The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1894-09-01
Ghe 8armer.
VAST CROPS IN RUSSIA.
TeO Great 10 BE Harvested. where Two
Years Ago There Was Famine.

Cries of despair are coming from Rus
sian farmers and landowners because OF
the abundant wheat harvest. For weeks
past the Russian press has been devoting
its leading articles to a discussion of the
measures best calculated to neutralize the
effects of the coming plentiful harvest, and
now, curiously enough, the question has
reduced itself to this simple issue; Should
the wheat be reaped and garnered in or
would it not be wiser to turn sheep and
cattle into the fields, and thus lessen the
quantity of the produce?
1t seems well nigh incredible that a
people, who, two years ago, were In the
ihroes of famine, and publicly offered up
prayers to Heaven for an abundant harvest
should be now concerning measures for the
purpose of counteracting the effects Of the
wished-for abundance. But it is none the
less true; and, stranger still, some organs OF
the press, in reply to the question, SHOULD
the wheat be reaped ?" have deliberately
given it as their opinion that, "for numer-
GUS districts it would be advisable to solve
this problem in the negative" Nay, more,
it now appears that many landowners re-
fused last year to gather in the harvest,
and are determined not to remove it this
year, either. One landlord, for instance,
who owns large estate near Odessa, and
whose facilities for export are therefore
exceptionally numerous, foreseeing the fall
of prices, purchased 900 sheep and un-
hesitatingly turned them into his field of
wheat He is said to be so satisfied with
the result that he means to do likewise now
that further fall in price is probable.
The Odessa Norosti, a journal which is
usually very well informed upon agricul-
tural questions. has published series of
articles to show that to gather in the har-
vest this year would be tantamount to
throwing good money after bad, for 1t can
only be done at heavy loss to farmers.
A pood (36 pounds of barley, for instance,
when it reaches the port of Nikolaietf from
the neighboring government of Poltava
costs the producer 36i copecks, whereas
the market price is at present 81 coPecks,
and is bound to become less as soon as the
abundance of this years harvest is gener-
ally known.
A very severe agricultural crisis is an
ticipated in consequence, and the we'll
meaning effort Of the government to keep
down the price of the ruble, with a view
to facilitating expectation, will avail moth
ing. The results of such crisis may be
gagged by the circumstance that Russia is
an agricultural country, which cannot hope
to find in the increased profits of manufac-
lures a compensation for the falling off of
corn exports. The situation is critical, and
will make itself sorely felt in more forms
than one before the present year comes to
a close.
Unfortunately dispassionate study of
the causes that have combined to bring
about the present crisis fails to bring to
light single consideration which would
warrant hopes of brighter prospect in the
near future. Some authorities maintain
that the prohibition to export grain, which
was issued by the government during the
famine, enabled American farmers to tri-
umph over their Russian competitors by
leaving European markets without Russian
Grain for year. But most Russians hold
that this was no more than the occasion;
the real cause lay deeper, and is to be sought
for in the manner in which the Russian
producer is handicapped by domestic laws
and conditions, in the negligence OF Rus
sian grain merchants, who sought to enrich
themselves rather than acquire high rep
utation for the native produce, and in the
resulting inferiority of Russian grain.
Thus RussIGiG Chish, well-iniormed
agricultural organ, unhesitatingly declares
that the "foreign demand for Russian grain
was the result of a misunderstanding, for
the grain itself, owing to its quality, could
not compare with that of America or even
Australia and East India, and those who
transacted the sale, if judged by the stand
ard of consciousness or by the CONNER
cial methods they employed, would lose by
comparison with their foreign colleagues.
The journal then goes on to say that the
export from Russia was artificial, due ex-
clusively to the mistaken agricultural policy
of the government, which made it possible
TO forward grain from the farthest corners
of Russia to Germany, England and Bel
GUM for nominal freights, while it was
practically impossible to distribute 1t in the
neighboriDg Russian districts where people
were dying of hunger. Thus on the one
hand it was scarce at home, where sorely
needed, and plentiful abroad, where it was
not really wanted.
Disappearance of the Apple.