Few farmers are convinced cooperators and are seldom able to distinguish between cooperative principles and commercialism. They also, as a rule, lack in loyalty to their society. Still I believe that things are getting better in this respect.

The hope of the future lies with the better educated young farmerthe product of our universities and farm institutes. Cooperative efforts in all branches of agriculture will stand a better chance when jolly old Hayseed and Giles have been gathered to their "rude forefathers."

Chairman WILLITS. I am sure we appreciate that very much. Are there any questions?

Mr. G. CLARK (Des Moines, Iowa). You spoke about these creameries being in charge of an experienced dairymaid. Do I understand that your butter maker over there is a woman?

Mr. OWEN. These are such small concerns we can seldom afford to pay a man's wages. Nearly all the dairies are managed by trained women from our universities; they are cheaper, I am sorry to say, but that is a fact.

Mr. HARRIS. I would like to ask in regard to the feed. You speak of the wet there. You have no trouble about the pastures?

Mr. OWEN. We have excellent pasture in the hills of Wales. If anything, we have too much water. I understand you are short of it in America, that you are extremely dry. [Laughter and applause.] Chairman WILLITS. The next paper will be by Mr. E. W. Langford on "Work of the National Farmers' Union in connection with milk organization in England."

WORK OF THE NATIONAL FARMERS' UNION IN CONNECTION WITH MILK ORGANIZATION IN ENGLAND.

E. W. LANGFORD, J. P., past president, and chairman of the milk and dairy produce committee, National Farmers' Union of England and Wales, Hereford, England.

The National Farmers' Union, which operates in England and Wales Scotland has a union of her own-is a young organization. The task of organizing a scattered community must be a difficult one anywhere, but it is particularly so where, as in England, urban interests predominate. Had the farming interests of England been strongly welded together two generations ago, the industrial history of the country might have been written differently. Unfortunately such organization as existed in these days was sparse, local, and irresolute. Agriculture declined as an industry and the State was indifferent to the process, and it was not until the early years of this century that a farmers' organization came into existence the leaders of which had the courage and imagination to work for the extension of the movement to every county of England and Wales, and the establishment of national headquarters in London. They persevered and attained a certain measure of success. Even so, when the European war broke out, the National Farmers' Union could only claim some 25,000 members, who were far from representing the whole of the country.

The war gave an impetus to organization, by reason of Government control, which made it imperative that farmers should have an effective body to voice and protect their interests. By the time the armistice came, the National Farmers' Union had more than doubled its strength, and more ample resources made it possible for those who were directing the union's activities to grapple seriously with the task of spreading the gospel of organization. An efficient 66 machine was built up at headquarters in London and successful efforts were made to "grade up "the branches which now exist in every county south of the Tweed, with some 800 local branches scattered through the counties.

It is necessary to state these facts in order to show why, in the very nature of things, the work of the National Farmers' Union in the way of milk organization does not make a lengthy story. The work of the union, indeed, is in its infancy, and those of us whose privilege it is to be associated with it are sitting at the feet of those whose experience in other lands, by reason of greater opportunity, is larger than our own. We are seeking to gather knowledge and to apply the knowledge when gained to the problems which confront us.

Another fact should be made clear at the outset, namely, that the National Farmers' Union is not a trading body nor is it any part of the union's functions to establish agricultural trading societies. On the other hand, it ought, perhaps, to be stated that the experience of the usefulness of collective action which our members have gained within the ranks of the union has led in a great many cases to the establishment independently of cooperative enterprises for different purposes in many parts of England and Wales.

What, then, are the conditions that the milk and dairy produce committee of the union has to face in seeking to promote the interests of the dairy farmers of England and Wales? They may best be described in the words of a recently published report of the departmental committee on the distribution and prices of agricultural produce:

Until the beginning of the present century, nearly all fresh milk passed direct from the cow keeper to the consumer, or passed through the hands of a single distributor who bought from the producer and retailed direct to the consumer. To-day, London is a striking example of the other extreme. It has been computed by recent investigators that the milk supplies for the population residing within a radius of 10 miles from Charing Cross are almost exclusively drawn from outside a ring of 40 miles radius, the milk produced in the intervening belt being no more than sufficient for local requirements, while, to an increasing extent, these supplies tend to pass through the hands of two distributors. As the demand for milk increased and it became necessary or economical to obtain supplies from ever-widening areas, personal contact between producer and consumer, and even between producer and retailer, was largely eliminated. *** To bridge this growing gulf, the business of the wholesale dealer developed. In many parts of the country, even in the more important towns, the wholesaling of milk is a development of the last decade or so. In London, the history of the wholesale trade does not extend far beyond the beginning of the present century.

Before the war, as has been indicated above, there was verv little organization among the dairy farmers of this country. Each man did what he considered best for himself, and as a consequence the purchaser of milk was able to play one off against another, with the result that prices ruled low. This was particularly the case during the summer season, as it was customary for all milk then to

be purchased at the cheese-making price, i. e., at such a price as would enable competition with the imported cheese supplies which we were then receiving from Canada and elsewhere.

With the war came an increased demand for milk to meet the requirements of the large number of sick and wounded who were constantly arriving from the battlefields of Europe. Owing to shortage of labor on the farms and to the poorness of artificial feeding stuffs, the yield per cow decreased, and it became necessary, therefore, to look for fresh sources of supply. The Ministry of Agriculture initiated propaganda in many of the more remote agricultural districts where up to then all the milk produced had been utilized for butter making and calf raising or for cheese making and pig feeding, impressing on such producers the advantages of selling some if not all their produce as liquid milk. The Ministry of Food also stimulated milk production by fixing prices based on cost of production, and the large wholesole dealers did much to render such supplies available by arranging for the collection of the milk from the farm. In these ways the increased demand was supplied.

The National Farmers' Union had not up to that time taken any very active part in the organization of the milk industry, but, with the fixing of prices by the Ministry of Food, it became necessary for somebody to undertake to place the producers' case before those responsible for the fixing of prices, and the union, as the premier organization of farmers, undertook the task. The "control extended from April, 1917, to January, 1920, inclusive.

period

With the decontrol of prices there appeared a danger of milk selling again reverting to the pre-war conditions. The union, however, had been in touch with the distributive trade and endeavored at each six-monthly contracting period to come to some general agreement with the trade with regard to prices.

In September, 1920, the union appointed 15 representatives to meet an equal number of representatives of the distributors to submit the views of producers regarding winter milk prices. This meeting proved abortive so far as any agreement in regard to prices was concerned and, the distributors having met independently and fixed their own scale for the period October, 1920, to March, 1921, it was left to producers to obtain the most satisfactory prices possible from buyers of milk by individual arrangement and united action through the county branches and groups of county branches of the union.

Profiting by experience, the union next year agreed to the formation of a joint committee with the National Federation of Dairymen's Associations to deal with matters of interest to the milk industry. Within the ranks of the union itself, each county branch was asked to set up a county milk committee, which in turn sent delegates to area" milk committees and the area committees sent delegates to the central committee at headquarters. The branches were urged to exhaust every effort to "recruit all the milk producers who were still outside the union.

66

The establishment of this system of committees naturally served a useful purpose in the way of increasing the flow of information through the channels mentioned to the union's headquarters. In 1921

industrial depression was acute, and the consumption of liquid milk fell off with the decreased purchasing power of the community. Supply exceeded demand, and large quantities of milk had to be purchased for conversion into goods. Manufactured milk products showed a great decline in price. In such circumstances it is no matter for surprise that the milk prices fixed for the summer and autumn periods were not altogether satisfactory from the producers' standpoint, and the union felt compelled to ask its members to examine the question of whether milk production at then ruling prices offered a remunerative return on capital and labor invested.

66

The winter of 1921-22 was a favorable winter for milk production, and the distributive trade had been faced with a large amount of surplus" milk which they had had to convert into products at a considerable loss, for those producers who had come into the liquid milk trade during the war had not reverted to their previous methods of disposal. In order to recoup themselves the distributive trade endeavored, when spring contract time came, to lower the price of milk to such an extent that it was clearly evident that producers would be faced with serious losses. On the advice of the union, milk producers all over the country withheld all "surplus" milk.

The demand had increased, owing to the lower retail price at which the distributive trade had stated they were prepared to sell, and supplies were not forthcoming to meet it. The result was that after abortive negotiations had taken place between representatives of producers and distributors, following the intervention of the Ministry of Agriculture, a meeting was held at the headquarters of the National Farmers' Union in London and an agreement was reached by which prices to the producer were raised by 2 pence per gallon. This, being the first agreement made between the distributive trade and producers, was regarded as a victory for collective bargaining. During the summer of 1922 the union and the distributive trade met each month to discuss difficulties which arose and also to endeavor to find some method by which agreement could be reached when the time came for making winter contracts. Members of the union were prepared to rely upon collective bargaining by their central milk committee, and they desired to make contracts for 12 months. After many schemes for fixing prices had been considered and reluctantly rejected for various reasons, the union eventually decided to put forward the scheme which was ultimately adopted by both parties, the main outlines of which were as follows, and were based to a large extent on successful American practice:

That contracts should be for 12 months from October, 1922. That November, December, January, and February should be regarded as basic months and that all milk supplied during those months should be paid for at liquid-milk prices and be known as the "basic" quantity; that all milk sold in October and February should, so far as the basic quantity was concerned, be paid for at liquid-milk prices, but that anything over and above that quantity should be paid for at manufacturing price; that for the summer months, the basic quantity plus 10 per cent should be paid for as liquid milk, and all further quantities at manufacturing price.

After much discussion these ideas were adopted, and it then became necessary only to fix the price of winter and summer liquid

milk and to ascertain how the manufacturing price was to be arrived at. The prices eventually fixed were 1 shilling 8 pence per gallon (of 10 pounds) for the winter, and 1 shilling for the summer months, for liquid milk delivered London, and it was decided that the manufacturing price should be ascertained month by month by taking the average price of Canadian and New Zealand cheese, and deducting 2 pence, the cost of manufacture.

This scheme, whilst not giving satisfaction to all, has worked with wonderful success, and although the union can not claim even yet to have the milk producers in the country in its ranks, yet many who are not active members of the organization have made contracts on the terms negotiated by the union. The departmental committee set up by the Ministry of Agriculture to inquire into the distribution and prices of agricultural produce accepted the principle of collective bargaining as sound and recommended that it should be maintained. They also emphasized the importance of the method of buying excess supplies on the basis of their potential value for manufacturing purposes.

Before leaving this subject, it may be noted that the distributive trade have done their best, as have the producers, to give the scheme a fair trial, and that there now exists much better feeling between the two sections of the industry.

Another phase of the union's activities is directly related to the matters just discussed. Our difficulties in connection with the problem of "surplus" milk have been and are in a large measure attributable to the underconsumption in Great Britain of liquid milk and home-manufactured dairy produce. The importance of this question was so borne in upon the milk and dairy produce committee of the union that last year we summoned a special conference of representatives from all our county branches to consider the subject

The upshot of the conference was that it was agreed that a milk publicity campaign should be inaugurated. A National Milk Publicity Council came into being, on which representatives of the union were appointed, and we made a contribution toward the initial expenses involved. The publicity council drew up a scheme under which its activities were to be financed by equal contributions from producers and distributors on a basis of gallons sold and bought. It is too early yet to prophesy in regard to the results which will be obtained from milk publicity, but it can be said with confidence that there is a growing appreciation of its importance on the part of our Ministries of Health and Agriculture and of public authorities generally, and that, so far as the union and the distributive trade are concerned, vigorous efforts will be made to establish the indispensability of the work of the National Milk Publicity Council in the best interests of all concerned.

It is not, perhaps, out of place to mention here, as illustrative of the union's attitude toward milk organization problems, that last year the national executive invited me, as chairman of the milk and dairy produce committee, to visit North America to examine and report upon the conditions relating to the production and distribution of milk obtaining in the United States and Canada. This I did in company with the medical officer of health for the