The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1911-09-13
FooLINF THE FARMER.

Soetoh, ihuiSTeihS ueloiioTatiou III tuo
crop. has CAUSED no little surprise
among those not aware that by others
than the planters these government
reports are not trusted. BY "the trade"
they are usually discounted, for "the
trade" has methods of its own for
ascertaining the condition of the crop.
1t has come to pass that no one trusts
the government reports and they are
utilized only as an excuse not accent
ed as reason
But it may be still more surprising
to our cotton planters to learn that in
other sections of the country the fact
that the reports gathered by the gov
ernment are sent in by men who are
themselves interested in the cotton
crop is taken as the foundation for
doubling the impartiality of, the re-
ports. This comment from the Spring
field Republican the weIl-posted New
England paper lis case in point:
But 1t is worth noting that hard
ly anybody is taking either the private
or the government reports at their
face value. The cotton market responds
| feebly. 1t is a sensational develop
ment, but the market refuses to act
sensationally. And the reason is that
the concerted movement among the
| cotton-growing interests to hold back
the crop and force higher prices has
destroyed confidence in these reports
of condition. We have even had the
Southern representatives in congress
giving their influence to this move
ment-the/very men who have been
loudest in denouncing the trusts and
demanding that all restraints of trade,
| however reasonable or inconsequen-
tial, shall be branded as criminal un-
der the antitrust act. The Dallas
| (Texas) News has something worth
quoting on this whole business:
If anyone should question whether
nice sense of propriety is shown by
those congressman who join in urging
| farmers by concerted action to sell
none of their cotton for less than l3
cents pound, we would say that the
question is at least debatable Espec-
| tally would that be true if those giving
the advice have, in other circum-
stances, proclaimed the conviction that
no restraint of trade can be reason
able or defensible.
"And both the government and these
private crop-reporting agencies have
to rely for their information as to cot
ton conditions on men closely related
to the planting industry. How much
| are their reports worth when made
| under the stimulus of this concerted
movement, helped along by the politi-
cal leaders of the South, to obtain
higher prices than the trade would
otherwise pay?
We can now see the mischief re-
sulting from such arbitrary interfer-
ences with the natural laws of trade.
| In this case there is the strong possi-
bility of a reactionary effect more
damaging to the cotton growers than
the trade laws they would set aside.
The crop may have been damaged
quite as badly as represented, but the
trade has been made skeptical and
cotton may thus sell for some time at
lower prices than the actual conditions
warrant. The lesson should not be
lost on the cotton belt. These agita-
tions to hold cotton for this or that
high price never in the long run can
help the planters, and may, as in this
case hurt them"
Those leaders who have perennially
urged upon the cotton planters to hold
cotton for Il given price have never
seemed to understand that If their adj
vice should be generally acted upon
the fact would be known to the con-
sumers as quickly and as accurately
bales held is easily ascertained ard it
is the available supply, not the supply
In the market. which fixes the price of
any commodity, not cotton alone. Fol
lowing the present agitation for the
holding of cotton, therefore, we have
just such comments as the above, in
dicating that the movement is not only
we'll understood but that it's effect is
being discounted just as the effect of
the government crop reports is dis
counted.
To hold for a given price is at best
merely temporary relief from low
prices; solid organization, compactly
| knit together, might be able to secure