Ike RURAL. NEW-YORKER 
April 19, 1924 
t>58 
on a commission basis, so much per hundred pounds 
of cheese made. Undoubtedly the farmer receives 
the full financial return to which he is entitled, but 
the cheese maker endeavoring to make a good show¬ 
ing for himself varies the weights and tests in order 
to return an apparently high price per hundred 
pounds. In running the association, the tendency of 
our operators is to give over-liberal tests and weights 
which has an effect to a lower return from the op¬ 
eration.” 
Q. “What particular advantage is there to the 
farmer in the multiple price plan?” 
A. “Ours is a Class I organization, but we took 
the situation as we found it, with comlenseries, dry 
powder and other factories. These had to be con¬ 
sidered. We had to meet the competition of the 
West, and to keep the by-product factories in our 
territory we were obliged to make class prices. In 
consideration of this we expect them to turn Class I 
milk over to us for liquid consumption, if a shortage 
exists during seasons of low production. The only 
alternative to this would be to take over all these 
plants. The multiple plan of selling milk is the only 
means whereby the farmer can obtain the same re¬ 
sults for his product through existing agencies as he 
would obtain were he handling all this milk himself 
through one plant. He thereby reduces the amount 
of money which is necessary for him to raise for 
capital purposes and uses the brains and finance of 
already established agencies. These agencies oper¬ 
ating in our territory have established markets of 
their own, which they more or less have title to, and 
from which we obtain the benefit.” 
Q. “Is it not true that the multiple price plan af¬ 
fords opportunity to manipulate the milk and 
classes?” 
A. “If you mean reporting milk which is used in 
('lass 1 as Class 4, etc., yes; there is that opportunity 
for so reporting. However, we check up all reports 
coming from the plants of the dealers handling our 
milk, and have a corps of competent auditors on the 
road making these monthly audits, and collections 
for adjustments are continually being made, and 
where such adjustments lead to dispute it is some¬ 
times necessary to resort to the courts.” 
Q. “Did any class of producers or any organiza- 
,tion gain from the November and January reduc¬ 
tions?” 
A. “No. All suffered.” 
Q. “In view of the expense of the pool plants, do 
you not think that the surplus could be handled 
cheaper in the local farm-owned plants?” 
A. “I think the present plan more successful than 
the local plants. We have not been able to fully 
demonstrate the proposition, because we are build¬ 
ing a new business, but experience has shown that 
the locally owned plants evade their responsibility 
in this matter.” 
Q. “What do you think of the suggestion to stand¬ 
ardize production by paying commercial prices for 
the average yearly production, and by-product 
prices for the irregular production?” 
A. “That may come, but we are very well satisfied 
with production as it is, as there is an ample amount 
of production for all months of the year. It would 
increase Winter production, and until Winter de¬ 
mand increases we do not want to encourage more 
production at a time when costs are at the peak. 
Under present conditions we would rather have the 
heavy production in May, June and July, which are 
the low cost months of the year.” 
Q. “What plans have you, Mr. Slocum, to correct 
the present deplorable conditions and get better 
prices for milk?” 
A. “I see only one plan. That is for all dairymen 
to get solidly behind one organization. We have a 
unique location for co-operation. An organization 
cannot stabilize the market with much less than 90 
per cent of the product, which is practically all of it. 
In the past possibly our Association might have been 
in error from the standpoint of its own welfare in 
holding out for the highest prices. On that plan the 
market began to slip away from our members, and 
we found, to hold the markets for our producers, we 
must meet the competitive conditions of the market 
or eventually lose it all. Our present plan is to hold 
the trade that we have and obtain as much more as 
we are able through service and good merchandizing 
methods.” 
Q. “Your plan then is that all producers come into 
the pool?” 
A. “Yes. We can see no other plan which recog¬ 
nizes the fundamental difficulties and offers any cor¬ 
rection for them.” 
Q. “From the indications, do you look for 90 per 
cent of them to do so?” 
A. “I would not say that. We are hopeful that 
eventually enough producers will see the benefits to 
be derived from this plan, and will be willing to 
support it.” 
Q. “Would you be willing to make terms with the 
other groups to avoid the competition and price cut¬ 
ting?” 
A. “There is no one in the other groups with au¬ 
thority to act for producers or to negotiate with this 
Association. This prevents us from doing anything 
further than a discussion which can get nowhere. 
Both the Federal and State laws on the question of 
restraint in trade hold us within certain limits.” 
Q. “Would you be willing now to help arrange a 
conference of a dozen of the best lay dairymen of 
the territory, both poolers and non-poolers, but with¬ 
out group bias to sit in with two representatives of 
each group to work out a solution of this problem 
in the interests of producers?” 
A. “Yes. That would be a good thing. I am 
willing to do anything to better conditions, it 
should be a permanent, or at least a reconvening 
committee.” 
Q. “Would you be willing to make some changes 
in your plans if necessary to harmonize all inter¬ 
ests?” 
A. “Yes. We would make changes that did not 
affect fundamentals. We would consider any and all 
suggestions.” 
The Non-poo! Association 
P RESIDENT W. S. Rhodes, and Vice-president C. 
W. Newton of the Non-poolers Association con¬ 
sented to an interview for that organization. “The 
first thing I want to say,” volunteered. Mr. New¬ 
ton, “is that all the associations have been neglect¬ 
ful in not conducting experiments to develop ways 
to utilize by-products of milk. Other industries have 
made great strides in finding uses and markets for 
waste products. I believe we have great possibilities 
in this direction in the dairy business. 
“The sale of milk on the city platform,” they 
agreed, “is a bad policy for the producer. It is a 
highly perishable product. It must be sold promptly. 
It is a surplus forcing itself on a market that does 
not need it, or at best pretends it does not need it. 
The dealers make their own price for it, and that 
price is used at the next monthly sale time as an 
argument to reduce the price for the following 
month. With the platform sales policy, the dealers 
make not only the platform price but practically 
the monthly contract price as well. It is not an 
economic policy for producers to sell on the city 
platform under any circumstances. The surplus, 
when it exists, should be kept out of the liquid milk 
market, and the dealers should be supplied on a 
definite period contract. Our refusal to ship milk 
until it is sold is one reason why we have been able 
to return producers higher prices than some of the 
other groups. Our dealers want a sure and regu¬ 
lar supply, and we are able to get the benefit of 
that desire in a better price for our members. At 
that we are, of course, affected by the platform cut 
prices and the competition in the monthly contracts, 
but even with the competition drawback we are 
able through the monthly contract to exert a 
stabilizing influence on the market. In that way 
we set the price for a large volume of milk because 
it is accepted by Non-poolers generally who supply 
more than one-half the metropolitan supply. 
“If the present scramble for the liquid market 
continues the price must go still lower during the 
coming months. Some of it is close to the butter 
and cheese values already and in some cases it may 
go below that level. The price cutting in the up¬ 
state cities now admitted by the Pool helps lower 
prices in these cities, and at the same time has the 
effect of sending rnoi-e milk from these centers to 
New York City with the double effect on price re¬ 
duction. 
“The multiple price scheme is an invention of the 
Borden Company. Every dealer handling a perish¬ 
able product will have something left over at times. 
The dealer must order the maximum requirements 
of his consumers. In the old order, when their de¬ 
mand fell off he had a surplus incidental to his 
trade. This is rightly the dealers liazai-d. He pro¬ 
vides for it in his margin of pi’ofit, but under the 
new plan the producer carries this hazard. The 
dealer throws the left-over daily supply back on 
the producer, at by-product prices. Taking the plan 
as a whole the small dealer may not save much on 
this arrangement; but a lai-ge dealer with an iru- 
poi’tant business in manufactured products l’eaps a 
rich harvest through the purchase of milk on the 
classified price plan. 
“Our expei'ience in the Buffalo territory inclines 
us to believe that px-oducers can be easily induced 
to produce a practically unifonn supply the year 
around. We have been working on this plan for 
some time, and farmers are responding to it readily. 
Without any drastic regulations we think this is 
one of the important factors in a successful market¬ 
ing scheme. 
“Our pi-esent plan of fixing skim-milk is also un¬ 
fortunate. If a dealer dumps it into the sewer ox 
the near-by river, he pays nothing for it. If. how¬ 
ever, he attempts to utilize it, he is obliged to pay 
for it. It costs money to prodxxce it. It has a valxxe, 
and the price and terms should be fixed to stop the 
waste and enc-oui’age a regular use of it.” 
Q. “Do you think the four organizations are earn¬ 
ing their cost to producei*s at the pi'esent time?” 
A. “We think our oi'ganization earns its cost to 
producers even xxnder present distressing circum¬ 
stances. For example we believe that oxxr being 
able to go direct from the producei*s to the distri¬ 
butors’ committee and presenting to them the con¬ 
ditions faced by their pi’oducers benefited the non¬ 
pool farmer to the extent of 10 cents per 100 lbs. 
for the month of March, and 47 ceixts per 100 lbs. for 
nine days in Janxxary. The organization has not at¬ 
tained the results that it could had it had the sup- 
poi-t of all non-pooling farmei*s who have received 
the same benefits as the members. The present 
price cutting policy if continued will impoverish all 
dairy farmers and demoralize the industry.” 
Q. “Are you willing to sit in with the other groups 
and work out a plan fair to all that will stabilize 
the business?” 
A. “We are. You ask us to limit our replies to 
constnxctive policies; but you may pei’mit us to say 
that from the very first we have proposed a get- 
together policy, and have always given assui’ances 
that we would abide by the discussion of a majority 
if producers were given opportunity to change their 
plans and their management to suit themselves.” 
Q. “Do you want to suggest a plan?” 
A. “Off-hand our suggestion is that our association 
would assume responsibility for the sale of all milk 
used for liquid consumption at an expense of one 
cent per 100 lbs., each gi’oup cai’ing for its own 
surplus.” 
Q. “You would hardly expect the other and lai’ger 
groups to give up their own organizations and go 
over in a body to yours, would you?” 
A. “We have the organization best qualified for 
the work, and in the best position in the market to 
do so.” 
Q. “Would you be equally willing to sit in with 
the other groups in a conference committee domi¬ 
nated by high-class dairymen with no official connec¬ 
tion and no partisan bias for any group to work out 
a solution of the present dairy problem?” 
A. “Yes. The ideal is one united organization 
with 100 per cent of shipping producers in it. We 
have no policies and no ambitions that would stand 
in the Avay of such an organization. We would not 
join in any plan that a small minority group can 
always control it and fix its policies. It would be 
folly for us to do so because our members would 
not follow our lead if we attempted to commit them 
to it. The essence of co-opei-ation as of democracy 
is information and a ballot for each member, (live 
us these with proper safeguards and we will work 
out an organization and a service that will need no 
ax*gument to get farmers into it, and no courts or 
law to keep them in. You would not be able to 
keep them out. We are ready to help construct such 
a service.” 
Eastern States Milk Producers 
ORGAN B. GARLOCK, president of the East¬ 
ern States Milk Produeei's, Inc., talked for that 
association. Under present conditions, he said, the 
unorganized farmer and competing groups who ac¬ 
cept dealers’ offers for milk make the price. This 
pi’actice nullifies all attempts to stabilize prices. It 
defeats all attempts to get togethei*. In the last 
analysis then, the dealers are making the price for 
milk because they can buy through unorganized 
farmers and weak-kneed groups. 
“At a meeting of three dairy gi’oups in Utica last 
June, Sheffield Farms and Eastern States suggested 
an incTease of one cent a quart. November 1 we 
raised our platform price on the city platform and 
it remained so until the reduction by the Pool No¬ 
vember 7. 
“Under present competitive conditions the price 
must continue for some months at least to gravitate 
to the level of the by-product values. That being so, 
continuing as we are, the organizations can give no 
(Continued on Page 073) 
