— 19 — 



increased to nearly 7,000 carloads for 1894 — yet, with all the advantages 

 and benefits that have followed the introduction of sale by public auc- 

 tion, the auction system has not made it possible for a market that can 

 use but five carloads a day to use ten carloads a day at an equally fair 

 price. Nor is it possible for the human mind to devise a plan that will 

 make a five-carload market handle at a satisfactory price a ten-carload 

 shipment. 



" The remedy must lie in the direction of sending to the one-carload 

 market one carload of fruit only; to the five-carload market, five car- 

 loads of fruit only, and so on. The surplus, if there be any, must be 

 kept at home, dried, sold to canneries, or if this cannot be done, then it 

 is better that such surplus shall rot on tree or vine rather than go East 

 and there demoralize the prices for the great bulk of shipments which 

 otherwise would yield fair returns. 



; ' With proper and intelligent distribution, however, there need, as a 

 rule, be no surplus ; at least not for years to come. It is to the end that the 

 glutting of markets be hereafter avoided, and that our fruits be more 

 intelligently distributed, that the proposed Bureau of Information is 

 advocated.'' 



But there are yet other evils that must be remedied. 



The wonderful success attained by the auction plan during the earlier 

 years of its trial in the selling of California fruits has of late been les- 

 sened by unexpected abuses that have been allowed to creep in. One of 

 the great advantages claimed for the auction plan was the bringing 

 together, under one roof and at one hour, all the buyers, great and 

 small, from a radius of many miles, who were obliged to bid against 

 each other to obtain a share of our products. This great gathering of 

 bidders insured the growers getting the highest value for their fruits 

 and. diminished the possibility of combinations among dealers. 



But soon jealousies and bitter differences arose among the California 

 shippers and growers, who, to spite each other and regardless of their 

 own best interests or the best interests of the fruit industry, encouraged 

 the establishing in the leading Eastern cities of rival auction houses. 

 So that to-day we find four auction houses in Chicago, two in New York, 

 two in Boston, three in Philadelphia, two in Buffalo, and so on. All of 

 which cannot but be most hurtful in its results to the interests of the 

 grower. 



Two or more auction houses in any one city cannot but mean the 

 scattering of the buyers and the forcing of our fruit into competition 

 with itself; thus defeating one of the chief benefits claimed for the 

 auction plan, namely, that of bringing all buyers together at one time 

 and under one roof, compelling them to compete with each other for the 

 benefit of the grower, instead of forcing our fruit to compete against 

 itself for the benefit of the buyers. 



There can be absolutely no advantage in more than one auction-room 

 in any one city; while the evils and the injury to the grower and ship- 

 per in supporting two or more auction houses in any one market must 

 be self-evident. 



Nor will the highest results to the grower be reached until this second 

 evil in marketing our fruits be overcome, and one auction-room only is 

 maintained in each city. 



There remains yet a third evil that must be corrected. 



It will be remembered that it was claimed for the auction plan that 



