The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-12-28
Shall tho Future BE Abolished :?

The object OF the Anticipation bill Is two
fold. So much appears from the speeches
OF its champions in the Senate. On its
economic side the bill Is measure provid
ing that dealers in futures shall be taxed
for the supposed benefit OF tho farmers;
for tho real benefit. as is charged. of the
great Northwestern millers. whose friend.
Senator WAsHBURN. is the chief OF tho
Anti-Optionists In the Senate. On tho
moral side. the bill is urged us q means OF
restricting the sin OF gambling. The moral
and improving remarks Of this kind made
by Senator PETER OF Kansas are truly If
fecting and soaked with that high Roman
virtue which we look for in q Fopulist chief.
II Senator PEFFERs brains were not as
tangled and unkempt as his whiskers. we
might take the trouble OF asking him to
give his notion OF gambling. and TO define
tho proper limits Of State restriction OF
gambling. II q farmer. either from opti-
mism OF temperament or a roseate view Of
the prospects Of live stock. or an expectation
Of vituline scarcity. refuses to sell q calf
to butcher to-day and holds that calf for a
rise. Is that farmer not gambling in fu-
turesP II a farmer mortgages his farm or
planter his cotton crop. Ia not such q
mortgage q speculation in futures II GIN
CINNATus GALLUs contracts to furnish
MARCUS MERcAToR with three dozen eggs
week at so much dozen, Is not that a
dealing In futures and an uncertain bank
Ing upon commodities that may never
exist, or the existence OF which depends
upon tho digestive powers and aversion to
sedentary affairs Of GALLus's hens2 If
Mr.. PETER makes . contract with a
Washington barber for the annual prun-
ing Of that aboriginal forest. is not
that q dealing in futures? Is not
every bargain. every acceptance or refusal
Of price for certain commodity. bit of
gambling7 Somebody will probably lose
by that bargain or that refusal to mako a
bargain. Each party ia gambling that the
price Of that commodity will or will not go
up subsequent to the bargain or the refusal
to make one. All business contains the
element OF chance. and whether the subject
Of any particular transaction be an exist
Ing or non-existing amount Of certain
commodity makes no difference. Mr.. PEI
FER might. in fact, object with just as
much reason to the substitution OF checks
for money.
knowledge. capital. foresight will always
be great, and in the long run tho greatest
factors In business. but the element of
chance cannot DO eliminated; nor is that
element the main element In transactions
in options. Only the Ignorant speculator.
blindly rushing into the market, trusts all
to chance.
II Mr.. PEPFER and his friends want to
abolish speculative operations. they must
In fairness strive to abolish all speculative
operations. large contract. but ono that
can be executed by furnishing or putting to
death most OF the inhabitants OF tho United
States. IfMr. PETER and his friends want
to prohibit dealing In futures. they must
abolish in the human constitution tho hope
full and the Respondent propensity. the
eternal bullish and the eternal bearish. rs
the philosophers OF Mr. HENRY V1LLARD's
fatherland would say. Furthermore. the
Antl-Optionists should try to pass law
providing that every man. not farmer or
miller millionaire. shall be compelled to sell
and buy at the other mans price. Or
simpler and better means OF abolisbng
dealing with futures would be to abolish the
future. As the wit said. what has poster
ity done for us2" And. whatever may be
the case with Democratic Anti.Optionsts
like Senator GEORGE. or Republican Anti
Optionists like Senator WAsHBURN, there
can be no considerable future for Populists
like Mr.. PETER, 80 that he and they
ought to resolve. and can afford to resolve,
that the future ought to be and hereby ia
abolished. The inanity Of their political
proceedings seems to show that they
already regard such . resolution Us part
OF the statute book.