Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1922-02-25

crop of 1920 totaled 237,437, 900
| bushels, as compared with 279,1 ILL.,
| 900 bushels in 1914, and 344 1926 900
| bushels in 1918. These figures are
typical and significant Of world con-
ditions in general. They fully sus-
! tain the position taken relative to
| the question that there are less than
| normal, ct alone surplus supplies
of food crops and animals available
world at large.
1t is true we can make rather
rapid recovery along these lines, but
the tendency Of the times seems to
be to cut down production to what
I believe to be an undesirable de-
| gree. Certainly every nation and
every state should expect to feed
| it's people superabundantly in times
like these and to so organize it's
agriculture as to provide reason
| able surplus for emergencies. If
| the world should make a sudden
recovery along any particular line
such surplus as now exist either in
| foods or raw materials would be
wiped out almost Immediately. Con-
| sentative and diversified production,
| therefore, not only of food, but raw
materials and manufactured arti-
| cles, would seem to be the wise
and desirable policy to pursue from
this date forward. There will come
time, and it may not be so far
! distant, when there will be a keen
| demand for all Of these articles,
and when those who are fortunate
enough to possess them will reap
a rich reward as a result of their
foresight and industry.
The year 1921 was not a good
crop year in so far as Georgia was
concerned. There is certainly no
very great surplus of any food
crops in our own state. Our sweet
potatoes are only about half a crop.
The number of hogs we own has
decreased by 100000 head. We
have only about 100000 bushels
of corn, and not 90,000,000 as we
were led to believe for some time
by the bureau of crop estimates.
Our cotton is less than half a crop.
| Our peaches, WatermelOnS and musk
melons were bumper crops and
brought excellent prices. Hence
| THEY pIONSu SctN1IIS 81 acc " II1ctlly
localities on that account. If the
| people of Georgia are to be ade-
quately fed, and I mean by this to
include the residents of our urban
communities as well, we must in
crease our harvests either by en-
1arging the yields per acre, which
would be the most desirable practice,
or by extending the number of
acres under cultivation. We can
not hope to be permanently pros
porous or happy unless we feed our
selves abundantly and then have
some surplus for distribution to
other less-favored sections.
The year 1922 should be much
better year for our state. We
should grow more of everything.
This can easily be accomplished by
instituting and following out the
rational cropping systems which the
college has prepared and promul
gated for use in the Piedmont Sec
ton and the coastal plain area of
Georgia. This plan provides for a
transition from the all-cotton to a
diversified cropping and live stock
raising program that can be made
on any farm where the realization
has come home with sufficient
force that the weevil is a real men
ace and one which can not be cir
cumvented save by the institution
of a new agricultural policy on the
part of the landowner. All we need
to do in Georgia to be essentially
prosperous in 1922 is to follow out
a rational and well-defined program
of cropping and live stock raising
that will make our cotton a sur
plus crop. Let the receipts from
it be a circulating medium for the
state of Georgia alone. We can no
longer afford to have a lien existent
upon this crop even before we plant
it which we must pay to the people
who live north of the Ohio river for
the hay, grain, dairy supplies, poul'
try, truck and canned goods they
put up in such superabundance in
that section of the United States
and ship to us for local consumption.
Every dollar we can keep at home is
a dollar saved. 1t is a dollar with
which we can hope to win add
tional prosperity for our people. If
we feed ourselves successfully next
year we can put $3.50, 100000 in cir
culation within the borders of our
own state, which, has gone in pre-
Vious years to enrich the Golfers of
our northern farmers. If we dc
not accomplish this end then we
may not have the money with which
to buy the necessary food supplies,
and if we do purchase these we
must sacrifice our entire cotton
crop to that end. Such a policy
simply means that we are to con.
tinue swapping dollars with the
other fellow without any material
gain to the wealth of our state
Manifestly we can not hope to be
prosperous under any such regimen.
1t is impossible to say, of course,
what the price of cotton may be in
1922, but it would not appear, with
world industries in the condition
they now evidence, that the demand
for the staple would be unusually
keen or prices particularly high.
This statement, of course, is made
as an observation based solely upon
existing conditions. Many things
can happen between now and the
end of next year, but it is certain
that the farmer who has abundant
supplies of food crops from his soil
and plenty of animal foods at his
command is in a very solid and sub
stantial position. Such cotton as he
then grows is assuredly a surplus
crop, and if the price is good his
profits will be accordingly greater.
We should safeguard our cotton
crop in 1922 in every conceivable
way. Insure it against boil weevil
damage as completely as possible.
We can make a good crop at very
reasonable cost under wise and eff
ficient management If prices are
low the grower is then protected
against material loss. If they are
good he will reap a just reward for
his foresight and sound business
Judgment. On the other hand, if
the price remains as it is today, or
even should sink to lower levels