The commonwealth. (Greenwood, Miss.) 1896-1923, 1919-10-08
FIGURES GIVEN
ARE INCORRECT
MISLEADING AND
Unfair To Cotton Pro-
ducers And All 9th
ers Affected By
PRODUCTION
Of COTTON
CalhOOn Wilson Refutes
Figures Compiled by
Chamber of Com.
(From Mondays Daily

Dear Sir:
l take issue with the article appear
ing in the October 4th edition of your
most excellent newspaper on the av-
erage cost of the production of cotton.
The figures given are incorrect, mis-
leading and unfair to the cotton pro-
duers and all others affected by the
production of cotton, which means ev-
cry one in this section of the State.
The figures submitted are that it
costs, exclusive of rent, 81 100000 to
raise a cotton crop of 20 acres, or just
$4,000 per acre; accepting the figures
of $1,000 an acre rent (much more
than a ten year average) and accept
ing the figures of a yield of 1-3 of a
bale per acre. On this basis, a plan
tation with 1000 acres in cotton, no
rent to pay, would require $4,000 a
year to run on" No mules to buy.
No manager to pay. No improve
ments. No interest. No taxes.
No living expenses. We all
know, however, that a plantation of
this size would not require $5O,0OO.O 90.
a year if every member of the family
bought an automobile and took a trip
to Europe.
l have a friend who is working a
place of about $50 acres, gross. This
includes the wood land, corn and 9TH
err crops as we'll as cotton. On the
Both day of September 1919, he paid
off an Indebtedness of $14, 100000, all
| of which was incurred for running ex-
penses for his place, purchase of
mules and his living expenses. No in
debtedness on or for land. After pay
ing this $14, 100000 he had left 100000
in cash, 27 bales of cotton ginned and
unsold and 35 bales of cotton picked
but not ginned, besides what remained
unpicked. This $14,OOO.OO is a good
fair average of what it costs this year
to run a $50 acre, gross, plantation,
and which includes, as stated, the
purchase of a few mules and his liv-
ing expenses. which are about an av-
erage. He has what he wants but is
not extravagant. 1t figures about
$500 an acre and is above normal,
as is everything else. l asked him
what he thought it cost him to raise
this years crop and with his usual
infectious grin he said compared
with 1914, it didn't cost me a frazzl-
ing damn cent"
I asked another planter, operating
on a larger scale, what valuation he
would place on his property if he knew
that cotton would cost 40 cents a
a pound to produce, using this years
level as a basis, and advancing or de
clining with the cost of other commo-
dities and he replied that he would
sell it for what he could get for it, re-
CARELESS of price.
If any planter or investor had any
idea that 40 cents remotely approach
ed the cost of production of cotton this
year, not one of those numerous high
priced sales of land would have been
made and if those dealing directly or
indirectly with the producers of cot
ton believed that it would or will cost
anything like 40 cents a pound to
raise, on this years level and this
years crop, the price of our Delta
lands would be less than in 1914. The
price Of 100000 an acre n more for
these lands was brought about by the
belief that they could GET 40 cents a
.-,~I co, 49,, 1.ar3, o~o~ ,rl r,ovha
a 3O-cent average for the next five
years, and if such is the case, and it is
only reasonable to so anticipate, these
lands are cheap even at the new val
ues, but they are not cheap at a pro-
duction cost of 40 cents, regardless
of what price cotton might bring. The
figures outlined in your article and
the propaganda behind them, if effec-
tive, would do more harm than good
even should it bring this years crop
up to so cents for middling short cot
ton, because if a planter ever really
believes that cotton is going to cost
him 40 cents a pound, he is going to
make one of two mistakes; he is eth
er going to sell his place at a sacri-
flee or he is going to make the other
serious mistake of planting something
else. We all know that an average
crop at 40 cents a pound means I'M
equalled prosperity. Five years of
such prices as last year and this, re-
CARELESS of short crops, will make this
Delta blossom like a rose and an av-
erage price of $4,000 an acre will be
literally and figuratively dirt cheap.
Our cotton is worth 40 cents a
pound and more, but not for the rea-
sons given in your article, but for the
following reasons:
First: We have had five consecutive
short crops.
Second: The purchasing power of
The American dollar, the English
pound and the French franc have all
decreased.
Third: The South is able to hold its
until the consumer really
--