The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1916-12-20
CROP LIENS SHOULD BE 81
GIVEN ONLY FOR CASH

x . q 20 = . s Z sd
The first thing that we believe
ought to be done to reform our credit
system and put the South on cash
basis is to abolish the crop lien sys-
tenn. 1t is an iniquity. Doing mer-
.handising on q crop lien basis is a
form of gambling and is about as i'm
moral and demoralZing to all con-
:erned as any other form of gamb-
ling.
What we need is law saying that
crop liens may be given only in re-
turn for actual cash advanced at the
legal rate of interest, either so much
down or so much per month, leaving
the giver of the lien free to buy at
cash prices wherever he pleases.,
The merchant should stick ITO ! his
job of selling goods. Banking or
financing the farmers business is not
properly his job.
1t has often been said In the past
that the crop lien should be repeated
altogether, but it may De possible to
destroy the evil Of the crop lien with
out destroying the crop lien itself.
And the evil Of the crop lien is this:
that a man is tied up, bound up,/ to
buy from one merchant, and the1aw
fixes no limit whatever to the extra
profit, or interest rate, which this
iiSl lSliiilI NAY cHaISc oii MS nloIlcy
by calling it "time prices" The law
may say it is crime to charge a
man over 6 or per cent per annum
on cash advances, and yet our n1er-
chant friends will admit that it is
possible to charge 60 to 80 per cent
in the form of time prices. And we
ask them to say whether this lis right.
, 1t may be all right for IL man to ask
what he plcases for his goods, when
the purchaser has the privilege of
saying whether he will buy or not,
It it isn't right for any state to let
its citizens be so bound UP that they
cannot choose bit pay whatever is
asked. If that isn't simply a modern
taken. We believe, too, that most of
oar merchant friends are fairminded
enough to say that such system
isn't right, and that if the matter
were properly put to them, they
would be willing to help farmers
change this system.
Nor do we believe our better class
Of merchants, those who are willing
to live ami let live, would suffer by
such a reform.
Suppose man were allowed to get
only cash in exchange for crop lien,
such advances subject to the anti
HSEfy RESTRICTIONS, as we have Sug
gested; what would be the result?
The result would be to put crop-lien
creuit on safe legitimate basis and
tao =. out Of the realm Of gambling.
The lender Of the cash would be pru-
dent-carcful not to risk too much
and the giver - the lien would be
restrained from getting into debt in
ste:,u Of being encouraged to get into
debt, as is now too often the case
:. large proportion of tenants would
therefore get something ahead. In
some cases, of course, men woald not
be able to get sufficient crop lien
credit, bat would have to work
awhi.e ior wages, instead of plung-
ing ahead with an Improbable, half
cultivated crop, but this would be bet
ter for them and better for the state.
If crop lien gambling could only be
abolished ten years we believe thhe
merchants themselves would be al
most unanimous for it's perpetual
abolition. Consider this phase of the
question, Mr.. Merchants: Your pros
perity depends upon prosperous pat
rons, and the crop lien keeps your
patrons poor. The poor fellow doesn't
use proper work stock and machinery
to make good crops; doesn't rotate
ana grow legumes to keep his soil
in condition to make good crops. He
keeps poor and keeps you poor with
him-keeps you making small profits,
as we have said, selling Western