Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1914-10-13
REDUCTION VS.. ELIMINATION
Question Presented on the Floor Of
the Senate Last Week.
CONSTITUTlONALITY is IN QUESTION.
Interesting Debate Between Senators
Johnstone and Melaurin, Develops
Information as to the Necessities of
the Situation and Possible Reme-

SoHHotone anu mCLduTlnI IcNcioPo
Information as to the Necessities of
the Situation and Possible Reme-
dies.
Correspondence The Yorkyills Enquirer
Columbia, October 9.-The fight over
the cotton situation opened unexpect-
edly in the senate on Wednesday in a
hot debate between Senators Johnstone
and McLaurin.
Senator Clifton introduced a resolu-
tion providing for seven acres to the
mule and the debate dragged along all
day, until at the night session Senator
Hardin rose and inquired II any senator
was in favor Of total elimination Of the
cotton crop in 1915. Senator McLaurin
took the floor and said that he was, be-
cause it was the only effective means
Of imparting immediate value to the
cotton crop. Mr.. Hardin then suggest
ed that Mr.. McLaurin introduce a res
olution to that effect, which he did.
Senator Johnstone then said that he
would like to hear a statement Of the
reasons for taking such revolutionary
step.
Senator McLaurin said that he would
prefer to wait later as he was not pre-
pared to jump without preparation into
such grave question. Several sena-
tors, however, insisted upon his going
ahead and Mr.. McLaurin landed at
once into a comprehensive discussion.
He first rapidly outlined the financial
off Of hn ha nf
eral moratorium in Europe, etc. Then
he explained the Aldrich- -Vreeland act
and the new currency law. Calling at
tention to the fact, that when the lat
ter went into operation, that II made
discount Of bills based on cotton, oblig-
atory on the banks forming the various
currency associations, etc. The senate
and many outsiders listened with rapI
attention to the clear, clean cut pre-
sentation of a subject that few under
stood. Then coming down to cotton,
he applied the law and showed conclus-
lively that it all depended on the mar
ket value Of cotton, that If 1t had no
market value, then it was useless as
collateral.
He said that at present cotton had
no established market value. That the
Bank OF England had informed the
mills that they could not furnish gold
to buy cotton; that they must draw
upon their reserves. That there was
visible and an invisible supply Of cot
ton Of 6,23S,000 bales; some Of it was
in Bombay, Calcutta and Egypt; other
cotton was warehoused in the United
States, England, Germany and France.
That as long as this cotton lasted,
there was bound to be limited de-
mand for American cotton. That 1t
seemed to him, that what was needed,
was not gold, but bank credits in New
York, where the debts contracted for
making this crop were due. That
there was a large debt due by New
York to England We should have
state warehouse receipts that We could
exchange for American securities held
in England, and discount them through
the Aldrich- h-Vreeland act and in that
way cancel out debts to New York, by
transfer Of credits on the books OF
the New York banks. This would re-
lieve our banks, which are straining
under the load Of the present crop and
enable them to aid in carrying the sur
plus. That they are absolutely unable
to do so with New York pressing for
settlement. He said that according to
the figures Of Hester, they were esti-
mating this crop at 15 900 900 bales and
the world supply Of 6,23S,000 and 7,000,-
900 Of Egyptian and Indian cotton
would make a world supply Of 2S,6O0,-
900 bales. The consumption for next
year will be, according to best esti-
mates, 14,S00,0 bales, against one Of
2l,000,0 900 bales in times Of peace. This
will leave 13,5OO,O0O bales to go over
in 1916, provided not another bale is
made anywhere in the world. II other
countries produce even 100000 bales,
there will be 100000 bales to supply
demand for 14,800,0 900. Suppose we
cut to eight acres. That will mean at
least 100000 bales in the United
States, so that one year from today we
will have bigger surplus than we now
have. What hope can any man have OF
making a pound Of cotton next year in
the face Of these figures? Whereas
grain and food products were high
and constantly increasing In value.
1t was a powerful speech and made
a profound impression on all who heard
1t.
Senator Johnstone expressed doubts
as to the constitutionality Of such a
law, and denounced it as the result OF
panic and fear. He called upon Sena-
tor McLaurin 20 first show that 1t was
constitutional and predicted that the
people would rebel If such radical ac-
tion was taken.
Friday morning, Senator McLaurin
took the floor again and said that the
law was constitutional That the Fed
eral constitution was a grant Of power
from the states and that all Of the re-
serve rights Of the people were vested
in the legislature, and that for an act
of congress you had to point to the
provision in the Federal constitution
enabling congress to act; but that to
prevent the legislature from acting,
you must show something in either the
state or Federal constitution specif-
cally forbidding such a law. He then
cited numerous decisions Of the courts,
defining what were the police powers
of the state, calling particular atten-
tion to the warehouse case argued by
and Stevenson, before the
supreme court in 1912, in which the
court declared that under the general
welfare clause, cotton came peculiarly
within the police powers. He said the
general welfare clause in the state
Was as broad as neces-
sity, as deep as the love Of Christ, and
a cpm cSiOnata a G the mercy Of God -