The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1899-01-16

one section of the country and short
crops in another section, in neither in
stance, as experience proves, would the
price be improved so long as the sup
ply offered in the open market was
equal to the export or cash demand.
Moreover, suppose the two Dakotas,
not as might be reported but as mat
ter of fact, should raise Tlll crop of
wheat and Kansas only a half crop.
A full crop of wheat produced in the
DakOtas is about equal to our annual
exports of wheat. The farmers of the
Dakotas with good season can pro-
duce wheat at a cost of 40 cents a
bushel and could put their wheat on
the market in Chicago for 80 cents and
make a good profit. F'ifty-cent Dakota
wheat, then, supposing the crop to be
equal to the export demand, would fix
the price of the whole crop of wheat
sn the United States, and thus compel
the farmers of Kansas, with only a half
crop. to sell their wheat at one-half
less than the cost of production. Now,
if we were to abolish our official crop
reports, then it could not be accurately
known whether we had full or short
crops in the United States, nor that the
Dakotas had produced full crop and
Kansas only a half crop. The result of
all this would be to put every body
guessing, and at the game of guessing
the farmers would hold the dice box.
We have on our boards of trade two
sets of gamblers, known as the bulls
and the bears. When the bulls win the
farmers win; but when the bears win
the farmers lose. 1t is a significant
fact to be noticed in all great wheat
deals that our official crop reports are
so manipulated as to favor the bear in
terest who win out at a great loss to the
farmers.
I have been a wheat grower in Kan
sas for the past thirty years and can
not recall an instance that crop reports
ever benefited me in the least, but on
the contrary I have been damaged by
crop reports hundreds of dollars. Some
uoo 7 lA1d ha nv Of W h
for a rise in price, but before 1t was
marketed there appeared a report sent
out from the department at Washing
ton showing large stocks of wheat held
in the hands of farmers, and the loss
to the farmers of this country from this
single crop report was more than dve
million dollars.
If all surplus producing nations were
to abolish their crop reports prices
would be better sustained. The buyers
and spectators then could have no re-
liable data from which to bear the mar
ket, but would be compelled to submit
to the price fixed by the law of supply
and demand Offering in the public mar
kets.
But official crop reports are made
available for the protection of agricul-
ture In all the countries Of Europe, ex-
cept free trade England and surplus
producing Russia.
France, Germany and in fact all ma
tons that are not self-sustaining have
tariff or corn laws for the protection OF
their respective agricultural interests,
hence an accurate report of the crops
of each one Of those countries is indls-
pensable to the regulation of imports
SO as to give the needed protection to
the producers as well as justice to the
consumers.
But government reports of the crops
of surplus producing or exporting coun-
tries are a great mistake, in this, that
while they are of no material benefit
to the consumers, experience shows that
they have been a positive Injury to the
agricultural class Of the Wo1Id.