120 27TH REPORT, BUREAU OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY. 



the second, that by adding the amount suggested for the breeding 

 appropriation ($250,000 the first year and $100,000 in succeeding 

 years) to the amount now appropriated for the purchase of horses 

 for the Army, and thus adding $50 to $100 to the average price paid 

 for horses, the necessary number could easily be obtained. 



The writer believes that the figures shown on page 107 for the rela- 

 tive numbers of purebred draft stallions in variolas States effectually 

 answer the first argument. It must be again plainly pointed out 

 that there are now probably enough horses annually available for the 

 requirements of the present peace footing of the Army. The countn r 

 should in wisdom, however, provide for a reasonably sufficient supply 

 in case of war, and it should take steps to check the unquestionable 

 decrease in the breeding of light horses. Cavalry is of the utmost 

 importance in warfare, and we must sooner or later either encourage 

 the breeding of horses for the mounted service of the United States 

 Army or dismount the cavalry. 



The second argument voices a popular appeal which carries con- 

 siderable weight, but it is very doubtful whether it would in any 

 measure bring about the desired result. Let it be repeated that the 

 Army is now paying good prices to farmers for the horses it buys. 

 Officers claim that they are paying somewhat more than farmers have 

 usually received for such horses. One hundred and fifty dollars for 

 an unbroken 3-year-old colt, or $125 for a 2-year-old, are not starva- 

 tion prices as farmer's colts run. The purchasing officers are buying 

 ir^the face of the competition of other buyers. For the Government 

 to add gratuitously $50 or $100 to the price now paid would be reck- 

 less and wasteful extravagance. This argument has been advanced 

 by persons who do not seem to realize the difference between the direct 

 system of buying young horses for the remount stations and the old 

 system of buying by contract mature horses for direct issue to troops. 

 The former eliminates the middleman's profit and gives the farmer a 

 fair price; the latter gave the farmer a price which was far below 

 what a good mature horse was worth, and the whole system worked 

 against getting good horses. If the contract system only were con- 

 sidered, adding $50 to $100 to a minimum contract price might have 

 some effect, but the contractor would probably be the principal 

 gainer. The price paid by the Army for horses is now governed by 

 supply and demand, just as that of any other commodity. 



Again, if a given sum were added to the average purchase price 

 and the country were plunged into war where large numbers of 

 horses were needed, $50 to $100, nor twice those amounts, would 

 not supply the demand unless horses of draft breeding were taken. 

 Witness the New York police department, with a contract price of 

 $372.50 per head, scouring the country for 75 saddle horses per year 

 of certain definite specifications. 



