« AnteriorContinuar »
Board of Trade of the City of Chicago
REUBEN G. CHANDLER, President. WILLIAM L. GREGSON, 1st Vice-President.
H. M. S. MONTGOMERY, 2d Vice-President.
TERM EXPIRING 1901. FREDERICK W. SMITH. THOMAS 0. EDWARDS, HARRY B. SLAUGHTER WILLIAM A. CHADWICK. FRANK 0. REMICK.
S. A. McCLEAN, JR.,
TERM EXPIRING 1906. WM. S. WARREN, JOHN B. ADAMS. EMIL W. WAGNER, ROBERT BINES, GEO. W. PATTEN.
G. F. STONE, Secretary.
.E. A. HAMILL, Treasurer. R. S. WORTHINGTON, Ass't Secretary. HENRY S. ROBBINS, Counsel. SAMUEL POWELL, Clearing House Manager.
STANDING COMMITTEES: EXECUTIVE.
.......MESSRS. GREGSON, EDWARDS AND BRIDGE. ON FINANCE ...
SMITH, MOCLEAN AND PATTEN. ON REAL ESTATE
TAYLOR, BINES AND ADAMS. ON RULES..
CHADWICK, EDWARDS AND PATTEN. ON LEGAL A
EDWARDS, JONES AND BINES. ON ROOMS.
MONTGOMERY, JONES AND REMICK. ON MEMBERSHIP
GREGSON, MONTGOMERY, SLAUGHTER. ON WAREHOUSES
RICHARDSON SMITH AND ADAMS. ON CLEARING HOUSE..
SLAUGHTER. MONTGOMERY AND JONES. ON MARKET REPORTS
WARREN, SMITH AND BINES. ON VIOLATION OF RULES ...
GREGSON, WARREN, CHADWICK, JONES,
SLAUGHTER AND MCCLEAN.
HARDT, R. S. LYON, B. A. ECKHART. ON TRANSPORTATION...
1 H. E. DOUSMAN, H. H. PETERS AND
i RICHARD GAMBRILL. ON WEIGHING....
SMITH, RICHARDSON AND BRIDGE. ON CLAIMS
REMICK, TAYLOR, ADAMS AND WAGNER. ON METEOROLOGICAL OBSERVATION.
WAGNER, BINES AND REMICK. ON PROVISION INSPECTION...
GREGSON, EDWARDS, McCLEAN, J. A. 7 BUNNELL AND CHAS. BERRALL, JR.
B. A. ECKHART, F. B. RICE, FREDERICK ON FLOUR INSPECTION ....
3 DICKINSON, ISAAC HORNER AND H. 3.
i CHADWICK, T. M. HUNTER, ALBERT ON FLAXSEED INSPECTION............
SECKEL, P. H. ESCHENBURG AND GEO.
IEALT. ON OTHER INSPECTION......
SLAUGHTER, RICHARDSON AND WAGNER. ON ARBITRATION ON GRASS AND FIELD
(T. M. HUNTER, C. A. HEATH, ALBERT SEEDS....
SECKEL, F. E. WINANS AND GEO. S.
......JOHN A. TOBEY.
.CHARLES F. LIAS.
JOHN A. COSTELLO.
ROBERT P. KETTLES.
..JOHN A. TOBEY.
WEIGHER OF PACKING HOUSE PRODUCT ..........
COMMITTEE OF ARBITRATION:
TERM EXPIRING 1905.
JOHN B. KILPATRICK.
COMMITTEE OF APPEALS:
TERM EXPIRING 1905.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF TRADE WHO DIED DURING 1902.
WINANS, DIGHTON H., JANUARY 10.
MR. WILLIAM S. WARREN, President of the Board of Trade of
the City of Chicago.
Sir: — The business record of the year is in many respects without a parallel. At times the markets were dominated by speculative influences, and again there were periods, though comparatively brief, of dullness; yet the record is one showing a substantial growth and a widespread and intense enterprise pervading all industries and all phases of mercantile activity. It must be acknowledged that the year was one of unexampled prosperity and that in spite of exciting and radical changes in business methods, in spite of extensive operations, gigantic schemes and industrial consolidation, a sagaciously judicious caution in the conduct and control of vast business interests, as well as those of moderate volume and importance, was observed by merchant, manufacturer and banker. It has been a year of departure from old methode. All the avenues of our industrial life have been crowded. There was more work offered than could be done; a greater volume of merchandise presented for transportation than could promptly be carried; more projects inaugurated than could be completed; the facilities of common carriers were unequal to the demand for such facilities; every industrial plant was taxed to its utmost capacity; all kinds of labor from the rudest and simplest to the most skillful and artistic were profitably employed; wages were generally proportionately advanced and a new stimulus to excel and prosper stimulated all classes of people throughout the land.
As a result, the productivity of our mills has largely increased; the quality of the product has improved; prices have advanced, but not beyond the purchasing ability of the masses. It can not be denied that there were numerous strikes and some of them assumed alarming proportions; these are likely to occur when business is exceptionally profitable. When the cost of living is
increased the wage eårner should not be expected to be content with wages fixed upon the old basis of living. Why should be? He should be admitted to a proper and fair share in the common prosperity. It is for the interest of all classes and of the State that he should not be left out of a just participation in the common wealth. It is a cause for congratulation that the principle of arbitration in the adjustment of great controversies between capital and labor has been recognized as never before, and that the National Government has exercised a salutary influence in bringing about such a mode of reconciling conflicting interests. So potent was that influence that we may hope to avoid in the future such serious complications as were involved in the great coal strike which for a time paralyzed the coal trade of the entire country, throwing thousands of men out of work and entailing untold suffering upon vast numbers of people whose business was not directly concerned in the mining or marketing of coal. There is but a remote possibility that such a catastrophe will again take place in this country.
The yield of our principal cereals, comprising wheat, corn, oats, rye and barley, aggregated 4,350,138,647 bushels, valued on the farm at $1,821,805,745, grown upon 172,538,792 acres. Our crop of hay aggregated 59,857,576 tons, valued at $542,036,364, produced on 39,857,576 acres; the production of potatoes amounted to 284,632,787 bushels, valued at $134, 111,436.
The corn crop was 1,001,128,421 bushels more than the crop of the year 1901, and was the largest ever raised in the country; the crop of wheat was 78,397,210 less than that for the year 1901, and was 670,063,008 bushels, and the crop of oats was 251,973,988 bushels in excess of that for the year 1901 and was the largest of record, being 987,842,712 bushels, valued at $303,584,852, produced on 28,658,144 acres.
Minnesota raised more wheat than was produced in any other state, aggregating 79,752,404 bushels; next came North Dakota with 62,872,241 bushels; then Missouri with 56,266,494 bushels; Nebraska with 52,726,451 bushels; then follow Kansas, South Dakota, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Washington and California in the order of their production.
Of the crop of corn, amounting to 2,523,645,312 bushels, Illinois produced 372,436,416 bushels, valued at $134,077,110; Iowa,
297,686,016 bushels, valued at $98,236,385; Missouri, 264,232,605 bushels, valued at $87,196,760; Nebraska, 252,520,173 bushels, valued at $75,756,052; Kansas, 222,805,621 bushels, valued at $75,753,911; Indiana, 171,332,142 bushels, valued at $61,679,571, and Ohio, 121,608,512 bushels, valued at $51,075,575. These states compose what is commonly known as the “Great Corn Belt” and have remarkable climatic conditions and a soil of wonderfu fertility.
Final returns to the Statistician of the Department of Agriculture from regular and special correspondents, supplemented by reports of Special Field Agents, show the acreage, production and value of the principal farm crops of the United States in 1902 to have been as follows: