The RURAL NEW-YORKER 
I 163 
/ 
Which System Do Farmers Want? 
OME advocates of the centralized plan of farm 
organization would dismiss the whole subject 
of adaptable forms or plans with the arbitrary dic¬ 
tum that those who favor a decentralized plan are 
enemies of the fanner, and intent only on the defeat 
of co-operation. The friends of the decentralized or 
local-federated plan might with equal logic reverse 
the argument, and charge all autocracies with being 
enemies of the farm and bent on the discouragement 
and ultimate defeat of co-operation. Neither conten¬ 
tion would get us anywhei’e. Such argument is only 
an appeal to prejudice and passion, and entirely for¬ 
eign to the spirit of co-operation. 
The American Farm Bureau Federation has adopt¬ 
ed a wiser course. More, than two years ago it ap¬ 
pointed a committee of research to work out co-op¬ 
erative marketing plans. The committee consists of 
Dr. Henry C. Taylor, Prof. H. B. Hibbai’d, Dr. E. G. 
Morse and the late Prof. W'm. F. Handschin. The 
dairy px-oblem was taken xxp first, and Dr. Theodore 
Macklin of the Department of Agricultural Econom¬ 
ics of Wisconsin University supervised the work. 
After two years of study in co-operation with the 
Illinois Agricultural Association, the Farm Bureau 
Fedei’ations of both Iowa and California, together 
with the agricultural colleges of these States, and 
studies in Texas and Wisconsin, a comprehensive re¬ 
port has been made and is now being distributed in 
pamphlet form by the American Farm Bureau Asso¬ 
ciation, Chicago. 
After a compx*ehensive analysis of co-operative 
marketing. Dr. Macklin indorses the decentralized 
plan. He says: 
The best experience during a period of more than 30 
yeai’s points to the wisdom of building co-operative 
dairy marketing upon the foundations, first, of local 
associations to which farmers are locally joined by mem¬ 
bership and contract; second, by federating locals into 
central sales organizations with or without intermediate 
district organizations, depending upon circumstances 
and the problems to be met. 
The report is conservative, but finn in its opposi¬ 
tion to the centralized plan. It says: 
By one group the problem is thought to be beet at¬ 
tacked by 'having all milk handled entirely under the 
responsible direction of one large centi'al marketing and 
sales organization. This assumes that the work of con¬ 
verting milk into finished products and of selling all of 
these finished products can be more efficiently done 
under the control of one overhead company. Its chief 
argument is that this unified control of all milk in 
essential to cause milk to be directed in balanced 
amounts into each of the many finished products made 
from the raw material, milk. Upon this central author¬ 
ity, assumed to be all powexfful and capable of switch¬ 
ing milk into its various channels of use, is placed con¬ 
fident hope and expectation, as well as the actual re¬ 
sponsibility of bringing about increased price levels. 
These increased price levels are idealized as the single 
main purpose of co-operative marketing, thus pinning 
the hopes of co-operation entirely upon an elusive and 
uncertain objective. And this is done in apparent dis¬ 
regard of the fact that the increased price level in co¬ 
operative experience has almost everywhere inevitably 
defeated itself through the responding wave of increased 
supply. 
To attempt to gain this sort of uncertain benefit for 
dairy farmers, these centralization enthusiasts would 
cast aside the local co-operative associations and their 
respective sales federations which have grown into be¬ 
ing through 60 years of farmer endeavor. The extreme 
centralized plan is a substitute for the federated plan 
with its homegrown, firmly rooted local co-operatives. 
In centralizing the sale of all dairy products in one 
company, it would transfer control of the sale of each 
finished dairy product from existing co-operative sales 
organizations to the proposed new organization. And this 
sale task of merchandising a variety of finished products 
makes this particular centralized organization a variety 
co-operative instead of a commodity co-operative. In 
doing this, it would either absorb or demolish the exist¬ 
ing federated systems. Unless this occurred the cen¬ 
tralized plan would not come into operation. 
The question involved is whether farmers want a 
complicated system of organization which requires 
lawyers and professional promoters to keep it going, 
and which requires a staggering overhead expense, 
or whether they want a simple system that they can 
understand and operate themselves, and which will 
always be automatically under their own control. 
If they have the chance we think they will keep the 
power to do it themselves. 
Cost of Tuition in Town School 
Enclosed is a clipping from a recent town newspaper. 
Will you quote the law and advise what date it went in 
force, that the board of education of a town high school 
has the power to make resolutions regarding the finan¬ 
cial affairs of the outlying districts, or residents thereof? 
Oswego Co., N. Y. c. H. 
The clipping is as follows: 
To trustees of outlying school districts, and prospec¬ 
tive entrants to Parish High School and grades thereof: 
In accordance with a resolution passed by the Board 
of Education of Parish, N. Y., July 7, 1924, tuition is 
to be charged as follows: 
1. High School department, a charge of $30 per school 
year, said amount to be paid by the district where the 
pupil belongs, and not by the parents or guardians of 
such pupils. 
2. Grade pupils shall be subject to a tuition charge of 
$25 per school year, for which the parents or guar¬ 
dians of such pupils shall be responsible. 
By oi*der of the Board of Education, Mrs. E. I. 
Chateau, Clerk. July 7, 1924. 
ERHAPS yoxi have not read this notice care¬ 
fully. The board of education does not attempt 
to regxxlate the financial affairs of your district, or 
. any of the other distiicts, but simply annoxinces what 
its charge will be when non-resident pupils are 
brought in the high school. Under the law the board 
of education has a right to do this, and to make a 
charge for outside pupils. The State demands that 
children shall attend school up to certain age. If 
the home district does not provide for teaching the 
higher grades the pxipil is entitled to such instruc¬ 
tion and the district mxist arrange to have it given 
elsewhere. If sxich children are sent to town natur¬ 
ally the district must pay part of the cost of con¬ 
ducting the town school, and the local board de¬ 
cides what this compensation must be. The State 
will pay, for such high school instruction, up to 
$50 per year—the balance, if any, is to be paid by 
the district . 
That Child Labor Amendment Again 
You seem to be pretty strongly opposed to the child 
labor amendment. My idea of it is that it is not in¬ 
tended to interfere with farm work at all, but to apply 
to exploiting of children in sweat shops, factories and 
some lines of mining. j. o. keeling. 
E are strongly opposed to this so-called child 
labor amendment. Whei'e do you get the idea 
that it woxxld not interfere with farm work? The 
amendment is brief, and we repeat it here: 
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representative* 
of the United States of America in Congress assembled 
( two-thirds of each house concurring therein), That the 
following article is proposed as an amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States, which, when rati¬ 
fied by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the several 
States, shall be valid to all intents and purposes as a 
part of the Constitution : 
“ARTICLE -. 
“Section I. The Congress shall have power to limit, 
regulate and prohibit the labor of persons under 18 
years of age. 
“Sec. 2. The power of the several States is unim¬ 
paired by this article except that the operation of State 
laws shall be suspended to the extent necessary to give 
effect to legislation enacted by the Congress.” 
As you see it simply gives Congress the power to 
decide about it, and takes such power away from 
State, county and family. It seems entirely clear to 
us that if this amendment should be ratified Con¬ 
gress might, make such a law or rule that the parent 
would have little or no control over the work of his 
children. There is nothing in sight to show that 
farmers would be exempt. On page 1095 we printed 
a note which shows that the National Educational 
Association fully expects that this amendment will 
prohibit child labor on farms. We oppose giving 
Congress any such power. We think it should re¬ 
main with the State and family. Congress has not 
of late shown itself capable of handling such ques¬ 
tions without mixing them up with political matters. 
The amendment has been passed by Congress and 
is now, under the constitution, presented to the 
States for ratification. We understand that one 
State has ratified it, while two others have refused. 
Before it becomes a law three-fourths of the States 
must ratify. It is unquestionably true that some 
children are overworked both in the South and in 
the North, but we think the remedy proposed by this 
law is too drastic. It would do more harm than 
good by making loafers out of many a boy and girl 
who can only gain character and self-reliance 
through sound labor—beginning early in childhood. 
School Children and the Automobile Law 
Could you please help me out with my trouble? My 
daughter passed the rural school in January, and was 
going to go to high school, but sickness in the family 
prevented her from going. Now school time is dx-awing 
near again, and she plans to go to school, but there is 
no way to get to high school. To New Paltz from our 
place is over 15 miles, and we live about three miles 
from the State road. I do not like the idea of a girl 
walking there and back in Winter; in Summer it would 
not be so bad. To Newburgh it is 12 miles, and about 
three miles to walk to the bus, which goes at 7 a. m. To 
Wallkill it is only five miles, but no way of getting 
there at all, especially now that the new law passed that 
no child under IS can drive. Our neighbor has a ma¬ 
chine and his children plan to drive to school, back 
and forth. Do you think that there could be secured 
some special permission from Albany allowing the chil¬ 
dren to drive to school? All the children are under 16. 
Perhaps some of your readers can tell us what to do in 
this case. c B. 
New York. 
E have written to Albany about this and sim¬ 
ilar cases, and the answer is that no excep¬ 
tions will be made in enforcing the new automobile 
law. No license will be given to any person under 18 
years of age. There is no question that this will 
prove a hardship in many cases, such as the one de¬ 
scribed by “C. B.” There will be no way for many 
children to reach the town school. We have often 
seen a fringe of cars around such schools, showing 
that children have diiven in fx*om the country, just 
as in former years they rode or drove horses to the 
“academy.” Many of these children are of good size 
and careful drivers, though not yet 18. The new law 
will make great trouble. We think it too strict. 
There should be some rule or provision for a severe 
road test for such school children, and if they pass 
it an exception should b.e made in their case. 
Free Advice to Farmers 
I The following is taken from the Binghamton (N. Y.) 
Morning Sun. It is one of the best things we have seen 
in a town paper in many a day. Such things greatly 
help, for they give our town people something of an 
idea of the farm problem—which is of far greater im¬ 
portance to America than the League of Nations ever 
was.] 
“Stick to the farm, farmers,” is the New York Her¬ 
ald-Tribune’s admonition. “Those who stay on the 
farm and lend a helping hand fare better than the wan¬ 
derers who regard farming as an occupation to which 
one can always turn when necessity compels,” sagely 
observes the paper. 
Armchair farmers are fond of passing out advice and 
of chastising dirt farmers for their shortcomings in this 
or that. In the Ziegfekl Follies, Will Rogers as Senator 
Doolittle of Oklahoma, glibly informs the pseudo Sena¬ 
tor T.odge offhand that the way to solve the farmer’s 
problem is to “take away his automobile and put him 
back to work.” 
There is a regrettable tendency to treat the farmer 
as though he were a being apart, and his problems as 
though they differed from the problems of other people. 
Sages seated comfortably in the shade readily end the 
world’s economic difficulties by putting other people to 
work. 
Why do they not take a little of their own medicine? 
Instead of taking away the farmer’s automobile and 
putting him “back to work,” why not take away the 
automobile of the city idler and put him to work? 
The farmer as a rule works hard enough and long 
hours, whether or not he possesses an automobile. If he 
has a car it usually is a flivver, in this part of the 
world. He has earned it and he is entitled to it more 
than most of the chaps who are operating costly auto¬ 
mobiles without producing anything, and who in many 
cases have acquired the price of a car by overcharging 
somebody else. 
It would be fairer for the New York Tribune and 
other metropolitan journals to invite city people to go 
to work and stick to their jobs than to suggest the same 
thing to the farmer. The farmer, on the average, needs 
no advice in particular. What he needs is a living 
price for the commodities he has to sell. There is, to be 
sure, a growing conviction that the farmer hasn’t had 
a square deal—that he has had the short end of things 
for some years. 
But the conviction has yet to hit home to a great 
many people, apparently, and the extent of ignorance 
regarding the true status of the farmer is hardly less 
than amazing. Up-Staters, of course, have a better 
conception of the farmer’s problems than down-Staters, 
for obvious reasons. But even up here there is cimss 
ignorance in the populous communities of farm condi¬ 
tions and of the true significance of agriculture as a 
basic industry, without which evei-yone else would 
starve. 
It is of course a fact that but for the farmer the rest 
of us would be subsisting on roots and herbs, and lucky 
to get that diet. With the farms laid waste, roots and 
herbs soon would be at a premium before the onrush of 
hungry city people, too lazy or inexperienced to grub 
for their own living. 
Labor, true enough, is needed on the farms, and most 
of us would be better off if we would quit the regular 
jobs in Summer, get into overalls and help harvest the 
crops. Nobody would miss us, either; the city job on 
the average could wait, if we only knew it. The great 
majority of ue aren’t vital to the nation’s economy, but 
are simply parasites, eating what the farmer raises, and 
pretending to deliver something in return—but. as a 
matter of fact failing to deliver. 
With these facts in mind the farmer’s problems can 
be approached with a great deal more intelligence and 
probity than otherwise. A careful study of them may 
be suggested to all the armchair editors of all the jour¬ 
nals which spout free advice to farmers. They can be of 
infinitely greater service to agriculture, and necessarily 
to the country, by haranguing city people on the virtue 
of farm work as an antidote for surplus fat, rather than 
golf, tennis and other forms of misspent energy, 
i Conservatively, two-thirds of the energy exerted by the 
average city dweller is wasted, whereas only a trifling 
part of the farmer’s energy is wasted. Let the farmer 
keep his car, Will Rogers notwithstanding, and such 
few other minor forms of divei’sion as he has. He is 
already doing more than his share of work. If some¬ 
thing drastic needs doing, take away the city idlei-’s 
car and put him to work. 
Meeting of the Agricultural Teachers 
The meeting of agricultural teachers held at Farm- 
ingdale, L. I., August 15-22, was a notable affair. There 
were pi-esent the men who teach agriculture in the high 
schools of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. 
With them came some of the most noted economists and 
educators in the eastern part of the country. There 
were also school superintendents and others interested 
in education, along with a good sprinkling of farmers, 
fi’here was an excellent program, including a long trip 
through the New York markets to study transportation 
and selling. It would seem that this teaching of agri¬ 
culture in high schools is coming to be a strong feature 
of our system of education, and it is an excellent plan 
for these young men to come together, talk things over, 
arrange their programs, and agree upon a proper kind 
of teaching. The world is moving on rapidly in all lines 
and, when we look back to the teaching of agriculture 
40 yearo ago, we can realize what a tremendous ad¬ 
vance has been made and how necessary it is at the 
present time to make sure that instruction is along 
practical and useful lines. 
All sorts of men appeared on the program at Farm- 
ingdale, running all the way from practical gardeners 
and poultrymen up to Secretary Wallace, of the De¬ 
partment of Agriculture. This meeting was an excellent 
thing and should be followed each year, because it is 
eosential that in any teaching of this sort the educators 
should have the benefit of every development which will 
enable them to give young men and women a sensible 
and practical idea of farm life. 
