The Monticellonian., 1908-12-03
Farmers Educational
 -AND- Co-Operative Union Of America
The Two Conventions.

New Orleans by the Farmers Union Association at Memphis-have passed into history and the question natural. ly arises, what has been accom- plished?
 Neither convention carried to ma turity any definite plan for holding the cotton crop for satisfactory prices because of the many difficult ties in the way of taking care of that part of it which is under mortgage for the supplies on which it was made. But both did much to overcome these difficulties by bringing forcibly before the business world the fact that when this fraction of the cotton is forced upon the market in advance of the demand for it, the price on the entire crop is depressed and the South loses millions of dollars which should flow through all her channels of trade. And not only did they bring these con- ditions clearly before the business world, but representative bankers and business men expressed a willing ness to cooperate along safe and sound methods of improving them The Farmers Union needs a campaign of education among business men. as well as among farmers, and the New Orleans convention was worth all it cost for what it accomplished in this respect alone.
 In the matter of marketing that part of the crop not under the neces- sity of immediate sale, the work of both conventions is calculated to have very beneficial effect The SUD- port of the holding and gradual mark eting movement by leading fnanciers and large planters should be a power full stimulus to those who have hesi- tated as to what they should do, and where one bale has been held back be- fore, two should be held since these conventions.
 It is too early to say what may be expected from the great warehouse tion, the committee in whose charge 1t was placed has not given a definite outline of the plan Some such ar- engagement at New Orleans as that made at Galveston by the Farmers Union of Texas would materially help, and it seems quite probable that this much will be accomplished As to the organization of a great cotton hold ing company, that is another question. Evidently the Farmers Union is not ready for such move, and we do not believe the time will ever come when 1t can be made successful Our opin- ion is that the remedy does not lie in that direction.
 The one damaging result, in our opinion, of both conventions was the disposition to compromise with the cotton exchanges. At Memphis, gam bling in cotton futures on the ex- changes was boldly defended and the claim was made that anti-bucket shop legislation in the Southern states had helped to depress prices to the present low level. Of course, bucket shops were condemned, although the speak CTS did not show why gambling on exchanges is any more beneficial to the cotton growers than on bucket shops. but the spurious claim was ad- yaneed that buyers of futures on the exchanges supports the spot market.
 At New Orleans no defender of fu- ture gambling raised his voice on the floor of the convention, but in some way press reports went out to the ef- feet that a strong sentiment had de- veloped. or was developing, in the un- ion in favor of amending our anti bucket shop legislation so as to per init gambling on Legitimate ex- changes" whatever they are. This ought not to have been, because there is no such change of sentiment in the union and the spreading of such reports will strengthen the specula- tors and gamblers in their war upon these laws, which will be renewed before the next legislatures.
 As a whole however. we believe the New Orleans convention has greatly strengthened the holding and gradual marketing movement; has strength ened confidence in the final outcome for better prices. and we confidently expect to see more cotton held for bet ter prices and a gradual advance in the authorizations Co-Operator.