New-York tribune., 1883-06-20
"cORNFRSn AND THEIR CURE.

The collapse of powerful clique of specu-
lators who have been trying to make cor
nern in lard is hailed as public benefit III
If is so. why is not the formation OF such
q pooln held to be contrary to the public well
fare Whv are not spectators, if they seek to
fix unnaturaly high prices upon any OF the
articles of prime necessity, held to be public
enemies
1t may be objected that nobody can say that
INV price is a natural one, or show that any
other is unnatural aud excessive Practically
this is not true. Spectators may argue about
if rs they please, but as to nearly all the articles
of urime necessity, the cost of production Is
measurably known. Europe as well as Amer
ica knows the cost OF wheat on the Dalrymple
farm. and the cost of transportation thence
Practical farmers can tell at what pilce Ior
corn i'm the crib it is more profitable 10 ieed II
TO hogs, and packers can tell whether Win
corn at certain price, hogs are too hlgh. hec-
oguized organs of that business compute that
with hogs at $5 per hundred pounds, gross
weight, lard in tierces is worth rs % Per hub-
dfed mounds, and with hogs Mt 81. lard is worth
S11 Sc. and so on. These calculations are
familiar in many trades. About some things
tlere NAV he reasonable dispute; about the
cost of iron, for instance. where SO much de-
pends upon the kind of furnace, aud the quality
| of ore and fuel, and the proximity of each to
the others or about the cost of oil, since no.
body knows whether the supply may be in
definitely increased or indefinitely diminished
But it may be said of most articles that they
have a natural and legitimate range OF prices.
| a combination to corner" any article OF gem
1. Il.
eral use and necessity is intended, as everybody
| knows, to extort from consumers price which
is not natural, but beyond the natural variation
| of prices.
II has been held by the Legislatures and
Courts of some States that all such combina-
tions are contrary to public policy. But, as
THE TRIBUNE has often pointed out, it has
| been found difficult to prevent or even 10
define them. A simple remedy, many times
suggested, is to prohibit "option dealings, OF
sales of property not owned by the seller. But
! dealers object that such step would take
away great part of their business. No doubt ii
would, But the public endeavors to take away
| the whole of the business of the faro dealer,
| on the ground that il is contrary to the public
welfare.
The speculator replies that gambling in
grain. provisions, cotton and other products is
not contrary to the public welfare. 1t makes
a larger market, and thus conduces to steadi-
ness of prices, SO that consumers lose less at
one time, and producers less at another than
they would otherwise lose" A performance
like that of McGeochs casts flood of light
upon this reasoning. The prolonged holding OF
prices at fictitious level, ard the violent fall
of 20 per cent in an hour, were equally harmful
to every legitimate public interest. From first
to last, the public suffered, and only few
speculators had any chance to gain Yet public
opinion does not seem ripe for the application
| of any effective remedy.