, 1924-08-13
FARM
SELLING
By CLIENT C. HAYES
How Organization Benefits
Cotton Growers.

Wnlte, drenched in heavy dew. The
thin white haze that had wrapped the
valley in the darkness slowly rose to
be dissolved in sunshine.
Across the fields came snatches of
song, a bit of conversation, the lifting
note of a whistler. 1t was cotton-pick-
ing season in Louisiana. A blue-eyed
little gir1 with long black braids of
hair tied together with a shoestring
ooked up from her half-filled bag of
cotton. She was listening. From
across the valley came the slow, even
tongs of "A school bell. For three
years she had listened to the ong-
tong-tong of the bell-but school
wasn't for the poor whites; there was
the cotton.
Shed had her l%earnin'. Most four
years of it. That was more'n most
the kids got"-so she consoled herself
and turned again to her picking.
She is only one of IA million children
that King Cotton has cheated out of
an education-out of the joys Of child
hood. On two million cotton planta-
tions boys and girls, black and white;
are the slaves of cotton. Dixie is the
home of more than half of all the
worlds cotton. Its average crop of
1900 900 bales Is double the amount
grown in the remainder of the globe.
Yet, despite this supremacy in world
production the South has kept poor.
Cotton is king. but his throne is being
undermined by the poverty of his king
dom.
EnI. SiXtu ira tho Snnfhnrp gtntnG
ave led with the highest percentage
of illiteracy in the United States, with
the lowest percentage of landowners.
The standard of living among the cot
ton growers is the lowest of any class
OF farmers. For two hundred years
the South has been trying to raise
itself out of its poverty. its illiteracy.
The effort has been wasted.
Discovering the Defect.
In 1920 began the dawn of a new
day. Agricultural leaders declared
that all that was wrong in the cotton
states was their system of marketing.
By changing heir marketing methods
the whole South could be put on a
higher economic plane. Up to his
time the marketing to the producer
meant merely hauling the baled prod
uct from he gin to the merchant with
the crop mortgage or to the public
square, where buyers offered ash.
That was marketing-dumping de luxe.
Three-fourths of the cotton is grown
by h tenants and small landowners
who are always a year behind when
1t comes to money matters. They live
- -.,lN - al.I. -. 49,.
merchants. who take a lien on the crop
as security. At marketing time IL
cotton prices are low the producer is
simply out of luck. He can't afford
TO hold his crop for better prices for his
debtors are demanding. And very likely
If he did hold 1t prices wouldn't inn
prove, for prices on cotton exchanges
are largely manipulated by spectators
and traders. These small
know nothing about the grades or clas-
sifications of cotton. They leave that
to the judgment of the buyers and
buyers are not always honest The
whole system of marketing Is made to
benefit the buyer.
Before the Civil war the outstand-
ing feature in the marketing of cotton
was the English factOrage system.
The factor invariably required the con
signment of h entire crop for the
sale of which he charged n commits
sion. The planters basis of credit
was usually fixed on baleage; on ar
advance of SO many thousand dollars
so many bnles of cotton were re-
quired to be shipped. A penalty com
-.E.-El, ,-., 80. TAr n,rA-, ha1n
short of the contract number. The
system had ~far-reaching results. 1t
established one of the most vicious
circles possible to any industry. 1t
was a business of unusual hazards for
both the factor and the planter. But
the planting end was fundamentally
unsound. 1t couldn't ave stood up
many more years if there had been no
Civil war.
Another result was the concentra-
tlon in a few important cities and
towns of practically all Of the fluid
wealth of the cotton-growIng South.
The interior country which was prac-
tically the sole source of this wealth
was in n state of hopeless economic
dependence on these urban centers.
This condition was moi relieved until
after the mortgage oan companies
went into operation about thirty years
later.
What Brought the Change
For two and a half decades follow
ing 1885 there were some very definite
changes for the better in cotton mar
keting. Local factors still did IA large
part of the business, but under "a modi-
fed system. Local buyers established
themselves in every small town. Local
banks were organized, local COM
presses n warehouses were built.
The market had met the producer half