The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1875-09-02

will the Indiana Farmer tell how those pri-
ces are TO be obtained? The Sentinel is not
tenacious to crowd this dispute, but the
Farmer of last week rejoins to an article of
the Sentinel without meeting any of its
points. 1t is very plain that the individual
or the combination" which the Indiana
Farmer recommends, may fix the prices
named, and, if nobody viii pay, them
they may refuse to sell for
any less. The only alternative
LETT Is to keep the grain. If all the owners OF
grain could or would hold and hang on long
enough to shorten the supply at Liverpool,
which comes from France, Germany, Russia,
Australia, California and the United States,
and raise the price at that point, then it
would advance in New York, Chicago would
! follow, and the combinations might thus en-
force their agreed rates. But tits plain that
a combination among producers sufficiently
strong to move the markets of the world on
grain is not possible. While there is
goodly number of our Western farmers who
are able to hold their stocks of grain, prob
ably majority could not do so at all,
or il they could, it would be at a
sacrifice greater than the saving on price.
cannot be forced up, the combination have
still the election to hold as long as they can
for the chances of better market. Many
individuals do this sometimes to their sd-
vantage, and sometimes at a loss. The tes-
timony of the Oldest and wisest farmers is
that the chances, as a rule, are against keep
ing grain over for a better market. There
is inevitably both waste and deterioration.
The weather, vermin, fowls, and various
causes carry on constant destruc-
ton, while the value of the crop
is not paying interest. Corn also
deteriorstes largely in quality and even
wheat is difficult to keep well. A case in
point. A farmer last week brought TO the
Board of Trade sample of old red wheat
which was originally fully up to No. 2 quail
ity and had been kept in dry clean bins as
carefully as wheat could be kept. 1t looked
well. But no sooner did the finger ends of
an experienced miller touch it than he
looked doubtful. Next the end of his nose
went down and that acute organ shifted
must" In short Sl.25 was the best offer
that could be obtained in a market where q
good article would have been sought eagerly
at ten per cent. higher figures. So much for
the loss OF keeping in quality. Moreover the
farmer received the wheat of his
tenant Tor lis bushels, but did
not hope to make it weigh out now over 1O5
bushels. There has been loss of ten dol
lars interest on the lot, and altogether the
holding of the grain was evidently unprofit-
able. But no body has a right to complain
or demonstrate with the producer for doing
as be pleases with his own. The Farmer
quoted in its support an article from Moore's
Rural New Yorker to which the only reply |
required is that it was one Of the exception |
al, foolish pieces ofsentiment such as rarely
find way into that excellent paper. One
word. The Sentinel does not counsel farm |
ers to sell their produce for less money than
it cost them to raise it. That is terrible |
policy and. quite to common. But the REM
edy is TO farm so well and make such crops
per acre that there will be profit at market
DriCez