The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1919-08-16

/ There is considerable critiei SIN in I
some of the papers Of the state regard
ing the government guarantee of wheat
prices and the. discussioh is ssof such a
nature s hat the consumes may gain the
impression that The present high prices
of the necessities of life are attribnt
able to this cause. Therefore, a brief
review of the government S control of
wheat prices may. serve to clear. up
some misunderstanding which seem to
be prevalent.
In the fall of 1916 and the spring of
1917 the farmers of the United States
sowed crops of winter and spring wheat
they expected to sell in the world S mar
kets at "a price determined by the
world S relative supply and demand of
this commodity. In times past a large
world wheat crop had brought the pro-
Queer prices ruinously low; on the 9th
er hand, short crops had brought, higher
prices and recoupment. The crop of
1917 was short and the demand large
for the countries engaged in the war
with Germany. In the spring of 1917
May future wheat sold for 1913 per
bushel on the Chicago market, when
trading in futures was suspended.
In August, 9l917, the President, under
authority given him by the food con-
troll act appointed a commission of
eleven men to determine what was a
fair price for wheat. In the words Of
Mr.. Hoover, g These men came to the
unanimous conclnsion that $3.50 for No.
| Northern, at base markets represent
led q fair average profit to the farmer
and the Food Administration was di-
rected by the President to maintain
that price Although this price was
ST. per bushel below the price for which
wheat of the 1917 crop had already sold
and although Mr.. Hoover stated in a
public address that he agreed entirely
with the contention of some farmers
that they would have received So and
perhaps SO per bushel for wheat had
it not been for the restraints imposed
by the government, there was never
theless no substantial body of complaint
from wheat raisers, even though III
some sections of the country the fixed
price resulted in an acrlal loss to the
grower, and at certain periods of the
year a farmer who sold his wheat could
not buy back corn or barley for cattle
feed at the price which he received for
his wheat. Government price fixing of
wheat in 1917 probably resulted in keep
ipg~in the pockets of consumers and ont
Of the pockets Of farmers from one 10
two billions of dollars.
The food control act carried mini
mum guaranteed wheat price of s. per
bushel for the 1918 wheat crop and the
President fixed the price at 1920, the
same as in 1917, which price was in
creased to 1926 in order to absorb the
% per cent increase in freight rates or
dered by the director general of rail
roads. Concerning the price for which
This crop of wheat might haze sold had
the price not been controlled, Mr.. Hoov-
, er said, altogether the balance of the
! supply and demand for our present
! wheat now looks as though we might
| see wheat at $3.50 per bushel, as it was
| in 1917 if there is a free market =
Therefore. upon Mr.. Hoover 5 estimate
(and no man is in a better position to
make correct estimate) the consumer
!, was again saved over a billion dollars
by government control, which saving
was at the expense of the producer
In August 1918, the National Agricul-
tural Advisory committee, upon which
served as the representative of New
England, was called to Washington tC
advise what, in the language of the
food control. act, would be q reasonable
guaranteed price for wheat. in order tt
assure producers d reasonable profit
The committee heard the evidence ant
reported unanimously that an increas,