‘The RURAL NEW-YORKER 
641 
Final Results of the Farm Referendum 
The total vote on the farm referendum was 4,587. 
Many of the voters reported that they had consulted 
neighbors, and discussed the questions with members 
of their local organizations: and that their vote 
represented the whole neighborhood or the whole 
organization. The following letter is a fair sample 
of many such communications: 
It occurred to me that your farm referendum was too 
valuable not to receive wide attention. So I secured its 
presentation at our last meeting of the Cortland 
(’minty Pomona Grange, and I am very glad to report 
I hat the votes w ere practically unanimous in all cases. 
Farm sentiment i- for the most part very clear-cut on 
these important topics, and in this case the referendum 
t ('presents the sentiments of about 100 leading rural 
people of Cortland County. I would urge that all 
Granges ami other farm organizations take immediate 
action on these topics that our representatives at 
Albany may know our wishes, aud particularly that 
those legislator' from the cities may have no excuse for 
not knowing the wishes of rural people on important 
measures. • M. G. F. 
Another Master of a Pomona Grange reported a 
poll of 1.500 members. It is safe to assume that 
every single vote from a single family represented 
the sentiment of an average of live votes. Indeed, 
many voters so stated, so that the vote fairly speaks 
for something between 20.000 and 30,000 voters. 
The single votes a< recorded were as follows: 
Shall the New York State daylight saving law he 
repealed? 
Yes. 4.587; No. 134. 
Shall the agricultural law of New York State be com¬ 
pletely revised where needed, and inkers removed? 
Yes. 4.210; No. 12. 
Shall the Commissioner of Agriculture and the Com¬ 
missioner of Foods aud Markets be elected by direct 
vote at general elections? 
Yes. 4.450 : No, 55. 
Shall the State create eommssions arbitrarily to fix 
tlie price of any farm product? 
Yes. 43; No. 4.355. 
Shall the dog law limit the amount to be paid for 
fancy animals or fowls? 
Yes. 2.432: No. 1,020. 
Shall the State school laws be amended so as to take 
same of the present arbitrary powers from the State 
1 department ? 
Yes. 3,221: No, 62. 
I>o you favor a referendum rote like this to represent 
farm demands at Albany? 
Yes. 4.280 : No. 10. 
'Flie vote was singularly almost unanimous, except 
as to the dog law. and there were many indications 
that the information on this proposition was not 
complete. The approval of the first three proposi¬ 
tions was generally followed by a “no” on the price- 
fixing proposition of the fourth. 
The vote clearly demonstrates what some of us 
knew before, that farmers know what they want, 
and when a fair -proposition is clearly expressed they 
give a prompt and intelligent expression of their 
sentiments. 
No member of the Legislature can now be in doubt 
as to farm wishes on these propositions. There can 
be no mistaking the general sentiment from those 
wlm voted from every corner of the State. If every 
voter had had an opportunity to vote the percentage 
would not be much, if any. changed. Considering 
that the ballot was printed only once, and conse¬ 
quently at best there was only one ballot to a family, 
and further, that many do not like to mutilate the 
paper, the number voting was all that could be ex- 
reeted. The approval of the opportunity was gen¬ 
eral, and many valuable suggestions were made to 
make the voting more convenient in the future. 
Already other organizations have expressed inten¬ 
tions of following this plan of referring propositions 
to their membership. This is just what we hoped 
might be the result. When farmers find a means of 
expressing their wishes on their own problems and 
wishes they will soon find a way to enforce their 
demands. The movement is started none too soon. 
The Agricultural Legislative Situation at 
Albany 
NO RELIEF FN SIGHT.—There is nothing in the 
Albany situation t<> comfort either the producer or 
the consumer of food. There is an abundance of 
talk and argument for political effect, but no real 
attempt to solve the problem of a food supply. So 
'"tig as the public remains satisfied with explana- 
1 mis and apologies and partisan arguments, they 
noecl look for no relief from present conditions ex- 
< epi as time and natural forces work changes. 
DISAPPOINTED FARMERS. —Last year Gov¬ 
ernor Smith was expected to take a strong hand in 
the farm and food situation. During his campaign 
im election he had promised to do so, and many 
tanners who had resented the abuse of agriculture 
dining the previous administration turned to him 
;,s a reproof of past wrongs and as a hope of sub- 
•stantial redress. They relied on Governor Smith's 
promises, but he failed them. His only suggestion 
was a minor change in the law to make the Food 
and Markets Department a bureau in the Agricul¬ 
tural Department. He suggested leaving the farm 
and market regency as it was. He had an oppor¬ 
tunity and a provocation to take a strong hand in 
the milk problem. He neglected the opportunity and 
the duty. 
CHANGED CONDITIONS.—This year the Gov¬ 
ernor has gone hack to his pre-election promises to 
revise the agricultural laws, to restore the functions 
of the Market Department and to make the whole 
agricultural service of the State responsive to the 
needs of the farms. Last year nothing could have 
resisted this appeal. This year it fell on deaf ears. 
Confidence was lacking. The feeling was that the 
Governor had played politics with the proposition 
last year, and they scented more politics in this 
year's change of policy. 
FOOD AND MILK PROBLEMS.—The unwilling¬ 
ness to renew enthusiasm over the Governor's belat¬ 
ed proposal was increased by the reactionary recom¬ 
mendations of his reconstruction committee, and the 
blunder of his proposed milk legislation. The Fed¬ 
eral Food Commission first allured him with a 
fair price for food sedative. Unable to exert any 
influence whatever on the current price of milk, the 
Fair Price Committee resorted to investigation and 
finally proposed legislation which, if enacted, would 
increase its cost to the consumer. The distrust of the 
Governor's belated legislative proposals was further 
increased by his ready acceptance of the Battle re¬ 
port. It is not necessary to question the good inten¬ 
tions or sincerity of the members of the Governor’s 
committees and commissions. Many of the mem¬ 
bers represented the best intelligence and ability of 
the State, but there was a singular consistency of 
fatality and error in every recommendation they 
made to the Governor. This was especially empha¬ 
sized whenever they touched agricultural or food 
subjects. The consistency of these errors and the 
ready acceptance of them by the Governor could not 
fail to raise the suggestion that back of it all there 
must 1 ie some superior authority directing the pro¬ 
ceedings for an ulterior purpose. 
DISCOURAGING CONDITIONS.—In the mean¬ 
time the other side is not making an enviable repu¬ 
tation for service. It is defeating the bad features 
of the proposed milk bills, but it is attempting noth¬ 
ing constructive or helpful in place of them. Farm 
ers are selling milk for less than it costs them t<> 
produce it. and conditions are growing daily mor - 
discouraging. The middlemen in every line take a 
bigger share than ever of the consumer’s dollar. The 
Governor has misdirect authority over the Food and 
Markets Department. The Legislature has. With 
new laws giving the Department more authority it 
has all the power necessary to take a strong hand in 
the problem of the distribution of milk and other 
farm products. It lias now an annual appropriation 
of more than $200,000. No new commission is need¬ 
ed. No new law is essential. The law we have is 
ample. It is through this Food and Markets De¬ 
partment that the State should exercise its functions 
to reduce the cost of food distribution and to stabil¬ 
ize the milk industry. It is doing nothing of the 
kind. 
NO CONSTRUCTIVE POLICY.—The one side 
suggests legislation that appeals to the city con¬ 
sumer. but injects features that are sure to justify 
the other side in defeating the whole measure. Each 
side denounces the other and appeals to the preju¬ 
dice of its partisans. Neither one nor the other do a 
thing to help the situation. The middlemen, the 
food trusts and the milk barons direct the move¬ 
ments from the one side, as they do from the other. 
The political servants of the food trust are free 
agents only in their privilege of using their ingenuity 
on both sides to fool the public. When we take a 
hand at selecting the men and women we send to 
Albany we shall he able to dissolve this partnership 
between the government and the food trusts. Then 
we can figure the cost of production like other manu¬ 
facturers, and get it. 
Financing the Potato Growers 
The farmers around Iliglitstown. N. .T.. have or¬ 
ganized the Giant Potato Growers’ Association. This 
takes its name from the Giant or American Giant 
potato, a variety largely grown in that section. At 
a recent meeting there was a lively discussion on 
co-operation and financing the grower. It seems that 
most of these growers are financed by the dealers. 
During the discussion one member suggested the 
following method of financing a co-operative associa¬ 
tion : 
Fad' member of the co-operative association to give a 
non-interest bearing note to th^ treasurer of the asso¬ 
ciation for $25 for each acre of potatoes he has planted, 
or usually plants, said notes to be used as collateral 
security only, for borrowing any moneys to operate the 
association’s business. The association would then 
give its interest-bearing notes for tiie necessary sums 
it would need from time to time, until it had estsiblished 
a credit sufficient to borrow its moneys without pledging 
collateral notes. 
After some discussion this plan was endorsed by 
all present. A committee was appointed to consider 
it. Bankers present at the meeting said that the 
banks would lend all the money the growers needed 
on their real estate. He said farmers did not come 
to (lie banks for direct loans as other business men 
did. 
A Fair Statement of Farm Conditions 
Dairying is the most important part of our farming 
here, with nearly everyone a member of the Dairymen's 
League and. of coarse. League prices for fluid milk. 
Next in importance is hay. which brought $1 6 to 820 
until now. when dealers offer up to $30 for immediate 
delivery. This means, of course, that little can be 
moved on account of bad roads. Last season’s wheat 
crop_ was large both in yield and acreage, and brings 
$2.15. Buckwheat was a good crop but .small area, and 
brought only $2.50 per ewt.. which resulted in much 
being ground for cow feed. Potatoes were a fair crop. 
$2.25 per bu. at car. Oats were very poor, none sold. 
Barley fair, but small acreage. Corn was verv good, 
with every silo full. Pork. 18 to 20c dressed, but little 
raised beyond home needs. Beef. 15c by side. Eggs 
scarce at 70c. Butter. 65c. sold mostly to farmers; ciry 
people eat oleo. Now. when we cash rlii- in and buy < ur 
supplies from the local stores, we pay 10c for sugar. 5<> 
for the cheapest coffee. 22c for kerosene. 22c for twine. 
fced_$75 to $00 per ton. flour $4.30. per 40-lb. sack. <■ ai 
$10.75 per ton. and one-third stone. Day help for 
thrashing and silo filling costs $4. Regular hired men 
are extinct as the dodo. The help problem will result 
in greatly reduced acreage in all crops. Many farms 
which used to employ two to five men will be’ run hv 
the owner or tenant alone, as they cannot and will not 
try to compete with shops in either wages or hours of 
labor. What this will result in it will bp hard to tell. 
Perhaps more price fixing to stem the II. C. L. or im¬ 
ports from cheap labor countries (if they have food to 
spare). But. one thing is certain: it takes a year to 
grow a crop, while a man can starve in a week. 
Again, duty-free wools have not furnished cheap 
clothing, hut a well-protected wool market would again 
fill our empty pastures with sheep and insure a full 
supply of clothing. The destruction of the sheep indus¬ 
try has resulted in an overloaded dairy business in New 
York. Dairymen do not seem to realize rhis. but the 
sheep man would eliminate the trouble of surplus milk. 
The dog question could be settled by simply making an 
"pen season on dogs. Any good sheep man w'.mid know 
how to clean them out. Many farms are offered for sale 
and some find buyers from the West where land is high. 
Li many instances these newcomers try to resell, aud 
she profits of speculation become more important than 
any gain from farming. Some of our best farm are de¬ 
clining in productiveness as a result of frequent change. 
Tompkins Co.. N. Y. c. ii. Scofield. 
Small Dairy and Milk Distribution 
I feel it a duty to write you how much we small dairy¬ 
men appreciate your paper. It is like having a close 
friend drop in for a visit, and a friend who has the in¬ 
formation and who is not afraid to say what he knows 
to be right. I think that is why we all loved Roosevelt. 
He came right out and said what he thought right, and 
not what high officials and money kings wanted him to 
say. Anyone who reads Mr. Dillon’s speech to the 
meeting of city consumers needs no other proof that we 
have one man who is not on the “pay list" of the milk 
trust or city politicians. 
I think your plan of selling milk through the small 
stores is right. Let those who are not willing to walk a 
few yards for their milk pay for its delivery, but let the 
prudent have it. The farm woman goes further for her 
morning supply of milk than the city woman would go 
to the local store, aud unless the consumer is willing to 
discommode herself a little she has no right to ask her 
sister on the farm to work for nothing in order to save 
city inconvenience. 
M hat we need is a lower cost of distribution. Gov¬ 
ernment price-fixing will not help. It would make mat¬ 
ters worse. The government has helped in reducing the 
cost of production. It would do greater service if it 
would help to reduce cost of distribution. It probahlv 
will not do it. and in that case the producers must find 
a way to develop sales through the stores themselves. 
We want milk sold at a price that will increase its 
use. We will meet any demand if there is a small profit 
in making milk. Farmers are probably as a whole 
making less milk per farm than ever before. \Ve can¬ 
not increase production at the present price without ad¬ 
ditional loss, and we are losing at a rati' that will soon 
put us out of the dairy business. I know of five farm¬ 
ers who are paying more just for feed bought at the 
dealers than their milk check amounts to. It' it were 
not for the economies in living and the side helps from 
eggs, chickens and wool, it would be hard for the small 
dairyman to exist. The small farmer has a pretty hard 
job to make more than a living, but we are thankful 
that we are not the city man. just the same. We love 
the farm life, the stock and raising of crops. If it were 
not that we do love the life I am sure we would uot 
work for the money part of it. The city man can thank 
his lucky stars for this, for where would he l> > without 
the farmer? Don't ease up on the small store plan. It 
has got to come. The consumer has got to have cheaper 
milk, ami the farmer must have a living price. Two 
rights are bound to win over one wrong. 
MARCUS S. POTTER. 
