .soil, I Avas easy enough to 
fall for anything and bought it. Instead of becoming 
disgusted when I saw that I had been beaten, I set 
my mind doAvn to bxilld it up, so I sent for many 
farm magazines, and from them learned a lot of 
valuable information. I ahso consulted the Agricultural 
Experiment Station, and today I have as fine a farm 
as in the county. I have taken land that would not 
raise 10 bushels of corn to the acre seven years ago, 
and today am pi’oducing 65 bushels to the acre. I 
had land that Av’ould not produce any clover, and to¬ 
day have as fine a stand as you could see. 
I am going to ask exemption on agricxiltural grounds, 
but the lawyer I Avent to see told me my chances are 
very slim, as he has lost several cases the .same as 
mine already. Many boys in my neighborhood have been 
drafted, and have been refused exemption. This is 
the thanks Ave get for a hard Summer’s work. I asked 
the examining doctors Avhen we would have to leave, 
and he said the end of September sure. All my corn 
is late, and will not be ready to cut by that time, so I 
can’t see where Ave young farmers are given a square 
deal, withoxit giving us a chance even to hai’vest our 
crops. 
I am 28 years of age and single, and the only one 
home to do the farming. I live Avith my widowed moth¬ 
er and sister. They are telling a lot of the boys who 
are asking exemption that their mothers can rent tjie 
farm out on .shares and get along. You know that 
you can’t do this, as I have been unable to hire help 
for love or money, as farm help is scarce noAV. I 
can’t see Avhere the government is using good judgment 
in alloAA’ing to draft farmers, as young farm boys in 
my county are fast leaving farms to take Avork in the 
city for better money and eight hours a day. We are 
losing our help fast enough without taking aAvay more, 
and they ought to be glad that some of the boys are 
still willing to Avork on a farm AA-ith the long hours 
(Continued on page 1069.) 
