The Fargo forum and daily republican., 1910-03-18
HOLDING WHEAT.


This is the way the situation looks
to the editor Of The New York Journal
of Commerce:
The government estimate Of the
amount Of last years crop Of wheat
held in reserve by the farmers on the
first Of this month puts it at 1884, 900
bushels, or about 10000, 900 bushels
more than at the same date last year
and 25,000,000 more than in 1908; but
last years crop was larger by nearly
74O00,OOO bushels than that of 1908 and
over 100,000,000 bushels larger than that
OF 1907. Hence 1t might be expected
that the reserve on hand at the begin
ming Of March would be considerably
greater. AS the visible supply in ele-
vators and warehouses was II 600, 900
bushels smaller this year than last. the
actual reserve supply is about 19,0OO,-
600 bushels greater. The popularity
of the situation is the firmness with
which the farmers have been holding
back their supply in the face of ex-
ceptionally high prices. This has put
the trade somewhat out Of joint.
The persistent high price of Ameri-
can wheat and the increased supply
from other Sources have practically
interrupted our export trade in this
staple product and confined 1t to the
domestic market. They have also him
dered the export of -four. which has ac-
cumulated on the hands of millers while
they are embarrassed by the scantv
supply and high price of the material
at their command. The farmers evil
IDENTIFY have been looking for a still
further advance in price and they are
within their right in holding back fer
II, but they are taking considerable
risk in case the new crop promise
should be- bright between now and
when July options will be
expiring. The same expectation that
mas caused a large old crop reserve has
induced considerable increase in
acreage, and If conditions should be
favorable there may be a large in |
crease in this years yield and a break
in prices.
If there is no unlawful combination
among the farmers to restrain or mon
opolize trade in their product thew are
not to be blamed for holding IL for the
best price they think they can get, and
their financial condition seems to en-
able them to do so. But the course
they appear to be pursuing has its dis
advantage for the rest of the country.
as wen as It's risk for them, and there
is one regulating force which ought 90
he allowed to have way by removing
the tariff barrier. When We were pro-
duclng larger surplus for export and
the price was necessarily determined
IN the foreign market, the duty was
doing the producer no good and the
consumer no harm; but, If the duty is
to become really protective, it will have
the same effect as in other industries.
1t will enable the producer to obtain
an inordinate profit at the expense of
the consumer, who Is a much more
numerous person for any particular
commodity.
There is no sense in a protective duty
upon any food product. and that upon
wheat is just now furnishing an object
lesson. If it were removed we should
import very little of the grain except
from the Canadian northwest and that
would merely serve the purpose of
keeping the price within a fair, econo-
mic limit, helping our millers to a freer
and more equable supply of their ma
terial and contributing to our export
trade In the grain and especially in it's
manufactured product, flour. This
would be a general benefit to our peo-
pie and our trade, and would not hurt
the farmers who would be stimulated
and not paralyzed by the competition.
The desire to shirk competition is one
of the worst results of our protective
tariff, and that is at the bottom of the
higher cost of living in this than in |
other countries when it ought to be
lower with a, greater abundance of the
means of living.