The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1913-07-10
TAXING COTTON FUTURES.
What the South Has to Say of the
Tax on Futures.

~ an Stl ! 10
New Orleans Picayune: For some
reason or other the south seems to be
the special victim and scapegoat OF
the present special session Of congress.
The advocates of a law to tax trad
ing in cotton futures out Of existence
having failed to accomplish their pur-
pose by direct legislation, are now n
~deaVoring to accomplish the same our
pose by a rider to the tariff bill. Such
methods are actually against the rules
Of congress, as a tax or futures, being
a regulation Of morals n not a reve-
nue. measure, could actually be ruled
out under the rules If anybody had the
courage to insist upon such a course.
Courage, however, is the one quality
that appears to be woefully lacking in
the present congress-.
A stamp tax of one-tenth of Il cent
per bale would amount to $50 on every
contract, and naturally would be ut
terly prohibitive. The destruction of
trading in cotton for future delivery
would deprive both the traders in cot
ton and the mill owners of the ability
to hedge their sales or purchases, and
all such hedges would naturally be
placed in Liverpool, with the result
that the great English market would
control the price of cotton as absolute
ly as Chicago now controls the price
of wheat or corn. The control OF the
raw cotton market would be a benefit
Of inestimable advantage to the spin
ners OF Lancashire, as it would enable
them to dictate the price which they
would have to pay for their raw cot
ton.
Another feature of the proposal to
tax cotton futures is the utterly unjust
discrimination against n American
industry. while all others are. left I'M
touched, .. -.
Savannah Morning News: The pro-
posed tax on cotton future transact
tons is having a very disturbing eff
feet on those who buy and sell Or in
any way deal in cotton future con-
tracts. A big element in congress,
however, believes that speculation in
cotton futures has an extremely dis
turbing effect on the cotton market,
that in. fact, it tends to keep the price
of cotton down. The effect of the pro-
posed tax would be to practically put
an n to the cotton future business.
That probably Is the purpose of those
congressman who are insisting upon
a high tax IN cotton future transact
lions. 1t is a question if the effect of
the proposed legislation wouldn't be to
keep down the price of cotton, since
the general tendency is to bull rath-
er than bear the cotton market. One
thing, however, is certain, and that Is
.I11oI q SASqh# IL l1lDAACy LlId INV
goes to New York and New Orleans
for speculation in cotton futures, most
Of which remains there, would remain
at home.
Florida Times Union: We think
congress attempts class legislation
when it imposes a tax on cotton sold
for future delivery, and does not inn
pose one on stocks grain or provisions
sold in the same way. And the cotton
grower will turn out to be the goat.
From 10000, 900 to $4,000, 900 bales
of southern cotton are gathered during
the months Of September, October,
November and December. The grow
ers would like to sell it all promptly.
They need the money. The majority
of them have gone in debt to make the
crop, and the merchants who credited
them or the warehousemen who made
advances on the crop need the money.
But the manufacturers do not need
more than 5000, 600 bales during these
four months. They don't care. to pay
out money for cotton months in adj
vance of its use, and they have no
provision for housing in the autumn
enough cotton to last them a year.
So it is easy to figure out. with the
growers in a. hurry to sell and the
manufacturers in no hurry to buy, who
will say that so cents a bale tax. 1T
will come out Of the pockets Of the
cotton planters. The tax will probably
be paid directly by the man who buys,
but he will subtract it from the
price.
Then when the cotton lis actually
transferred, liz it Isl delivered at all,
the government will pay back to the
buyer a tenth of a cent a pound or so,
cents a bale. The buyer will have al
ready taken 1T out of the price. and
will get it back, while the seller, who
has already lost il. will get nothing,
but will go to the expense OF collect
ing and paying back.
The proposed amendment will really
serve to take so cents a bale out Of
the pocket of the maj who grew the
cottoi. and put 1T In the pocket of the
ma who manufactures it into goods.
and the funny part of tiff injustice,
could be funny-is the fact that this
amendment will be added to the tariff
by senators elected by the very men iii
will fleece.
Don't miss Wasesn's $2.98 millinery
sale Friday and Saturday. Advt.