Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-02-01


ton as the law indicates, the Farm Board
Is sending its representatives into the
cotton growing States, pleading with the
cotton farmers to reduce their acreage;
but offering no inducement Ior the
farmer to do so. The reduction OF
acreage is necessary, and the farmers
are well aware of this fact; they do not
need a Farm Board Nor Sterilization
corporation to tell them to do SO. what
they have a right to expect under this
law is a real profitable aid in this
emergency
Somebody has bought this surplus
cotton at prices as low as now, or lower
than now, and are offering it for sale
at the present price. which is from $40
to $50 a bale less than the average cost
Of production. Now, in case the cotton
producers do reduce their acreage and
their production SO as to create sub
stantial rise in the price, some one VIII
get the benefit of this increased price
on this surplus now in existence. Why
not arrange under the present law so
that the farmer, the producer of cotton.
who by his reduction in acreage will
not only get the profit on the reduced
crop he makes, but on the surplus as
well?
One of the criticisms of this plan was
that substantial rise in the price of
American cotton would stimulate foreign
production of cotton. which would come
into competition with American cotton.
It is stated in this criticism that the
increase in foreign production, both in
quantity and quality, is now threaten
ing Americas supremacy in the cotton
markets of the world. Statistics fur
nished me by the Bureau of the Census
and the Department Of Agriculture dis
MN fla foo 7IAo TON rNF f,1.
eign cotton in the worlds production
was less in 1880 than it was for several
years previous. The figures as fur
nished me were as follows:
Would Remain Employed.
The per cent of foreign cotton was
434 in 1880, 445 in 1929, as in 1928,
48 in 1924, and in 1923 it was 49.5.
This shows a substantial decrease in
the percentage of world cotton rather
than an increase, so that America has
nearly 60 per cent of the worlds en-
tire production of cotton. and she has
a vastly greater percentage in the quail
ity of the worlds production of cotton.
Another criticism YVES to the effect
that If the farmers were to take this
surplus cotton in lieu of planting cot
ton in 1881 it would leave the laborers
employed in making cotton without
employment. This would not be true,
for the reason that the labor would
still be employed in making foodstuffs
raising live stock and each laborer
would be given share of the profit in
the cotton allocated to the landowner
by the Farm Board. Besides this, it is
hardly to be expected that the land
owner should continue to make cotton
at loss in order to keep labor en-
ployed.
Before making this plan public, I
discussed it with members of Congress
from the ton-growing States, both
Senators and Representatives. 1t was
almost unanimously Endorsed by them.
I subsequently had a meeting of these
Senators and Representatives with GER
tain members of the Farm Board, at
which meeting the matter was fully
discussed. AS a result, the board took
the matter under Amusement, and after
nearly a month of consideration the
cotton representative, Mr.. Carl VIII
liams. in a communication to me, set
forth at length certain reasons why
the board could not put the plan into
practical operation. The objections TO
the plan as set forth by the board were
not convincing to me. more particularly
SO in the light of the declaration of
policy in the act under which the board
was created and the declaration OF the
powers and purposes of the Stabiliza-
ton Corporation, as set forth in the be-
ginning of this talk After being in
formed by the board that, in its opin-
ion, the plan was not practicable, 1
then made public the plan. The re-
sponses by mail and otherwise have
been Overwhelmingly in favor OF its
trial.
Suggested Wheat Action.
I might say in conclusion that If the |
beard were to purchase this cotton, as
the law indicates it should do, only |
very small per cent of the purchase |
price need be furnished by the board, |
as the cotton is splendid collateral for |
the major per cent Of the purchase
money.
I understand that the Grain Stabili-
cation Corporation has purchased large |
amounts of wheat and has already |
advanced the American wheat price |
above the world level Of price. mar |
ket will have to be found for the wheat |
thus purchased and, unless the wheat /
crop of this year is substantially re- |
duced the same condition will confront J
the wheat grower as now confronts the !
cotton grower. Would it not be FEAST |
BILE for the corporation to allocate |
among the wheat producers the wheat J
thus held by it, thereby guarantee |
ing a reduction in acreage and the !
profitable rise in the price of wheat |
during the next marketing season?
I do not see why this plan put into |
operation would not be a solution of
all subsequent overproduction. If car
ried out successfully it will convert an
impending disaster into blessing. 1t |
would guarantee reduction of acreage, |
a reduction in surplus, diversified farm
ing and a profitable return on staple |
crops.