The Colfax chronicle. [volume] (Colfax, Grant Parish, La.) 1877-1981, 1889-09-28
Ak, GRANT PARISH, La, SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 2s 1882

it is m lnifestly absurd to suppose that
100 pounds of cotton added to q 400
pound bale will necessitate the use of six
pounds additional weight of bagging and
ties. As a matter of fact twenty-four
pounds is in excess of the average weight
of bagging and ties used ON the heaviest
bales.
have seen that buyer with 8 pur-
chasing limit of ten cents per pound OF
net cotton is enabled to buy bale weigh
ing 500 pounds gross for $47 under the
existing tare rules. Take the same pur-
chasing limit and the same gross weight
OF bale, apply the fixed tare of twenty
four pounds, and we find that the pro-
Queer gets S47 60 for the same bale Of
cotton that now brings him S47, without
the purchaser raising his price per pound
or being called on to pay for cotton that
he does not get. Consequently under the
existing usages, the producer loses per
cent on every pound OF cotton over 400
pounds that he puts into bale, and at
10 cents per pound the loss in this way
last year amounted to about $685. 900.
This was a nice margin for the buyers,
in itself, without calculating the addi-
tional margin they had ON all bales cover
ed with cotton bagging and other light
wrappings. And they take full advantage
of this margin, for where the actual tare
is ascertained IN Liverpool to fall short
of per cent bagging is added to the
bales to make up the deficiency.
1t must surely be plain to our farmers
from the foregoing statement that the
existing tare OF per cent is excessive on
any bale weighing over 400 pounds, and
that If they wish to put up heavier bales
without paving tribute to the cotton
buyers for that privilege they must insist
on the flied tare of twenty-four pounds
for jute and sixteen pounds for cotton
bagging, and at the same time see to it
that sufficient covering is put on their
bales to make up their weights.
Six yards OF Ia pound jute bagging,
and six ties will weigh only 201s pounds,
and this is about the average used in
covering bale to-day. Consequently,
even under the A-pound tare rule, it will
be false economy to the extent of 31S
pounds of cotton on each bale to use
only this quality of wrapping. Under the
present system of 6 per cent tare such
false economy must have cost the plant
ers last year about eighty-fi cents on
every bale OF cotton thus marketed.
Entirely apart from the cotton bagging
question the existing tare system needs
correction. and the cotton producers are
to certain extent under obligations to
the Jute Trust for having forced them to
fully consider the subject.
1t Is stated IN the papers that the cot
ton buyers here claim that the adoption
of the wet-weight rule would entail on
them very small losses, as they have made
contracts ahead on the G per cent basis,
and that they will not agree to the net
weight basis. Whose fault is this?
The Farmers Alliance has always been
DESTROYS of making arrangements to settle
this vexed tare question. in connection
with new standard cotton bagglng, in
such way as to cause the least hard
ship to all interested.
The buyers apparently did not realize
that the Alliance was in thorough earnest
when the Birmingham convention in May
last declared in favor of standard cotton
bagging, and an allowance of eight pounds
on each bale covered with this fabric;
and they now insist that the cotton pro-
ducers must not only continue to submit
to the injustice of the per cent tare,
but that they must also make a further
sacrifice of eight pounds of cotton ON
every bale that wears home made coat!
This would be protection with q ven-
geance for jute bagging!
There will be not less than 100000
bales Of the present crop covered with
light bagging, SO that the cotton pro-
ducers are to be asked to sacrifice about
$1,250,000, because the cotton buyers
failed to understand that the National
Farmers Alliance was capable Of knowing
its own mind. And there are Southern
men and Southern papers that take sides
against the producers, and do their best
to bamboozle them into submitting to
such loss.
Let the cotton buyers come forward
and propose some other way to equitably
adjust this matter, and they will find the
alliance as fair minded and as accommo-
dating as it has shown itself determined
and strong. As simple obstructionists |
their position is neither dignified nor
tenable. If the cotton raisers of this
grand country cannot get justice given |
them, they will take it.
Yours respectfully, IA. CLAYTON,
State Agent Louisiana Farmers Union, /
Chairman National Alliance and Wheel |
Committee on Cotton Begging.