The Birmingham age-herald., 1920-05-06

been trying to get through an amend ment to the cotton-futures act which l regard as most important but against which highly organized propaganda has been carried on by strong outside influences.
 1 Cotton. notwithstanding it's sectional culture and production, is not a sec tional product but is a national prod uct, of national use, of international use, and 1t is the highest duty of Con- gress to enact remedial legislation caring for it against selfish interests, particularly that class of interest which, while adding nothing to the in trinsic value of 1t, yet within the law | organize to get undue gain.
 Cotton is the only agricultural prod !, 4ct where the gamblers interest is recognized by law, and by law should be restricted to the smallest possible | opportunity to levy tax where no tax is due. The cotton exchanges are the only aggregation of business manage ment which, proponing to take the functions of the economic law of sup ply and demand. to take the functions of the, worlds, political economy, an l economy where use makes the price, and which law is as old as commerce, and by pure egoism ensemble unto themselves the power to create a price, the power to govern prices, and the power to establish value.
 This assumption, if not connected by experience with their business rela- tions with the facts regarding their business as put forth by them and run ming through years, would be pro- nounced insolent and yet this is just what the cotton exchanges in their claimed relation to the price fixing and consequent value of cotton. the different grades of it, assume for them selves, and if remedial legislation is attempted which disturbs this power to get an increment where no incre- ment is due, to reap a harvest from the other mans crop, they cause to be threatened dire results.
 H. 6 B. Beer, cotton commission merchants, New Orleans Exchange, have issued circular containing statements regarding the effect of the proposed amendment to the cotton-f flu lures act on the cotton trade, particu- larly on lowgrade cotton, and sent this broadcast through the cotton states and Congress. In this circular is given a set of figures on different styles of low-grade cotton proposing to show that even the present amend ment to the Smith-Lever bill enacted a year ago had greatly depressed the value of low-grade cotton, causing serious loss to the holders of very large quantities of cotton not included in the tenderable grades.
 { Sapposing that H. x B. Beers are | to hn af,1ic ccif r,anf chants, we will cite them to the law of supply and demand, will cite them | that the price of every grade of cot 1 ton is made in the markets of the world and not in the exchanges. Ii the exchanges made the prices, then by the law we should multiply the number of exchanges until we had al least one in each cotton county, ther by law we would make the exchanges good-I mean make them operate ir the interest of the farmer and le' them make the price of every grade of cotton and let them say how much difference there should be be- tween the grades, high and low. anc see that the spinners- bought their al, iotment at their prices and at stated differences. I put this down bare. faced to let H. x B. Beer understand that their statement is camouflage so thin that 1t ought not to deceive that large class of credulous citizen: who buy the medicine which makes the hair grow straight.
 The schedule of types and prices and comparison that H. & B. Beer made and which I simply make a part o1 this address. and the difference be- tween those grades which they infer entiate was caused by being outlawef i from the exchanges, l mean by law are not now tenderable grades on tho exchanges. They use good ordinary as being now 13.5 cents below mid ding. This extreme difference be cause it is not now tenderable H. G Hester official statistician, states that low middling is 7.5 cents below mid ding the greatest difference ever known, and yet low middling is 1T the tenderable grades. and by the very fact that it is tenderable, accordins to the logic of H. & B. Beer, should Influence it's value, but it does not; i can not.
 H. & B. Beer also state that middlins tinges. which are not tenderable, bu because of the intrinsic value is 4% cents above low middling, and there fore because of it's high relation te the tenderable grades should be ten | derable If the law of supply anc demand, if the markets of the worlc make the price, if political economy is true, then this reasoning of Il. B Beer either emanates from minds un- acquainted with the first construc- tive principles of trade. or if appre- ciative of it's true deceptive influence because of it's appeal to the cupidity oi the holders of low grade cotton. ther it becomes comparable to the vile in, tent of Iago whispering into the ears of the Moor. but with this difference the exchange propaganda has for it's purpose loot from that most oppressed class of our fellow citizens, the cot ton farmer.
 H. X B. Beer state that our present tenderable contract, of 10 standard types is too contracted: that We ough' to go back to the 21 grades. If hay ing the right to tender on the ex- changes increases the value, why have any restrictions on the grades at all, Why not let any grades be rendered That is the true logic of their req Soning.
 As commission house, they nc doubt remember the fat times aftei 1890 and on through 1906-l91o, wher there were tens of thousands of bales of the lowest grade cotton at differ ences made by themselves assembled by the exchange members for the pur- pose of footing the market, and it was a scandal. In the immensity of Its levy on the cotton trade the present motor hold-ups are tame. It became national scandal and an attempted protective law was provoked Under the loose management of the Bureat of Markets the intent of this law was