c-^
 

INTRODUCTION
 

In the month of September, 1916, the receipt of the daily milk
supply of New York City was seriously imperiled. For more than a
wedc, the producers under the leadership of their "association" had
been on a strike demanding increased prices from the New York
dealers. Much good milk in the possession of those seeking to
deliver it to shipping stations was destroyed by the striking pro¬
ducers. A large part of the milk received during this period was
not of a sanitary character. A deadlock was reached. The Mayor of
the city intervened and tried to settle the dispute, but he made no
progress whatever. The dealers were proceeding on the theory that
the public would not stand for a rise in the price of milk and their
profits were so small that a very slight advance in the cost of milk to
them if they were compelled to sell at the then retail prices, would
drive practically all of the smaller companies out of business.

TTie producers were conscious that the price they were receiving
from the dealers did not cover the cost of production and so were
determined at all events to see the strike through. Beyond the
interest taken by the Mayor, there was no authoritative assertion of
the right of the New York public to receive its daily supply. The
controversy was finally settled, but the public paid the bill. From
this time on, the price of milk to the consumer was progressively
higher until in November, 1917, but little more than a year from
the time of the first strike, grade B milk rose from 9 cents to 15
cents or an advance of 66-2/3% over its former price.

In the fall of 1917, controversy again rose. Public authorities
began to take cognizance of the situation and the District Attorney
even threatened to indict the leaders of the producers who were
making what seemed to him to be exorbitant demands. It was
reported that if the District Attorney should carry out his threat
against one or more of the members of the Producers' Association,
the cows would be killed and the milk destroyed. Again the New
York milk supply was imperiled and again the controversy was
settled by the New York public's paying the bill.

Something more than a year has passed. In the meantime, the
Federal Food Commission which had adjusted the price between the
producer and the distributor during the war, after die armistice, dis¬
continued its efforts along that line. Under the Commission the
policy followed was for the dealers to charge their patrons just as
much more for their milk as the commission permitted the producers
to add to the existing price. Thus both the dealers and farmers got
along very nicely at the expense of the consumer. But, in January,
1919, the first month that these two interests in the industry were left
to themselves, on account of their inability to agree, a milk strike
resulted. There were three conflicting factors in this strike, the
dairymen's league, the milk dealers' pool and the New York public.