Iht  RURAL  NEW-YORKER 
1049 
The  School  Bill  and  Its  Discussion 
Part  IX 
WE  have  been,  asked  many  questions  about  the 
members  of  this  Commitct'e  of  Twenty-one. 
People  want  to  know  their  occupation,  where  they 
live,  their  knowledge  of  rural  conditions,  how  many 
children  of  school  age  they  represent,  and  many 
similar  things.  We  do  not  consider  these  questions 
impertinent;  we  think  they  arise  from  an  honest 
desire  to  know  more  about  these  people  who  pro¬ 
pose  such  radical  changes  in  the  school  laws.  Most 
of  the  21  members  occupy  some  official  position — 
very  few  of  them  can  be  said  to  he  practical  farm¬ 
ers.  Most  of  them  are  in  some  way  connected  with 
organized  education.  The  majority  of  them  were 
raised  in  the  country  and  have  attended  district 
school  in  years  past.  As  for  their  children 
most  of  the  members  are  of  mature  years  and  their 
children  are  mostly  grown  up.  All  told  the  members 
of  the  committee  seem  to  have  15  children  now  at¬ 
tending  school — only  four  of  this  number  are  at 
rural  or  district  schools.  This,  however,  has  noth¬ 
ing  to  do  with  their  ability  to  prepare  or  suggest  a 
new  school  law.  If  we  were  to  limit  school  matters 
to  those  who  have  children  at  school  more  than 
half  our  teachers  would  be  promptly  eliminated.  We 
notice  the  question  simply  because  it  has  been  asked 
bv  several  readers  and  in  this  discussion  we  intend 
to  leave  nothing  hidden.  The  members  of  the  Com¬ 
mittee  of  Twenty-one  are  ladies  and  gentlemen  who, 
we  believe,  have  worked  hard  and  honestly  to  sug¬ 
gest  school  improvements.  Nothing  will  be  gained 
by  impugning  their  motives  or  attempting  to  criti¬ 
cize  them  personally.  Their  plan  evidently  was  to 
make  a  survey  of  the  State  and  for  this  purpose  a 
number  of  leading  educators  were  employed. 
These  came  from  Cornell,  Columbia,  University  of 
Chicago,  University  of  Minnesota,  Pennsylvania, 
Texas,  and  Kansas.  As  a  result  of  all  this  work, 
a  report  was  issued  and  the  bill  which  we  are  dis¬ 
cussing  was  introduced.  We  think  the  committee 
made  two  mistakes  in  its  campaign.  It  claimed  or 
assumed  that  the  rural  people  fully  understood  the 
report  and  the  proposed  bill.  Our  investigations 
plainly  show  this  was  not  correct.  Then  the  conn 
mittee  urged  its  passage  before  the  rural  people 
were  ready  for  it.  This  effort  to  rush  the  bill  through 
has  made  many  of  our  country  people  suspicious. 
They  have  gained  the  idea  that  some  one  is  trying 
to  take  advantage  of  our  unusual  political  situation 
to  ‘‘put  something  over" — as  was  the  case  with  the 
old  township  law.  It  is  a  fair  criticism  of  the 
Committee  of  Twenty-one  that  its  members  do  little 
arguing  on  the  real  merits  of  the  bill.  They  take 
the  position  that  the  bill  has  been  worked  up  by 
famous  educators,  checked  off  by  farm  organizations 
and  therefore  it  must  be  right !  They  have  tried  to 
throw  the  burden  of  proof  upon  the  negative  which 
is  always  the  hardest  part  of  an  argument.  The 
opposition  must  accept  this  situation  and  make  the 
most  of  it. 
acreage  of  wheat,  or  make  it  the  chief  crop  on  small 
farms.  The  production  of  wheat  has  been  for  some 
years  following  the  line  of  beef  cattle  production, 
that  is,  falling  into  hands  of  very  large  producers, 
so  that  most  Eastern  farmers  now  grow  it  at  a  loss. 
The  use  of  tractors  and  powerful  machinery  has  in¬ 
creased  man  power  so  that  one  man  can,  with  his 
own  labor,  produce  more  grain  than  he  formerly 
could.  Then,  too,  the  use  of  Sweet  clover  and  other 
green  manuring  crops  has  'built  up  or  restored 
many  acres  of  wheat  land,  and  thus  increased  the 
yield.  The  shortage  of  labor  has  also  had  its  effect. 
A  good  many  farmers,  unable  to  obtain  hired  help, 
have  changed  away  from  mixed  farming  and  seeded 
most  of  their  farms  to  grain.  All  this  will  explain 
why  the  wheat  yield  has  been  kept  up. 
In  many  localities  the  demand  for  flour  has  fallen 
off.  The  modern  theory  of  nutrition  does  not  give 
bread  as  high  a  place  in  the  human  diet  as  it  occu¬ 
pied  years  ago.  Without  question  people  in  general 
are  using  more  rice  and  vegetables  and  less  wheat 
bread.  There  is  already  enough  of  this  change  in 
diet  to  make  a  difference  in  the  demand  for  flour. 
Before  the  war  the  demand  for  wheat  from  Europe 
was  expected  to  take  care  of  American  surplus. 
While  we  are  still  shipping  some  wheat  abroad,  the 
European  demand  is  not  what  it  should  be.  The 
European  nations  are  poor  and  without  credit  with 
which  to  buy.  Under  our  present  tariff  they  cannot 
make  full  exchange  of  goods  for  food.  Even  if  they 
had  the  fullest  credit  they  might  not  eat  up  our 
surplus.  Canada  has  the  biggest  ci’op  in  her  history, 
and  other  English  colonies  have  a  surplus  for  export. 
In  Europe  grain  crops  have  been  increased.  England 
has  more  homegrown  wheat  than  for  .veal’s  past. 
Russia  has  a  large  surplus  for  export.  More  of  rye, 
oats  and  barley  are  being  used  as  human  food.  It  is 
not  likely  that  our  exports  to  Europe  could  be 
greatly  increased  at  this  time,  even  by  joining  the 
League  of  Nations  or  loaning  money  on  poor  security 
to  European  nations. 
The  great  trouble  is  that  too  many  farmers  are 
trying  to  produce  wheat  in  a  small  way  when  the 
grain  is  no  longer  a  profitable  crop  for  the  small 
farm.  The  small  cotton  grower  at  the  South  is  being 
ground  out  by  much  the  same  forces  that  have  upset 
the  wheat  market.  The  great  proportion  of  Eastern 
people  buy  most  of  their  flour,  and  they  are  not 
affected  by  the  present  slump  in  wheat.  They  . went 
through  the  same  trials  years  ago,  when  the  newly 
opened  West  took  profitable  wheat  growing  and 
stock  feeding  away  from  us.  Then  our  people  faced 
ruin,  but  they  gradually  worked  away  from  it,  by 
changing  their  crops  and  methods.  The  smaller 
Western  farmers  will  be  forced  to  do  the  same  thing 
— many  of  them  will  be  obliged  to  give  up  wheat 
growing,  for  some  years  at  least,  and  find  new  crops. 
That  is  what  Eastern  farmers  were  forced  to  do, 
and  they  will  not  see  the  justice  in  asking  the  gov¬ 
ernment  to  give  artificial  aid  to  an  industry  which 
will  settle  itself  naturally. 
The  Slump  in  Wheat  Prices 
THE  present  wheat  situation  has  come  as  a  stun¬ 
ning  surprise  to  many  of  our  people.  We  have 
all  been  told  how  farmers  are  leaving  the  land,  and 
how  the  soil  is  losing  its  fertility.  Then  we  are  told 
how  the  non-producers  are  increasing  in  town  and 
city,  and  demanding  more  food.  With  the  pro¬ 
ducers  of  grain  falling  off  in  number  and  the  con¬ 
sumers  of  bread  increasing,  how  could  it  be  possible 
for  a  surplus  of  wheat  to  accumulate?  We  all  re¬ 
member  how*  a  few  years  ago  the  economists  told  us 
that  there  never  again  could  be  cheap  grain  or  cheap 
bread !  Yet  we  have  a  full  crop  of  wheat  this  year, 
a  great  surplus  of  grain  on  hand,  and  a  selling  price 
below  the  cost  of  production.  A  fair  analysis  will 
show  some  curious  things.  Wholesale  wheat  pro¬ 
duction  is  now  confined  to  half  a  dozen  Western 
States.  Three-fourths  of  the  States  do  not  produce 
enough  wheat  to  provide  bread  for  their  own  peo¬ 
ple.  While  bread  is  a  universal  food,  wheat  is  a  sec¬ 
tional  crop.  Fourteen  Western  States  produce  80 
per  cent  of  the  total  crop.  Wheat  represents  only 
about  10  per  cent  of  the  total  value  of  farm  crops. 
Cotton,  hay  and  corn  are  all  worth  more.  Ten  peo¬ 
ple  buy  flour  where  one  person  raises  wheat.  True, 
it  is  grown  in  small  quantities  on  many  farms  of 
100  acres  or  thereabouts,  but  rarely  at  any  profit 
except  for  the  seeding  of  clover  and  grass  which  fol¬ 
lows  it.  Commercial  wheat  is  coming  to  be  a  crop 
for  large  or  factory  farming,  where  large  areas  and 
powerful  machinery  reduce  the  cost  of  production. 
Even  at  present  prices  the  wheat  grown  on  the  large 
grain  ranches  will  pay  a  small  profit,  or  at  least 
cost  The  loss  comes  to  farmers  who  grow  a  small 
1930 .  11,500,000 
1940 .  14.100.000 
1950 .  10.800,000 
1960 .  19,600,000 
duplicated  in  othei  large  cities.  There  is  to  be  a 
back-to-the-land  expansion  such  as  has  not  been 
known  before.  What  will  be  the  effect  of  all  this 
upon  American  farming?  On  the  whole,  it  will  be 
good.  As  these  people  reach  out  into  the  country 
they  will  increase  the  values  of  land.  They  will 
learn  more  of  the  troubles  and  problems  of  farmers, 
and  be  more  inclined  to  act  with  them  politically. 
They  will  provide  a  better  market,  and  bring  it 
closer  to  the  producer.  On  the  other  hand,  this 
spreading  out  from  the  city  will  bring  great  changes 
to  farm  life,  and  we  must  be  prepared  for  them.  We 
believe  that  during  the  next  50  years  what  we  call 
the  Upper  Atlantic  coast  section  can  be  made  to 
prove  more  profitable  for  farmers  than  any  other 
section  of  America.  We  refer  to  the  territory  from 
Canada  to  lower  Delaware  which  drains  into  the 
Atlantic  Ocean.  There  will  be  found  the  best  mar¬ 
kets  in  the  world,  the  greatest  accumulation  of  cap¬ 
ital  and  wages,  the  shortest  hauls  and  the  most 
suitable  soil  and  climate  for  producing  certain  stand¬ 
ard  crops.  The  one  thing  needed  to  make  this  terri¬ 
tory  unsurpassed  for  profitable  farming  is  true  co¬ 
operation  in  selling  and  distributing  farm  products. 
Population  of  New  York  Area 
CERTAIN  scientific  men  have  been  figuring  out 
the  future  population  of  what  they  call  the 
New  York  district.  This  will  include  the  present 
counties  of  New  York  City,  the  county  of  Fairfield 
in  Connecticut,  Dutchess,  Putnam,  Rockland,  Or¬ 
ange,  Westchester,  Nassau  and  Suffolk  in  New  York, 
and  Bergen,  Hudson,  Passaic,  Essex,  Union,  Morris, 
Somerset,  Middlesex  and  Monmouth  in  New  Jersey. 
This  means  the  territory  at  present  within  an  hour’s 
ride  of  the  New  York  City  Hall,  and  this  will  be 
reduced  to  half  an  hour  before  many  years.  This 
territory  includes  more  than  5,500  square  miles. 
There  are  at  present  9,000,000  people  in  this  area,  or 
something  over  1,600  to  the  square  mile.  Now  these 
scientists  give  the  following  probable  rate  of  in¬ 
crease  for  this  district: 
1970 .  22,300,000 
1980 .  24,800,000 
1990 .  27,000.000 
2000 .  28,800,000 
This  is  not  at  all  unlikely.  We  think  the  popula¬ 
tion  of  New  York  City  itself  will  grow  smaller.  The 
increase  predicted  by  these  scientists  will  be  found 
in  the  country — mostly  grouped  in  rather  small 
towns.  They  will  be  “open  towns” ;  that  is,  not 
closely  built,  but  with,  room  for  gardens  and  small 
farms.  The  new  tunnels  and  bridges  which  are  to 
span  and  pass  under  the  Hudson  will  empty  the 
great  city  rather  than  fill  it  up.  For  years  we  have 
predicted  the  breaking  up  or  spreading  out  of  the 
great  cities,  and  it  is  surely  coming.  New  means  of 
transportation  will  enable  people  to  go  out  further 
and  obtain  country  homes.  We  think  what  is  happen¬ 
ing  in  this  “New  York  district”  will  be  more  or  less 
Figures  From  Dairymen’s  League  Report 
THE  reports  of  the  Dairymen’s  League  Co-opera¬ 
tive  Association  shows  the  following  receipts  of 
pooled  milk  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  April  1,  1923 : 
To  dealers,  cwt .  25,662,327 
To  League  plants,  cwt .  7,930,406 
Total  pooled  milk,  cwt .  33,592,733 
INCOME  REPORTED 
From  dealers  . $59,702,495.81 
From  League  plants  .  22,428,406.36 
Finished  goods  on  hand  .  605,163.34 
Discounts,  interest,  rents,  etc .  184,521.22 
Total  income  . $S2, 920, 586.73 
Expenses 
Returns  a*.d  allowances . $  259,917.29 
Administration  .  567,368.60 
Organization .  282,002.26 
Extraordinary  hauling  .  840,152.55 
Dairyman’s  League  News  losses  .  19,668.50 
Plant  operations,  etc .  9,421,903.15 
Discounts,  interest,  and  adjustments  ....  456,873.18 
Deductions  for  doubtful  accounts,  adver¬ 
tising,  local  organization,  depreciation.  6,039,511.53 
Total  . $17,887,397.06 
Due  members  for  March  milk  . $  5,598,454  96 
Paid  members  .  63,421,411.47 
$69,019,866.43 
Less  amount  due  at  beginning  of  period  $  4,620,146.66 
Net  returns  . $64,399,719  77 
Balance  due  members  .  633,469.90 
This  is  an  actual  cash  return  to  the  producer  for 
milk  as  it  comes  from  the  cow  of  $1.91  per  100  lbs., 
or  $1.92  for  net  returns  including  the  amount  yet 
due.  Allowing  an  average  test  of  3.6  per  cent,  this 
is  equivalent  to  $1.68.  If  as  estimated  a  dollar  is 
now  worth  only  69  per  cent  of  its  purchasing  power 
in  1916,  the  price  would  be  equivalent  to  $1.16  in 
1916.  The  average  price  paid  that  3rear  was  $1.38. 
The  difference  is  22  cents  per  cwt.  in  favor  of  1916. 
The  exact  volume  of  the  surplus  is  not  given,  but 
the  sales  of  fluid  milk  and  cream  from  the  League 
plants  were  $10,807,297.17,  and  the  sales  from  the 
by-products  or  surplus  must  have  been  $11,621,- 
109.19.  Allowing  one  cent  a  hundred  for  the  ex¬ 
pense  of  selling  the  fluid  milk  and  maintaining  an 
organization  for  same  or  substantially  $300,000 
and  deducting  the  $4,622,579.76  taken  for  capital 
fund,  the  expense  of  the  surplus  would  seem  to  be 
$12,964,817.30,  or  nearly  two  millions  more  than  the 
value  of  the  surplus  products. 
These  results  may  be  unavoidable  with  four  or¬ 
ganized  groups,  several  dozen  organized  units  and 
many  individual  producers  competing  with  one  an¬ 
other  for  trade  through  reduced  prices ;  but  the  rec¬ 
ord  is  eloquent  for  the  necessity  of  all  producing 
individuals,  units,  and  groups  to  get  together  and 
devise  a  plan  on  which  all  can  agree  for  the  good 
of  the  industry.  Producers  fully  realize  salvation 
depends  on  organization.  They  are  loyal  to  the 
groups  with  which  they  are  now  connected.  It  only 
remains  for  these  groups  to  get  together  and  act  to¬ 
gether  in  a  single  unit.  The  leaders  of  all  the 
groups  owe  this  to  the  dairymen  of  this  territory 
who  constitute  the  most  loyal  and  determined  mem¬ 
bership  ever  associated  in  a  farm  organization. 
The  way  to  hatch  a  real  trouble  is  to  brood  over  an 
imaginary  one. 
If  the  State  or  national  government  puts  a  legal 
quarantine  on  your  place  or  on  your  stock,  we  advise 
you  to  live  right  up  to  it  while  it  lasts.  Otherwise  you 
will  surely  be  liable  to  a  penalty. 
The  New  York  Highway  Commissioner  gives  the  fol¬ 
lowing  figures  showing  road  construction  work  for  1923 
thus  far:  Contracts  under  way,  218;  men  employed  by 
contractors,  6,453 ;  pavement  completed  this  season, 
88.83  miles.  Total  maintenance  force,  4,936. 
