The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1915-12-29

times compose the larger part of the
warehouse stock of the exchange
and were delivered on contract, to
the fact that tenders of cotton I'M
der contracts did not indicate the
qualities to be delivered and to the
further fact that several weeks
sometimes elapsed before the person
who was to receive the cotton knew
the grades rendered to him. This
act undertook to correct these evils,
and after about a year of opera
ton / have nj hesitation in saying
that it is meeting its purposes not
only to the satisfaction of producers
but also to the great body of men
engaged in the buying of cotton. The
act is constructive and regulatory,
and not destructive or Oppressive.
But this act needs to be supple
merted. Although the new stand
ard for cotton necessitated under
the act has been adopted by twenty
eight of the leading spot markets
of the South, there are many other
smaller markets which ignore it's ex-
~istence, and cotton buyers in many
instances continue to purchase cot
ton without reference to any stand
ard. or purchase it on a much higher
standard than the official standard.
Thus by purchasing OF a high stand
ard and selling on a lower one,
they are able to make profits at the
expense of the producers. The
passage of the cotton standards bill
would prohibit the use of any other
standard than that established by
the national Government in the in
terstate and foreign m of
the United States and would make
the use of our standards practically
universal. The early passage of
the cotton standards bill introduced
by Mr.. Lever and ~favorably reported
to the House would not only great
ly facilitate larger production but
also juster distribution, as would
the passage of a bill intended to
establish uniform grades in grain
and to encourage trading in grain
under these standards. So far as
I can see, it could hurt no human
being to have a standard for farm
products established by law which
should be universally known and uni
versally used in trade; and, while
with such standards, many farmers
acting individually would still be
handicapped in trading, many would
come TO know the quality of their
product, and the formation of asso-
Citations which might employ expert
representative members to deal on
an equal basis with the buyer, could
and would be formed.
But still at least two other things
are essential which relate more es-
pecially to the business of farm fl
nance. I refer to the proposals for
a system of licensed and bonded
warehouses, and for a system of
rural credits. A striking weakness
in the present system of marketing
cotton and other products is the lack
of adequate storage facilities and
of a warehouse receipt available as
collateral for loans. 1t is not i'm
probable that there are enough ware
houses in the South to house in
some fashion all the cotton produc-
ed; but these warehouses are not
equally distributed, and many of
them are operated under such con-
ditions as to render the receipts is
sued by them undesirable as collat-
eral. Furthermore. the laws of
the various States are not uniform,
and in many instances the banks
have no adequate protection when
advancing money on warehouse re-
ceipts, and capital becomes suspi-
cious Of all receipts as collateral.
1t seems to me that it is unfortunate
that the warehouse bill introduced
by Mr.. Lever in to the House at the
last session of Congress, or that the
substitute bill reported by him from
the committee and passed by the
House, did not become a law. Fav-
orable action on one of these meas
ures at the ensuing session of Con-
gress would seem to be desirable.
Such a measure would promote the
better storage of cotton, increase
the desirability of cotton receipts as
collateral for loans, and would
greatly assist in financing the cot
ton crop and other crops of the
Union. While it is permissive. not
compulsory, it seems highly likely
that because of the greater value of
the receipts that would be issued
under the law. storage companies
generally would take advantage of
the measure and the system would
speedily be put into operation. And
it seems equally desirable that each
State instead of attempting to regu-
late independently the operation of
storage companies should enact what
is known as the uniform warehouse
receipts act. This law has been in
operation for several years in Louis
lana and Tennessee, and has just
been enacted in Alabama. 1t would
not conflict with the proposed Fed
eral law but would supplement it
admirably. If the various States
should enact this uniform law. and
Congress should see its way clear to
pass the warehouse bill, it would be
possible to standardize the condi-
tons under which cotton is handled,
marketnd and financed and IF the