Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1921-05-23
SELLING FUTURES.

Several bills which has been proposed, and some OF
which have been introduced in congress, prohibit the
selling Of grain or other agricultural products which, at
the time of sale, are not owned by the seller or actually
being grown by him. There is in these bills an expression
OF the widespread belief that trading in futures In asri-
cultural products tends to lower the price of those prod
ucts, and is therefore detrimental 10 the interests Of the
producer. The subject has quite commonly been treated
as ii there were something immoral in selling what one
doeH not own. VA
The selling OF futures is not confined, and never hAa
been confined, to the great trading exchanges, nor has
it been confined to agricultural products. 1t mas m
cluded those products, and it has included nuch OF Inc
work of the exchanges. but 1t has from time lmmenorA1
been a part of the recognized activities of trade.
Today the farmer finds a market for a large share
Of he dairy products through the agency of the cream
cries and storage concerns. Some years ago this wa
not 80. and the marketing of all dairy products wa .
very hit-or-miss affair. Merchants and large individual
consumers, such as hotels. needed butter and eggs, out
could not so into the country after them. Farmers pro-
duced these things, but often it was impossible for them
to take the time to carry them to town. Then appeared
the middleman to fill the gap. On Monday, perhaps, he
made the rounds Of his city customers and aseertalned
from each how many pounds of butter and how many
cases of eggs would be wanted on Friday. Contracts were
made for the delivery of the goods at stated prices
buyer and seller using their knowledge of general market
conditions as a basis on which to base the price. Then
the peddler went out into the country, calling sometimes
at farms, and sometimes at little country stores, buying
thst which he had already sold. and making the best
bareair he could for it. Was there anything improper
iii this? It was a practice very commonly Followed, ana
IT seems to be advantageous to all persons concerned.
Lumber has been sold quite largely in just the same
nnannef. A dealer would make contracts with a large
number Of factories for the delivery Of lumber OF various
kinds and grades At a designated time Having COM
plst1d his sales and checked up his totals. he would
ma frat his sales would warrant him in buying the entire
outp,t Of ssverl small mills in various parts of the
E10nuu1rx He would deal with these mills ON the basis
of 49, actually made. and he could afford to pay better
mns than he could have done II he had yet to take
- chance Of selling. Nobody wa injured BY this
rrnoaaL although the dea,er was selling lumber that he
AZ lot own and which, at the time Of the 'ale. nhisht
Gaauding uncut In the forest
s@aTnAee are bit samples OF the manner In witch a1ss
6k f,aree have been made At ali tinneA Tho practices
- akeen followed because It was mutually oonvenfenf
l EAxantaSeous. Perhaps the prohibttion Of such aiss
SSEssnahlie e~1ehangas may be made TO stand. But without
S1acancAllation OF rights which. the constitution GUAR
16a1A2 u the Individual, there can be NO effecHve pro
TTasgi1onn sof the right OF individuals to make contraets ~
Aeitvssz no4mAtter shsthsr the propTty q The
S2Ey f contrAc4 HsSwnsd " the ssnar . ~