Evening star., 1933-02-20

uncertainty exists as to the practical
results to be achieved by the plan that
Senator Smith Of South Carolina has
introduced for handling the cotton
crop. 1t would provide for a system un-
der which the farmer would share in
any direct profit brought about through
reduction in acreage. 1t calls for giving
the individual farmer an option on cot
ton held by the Farm Board, at pres
ent prices, for each bale by which he
reduces his production of cotton this
year, as compared to last year, up to
one-third Of the total. 1t is esti-
mated that the reduced acreage would
strengthen prices by Autumn, at which
time the farmer would be able to take
his Farm Board cotton at the present
price and sell it at the advanced price.
"Out of the practical abandonment lof
the allotment plan," says the Charlotte
Observer, "there Is turning to Sen
ator Smiths proposition" That paper
observes favorable action by the Senate
Committee on Agriculture and COM
ments: by forcing decrease in cot
ton acreage, the plan would operate In
the direction of an assured higher mar
ket for the next crop. The farmers
would profit in two ways. They would
be paid for reducing the acreage, ana
would get another pay by reason OF the
reduced acreage" -,
Support of Senator Smith In this
matter by Senators George and RuSseu
is recorded by the Atlanta Journal, with
the statement that both of these leg1s-
lators were opposed to tyrannous re-
strictions upon the farmers right TO use
his land as he deemed best, but are
heartily in favor of any plan that
80 o.
cordance with their own freedom and
with American principles" The journal
also declares: THE unanimously favor
able report by the Senate Agricultural
Committee on the Smith bill, which
looks to voluntary reduction of this
years cotton acreage in the interest OF
fairer prices, bears striking witness to
the measures soundness. 1t would never
have won the approval OF so many criti-
cal minds, representing both parties and
all regions of the country, If 1t had in
volved either the constitutional doubts
or the economic heresies which marked
the cotton prohibition plans Of 1884,"
Nothing Is dead sure, but the Smith
plan has an apepal to reason" AYERS
the Columbia Is. CO. State. Comparing
it with a proposal made at meeting in
Texas, the State explains as to the lat
ter: "a tentative proposal by Nathan
Adams, prominent banker, was for the
Government definitely to remove g.
100000 bales from the active market
and feed 1t back as the surplus fell
below "a safe carryover.' Immediately
practical questions. dictated by expert
present themselves. Why should the
surplus fall when there is no positive
personal profit promised those who re-
duce? The Smith plan gives that
promise; no other holding plan does
or can SO do which does not carry
provision similar to the Smith plan.
which gives those who do not produce
a stake in the profit from advanced
prices. Suppose the Government takes
10000 more bales or 100000 more
bales off the active market, what hap
pens? Many of us thought once upon
a time that such action would be the
solution But experience in cotton and
other commodities has proved it is not.
The existence of the cotton cannot be
hidden, whoever holds 1t. Ex-
cept under the Smith plan, cotton
growers would have no interest In the
stored cotton
''The PLAN" in the opinion of the
Houston Chronicle, "offers prospects OF
considerable good, invites little If any
loss. and, in SO far as effective, would
tend to turn the Southern farmer from
his enslavement to the one-crop system.
From which facts 1t is easy to conclude
that the plan should be given a trial.
We need not bank on 1t saving the
country, or even the farmer. But any.
effort seemingly assuring us a net good,
however small, is not to be ignored In
these days" The Oakland Tribune sug-
gests: IF the plan works. cotton will go
up and the surplus win go down. Wheat
growers viii be interested to know that
has been introduced.