The times-news. [volume] (Hendersonville, N.C.) 1927-current, 1934-05-19
NEWSPAPERS OPINION
ExpERfMENrs-AND RESULTS

1t may be that the united otaIes WI" D'
to continue the effort to restrict production ny
governmental action, particularly in agrieuieure
The desperation of farmers faced with mouh.iiis
SURPRISES may demand from tarmer-cohS'i0u
administration new experiments as fast as 'he 0'N
ones fail But if we are to have these laoofa'oS
tests it is imperative that their results De lu"S
and accurately understood ~,
When the Bankhead Act was passed us au'o-
Gates declared that it was demanded Dy ~ PEI
cent, of the cotton planters whose opinions 'i''
Department of Agriculture has been aole " W.
tain. There is unquestionably general OPINION
IN the South that last years powing-under pro-
Gram beIped the cotton farmers. Yet 1T Is hardly
conceivable that either this opinion or the demand
fo4 tho gankhead Act could have survived an ade-
or.te understanding of what was actually accom-
nlsbed for cotton by the domestic allotment plan.
Four things have happened to cotton Some
,vsra MAINLY results of crop curtailment; others
were at least influenced by collateral causes flrst
,yas a slight increase in cotton produced as COM
pared with the 1882 crop. This gain IN production
despite the curtailment of acreage was que 10 III
tensiye use of fertilizers and coed growing condl
TONS The advocates of restriction believe that the
Bankhead Act by limiting bales rather than acres,
has plugged this loophole, but that can be proved
only by actual test.
Second, large numbers of tenant farmers were
throwns off the land. DR.. Calvin b. Hoover WIN
was employed by the AAA t. make study Oh 'ne
curtailment program reports that the acreage ie
ducton program created motive for reducing 'lie
number of tenants on farms" There is every prop
ability that under the Bankhead bill thousands
more will be thrown out of work. for much less
labor will be required to harvest its maximum OIL
10 600, 900 bales than has been needed to handle
the normal crop of about 100000 bales.
Third, there has been in the world Gncluding
America) far greater use of foreign than of
American cotton From the first of August to the
first of April 1.-THE first eight months of the cur
rent consuming season. the increase in the worlds
use of foreign-grown cotton was twelve times as
great as the increase in the buying Of American
cotton How much of this retreat of American
cotton in the world market was due to the do
nestle allotment plan is not clear. 1t does seem
reasonable, however, to expect that curtaiment Of
their crop will not help American planters to meet
the competition of other cotton-growing countries
where acreage is being steadily increased. There
is danger that blowing under may overlook some
things-such as the foreign market.
Lastly, there has been definite Improvement
in American cotton prices. On the first of Nav
middiing spot cotton was 1910 cents pound on
the Dallas market as compared with IT'S year
ago This gain in price undoubtedly has helped
the farmer and it is the one big thing that has in
fuenced the demand for the Bankhead Act. But
has this benefit come from crop restriction? There
is good reason to believe that it has not. The
Texas Weekly points out that there has been al
most no change in cotton prices on the Liverpool
market and that most of the change in American
prices has come from devaluation of the dollar.
If the dollar remains steady for the next year,
shall have More accurate test of priceraising by
eurtailment.
| Does all this mean that the AAA crop-restric-
ton program has failed? Certainly It means that
| the blowing under of cotton was far more of
failure than was recognized by the planters who
demanded the Bankhead Act Surely it should
give pause to over-eager expermenters. Probably
the government will be compelled as matter of
justice as we'll political expediency, to try to
help the farmer shut off SURPRISES until ways are
found for distributing them. But if we are to
have experiments must have careful reading
of the results. The farmer himself will be better
off If he IS willing to look those results in the face
and recognize that government is not too we'll cast
IN the role Of nature.-Christian Science Monitor