The Birmingham age-herald., 1909-01-18
MODIFICATION OF
 LAW |S DESIRED E. A. Calvin Says Texas Bucket Shop Law Is Too Rigid FARMERS LOSING BY II Mir. Calvin Believes That Future Trad ing Should Be Permitted In Cot
 ton Exchanges for Benefit
 of the Farmer.

Houston January 17.-(Special)-B. A. Calvin. former president of the state Farmers union of Texas, has issued an open letter to the public in which he urges the modification of the anti-future laws of Texas. The letter is as follows:
 The Farmers union was organized in 1903, and in August. 1so5 I became it's president.
 One of, If not the most vital questions, ever agitated by the Farmers union was the abolishment of bucketshops, and the influence and strength of the Farmers union is proven absolutely when, in their c de avor to abolish bucketshops they not only did so in nearly every cotton grow iue state, which was right and beneficial, but they actually destroyed legitimate speculation in cotton, which was detri- mental, especially to farmers.
 This now proven fact, while contrary Q, en vet to the ideas of few, both in side and outside of the Farmers union, is in reality the only tangible, logical or sensible solution of recent or present low prices for cotton, and if needed leads to
  ton or what is even worse, dissolution.
 The world comedies and history shows that one of the greatest tests of courage is to admit having made mistake, and unwillingness to rectify errors always leads to one ultimate result, disaster. \ Criticism is useless unless a remedy is suggested, which if promptly applied will be useful.
 The remedy is for the governors of all cotton growing states that now have stat utes similar to the anti-option law Tn Texas to immediately and urgently recom- prevent bucketshops operating within their respective states, but will permit the buying or selling of cotton or con- tracts for either present or future deliv- cry for cash or on credit.
 Every voter should constitute himself a committee of one to work in every hon orable way to secure the enactment of such law, as the agricultural and busi- ness interests are mutual, and all citizens are affected to certain extent by the success of failure of the farmer, who is the cornerstone of all commercial pros- perity.
 The Texas anti-future law passed in the senate by the narrow margin of one vote, and was an untried measure enacted in deference to a public demand, originally created by abuses of bucketshops and nat urally encouraged by spinners, that was impossible to stop or even check.
 There are now in Texas approximately 320 Farmers union cotton warehouses, practically all of which were built during my administration as president. and the warehouse idea is correct, not only in theory, but also in fact.
 They furnish the best method of reduc- ing carrying charges, such as damage, | loss in weight, interest storage, insur- ance, and are particularly economical, also a peculiarly essential means of ju- diciously marketing crop requiring a l year to consume, that must be sold at a discount or held for a premium during | the period when, from necessity or choice, 1 the bulk of cotton is pressed for sale. In the years of 1905 and 1906 the Farm 1 ers' union named minimum price of Il 1 cents per pound for cotton and this figure was reached, and was obtained by various l members of the Farmers union, also others.
 | During the time when the minimum | price asked was secured for cotton, trad | ing in contracts was unrestricted, and l subsequent events have demonstrated conclusively that spots and futures are so closely related and absolutely essen- l tial to each other that united they stand I or divided they fall"
 1 The Texas anti-future law became ef- fective July 12, 1907, and on that date ! July New Orleans cotton closed at 12 .S5c, and then steadily declined until April 2S, l 1908, when it sold for S.Hc, or decline l of AZ cents per pound. or s22.6 per bale. l This enormous decline can be attributed l to any cause desired, but the fact remains | that it occurred from the start to the l finish of the greatest holding movement l of cotton by farmers, merchants and their l friends, that ever was or probably ever | will be known.
 That this decline was unjustified is evi- l denced by the fact that during that year | spinners consumed II. .Ss5.OO0 bales of cot ! ton, or s13,0OO bales more than farmers