• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Commissioners of agriculture of...
 Personnel of the department of...
 Can co-operative marketing do it...
 More about co-operative marketing...
 Is the farmer's case hopeless?
 Organizing farmers for busines...
 Co-operation for various purpo...
 Rural credits in foreign count...
 Farm taxes discussed before bankers'...
 Utilities have faith in Florid...
 Growing tung oil at home
 Crotalaria as a Florida soil...
 The life of an automobile
 Planting table for Florida truck...
 Recent statistics on agricultu...
 Financial report
 Advertising fund






Group Title: Florida quarterly bulletin of the Department of Agriculture.
Title: Florida quarterly bulletin of the Department of Agriculture. Vol. 39. No. 1.
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00077080/00026
 Material Information
Title: Florida quarterly bulletin of the Department of Agriculture. Vol. 39. No. 1.
Series Title: Florida quarterly bulletin of the Department of Agriculture.
Uniform Title: Report of the Chemical Division
Physical Description: 9 v. : ill. (some folded) ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Florida -- Dept. of Agriculture
Publisher: s.n.
Place of Publication: Tallahassee, Fla.
Manufacturer: T. J. Appleyard, printers
Publication Date: January 1929
 Subjects
Subject: Agriculture -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Agricultural industries -- Statistics -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Statistics   ( lcsh )
 Notes
General Note: Title from cover.
General Note: Each no. has also a distinctive title.
General Note: Many issue number 1's are the Report of the Chemical Division
General Note: Issues occasional supplements.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00077080
Volume ID: VID00026
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 28473180

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Table of Contents
        Page 3
    Commissioners of agriculture of Florida
        Page 4
    Personnel of the department of agriculture
        Page 5
        Page 6
    Can co-operative marketing do it all?
        Page 7
        Page 8
    More about co-operative marketing -- its possibilities and impossibilities
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
    Is the farmer's case hopeless?
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
    Organizing farmers for business
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
    Co-operation for various purposes
        Page 19
        Page 20
    Rural credits in foreign countries
        Page 21
        Page 22
    Farm taxes discussed before bankers' association
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
    Utilities have faith in Florida
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
    Growing tung oil at home
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
    Crotalaria as a Florida soil builder
        Page 38
        Page 39
    The life of an automobile
        Page 40
        Page 41
    Planting table for Florida truck crops
        Page 42
        Page 43
    Recent statistics on agriculture
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
    Financial report
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
    Advertising fund
        Page 61
        Page 62
Full Text



VOLUME 39


.Agricultural


Information







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN
OF THE
Department of Agriculture
JANUARY, 1929







NATHAN MAYO
Commissioner of Agriculture
TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA


Entered January 31, 1903, at Tallahassee, Florida, as second-class matter
under Act of Congress of June, 1900. "Acceptance for mailing at special
rate of postage provided for in Section 1103, Act of October 3, 1917, au-
thorized September 11, 1918."

A T. J. APPLEYARD, INC.. TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA


NUMBER 1











Contents



Commissioners of Agriculture of Florida ................ 4
Personnel of the Department of Agriculture .............. 5
Can Co-Operative Marketing Do It? .................... 7
More About Co-Operative Marketing-Its Possibilities and
Im possibilities .................................... 9
Is the Farmer's Case Hopeless? ....................... 12
Organizing Farmers for Business ........................ 15
Co-Operation for Various Purposes ..................... 19
Rural Credits in Foreign Countries ..................... 21
Farm Taxes Discussed Before Bankers' Association ....... 23
Utilities Have Faith in Florida ....................... 31
Growing Tung Oil at Home ........................... 35
Crotalaria as a Florida Soil Builder ...................... 38
The Life of an Automobile ............................. 40
Planting Table for Florida Truck Crops ................. 42
Recent Statistics on Agriculture ....................... 44
Financial Report ................... ................ 49
Advertising Fund ................................... 61














Commissioners of Agriculture
of Florida


AS REGISTER OF LANDS-
John Beard: January 12, 1847, to May 29, 1849.
David S. Walker: November 23, 1850.
Hugh A. Corley: December 31, 1859, to Dec. 31, 1866.

AS COMMISSIONER OF IMMIGRATION-
Oscar E. Austin: August 7, 1868.
J. S. Adams: January 14, 1869, to January 16, 1873.
Dennis Eagan: March 4, 1873, to 1877.
Hugh A. Corley: January 3, 1877, to March 16, 1882.
P. W. White: March 16, 1882, to February 12, 1885.

AS COMMISSIONER OF LANDS AND IMMIGRA-
TION-
C. L. Mitchell: January 29, 1885.

AS COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE-
L. B. Wombell: December 31, 1888.
B. E. McLin: January 1, 1901, to March 1, 1912.
W. A. McRae: March 1, 1912, to October 31, 1923.
Nathan Mayo: November 1, 1923.









Personnel of the Department

of Agriculture


NATHAN MAYO, COMMISSIONER
Miss Anna Belle Wesson, Secretary to the Commissioner

AGRICULTURAL AND IMMIGRATION DIVISION--
T. J. Brooks, Chief Clerk and Director, Bureau of
Immigration.
Phil S. Taylor, Advertising Editor, Bureau of Immi-
gration.
J. M. Burgess, Clerk.
Bennett T. Mayo, Clerk.
Mrs. Inez Hale McDuff, Stenographer.
Miss Leola Sauls, Stenographer.
Mrs. Vera Leverett, Mimeographer.

PURE FOODS AND DRUGS, STOCK FEED, FERTILIZER, CITRUS
FRUIT AND GASOLINE INSPECTION DIVISION--
J. H. Pledger, Chief Clerk and Supervising Inspector.
R. J. Mays, Clerk and Bookkeeper.
Miss Margaret Walker, Stenographer.
J. B. Wilkerson, Inspector, Pensacola.
D. P. Daniel, Inspector, Marianna.
J. B. Brinson, Inspector, Madison.
Wm. McCarrel, Inspector, Jacksonville.
Nathan Mayo, Jr., Inspector, Ocala.
A. N. Turnbull, Inspector, Daytona.
J. W. Davis, Inspector, Ocala.
J. B. Taylor, Inspector, Tampa.
I. D. Stone, Inspector, Lakeland.
S. W. Clark, Inspector, Punta Gorda.
W. D. Eminisor, Jr., Inspector, Miami.









PERSONNEL-Continued.

LAND DIVISION-
C. B. Gwynn, Chief Land Clerk.
F. E. Bayless, Jr., Clerk.
Mrs. L. B. Hopkins, Stenographer and Certificate Clerk.
Miss Helen Parks, Stenographer.

FIELD NOTE DIvisioN-
Miss Bessie Damon, Clerk.
Will E. Graham, Clerk.

PRISON DIVISION-
T. E. Andrews, Clerk.

SHELLFISH COMMISSION DIVISION-
T. R. Hodges, Commissioner.
Mrs. Anna Parker, Clerk.
Miss Elizabeth Rief, Stenographer.
Mrs. Lizzie Lej Leman, Shellfish Clerk and Bookkeeper.

CHEMISTRY DIVISION-
R. E. Rose, State Chemist.
Gordon Hart, Assistant Chemist.
B. Jay Owen, Assistant Chemist.
Nals Berryman, Assistant Chemist.
E. Peck Greene, Assistant Chemist.
Miss Muriel Rose, Clerk and Stenographer.

STATE MARKETING BUREAU DIVISION-
L. M. Rhodes, Commissioner.
Moses Folson, Secretary.
Neill Rhodes, Assistant Marketing Commissioner.
R. H. von Glahn, Marketing Agent.
Fred N. Reed, Multigrapher.
E. M. Roberts, Assistant Multigrapher.
Howard Mueller, Stenographer.








Can Co-Operative Marketing

Do It All?
By NATHAN MAYO
Commissioner of Agriculture
(In Florida Review)
AN the American farmer obtain through co-operative mar-
keting his much-needed ''relief''?
How far will orderly selling by producing groups go in
stabilizing markets?
Can Florida producers hope to hold up profitable prices
permanently by clearing houses and similar organizations?
These questions may well be considered in the light of recent
developments in co-operative marketing circles outside of Florida.
In California, where co-operatives have had some years of suc-
cess, it now appears that trouble is at hand. Growers of peaches,
raisins, prunes and some other crops are loaded down by surplus
production and are said to be facing ruinous prices. After sev-
eral seasons of prosperity resulting from collective action in the
sale of their products, these California folks are now said to be
feeling the weight of their own heavy crops which cannot be sold
except at loss. They are reported to be considering heroic
measures, such as allowing a large part of the present year's
crop to go to waste in order to reduce this surplus to the level
of a profitable instead of unprofitable supply.
Up in Canada where they grow vast quantities of wheat, the
growers formed a pool and operated it successfully for a number
of years. For a while it worked well. Undoubtedly it steadied
the price of wheat and did much to prevent sags and gluts in the
market. Like the California organizations, it brought cheer and
confidence to the producers. Farmers everywhere were looking
at these co-operatives with pride and hopefulness. But now we
have the report that the wheat pool is in trouble. More than
seventy-five million bushels of wheat, on hand as a "carry-over"
from last year, was added to this year's large crop, and the two
combined proved too much for the market to stand. Low prices.
asserted to be lower than the cost of production, resulted, and
Canadian and American wheat growers are now figuring their
losses.
This experience of our friends in California and Canada is not
a new one for co-operatives. The rice growers and tobacco grow-
ers of the South have had similar troubles. Both flourished a
while until over-production piled up its excess baggage too
heavy for them to carry.
In the case of Florida, it may be pointed out that we do not
produce crops that can be kept from one season to the next, as







8 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

with wheat or tobacco or raisins or cotton. It is true that Flor-
ida's chief products are citrus fruits and vegetables, which are
perishables and cannot well be carried over. But this fact by no
means removes the peril of the surplus. In reality, it only em-
phasizes this peril since it practically compels the marketing of
these perishables as soon as they are harvested. A Florida co-
cperative with an excess of oranges or of vegetables, unlike a
co-operative handling cotton or wheat, would be forced to dispose
of this surplus at the same time it was selling the normal amount
demanded by the trade. We would not have the chance that a
wheat pool might have, viz., to unload the "carry over" at a
profit should the year into which it was carried prove a year of
low yields. Again, with the Florida citrus grower there would
be the added difficulty of controlling annual production, since
the citrus crop is not planned or planted for each separate year,
but for all the years the groves live and bear.
What lesson can we get from these troubles?
Just this: CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING CANNOT SUC-
CESSFULLY HANDLE A SURPLUS SO LARGE AS TO
EXCEED ALL DEMAND.
We must consider the fact that one invariable result of suc-
cessful collective selling by farmers has always been a marked
increase in production. Co-operatives that direct the marketing
of seventy-five per cent or more of any crop can and have always,
under normal conditions, sold that crop at a price satisfactory to
themselves. This far they can serve most helpfully the cause of
agriculture. But no co-operative yet brought forth has mastered
the vexing problem of EXCESS or SURPLUS. It is one of the
tragedies of agricultural life that the very agency which has
profitably sold a crop of normal size has been the agency which,
without intent to do it, has stimulated the production of succeed-
ing crops which were of abnormal size and had to be sold at low
prices. There we have the sad spectacle of farm organizations
defeating their own ends and thwarting the very purpose for
which they were founded.
What can be done about it? The thing that MUST be done,
if co-operative marketing shall function, is to CONTROL NOT
ONLY MARKETING, BUT AHEAD OF IT, CONTROL PRO-
DUCTION.
Whether this can readily be done is the BIG QUESTION
LOOMING UP BEFORE CO-OPERATIVES. It will have to
be solved or all of our efforts to help ourselves through organi-
zations will in the end fail. This will apply here in Florida just
as it did in California. We had as well face facts. The co-opera-
tives we are to have in our State will give us some IMMEDIATE
RELIEF and will prove a blessing. But unless our growers by
common consent can control production they will not long be able
to control prices.








FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


More About Co-Operative Marketing

-Its Possibilities and Impossibilities
By NATHAN MAYO
Commissioner of Agriculture
(In Florida Review)
H ERETOFORE in this publication we discussed the topic
"CAN CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING DO IT ALL."
In this paper we pointed out some of the troubles which
come to co-operatives, calling special attention to the menace of
surplus production-an unhappy aftermath of many co-opera-
tive enterprises in the past.
Nothing in this article was designed to "throw cold water"
upon co-operative effort in Florida or elsewhere, despite the fact
that a very few of our friends seem to have so construed it. We
are in no sense opposed to this movement-we are in the true
sense very much in favor of it. But we still stand upon our posi-
tion taken in the article referred to: WE KNOW THAT CO-
OPERATIVE MARKETING IS NOT A PERFECT PANA-
CEA FOR THE TROUBLES OF FARMING. IT HAS NOT
ALWAYS WORKED SUCCESSFULLY, PARTICULARLY
IN THE HANDLING OF THE SURPLUS WHICH IS
LIKELY TO FOLLOW IN ITS WAKE. Here let us quote
from C. A. Cobb, editor of SOUTHERN RURALIST, who says
in an editorial under date of January 1st:
"The best co-operation can do in marketing is to put over an
outstanding job of selling the products entrusted to it. And when
this is well done, over-production with all its train of evils is not
only invited but is inevitable, WITHOUT SOME MEASURE
OF CONTROL. This is what has happened in California, where
co-operation in this country had its birth. If you doubt this,
write the raisin growers and the prune growers and any of the
rest. Co-operation is no answer to tariff discrimination against
agriculture; it is no answer to labor restriction in the interest of
higher wages for industrial workers. Co-operation is no answer
to the burden placed upon agriculture through the govern-
mentally guaranteed income of industry."
SOME THINGS A CO-OPERATIVE CANNOT DO
It cannot perform miracles.
It cannot distribute large crops to the market at as high prices
as small ones.
It cannot entirely eliminate the middleman.








10 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Controlling only a part of the crop, it cannot dominate
markets.
It cannot change human nature or make a good farmer out of
a poor one.
It cannot sell all the produce of all its members all the time for
a profit (neither can this be done by independent marketing).
It cannot monopolize supply or prevent all competition.
It cannot succeed if a majority of its members are disloyal.
It cannot wave a magic wand and remove all the difficulties in
production and distribution.
It cannot change sorry culls No. 3's to A grade or No. 1 's.
It cannot make the weatherman co-operate even if farmers
limit the acreage.
THINGS A CO-OPERATIVE CAN DO
It can standardize and help stabilize production.
It can advertise and widen distribution and develop new
markets.
It can improve grade, pack and containers.
It can help to improve distribution between existing markets.
It can buy collectively.
It can finance marketing operations.
It can maintain favorable relations with the trade by conform-
ing to the highest ethics in business.
It can hire men who believe in co-operation and fire men who
don't.
It can be a democratic instead of an autocratic movement.
It can employ skilled salesmanship.
It can assemble the commodities and resources of its members.
It can employ expert graders and packers.
It can eliminate competition between local organizations.
It can decrease wasteful practices.
It can more easily secure shipping point inspection.
It can collect claims, improve quality, form pools.
It can help to avoid gluts and famines.
It can make cheaper credit possible.
It can make for co-operative production.
It can make for co-operation in preparation for market.
It can eliminate a large percentage of the middlemen dealing
in farm crops.
It can get the grower a quality price when he grows a quality
product.
BUSINESS DONE BY CO-OPERATIVES IN 1927
With the limitations and difficulties of co-operative marketing
ever in mind, Florida producers may well press ahead to the
work of building their organizations. With the experience of








FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


hundreds of farm business enterprises to guide them, our people
have the best possible chance to construct and guide their own
associations so as to become permanently successful.
It is heartening to consider the size of the business transacted
by farmers' associations in the United States. A report issued
by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics at Washington, D. C.,
gives us the following very interesting figures relative to the
11,400 co-operative associations listed in the nation:

Grain Associations .......................$ 680,000,000
Dairy Associations ....................... 620,000,000
Live Stock Associations ................... 320,000,000
Fruit and Vegetable Associations .......... 300,000,000
Cotton Associations .................... 97,000,000
Poultry and Egg Associations ............. 40,000,000
Nut Associations ......................... 14,600,000
Tobacco Associations ..................... 22,000,000
Wool Association ........................ 7,000,000
Miscellaneous ............................ .200,000,000

Grand Total Business for Year 1927 ...... $2,300,600,000

This huge total of business indicates the tremendous strides the
American farmer has made toward the proper management of his
own business affairs. Here in Florida we are just beginning.
Our citrus, poultry, dairy, truck and general farming groups are
in need of sound organization, intelligently directed. The efforts
already made toward this end would seem to lend a hopeful out-
look to the future. Collective action, directed by intelligence and
made vital by loyalty, can, and we believe will take our producers
far along the highway of progress.


11







12 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE



Is the Farmer's Case Hopeless?

By NATHAN MAYO
Commissioner of Agriculture

(In Florida Review)

D EAN MUMFORD of the University of Missouri recently
stated the ease of the farmer as being desperate. His
figures showed that farm indebtedness could not be
liquidated from farm incomes. His article appeared in the
August 20th issue of Florida Review.
If the case is as desperate as he states, what is to be the future
of American agriculture ? Are the farmers of the future to be
peasants in fact? Are we drifting back to "The Man With
the Hoe" as pictured by Millet and sung by Edwin Markham?
Have we gone in a circle and lifted the farmer from his lowly
estate during feudalism to the high plane occupied by the inde-
pendent American farmer, only to circle back to feudalistic
bondage? It is true that agriculture is carrying a heavy debt.
So is almost every other kind of industry. It is also true that
the average farmer can rent his farm and home for about what a
similar home alone will cost in rent in town. It is also true that
no man can live in town and hire himself out to work on the
farm for a wage sufficient to pay his family board bill in town,
much less house rent. It is true that for many years the ap-
proximate price indices show that the purchasing power of the
farmer's labor is the lowest per day of any class of workers
listed among gainful pursuits.
Now, what is to be done about it ? First, find out the cause.
Second, apply the remedy.
That sounds easy, but it is not. There is no one cause, but
there are numerous interlocking causes for the farmer's plight.
The consuming power of the world has been so greatly increased
during recent years that all kinds of manufactured articles
have been put on the market at good prices. This has called
forth millions from farms to industrial centers. The fact that
more efficient methods of farming have enabled those left on
the farm to produce as much per capital as before the exodus
from the country accounts for the purchasing power of farm
labor per day being lower per hand than before.
When the relative number of people on the farm gets low
enough to reduce production to a point below normal consump-
tion, then will the price increase until the purchasing power of







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


labor on the farm will equal the purchasing power of the aver-
age of other vocations.
The few who stand head and shoulders above the average
in efficiency of production on the farm are the ones who are
making money. If every one on the farm were as good as the
best, no one would make anything-production would overtake
consumption and pile up a surplus that would throw prices
below cost of production.
As was pointed out by Dean Mumford, taxes are unjust to
farmers. A man with farm property enough to earn an income
of $4,000 per year would pay several hundred times as much
taxes as the salaried man drawing $4,000 a year. However,
the salaried man with nothing but his salary has nothing to leave
his family when he dies, while the owner of property, whether
in town or country, has the property which earns the $4,000
to leave as a patrimony. It takes a great deal more of his salary
for the $4,000 wage-earner to live than it takes for the $4,000
farm-owner to live.
At the rate lands, both farm land and other lands, are being
allowed to sell for taxes there will be very little land-tax rev-
enue in a few years in Florida.
Taxes have been a bone of contention since taxes were in-
vented, and always will be. If those in position as statesmen
do not realize that taxation that confiscates destroys the gov-
ernment that imposes it, sooner or later, then statesmanship is
dead and the end is in sight.
We do not want a peasant-minded people as any part of our
population. The only way to prevent it is to have no peasants
economically.
It was found years ago, both in Europe and America, that
farming could not pay commercial rates for loans nor meet
commercial terms as to the length of loans. The Rural Credit
Bank, for both long and short time loans, was provided. But
in many localities neither of these facilities is available because
of the inability of the farmer to comply with the requirements.
There should be an extension of this to accommodate a wider
scope of farmers.
Efficient marketing is needed. Finding new customers for
one product ofttimes crowds out some other product-there is
nothing that has not a possible substitute. However, increased
consumption per capital is limited only by the power to purchase.
Wants multiply as the means are acquired to accommodate
them. The writer believes a halt will be called before it is
too late in the rush toward general bankruptcy of agriculture.
The case may be desperate, but not hopeless. Red-blooded


13







14 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Americans will not be crowded beyond a given point. The reme-
dies applied will be a shock to some, inevitably; but humanity,
justice and self-preservation will demand measures, though
drastic, that will place farming on as remunerative a basis as
the average of other vocations.
No, the farmer's plight is not hopeless unless this nation is
hopeless. This nation is not hopeless unless civilization is hope-
less. For if and when the farmer is crushed by the weight of
economic injustice, no other part of the republic will stand.
He will bring down the temple on which his hands rest.
Civilization must reckon with the man behind the plow. He
is the anchor of the republic, the hope of the world. He holds
in his hands the material of life. Should he dodge his task one
season, famine would sweep off the inhabitants of the planet.
Law-makers, take heed, and build prosperity where the fountain
of economic life springs from Mother Earth---on the farm.










iadtn







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


Organizing Farmers for Business
By T. J. BROOKS
Chief Clerk, Departmnt of Agriculture

THE farmer is a manufacturer: The soil, atmosphere, sun-
shine and showers are the material to which he applies his
skill, and from nature's laboratory is poured annually into
the channels of trade the materials from which is fed and clothed
the teeming millions of the earth.
The farmer is a business man: The selling of his surplus is
the great paramount source of the world's commerce and trade.
He furnishes 600,000,000 tons of food annually to feed the
nations of the earth.
The farmer is a consumer of the materials turned out by the
great urban industries. He interchanges his products with
those of other lands till all the nations of earth are linked to-
gether into one stupendous whole.
History is a voice forever sounding across the centuries the
interpretations of man. Opinions alter, manners change, creeds
rise and fall, but the law of cause and effect is written on the
tablets of eternity.
To trace the law of cause and effect in the past for future
guidance is a task of civilization. Present conditions are the
composite reflection of the operation of this law. Present ten-
dencies are prophetic, and to properly interpret is to be fore-
armed and empowered to direct the course of history.
The farmer of today is going through a period of transition,
economically, industrially and financially. How to adjust his
methods, habits, and business to the changing order is one of
the difficult problems of the day which he alone can solve.
The consumer furnishes the demand for production. He pays
for:
(1) Cost of production.
(2) Cost of distribution.
(3) Profits of production.
(4) Profits of distribution.
(5) Waste of production.
(6) Waste of distribution.
The ability to consume is gauged by the power to earn. When
so much of the consumers earning power goes to defray the ex-
pense of waste his consuming power is curtailed and the market
he can furnish the producer is lessened. It behooves both the
producer and consumer to eliminate waste.







16 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

The best statistics obtainable inform us that production and
distribution are about equal factors in establishing the retail
price to the ultimate consumer. We know that this can be
greatly cheapened by the producer assuming a larger share in
the task of distribution along lines demonstrated to be practical.
efficient and economical by the larger distributing concerns of
the leading nations of the world.
There are two general divisions of business methods:
(1) Individual.
(2) Collective.
The individual method has been followed almost universally
from the very earliest to very recent times. The development
of modern machinery, the corporation and the trust has elimin-
ated this method in the larger affairs of the business world.
There is no individual distribution by those who hire for wages.
They do not own the things they produce. The distribution is
undertaken by the firm or company owning the output. The
workers in a shoe factory think not of marketing the shoes they
produce. This is done by the factory owners; not as individuals
either but by distributors under the direction of the owners.
The same is true of the manufacture of machinery, furniture,
vehicles, mining, etc. A railroad has service to sell but the ones
who perform the individual service on the road or trains are
not the ones who set the price. This is the work of the corporate
body endowed by law with the powers of personal entity.
When farming is done on the bonanza scale the same process
of marketing is followed: The individual worker sells nothing
but his service; the corporation sells for all the workers and pays
a stipulated wage to them.
When the ownership and operation is on the small scale the
business is at a serious disadvantage in competing with the
larger business, both in power to handle a distributing system
and in economy of operation. This brings the farmer of tomor-
row face to face with the alternative of collective marketing
among the small farmers or gradually retreat before the corpo-
ration farmer. The corporation has superseded the individual
in all other lines. Even though corporation farming is outlawed
it will not do away with the need of collective distribution.
We need only to study the co-operative movement, as it is now
progressing on both sides of the sea, to see its possibilities and
understand the details of its principles. What we do is mostly
a matter of choice but the consequences of what we choose to do
are meted out to us with cold precision as destiny swings the
pendulum of time.







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


CORPORATE BUSINESS
There are three methods of conducting corporate business:
1. The ordinary joint-stock method;
2. The co-partnership or profit-sharing method;
3. The co-operative method.
Let us take them up in the order named and study the essen-
tial qualities of each. The process of securing a charter is the
same in all three kinds.
The first was originally the only kind organized. This class
has but one purpose: the welfare of the stockholder. All net
profits are considered the rightful property of the stockholders.
The voting power is lodged in the shares. The shareholders
may vote for the board of directors or other officers. The vot-
ing power may belong exclusively to the holders of common stock
or may extend to the preferred stock. It may have both pre-
ferred and common or all may be common. It may have a
voting board which has all the voting powers. In either case
the profits go to the stockholders. Most of our industrial cor-
porations are of this kind. The defense of this type of corpora-
tion is that those who assume the risk of failure and have their
money invested are due whatever returns the business may net.
The second class of corporations-the profit-sharing-goes
one step further and allows a certain percent of the profits to
go to the employes in additions to their wages, the bonus to be
pro rata, based on the salary or wages or each. This is calcu-
lated to tie the employes to the company and encourage the
''spirit of the shop" till strikes will be a thing of the past. This
plan is calculated to make the employes feel that they are getting
a square deal and they will have no desire to destroy the busi-
ness that gives employment and gives them all that the profits
will justify. This plan is coming in favor with quite a few large
employers.
The third kind of co-operative corporation goes still one step
further and includes the three absolutely essential factors in
the operation of any business: the stockholder, the employee and
the customer. Neither is more important than the other and
neither should have all the benefits of success. In the distribu-
tion of profits the co-operative corporation limits the profits
that go to the stockholder just as profits are limited to a bond
holder. After paying expenses the stockholder is a preferred
creditor up to the rate which is established as the rate. Next
comes the employes and customers. The employes get a certain
percent pro rata, based on the earnings of each. The remainder
goes back to those furnishing the business. If it is a mer-
cantile business the refund goes to the purchaser of goods in
2-Agri.







18 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

proportion to value of purchases by members. Outside custom-
ers get one-half the rebate of members which may be credits
till they amount to a share and then a share may be issued. If
it is a selling association commissions are charged to cover ex-
penses and a reserve; when this has reached a specified standard
the profits are returned to those furnishing the shipments, to
each according to the profits yielded by his shipment.
In the control it is usually one man who votes regardless of
the number of shares owned. In a few instances the members
vote according to the volume of business furnished-so much
business counting a vote. The same principals apply whether
the articles handled are eggs, poultry, live stock, dairy products,
fruit, vegetables, wheat, cotton or what not. Farmers' Ex-
changes never deal in futures subject to settlement by forfeiture
of margins.

COPYING THE ECONOMICS OF BIG BUSINESS
All examples of successful co-operative business exemplify the
possibility of conducting the distributive end of farming on the
same principles that are followed by the big industrial corpora-
tions and trusts without the monopolistic extortions for the bene-
fit of a few stockholding exploiters.







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


Co-Operation for Various Purposes

By T. J. BROOKS
Chief Clerk, Department of Agriculture

CO-OPERATION has had many interpretations. It may be
exemplified in Productive, Commercial, Financial and
Social Life. Co-operative undertakings may be based on
ideas of material profit only or on ideas of altruism or on a
combination of the two.
Social innovations are to be found in every age of the world.
However diverse the systems and theories put forward or vaguely
expressed, the idea of associated effort runs through them all.
Whether expressed by ancient philosophers, as in Plato's "Re-
public," or by modern thinkers as in Bacon's "Nova Atlantis";
by Moore's "Utopia"; by Harrington's "Oceana"; by Campa-
nella's "City of the Sun." Making experiments in accordance
with theories have been frequent during the last half century.
Most of these experiments have come to grief. Impractical
theories may be so because they are unreasonable or run counter
to the public attitude of mind. A scheme may be plausible,
reasonable, worked out logically-planned on the assumption
that the human family will act rationally-yet fail because
human beings so often utterly fail to act rationally. The plan
is impractical, though just and reasonable, if it will not coincide
with human conduct as influenced by heredity and environment.
The Essenes were communists and held all things in common.
Christ was of this tribe. The Apostles seem to have followed
this plan in their early collaborations. Examples of this kind of
co-operative effort have not proven verile, permanent or capable
of large growth.
Adam Smith, Malthus, Richardo and Spencer worked out the
theory of competition from the economic and individualistic
standpoint. Robert Owen, "the father of co-operation," gave
experimental expression to a means of escape from the evils of
competition by means of association on mutual terms industri-
ally. Dissatisfaction with existing conditions has provoked
various schools of thought which involved radical changes in the
social structure.
General economics treats of man's temporal well-being; of
production, distribution, consumption and agencies controlling
each. Pure economics is the science of value, price, exchange
and markets. National economics has to do with governmental
policies and operations. Dynamic economics is prophetic as it








20 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

deals with economic tendencies as contrasted with conditions.
Rural economics relates to the production, distribution and use
of agricultural wealth and the forces of rural life. Urban eco-
nomics covers the field of urban activities in industry and trade.
Social economics concerns problems of organized society as it
exists and in its potentialities. Political economics generalizes all
branches, with special reference to the influence of government
on industry and society.
Social science or sociology treats of the origin, history and
evolution of society; of ethnological forces, progress of civiliza-
tion and laws controlling human intercourse; the development
of government, marriage, law, custom, land-tenure, caste and
privilege; of domestic and international social phenomena.
Co-operation is a phenomenon of social development. It may
come from (1) mobilization of a religious sect brought about
by persecution from without; (2) a fraternity; (3) a revolt
against economic conditions; or (4) constructive efforts to es-
cape unsatisfactory economic conditions.
We see the first exemplification in the religious colony; the
second in the numerous fraternities with which we are all famil-
iar; the third group is seen in the labor unions, such as the
Knights of Labor, the American Federation of Labor, the
miners' unions, etc., and the Farmers' Alliance, the Grange,
the Farmers' Union, etc., the fourth group is exemplified in the
co-operative enterprises for purposes of production, distribution
and finance.








FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 21


Rural Credits in Foreign Countries*

By T. J. BROOKS
Chief Clerk, Department of Agriculture

EUROPEAN BANKING SYSTEM
I. Commercial.
Governmental.
Private.
II. Co-operative and non-co-operative credit systems.
1. Land loans.
Landschaft:
Is merely a syndicate of land owning borrowers; supervised
and regulated by the government but operated by the mem-
bers; makes long-time loans on mortgages; all land mort-
gages pooled and bonds issued on them; bonds sold on open
market; loans repaid by amortization; both limited and
unlimited liability, with the former tendency; the Land-
schaft, as are all other European co-operative associations,
exempt from taxation; loans to members only.
2. Credit Foncier:
A non-co-operative, centralized institution, patterned to a
large extent after the Landschaft; government appoint
principal officers as well as supervising and regulating
same; debentures issued on collection of mortgages; short
time loans and long time loans made, the latter being re-
paid by amortization; loans repaid at the option of the
borrower and equal amount of debentures recalled; limited
liability.
3. Credit Agricole:
Created by the government in 1899; its organization con-
sists of the regional banks and the member societies; mem-
bership subscribes capital and Bank of France furnishes
free five times this amount, which is lent back to the mem-
bers on long time land loans.
4. Direct government loans:
Government of Denmark furnishes $9 to every $1 of the
farmer's; England bought the big estates in Ireland in
order to sell them back to the small holders; New Zealand
also.
For Treatise on Co-operative Credits in United States, write to State De-
partment of Agriculture for Bulletin on this subject.








22 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

III. Personal credit.
1. Rural.
Raiffeisen:
Local, independent, rural, co-operative, credit association;
funds for loans come mainly from deposits; the security
is mostly character, less often, other collateral; loans aver-
age $100; use of same must be meritorious; management is
gratuitous; operates in a restricted area; has marked social
merits.
2. Schulze-Delitzsch:
This type of bank is agricultural; has shares the same as
commercial banks and intended for short time personal
credit to farmers.
3. Credit Agricole:
Short time loans made on personal credit without the
amortization feature.

IV. Metropolitan.
1. Schulze-Delitzsch:
Same as Raiffeisen except: absolute business management;
is an urban bank-co-operative; has capital stock; declares
dividends; has paid officials; its credit is either a loan or
a discount on a trade bill of exchange; loans are either
straight loans or credit limits within which a borrower
may draw.
2. Credit Foncier:
Makes loans to municipalities, corporations, and workers,
in certain industrial pursuits.


cP7fqn )







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 23


Farm Taxes Discussed Before
Bankers' Association
AX RELIEF for farm lands, through adjustments basing
taxation systems on ability to pay, coupled with the recog-
nition that capital values of the farm must reflect earning
power rather than inflated prices for real estate, were the chief
points for farm betterment stressed by Dean H. L. Russell, of
the University of Wisconsin College of Agriculture, in an ad-
dress recently delivered in Philadelphia before the American
Bankers' Association convention discussing the farm situation.
Dean Russell, nationally recognized as an authority on farm
economies, said that present land values may be taken as repre-
senting the maximum of deflation, but that agriculture will
have to recognize they cannot be expected to return again to
anywhere near war-time levels. Future success of the farmer,
he said, lies in improving his labor income rather than in the
unearned increment due to advance in the price of his farm.
NO UNIVERSAL PANACEA
"There is no universal panacea for the agricultural troubles
for the fundamental reason that American agriculture is not
a single industry. This country, spanning twenty-five degrees
of latitude, is as diverse as Europe. No one thinks of securing
a. solution to Italy's problems equally applicable to Norway's
ills.
"Before election the political medicine vendor is abroad with
his wares promising relief for all troubles through legislative
cures. If the farmer is in economic distress, the 'doctor' surely
has a liniment that might do some good, so the patient is in-
duced to grab it and try it.
"A basic difficulty with agriculture is a lack of adjustment
between what is produced and what is consumed. Most people
consider the problem is generally one of over-production, and
this is often the case, but under-consumption is likewise potent
in producing a surplus. When both these forces pull in the
same direction the effect is materially heightened.
"Agriculture deals with consumer demand for food, but is
definitely limited in its possibilities of expansion when com-
pared with consumer demands for raiment, shelter or recrea-
tion. Advertising can divert attention from one food to an-
other, but if an apple a day keeps the doctor away, it means
less orange juice used.







24 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

"I wonder if we really appreciate how food habits are chang-
ing. 'Slenderizing,' so fashionable in certain circles, is ma-
terially reducing per capital use of food with a large group of
the population. The stream line waist is bad for the American
farmer. Congress ought to do something about it. Either of
the political parties overlooked a good chance to put a plank
in its platform making this an issue for the present campaign.
The farmer vote should have been solid for the man who had
such an appealing platform.
"In the main, food requirements are directly related to
population increase. But agricultural production in recent
years has piled up faster than ever. The total food supply pro-
duced in the last four years has been 14 percent greater than
it was for the four-year period from 1917-21. During this
period population has increased less than 9 percent. In other
words, increase in food production has outrun population ex-
pansion by 50 percent. Yet this increased production and
resulting surplus was grown on 13,000,000 less acres in 1925
than were used for the crop of 1919.

WIDE COST OF PRODUCTION
"Probably in no field is there so wide a range in cost of pro-
duction as in farming. Cost of production between different
farmers living under the same conditions will often vary from
50 percent to 100 percent. Such a range in most lines of
business would put a concern in the bankruptcy courts. The
farmer, however, hangs on longer because he cannot unload
on someone else and if compelled to he can take a lowered
standard of living.
"Many people lament the constant shift of the country popu-
lation to the city, and regard this as an index to a decline in
agriculture. Such a conclusion is far from being justified.
Farm population decreased about 6 percent from 1920 to 1925,
but the machine has more than replaced this human brawn,
and would one say that it was necessarily to the detriment of
the farm? If increasing efficiency in man power output is a
measure of business ability it cannot be said that American
agriculture has sunk to a lower level than it earlier occupied.
"The improbability of controlling crop production by any
concerted means on the 6,000,000 farms of America is so great
no one as yet has been wise enough to work out a satisfactory
plan. The lumber, oil and coal industries have found restric-
tive measures of a voluntary character difficult to maintain.
If business were definitely to control production by agreement,
it finds itself in conflict with the government under the law








FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


forbidding combinations acting in restraint of trade. The in-
exorable laws of an economic character ultimately will prevail,
and unless surpluses can be consumed or prevented from occur-
ring, disaster impends.
"Some of the factors governing production are well within
the control of man. Hence if he does not exercise good judg-
ment in this regard he has no one but himself to blame. The
stimulus to over-produce because of high prices is the tendency
that is most difficult to control, yet this is where the majority
of the farmers suffer the most. If prices of any product are
above normal, the inevitable tendency is to expand operations.
Where each individual acts separately under the same economic
stimulus, the mass effect is an expansion in acreage that cannot
but react disastrously.
"The government tried to impress caution on the potato
growers this spring. In spite of direct warning, the national
increase in acreage was nearly 350,000 acres. The American
potato grower now finds himself smothered with a prospective
crop estimated at over 466,000,000 bushels. The market is
opening at not enough to cover costs of production. Probable
total value of this enormous crop will be $100,000,000 less than
if there had been unfavorable season in which 50,000,000
bushels less had been grown.
"How is it possible with millions of growers scattered over
the forty-eight states to meet a situation in which the hazards
of weather bulk large? Some economists have suggested that
a federal farm board can control the weather which may exert
even a more potent influence on production than the difference
in acreage? Even Congress cannot legislate so as to out-
maneuver the weather.
"The government did all that it could do when wide publicity
was given to the statistical situation as shown by the 'intention
to plant' census, and yet last year a move developed in Con-
gress to stop the government from publishing forecasts of pro-
duction with reference to cotton. Somebody did not want too
much information given the public about the total crop pros-
pects.
"Orderly marketing may be offered as a help. Co-operative
endeavor has been put forth as a panacea but no formula can
be blindly followed on the assumption that it is certain to lead
to the promised land.
"Instead of over-production at present there is actually a
shortage in certain staple food products. Certainly surplus
production cannot now be said to exist in the live stock industry
with beef at the highest price since the war. With dairy cattle


25







26 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

bringing the highest price since 1920, with stocks of condensed
milk the lowest of any period but one in the last eight years,
the outlook for the old dairy cow does not appear so very bad.
No one is now suggesting a McNary-Haugen bill to remedy this
situation.
"The recent price decline in wheat has been accentuated by
the unusual percent of the crop thrown on the market by ex-
tensive use of the harvester combine. This has made possible
early as well as extensive marketing. Did you ever stop to
think what a revolution in the use of land has come from the
widespread employment of the motor? The replacement of
horses by tractors and other motor equipment has reduced the
use of land for the production of feed for horses by about
10,000,000 acres. The released acres must be put to use if they
are to bear the burden of taxes, of interest and the like.

SOME WAYS TO HELP SUGGESTED
"I shall venture to indicate some ways which might serve to
equalize the status of the farm with other phases of industry
and business. Some of these suggestions would require legis-
lative and governmental action before they could be made
effective, but all of them first require the development of a
body of public opinion that can only be brought about by frank
discussion.
"With all of the discussion on the subject of curtailing fur-
ther expansion in crop area, agitation still continues for more
governmental reclamation projects. The halls of Congress re-
sounded last session with new proposals for additional federal
projects that would bring into use hundreds of thousands of
acres of desert land and incidentally cost the treasury only
$100,000,000 or so. Congress might refrain from further recla-
mation until population needs warrant development. Drainage
enterprises have also been developed far in advance of eco-
nomic needs.
"One of the most effective ways the hands of farm leadership
could be strengthened would be a non-political, non-emotional
critical study of the problems of taxation, with the object in
view of placing this important and necessary attribute of gov-
ernment on a sound and modern basis. It is a fair question to
ask whether the relation between taxes now levied on income
throughout all of the states of the Union is properly correlated
with those levied on real property. Eighty percent of all taxes
paid in the United States is paid by real estate.







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


WEIGHT OF TAX BURDEN INCREASED
"When land values were rising steadily the burden of taxa-
tion was not disproportionately severe, but with the terrific
deflation which has occurred within the last decade in farm
real estate, the crushing weight of the land tax burden has in
many cases now become unbearable. The ratio of land tax to
the cash rent of farms formerly was about 1-10 to 1-8 of the
rent received, but it has now risen in many places to 1-3 and
even 1-2 of the income. Rapid increase in tax delinquency in
practically all agricultural states shows how the weight of this
tax burden has been increased. In a recent study of the income
tax in Wisconsin we found that three times as large a propor-
tion of the net income of farmers was now required in taxes
as were required of city dwellers.
"The great trouble with the tax on real property is its rela-
tive inelasticity. It does not rise and fall with the income from
land or the assessed value of property. Much as the politician
is willing in his p're-election promises to tell his constituents he
is in favor of a reduction in taxes, it is not at all likely that
less money will be spent on schools and roads than in the past.
These two major items take about two-thirds of the taxes
raised.
BANKERS CAN HELP
"No more statesmanlike step could be taken by the American
Bankers' Association with its 21,000 members, which includes
the financial leadership of America, than to put its shoulder to
the wheel to solve this tax problem wisely. What is needed is
a non-political study of the whole field with the end in view
of recognizing that greater justice and equality will come by
transfer of a larger proportion of real estate taxes to other
types of taxation. Whether this should be borne by income
directly, or through a consumption or sales tax which indirectly.
comes back upon income, only a careful, unbiased analysis
would determine. Some day America will solve this problem
in the light of twentieth century ideas. Must progressive
America wait for an agrarian revolution before we drop the
tax methods of the days of Washington and Jefferson and line
ourselves up with those countries that are industrially in our
class ?
"One of the main expenditures that is made from public
taxation is due to the maintenance of our schools, and there
are but few who would gainsay this item of expense. The country
school with its wide range and smaller attendance finds it in-
creasingly difficult to meet the advanced steps that a progress-







28 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

sive system requires. Steadily have taxes for such schools grown
heavier until the burden has called beneath the yoke.
"The tremendous variation in the assessed valuation per
pupil in one district compared with another shows the injustice
of expecting each local school to bear in the main the burden
of its own schools. In my state one country school had a valua-
tion of only $3,300 per pupil, while another rural district hav-
ing exactly the same number of scholars had over $52,000 of
assessed wealth behind each pupil. An equalization of these
school taxes over a larger assessment basis has been put into
operation in a number of states. An educational equalization
tax is raised, sometimes on the basis of a general property tax,
sometimes from income, and in some cases as a sales tax on
luxuries, relieving the school burden in the less populous and
poorer districts.
"Education is a state-wide or even a nation-wide problem.
We who live in the city are directly concerned as to the kind
of education that the country boy and girl is to get for the
chances are that our next door neighbor will in a few years
be one of those same country boys. Educational facilities
should be as uniformly distributed as possible.

OVER-CAPITALIZATION A HANDICAP
"One of the heaviest handicaps industry may suffer from
is over-capitalization of its plant. In farming the charges im-
posed through a rise in land values laid an exceedingly heavy
burden on this industry. In the tremendous inflation of the
great war all normal conditions vanished and sky-rocketing
prices led to an orgy of speculation that rivaled the hectic
periods in Wall Street. Farm prices were marked up over
night on the basis of the earning power of the moment only.
The man who owned his land and was perhaps out of debt was
lured into the maelstrom of speculation to borrow money and
'buy adjoining farms.
"This condition started much of the financial embarrass-
ment of the agricultural West. With interest to meet on mort-
gages as well as taxes when deflation in prices occurred a man's
labor income dwindled to nothing or went to the red side of
the ledger. It was then that trouble in agriculture began to be
acute. Delinquent interest began to pile up. Taxes were more
difficult to meet. The banks and other loaning agencies began
to be congested with frozen loans.
"Agitation for legislative relief grew more and more insist-
ent. The politician with his ear to the ground quickly heard
the rumblings of discontent, and scheme after scheme was







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


launched in the halls of Congress as a panacea for the troubles
of the farmer.
"Financial burdens increased. Farm bankruptcies rose as
never before. Tax delinquencies multiplied many fold, and in
many localities land values have fallen to pre-war levels and
even less.
"The interest of the non-agricultural class in this financial
picture has taken on a new aspect mainly for the reason that
a larger and larger proportion of increasing farm indebtedness
has passed into the hands of city people. The current value of
invested capital in American agriculture is almost $59,000,000,-
000, with but $32,000,000,000 actually owned by farm opera-
tors. Twenty-seven billions represents the financial stake that
the outside public now has in American farms. Prior to the
war inflation in 1910 the estimated obligations of farmers in
the hands of the public was only $16,000,000.
"The investor in land mortgage securities has had no end of
trouble and loss in liquidating his land mortgages and bonds.
Bankers have individually told me that their main interest in
some of the proposed relief measures was the hope that the
Congressional pulmotor might inject enough life into the body
of agricultural finance to enable what they feared might be a
corpse to be brought back to life, and thus give them an oppor-
tunity to get out from under before the patient had a relapse,
but agriculture is suffering from basic conditions that need
more than pulmotor treatment.

EARNING CAPACITY AS BASIS OF VALUE
"American agriculture may have to recognize that it is
futile to expect farm land valuations can wisely again approach
war-time levels. The only sound basis of value is stabilized
earning capacity. Ultimately and permanently land values
must reflect the relative profits after fixed charges are met.
This is the basis on which all other business is conducted and
agriculture can neither expect nor demand any other policy
as a permanent method. Railroads and factories not infre-
quently have to undergo a financial reorganization in which
the capital structure has to be reduced to what the business can
actually earn.
"Leaders who have to look to political future will not be
willing to advocate the wisdom of such drastic treatment. But
it would mean much for the permanence of American agricul-
ture if we could get out of the public mind the idea that agri-
cultural prosperity is dependent in a large degree on marking
up the price of land. Will not profits in farming be increased







30 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

more with a lower land valuation based on earning power than
from an inflated level of land prices? Such deflation would in
time aid materially in a reduction of the tax on real estate.
"The future success of the farmer lies in improving his labor
income rather than in the unearned increment due to advance
in price of his farm. More and more the farmer's return will
rest on what he has for his labor and less on the income he re-
ceives from property.
"When capital is secure it is willing to take lower rates of
interest. The government already has gone far to give the
farmer an opportunity to get his needed financial help at a
lower rate than most other lines of business enjoy. Only gov-
ernment itself through its various political units can borrow
money now as cheaply as can the farmer.
"Present land values may doubtless be taken are represent-
ing the maximum of deflation. The decline has run its course.
In all probability there will never be another opportunity in
our lifetime to buy land as cheaply as can be done at the pres-
ent time.
"With reasonably cheap money where interest charges have
to be met; with reasonable adjustments in taxes that are suffi-
ciently elastic in their imposition to meet the fundamental
principle that the cost of governments should be met primarily
on the basis of ability to pay; with a capital structure that re-
flects earning power rather than inflated and unearned incre-
ment in property values, the human element in farming is in
a better position to enjoy the fruits of its labor on the basis of
a better labor income, just as the human equation in the in-
dustrial world has within the last decade received relatively
a higher reward for its service than was formerly its wont."


.4m,118 *~






FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


Utilities Have Faith in Florida

Investment of More Than $160,000,000, Mostly by Northern
Interests, Based on State's Future

(Wall Street Journal, Dec. 17, 1927)

FLORIDA enthusiasts point to the development of their pub-
lic utility industry as one proof of Northern confidence in
the future of the State. At present there are four main com-
panies operating in Florida, all controlled by Northern capital,
and three of them subsidiaries of large and successful electric
systems. The companies are: Florida Public Service, Florida
Power & Light, Tampa Electric and Florida Power.
Physical properties of these four companies were carried at
$147,500,000 on their December 30, 1926 balance sheets, at which
time combined assets were $166,300,000. The noteworthy feature
of this large investment is that all but about $10,000,000 of it
has been made by Northern interests in the last four years. It
is significant that these companies have spent well over $60,-
000,000 in new construction alone in the last three years.
This capital was not attracted to Florida by a boom which
might ultimately prove to be only a flash in the pan. Rather,
it was attracted by the future possibilities of the State, and no
investments were made without analysis by engineers and utility
experts.
FLORIDA POWER EXPECTED DEFLATION
The attitude of the utility companies is well expressed by S.
R. Inch, president of Florida Power & Light Co., largest utility
company in Florida, who said in the 1926 annual report of that
company: "The management of this company has been perhaps
as intimately connected with the development of the State of
Florida as anyone within the past three years. At all times it
expected the deflation which occurred in real estate values and
was surprised only that it was so long deferred. The company's
construction program consequently was undertaken not on the
basis of inflated values in real estate but because Florida, in
addition to and entirely apart from its attractiveness as a winter
resort, possesses many large and varied potentialities as an agri-
cultural and horticultural state and as the source of valuable
raw materials for industrial and manufacturing purposes. The
management of this company confidently expects the develop-








32 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

ment of the State to continue along these lines and proposes
to maintain the company in such a position as will permit it,
at all times, to provide adequate service for its important and
rapidly growing territory."

UTILITY INVESTMENTS

The exent of public utility investments in Florida is shown
by the following table, based upon figures as of December 31,
1926:
Fla. Pub. Svc. Fla. P. &. L. Tampa El. Co. Fla. Pr. Co. Total
Prop................ $11,473,592 $104,410,282 $13,507,326 $18,064,578 $147,515,778
Tot. assets... 13,128,044 117,274,534 15,507,337 20,393,711 166,303,626
Represented by:
Fd'd debt...... 7,867,550 64,000,000 1,184,000 9,942,000 82,993,550
Pf. & Com.
Stocks...... 4,077,029 44,996,655 568.600 3,649,450 53,291,734
Surplus........ 319,657 2,191,592 11,931,800 2,776,138 17,219,139

That the above investments have been wisely and conserva-
tively made is shown by the earnings of the companies. Despite
the business and financial depression that has followed the
bursting of the land speculation bubble, all companies have
reported earnings sufficiently high to cover interest, sinking
fund, depreciation and preferred dividend requirements and
leave considerable balances for common stockholders and sur-
plus. While both gross and net earnings generally have shown
a tendency to fall off this year as compared with 1926, the de-
creases have been slight and the major portion of increased busi-
ness resulting from the rapid development of Florida since
1924 has been retained.
Earning statements for all four companies are available only
for the full year 1926, and are as follows:

Fla. Pub. Svc. Fla. P. & L. Tampa El. Co. Fla. Pr. Co. Total
Gross........................ $1,673,249 $13,101,520 $4,871,520 *$2,562,185 $22,208,474
Net op. inc.......... 637,197 4,878,326 1,830,221 1,504,690 8,850,434
Other income... 176,082 1,232,240 ........................ ................. 1,408,322
Total income...... 813,279 6,110,566 1,830,221 1,504,690 10,258,756
Interest, etc....... 457,746 2,359,765 77,981 539,075 3,434,567
Net for div....... 355,533 3,750,801 xl,752,240 965,615 6,824,189

Includes "other income." x Before depreciation.

The above figures show that net operating income of the com-
bined companies was approximately 40% of gross, a showing
which compares favorably with leading public utility companies
in the country. It also shows that in every case interest re-
quirements were covered by ample margin.







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 33

FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE

Florida Public Service Co., a subsidiary of General Gas &
Electric Corp., operates in the central part of Florida in the so-
called lake district. It serves a population of about 86,000 with
electricity and about 30,000 with gas, in addition to which it
does an extensive business in ice and water. The company's
system is interconnected with 332 miles of high-tension trans-
mission lines, further supplemented by more than 575 miles of
distribution lines. Plans call for additional lines which will tie
in the Benson Springs plant with the Lake Wales plant.
From 1924 to 1926 property account was increased by $7,600,-
000, or approximately 200%. Results of these expenditures,
in output and revenues, are shown in the following table:
12 mos. ended
Oct.31, 1927 1926 1925 1924
Electricity sold, k.w.h.......... 17,005,218 16,553,030 7,378,981 4,267,399
Gas sold, cu. ft............................ 151,668,000 144,135,000 86,896,600 47,771,816
Ice sold, tons not available ........................ 30,300 42,873 29,100
Gross operate. revenue............ $1,842,141 $1,673,249 $1,059,357 *$767,739
Net for dividends............... 292,660 355,533 80,967 57,325
Includes "Other income."

While fixed charges show a material increase over 1926,
earnings were sufficient to cover all charges and leave enough
to cover preferred dividend requirements about twice. Gross
earnings are holding up despite generally unsatisfactory con-
ditions. October gross having been $141,503, or 6% above
the same month in 1926, while operating income of $60,247 was
nearly 18% above October, 1926.
The largest utility company in Florida is Florida Power &
Light Co., subsidiary of American Power & Light and run under
the supervision of Electric Bond & Share Co. Incorporated in
December, 1925, it is impossible to show comparative statistics
over any extended period. Expenditure of around $40,000,000
in 1926 and 1927, following an extensive expansion program in
prior years, has increased the gross income of constituent com-
panies from $3,823,906 in 1922 to $12,771,387 for the 12 months
ended October 31, 1927.
Florida Power & Light is now an interconnected system with
more than 1,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines. It is
estimated it serves a population of 482,000, with about 100,000
electric consumers.
The growth of Tampa Electric Co. is discussed elsewhere in
this issue. Tampa Electric is the only one of the four com-
panies whose common stock is not held by a parent holding
company.
Florida Power Co., the fourth of the companies mentioned,







DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


is a subsidiary of the Tide Water Power Co., in turn controlled
by the National Public Service Co., United Gas Improvement Co.
and others with a substantial investment in National Public
Service have recently sold to the Insull interests of Chicago.
Florida Power Co. operates mainly around St. Petersburg. Like
Tampa Electric Co., it operates as a separate entity, and is not
part of a large interconnected system. Few figures are avail-
able, the company being a consolidation, in 1927, of the Pinellas
County Power Co., successor to St. Petersburg Lighting Co.
The Florida utility companies have solved their fuel problem
chiefly through use of fuel oil, available at low prices and in
quantity because of the nearness of the west coast of Florida to
the Texas, Mexican and South American oil fields. Most of the
companies have equipped their plants to use either coal or fuel
oil. Water power as a source for electrical development presents
few possibilities in Florida because of the low altitude of all
Florida land.






FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 35


Growing Tung Oil at Home

BY ORLAND KAY ARMSTRONG

(Nation's Business for April, 1928)

BOUT twenty years ago, tung oil was introduced into this
country on a commercial scale for the manufacture of
waterproof varnishes. It was found that such varnishes,
when dry, would not turn white when wet with water, and it
was found that their drying time was superior to varnishes
made with linseed oil and that their weathering properties were
often better than the latter type.
Unfortunately, however, all tung oil came from China.
Tung oil came from away up the Yangtse river, far in the
interior, where coolie labor ground the nuts, extracted the oil,
and prepared it for exportation. Inquiries about the tung oil
industry were met by stoical rebuffs on the part of the Chinese
growers. The process was a secret and would remain so.

EXPERIMENTS WITH TUNG TREES
But Uncle Sam's energetic agricultural experts, through the
consular service, got hold of a number of tung trees and set
them out experimentally, here and there, in various parts of
the United States. That was twenty years ago. Those twenty
years have shown that tung trees can be grown successfully
and profitably in this country, and just where they can best be
grown. Late this summer the first crop of tung nuts will be
gathered from the first large tung grove in America.
The trees must have warmth and rainfall. Fifteen degrees is
the lower limit of temperature and 30 inches the minimum of
rainfall. Hence the selection of Florida, particularly the north
central section, for the production of tung groves on a large
scale.
Meantime the Chinese "secret" processes of tung oil produc-
tion have been observed and found to be crude methods of oil
extraction used perhaps since the beginning of the industry
some thousands of years ago. The tung nuts are gathered,
heated in pans, and ground up in primitive stone grinders by
hand. The meal is then put in bags and these bags placed in
splits of great logs. Flat stones are placed about them and
wedges driven to press the oil from the meal.







DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


PRIMITIVE METHODS

The oil is collected in pans and allowed to settle. Coolies
carry it from 25 to 100 miles to the river, where it is carried in
boats several hundred miles down to the point of exportation.
At least 20 percent of the oil is left in the meal, and much is
wasted.
American official observers saw with amazement the many
uses the Chinese has for his tung oil besides the manufacture of
paint and varnish. He waterproofs his boats with it. He
uses it to mix with shavings to make roofing material. He
uses it on silk, raincoats, paper, and a long list of articles
where waterproofing is desired. Marco Polo, in his memoirs
on Chinese travel, mentions tung oil and its uses.
When the demand for tung oil grew so urgently a few years
ago and the paint and varnish trade was trying frantically to
obtain more oil, the Chinese growers were given opportunity
to install American machinery of the most efficient type to
turn out oil quickly and in greater quantities. But they would
have none of it. A superstitious dread of modern methods
prevented any change from the slow and wasteful process of
old.
This state of affairs convinced American experimenters that
tung tree groves should be set out in this country and produc-
tion begun in earnest.
B. F. Williamson of Gainesville, Florida, an authority on
vegetable oils, formed the first large company for the growing
of tung trees in America.
In 1923 the first large groves were planted in Florida. To
the 3,000 acres of bearing trees will be added 1,000 acres more
each year until production has made at least a measurable
approach to the demand. Representatives of the paint and
varnish industry have watched with great interest the growth
of these groves.
MACHINERY VS. COOLIES

To the objection that the American producer of tung oil can
not compete with the cheap labor of the Chinese coolie answer
is made by Julian Arnold of Peking, who says that one stan-
dard American press will do the work of a hundred Chinese
laborers. The groves are equipped with gasoline tractors
which do the work of cultivation quickly and effectively.
Comparative figures on the probable yields from tung oil
groves in comparison with linseed production shows an inter-
esting contrast in values. Linseed, under some conditions, may







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 37

produce only about 9 to 12 bushels per acre, which may repre-
sent a money value of probably less than $12.
It is believed that an acre of tung oil trees, when fully de-
veloped, will show a yield of at least $50 per acre, although
their suggestions are based upon the yields obtained from very
carefully grown individual trees.
From 109 trees last year on one grove in Florida, the first
one to bear commercially, a yield of 1,020 pounds of oil was
obtained.
Comparison with the Chinese product showed American
grown oil to be of a lighter color and higher quality. Time
and the hard-working tung growers will bring quantity in this
beginning of an important American industry.










Cjw.^^g"lL"







38 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE



Crotalaria as a Florida Soil Builder
Gives Good Results as a Leguminous Crop

By W. E. Stokes and W. A. Luekel

IN 1909 the Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, co-oper-
ating with the Forage Crop Office of the United States De-
partment of Agriculture, introduced a leguminous plant
which today ranks high as a soil improver for the poor sandy
soils of Florida. Various species of this plant, crotalaria, have
been tried out but the most promising ones in Florida are crota-
laria striata and crotalaria sericea. These crotalarias grow to a
height of 4 to 6 feet. They both have yellow flowers. The
crotalaria striata leaf is three parted or trifoliate, while the
crotalaria sericea leaf is one bladed or simple. Seed of crota-
laria striata are brown to olive green in color and about the
size of cleaned beggarweed seed, while seed of crotalaria
sericea are black in color and twice as large as crotalaria striata
seed. The principal difference between the two species is in
the habit of flowering. Crotalaria striata starts flowering
about 60 days after germinating and flowers continuously until
killed by low temperatures, while crotalaria sericea starts
flowering later, but puts on all its flowers during a definite
period. Both are killed by a temperature of 28 degrees F.
In various tests at the experiment stations at Gainesvillb,
Lake Alfred, Quincy and Belle Glade, and co-operative tests in
different parts of Florida, it was found possible to grow cro-
talaria successfully on any soil in the State except the raw
peaty lands of the Everglades.
Crotalaria may be sown from March to June. Early seed-
lings generally produce a more satisfactory cover crop to com-
pete with weeds. Rates of seeding vary from 5 to 20 pounds
per acre. The heavier rates of seeding produce heavier stands,
a finer quality of top growth and a larger yield per acre. Lower
rates of seeding produce a top growth of coarser texture but
yield a larger quantity of seed. Five to 12 pounds of seed per
acre is sufficient to produce a good stand which will yield
enough seed for a thick volunteer crop the following season.
The seed may be planted broadcast or in rows. Both methods
give good results. No inoculation is necessary. Thorough
preparation of the land and shallow covering of the seed are
recommended.
Crotalaria seed may be harvested when mature or allowed







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 39

to fall upon the ground to produce a volunteer crop the follow-
ing season. It has been found to yield as high as 125 pounds
of seed per acre. If grown for seed, planting in rows assures
a higher production. The seed may be threshed by hand, with
a flail or with a pea huller. Seed will shatter after they mature
if left too long.
Crotalaria may be mowed once a year, just before blooming
commences, to prevent it from becoming too coarse. The plants
should be cut from 8 to 10 inches from the surface of the
ground. A second top growth will then soon follow and pro-
duce enough seed for a volunteer crop the next year. Cutting
the plants close to the ground results in a poor second top
growth or none at all.
Crotalaria, when grown on Norfolk sandy soil and harvested
as a hay crop, has produced one-third more in pounds per acre
than Brabham cowpeas, twice as much as bunch velvet beans
and three times the yield produced by beggarweed. Its hay is
of a coarser texture when these larger yields prevail. Its value
as a feed crop is still in the experimental stage.
As a soil improver for Florida, it has given better results
than other leguminous crops. The percentage and quantity of
nitrogen in crotalaria is as high as or higher than in any other
leguminous crop depending on the stage of growth. This high
percentage of nitrogen coupled with the large yield of top
growth has produced from 83 to 207 pounds of nitrogen per
acre in tests carried out at the Gainesville and Lake Alfred
stations. The greater part of this nitrogen is fixed from the air
by the nodule bacteria on the roots of the plants. Turning
under this high nitrogen crop not only increases the available
nitrogen in the soil but also adds to the humus content of the
soil. When compared with other green manure crops turned
under, crotalaria produced 3,000 pounds more organic material
per acre.







40 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE



The Life of an Automobile

(Literary Digest)

The results of a study to determine the normal life history
of automobiles are given in a bulletin issued recently by the
Bureau of Business Research of the University of Michigan.
The study was conducted by C. E. Griffin, Professor of Mar-
keting at the University, says a reviewer in Roads and Streets
(Chicago).
The method employed was to take a sample of cars of the
1923 registration and, by comparing it with a sample of the
1924 registration, determine the "death-rate" for cars of vari-
ous ages in the intervening period. The study was made on
automobiles in the State of Michigan. It happened that in
1923 and 1924 the registration authorities of Michigan obtained
from automobile registrants the year-model of the car regis-
tered as well as other data; and they have published in some
thirty-five volumes (1924) the license number, name and ad-
dress of owner, make of car, and year of manufacture. Employ-
ing this source of information, a sample of 41,641 cars was
taken from the 1923 reports and 49,245 from the 1924 reports.
The total number of cars each year-model in the two registra-
tion periods, as indicated by the samples were then compared.
The following conclusions are given by Professor Griffin in
the bulletin:
1. The mortality rate for automobiles follows a curve similar
in form to that for human lives and for various types of in-
dustrial goods.
2. The average life of motor vehicles generally is 7.04 years.
3. The average life of Ford cars is substantially longer than
the average life of all other cars as a group.
4. The average life of automobiles has shown a definite
though not a steady increase.
5. The rate at which automobiles of a given year's produc-
tion are eliminated from use is indicated by the following
facts: of any given 100,000 cars placed in use, 75 percent will
still be in use at the end of 4.75 years, 50 percent at the end
of 6.94 years and 25 percent at the end of 9.2 years.
6. The normal "expectation of life" for cars of different
ages is as follows: for new cars it is 7.04 years; for cars 3.5
years of age, 4.27 years; for cars 6.5 years of age, 2.8 years;







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 41

for cars 9.5 years of age, 1.8 years; and for cars 12.5 years of
age, 1.2 years.
7. On December 31, 1924, 93.1 percent of the cars produced
in the preceding five years, 76.9 percent of those produced in
the preceding ten years, and 71.3 percent of those produced in
the preceding fifteen years were still in use.
8. The average age of the cars in use on December 31, 1924,
was 3.07 years.
9. The replacement demand has shown a marked increase
both absolutely and relative to the total demand. This ten-
dency will continue. It is predicted that the replacement de-
mand of 1926 will be 1,796,000 cars, of 1927, 2,063,000 cars, and
of 1928, 2,341,000 cars. This increase in replacement demand
means that the automobile market is approaching a stabilized
condition.
10. At a rate of production of 4,000,000 motor vehicles a
year, (last year's total was 4,480,000) and exports of five per-
cent of production there would be in the United States in 1930
a total of 25,580,000 such vehicles, or one for every 4.3 persons
of the estimated population of that year.




PLANTING TABLE FOR FLORIDA TRUCK CROPS
Florida Grower for September, 1927.
General Instructions for the Commercial Production of Vegetable Crops.


A LL truck crops listed in this table are produced in com-
mercial quantities by Florida farmers. Such crops as
beets, turnips, radishes, spinach and cantaloupes,
which are grown mainly for local markets in this State, are
not listed.
Because of the wide range in Florida climatic and soil
conditions, the rules for growing one crop in the southern
part of the State do not always apply to growing the same


crop in the central or northern sections of the State. Hence,
the information and suggestions given in this table are of
only a general nature, and must be properly interpreted
when applied to various local conditions.
REFERENCES: Florida Agricultural Experiment Station,
Gainesville; Florida State Department of Agriculture, Tal-
lahassee; P. H. Rolfs' "Sub-Tropical Vegetable Garden-
ing,"' and Win. Gomme, Duval County Agricultural Agent.


DISTANCE
AMT. YIELD COST APART
CROP PRINCIPAL TYPE OF SOIL SEED PER WHEN TO AMOUNT DAYS TO PER PER ROWS REMARKS
VARIETY BEST ADAPTED ACRE PLANT FERTILIZER MATURE ACRE ACRE AND IN
SRows
Giant Stringless I II I I I I
Refugee | Jan., Feb., ] I I I
Black Valentine Mar., April, |
Wardwell's Kidney Mu c k; Ham-I June, (butter R I I I i
Wax mock; Flat 13pks.to varieties) 1 800 to 170 days 1110 ham-$60 to 13 to 4 ft. Ready market for late
BEANS New Davis White woods, well I 1 bu. 1,000 lbs. I pers. $85. 3 to 4 in. fall and spring crop.
Wax drained; Pine, I per acre. I I Ibeansouth Florid fallwe
Green & Yellow good quality. I Aug. and I I means sell well.
Bountiful I Sept., I I
Fordhook I (snap I I
Lima _varieties) 1 45 days I I I
Jersey Wakefield I I I I
Charleston Wake- Muck; Ham- Ib.suf-I I I II
field mock; Flat ficient October, 1 1,500 to |90 to 100 to I $75 to ] Spring crop brings good
CABBAGE Premium Flat Dutch woods, well for 2 November and[ 2,000 lbs. I100 days.| 150 I$100. 16 by 3 ft.[ return.
Succession drained; Pine, acres January. I per acre I crates. I I I
Copenhagen good quality.
Golden self-blanch- Muck; Ham-I 2,000 lbs. I I This crop must be
CELEY ing (Ey) mock; Flat ozs. August to per acre 1130 days. 600 $400 to 13 ft. by I carefully handled for
Green Top woods, well November and more if I crates. I $600. 14 in. I the best results.
Easy Blanching drained. ____ necessary 1 _______
Improved White I I
CUCUM- Spine Hammock; Flat 2 to 3 August, 1500 to 8001 05 to 1200 $75 to Easy crop to grow;
BERS Davis Perfect Woods, well I lbs. September, I lbs. per I 75 days.] to 300 I$100. 16 by 5 ft. good local market.
Stay Green drained. October. I acre I I cukes I I
.n a I . I i


Black Beauty
Florida Highbush


Hammock; Flat]
woods, well I
drained; Pine, 6 ozs.
good quality. I


January
(spring crop)
July
(fall crop)


I 2,000 lbs. I
I per acre. 1140 days.
I L


400
crates


$125.
I


I I Good, profitable ship-
35 by 3 ft. ping crop. Ready mar-
I Iket.


EGG-
PLANT




Big Boston
Cream Butter
LETTUCE Romaine
Sbouor l


- II II


Mu C K, Ham- I
mock; Flat I September
woods, high 2 lbs. I to December
drained. I


3,000 lbs. I| 600
per acre. I60 days.| to 700
I I crates


I14 by Good drainage essen-
114 in. tial and land should
I not be sour.


I i I I I I I Use well rotted stable
Crystal Wax Low Hammock;I 3 to 4 Dec. to Feb. I 1400 1 manure when able.
White Bermuda Flat Woods; |Ibs. seed (seed) 1 2,000 lbs. 1 120 days. Ito 500 1 $125. 12 by Nitrate soda can be
Australian Brown Pine. I 8 bu. Jan. to Mar. I per acre. I I crates. 16 in. I used when maturing.
Red Bermuda sets (sets) 1 I I_ ___100 lbs. to acre.
-~ -- *


MucK; Ham-
Alaska Extra Early mock; Flat
ENGLISH Thomas Laxton woods, well
PEAS Florida McNeil quality; Pine,
T l nhnA goonnd rualitv-


80 lbs. October
Sto March


500 to 800
Ibs.
per acre.


65 days.1200
hampers.


4 ft. by
1 in.


Soil must not be sour.
Inoculation of seed ad-
visable.


IJuly, August I I I
Ruby King Flat Woods, (fall) 3,000 lbs. 125 to 1200 i3 ft. by Good fall shipping
PEPPERS World Beater Hammock; Pine, % lb. I January per acre. 140 days. crates. $85. 20 in. crop.
good quality. I (spring) | _____ ________ 1____ _________
Flat Woods, 1,500 lbs. I Treat seed before plant-
POTATOES Spaulding Rose 4 well drained; I December to i 3 ft. 6 ing. Be prepared to
(Irish) Bliss Triumph Hammock; 10 bu. and I 2,000 lbs. 170 days. 45 bbls. I $125. in. by 12|dust or spray with
Irish Cobbler Muck. January I per acre. | | I in. I bordeaux preparation.

Porto Rico I I I I
Big Stem Jersey Pine Lands; 600 to
POTATOES Triumph Sandy Flat 8 bu. for April, May, 1,000 lbs. 1120 days.1 100 to $45. 3 ft. by Allow 10,000 slips to
(Sweet) Norton Yam Woods. draws June, July. per acre. I200 bu. I14 in. acre.
Nancy Hall II I I __ I I
Single 1
Row
15,000 11,500 lbs.| 11,500 Use stable manure if
STRAW- Missionary Flat Woods; plants Sept.-Nov. I plus 100 170 days. to 2,000 $175 to 3 ft. by Ipossible in addition to
BERRIES Klondyke Hammock. 9x12 in. Ilbs. nitrate quarts. $250. 114 in. commercial fertilizer.
35,000 I per acre. 1
plants __
Adams' Early I 500 lbs. I I Run seed through creo-
Adams' Early I plus 50 [ |lin solution to keep off
SWEET Crosby's Early Muck; Flat I February, Ilbs. nitrate 70 to 85130 to 50 13 ft. by |birds. Use half pound
CORN Stowell's Evergreen Woods; Ham- 15 lbs. IMarch, April,I soda at I days. I crates. $25 in. I arsenate lead powder to
Country Gentleman mock. I May. I tasseling I I Isix pounds hydrated
Howling Mob I per acre. I lime for bud worm.
Livingston Globe I I I
Marglobe I I I
Stone Prairie; Ham- January 1,300 lbs. I Good commercial mar-
TOMATOES Earliana mock; Muck; 1 lb. I to to 135 days.[ 250 I $100. 4 ft. by ket for first-class mate-
Beauty Flat Woods, March. 1,500 lbs. I crates. I 2 ft. Irial. Local market
Bonny Best well drained. per acre. I| I Igood.
Norton I I I I II
-----i -I i I 1 Treat seed and be pre-
WATER- Tom Watson Pine; Flat | January I 1,500 lbs. 170 to |1 carload 1 $30 110 ft. by pared to dust or spray
MELONS. Florida Favorite Woods, well | 2 lbs. I to I per acre. 190 days. 12 acres. I acre 110 ft. I with nicotine and bor-
Irish Gray drained. ] March. I I [ I deaux solution.


I








DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


Recent Statistics on Agriculture
(Progressive Farmer)
COTTON REDUCTION CAMPAIGNS

Since 1895 there have been six well marked campaigns for
the reduction of cotton acreage, and in each case there has
been a reduction in acreage and an increase in price, as shown
by the following table:
1895-Acreage reduced 14.7%; price increased 65%.
1905-Acreage reduced 13.1%; price increased 20%.
1915-Acreage reduced 14.1%; price increased 66%.
1919-Acreage reduced, 7.4%; price increased 29%.
1921-Acreage reduced 15.0%; price increased 17%.
1927-Acreage reduced 12.5%; price increased 60 to 65%.



INTEREST RATES ON FIRST MORTGAGE FARM LOANS
Life Federal
Commercial Insurance Land
State Banks Companies Banks
Percent Percent Percent
Virginia ......................... 6.13 5.36 5.50
North Carolina .................. 6.12 5.49 5.50
South Carolina ............... 7.88 5.95 5.50
G eorgia ................................... 8.10 6.27 5.50
F lorida ...................................... 8.14 7.19 5.50
K entucky .............................. 6.40 5.34 5.50
T ennessee ................................. 7.39 5.50 5.50
A labam a ................................... 8.04 6.18 5.50
M ississippi ............................. 7.95 6.21 5.50
A rkansas ............................... 9.20 6.56 5.50
Louisiana ...................... ..... 7.99 6.12 5.50
Oklahom a ................................. 9.09 5.55 5.50
T exas ....................................... 8.77 6.35 5.50
United States ..................... 6.89 5.36 5.50








FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 45

TARIFF ON AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS

Act of 1922 (With up-to-date revisions)
Animals-Cattle, 11/2@2e per lb.; horses and mules, worth
$150 or less, $30 per head; others 20% ad valorem; sheep, $2
per head; swine, 1/2c per lb.; for breeding, free.
Breadstuffs-*Wheat: 42c per bushel, wheat flour, $1.04
per cwt.; rye: 15c per bushel, flour and meal, 45c per cwt.;
corn or maize: 15c per bushel, grits, flour, etc., 30c per cwt.;
oats: 15c per bushel, ground, 45c per cwt.; oatmeal, etc., 80e
per cwt.; barley: 20c per bushel, barley malt, 40c per cwt.,
pearled, flour, etc., 2c per lb.; buckwheat: 10c per cwt, flour
and grits, 1/2c per lb.
Dairy Products-Butter and butter substitutes, 12c per lb.;
cheese and cheese substitutes, 5c per lb, but not less than 25%
ad valorem.
Milk-Fresh, 2/2c per gal.; cream, 20e per gal. (with ex-
ceptions); preserved or condensed, 1@3c per lb.
Eggs of Poultry-8e per doz.; dried, 18c per lb.; frozen or
prepared, 6c per lb.
Hay and Feed-Hay, $4 per ton; straw, $1 per ton; *bran
and shorts, 71/2% ad valorem; grain hulls, 10c per cwt.
Feed-Malt, by-products, $5 per ton; mixed feeds, 10% ad
valorem; grain screenings, 10% ad valorem.
Meats-Fresh or frozen-Beef and veal, 3c per lb.; lamb and
mutton, 4c per lb. and 21/2c per lb.; pork, 2c per lb.; all kinds
prepared or preserved, not specifically provided for, 20% ad
valorem.
Oils (vegetable)-Peanut oil, 4c per lb.; cottonseed oil, 3c
per lb.; cocoanut oil, crude or refined, 2c per lb.; soybeans, 2/2
per lb.; olive oil: bulk, not specially provided for, 61/2c per lb.,
in containers, 71/20 per lb.; linseed oil, 3.3c per lb.
Potatoes-50c per cwt.; dried, 28%c per lb.; flour, 21/2c per lb.
Seeds-Seeds of grass: Alfalfa, red and alsike clover, 4c
per lb.; crimson clover, le per lb.; white clover, 3e per lb.; other
clover, 2e per lb.; millet and spring vetch, Ic per lb.; timothy,
hairy vetch and others not provided for, 2c per lb.









46 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


WORLD COTTON PRODUCTION FOR 1926-1927
(In bales of 478 pounds net)
Average
Country 1909-13 1924 1925 1926 1927
Bales Bales Bales Bales Bales
United States .-........ 13,033,000 3,628,000 16,104,000 18,618,000 12,842,000
India (a) .................... 3,568,000 5,069,000 4,660,000 4,269,000 .............
Egypt ............................ 1,453,000 1,507,000 1,650,000 1,497,000 1,255,000
Russia .......................... 905,000 484,000 737,000 756,000 ...............
Chosen ........................ 20,000 121,000 125,000 154,000 ...........
Mexico ........................ 187,000 298,000 202,000 379,000 ...............
Anglo-Egyptian
Sudan .................. 14,000 41,000 110,000 120,000 125,000
Greece .......................... 17,000 18,000 15,000 35,000 ...........
Morocco (French) .... ................ 1,000 1,000 1,000 .........
Bulgaria ...................... 1,000 3,000 2,000 3,000 9,000
Algeria ........................ t 1,000 2,000 6,000 6,000 5,000
Ecuador ...................... ................ 17,000 $ 6,000 t 6,000 ...............
Total above countries ................ 21,189,000123,844,000 25844,000 14,236,000
Estimated world ..
total ...................... 20,900,00024,800,00027,00,000 ...
Official sources and International Institute of Agriculture, except as
otherwise stated. (a) First estimate-incomplete. f Average for three
years. Interpolated. $ Unofficial.












1926 COST OF PRODUCING COTTON, BY YIELD GROUPS
Net cost
Cost per acre of lint
a a
sa aJ a
Yield groups (pounds of lint a e a a a
p6a er acre) $1.64 $1.77 02 $14

Zn ^e P | a
. u -.S a a u a Soo a a
60 pounds and under .................|I 321 50] 411 $3.76 $4.17| $2.601 $0.35 $1.64) $1.07) $0.711 $4.22| $1.77|$20.29j $0.851$19.441 $0.47


61 to 100 pounds ..............................
101 to 140 pounds ....................-..........
141 to 180 pounds .................. .......
181 to 220 pounds ..........................
221 to 260 pounds ...............................
261 to 300 pounds ...............................
301 to 340 pounds ...........................
341 to 380 pounds ...............................
381 to 420 pounds ....................1.........
421 to 460 pounds ....................-........
461 to 500 pounds ................................
501 pounds and over ..........................


91 68
114 77
166 74
130 58
200 47
106 54
48 68
46 82
56 64
19 44
41 27
21 29


4.16 4.54
3.82 5.02
3.90 5.28
4.02 5.57
4.29 5.74
4.65 6.00
4.61 7.28
4.14 5.88
5.23 7.62
4.56 6.261
4.48 6.811
4.64 7.651


16891
19.231


.40
.68
.40
.57
.59
.67
.91
.54
1.64
1.22
.68
.83


Z.U9
2.54
2.67
3.55
4.49
4.43
5.13
5.52
6.73
8.33
7.53
8.43


4.55
5.37
4.92
5.15
4.90
6.79
7.49
6.08
8.79
9.87
8.24
9.821


1.52 44.93
2.34 28.33
2.15 29.65
2.83 33.27
2.86 36.15
2.92 41.49
2.92 45.29
3.19 42.69
3.95 54.14
2.51 53.59
3.71 55.43
4.24 62.40


2.67
3.60
3.71
4.83
5.09
5.34
6.45
7.02
8.47
9.30
10.38


25.66
26.05
29.56
31.32
36.40
39.95
36.24
47.12
45.12
46.13
52.02


.Q0
.20
.16
.15
.13
.12
.12
.10
.12
.10
.09
.09


-----~









COTTON PRODUCTION IN THE UNITED STATES-1926-27


Acreage in
cultivation
State
June 25, July 1,
1926 1927

-1,000 1,000 1
acres acres


Missouri ............ 472
Virginia ..--..... 95
North Carolina 2,015
South Carolina 2,716
Georgia ........... 4,025
Tennessee ........ 1,178
Florida .............. 108
Alabama .......... 3,699
Mississippi ........ 3,809
Arkansas .......... 3,867
Louisiana ......... 2,019
Oklahoma ....... 5,083
Texas ............... 19,140
New Mexico .... 125
Arizona .............. 168
California .......... 167
All other ......... 44
United States.... 48,730
Lower Calif ...... 135


Cotton Lint

Acreage aban- Y d pr
doned after- Acreage harvested Yield per acre


June 25,
1926

I Pet.


294 8.0
68 2.0
1,748 1.5
2.522 2.5
3,499 1.5
962 30
68 3.0
3,274 1.3
3,406 1.5
3,139 2.0
1,608 2.0
4,187 8.0
16,948 4.0
100 4.0
138 0.6
130 3.0
21 2.3
42,112 3.4
110 4.0


July 1,
1927 1926

Pt. II1,000
SPet. | acres
4.5 434
2.0 93
1.21 1,985
4.0 2,648
5 3,965
1,143
3 105
1.J. 3,651
L'.11 3,752
3.0i 3,790
3 I 1,979
18.0 4,676
4.0 18,374
50 120
1.0 167
1.5 162
5.0 43
4.6 47,087
0.0 130


1927

1,000
acres
281
67
1,727
2,421
3,412
943
66
3,225
3,338
3,045
1,560
3,433
16,270
95
137
128
20
40,168
110


1926


1927


Lbs. I Lbs. I


240
264
292
182
180
145
188
196
241
195
200
181
147
299
349
387
189
182.6
317


* December preliminary estimate for 1927.


177
230
237
145
154
122
175
178
192
154
167
138
126
352
325
352
166
152.3
217


Production I Dec. 1


1926 1927 1926

1,000 I 1,000 I Cents
bales bales per lb.


218 1041
51 32
1,213 857
1,008 735
1,496 1,100
32 17
451 345
1,498 1,200
1,888 1,340
1,548 980
829 545
1,773 990
5,628 4,280
75 70
122 93
131 94
17 7
17,977 12,7891
86 501


10.0
11.4
11.5
11.7
11.1]
102
10.0
10.7
11.6J
11.0
11.0
9.7
10.81
12.3
13.3
14.0
9.7
10 9
- - - - -


1927

Cents
per lb.


Total value, basis
Dec. 1 farm price


1926

1,000
dollars


20.5 10,900
20.0 2,907
19.5 69,748
19.6 58,968
19.4 83,028
19.1 1,632
19.0 22,550
19.0 80,143
20.5 109,504
20.2 85,140
19.21 45,595
19.8 85,990
19.3 303,912
19.S 4,612
25.6 8,113
21.0 9,170
19.1 824
19.61 982,736


1927

1,000
dollars
10,660
3,200
83,558
72,030
106,700
1,624
32,775
114,000
137,350
98,980
52,320
98,010
413,020
6,930
11,904
9,870
668
1,253,599


~-~--


I








FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 49


Financial Report


PRINTING QUARTERLY BULLETIN JULY 1, 1926-JULY
1, 1927.
1926
By Appropriation ....................$10,000.00
Balance ............................. 26.77

$10,026.77

July 3-T. J. Appleyard, 12 M ................$ 1,845.60
July 16-T. J. Appleyard, 12 M ................ 1,334.00
Aug. 20-Chas. Cottrall (2 Photos) ............. 10.00
Oct. 31-W. H. May, P. M ..................... 54.69
Dec. 18-T. P. Robinson, 6 Photos .............. 17.25
Dec. 18-Harold Fowler, Photos ............... 55.55
Dec. 1S-The Woodward Studio ................ 8.25
1927
Feb. 1-The Record Co., Color Plates .......... 2,553.42
Feb. 22-Walker, Evans & Cogswell, envelopes ... 234.10
March 25-Record Co., Part Payment ............. 3,500.00
April 15-D. C. Adams, Photos ................. 5.00
June 16-W. H. May, P. M., Pos. Quar. Bulletin 256.20
June 18-Artcraft Printers, Pecan Bulletin ...... 122.25
June 18-Arteraft Printers, Printing Slips ...... 28.80

$10,025.11
Balance ............................. 1.66

$10,026.77

PRINTING QUARTERLY BULLETIN JULY 1, 1927-JULY
1, 1928.
By Appropriation ....................$10,000.00
1927
July 26-The Record Co., Bal. on Quar..........$ 4,819.00
July 28-T. J. Appleyard, Quar. Bulletin Com. for
Farm er ............................. 2,456.00
July 28-T. J. Appleyard, Sup. Bulletin ......... 96.00
Aug. 3-Artcraft Printers, Coop. Assn. ......... 204.40
Aug. 31-W. H. May, P. M., Quar. Bul ........... 63.53
Sept. 8-E. L. Lord, Grape Bulletin ............ 250.00
Nov. 2-Artcraft Printers, Grape Bulletin ...... 179.59








DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


1928
Feb. 3-Artcraft Printers, Fla. Gov. ........... 55.50
June 20-J. W. Clement Co., Market Charts ...... 1,800.00

$ 9,924.02
Balance ............................ 75.98

$10,000.00

EXPRESS AND TELEGRAMS JULY 1, 1926-JUNE 30, 1927

By Appropriation .................. .$ 1,500.00
1926
July 3-Am. Ry. Exp. Co. ................... $ 18.01
July 3-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co............... 19.40
July 10-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Dray ............. 23.35
July 12-W. U. Tel. Co. ...................... 41.28
July 21- W C. Dixon ......................... 43.35
Aug. 1-Am. Ry. Exp. Co. .................... 12.46
Aug. 3-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Drayage .......... 6.63
Aug. 1-W. U. Tel. Co. ....................... 27.26
Aug. 1-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co. ................. 19.05
Aug. 18-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Drayage .......... 19.01
Aug. 18-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Drayage .......... 13.05
Aug. 16-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Drayage .......... .50
Aug. 21-W. C. Dixon, Drayage on Mail ......... 1.50
Aug. 17-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ............... .50
Aug. 18-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 6.17
Aug. 27- W C. Dixon ........................ 6.81
Sept. 2-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. ................... 38.95
Sept. 2-W-. U. Tel. Co ....................... 14.54
Sept. 2-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co. ................. 19.05
Sept. 16-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Dray.............. 5.44
Sept. 22-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ .75
Sept. 22-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Drayage .......... 4.80
Oct. 5-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co ................ 16.70
Oct. 5-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. ................... 5.13
Oct. 13-W. U. Tel. Co. ...................... 14.01
Oct. 14-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Dray. ............ 24.10
Oct. 16-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 18.91
Oct. 14-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 1.75
Oct. 18-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 2.90
Oct. 14-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................. 3.81
Oct. 19-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 3.25
Nov. 1-Postal Tel. Co. ....................... 2.26
Nov. 1-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co. ................. 18.50
Nov. 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 12.09








FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


1926
Nov. 1-W. U. Tel. Co. ....................... 10.07
Nov. 10-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Dray. ............. 31.34
Nov. 20--W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Dray. ............. 17.52
Dec. 1- Postal Tel. Co. ....................... 2.25
Dec. 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. ................. 26.94
Dec. I-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co .................. 16.50
Dec. 1-W. U. Tel. Co. ....................... 2.82
Dec. 10- W U. Tel. Co. ... ........ ........... 5.85
Dec. 10-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Dray. ............. 9.75
Dec. 18-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 4.31
Dec. 23-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 7.88
1927
Jan. 1-Postal Tel. Co. ....................... 2.04
Jan. 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. ................... 29.85
Jan. 1-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co. ................. 21.20
Jan. 1--W. U. Tel. Co. ........................ 15.63
Feb. 1-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co. ................. 22.80
Feb. 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 18.89
Feb. i- Postal Tel. Co. ....................... 6.61
Feb. 1-W. U. Tel. Co. ........................ 14.27
Feb. 14-Postal Tel. Co. ........................ 3.81
Feb. 14-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 3.50
Feb. 22-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Dray .............. 15.77
Feb. 22-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 4.05
March 1-Sou. Tel. & Conet. Co. ................. 23.30
March 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. ................... 16.43
March 1- Postal Tel. Co. ...................... 4.11
March 1-W. U. Tel. Co. ....................... 3.25
March 17-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Dray .............. 21.22
March 22-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Dray .............. 9.83
March 30-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 1.00
April 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 3.62
April 1-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co. ................ 24.10
April 1-Postal Tel. Co. ...................... 1.89
April 6-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 2.00
April 12-W. U. Tel. Co. ....................... 15.20
April 18-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 7.00
April 21-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 4.07
April 27-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 2.00
May 3-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 1.19
May 3-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co ................. 29.20
May 3-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 14.17
May 3- Postal Tel. Co. ....................... 9.61
May 3- W U. Tel. Co. .................. .... 11.20
May 3-W. C. Dixon, Dray .................... 3.30








52 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

1927
May 10-W. C. Dixon, Dray .................... 8.22
May 11-W. C. Dixon, Dray. .................... 3.00
May 11-W. C. Dixon, Dray. .................. 3.73
May 16-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 7.03
May 27-W. C. Dixon, Dray ................... 1.50
May 27-W. C. Dixon, Dray ................... 3.07
May 27-G. R. Leonard & Co., Sub. to Popu ...... 15.00
June 2-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co. ................. 28.15
June 2-W. C. Dixon, Frt. & Dray.............. 39.63
June 2-Postal Tel. Co. ....................... 1.93
June 24-W. H. May, P. M., Reviews ............ 5.90
June 24-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 1.50
June 30-Western Union ...................... 24.76
June 13-W. C. Dixon, Drayage ................ 2.54
June 30-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co .................. 62.77
June 30-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co. ................. 24.85"
June 30-W. U. Tel. Co. ...................... 35.83
June 30-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. ................... 24.37
June 30-Postal Tel. Co. ....................... 16.56

$ 1,276.95

EXPRESS AND TELEGRAMS JULY 1, 1927 TO JUNE 30,
1928.
July 1-By Appropriation ....................$ 1,500.00
1927
July 5-Sou. Tel, & Conet. Co. ............... $ 24.85
July 5-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 24.37
July 5-Western Union Co .................... 35.83
July 7-Postal Tel. Co. ...................... 16.56
July 8-W. C. Dixon ......................... .50
Aug. 3-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co. ................. 15.25
Aug. 3-Postal Tel. Co. ....................... 16.08
Aug. 4-Western Union Co. .................... 17.07
Aug. 5-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. ................... 34.85
Aug. 3-T. J. Hicks, Jr .................... 1.50
Sept. 1-Sou. Tel. Conct. Co .................. 17.85
Sept. 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 51.87
Sept. 1-Western Union Co. ................... 25.25
Sept. I-Postal Tel. Co. ...................... 6.14
Sept. 12-W. C. Dixon .......................... 1.00
Oct. 1-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co .................. 32.30
Oct. 1-Western Union Co. .................... 30.15
Oct. 1-Postal Tel. & Cable Co ................. 12.32
Oct. 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 47.49








FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 53

1927
Oct. 29- W C. Dixon ........................ 6.96
Nov. 2-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co. ................. 26.20
Nov. 2-Western Union Tel. Co. ................ 48.13
Nov. 2-Postal Tel. Co. ...................... 5.21
Nov. 2-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 86.09
Dec. 3-Western Union Co. .................... 42.59
Dec. 3- Postal Tel. Co. ...................... 7.63
Dec. 3-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co ................. 19.25
Dec. 8-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 39.87
1928
Jan. 4-Western Union Co. .................... 19.66
Jan. 4-Postal Tel. Co. ...................... 1.97
Jan. 4-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. ................... 24.79
Jan. 4-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co. ................. 16.05
Jan. 1- W C. Dixon ......................... 1.00
Feb. 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. ................. 34.26
Feb. 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. ................... 3.17
Feb. 1-Western Union Tel. Co................ 47.88
Feb. 1- Postal Tel. Co. .............. ........ 12.81
Feb. 1-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co .................. 27.60
Feb. 14-Matthews Northrop Co. ............... 4.58
Feb. 14-Matthews Northrop Co. ................ 6.97
Feb. 29- W C. Dixon ........................ 1.00
March 1-Sou. Tel. & Conet. Co. ................. 25.05
March 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 16.70
March 1-Postal Tel. Co. ....................... 6.28
March 1-Western Union Co. .................. 44.54
March 23--Foster Reynolds Co. .................. 4.40
March 12-W. C. Dixon ....................... 1.25
April 1- Sou. Tel. Conct. Co. .................. 19.30
April 1- Postal Tel. Co. ...................... 8.42
April 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 23.07
April 1-Western Union Co. ............ ...... 110.98
May 2-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 27.82
May 2-Postal Tel. Co. ....................... 3.94
May 2-Western Union Co. ................... 18.55
May 14-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co ................. 28.40
May 23-W. C. Dixon ............. .......... 1.50
June 1-Amer. Ry. Exp. Co. .................. 26.77
June 1-Sou. Tel. & Conct. Co .................. 27.50
June 1-Postal Tel. Co. ...................... 4.29
June 1-Western Union Co. .................... 14.61

Total .............................. $ 1,308.27








DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


POSTAGE JULY 1, 1926-JUNE 30, 1927.
1926
Balance ........................... $ 15.86
July 1-By Appropriation ...................$ 1,800.00

Aug. 24-W. H. May, Stamps .................. $ 1,540.00
1927
Jan. -W. H. May, Review .................. 4.82
Jan. -W. H. May, Quarterly Bulletin ........ 56.46
Feb. 2-W. H. May, Stamped Envelope ........ 207.18
March 3-W. H. May, Review .................. 5.13
March 25-W. H. May, 11/2c Stamps .............. 2.27


$ 1,815.86


July
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Sept.
Sept.
Jan.
May
May


POSTAGE JULY 1, 1927-JUNE 30, 1928.
By Appropriation ................... $ 2,500.00
17-W. H. May, P. M. ................... $ 2,000.00
12-W. H. May, P. M. .................... 20.00
13-Jno. B. Mullan ...................... .22
24- R. C. Sheafer ........................ .50
31- 0. W Pittman ....................... .98
6- J. J. K iely .......................... .98
20- H E. Ross .......................... 2.60
30-W. H. May, P. M. .................... 230.20
2--W. H. May, P. M. .................... 50.00
23-W. H. May, P. M .................... 194.52

Total ............................. $ 2,500.00


STATIONERY AND CONTINGENT FUND JULY 1, 1926-
JUNE 30, 1927.
By Appropriation ................... $ 1,650.00


1926
July
July
July
July
July
July
July
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.


6-D. A. Dixon Co ...................... $
6- Geo. D. Barnard .....................
7-Leon Elec. Co. .......................
7-Capital Office Sup. Co ................
7-Capital Office Sup. Co. ..............
7-Capital Office Sup. Co .................
7-Photostat Corp. Co. ..................
1-D. A. Dixon Co. ....................
1-Capital Office Sup. Co .................
1-Leon Elec. Sup. Co. ...................
1- Bass Hdwd. Co. ................... ...


13.00
43.25
8.40
4.00
.30
3.00
15.00
30.75
3.00
3.95
.50








FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


1926
Aug. 23-Industrial School for Boys ............ 5.00
Aug. 24- Geo. D. Barnard ..................... 168.58
Aug. 20-Capital Office Sup. Co ................. 1.35
Aug. 7-Capital Office Sup. Co ................. 51.28
Aug. 31-D. A. Dixon Co. ..................... 11.75
Sept. 3- Leon Elec. Co. ...................... .60
Sept. 3-P. W. Wilson Co ...................... 5.70
Sept. 1-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............ 9.60
Sept. 3-Royal Typewriter Co .................. 50.53
Sept. 3-Tallahassee Typewriter Exchange ...... 10.00
Sept. 10-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............. 159.88
Sept. 16-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............. 6.21
Sept. 27-W. A. Bass Hardware Co .............. .50
Oct. 5-Tallahassee Typewriter Exchange ...... 10.00
Oct. 5-Capital Office Supply Co. .............. 4.00
Oct. 5- D. A. Dixon Co. ..................... 7.00
Oct. 5-D. A. Dixon Co. ...................... 1.40
Oct. 5-Capital Office Supply Co. .............. 2.20
Oct. 1-Leon Electric Co. ..................... 7.60
Oct. 8-Bass Hardware Co. .................. .75
Oct. 30-Maxwell's Pharmacy ................. .75
Nov. 1-Rhodes Hardware Co .................. 4.25
Nov. 5- W alter Scott ........................ 7.00
Nov. 3--Capital Office Supply Co. .............. 8.20
Nov. 22-Capital Office Supply Co. .............. 8.65
Nov. 19-Capital Office Supply Co. .............. .55
Dec. 1-Capital Office Supply Co. ......... .... 2.50
Dec. 1-Bass Hardware Co. ................... .10
Dec. 1-Maxwell's Pharmacy ................. '1.25
Dec. 2- Clark's Jewelry ...................... 1.25
Dec. 6-D. A. Dixon Co. ...................... 27.55
Dec. 10-Quarterman Electric Co. ............... 8.25
Dec. 10-Capital Office Supply Co. ............. 2.00
Dec. 18--Capital Office Supply Co. .............. 8.00
Dec. 18-Capital Office Supply Co. .............. 1.15
Dec. 18-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............. 5.00
Dec. 23-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............. 5.00
Dec. 23-Royal Typewriter Co. ................. 7.50
Dec. 7-P. W. Wilson Co ..................... 11.40
1927
Jan. 6-D. A. Dixon Co. ...................... 3.00
Jan. 4-Capital Office & Supply Co. ............ 14.00
Jan. 1-Leon Electric Supply Co. .............. .80
Jan. 1- Hill's Book Store ..................... 1.20
Jan. 1- Loomis Studio ....................... 64.98
Jan. 13-Geo. D. Barnard Stationery Co. ......... 3.10








DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


1927
Jan. 19- T. J. Appleyard ..................... .60
Jan 12- T. J. Appleyard ...................... 2.15
Jan. 16-Underwood Typewriter Co. ............ 4.00
Jan. 13-Capital Office & Supply Co. ............ 8.60
Jan. 22-W. H. Wehunt ....................... 6.15
Jan. 22-Underwood Typewriter Co.............. 91.64
Jan. 26-T. J. Appleyard ..................... 8.40
Jan. 8-Leon Electric Supply Co ............... 1.50
Feb. 2-D. A. Dixon Co ....................... 33.45
Feb. 2-W. H. Wehunt ....................... 10.10
Feb. 14-T. J. Appleyard ..................... 7.65
Feb. 14-Geo. D. Barnard Co .................. 6.54
Feb. 14-Supt. of Documents, Gov. Pt. Office ..... 1.25
Feb. 19- T. J. Appleyard ...................... 5.50
Feb. 28-United Office Supply Shop ............ 1.85
Feb. 28-Maxwell's Pharmacy ................... 1.00
March 1-T. J. Appleyard ...................... 72.50
March 1-T. J. Appleyard ...................... .45
March 1-T. J. Appleyard ...................... 2.70
March 1-T. J. Appleyard ..................... 2.00
March 1- T. J. Appleyard ...................... 2.25
March 4-Quarterman Electric Co. ............... 6.26
March 4- Pichard Bros. ........................ .20
March 7-Dixon & Co. ......................... 70.10
March 10-Florida State News ................... 9.00
March 10-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............. 19.00
March 15-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............. 9.39
March 1-Industrial School for Boys ............. 10.00
March 18-National Geographic Magazine ......... 3.50
March 22-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............ 2.85
March 25-Pichard Bros. ................... ..... .30
March 10-W. H. May, P. M. .................... 4.85
April 1-Tallahassee Typewrite Exchange ....... 1.50
April 4-Sanford Herald ...................... 3.50
April 4-Gainesville Sun ...................... 1.75
April 4-Bass Hardware Co. ................... .60
April 4-Tallahassee Typewriter Exchange ...... 4.50
April 4-D. A. Dixon Co. ....................... 26.30
April 4- T. J. Appleyard ..................... 31.60
April 6-P. W. Wilson Co ..................... 6.00
April 12-Zephyrhills News ..................... 2.00
April 12-Grant Furniture Co. .................. 2.00
April 14-Industrial School for Boys ............ 13.50
May 3-Walker, Evans. & Cogswell ............. 11.25
May 3-Bass Hardware Co. ................... 1.75
May 3-T. J. Appleyard ..................... 74.11








FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 57

1927
May 3-D. A. Dixon Co. ...................... 17.00
June 2-D. A. Dixon Co. ..................... 95.05
June 2- T. J. Appleyard ...................... 28.00
June 2-Old Dutch Carbon Co. ............... 18.00
June 2-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............ 26.58
June 30-Leon Electric Co ...................... 27.25
June 9-Bruno Riese ......................... 6.00
June 30-D. A. Dixon Co ...................... 4.00
June 30-Van Brunt & Yon Hardware Co. ........ 1.65
June 30-W. L. Marshall ...................... 2.50
June 30-Fain Drug Co. ....................... .25

$ 1,648.13
Balance dropped ...................... 1.87

STATIONERY & CONTINGENT JULY 1, 1927-JUNE 30,
1928.
1927
By Appropriation ................... $ 2,000.00
July 1-Walker, Evans & Cogswell .............$ 121.00
July 26-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............. 5.60
July 28-T. J. Appleyard ..................... 9.35
Aug. 3-H. Clay Crawford .................... 1.60
Aug. 3-Tallahassee Typewriter Exchange ..... 7.50
Aug. 3-Bass Hardware Co. ................... .50
Aug. 3-P. W. Wilson Co ...................... 2.50
Aug. 10-D. A. Dixon Co. ...................... 80.70
Aug. 24-Underwood Typewriter Co. ............. 65.05
Aug. 31-Industrial School for Boys ............ 16.00
Sept. 1-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............ 16.61
Sept. 1-Leon Electric Supply Co. .............. 465
Sept. 1-Tallahassee Typewriter Exchange ...... 1.50
Sept. 1- D. A. Dixon Co ...................... 46.35
Sept. 6-Quarterman Electric Co. .............. 14.08
Sept. 6-Geo. D. Barnard Co. ................. 47.17
Sept. 29-Walker, Evans & Cogswell Co .......... 9.00
Oct. 12-Industrial School for Boys ............ 30.25
Oct. 12-Seabrook Hardware Co. ................ 1.60
Oct. 22-T. J. Appleyard Co .................. 1.00
Nov. 2-Leon Electric Co. ..................... .80
Nov. 2-Williams & Harrell ................... 17.50
Nov. 2- G. M Store .......................... 2.50
Nov. 2-Tallahassee Typewriter Exchange ...... 3.00
Nov. 8- W L. Marshall ....................... 5.00
Nov. 21-Market Growers Journal .............. 8.75








58 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

1927
Nov. 12-Hicks Drug Store .................... .60
Nov. 1-Underwood Typewriter Co. ............. 60.05
Dec. 1-D. A. Dixon Co. ..................... 73.80
Dec. 3- Leon Electric Co. .................... 7.32
Dec. 14-Quarterman Electric Co. ............... 6.30
Dec. 14- W L. Marshall ....................... 2.00
Dec. 14-Craig & Co .................. ....... 5.00
Dec. 16-W. H. May, P. M ..................... 15.10
1928
Jan. 4-Quarterman Electric Co. ............... 1.05
Jan. 3- Mailing Review ...................... 9.41
Jan. 3-G. M. Store .......................... 2.00
Jan. 3-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............. 14.16
Jan. 31- P. W W ilson ........................ 2.90
Jan. 20- The MacMillan Co ................... 1.41
Jan. 13-Bass Hardware Co. .................... 1.10
Jan. 17-Dixie Engraving Co ................... 27.35
Jan. 21-H. & W. B. Drew Co .................. 7.15
Jan. 30-Maxwell's Pharmacy ................ .75
Feb. 1- T. J. Appleyard ..................... 53.03
Feb. 1-D. A. Dixon Co ...................... 132.94
Feb. 1-Artcraft Printers .................... 3.50
Feb. 14-W. L. Marshall .................... 3.25
March 1-The Surprise Store .................. 4.05
March 1-Underwood Typewriter Co. ............. 17.00
March 1-D. A. Dixon Co ...................... 47.11
March 1-T. J. Appleyard Co. ................... 15.20
March 2-Craig & Co. .......................... 9.00
March 23-Geo. D. Barnard Co. ................ 14.06
March 23-H. & W. B. Drew Co .................. 11.80
April 3-Frankel Manufacturing Co. ........... 24.00
April 3-Underwood Typewriter Co. ............. 9.25
April 3-Walker, Evans & Cogswell ............. 17.00
April 3- D. A. Dixon Co. ..................... 20.29
April 3-T. J. Appleyard ......... ....... 21.20
May 2-T. J. Appleyard ...................... 9.00
May 2-H. & W. B. Drew Co. ................. 4.00
May 2-The Surprise Store ................... 5.00
May 2-D. A. Dixon Co ........................... 3.75
May 25-The Record Co. ...................... 26.00
May 25-H. & W. B. Drew Co .................. 63.00
June 1-T. J. Appleyard ..................... 26.10
June 1-The Surprise Store ................... 5.00
June 1-Addressograph Sales Co. ............. 5.85
June 1-P. W. Wilson Co. ................... .50
June 1-D. A. Dixon Co. .................... 19.86







FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN


1928
June 18-Industrial Boys School ............... 58.25
June 20-D. A. Dixon Co. .................... 45.88
June 30-D. A. Dixon Co. .................... 61.00
June 30-R. W Duval ........................ 1.75
June 30-T. J. Appleyard ..................... 218.27

Total, July 1, 1927-July 1, 1928 .......$ 1,712.45
Balance Dropped .................... 287.55
TRAVEL EXPENSE COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE
JULY 1, 1926-JUNE 30, 1927.
By Appropriation ....................$ 1,000.00
July 15-Trip to State Farm ................... $ 36.54
Aug. 3-Trip to Miami and Ocala .............. 71.84
Aug. 25-Trip to Inspect Prisons ............... 39.08
Sept. 9-Trip to Raiford and Ocala ............ 11.53
Sept. 29- Trip to Orlando ..................... 36.86
Oct. 25-Trip to Haines City .................. 148.44
Nov. 20-Trip to Ocala, Leesburg, Jacksonville, etc. 80.48
Dec. 2-Trip to Jacksonville, Ocala ............ 64.28
Dec. 15- Trip to Miami ....................... 157.45
Jan. 22-Trip to Raiford, Jacksonville .......... 19.24
Feb. 2-Trip to Raiford, Lake City ............ 32.81
April 7- Trip to Orlando ...................... 37.28
April 13-Trip to Orlando ...................... 59.61
April 21-Trip to Washington .................. 145.86
May 3-Trip to Orlando, Ocala ................ 53.77
$ 995.07
Balance Dropped ..................... 4.93
JULY 1, 1927-JUNE 30, 1928.
By Appropriation ................... $ 1,800.00
July 1-Trip to Raiford, Ocala, Orlando ....... 75.61
July 1-Trip to California ................... 448.60
Aug. 6- Trip to W acissa ...................... 10.80
Aug. 17- Trip to Greenville .................... 141.60
Sept. 2-Trip to St. Petersburg ................ 29.60
Sept. 8-Trip to Live Oak .................... 18.00
Sept. 28-Trip to Jacksonville and Ocala ........ 40.60
Sept. 25-Trip to Ocala and Raiford ............ 23.60
Nov. 14-Trip to Tallahassee and Madison ....... 18.30
Nov. 8-Trip to Ocala and Leesburg ........... 7.20
Nov. 22-Trip to Everglades ................... 93.75
Dec. 8-Trip to State Fair, Jacksonville ....... 26.80
Dec. 20-Trip to Raiford, Orlando, Bonifay ...... 94.44


59







60 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

1928
Jan. 12-Trip to Pensacola and West Florida .... 98.60
Jan. 24-Trip to Ocala, State Cham. of Com ...... 13.45
Feb. 1-Trip to Belleview, Winter Haven, Tampa 96.28
Feb. 14-Trip to Tampa Fair .................. 84.95
Feb. 16-Trip to Round Lake .................. 20.15
March 23-Trip to Bay Mabel, Jacksonville, Orlando,
Sarasota, Babson Park and Haines City 167.29
May 5-Trip to Tavares, Winter Haven ........ 88.91
June 18-S. A. L. Ry. Co., 5 Script Books ....... 150.00
June 28-S. A. L. Ry. Co., 2 Script Books ........ 45.00

$ 1,793.53
Balance Dropped ................... 6.47
ADVERTISING FUND JULY 1, 1926 TO JUNE 30, 1927
Appropriation ............................. . $50,000.00
Contracted for ................................. 199.35
Sale of Maps ................................... 85.25

$50,284.60
Printing ..................................... $24,051.00
Salaries ..................................... 10,634.13
Advertisements ................................. 8,958.00
Postage ......................... ............ 2,553.54
Stationery ................................... 1,679.06
General ....................................... 1,136.48
Travel Expense ....................... .......... 953.27
Newspaper Subscriptions ......................... 318.55

$50,284.03
Balance Dropped ..................... .57
ADVERTISING FUND JULY 1, 1927 TO JUNE 30, 1928
Appropriation ......................$75,000.00
Salaries ...................... .............. $12,833.62
Printing ...................... ............. 11,737.32
Advertisements ................................. 6,379.86
General ......................... ............ 2,109.79
Travel Expense ................................. 1,535.32
Postage ....................................... 828.22
Newspapers .................................... 722.02
Stationery ..................................... 766.10

$36,912.25
Contracted for ....................... 38,087.75

Total ............................... $75,000.00






FLORIDA QUARTERLY BULLETIN 61


Advertising Fund

UNDER the law the Advertising Appropriation is expended
through the Bureau of Immigration in the Department of
Agriculture. We are now in the fourth year of this work.
Within the biennial period from July 1st, 1926 to June 30th,
1928, in response to advertising placed in periodicals having a
combined circulation of 4,247,529, the Bureau of Immigration has
received inquiries by mail totaling 33,462. The periodicals
carrying these advertisements were for the most part agricultural
although other advertising media were used, including industrial,
educational and literary publications. In addition, approxi-
mately 5,000 inquiries about the State were received through the
Ask Mr. Foster Service.
In response to these requests, thousands of letters were sent to
people all over the United States and many were written to
citizens of other countries. Literature giving facts about the
State, sectional maps, highway maps and information of various
kinds on scores of subjects were mailed to all those who applied.
In all, the Bureau of Immigration, in the two year period, mailed
339,000 pieces of literature to those who expressed an interest in
the State. In weight, this represented several tons.
Mimeographed lists containing the names and addresses of
those individuals who had asked for information about Florida
were mailed from time to time to the various chambers of com-
merce, boards of trade, newspapers, banks, county agents, home
demonstration agents and other public officials, workers and
agencies throughout the State. It was the object of this service
to enable each community in the State to follow up our advertis-
ing by correspondence with the person who had expressed, or
might have, an interest in that particular section. Some very
gratifying results have come to our attention as a result of the
co-operation between the Bureau of Immigration and various
organizations working to upbuild their respective communities.
In the preceding biennium we began in a very modest way the
publication of FLORIDA REVIEW, a small periodical which
was made up of items of general interest about the State clipped
from the Florida papers for which we subscribed. By carefully
selecting this material so that it would be representative of every
section, city, industry and notable advancement in all lines of
endeavor, we have sought to give a semi-monthly, fact-stating
summary of the State's progress. Our efforts in this direction
seem to have won recognition, as the circulation of FLORIDA
REVIEW has steadily increased and many people have written
to us commending the publication.







62 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

A portion of the advertising fund was expended for printing
the report of the Industrial Survey. This survey was authorized
by the Legislature of 1927 for the purpose of collecting data as
to the commercial, industrial, agricultural and other resources of
the State. The report makes up a volume of approximately 350
pages and is a comprehensive and informative work.
It is impossible within the compass of this report to detail the
work done by the Bureau of Immigration in advertising the
State. No attempt has at any time been made to advertise our
work. We have expended the appropriation entrusted to us
with the best judgment and ability at our command and we
sincerely feel that the results justify the action of past Legis-
latures in providing funds for the venture. It might not be out
of place to say here that other States have followed the example
of Florida and are now advertising their resources and inviting
new settlers into their borders.
Below is a table giving figures relative to publications dis-
tributed by the Bureau of Immigration during the biennium:

(July 1, 1926-June 30, 1928)
Comparative Data ............................ 120,000
Florida Data ................................. 20,000
Interesting Facts ............................. 20,000
Latitude Maps ................................ 5,000
Blackberry Bulletin ........................... 2,000
Pineapple Bulletin ............................ 1,000
Squab Bulletin ............................... 1,000
Handbook for Florida Growers and Shippers ..... 20,000
Florida Facts ................................ 70,000
Agricultural Statistics ........................ 2,000
A ll Florida .................................. 30,000
FLORIDA REVIEW ......................... 48,000

Total ...................................... 339,000

The attention of the reader is directed to that portion of the
financial report of the Department relating to the Bureau of
Immigration. It will be noted that a goodly part of the appro-
priation of the previous year was contracted but not expended.
The fiscal year of July 1, 1928 to June 30, 1929, will show the
purpose for which this amount was expended.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs