"BJTyV '
- wujv ySi -.!
1 ??J " '
afv
"V
1
APRIL 30, 1909
The Commoner.
3
- , tr r ..("--
EDUCATIONAL SERIES
Crime in the Gambling in Food Products
No citizen has a natural right to injure any
other citizen; and the government should neither
enable nor permit him to do so.
Speech of William J. Bryan of Nebraska in
the House of Representatives, Monday, June 18,
1894.
The house being in committee of the whole on
the state of the union, having under considera
tion the bill (H. R. 7007) known as the Anti
Option Bill.
Mr. Bryan said:
Mr. Chairman: I shall not trespass long on
the time of the committee; but it seems to me
that if we can strip this question of some of the
verbiage which has been thrown about it, and
resolve it into a few simple propositions, we may
be enabled to arrive at a more just conclusion.
The object of the bill and I shall speak only
of its general object, because if there are any
amendments to bo offered to it which will make
it carry out its object better and at the same
time make it less onerous upon those whom wo
do not desire to disturb, I am perfectly willing
that such amendments should be adopted the
object of the bill I say, is to prevent gambling
in certain products. We can assume, to begin
with, that there is gambling in these products.
Now, if there is gambling in these products, tho
gambling either affects the price of the products
gambled in, or it docs not. If it can be shown
by the opponents of this bill that gambling in
the products named has absolutely no effect
whatever in raising or lowering prices, then the
only reason for passing the bill wojild be to stop
gambling because of its general demoralizing
effect upon the community.'
If, however, it is admitted that gambling in
these products has some effect on prices, how
ever small, then that effect must be either to
increase or diminish the price of the product
gambled in. If the price of the product is
increased to the man who buys it, then tho
gambler has done a wrong to that man. If the
price of the product is decreased to the man
who sells it, then the gambler has done wrong
to that man, and the only way that you can
escape this conclusion is to assert, as was as
serted by the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Warner), that the gambler helps the man who
sells by raising the price of his commodity a
little, and helps the man who buys by lowering
his price a little, and takes his profit out of those
who speculate.
Mr. Warner. Will the gentleman allow me?
Mr. Bryan. Certainly.
Mr. Warner. I do not believe that any
gambler ever helped anybody except by the
merest chance. It is the investors of funds
which might otherwise be idle, who put their
investments temporarily in the purchase of
wheat or cotton; that produce somewhat of the
effect the gentleman has suggested.
Mr. Bryan. I care not whether the purpose
of the gambler is to help or not. If the gentle
man could prove, that the effect of gambling
was to take the cost of handling and transport
ation out of the pocket of somebody other than
the producer and consumer, then he might
justify gambling by showing that it is wise for
us to promote laws which enable gamblers to
take from the people who are willing to gamble
and give the benefit of their losses to the pro
ducer and consumer alike.
But, Mr. Chairman, I am not going to assume
that the "gambler simply makes his money out
of the people who buy for speculation. I am
going to assume, upon evidence satisfactory to
me, that these gamblers increase or decrease
to some extent the price of the products specu
lated in, increasing it to the man who buys or
decreasing it to the man who sells. . No citizen
has a natural right to injure any other citizen;
and the government should neither enable nor
permit him to do so. Therefore, no man has a
right to lessen the value of another man's prop
erty, and the law should not give to a man, or
protect him in, the exercise of such a right.
My district is perhaps an average district;
about half of my constituents live in cities or
towns, and about half are engaged in agricul
ture. I have in my.district the second largest
city in the state, Lincoln, the state's capital
a city of 60,000 inhabitants. My home is In
that city, and I have no hesitation, in declaring
that it is one of the most beautiful and pros
perous cities of Its size in the United States.
The people who livo in cities will, if gambling
in farm products reduces the price of such pro
duce, be the beneficiaries to-that extent. But,
sir, I do not come here to lower tho price of
what my city constituents have to buy, by en
abling grain gamblers to take it from the
pockets of those who raise farm products. My
city constituents do not ask that of me, and I
would not assist them in so unjust an act if
they did ask it.
As I said, about half of my constituents livo
on farms, and they labor in a veritablo Garden
of Eden, for wo have in the First Nebraska dis
trict as beautiful and fertile farm lands as tho
sun turns his face upon in all his course. I
deny that it is just to the farmers of my dis
trict that gamblers should be permitted to bet
on the price of their products to their injury
after they have prepared their crops for the
market. When the farmer has taken tho chances
of rain and drouth, when he has taken tho
chances which must corne to the farmer as they
scarcely come to anybody else; when ho has
escaped the grasshopper and tho chinch bug
and the rain and tho hail and the dry winds,
I insist that he shall not then be left to tho
mercy of a gang of speculators, who, for their
own gain, will take out of him as much of tho
remainder as they can possibly get.
There is no difference in tho moral character
of the transaction between the action of tho
'burglar who goes to a man's house at night and
takes from him a part of that which ho receives
for his wheat, and the action of the .gambler
who goes on the board of trade, and, by betting
on the price of tho product, brings down that
price and takes that much from the farmer's
income.
Mr. Black, of Georgia. If the gentleman will
permit me? I am seeking information on this
subject, and desire to ask a question. Do you
hold that it is proper legislation for congress' to
pass an act against the burglar of whom you
speak?
Mr. Bryan. I am coming to that in a mo
ment. The gentleman anticipates a part of tho
argument which I shall reach in time.
Mr. Black, of Georgia. I should be glad to
hear from the gentleman on that point.
Mr. Bynum. Let me ask the gentleman what
becomes of the other gambler who is buying
the wheat? What Is he doing all this time?
Mr. Bryan. I am not speaking of any par
ticular gambler, but of the transaction in gen
eral. It may be that the man who sells wheat
in the market for future delivery will be lower
ing the price more than the man who buys, or
the reverse may be true. But I speak simply
of the gambler who claims the right to specu
late in another man's produce, and who, by his
speculation, affects the prices of what tho farmer
has to sell.
Mr. Goldzier. Will the gentleman yield to me
for a question?
Mr. Bryan. Certainly.
Mr. Goldzier. A question on general prin
ciples? Mr. Bryan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Goldzier. Do you consider high wheat
as a blessing to the world at large?
Mr. Bryan. Mr. Chairman, the question
whether high wheat is a blessing to the world
at large depends very much on circumstances.
It depends upon what makes it high or what
makes it low.
Mr. Goldzier. Are there any circumstances
under which the high price of food is a blessing
to the majority of the people of the world? Do
you know of any Instance in history?
Mr. Bryan. If the price of food Is high, as
compared with the price of other things, it Is
not a blessing, and if the price Is raised by the
action of anybody, beyond what natural laws
would fix it, I do not believe that it can be
justified.
Mr. Coombs. While It Is true that the price
of wheat has gone down, Is it not equally true
that the price of all other products that the
farmer uses have gone down even in greater
proportion?
Mr. Bryan. Nearly everything has fallen In
price, except the debt which he owes; that has
not gone down.
Mr. Lane. That has gone up.
Mr. Bryan. The gentleman has spoken of the
fall in prices. There are a number of things
which enter into and affect prices. Supply and
demand, other things being equal, will regulato
prices gonorally; but tho controling Influonco of
supply and demand may bo changed from timo
to time by other causes. It may bo that tho
price of wheat or grain will rise with all othor
things and bo duo to a fall in the price of
money, and it may bo that tho prico of grain
will fall with all othor things, because money
rises; but what wo aro aiming at in this bill
is, not to stop the appreciation of gold, nnd thus
prevent a greater fall in prices, nor is it to
supply more money in ordor to nmko prices
higher, nor Is it to incrcaso tho supply of grain,
or to diminish or increase tho demand for grain.
Wo aro now simply striking at ono of the things
which enters into tho prico of grain from day
to day? and we beliovo that tho farmor and
the man who buys his product should both bo
loft to buy and sell in accordance with natural
laws, and that prices should not bo affected by
the action of other people speculating upon their
products for the benefit of (he speculators them
selves. Mr. Goldzier. Does not tho gentleman con
sider that improved methods of production havo
had more of an infiuenco on tho prico of grain
than any othor matter you can mention?
Mr. Bryan. It is not necessary for us to enter
into a discussion as to how much, if any, of tho
fall in tho price of farm products Is duo to Im
proved machinery.
Mr. Goldzier. Do you not admit that it must
bo? If you speak of tho law of supply and de
mand, do you not admit that it must bo. You
know that the supply has been vastly increased.
Mr. Bryan. Tho demand also has boon large
ly increased, and I havo hoard it stated I will
not state it on my own authoritythat there has
been little or no improvement in tho methods
of producing cotton in the last twenty or thirty
years.
Mr. Williams, of Mississippi. If tho gentleman
from Nebraska .will permit mo, I just want to
say, in response to tho inquiry of tho gentleman
from Illinois (Mr Goldzier) that the prico of
cotton has gone down as much as tho prico of
wheat, and thero has not been ono single, soil-
tary improvement in tho method of producing
cotton; not ono piece of labor-saving machinery.
Mr. Goldzier. Tho reason for that can prob
ably be found in the fact that there aro substi
tutes for it.
Mr. Williams, of Mississippi. Not at all.
Mr. Bryan. I can not yield to an argument
by any gentleman on any point in this discus
sion. I am willing to yield for any question, and
I shall answer it as best I can, but I do not want
to yield for an argument by any gentleman who
may think I am not correct.
Mr. Marsh. If the gentleman from Nebraska
will permit me I wish in one sentence to answer
my colleaguo from Illinois, Mr. Goldzier.
The Chairman. Does tho gentleman yield?
Mr. Bryan. If the gentleman will state it In
a word.
Mr. Marsh. Tho gentleman asks If tho im
proved machinery used by the farmers at the
present time does not largely account for tho
fall In the price of wheat. I want to say here,
Mr. Chairman, as a practical farmer in tho stato
of Illinois, that it costs as much in dollars to
raise a bushel of wheat today in Illinois, with
all your improved machinery, as it cost forty
years ago. And I am prepared to establish the
truthfulness absolutely of that statement.
Mr. Goldzier. I do not think the gentleman
from Nebraska will aocept that; because tho
statistics are directly contrary to that statement.
Mr. Bryan. Mr. Chairman, I must insist that
if the gentlemen desire to interrupt my remarks
they will confine their interruptions to ques
tions. I will not deny or indorse what has been
stated by the gentleman - from Illinois (Mr.
Marsh), who answers and gives his opinion as
to tho cost of producing wheat. I do not, be
lieve, however, that In the last few years there
has been any such improvement In the cost of
producing wheat as will account for the great
fall in the price of wheat, nor do I believe
that in the last year there has been any such
reduction in the cost of production as would
account for the tremendous fall in the price
of wheat. That, In my judgment, it is due to
legislation which has appreciated the value of
gold and robbed the farmer of his just dues.
(Applause.)
Mr. Goldzier. I would like to make one sug
gestion there.
Mr. Bryan. I can not yield for a suggestion.
If the gentleman desires to ask a question, I
will answer him.
Mr. Goldzier. I will put It in the shape of
a question. Do you not ascribe the tremendous
fall of whicii you spoke, in a comparatively
'Vjwrtt mgfciflrjMjiH mtbuwm i m
. .'- t ...UM . h...l 1 tfWRiJ
--. - . . . .....IMtHI
3fpnP1TOllWnrw"iww
..-
rPdWffw
. - - -
V3DKIW'Miim
w.
S
I
1.;
v
,u
4J
&&'
W JmMA&.Am-x-Ji-i HWfr-MfaanlfartftuiiMin AitAilMtorfri
uMit , ,