Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1921-09-10
THE EDITORS DESK

H. G. Hastings, Atlanta seedsmen, recently
wrote card for The Tri-Weekly Journal in
which he advocated crop Investigation as a
plan more practical than regulatory legisla-
ton for curtailing cotton acreage.
reader of the paper disagrees with Mr..
Hastings in various particulars and has writ
tie nthe following letter telling his views:
Wrightsville, Ga.
The Editor Atlanta Tri-Weekly Journal: I
have just been reading Mr.. Hastings plan for
cutting the cotton crop and note his plan Of
diversifcation, which is good and which L
heartily indorse so far as it reaches. also
note his idea as to the necessity OF legislation
to prohibit the planting Of cotton and the
expense such legislation would incur to the
state. This is the part which l can not under
stand as Mr.. Hastings sees 1t. OF course,
am not posted as to whether such legislation
would be practicable or not, but 1 have been
studying this question for several months and
have already written my views to Governor
Hardwick and Congressman Larsen while the
Georgia legislature was in session. l know
that it would incur some expense to the state
to enact and enforce such laws by the state,
but I fully believe that this cost would be
but small sum when compared with the
present cost to the farmer trying to raise cot
ton in Georgia under boil Weevil conditions
| at or anywhere near present prices Of cotton.
Every live and honest farmer is anxious to
meet his obligations and make a success in
an dbest efforts, as he sees it, to accomplish
this end. And cotton has long been consid-
cred the money crop Of the cotton belt by
both the farmer and the business man, and
it is very hard for the farmer to make up his
mind and get away from it when he wants to
meet his obligations, and his creditor, who
probably has no experience or idea of the cost
to the farmer Of raising cotton, feels that this
is the only way for the farmer to raise the
money.
Ac tote oh r ooIr DIV DIV
ernor Hardwick and Congressman Larsen my
views as to how to cut the crop and extermi-
nate the boil weevil, and it is this: am told
that the boil weevil can not and will not
exist on anything very long except the cotton
plant. If this be true and the national con-
gress can enact laws prohibiting the planting
Of or allowing to grow any cotton east of
the Mississippi river for the year, say 1922,
and west of the Mississippi for 1928, then
again east Of this river in 1924 and west Of
it in 1925, it would eXterminate this pest in
four years and neither section of the country
could be seriously affected By this plan we
would not only stamp out the weevil, but we
would allow the present surplus of cotton to
be used up and thereby materially increase
the demand which would increase the price
at the same ratio and at the same time allow
sufficient amount to be made to supply the
actual necessities for the four years. If it
is not PRACTICAL to enact a national law along
this line I am fully convinced that a state
law prohibiting Inc plduIlHS OF growing VI
any cotton in the state of Georgia for period
of two years should be best for both farmer
and business man.
Now, as to the cost of enacting and main
tanning such law. No one who has not kept
a record or watched it very closely can hardly
estimate the cost to the farmer of raising
cotton in this state under boil weevil condi-
tions. I am but small farmer but l am
connected in a small way with both farming
and other lines of business, and know that
have lost enough moeny in the last two years
on my own cotton farms trying to raise cot
ton to have maintained this law in my county
-Johnson--for the full two years. OF course,
I know that many will say, why did you do
it? Why did you not cut out cotton this
year? This is the burning question now, and
could be answered in too many ways to emu
merate here, but believe every cotton farmer
can answer this for himself.
If it is true that the boil weevil can not
exist except on the cotton plant and our gov
eminent would use the money spent each
year in fighting the weevil on the plant,
whether state or national, to enact and main
tain laws to prohibit the growing of cotton
long enough to eradicate the weevil, the ben
eft to both farmer and business man would
be almost inconcevab1e at this time.
I suppose that it is Mr.. Hastings idea to
let every farmer use his own free will and
judgment as to when to leave off the cotton.
OF course, one view Of this looks democratic
and right, but so long as we do this, one
farmer will leave it off one year and another
the next year and we will go along in the
same old rut fighting the weevil and spending
untold sums of money at the expense Of our
live stock and other crops, and trying to
make cotton while the weevil remains and
saps the life out of every other industry as
we'll cotton.
When we are sick and call a physician we
try to get the best available, and do not tell
him the kind of medicine we will take. We
call him because we believe that he is our
superior in his line and knows better what
we need. Hence we rely on his judgment and
take the medicine he gives us with full sat
isfaction. When we elect our lawmakers,
whether state or national we try to get the
best available and should allow him to study
these questions for the masses and not for
the classes.
This letter is written solely for the pur-
pose Of exchanging ideos and getting the best
| plan to handle the south8 greatest pest, the
| boil weevil, and l am fully convinced that
| laws to prohibit growing cotton is the quick
est, easiest and by far the cheapest and most
! substantial plan. First, national law as
outlined above If this is not practicable
then state law and ask as many adjoining
states as will to join in and make the ter
ritory covered as large as possible.
Very respectfully,
| J. H. ROWLAND.
On Shutting PROSPERITY Out
T7HE country's best business judgment, re-