COTTON 248 
to the farmer’s interests, whether or not other con- 
siderations counterbalance them. 
These are: first, the extended activity of the 
market from a short period to an entire year; and 
the second, a demand for cotton created by the 
Cotton Exchanges in their business operations. It 
is safe to say that the members of the two leading 
Cotton Exchanges find it necessary to control 
annually nearly a half million bales of cotton. 
Here is a specific demand that exists over and above 
the takings of spinners. While the Cotton Ex- 
change does not consume this quantity nor with- 
draw it from circulation, it does advertise the ar- 
ticle, thereby creating a wider market for the prod- 
uct than would exist if spinners alone were 
purchasers. 
But are these influences of sufficient importance 
to be of any material benefit to the producer? 
Since the Cotton Exchange was not founded with 
any such philanthropic design, and since in its 
tradings it so often operates adversely to the in- 
terests of the producer, it may readily be seen that 
the evils more than counterbalance the good. 
So we may say that on the wholethis machinery 
is not helpful to the farmer. 
THE EVILS COME IN 
The evil-in-chief is the speculative spirit in all 
this trading incontracts. To legitimate trade, spec- 
ulation in cotton is a disadvantage—always a 
disadvantage. It uses all sorts of tricks and prac- 
tices to distort real conditions: it endeavors to “get 
the other fellow on the hip” and to hold him 
there until he is “good and dead”’; it inflates values 
part of the time, and part of the time it depresses 
