06.06.2013 Views

Antitrust Status of Farmer Cooperatives: - USDA Rural Development ...

Antitrust Status of Farmer Cooperatives: - USDA Rural Development ...

Antitrust Status of Farmer Cooperatives: - USDA Rural Development ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

200 51 Cong. Rec. 9568 (1914).<br />

201 51 Cong. Rec. 9569 (1914). The limited application <strong>of</strong> the committee<br />

language is highlighted by a later comment <strong>of</strong> Rep. Edward Browne (R-WI)<br />

that "At least 75 per cent <strong>of</strong> the farmer organizations in the United States are<br />

organized for pr<strong>of</strong>it and have capital stock." 51 C ong. Rec. 9571 (1914).<br />

80<br />

one <strong>of</strong> their main objects for organization. I am not willing<br />

to subject them to any such danger.<br />

Again, suppose an agricultural or horticultural<br />

organization in my county or anywhere else should, in<br />

addition to their other purposes, wish to organize for the<br />

purpose <strong>of</strong> erecting a warehouse and issue stock for that<br />

purpose, a thing which they have done in some cases, in<br />

order to have some place in which to store their products,<br />

while they are holding them for more favorable conditions in<br />

the market. Most <strong>of</strong> them are people <strong>of</strong> small means and not<br />

able by voluntary contributions to build warehouses, and if<br />

they should issue capital stock to build one, they at once,<br />

under the provisions <strong>of</strong> this section as worded, would<br />

become subject to the operations <strong>of</strong> the antitrust laws. Thus<br />

you force them either to expose their products to the weather<br />

or rent warehouses possibly at exorbitant rent. For one I am<br />

not willing to do this, but want them to have the right by<br />

issuing stock or otherwise to build and own their own<br />

warehouses. If we are going to do anything for them, let us<br />

do it ungrudgingly. 200<br />

Faced with strong opposition from Rep. Webb, the Thomas<br />

amendment was rejected, 105 to 69. 201<br />

Rep. John Nelson (R-WI) then <strong>of</strong>fered an amendment as a<br />

compromise between the committee and the Thomas language. While<br />

it was pending, he engaged in a spirited discussion with Rep. Webb<br />

over the issue <strong>of</strong> a possible cooperative monopoly.<br />

Mr. WEBB: Does the gentleman think that it would be<br />

right to allow the cotton farmers in the South or the corn<br />

raisers <strong>of</strong> the West to form corporations whereby they could<br />

hold, corner, or monopolize the entire cotton or corn crop <strong>of</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!