The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1900-04-20
AFARMERs' WORLD COMBINE.

From Minneapolis the whole family |
Of man receives notice that two great
organizers are going to improve the op-
portunity afforded by the Paris exposi-
ton to unite the farmers Of the world
in one grand monopoly combine, with
dollar wheat for the object. The notice
goes into details far enough to say that
]. C. Hanley, of st. Paul, is the chief
organizer of the American end Of the
line, and that Professor G. Rutland,
of the University of Fribourg, Switzer-
land, is the chief organizer at the Eu-
ropean end of the line.
The purveyor of information states
that the grand idea was conceived by
these two men independently. Mr.. Han
ley has been heard Of before as hold
your-wheat" philosopher and philan-
thropst, but, while he has undeniably
meant well to the farmers and probably
| to himself, his eloquent exhortations
which have seen the light at intervals
during the last ten years have not been
productive Of any extraordinary COM
motion in the economic world.
AS result of his disinterested labors
Mr.. Hanley is executive agent of the
Farmers alliance and Industrial Union,
| the National Cotton Growers associa-
ton, the Farmers Federation of the
Mississippi Valley and the National
Grain Growers association. And on the
top of all that he is the chief promoter
of the international agricultural trust
in America and is prominently asso-
ciated with a number of farmers coop
erative associations.
| The European member of the firm of
combine organizers is not so many
| things. About all he can make out to
do is to fill the chair Of economics in
the university above named and serve
as chief promoter of the combine move
ment in Europe. We are told that "his
studies Of the problems Of different
countries led him to believe that the
only cure for the widespread troubles
of farmers, which are much more Sc
we're in the old than in the new world,
Is to restrict production. Identity Of
thought and aim has brought these
great minds together and now they are
laboring in unison to persuade the in
Iternational agricultural congress to in
dorse their plan and recommend it to
the various national associations for ap-
i plication next year.
All this suggests few brief remarks.
One is that farmers world wide COM
bine to force up the price of wheat by
restricting production would not be one
whit better, economically or morally,
than a world wide combine Of ironmast-
ers to force up prices of iron and steel
by the same means. 1t would be crea-
tion Of monopoly by conspiracy, and
that would be no more defensible in the
case of a staple food product than in the
case of an article which people can bet
ter do without. Some may think it
would be even less defensible.
Another remark is that the project is
quite impractlcable. 1t has been tried
planters and 1t has always failed. If
cotton planters in this country alone
cannot carry out a scheme to restrict
production much less can wheat grow
ers throughout the world. The growers
Of each country, supposing that those
Of other countries were going to produce
less, would certainly produce more, just
as did the cotton growers in the several
southern states when the scheme was
! tried there.
: Another remark, or another phase of
the one last made. is that the govern
ment Of Russia not many years ago
approached the government at Wash
ington with this very scheme, the only
!, difference being that the idea was first
rather to restore wheat and hold 1t for a
81 bushel than to restrict production,
and, second. to bring to bear the whole
power of perhaps half dozen Of the
most powerful governments in the
world to carry the monopoly program
into effect. If that was wildly imprac-
ticable much more so is the scheme OF
: monopoly by voluntary cooperation,
} The grand scheme Is foredoomed to
r failure. as 1t ought to be. Some people
need to know more about the benefi-
cence Of natural law in the economic
world.