Kansas agitator. [volume] (Garnett, Kan.) 1890-1905, 1892-03-10
OPTION GAMBLING.
A FARMER TALKS Of OvERPRODUC-
TON AND DEPRESSION.


During IA recent session of the house
of representatives committee on agricul-
ture. while tho antioption b@s We're I'M
der consideration, G. Wood Davis. the
well known statistician and Kansas
farmer. made the following address in
advocacy of the proposed legislation:
My sole business is that of a farmer
and producer. Finding this business
Improbable in recent years, | was i'm
PEELED to an investigation of the causes
of the depression in prices OF farm prod
ucts started to work procuring data
from all parts Of the world, official and
otherwise. found that up to 1884 the
was producing more wheat and bread
stuffs than it required, and large &C
emulation took place the world over;
but since 1884. if numerical data can be
relied upon. the world has produced in
but one year rs much wheat as it con-
sumed. That year was 1897. In 1884
there were 4O0. 900, 900 bushels of wheat
piled up in the farm and other granaries
of the world Since that time we have
in a sense drawn upon that surplus.
Now it follows logically that when
the world is producing less than it con-
sumes the price of wheat and other
breadstuffs should increase. Yet such
has not been the case. Why is this? |
will not go into the question of the eff
feet of tariff or the currency supply
upon the price of these commodities. l
can't see that the question of tariff af-
fects the farmer materially. am Re-
publican and protectionist. but it does
in some cases, have no doubt, enhance
the cost of necessities.
After the year 1870 there had grown
up on the boards of trade system of
dealing in fictitious or fiat products.
This system began with the short sell
ing of gold in Wall street during the
war. and was to market the farm prod
ucts of the country, during the seventh
decade. 1t became, so far as can learn,
distributing factor about the first OF
the last decade, that is. after 1880. Its
influence seems to have grown with the
years The gentlemen on the other side
of this question tell us that in order to
market farm products of the country,
we must have these new methods.
Yet we marketed. think, more bread
stuffs and pork relatively to population
ten years ago, before this method came
into vogue, than we do today. If we
were then able to market our products
without these methods, why can't we do
it now? They tell us we can't do it with
out the money. But there is more
wealth relatively in this country now
than there was ten years ago. Recently
one of the bankers of Chicago told me
there was more money tied up in mar
gins on these future sales than would
pay for the entire visible supply of
wheat three times over. The heaviest
visible supply of wheat we ever had
was 70 DOC. 900 bushels. If the invisible
supply was another 81, 0O0. 900, then $l34,-
.OOO. 600 would move this entire crop at
one dollar bushel.
Now the consumption of the world
has overtaken the production. If wheat
brought $40 per bushel in Britain for
the nine years ending in 1874, why should
it not bring good price now, with a
lessened product per capita? 1t is, !
think. because of the offering of unlim-
tied fictitious amounts on the markets
without any regard for the real product.
AS a matter of fact. the prices of grain
are frequently made in Chicago by three
or four men. have here a telegram re-
ceived the other day which says. Par
bridge is bigger than the market and
sold freely all day.
Mr.. Partridge has for the last three or
fonr days dominated the market of Chi