The Lexington advertiser., 1913-07-25
Future Gambling.

Perhaps it is because we are a young
nation, where there is nothing fixed or
settled or crystallized, that we do It.;
but certainly in no other country in the
world is authority conceded and guild
ance asked as IN this land of the free
and home of the brave. Let man
become successful note shaver or a
three pail banker, and we go to HIM
with perfect confidence and ask his
opinion on the science of finance. Let
an Upton Sinclair write reporter 8
story, and publish it in book form,
exposing the ugly conditions in the
packing house plants, and he at once
becomes a high authority on literature.
Let a woman harpoon passing fad,
and write few articles on it that have
ephemeral vogue in a magazine, no
matter how trashy, and we make. of
her q great authority and critic. And
so on. Just now the EeX-presdent OF
one of the big cotton exchanges of the
country is being exploited as an au-
thority on gambling in cotton futures,
and he tells us that the proposed Clark
amendment, that seeks to tax dealing
in cotton futures out of existence. will
ruin the cotton growing industry.
With dogmatic assumption this "au-
thority" tells us that to destroy the
privilege of hedging will put the
cotton broker and the cotton buyer
out of bus ness, and compel the planter
to sell direct to the spinner. Admit
ting, for the sake of argument, that
he is right, there are those who will
esteem this calamity a blessing in dis
guise. 1t requires no elaborate or pro-
found skill in economics, but only CON-
mon sense, to show that any plan or
law that will reduce the number OF
middlemen or manipulators will be a
great economic saving, and a preven-
tion of great economic waste BY the
elimination of a vast army of cotton
brokers and cotton buyers each Of
whom must take toll and ind sup
port, millions of dollars in useless ex-
pense would be taken from the shout
derLs of the cotton growing industry.
What the farmers call cotton pullers
small buyers, who burrow into bales
of cotton and extract therefrom So
called samples cost the farmers OF
the South every year would aggregate
an enormous sum. These men renre
sent great economic waste, because
they are doing unnecessary and ex
pensive work, They buy that which
they do not want, and have no use for
They are middlemen who take toll
from a commodity passing through
their hands, when there is no reason
for its passing through their hands
and this toll and accompanying waste
the farmer has to pay. If the farmel
would sell direct to the spinner, tht
man who needs the staple, and who il
going to manipulate it and make use
of it, this expense would be done ava!
with, and the farmer would receive
more for his cotton, while the spinne
would pay less.
Under a direct sale policy each ball
of cotton would sell on its own merits
and bring to the producer its actua
| worth. Under the present system
number of planters ship their cottol
to chosen factor or broker, to be sold
and the money placed to their respect
i've accounts. Naturally the grade
differ, some being higher and other
lower. 1t follows that the good cottol
is used as a raft to tioat the inferio
grades, when sold in large lots. an
the producer of the higher grade re
ceives less than is due him. By sys
tenn of direct sale, drayage, storage i
warehouses, insurance and commission
would be saved toathe farmer, and any
one who thinks that these items d
net mean much knows little of tn
business or of arithmetic. The grea
curse of the country today is its para
site army of middlemen, who live an
thrive and grow rich on the toll the.
take from the products of the countr.
passing through their hands. This
the reason why the chicken for whic
the farmer receives 20 cents costs tn
consumer $1.50 when it is metamor
phosed into a ''bird" and set befor
him in hotel or restaurant. The pro
ducer and the consumer are too ia
apart. The product must pass throug
the hands of too many middlemen be
fore it reaches the consumer, and eac
middleman increases it's price by TAX
ing something from it, and this increas