Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1911-04-28

There seems to be still a lingering
belief in the minds of a large number
of southern farmers, fostered through
erroneous interpretations of various
facts and doctrines which have been
put before the public, that If cotton is
to keep its present price, or go higher.
there must be some curtailment OF
production on the part Of the southern
producers. Even The Yorkville En-
quirer, which is recognized as remark
ably clear in it's Interpretation of pres
ent day situations, seems to still mar
Dor some doubt on this question:
Greenville News.
After thanking the News for its very
complimentary reference, The Enqui-
rer begs to say that it Is not so much
concerned about the probable results
of overproduction of cotton as 1t is
about the possibility of a relapse to
the old conditions under which the
farmers of South Carolina were not
producing their supplies at home. We
have expressed the opinion more than
once, and we still hold to that view,
that cotton could not be profitably
raised even at thirty cents a pound,
except in connection with the raising
of home supplies. We agree with the
proposition that prices are ultimately
controlled by the laws of supply and
demand: we agree that the excess of
the demand over the supply Is proba-
bly, greater now than it has been for
good many years. but the relation
of the supply of actual cotton to the
actual demand for manufactured
goods is not the only consideration
that affects the price. AS pointed out
in an editorial on the subject Tuesday,
and as has been pointed out by others,
the terrible conditions Of eight or nine
years back when the price Of cotton
was below the cost of production, were
not the result of supply and demand
so much as they were the result of
trying to raise cotton without first
providing for the raising Of supplies
at home. During that period, the in
dustry was labOring under condition
in which the demand for manufac-
tured products was far beyond the ca
pacity of the mills to supply and the
crop was greater than the mills could
consume. AS the result the mills were
able to fix the price Of the raw pro-
duct as we'll as the manufactured pro-
duct, and they fell into the error of
paving too little for the raw product.
AS the result of that situation capital
on the one hand went into the multi
plication of mills until they glutted
the then available markets, while on
the other hand the labor end of the
proposition was forced to devote itself
to the production of something to eat.
The farmer then and there learned
that a full corn crib furnished the
very best possible means of guaran-
teeing a fair price for cotton, and he
has been developing along that line
ever since. AS we see the whole sit
uation, there is no danger whatever of
an overproduction Of raw cotton so
long as the farmer can keep 1t pro-
tected behind a well-fortified larder.
IL may ne poSSiple W piouuNS iii't
than the mills can manufacture or the
world can consume; but the unusable
surplus can no longer be made to fix
the price of the body of the crop. I'm
der the conditions outlined, we do not
think that a crop of fifteen million
bales would cause & ruinous break in
prices, but on the other hand. in the
absence of an abundant supply of
home produced food for man and
beast, the south would have to give up
even a twelve million bale crop for
less than 10 cents. OF course, twelve
million bale crop would cost the spin
ner more than that; but little actual
good would the high price do the pro-
ducer.