|Rights||No Copyright - United States (NoC-US)|
|Publisher||Digitized by J. Willard Marriott Library, University of Utah|
THE TIMES-NEW- S. NEPHI. UTAH EXCURSIONS IN CORRESPONDENCE ' " ' By THOMAS ARKLE CLARK Dean of Men, University of Illinois. " . Letters of Courtesy us learn from experience MOST of than we learn from any -- !ir - The American Farm On the Junk Heap By FRANK O. LOWDEN Farm UR agriculture Is decaying. bankruptcies In recent years have Increased more than COO per cent According to the Department of Agriculture, the average farmer could have obtained a larger income since 1920 if he had hired himself out aa a farmhand. In considerable portions of the agricultural area farms cannot be sold for the value of the improveFarm improvement ments alone. everywhere has practically ceased. And though the attendance In other courses In our universities and colleges has largely Increased ince the war, the number of students In agricultural courses has decreased about a third. Abandoned farms, which in the New England states xclted so much comment a few years ago, are now found in considerable and Increasing number In every state of the Union. And yet despite these facts, which are gathered from the records, there has been a persistent effort during all these yenrs of farm distress to minimize the seriousness of the agricultural situation. Interviews from prominent financiers, articles in magazines one going so far, I recall, as to characterize the agricultural depression a myth have appeared with astonishing regularity during all this time, denying that there has been a serious situation tipon the farm, or announcing confidently that the farmer's troubles were over and that the future was assured. Whatever may be the popular opinion In the cities upon the subject, the ablest farm economists generally agree that the farm situation Is desperate. This they think grows out of the great disparity between the prices of the things the farmer has to sell and the prices of the things he lias to buy. They can see no permanent relief until this disparity Is removed. They think that it may take from fifteen to twenty years to effect this adjustment If nothing Is consciously done to help the situation. They expect this to be brought about by the natural Increase In our population and by the running down of the great farm plant of America. At the end of that time they tell us there will be another maladjustment of prices, but this time In favor of the farmer, with a great and unwholesome increuse In the cost of living to the consuming classes, with Its attendant distress. A few months ago the Department of Agriculture issued Its statement of the estimated value of farm crops for the last year. This was heralded as another proof that agriculture had come Into Its own. For it found that the total value of the farm s of a billion crops for the year was dollars In excess of the value of the crops of the year before. This, of course, was welcome news. The report, however, disclosed some very perplexing fucts. To Illustrate, the corn crop was about 20 per cent smaller than the crop of the preceding year. The total value, however, exceeded that of the preceding crop by almost $200,000,000. And every one knows that the quality of this year's crop was far below the quality of the preceding crop. And yet, under a marketing system which It Is claimed Is one of the most noteworthy achievements of this commercial age, the smaller crop of Inferior corn was worth more In the market than the large and superior crop of the yenr The cause of this lesser and Inferior rrop was a cold, wet summer. It was a summer d sastrous for com, but very favorable to the growth of prasses In meadow and pasture. There was, therefore, an Increase in the production of milk, with the result that something like 100.noo.000 pounds more of butter was produced In V.C than In the yenr before. This was but about 5 per cent of the total annual production of butter In the 1,'nlted States. It created a surplti, however, on account of Increased domestic consumption of only about .V W0.OO0 pounds, or 2 per cent, a oru-- f Aih the surplus of the year before. This id red relatively small Increase, due to the same wet !ays and cold nights which so seriously ln.l'irel the com crop, resulted In. decrease of the price of butter from 20 to 25 per . tit. Now suppose that the com growers and milk producers had been completely organized during these years, do you believe that this depressing and puzzling condition would have come about? It Is safe to say that th larger part of tha three-quarter- ..... ,"4Va - 4 bumper corn crop of 1923 was sold at a price which did not cover the cost of production. If corn growers had been organized and found that the market would not receive their corn at what It cost them to produce It they would not have dumped the larger part of the crop upon the market in a few brief months. They would have sold sparingly. They would have stored the remainder, knowing full well that seasons of bountiful production are always followed by seasons of low production, and that at no distant day they would receive a profitable price for their corn. As it was, only a few of the corn farmers were able to hold their corn for the higher prices which they had rightly anticipated and which were later received. Of course, even If organized, they could not have expected to receive as much per bushel for a 8,000,000,000-bushe- l crop as for a 2,400,000,000-bushcrop. They would doubtless have asked a somewhat smaller price, but they certainly would have asked a price and have received It which would have made the 3,000,000,000 bushels of corn worth more to them than the very next year bushels of poor corn actually brought In the market. In other words, the corn farmers. If organized, would have adjusted the supply to the actual demand. And they would have made this adjustment before the price became demoralized. In fact, the adjustment was made later, but only " after the great bulk of the crop had left the farmers' hands., It cannot too often be stated that the supply of any commodity which affects the price Is not the entire stock of the commodity in existence, but only that portion of It which Is offered for sale at a given price. And so. If the dairy farmers had some way by which they could have taken last year the Incubus of 50,000,000. or at the outside 100,000,000. pounds of butter off the market. It Is almost certain. In the opinion of experts, that this depression in the great dairy Industry would not have occurred. If, In other words, this added 50,000,000 or, If you please, IW.000,000 pounds of butter had been purchased at a cost, say, of $50,000,000 and stored by the farmers themselves, awaiting a season of less luscious grasses, the dairy farmers of America would have received as a return upon their large investment and their labors many million dollars more than they actually did receive. And so I say this report from the Department of Agriculture discloses very perplexing facts. Now, I produce both com and milk upon my farm! I feed the larger part of my com In the form of silage to my cows. I sell It, therefore. In the form of milk. I receive considerably less for It than I did a year ago. And so these glowing figures of the Increased value of the com crop over which the financial writers of the great metropolitan dallies gloat do not comfort me much. I am indeed puzzled to know what to do. I have been taught that to produce 00 bushels of com to the acre Is a finer achievement than to produce 45. I like to see the milk pall brimming full with swee pure milk. Hut when I see 45 bushels of corn worth more than 60 bushels of corn, and when I s see the milk pall but full worth more than the brimming pall of another year, I become confused and hnrdly know what to do. Last summer the cotton crop, particularly In the Southwest, was suffering severely for lack of rain. And then one day the heavens opened and the rains descended. As a result, the government, w hich before had estimated the crop at 12.400,000 bales Increased the estimate to 13,000,000 bales. This was an Increase of less than 5 per cent In the yield and yet, because of this estimated Increase the In the market 20 per cent. '"This price declined meant that the total crop of the larger rstlmate was worth less In the market by $300,000,000 than the crop by the lesser estimate. And yet at that very time the world needed cotton as It had not needed It before since the Civil wnr. And this paradox was the result of a timely rain. Now, there Is no music sweeter to my ears than the ratter of raindrops upon the roof breaking a drought In the summer time, and yef, to save m life, I cannot tell whether that rnln Is a sweet and fragrant bearer of a benefit or bankruptcy. When the hot summer winds scorch the fields, i do not know whether to pray for rnln or to thank the Almighty for the unbroken drought. Something Is wrong with our methods of marketing when the ageregnte money value of a larger crop of a prime necessity Is smaller than the value of a smaller crop. There are untold thousands of men and women and children who need more cotton to clothe them than Is produced In the world today. To say, therefore, that 12.400.000 bales of cotton are worth more than 13,ooo,noo bales Is to condemn a system of marketing which so measures value. el 2,400,-000,0- two-third- - All fiW(ifl other source. We have to buy gold bricks with money we have earned ourselves, before we realize how thinly gilded most of them are. What 1 know about the subtleties and the effects of writing letters. I have learned from trying things out, and seeing how they work, from watching other people succeed or fall In their correspondence, and sometimes the results of what we attempt are not at first apparent. Years ago, I was brought Into contact with a man who had had a wide experience with people in business, In educational affairs, and in politics. He had a great many friends, he had a wide influence, and when necessity required, he could mnrshul an amazing number of supporters. I was very much interested in studying his methods, and in trying to learn how he had been able to acHe was not a complish so much. very broadly educated man, but he was shrewd, he understood human nature, he grasped the psychology of making men act, and he succeeded I came to see that he amuzingly. wrote more letters than most men whom I knew, and letters of a, different character. He used the best stationery he could buy, he wrote with but one sort of ink, and many of his letters, especially those of a personal character, were written by hand, though he had all the clerical help he could use. These practices of his gave his letters a certain distinction, called special attention to them when they came into one's hands, and emphasized his He made friends by individuality. paying attention to them, by showing them certain Individual courtesies which the average man neglects. His letters were never stock letters, pieced together with a patchwork of convenand tional, paragraphs; they always fitted the Individual case in hand. They were written to' all classes of people from the governor of the state when he won a close election, to the washerwoman who named her baby for him, and one was as carefully written us the other. There were letters of condolence, and congratulation, and encouragement ; letters which let people know that he was glad that they had succeeded, or full of sympathy with them In their sorrow and He found time to do these things, as most men find time to do wliat they want to do, and what seems to them really worth while. Not all of the letters he wrote were answered not many of them were, I suppose, for people are thoughtless, and procrastinating, and Ignorant, and Inexperienced, but none of them were forgotten, and everyone, I feel sure, added to the respect, and love which beciime his heritage. I came to see that the results which come from writing these letters of courtesy, as I have called them, rethe effort that must be pay many-folput forth in doing It. When, luter In life, I became Interested myself In writing letters of courtesy, as I have vailed them, I was somewhat discouraged at first; I thought that they had no effect upon those who received them, that the people were not especially helped or pleased, but later I came to see quite differently. Every year I write a score of letters or more to the young fellows In college who have made the highest scholastic average, and I attempt to make these letters as individual as I can. Most of them are never acknowledged, many of them I never henr from In ny remote way, but I know they bring pleasure and encouragement, that they are shown with pride and sent home to father and mother, and sometimes even ure produced In the local paper, as an Indication of what one of the favorite sons Is doing to bring credit to the old home town. The one who writes such letters must not expect them to be answered, though, of course, they should he, but lie can be sure th.it they will not be forgotten, and that their effect will be Some time ago, I determined that I would make a practice of writing one such letter a day. There are plenty of opportunities. The preacher has something worti while to say in church Sunday, the soprano has en effective solo. I notice in the paper that Smith is married, or that I'eck has a new hoy; Granger loses his mother, or Thomas Is elected president of Klwanls the opportunities Rre Infinite. The letters are Informal always In rhnrncter, pleasant, familiar, with first names and nicknames employed, if the relationship warrants such a familiarity. They are brief, nnd and to the point. It Is the spirit that counts principally, and not so much the frrtn. The time required Is not as great as might be supposed. With the materials at hand, ten minutes before hrenkfasr, or at lunch time, or after dinner, are enough, and the thing ix d..ne, and a friend Is made, or a friendship strengthened. Our agricultural colleges and our Department of Agriculture have constantly urged larger production. They have assumed, and naturally I think, that the more wheat and corn we raise the fewer hungry mouths there will be and that the more cotton we produce the fewer people will be obliged to go naked or but half clothed. For whatever economists may say as to surplus we know that there really has never been too much of food or too much of clothing for a. needy world. And of course It follows that the larger the production per unit, the cheaper will the product be. But when large production Is used to drive prices down so as to make large production less profitable than small production, large production will not continue, and the world will therefore have to pay more for the necessaries of life. This therefore la the consumer's problem as well as the producer's. It has been shown again and again that competition, when It goes to the extent of forcing prices below the cost of production, In the end is as disastrous to the consumer as to the producer himself. The demoralization of an Industry which Inevitably follows results In an Increased cost of production which the consumers finally- must meet. Organization Is a most powerful factor In human progress. The economist as long ago as Adam Smith found In organization the key to Industrial growth. 'Organization means the difference between the mob and a highly organized progressive society. In the modern world, the farmer alone has been the last to realize the value of organization for Its own sake. And therefore It happens that when the farmers In any community organize for any purpose, they soon find that there are other benefits derived in addition to the one that was their special aim. A finer community life, a widening of sympathies with their neighbors and associates, a broadening of their outlook upon the world, a new sense of the dignity and worth of their calling, an elevation of the nhlest and worthiest among them to places of leadership, are among the of fnrmers' organizations. Agriculture has emerged from Its primitive state. It must therefore conform to those practices which have been found necessary to the success of other great Industries. In all other fields of commerce, unrestricted, free and open competition In the marketing of products has been gradually disappearing. Agriculture, therefore, finds Itself with Its millions of members freely competing among themselves while It Is obliged to sell Its products In a highly organized Industrial and commercial world. Now, If the farmers are to put themselves upon terms of equality with the great Industries of the country they, too, must organize. It Is not desirable that they should Imitate the great Industries, adopt the corporate form of organization and operate their farms through corporate management. It would weaken our whole social structure If our millions of farmers were to surrender their Individualism In this way. Nor Is It necessary. While much Improved efficiency In production Is still possible, the farmers have made and are making constant progress In this respect. The problems which press hardest upon him today are concerned with the marketing of his products at a price which will enable him to live and to go on producing. He must find some way to restore the proper relationship between the prices he receives for his products and the prices he pays for other commodities. Those who oppose the principle seera to think associathat In some sort of way the tions are seeking to avoid the operation of the law of supply and demand. Quite the reverse Is true. Those who advocate this form of marketing are seeking only to create conditions by which that law will operate fully as between the seller and the buyer of farm products. At present It does not. Farmers' marketing associations, however, are making real progress. Some hnve failed. Doubtless others still will fall. The mortality among them, however, has been no greater than 'among new business organizations of any other kind of which I know. We have been gafji. erlng a large fund of experience which will enable not only those already organized, but new ones yet to be, to avoid largely the errors of the pnst. They are destined one day to occupy the entire field, for there Is no other way out. Just when that happy day shall come no man can tell. It depends largely upon the farmers themselves. (B. 1I2S. Wetrn Nwpapr t nlna ) This is not the problem ot agriculture alone. It Is the prohibit of all. Iters us there ran be no enJust Like a Man during prosperity unless all the prlnHpnl Industries which go to make up the commerclnl world, Hap He's been to see her twice; keeping step with one another, shall march once for dinner and ouca for no reason at all. Life. abreast. ready-to-put-o- n d -- sin-cer- OA I ALFALFA HAY BEST FOR DAIRY CATTLE Alfulfa hay proved superior to Sudan buy us a feed for dairy catjle at the Hays (Kans.) experiment station in the third trial comparing the merits of the two feeds, according to the report given by Prof. J. B. Fitch at tha annual Kansas roundup. This trial, conducted during the past year at the Hays station, gave results agreeing with those obtained in the first trial when cows fed alfalfa hay, kaflr silage and grain in proportion to milk production produced 13 per cent more milk each day than the same cows when sudnn hay was substituted for alfalfa hay. In the second trial, however, the cows fed sudan hay, kaflr silage and a liberal grain ration produced slightly more milk each day than the same cows when alfalfa bay was substituted for the sudun hay. Eight Holstetn cows were used In the third trial. They averaged 575 pounds of milk and 21.5 poimds of dally while fed alfalfa hay as compared with 511 pounds of milk and 10.7 pounds of butterfat on sudan hay. "Cows fed alfalfa hay, kaflr silage, and a liberal gruln ration, produced 8 per cent more milk and 10 per cent more butterfat than the same cows when fed Sudan huy," said Professor Fitch in summarizing the results of the third experiment. "The body weights of the cows were practically constant during the three periods. The alfalfa hay was consumed In larger amounts than was the sudan hay. "In two of the three feeding trials comparing alfalfa hay and sudan for duiry cattle at the Hays station, alfalfa has proved to be better than Sudan. In the trial where sudan proved better than alfalfa, the alfalfa hay was of Inferior quality. In all three trials the liberal grain ration and the relatlvdy short feeding periods apparently have reduced the difference between' alfalfa hny and sudan hay. This statement Is made as the result of a large nuier of feeding trials with dairy cows comparing feeds similar to those used In this experiment. Alfalfa hay and sudan have practically the same amount of digestible protein as has sudan. The quality of the protein In alfalfa Is also superior to that from other hay crops and grains that have been compared experimentally to date? As a source of minerals for dairy cows the legume bays, and especially alfalfa, are of special Importance. To maintain milk production and body weight over a large period of time when on sudan nny cows must be fe a grain ration containing a protefa supplement. In regions where alfalfa cannot be grown und where It is high In price it Is desirable to feed three or four pounds of alfalfa dully to dairy cows as an additional source of minerals and for the protein it contains." but-terf- at Soy Beans Are Superior as Protein Supplement Cracked soy beans are equal or slightly superior to linseed oilmeal as a protein supplement for dulry cows. After three separate trials with this new feed. Investigators at the Iowa experiment station have reached the above conclusion. Furthermore, they demonstrated that soy beans do not cause scours under the conditions existing In the experiment. The basai ration consisted of corn silage, alfalfa hay, cracked com and ground oats. Roughage was fed according to the capacity of the cows and the grain mixture according to production. No tendency In the beans to become unpalatable over long feeding periods was observed so long as a daily allowance of four pounds was not exceeded. When the price for soy bean seed gets lower, and reasonably large acreages are planted, soy beans can be extensively used. Soy bean oilmeal, which Is the product left after oil extraction, was also tested at the Iowa station. Its value was found equal to that of linseed oilmeal. The relative prices of the two feeds will determine which Is the better to buy. Planted with com for silage, soy beans did not show any value, according to the Iowa tests. Work done so far Indicates that com sllnge Is of practically the same value bs corn-beasilage for the production of milk nn.1 butterfat. The tonnage per acre show e I an Increase of 5.01) per cent where the two crops were grown together, compared with corn alone. The costs for seed and seeding largely offset the advantage In tonnage, however, making straight com silage practically as economical as corn-beasilage. In the first trial the percentaee f beans In the silage was about 3 and the second 25. No advantage was noted In the increased percentage. There win practically no difference In the n Soy Bean Meal Value The value of soy bean meal for producing meat, milk, and butter Is well established. It la one of the cheapest of the highly nitrogenous feeding stuffs and Is therefore economical for balancing rations deficient in nitrogen. Owing to Its high content of protein the meal should bs used with the same precautions as are observed with other highly concentrated feeds. As regards digestibility, soy bean meal compares fvor Jly with other oil meals.