120 OLEOMARGARINE. 



shipped and driven back to the grazing lands, feed lots, or are used 

 for breeding purposes, with the exception of a slight fraction known 

 as milch stock. Ultimately, however, all find their way to the block, 

 which would lead us to the proper basis to figure from, viz, 100 per 

 cent. 



While statistics are dry and uninteresting reading, if correct they 

 silence all argument. We propose to show to this honorable com- 

 mittee the tremendous loss which will accrue to the live-stock indus- 

 try of this country, especially the cattle-growing States of the great 

 West, North, and Southwest, if this Grout bill becomes a law and how 

 such loss affects the live-stock commission merchant. 



Through the members of this exchange nearly $60,000,000 are loaned 

 to the men engaged in this great industry in the territory tributary to 

 this market. The greater proportion of this enormous sum of money 

 does not belong to the men engaged in the commission business, but to 

 the financial institutions in every section of the country. True, the 

 commission merchant makes the loans and sells the paper, which is 

 negotiable, from the Atlantic to the Pacific coast, with his, the com- 

 mission merchant's, indorsement, accompanied with the usual safe- 

 guard of mortgages on cattle. Any depreciation of values from any 

 cause may result in loss to the holders of the paper. This enormous 

 sum of $60,000,000 controls about 2,000,000 cattle, whose ultimate 

 destination is the market. Competition has, from many causes, grown 

 so sharp in the live-stock commission business that great risks are 

 taken. Only a few years ago freight and pasturage money was all that 

 was required to control a good share of what we term "range" busi- 

 ness, but lately the cattle raisers and speculators from the cattle- 

 producing States of Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas, who 

 move their herds to the grazing lands of the Territories and Kansas, 

 demand a very large percentage of the purchase price of cattle, and in 

 many instances the full cost. 



We now come to the point where we, the live-stock commission mer- 

 chants, suffer. In the event of the Grout bill becoming a law our 

 security would be depreciated just $2 per head, whereas, under the 

 strain of competition, we have loaned up to the full value of cattle 

 already. We should also mention that cattle deals are not closed up 

 each year they are made. Renewals are granted, loans extended by 

 reason of unfavorable conditions for fattening cattle, such as crop fail- 

 ures, drought in the grazing districts, or unusual severity of the win- 

 ters. During the winter of 1898 20 per cent of all cattle in winter 

 range districts were frozen to death. So you can readily see we have 

 enough of the element of loss to contend against without the Govern- 

 ment permitting legislation that will make an additional burden of $2 

 per head loss. 



While this market is the "open door," the very threshold, of the great 

 cattle-producing States and Territories, the same conditions governing 

 the details of our business is proportionately true of every market of 

 the United States; and not alone does this bill propose to kill an indus- 

 try that benefits the producer and the packing industries, but every 

 butcher who slaughters his own cattle in the United States; for he 

 ships his butter fat to the nearest manufacturers of oleomargarine, 

 which, if legislated out of business, goes into candles and boot grease, 

 and he must charge the consumer a higher price for his beef in order 

 to offset the loss on butter fat. 



