Jht RURAL NEW-YORKER 
1753 
The American Farm Bureau Federation 
On November 12-14, at Chicago, Ill., at a very 
notable meeting of men and women interested in 
agriculture, the American Farm Bureau Federation 
was organized. There were delegates from 32 
States, all the way from Massachusetts to California, 
and from Minnesota to Georgia. Of course there had 
been in the past many gatherings of men and women 
who represented agriculture, but never before in this 
country has there been quite such a meeting as this 
one. It, represented not only the best that American 
farming can produce, but also expressed the vast 
growth of education and farm sentiment which has 
been slowly developing during the past 25 years. 
The Federation promises to become really and ef¬ 
fectively national, different in its way from any¬ 
thing that has been attempted before. It stands for 
a common purpose, which is primarily educational, 
and that form of education which believes in a most 
thorough organization. 
The primary object of the Federation is to cor¬ 
relate and strengthen the State Farm Bureaus, yet 
as a part of its work it is expected to promote, pro¬ 
tect and represent the business, economic, social and 
educational interests of farmers. It is also pledged 
to develop agriculture. As strongly as could be done 
by earnest resolution, ties thought was brought out, 
for the resolutions clearly state that “this organiza¬ 
tion recognizes that the origin and strength of the 
American Farm Bureau Federation has been 
achieved through co-operation with State and Fed¬ 
eral departments of agriculture, upon a sound edu¬ 
cational program of local work” and reaffirming its 
“purpose to continue such co-operation in the future, 
and that neither business enterprise nor legislative 
activity should diminish such co-operative educa¬ 
tional activities.” 
A strong platform was adopted which expressed 
the views of the majority after a thorough dis¬ 
cussion. The convention, of course, stood strongly 
for loyalty to all American institutions. It went on 
record as opposed to any affiliation with organized 
labor. It recognized the farmer's responsibility for 
what it calls the stewardship of the land. It also 
states that the farmer is under obligation to main¬ 
tain soil fertility. It commends the work of agri- 
tural colleges, the economic farm management and 
crop estimating work of the United States Depart¬ 
ment of Agriculture, and it asserts in the most 
vigorous terms the farmer's right to the cost of 
production. 
Any State Federation of Farm Bureau Associations 
or “association based, on the Farm Bureau or similar 
plan” is eligible for membership in the new national 
federation. The governing body consists of a board 
of directors composed of one from each member 
State, and one additional director for each 20,000 
paid-up members in the State association. This 
board elects an executive committee composed of 
the president and vice-president and 12 regional 
directors, three each from the four groups of States 
known as (1) Northeastern. (21 Southern, (3i 
Central, and (4) Far Western, nominated by each 
group respectively. This committee Is the real gov¬ 
erning body of the federation, and appoints the sec¬ 
retary or manager, a treasurer, and all employees. 
The American Farm Bureau Federation will be 
financed by a membership fee equal to 10 per cent 
of all the individual membership dues in the county 
units of the member State federations, and in the 
case of a few States which do not have paid mem¬ 
berships. by a sum fixed by the executive committee 
between a minimum of $250 and a maximum of 
$1,000 per State. 
.1. K. Howard of Clemons. Iowa, was chosen first 
federation president, and S. 1.. Strivings of Castile, 
N. Y.. first vice-president of the new federation. 
The directors by regions are E. B. Cornwall of Ver¬ 
mont. E. F. Richardson of Massachusetts, and II. E. 
Taylor of New Jersey for the eastern group: <>. E. 
Bradfute of Ohio, II. J. Sconce of Illinois, and C. 11. 
Gray of Missouri for the central group; W. II. 
Walker of California. W. G. Jameson of Colorado, 
and John F. Burton of Utah for the Far West group: 
and Gray Silver of West Virginia. J. W. Martin cf 
Georgia. George Bishop of Oklahoma for the South, 
It must be said seriouslj and sincerely that this 
federation as organized is the most hopeful organiza¬ 
tion that has thus far been formed in the interest of 
the American fa finer. If it can be kept as a democratic 
organization, authorized by and directed by plain 
working farmers, at the last analysis, it will prove 
a wonderful help in solving the great problems which 
are now looming up before us. The Farm Bureaus 
have certainly done remarkably fine work, and their 
influence is shown in every county of the country. 
They have been most successful where the plain 
farmers have joined them and taken a hand in their 
management. The thing that will save this federa¬ 
tion and make it a marvelous blessing to American 
agriculture, will be the spirit which we believe will 
carry the strong purpose and simple sense of justice 
of the plain American farmer up through the ma¬ 
chinery of this federation until it makes itself felt 
in national affairs. 
The “Cold Storage” Egg Business 
The Council of Farms and Markets has again 
yielded to the dealers, packers and cold storage in¬ 
terests, and discontinued the stamping of cold stor 
age eggs on the shell, and eggs laid last April in the 
South and West and Southwest, held in storage 
since, are now freely sold as “strictly fresh eggs,” 
with the virtual sanction of the department. Thi- 
competition with fresh-laid eggs in the city markets 
makes it hard for nearby producers to stay in busi¬ 
ness, producing eggs in cold weather and meeting 
high-price feed bills. If the producers of these stor¬ 
age eggs got the benefit, there would be some com¬ 
pensation in the encouragement of larger production, 
but as it is the extra profit goes to the speculator, 
the railroads, the cold storage warehouse, the 
banker, the jobber and the retailer. All of them get 
their share, and all of them fight for the privilege. 
That no one can be deceived in the custom of the 
traffic is evident from the fact that only about 5 per 
cent of the market requirements are now fresh eggs. 
That means 95 per cent of the city consumption just 
now is cold storage eggs, but stand at any counter 
in the city and watch the sales of fresh eggs, and 
you would never know that there was a cold storage 
egg in existence unless you are an expert in the 
business. Maybe we ought to let this traffic go 
through just as it is; but if so, why organize a de¬ 
partment of the State to help delude and swindle 
the consuming public, and to discourage a productive 
industry that is no bonanza at best? 
Short Weight of Milk 
We carry milk to Borden’s here, and a good share of 
the time we get short weight. Some days we are cut 
as much as 40 to 100 lbs., and some of the farmers 
complain. Now they come and tell us that our milk 
is too thin, and they can’t accent it if it doesn't im¬ 
prove. Our milk has averaged 3.5 butterfat and is 3.4 
now, according to their own test. The milk when left 
in pans forms a thick layer of cream in an hour's time. 
We thought perhaps they were trying to get back at 
us about the short weight complaint. It might he in 
the feed, but the other farmers’ who feed the same as 
we do get 3.6 butterfat. while the ones that keep track 
of the weight get cut down. propt'cer. 
Dutchess Co., N. Y*. 
The only way milk producers can be sure that they 
get full weight and correct fat test, is to incorporate 
their local branches and employ an agent to be on 
hand to weigh the milk and test it for fat. The 
expense would be trifling compared to the saving: 
even if there were no losses now. and consequently 
no saving, the experience of doing business right for 
themselves and the satisfaction of knowing that they 
were getting their due would be worth the cost. 
No dealer can legally reject 3.4 per cent milk on 
the ground that it is “too thin.” That argument is 
indeed “too thin." The milk sold to consumers in 
New York City in the past has not averaged 3.4 per 
cent, and when milk of this fat content or more is 
sold as it comes from the cow it is within the defined 
standards. 
There is another reason for the demand for high 
fat content in this case. If the milk now sold as it 
is bought in liquid form without adulterating three 
per cent milk would he more profitable to the dealer 
than milk with higher fat content. Indeed, some 
small dealers have complained and threatened to 
refuse milk of high fat content because they had to 
sell it under the law for the same price as three per 
cent milk. But when the milk is adulterated or 
when the fat is used for other purposes the result 
is different. This month three per cent milk is 
worth $3.33 per cwt. That is $1.11 for each one per 
cent of fat. Milk containing four per cent fat con¬ 
tains proportionately more other solids, hut this 
extra fat and other solids costs the dealer only 40 
cents, so that he buys the extra quality in four per 
cent milk at a saving of 71. cents. Figured in another 
way butter today i- worth 71 cents a pound. On 
that basis pure butterfat is worth 88 cents, and the 
fat in 100 lbs. of four per cent milk is worth $3.43, 
exclusive of the skim-milk. So that on four per 
cent milk as compared with three per cent, milk the 
dealer would have a profit of 48 cents on fat alone, 
and lie would have the benefit of the other extra 
solids besides. 
This does not consider the cost of manufacture 
of butter. TYe have figured actual values. Cost of 
manufacture ought not be considered, because the 
user of whole milk gets its actual value, and there 
is no good reason why the manufacturing cost of 
another product should he considered. 
Collecting Milk Accounts 
The R. N.-Y. recently collected a milk claim fur 
two Delaware County (N. Y.) farmers that will 
interest milk producers generally, and particularly 
in the New York producing district. The complaint 
was substantially this: On the 20th of February, 
1918, Mr. Otis P. Canfield, a dairy farmer at Stam¬ 
ford, N. Y., called the Sheffield Farms creamery at 
Hobart. N. Y.. on the telephone and inquired if the 
creamery wanted his milk. He was told “bring it 
along.” On the following day Mr. James II. Stowe, 
a neighbor, accompanied Mr. Canfield with his milk 
to the Hobart creamery. On inquiry Mr. Stowe was 
“directed to drive up and unload.” 
At that time the price of milk to the producer was 
made by the Federal Milk Commission, and nothing 
whatever was said on either side about price or time 
deliveries. On or about the 15th of March, payment 
was made in full to both Mr. Canfield and Mr. Stowe 
for the milk delivered during February at. the price 
fixed by the Federal Commission. Milk was deliv¬ 
ered daily by both patrons during March. During 
the last week of March Mr. Stowe notified the cream¬ 
ery that he would make no deliveries after March 
31 as he had rented his farm, and Mr. Canfield gave 
similar notice for other reasons, whereupon the Shef¬ 
field Company figured the March deliveries on the 
basis of butterfat value, then went back and figured 
the February deliveries on the butterfat basis also, 
and brought out a charge of $52.39 against Mr. Can- 
field and $44.97 against Mr. Stowe for alleged over¬ 
payment for the 10 days of February, this being the 
difference between the milk price and the butterfat 
price. This was done on the theory that these pat¬ 
rons were not entitled to the regular price, since 
they did not deliver during a six months’ period. By 
this process of figuring Mr. Stowe was short about 
$270 on his March returns, and Mr. Canfield was 
short nearly $300. 
Complaint was filed with the officers of the Dairy¬ 
men’s League, but this did not result in payment of 
the claim, and while the loss was a heavy one for 
them in view of the cost of feed and other expenses, 
the patrons hesitated to attempt redress through 
legal processes, and appealed to Tiie Rural New- 
Yorker. The case seemed to us such an arbitrary 
disregard of the producers’ right, we made request 
for a settlement. This was refused and we brought 
suit in the city courts to recover judgment for the 
difference between the regular price for the milk 
delivered for the two months and the amount paid. 
When the case was ready for trial Messrs. Canfield 
and Stowe came on to testify, but unfortunately the 
case was put over by the court, and considerable de¬ 
lay occurred before all parties could again be brought 
together. When the case was again ready for trial 
last month the Sheffield Company offered to pay 
$200 on Mr. Stowe’s claim and $225 on Mr. Can- 
field’-. To avoid further annoyance and expense 
they accepted this settlement and we had the pleas¬ 
ure of -ending them checks for these amounts. 
Up-State Farm Notes 
DAIRY IMPROVEMENT,—Delaware County has 
nearly one-half of all the cow-testing associations in this 
State. In a talk to Cortland County farmers on Sat¬ 
urday. H. C. McKenzie, of Delaware County, told of 
the business methods the dairymen of that county em¬ 
ploy by first determining the actual value of each cow. 
He advised improving the quality of milk as one way to 
increase its consumption and told of methods in use that 
make Walton milk very popular. M. J. Peck, of Cort¬ 
land. called attention to the fact that some of Cortland 
County's milk is the best in the State and that though 
Delaware County had the cow-testing associations, Cort¬ 
land County had the cows to test and that such asso¬ 
ciations were badly needed, lie said too many farmers 
did not know the actual value of their own cows aud 
told of one cow that was bought of a leading Tompkins 
County farmer for $175. She changed hands several 
times at that price. Mr. Peck secured her. developed 
her milking qualities, and sold her for $260. She could 
not be bought now for $300. M. S. Nye. a well-known 
breeder of llolsteins. advised weighing the milk of eve.y 
cow to determine which were worth breeding to a pure¬ 
bred sire. He urged the listing of sires needed, and of 
sires for sale, also surplus cows, with the Farm Bureau 
during the coming year. Two Gouverneur dairies have 
.lost shipped 10 calves to members of the Clinton Coimtv 
Calf Club; seven purebred Ayrshire.- and three pure¬ 
bred llolsteins. The animals were consigned to C. B. 
Till-on. manager of the Clinton County Farm Bureau, 
and will be'sold to members of the county chib by him. 
A new departure in developing junior interest in dairy 
work this year will be the dairy cow clubs for boys and 
girls. This plan offers immediate and visible returns 
to the young dairymen. The State Bankers’ Association 
through its agricultural department has arranged to 
finance these and other clubs and has set aside $1,000 to 
purchase emblems for the club mem tiers. 
CHEESE SALES EXCEED RECORD.—The Gou- 
verueur Dairy Board has closed its most successful sea- 
sou. It held thirty-two meetings and had sold a total 
of six and a half million pounds of cheese since April 5. 
The lowest price received was 28 cents, and the highest 
in July, was 31% cents. A total of 89.920 boxes were 
sold a nearly $2,000,000. Lust year 73.022 boxes were 
sold. m. G. F. 
