Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1892-02-18
THE SHORT SELLER.
He Gets a Turning Over from
Miller Pilisbury.
BUY ERs OVERWHELMED WITH WIND

Eow the young Man with His Office in
His Hat Has More Influence ON Prices
Than tho Big Purchaser of Real Wheat
Cheap Dollars for Farmers to Paw
Debts with A Chicago Man who
Thinks Washbnrn's Bin Gives AIilIers a
Monopoiy-OfliciaI News Notes.
WASHINGTON, Feb. lS.-Charles A. Pills
bury, the Minneapolis miller, told the
Hatch committee Yesterday what he knows
about futures, and while he was doing So
President Hamill, of the Chicago Board of
Trade, was telling a senate subcommittee
a story that might be interpreted as
an intimation that Pillsbury had
method IN his opposition to
sfuture' dealings. Pillsbury said that
the worlds surplus supply of wheat was
steadily dwjndlin%, and was being drawn
on each year to meet the increasing con
sumption of wheat. He said that il one
man owned the wheat crop raised in the
United States this year it would have
been possible to get $3.50 per bushel for
1t from Europe just as easy as 90 cents.
because Europe had to have it. Russia
had none to export, and India had shipped
its surplus of previous years.
Brings Up the Money Question.
Lewis-Then the statistical position of
wheat has been growing better for five
years past, and the price Except for
spurt this year. has been growing weaker?
Pillsbury-That is so.
Lewis-Doesn't the value Of money have
n great deal to do with it, Isn't money
worth more than ever?
Piilsbury-l think as a whole the dollar
will buy more goods now than ever
Lewis-If we had $l,500,O00,0O0, instead
$3.50, 600, in circulation, would not tie
farmers get more for their wheat?
WouId Pay as Much Debts.
Pi'lsbury-More nominal dollars. but
perhaps they would not buy so much.
Lewis-It would give the farmers more
debt-paying capacity.
Pillsbury-Oh, yes.
Lewis quickly retorteG THAT is what is
the trouble with them, i it not?" and
there was general laughter in the commit
tee. n
In reply toA further question from Lewis,
Pillsbury admitted that short selling alone
would not account for the decline in
able to one cause alone.
Young Man with Office in His Hat.
Pillsbury favored the bill under con-
sideration. He said that the owners of the
immense wheat fields of the northwest had
less to say about the price of wheat than
some young man bowling prices on the
Chicago exchange, who, perhaps, could
not tell the difference between grain of
wheat and grain of barley. He pills
bury was one of the largest buyers of
actual wheat, but his buying had less
actual effect on prices than some one at
the wheat pit whose office was in his hat
The only difference between the bucket
shop and the Board of Trade was that on
the board 10 per cent of trades We're legit-
mate. while III the shop only per cent
was so.
No Need of short" Selling.
"Short" selling was not neceSsB 1t
was not practiccd in the real estate or dairy
business. 1t had been stated that the mill
ers sold flour months ahead. That was
true, but he would stake his reputation
that 9924 per cent. of all -four sales were
followed by deliveries. He had never
known a speculative offering of -four
Formerly millers kept large supplies of
wheat and -four on hand, but they now
recognize Ihit IL WAS h'iTHiN SAFE Tor a man
to be long" over night of a round lot of
wheat unless he had contracts already
made, for he could olonger reckon on the
law of supply and demand.
Pretty Hard on the Buyers.
Pillbury said that buyers of wheat had
to take care of all actual wheat, and in ad-
dition care for millions of bushels of wind.
The wind was Just as heavy as actual
wheat and was so uluch more of n load IN
be carried. He thought contracts should
be negotiable, and that sales of contracts
were legitimate, provided the first maker
actually had the wheat Where contract
was made and the wheat was not behind
it the sale was mere gamble. The bur-
den of proof, in his opinion, should be put
upon the seller to show that he had the
wheat he sold.