Crawford avalanche. (Grayling, Mich.) 1879-19??, 1892-02-25

President Hamill and four other mem-
bers of the Chicago Board of Trade ap-
peared before the Senate Committee on
judiciary TO protest against the legisla
ton contemplated by the Hatch and
Washburn anti-option bills. President
Hamill made a long address, and was
followed by Thomas A, Wright and
Michael Cudahy.
Speculative bodies. urged Mr.. Ham
III, "are necessary to adjust the rela-
tions between the supply and demand OF
products. The advance in prices checks
consumption and stimulates production,
and the fall in price checks production
and increases consumption. There is
some price at which they are perfectly
adjusted. and this is termed prop
the actual market value conform
to IL. He cannot influence it, since the
supply and demand do that, but he
merely determines the actual market
price and makes it coincide as nearly as
possible with the proper price. Fluctu-
ations should be as little as possible,
and the tendency of speculation as con-
Quoted by the boards of trade is to keep
the market in a state of equilibrium.
The movement of wheat last fall was
enormous. Under the existing system
the dealers and exporters placed wheat
for delivery in the future at high prices.
The orders were filled, and by the time
the farmer was able to deliver IL the
machinery of commerce was in motion,
and the crop moved off eG<ily at good
prices. No glut ensued, and the sellers
as well as the buyers were benefited.
The speculative supply, as a third eie-
ment, prevents undue enhancement OF
prices. The speculator is also an inn
portant factor in distribution. Buying
In a market relatively cheap and selling
i'm market relatively high prevents ac-
ppumulatign at some points and undue
depletion at others, and this equalizing
process helps distribution.
Mr.. Hamill continued that the bill
would have the effect of prohibiting z Gser-
chants from handling products in legfti-
mate channels of trade. While it would
allow the farmer to sell his products for
future delivery, the merchant who bought
of him would be prevented from selling
until the actual delivery was made.
Tho result is" he continued, that
whiSo the farmer has the naked right to
dispose of his property, even before he
has raised 1t, he can really dispose OF
his wheat only, and tn s to the miller
i dtbfiC. Illb COlH, ING, uluDl
besold if sold for future delivery, to a
dealer who, under the provisions ,of the
| Bib, would be prohibited from disposing
OF such property until its actual deliv-
epyl 1t entirely eliminates all legiti-
mate competition in the purchase from
! the farmer of his products, for the reason
| that the miller and maltster alone re-
main unhampered as possible buyers
J from him. 1t discrimin ates solely in
2gwor of the miller and maltster, and
creates monopoly for their advantage
by driving out every other dealer and
warehouseman.
Under the bill, said Mr. 1iamill, the
packer OF hogs, now the only important
SDuyer in that line, would be prohibited
Srom contracting for future delivery OF
Ippork products. As the result the packer
lrwould be compelled 10 inEist upon a
Charger margin To cover the additional
! risk of market while manufacturing.
! This would tend to reduce the price to
\ the grower or farmer.
As final objection tO tie bill Mr..
4 Hamill urged that it wouM result in
t>overturning and unsettaing to,the extent
s,of the total destruction of lepg and dwell
understood usages in the handling of
Agricultural products The restriction
\ placed upon the business ofbuying and
shlling would prevent men from engag-
\ ingin N Legitimate trade
/ Thomas A. Wright followed in a. long
ISaPgument in which he cited the legal
}pphases of the situation and quoted from
various decisions to sh0T that contracts
ln6uch as were made on boards, of trade
were legitimate and recognized, as such
ll5y the courts. In closing he.claimed
that the effects of the passage of the
Law proposed would be TO drive capital
/ 0utoof the business OF handling agri-
cultural products. To prohibit futures
would be TO remove the only insurance
Afforded the dealers. He thought the
measure was intended solely for the
benefit of the big millers. Senator
Washburn, the author, who WAS In the
milling business himself, made mo OBJ
lection to this intimation.
Nr. Wright produced some statistics
recently gathered by 5. X. 7. Prime, of
Dwight, showing that many farmers as
well as millers and grain merchants
-throE ghOut IlliH ois, Iowa and Minnesota
weresOpposed to the anti-option bills. 1t
was Also shown that selling future de-
llivery,was practice coming into vogue
in many agriculSrIral districts, and the
farmers were taking the same advan-
tages SIS the grain dealers to insure
themselves against loss by selling for
delivery .ahead.