The Dawson news. (Dawson, Ga.) 1889-current, 1905-03-01
DEALING IN FUTURES HURT THE FARMER?
Florida Paper Discusses Senator Cays Bill an Inter-
esting Way. Says the Selling of Cotton for Flu
ture Delivery Is Beneficial to the Price

pOhdVoi Nldy has pFOpOSeu an
amendment to the postoffice appropri-
alton bill which, if adopted, would
make dealing in futures and options
illegal and wouldimpose heavy PEN
atty on all persons buying or selling
them.
The Florida Times-Union alludes to
the Georgia senator's amendment as
Legislative quackery," and proceeds
to argue the question with special ref
erence to the cotton crop. 1t argues
its side of the question well, too,
says the Albany Herald, and sets
up the contention that the buying
and selling of cotton for future deliv-
cry is beneficial, rather than detri-
mental, to the average price of the
staple. The Times-Union says:
"Since this proposition is the result
of low cotton it is intended in the in
terest of the farmers. Last year the
manufacturers were clamoring for
similar legislation, and as cotton was
high then it was to have been in their
interest.
$50 far as we have seen no one has
yet denied that this legislation would
be in the interest of somebody, and as
conditions change the party to be ben
Gifted shifts from one side to the 9TH
er. Why do not some of the men who
clamor, for such opposite reasons, for
the abolition of dealings in futures
tell how such dealings affect the price
of the commodity when offered for i'm
mediate delivery? SO far as we have
seen no one has thought it necessary
to explain. Each advocate of such
legislation seems to feel that he has
done his full duty when he has simply
made an assertion. And then many
individuals of the class that is suffer-
ing from over production, or under
production, as the case may be at the
time, jump up and echo the asser-
ton.
eve do not see any reason in the
world for the belief that speculation
in cotton hurts the farmers of the
south. If it has any effect at all it
helps them. If no one were buying
except the factories we think cotton
would be lower when it is in the farm
ers' hands, and higher after they had
sold it, We think speculation stead
les the price and keeps it about the
same all the year, or yields to changes
only when increased information de-
mandS them.
''The southern farmers sell nine
tenths of their cotton in September,
October, November and December.
The manufacturers need only one
third of it during these months. TAX
ing as basis a crop of ten million
bales the southern farmers would offer
for sale 9,000,00 during these four
months. The factories would need for
use during this period only 5000, 600
bales at the most. At least three
bales would be offered by the producer
for every one the consumer needed.
Would not this condition cause low
cotton during this time if no one would
buy for future use?
"And would not the price go higher
in proportion as the number of buyers
increased?
''The wealthier farmers could hold
for higher prices. The poorer would
have to sell their cotton for what they
could get for it, while three times as
much was being offered as was needed.
After awhile the manufacturers would
find the supply growing smaller than
their demands Then the price would
rise after the needier class of farmers
had sacrificed their crops.
eff the farmers will use their advant-
age intelligently the south will become
the richest country in the world-that
is, if the cotton farmers can only get
the legislative quacks to let them
alone"