The Waxahachie daily light. [volume] (Waxahachie, Tex.) 1894-current, 1916-02-10
MOTIFS FROM THE FIELD
AND CURRENT COMMENT.
BY BILL cox
,~~~~~~~~~~>~~~~s .


Having once rendered an opinion
on the merits on the state ware
house law renders second effort
somewhat embarrassing. A test OF
the law during tho ginning season
Just closing has thoroughly demon
strated the fact that that portion OF
the law requiring ginners 10 take
out, certify and seal three samples
from each bale ginned is that much
worse than useless I'm proportion TO
the amount II costs In excess OF ben
efits derived therefrom. That a
million dollars "a a conservative es-
innate OF the annual cost OF the OPP
Grafton OF this law seems TO be con-
ceded by all. That the farmers OF
the state have derived no perceiya-
BILE benefit from the law IL agreed
by all except few high salaried
public pap suckers at Austin. We
are therefore forced to conclude that
this law - utterly, not only useless.
but million dollar damage TO the
cotton raisers and ginncrs OF the
state BY the provisions OF the law.
next ginning season ginners viii Be
required to fully cover all cotton In
the bales. to do which ginnera tell
me. will require extra help. II such
il the case there will be another
addition OF another possible million
dollars tax on the cotton growers.
Two million dollars seems n pretty
high price for the farmers TO pay
without ono cent OF benefit. They
tell us that they will get back the
extra cost on bagging in tho weight
IL will add To their cotton bales. Is
there any one in Texss so innocent
as to believe that IL the weight OF
bagging and ties should be increased
on cotton that spinners would neg
lect TO deduct such taro from the
price OF cotton? The consumers of
the world are not buying bagging
and ties but are in the market for
the fleecy staple. People who are
so innocent IS to think tho extra
weight of bagging and ties would be
paid for as good white cotton, could
be made TO believe that the can
comes free when they buy toma-
toes. Another feature OF this law
does not seem TO be known TO peo-
pie generally aud that ia that after
the present year the warehouse com
missioners have the authority TO die
tate to the farmers and ginners con-
corning the kind OF bagging to be
used in wrapping every bale or cot
ton to be produced in the state OF
Texas. What do you think OF tho
pass we have come 10 when the pol
iticians who don't know the differ
erence between juts bagging and
muslin undertake To say 10 the farm
ers OF Texas. you must not select
the wrapping for your sotton. We
will attend to that" Had Il ever
occurred TO you that this Law gives
these gentlemen one OF the finest OPP
portunities Imaginable to do some
fine grating when the bagging fac
tories ask them TO select wrapping
for four or five million bales OF
Texas cotton. Talk about the abridg-
ment OF personal liberty. tho auto
cratic tyranny OF tho health officer
is not IN 1t with these gentlemen. l
am aware OF the fact that the peo-
pie OF Texas are usually averse to
a special session OF the legislature.
but since they understand and have
become acquainted with this statu-
tory monstrosity. | am sure they
would willingly bear the expense or
an extra session IL assured OF relief
and believe that those members
who refused to grant relief last year
by this time have heard from their
constituents to be ready 10 change
the provisions OF the Law. For my
part, would not hesitate q mo-
ment TO vote for tho repeal OF the
whole statute. with the possible ex-
eeption OF that portion which pro-
vides for the assistance In market
ing. and have failed 10 notice
where any appreciate effort has been
made I'm that line. II the farmers
and ginners OF the state will make
united effort. IL Ia possible for
them TO bring 10 bear such an In
fluence as will result In the amend
ment or repeal OF this Ubiquitous
political pabulum before the grow
ing and harvesting OF the 1916 cot
ton crop. IL is at least worth the
effort and | am willing TO do what
ever you demand In the premises
commensurate with my power.