This is to certify that the

thesis entitled
THE RESPONSE OF PEANUT SUPPLIES TO TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS,

INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES, AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

presented by

Daniel; Upton Livermore

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M—degree 111W

Mastsor

\\.\« ‘
Date __Mny_31.._19.61__

0-169

 

 

 

 

 

THE RESPONSE OF PEANUT SUPPLIES TO TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS,

INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES, AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

by

D. Upton Livermore

AN ABSTRACT

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE
Department of Agricultural Economics

1961

K»; [%%7
Approved ,flg/h/VL €237 [Aw/aw

ABSTRACT

THE RESPONSE OF PEANUT SUPPLIES TO TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS,
INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES, AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

.by D. Upton Livermore

A minimum national peanut acreage allotment of 1,610,000, as
prescribed by Congress, became effective administratively in 1954 as a
result of downward acreage adjustments since 1949. Meanwhile, peanut
yields per acre have continued to increase steadily at a rate sufficient
to create surplus supplies in most years in spite of greater total con-
sumption requirements for an increasing population at a relatively stable
per capita consumption rate. Since no further reductions in acreage
allotments can be effected under present legislation, the question arises
concerning the magnitude of prospective surplus supplies of peanuts, and
related diversion costs to be expected in the next few years, 1959-1965,
In brief, will the combined effect of technology, institutional arrange-
ments,.and economic conditions stimulate yield increases such that, given
fixed mdnimum acreage allotments, peanut production will equal or exceed
the increase in consumption deriving from population increase?

Using ordinary least squares procedures, yields per acre for
each of the seven major producing states have been estimated for the
period 1909-1958, and projected to 1965 under specified assumptions,
after making subjective adjustments to allow for recent technological p

progress. Yields per acre were significantly associated with technological

D. Upton Livermore

change, price of peanuts, and acreage of peanuts. In the Southwest,
yields per acre were also significantly associated with inches of
rainfall in specified critical months of the growing season.

In most years, growers collectively underharvest their
allotted acreage; however, attempts to associate underharvest with
economic factors were unsuccessful. In the Southwest production
area, however, inches of rainfall in specified critical months were
significantly associated with underharvest.

Attempts to develope acreage estimating equations for years
prior to 1949 were not successful. The changing economic structure
of the industry, and problems of intercorrelation among the price and
cost variables are believed to have obscured the relationships. A
qualified exception to this was found in the Southeast states for the
period 1921-1940.

Annual production for the period 1959-1965 was projected by
applying projected yields per acre to legal minimum state allotments
which were subjectively adjusted for probable underharveat. Efforts
to estimate peanut production directly by ordinary least squares pro-
cedures were unsuccessful.

Annual peanut supplies for the period 1959-1965 were esti-
mated taking into account imports and carry—in stocks. Comparative
annual market demand requirements for all domestic uses and commer-
cial export were estimated by two methods: (1) applying a subjectively

determined per capita consumption rate to population data with

D. Upton Livermore

non-consumption uses fixed, (2) applying a farmers' stock demand equation
developed by Oklahoma Experiment Station to projected data for price of
peanuts, per capita disposable income, and marketing charges, with non-
consumption factors fixed, such as seed, loss, and carry-in stocks.
Conclusions with.respect to prospective surplus for the period
1959-1965 suggest that if per capita consumption does not increase above
current levels, annual surplus production at about the current level of
200 million pounds will continue with some slight tendency to decline.
The Oklahoma demand equation, under the specified assumptions, predicts
increased per capita consumption of about one pound for the period 1959-
1965; if this occurs, surplus production will disappear and some increase
in alloted acreage and annual production will become necessary by 1963.
The study includes a detailed description of recent technologi-
cal progress in each production area and a chronology of peanut legislation

for each crop year since 1933.

THE RESPONSE OF PEANUT SUPPLIES TO TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS,

INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES, AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

by

D. Upton Livermore

A THESIS

.Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Agricultural Economics

1961

F 9/56”
7/5)“

PREFACE

This study was conducted with funds from Regional Project
SMPIA, Agricultural Research Service, U.S.D.A., and the Virginia Agricul-
tural Experiment Station.

The manuscript is being published in three parts by the Virginia
Agricultural Experiment Station under the same title as this thesis with
the following ,sub-titles: Research Report No. 48, Recent Improvements
in Peanut Technology; Research Report No. 49, Institutional Setting and
Legislative Chronology; and Research Report No. 50, Response of Peanut Pro-

duction to Economic Conditions.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The assistance of Dr. Glenn L. Johnson, chairman of my graduate
committee, in planning this study is gratefully acknowledged. Under his
generous guidance and sustained encouragement, a comprehensive approach
to the problem*was undertaken with results more meaningful and useful to
me and, it is hoped, to others concerned with the problem, than would
have been the case had the research been confined to the more usual scope
of a study of this nature. This called for extra time and effort on Dr.
Johnson's part; for this, I am deeply grateful. The constructive sugges-
tions of Dr. Harold Riley and Dr. W. A. Cromarty were most helpful in
handling difficult problems and in clarifying the manuscript.

The problem, as presented in Chapter I, was first directed to
my attention in 1954 by William Bing, formerly Chief, Program.Analysis
Branch, Oils and Peanut Division, Commodity Stabilization Service, United
States Department of Agriculture. His successor, Dr. A. T. Mace and Joe
P. Davis, of the same office, have been most helpful in supplying me with
essential data and relevant program information, and have contributed much
to my understanding of the economic and administrative considerations. A
substantial portion of the legislative and program chronology set forth
in Appendix A.was written by Mr. Davis. This constitutes new reference
‘material on the subject so essential to the work of the research worker
and.to the "policy maker". Mr. Davis's contribution to the study is deep-
1y appreciated. Additionally, Dr. Mace and Mr. Davis were helpful in re-

viewing the manuscript.

ii

The chapter on technology was reviewed in detail by Dr. Lawrence.
1. Miller and by Mr. George B. Duke, Virginia Agricultural Experiment Sta-
tion, Holland, Virginia, who each offered many constructive suggestions
which improved both content and accuracy. Dr. H. L. Dhnton, head, agronomy
department and Dr. G. M, Shear, department of plant pathology and physiology,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute, provided both information and counsel on
the technology phase of the study.

Many others assisted me in gathering together significant ref-
erences, or in appraising the current and prospective level of yields per
acre, or by providing helpful criticism of the manuscript. These include
W. V. Rawlings, Association of Virginia Peanut and Hog Growers; Joe Sugg,
North Carolina Peanut and Hog Growers Association; William J. Spain, Jr.,
Birdsong Storage Company, Suffolk, Virginia; S. Wormack Lee, Peanut Gro—
wers Cooperative Marketing Association, Franklin, Virginia; Professors
N. M. Penny and w. H3 Harper, Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station;
Professors Tyrus R. Timm, C. A. Bonnen, and.William.O. Trogden, Texas A.
and M. College; Professors Ralph S. Matlock, Leo V. Blakely, and James S.
Plaxico, Oklahoma State University; and Professors Harry M. Love and Daniel
D. Badger, department of agricultural economics, Virginia Polytechnic In-
stitute.

The basic statistical models were suggested by Dr. Johnson and
numerous variations on the theoretical theme were attempted in consulta-
tion‘with Professors David C. Hurst and Rudolph Freund of the Statistics
IDeparhment, Virginia Polytechnic Institute. Dr. Freund was most generous

of his time in processing the multiple regressions on the IBM.6SO at the

iii

V.P.I. Computing Center. Their assistance was indispensable and is deeply
appreciated.

In spite of modern electronics, many days of hand calculations
remained; these were faithfully performed by Mrs. Gladys Weiler. The
lengthy task of tabulating the rainfall data was done by Mrs. Irene Givens;
the bibliography and numerous tables, lists, and graphs by Mrs. E. L.
Williams, Jr.; and the charts, necessary for photographic reduction, by
Mrs. Preston Newman. To these people, and to the many who typed and re-

typed, I shall be ever grateful.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

LIST OF TABLES IN APPENDIX

LIST OF APPENDICES

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION

The Problem
Purpose of the Study
Methodology

II. INSTITUTIONAL SETTING

III. RECENT IMPROVEMENTS IN THE TECHNOLOGY OP PEANUT
PRODUCTION

Virginia-Carolina Area
Southeast Area
Southwest Area
Footnote to Progress

IV. INTRODUCTION TO STATISTICAL ESTIMATION OF PEANUT
ACREAGE, YIELD, AND PRODUCTION

Estimating Acreage
Estimating Yields Per Acre
Estimating Production

V. DESCRIPTION OF VARIABLES AND TRANSFORMATIONS
EMPLOYED IN THIS ANALYSIS

v1. ACREAGE, YIELD, AND PRODUCTION ESTIMATES VIRGINIA-
CAROLINA AREA

Acreage Estimates Virginia-Carolina Area
Yield Estimates Virginia-Carolina Area
Production Estimates Virginia-Carolina Area

Page

ii

vii

xiii

xxi

~o-una

11

23

25
38
4O
45

46

48

56
61

65

9O

90
101
114

VII.

VIII.

APPENDIX

ACREAGE, YIELD, AND PRODUCTION ESTIMATES
SOUTHEAST AREA

Acreage Estimates Southeast Area
Yield Estimates Southeast Area
Production Estimates Southeast Area

ACREAGE, YIELD, AND PRODUCTION ESTIMATES
SOUTIHEST AREA

Acreage Estimates Southwest Area
Yield Estimates Southwest Area
Production Estimates Southwest Area

ESTIMATED PEANUT SUPPLIES AND REQUIREMENTS,
1959-1965

Supply Estimates and Projections
Projected Requirements

EVALUATION OF THE STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY

Least Squares Assumptions
Effect of Shortcomings on Forecasts
In Summary '

Chronology of Peanut Legislation and Marketing
Programs

Analyses of Variance of Regression Medals Considered

Dependent and Independent Variables and Related Data,
Seven.Major Producing States, and United States

Rainfall Data for Seven Major Peanut Producing States

Statement of the Virginia-Carolina Peanut Association

to Mr. J. E. Thigpen, Director, Oils and Peanut Divi-

sion, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Relative to the
1958 Support Program for Peanuts, April 28, 1958.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

vi

Page

129
129
157
171
190
190
207
217
233

234
243

258
260

265
267

268

308

389
400

435

Chapter

II.

VI.

VII.

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1.--PeanutS: Apparent United States Supply and Dis-
position, All Types (Farmers' Stock Basis) 6

Table 1.--She11ed Peanuts (Edible Grades): Reported Use
in Primary Products, 1949-1959. Total All Types. .14

Table 1.--Se1ection of Crops which are Regarded as Com-
peting with, or Alternative to, Peanuts in the Seven
Major Peanut Producing States. 114

Table 2.--Months in which Rainfall is Deemed to be
Critical for Normal Growth and Maturity of Peanuts in
Seven Major Producing States. 177

Table 1.--Production of Peanuts in Virginia: Actual and
Estimated, 1949-1958; and Projected, 1959-1965, Using

. Specified Yield and Production Equations under Assumptions

of Price, 10.5 cents; Acreage, 106,000; 1954-1958 Average
Per Acre Value of Specified Competing Crops; and 49-year
Mean Total Rainfall in July, August, and September. 127

Table 2.--Production of Peanuts in North Carolina: Actual
and Estimated, 1949-1958; and Projected, 1959-1965, Using

.Specified Yield and Production Equations under Assumptions

of Price, 10.5 cents; Acreage 178,000; 1954-1958 Average
Per Acre Value of Specified Competing Crops; and 49-year
Mean Total Rainfall in July, August, and September. 128

Table l.--Production of Peanuts in Georgia: Actual and
Estimated, 1949-1958; and Projected, 1959-1965, Using
Specified Yield and Production Equations under Assumptions

of Price, 9.0 cents; Acreage, 515,000 Acres; 1955-1958

Average Composite Cost; 1954-1958 Average Per Acre Value

of Specified Competing Crops; and 49-year Mean Total Rain-
fall in June, July, and August. 185

Table 2.--Production of Peanuts in.Florida: Actual and
Estimated, 1949-1958; and Projected, 1959-1965, using

. Specified Yield and Production Equations under Assumptions

of Price 8.5 cents; Acreage, 55,300 Acres; 1954-1958 Average
Per Acre Value of Specified Competing Crops; and 49-year
Mean Total Rainfall in June, July, and August. 186

vii

Chapter

VIII.

Page

Table 3.--Production of Peanuts in Alabama: Actual and
Estimated, 1949-1958; and Projected, 1959-1965, Using
Specified Yield and Production Equations Under Assumptions

of Price 8.5 cents; Acreage 210,000; 1954-1958 Average

Per Acre Value of Specified Competing Cr0ps; and 49-year

Mean Total Rainfall in June, July, and August. 187

Table l.--Underharvested Acreage Expressed as a Function
of 3-month Average Rainfall in June, July, and August.
Texas, 1949-1958. 205

Table 2.--Underharvested Acreage Expressed as a Function
of August Rainfall. Oklahoma, 1949-1958. 206

Table 3.--Production of Peanuts in Texas: Actual and
Estimated, 1949-1958; and Projected, 1959-1965, Using
Specified Yield and Production Equations Under Assumptions

of Price 9.5 cents; Acreage 290,000; 1955-1958 Average
Composite Cost; 1954-1958 Average Per Acre Value of Speci-
fied Competing Crops; and 49-year Mean Total Rainfall in

June, July, and August. 231

Table 4.--Production of Peanuts in Oklahoma: Actual and
Estimated, 1949-1958; and Projected, 1959-1965, using

. Specified Yield and Production Equations under Assumptions

of Price 9.5 cents; Acreage 120,000; 1954-1958 Per Acre
Value of Specified Competing Craps, and Mean Total Rain-
fall for July, August, and September. 232

Table 1.--Production of Peanuts: Actual, Estimated, and
Projected Production from.Acreage Allotments Adjusted for
Over- and Under-harvest and Applied to Yields per Acre as
Estimated from Specified Predicting Equations. Projected
Data Include 103.9 Million Pounds Upward Adjustment for
Technological Progress since 1956. Virginia-Carolina,
Southeast, Southwest Areas, and United States. 1949-1965. 237

Table 2.--Subjective Yield and Production Adjustment to

Allow for Recent and ProsPective Technological Progress

in Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Oklahoma, and United
States. 1959-1965. 242

Table 3.--Production of Peanuts: Actual, Estimated, and
Projected from Specified Production Equations, Virginia-
Carolina, Southeast, and Southwest Areas, and United States.
1949-1965. 244

viii

 

Chapter

Page
Table 4.--Estimated per Capita Consumption of Peanuts for
Edible and Commercia1.Crushing Use, Farmers' Stock Basis.
United States. 1954-1958. 248

Table 5.--Proflected Production and Consumption of Peanuts
Under Assumptions of 400 Million Pounds Annual Inventory;

2 Million Pounds Imports and Exports; 102 Million Pounds
Commercial Crushing; 122 Million Pounds for Seed, Home

Use, Feed and Loss; and Specified Per Capita Consumption. 249

Table 6.--Estimated and Projected Per Capita Consumption
of Farmers' Stock Peanuts (excluding oil) as a Function
of Farm Price of Peanuts Deflated by the Wholesale Price
Index, Disposable Personal Income Per Capita Deflated by
the Consumer Price Index, and Index of Marketing Charges. 253

Table 7.--Projected Production and Consumption of Peanuts
Under Assumption Of Initial Annual Inventory of 400 Mil-

lion Pounds; 2 Million Pounds Imports and Exports, 122 Mil-
lion Pounds for Seed, Home Use, Feed, and Loss; and Per
Capita Consumption as Determined by the Demand Equation
Specified in Table 6. 255

Table 1.--Corre1ation Coefficients for Selected Pairs of
Independent Variables. 263

Table 2.--Durbin4Watson Test for Serial Correlation of
the Unexplained Residuals for Selected Regressions. 264

ix

 

Figure

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

CHAPTER II

‘Major Influences Affecting the Supply of Peanuts

CHAPTER V

Virginia Peanut Production Area Principal Counties and
Meteorological Substations.

North Carolina Peanut Production Area Principal Counties
and Meteorological Substations.

Georgia Peanut Production Area Principal Counties and
Meteorological Substations.

Florida Peanut Production Area Principal Counties and
Meteorological Substations.

Alabama Peanut Production.Area Principal Counties and
Meteorological.Substations.

Texas Peanut Production Area Principal Counties and
Meteorological Substations.

Oklahoma Peanut Production Area Principal Counties and
Meteorological Substations.
CHAPTER VI
Virginia 166
North Carolina 266
Virginia 166IW, North Carolina 266 PW
Virginia 190
North Carolina 290

Virginia 100::2

Page
17

79

80

81

82

83

84

87

93
95
99
103
105

109

Figure Page

7 Virginia 103 117
8 North Carolina 203 ' 120
9 Virginia and North Carolina: Actual, Estimated, and Pro-
jected Peanut Production from Specified Equations. 126
CHAPTER VII
1 Georgia 366 133
2 Florida 466 137
3 Alabama 566 139
4 Georgia 366TW 143
5 Florida 466IW 145
6 Alabama 566IW 146
7 Relationship of underharvested acreage for Georgia and

Alabama to price of hogs; and to inches of rainfall and
temperature at Dothan, Alabama, in June, July, and

August. 150
8 Relationship of underharvested acreage to rainfall and

temperature at Blakely, Georgia, in June, July, and

August. 153
9 Relationship of underharvested acreage in Georgia and

Alabama to inches of rainfall in June, July, and

August. ‘ 154
10 Georgia 390 158
11 Florida 490 160
12 Alabama 590 162
13 Alabama 500 166
14 Georgia 322 168
15 Georgia 303 174

xi

Figure Page

16 Florida 403 181
17 Alabama 503 182
18 Georgia; Alabama: Actual, Estimated, and Projected Pro-

duction of Peanuts from Specified Equations. 188
19 Florida; Georgia, Florida, and Alabama: Actual, Estimated,

and Projected Peanut Production from Specified Equations.189

CHAPTER VIII
1 Texas 666 . 193
2 Oklahoma 766 198
3 Texas 666111; Oklahoma 766IW 202
4 Oklahoma 700 209
5 Texas 621 211
6 Texas 621t2 214
7 Texas 603 219
8 Oklahoma 703 226
9 Texas and Oklahoma: Actual, Estimated, and Projected
Peanut Production from Specified Equations. 228
10 Southwest Area: Actual, Estimated, and Projected
Peanut Production from Specified Equations. 229
CHAPTER IX
1 United States: Actual, Estimated, and Projected
Peanut Production from Specified Equations. 240

xii

 

Table

52-1 '

52-2

52-3

52-4

52-5

52-6

53-1

53-2

53-3

53-4

53-5

53-6

54-1

LIST OF TABLES IN APPENDIX

APPENDIX A

Peanuts: Allotted acres, harvested acres and farms
with allotments, 1952.

Peanuts: Production by areas compared to C88 pre-
planting estimate 1952 crop.

Peanuts: Estimated acres harvested, yield, and
production by types and principal producing
areas in 1952.

Peanuts: Support levels and premiums and discounts
for sound mature kernels by principal types,
1952 program.

Schedule of discounts for damaged kernels, 1952
crOp peanuts.

Peanuts: Grade factors, expected and realized
1952 crop.

Peanuts: Allotted acres, harvested acres and farms
with allotments, 1953.

Peanuts: Production by areas compared to C88 pre-
planting estimate 1953 crop.

Peanuts: Estimated acres harvested, yield, and
productmon by type and principal producing areas
in 1953.4

Peanuts: Support levels and premiums and discounts
for sound mature kernels by principal types,

1953 program.

Schedule of discounts for damaged kernels.

Peanuts: Quality factors, expected and realized,
1953 crop.

Peanuts: Allotted acres, harvested acres and farms
with allotments, 1954.

xiii

Page

280

281

282

283

283

284

289

290

291

292

292

293

299

Table Page
54-2 Peanuts: Production by areas compared to CCC pre-
planting estimate, 1954. 300

54-3 Peanuts: Estimated acres harvested, yield, and pro-
duction by type and principal producing areas in

1954. 300
54-4 CCC peanut program: Support levels and premiums and

discounts by types, 1954. 301
54-5 CCC peanut program: Schedule of discounts for

damaged kernels, 1954. 301
54-6 Peanuts: Quality factors, expected and actual,

1954 crop. 302

APPENDIX B

1 Acreage of peanuts picked and threshed (X1 ) expressed
as a function of the logarithm of the pr cc of
peanuts per pound lagged one year (X5); and the
square of the United States index of prices paid
for items used in production, (X7), 1909-1958. 309

2 Acreage of peanuts picked and threshed (x10) expressed
as a function of the logarithm of the price of
peanuts per pound lagged one year (X5); and the
square of the United States index of prices paid
for items used in production (X7), 1909-1948. 312

3 Acreage of peanuts picked and threshed (X10) expressed
as a function of the logarithm of price of peanuts
per pound lagged one year (X5); the square of the
United States index of prices paid for items used
in production (X7); and the acfEage of Specified
competing crops (X14). 1909-1958 315

4 Acreage of peanuts picked and threshed (X10) expressed
as a function of the logarithm of price of peanuts
per pound lagged one year (X5); the square of the
United States index of prices paid for items used
in production (X7); and the acreage of Specified
competing crops (X14). 1909-1948 318

xiv

 

Table Page
5 Acreage of peanuts picked and threshed (X10) expressed
as a function of the logarithm of the price of
peanuts per pound lagged one year (X5); square of
the United States index of the cost of production
items (X7); and the acreage of Specified competing
crops lagged one year (X14). 1909-1948 321

6 Acreage of peanuts picked and threshed (X ) expressed
as a function of time (X1); price of peanuts (XBt-l)
deflated by the cost of production items (X6t_1); '
the ratio of the value of Specified competing crops
(X t-l) to the acreage of competing crops (X14fi_1),
deIIated by the index of the cost of production
items (X6 _1); the price of peanuts (X3) deflated
by the index of the cost of production items (X6);
inches of rainfall in Specified critical months
(X15), (X16), and (X17), respectively. 324

7 Acreage of peanuts picked and threshed (X10) expressed
as a function of time (X1); price of peanuts (X3t-1)
deflated by the United States index of cost of pro-
duction itema (x6t-1); the ratio of the value of
Specified competing crops (X13t-1) to the acreage
of competing crops (X14t-1) deflated by the index
of the cost of production items (X6t-1)- 1909-1917,
1923-1940 for Virginia and North Carolina; 1921-1940
for each other state. 335

8 Underharvested peanut acreage (Y11) as a function of
the price of peanuts (X3), and excess penalty rate
(x25) . 1949-1958. 338

9 Underharvested peanut acreage (le) as a function of
the price of peanuts lagged one year (X3t_1), and
excess penalty rate (X25), 1949-1958. 341

10 Underharvested peanut acreage (U13) as a function of
the ratio of the price of peanuts to the United
States index of cost of production items (X21),
and excess penalty rate (X25). 1949-1958. 344

11 Ratio of peanut acreage picked and threshed to peanut
acreage allotment (Y21) as a function of price of
peanuts (X3) and excess penalty rate (X25). 1949-
1958. 346

XV

Table Page
12 Ratio of peanut acreage picked and threshed to peanut
acreage allotment (Y22) as a function of price of
peanuts lagged one year (X3t-1) and excess penalty
rate (X25), 1949-1958. 348

13 Ratio of peanut acreage picked and threshed to peanut
allotment (Y23) as a function of the ratio of the
price of peanuts to the United States index of cost
of production items (X21), and excess penalty rate
(X25). 1949-1958. 350

14 Yield of peanuts per acre (X2) expressed as a function
of time (X1); logarithm of the price of peanuts per
pound lagged one year (X5); and acreage of peanuts
picked and threshed (X10), 1909-1958. 352

15 Yield of peanuts per acre (X2) eipressedas a function
of time (X1); time squared (X1 ; logarithm of the
price of peanuts per pound lagged one year (X5);
acreage of peanuts picked and threshed (X10); and
inches of rainfall in one critical month (X16).
1909-1958. 355

16 Yield of peanuts per acre (X2) expressed as a function
of time (X1); logarithm of the price of peanuts per
pound lagged one year (X5); square of the composite
cost index (X ); and the acreage of peanuts picked
and threshed (X10). 1909-1958. 358

17 Yield of peanuts per acre (X2) expressed as a function
of time (X1); time squared (X12) in Texas; logarithm
of the price of peanuts per pound lagged one year
(X5); square of the composite cost index (X9); acre-
age of peanuts picked and threshed (X10); and inches
of rainfall in Specified critical months (X15),
(X16), and (X17), reSpectively. 1909-1958. 361

18 Yield of peanuts per acre (X2) expressed as a function
of time (Xlfi; the square of time (X12); logarithm
of the price of peanuts lagged one year (X5); the
acreage of peanuts picked and threshed (X10); inches
of rainfall in specified critical months (X15),
(X16), and (X17), respectively. 1909-1948. 365

19 ‘Yield of peanuts per acre (X2) expressed as a function
of time (X1); logarithm of price of peanuts per
pound lagged one year (X5); acreage of peanuts picked
and threshed (X10); and the ratio of the index of
the value of Specified competing crops to the value
of peanuts, lagged one year (X19). 1909-1958 368

xvi

 

 

Table Page
20 Yield of peanuts per acre (X2) expressed as a function
of time (X1); logarithm of the price of peanuts per
pound lagged one year (X5); acreage of peanuts picked
and threshed (X10); inches of rainfall in Specified
critical months (X15), (X16), and (X17), reSpectively,
and the ratio of the index of the value of Specified
competing crops to the value of peanuts, lagged one
year (X19). 1909-1958. 371

21 Production of peanuts picked and threshed (X11) expressed
as a function of the value of peanuts picked and
threshed lagged one year (X12); the value of Speci-
fied competing crops lagged one year (X13); the
acreage of Specified competing crops lagged one year
(X14); inches of rainfall in Specified critical
months (X15), (X15), and (X17), respectively.
1909-1958. 374

22 Production of peanuts picked and threshed (X11) expressed
as a function of the value of peanuts lagged one
year (X12); value of Specified competing crops
lagged one year (X13); acreage of Specified
competing crops lagged one year (X14); and inches
of rainfall in Specified critical months (X15),
(X15), and (X17), reSpectively. 1909-1948. 377

23 Production of peanuts picked and threshed (X11),
expressed as a function of time (X1); time
squared (X12); the price of peanuts lagged one
year (X3); per acre value of Specified competing
crops lagged one year (X24); inches of rainfall
in Specified critical months (X15), (X16), and
(X17 ), respectively; and inches of rainfall in2
specified critical months Squared (X152 ), (X162 ),
and (X172 ) respectively. 1909-1958. 380

24 Production of peanuts picked and threshed (X11)
expressed as a function of time (X1); time squared
(X12 ); the price of peanuts lagged one year (x3);
per acre value of specified competing crops lagged
one year (X24); inches of rainfall in Specified
critical months (X15), (X15), and (X17), reSpectively;
and inches of rainfall in Specified critical months
squared (X152 ), (X152), and (X172 ), reSpectively.
1909- 1948. 385

xvii

Table

APPENDIX C

Yield, price, acreage, production, and value of peanuts;
U.S. index of prices paid for production items; compos-
ite cost index; acreage and value of Specified compet-
ing crops, July, August, and September average rainfall
at selected weather stations; and "profitability ratio"
--index of ratio of the value of competing crops to the
value of peanuts. Virginia, 1909-1958.

Yield, price, acreage, production, and value of peanuts;
U.S. index of prices paid for production items; compos-
ite cost index; acreage and value of Specified compet-
ing craps; July, August, and September average rainfall
at selected weather stations; and "profitability ratio"
--index of ratio of the value of competing crops to the
value of peanuts. North Carolina, 1909-1958.

Yield, price, acreage, production, and value of peanuts;

U.S. index of prices paid for production items; compos- -

ite cost index; acreage and value of Specified compet-
ing cropfis June, July, and August average rainfall at

selected weather stations; and "profitability ratio"--
index of ratio of the value of competing crops to the

value of peanuts. Georgia, 1909-1958.

Yield, price, acreage, production and value of peanuts,
U.S. index of prices paid for production items; compos-
ite cost index; acreage and value of specified competing
crops; June, July, and August average rainfall at selec-
ted weather stations; and "profitability ratio"--index
of ratio of the value of competing crops to the value
of peanuts. Florida, 1909-1958.

Yield, price, acreage, production and value of peanuts;
U.S. index of prices paid for production items; compos-
ite cost index; acreage and value of Specified compet-
ing crops; June, July, and August average rainfall at
selected weather stations; and "profitability ratio"--
index of ratio of the value of competing craps to the
value of peanuts. Alabama, 1909-1958.

Yield, price, acreage, production and value of peanuts;
U.S. index of prices paid for production items, compos-
ite cost index; acreage and value of Specified compet-
ing crops; June, July, and August average rainfall at
selected weather stations; and "profitability ratio"--
index of ratio of the value of competing crops to the
value of peanuts. Texas, 1909-1958.

xviii

Page

390

391

392

393

394

395

Table

8a

8b

8c

6a
6b

6c

Page
Yield, price, acreage, production, and value of peanuts;
U.S. index of prices paid for production items; compos-
ite cost index; acreage and value of Specified compet-
ing crops; July, August, and September average rainfall
at selected weather stations; and "profitability ratio"
--index of ratio of the value of competing crops to the
value of peanuts. Oklahoma, 1909-1958. 396

Peanut acreage, yield, marketing quotas, penalty rates,
and production, farmers stock basis. United States,
1909-1958. 397

Average price per pound and commodity credit corporation
transactions. 398

Peanuts: Supply and disposition (kernel basis), United
States, 1909-1958. 399

APPENDIX D

Average inches of rainfall reported for selected mete-
orological substations in July, August, and September.
Virginia, 1909-1959. 401

Average inches of rainfall reported for selected mete-
orological substations in July, August, and September.
North Carolina, 1909-1959. 403

Average inches of rainfall reported for selected mete-
orological substations in June, July, and August,
Georgia, 1909-1959. 405

Average inches of rainfall reported for selected mete-
orological substations in June, July, and August,
Florida, 1909-1959. 408

Average inches of rainfall reported for selected mete-
orological substations in June, July, and August.
Alabama, 1909-1959. , 410

Average inches of rainfall reported for selected mete-
orological substations in June. Texas, 1909-1959. 413

Average inches of rainfall reported for selected mete-
orological substations in July, Texas, 1909-1959. 417

Average inches of rainfall reported for selected mete-
orological substations in August. Texas, 1909-1959. 423

xix

Table Page
7a Average inches of rainfall reported for selected mete-

orological substations in July. Oklahoma, 1909-1959. 429

7b Average inches of rainfall reported for selected mete-
orological substations in August. Oklahoma, 1909-1959. 431

7c Average inches of rainfall reported for selected mete-
orological substations in September. Oklahoma, 1909- .
1959. 433

LIST OF APPENDICES

Page
APPENDIX

A Chronology of Peanut Legislation and Marketing

Programs 268
B Analysis of Variance Tables for Regression Mbdels

Considered 308
C Dependent and Independent Variables and Related

Data, Seven Major Peanut Producing States, and

United States 389
D Rainfall Data for Seven.Major Peanut Producing

States 400
E Statement to Mr. J. E. Thigpen 435

xxi

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

The Problem

About six years ago it was noted with some concern that, if
the then current rate of increase in peanut yields per acre were to
prevail in the future, growers would be obliged to accept, more or less
permanently, acreage allotment reductions representing the minimum per-
mitted by law. Since 1949, when mandatory acreage allotments and marketing
quotas were instituted by grower referendum, the national allotment had
been reduced rather precipitately from 2,629,000 acres to the legal mini-
mum of 1,610,000 in 19541, (Appendix C, Table 8a). It was also anticipated
that, unless the minimum national allotment of 1,610,000 acres was to be
reduced, a chronic annual surplus of peanuts would probably result. Per
capita consumption showed little tendency to increase; accordingly, total
consumption would be expected to increase only in proportion to the increase
in population. The question then arose as to what rate of increase in
peanut yields per acre, i.e. production, could be expected to prevail in
the near future, and whether it would exceed the upward shift in demand
represented by the rate of increase in population.

Interest also centered on the elasticity of demand. If acre-

age could be reduced no further, could per capita consumption be increased

 

1Commodity Stabilization Service, Compilation of Statutes,
Handbook No. 158 (Washington: United States Department of Agriculture,
1959), p. 77.

by price reduction? At that time, the Agricultural Adjustment Act of

1954 called for a change in the method of computing parity pricez,

beginning with the 1956 crop. The purpose of the general legislation

was to achieve a "modernized" parity price which would not only take

into account the relationship between prices received and paid by farmers
during the selected base period but also price relationships during the

most recent 10 year period. For some commodities, this meant an increase

in parity price level; for others, a decrease. As applied to the parity
price of peanuts this would effect, by means of annual 5 percent transitional
reductions, a 20 percent reduction in the level of parity price of peanuts

in its future relation to other prices. Up to that time (1954) with the

sole exception of 1951 when support was 88 percent, peanut price had been
supported at 90 percent of (old) parity3. The 1954 Act permitted support
price to vary between 82.5 and 90 percent of parity for the 1955 crop

and between 75 and 90 percent thereafter depending upon specified per-
centage relationships of actual supply to a calculated "normal" supplya.
This is termed the "sliding scale" legislation as provided in the
Agricultural Act of 19495. Accordingly, if supplies should become ex-
cessive, i.e. more than 108 percent of calculated normal, support price
levels could be further reduced progressively from 90 percent of parity

when supplies do not exceed 108 percent of normal to a minimum of 75

percent of parity when supplies reach 130 percent of normal, or more, in

 

2Harry W. Henderson, Price Programs, No. 135 (Washington:
United States Government Printing Office, 1957) pp. 50-51.

3Henderson, No. 135, pp. 57-58.
enderson, No. 135, p. 58
5Commodity Stabilization Service, No. 158, pp. 128-135.

 

accordance with a Specified schedule. Such reductions could be applied
first to the "transitional parity" during the four years necessary for
effecting the annual 5 percent reductions, and then to "modernized"
parity thereafter.

Demand has been Shown to be quite inelastic6. A 1.0 percent
change in the wholesale price, on the average, has been associated with
a change of 0.3 percent in the opposite direction in per capita consump-
tion of cleaned (in the shell) peanuts and 0.4 to 0.5 percent change in
per capita consumption of shelled peanuts. A 1.0 percent change in dis-
posable income, on the average, was found to be associated with a change
of 0.6 percent in the same direction in per capita consumption of cleaned
peanuts and 0.4 to 0.6 percent in that of shelled peanuts; the latter is
the more significant relationship because the major part of the crop is
sold as Shelled peanuts.

In light of prospective peanut price support reductions, the
one mandatory by change in the method of computing parity, and the other
effective if excessive supplies occurred, the question arose as to the
proepective supply-demand balance, given minimum acreage allotments held
at a constant level. Since that time (1954), these price reductions
gradually have been made effective, declining to 75 percent of modernized
parity in 1959 (Appendix A). This reflected a reduction in average
farm price from 12.2 cents per pound in 1954 to 9.5 cents in 1959. The

1960 Support level is 78 percent of parity. Kromer indicates7 that lower

 

6Antoine Banna, Sidney Armore, and Richard J. Foote, Peanuts

and Their Uses for Food, M. R. Report No. 16 (Washington: United States
Department of Agriculture, 1952), pp. 3-4.

7George W. Kramer, "It Looks Like a Record Year for Peanut
Consumption," Agricultural-Situation, Vol. 44, No. 5 (May, 1960), p. 4.

 

 

prices to growers in recent years have not been reflected in the price of
peanut products purchased by consumers. For example, he cites, the
average retail price of peanut butter increased from 49 cents a pound in
1954 to about 56 cents in 1959, up 14 percent. Meanwhile, during the
same period, prices to growers dropped 22 percent. These shifts, he
suggests, "have had little effect on the per capita consumption rate."
The elasticity of supply for peanuts is not known under the
present economic and institutional structure of the industry. The re-
duction in support price in recent years has not had any observable
effect on the supply forthcoming from the lower price levels. Yields per
acre have continued their upward trend. Of course, it is not known what
production would have been if support prices had not been reduced. It is
often said that supply reSponse is only partially reversible. This may
be particularly true with reSpect to the amount of price reduction Congress
is likely to provide under price support legislation because of conflict-
.ing policy goals; namely, those of achieving a supply-demand balance and,
at the same time, maintaining a market price above equilibrium price.
Peanuts are not storable for more than a few months as are
grains, cotton, and tobacco, except for normal cold storage holdings in
trade channels. Accordingly, government-owned supplies diverted from
trade channels to maintain market price are crushed for peanut oil or
sold for export, usually within the marketing year or soon thereafter.
Prices for these uses are well below (perhaps 50 percent below) prices
of peanuts for edible use in domestic consumption. Diversion for

crushing and export (Table 8b, Appendix C) beginning in 1955 in millions

of pounds farmers stock was 187; 269; 134; and 309. Estimated 1959 diver-
sion is 280 million pounds and proSpective diversion in 1960 is 240 million
pounds. A loss of 3¢ to Sc per pound is Sustained by Commodity Credit Cor-
poration on diversion sales depending upon the oil and export market and
the support price.

Meanwhile, since 1955, per capita consumption Shows the follow-
ing pattern in pounds, kernel basis: 4.1; 4.3; 4.5; 4.4; and estimated
1959, 4.6 (Appendix C, Table 8c). These figures have the appearance of
an upward trend, but may not be such because levels comparable to these
were also obtained in the early 1950's. Since 1947, per capita consumption
has varied between 4.1 and 4.5 pounds, a range not greatly different from
that which prevailed in the 1930's. Higher levels have prevailed only
during war years when peanuts substituted effectively for other foods in
Short supply. Relevant estimates regarding apparent United States supply
and disposition beginning in 1954 are included in Table 1, as prepared by
the Oils and Peanut Division, Commodity Stabilization Service, United
States Department of Agriculture. The estimates for 1959 and 1960 take
into consideration a demand elasticity8 of -0.46 and an annual population
increase of 1.7 percent. The figure pertinent to these considerations is
"total commercial edible and crushing” disappearance. It will be noted
that exports and imports (except for imports associated with the Short

crop of 1954) are negligible and offsetting; that commercial crushing for

 

8

Sydney Reagan, Peanut Price Support Programs, 1933-1952, and
Their Effect on Farm Income, (unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Harvard
University, 1953, Chapter VI).

 

.mouo coma com Ho>oH
ouomd3m ca omnouoca ucm ommouocg cowumandom com cocmsoHH< \m
.owmuo>m ummm m um>o announce Huuou Nom.HH

.omcmso cowumandod mo sundown owmuo>m use» m um>o unmouocw Nom.¢
.moaum SH owcmzo mo mmomomc owmuo>m use» m uo>o mammcocg Nem.n

comm .mN Susannah
museum mwmhaoc< Emuwoum

mmo .eoumn>ua unease was memo

 

\H

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

owe owe «.mwm m.mHm m.oon ¢.om¢ o.~wm o.oo~ axooom wcavcm..u
mmmm. moon o.umeu m.emou o.¢mmu e.eemu e.memu o.NRNH SeamusSAESSHS canoe .m
mam omN ~.mwu o.eom mammal. q.oA~ “.mmH c.e~ coumcm>ue canoe .o
N.N ~.m c.H ~.H u ommuoum ca mommoq .u
¢.m o.m : i i new: cocuo can an .oom .o
N.mm ¢.m¢ w.mm o.H m.m uuomxm .e
«.mmm o.Hm o.onH o.mwa m.m~ guano oaumoaon .m
coamuo>wv 000 .N
waea ONSH ¢.omma w.ome q.ommfl c.quH ¢.¢mHH o.o¢NH om: cmomfiou can cannon HmuoH .w
NNH NNH «.mNH m.mHH c.~NH m.NNH q.¢NH m.an umoH new pow .mms mace .ooom .o
N N o.N o.m w.~ o.~ N.H o. uuomxS Hmwoumaaoo .n
emmfi omma o.¢oHH q.meH o.HmmH N.m¢HH w.mmoH c.5oHH mcflcmouo one
maaaum Humouoeaoo HmuoH .o
Non r. Nee |.o.~0n e.HoH N.wmu d.oa e.Ha Mummwu. wanemauo Hauonmaaou .n
N¢HH\N soHH\H o.mooH o.mmHH w.NHHH o.wmoH «.mwm q.oHoH menace Hmaouoaaoo .m
cm: coomaou can cacwcm .H
succumommmmwn .m
.mwwm ”wwwm .mwmmmw e.w¢H~ mpmmmm. m.ooom mummmm. o.umeu Seesaw canoe .e
N N o.oe o.~ mumwai. .o.o e.~ S.ewu acreage .m
Nmoa mooa «.mwea m.mmma o.om¢H m.~ooa o.memH «.mooH cofiuosuoum .N
.me NHM. m.amm w.oom ¢.om¢ bhwmm o.ao~ m.mm~ wxuoum HmuoH .o
omH Nwa «.mn ~.moH m.N¢H w.mm u b.mN 000 .a
0mm Nmm o.no~ o.mm~ o.mHm «.mom o.mo~ ~.cmm Henchmaaoo .m
exooum wcwccwmom .H
madman .d
:mvcnom coHHHHE i .
@WWW u @MMW " UWMMQMQ u WWGH u NMGH " OWOH u mmGH u @mGH . ill. EQUH
H unswn< wcwccwwon Snow illzlsllllss

Acumen xooum consummv

mwazu HH< .cofiufimodmwv was madman moumum nouns: unopened .

 

oil is relatively small within a narrow range of variation Since it is
mainly a by-product of the shelling and manufacturing process; and that
seed uses, etc., are practically constant. The figures of Special interest
are production, commercial edible and crushing use, and total diversion.
For an understanding of the problem, these figures should be reviewed in
light of the foregoing discussion and.the descriptive material in Appendix
A. The magnitude of the diversion figure is a function of acreage and
yield of peanuts after deducting all requirements for other uses and mak-
ing appropriate allowance for beginning and ending commercial stocks

which are mainly those associated with the normal trade channel pipeline
and are fairly constant from year to year at the beginning of the market-
ing season, August 1. The substance of this study centers on appraising
the probabha future magnitude of the quantity of peanuts which will be
subject to diversion. In the process of doing so, the factors associated

with acreage and yield of peanuts are explored in detail.

Purpose of the Study
There are four factors of production: land, capital, labor,
and management. Of these, the peanut production control program exercises
direct restrictions on one-~1and. Admittedly, if control of the use of
land were fully exercised, production could be completely restricted. As
Observed elsewhere, this is not the policy. Accordingly, with a fixed
minimum of land, growers are free to apply to this one factor additional
Lllidits of other production factors and achieve additional production.
ilfil1l¢E= extent to which they may do this is thought to be associated with

the relative profitability of such action.

 

The purpose of the peanut control program is to obtain for
growers a price and income for peanuts greater than would be the case
under general equilibrium price conditions in a free market character-
ized by many sellers (growers) a relatively few buyers (shellers), and
an inelastic demand. Since the market for the individual grower is
perfectly elastic, he has nothing to gain by curtailing his own pro-
duction and much to gain by increasing it if his price-cost relationship
is favorable. Since the purpose of the peanut program is to provide a
favorable price-cost relationship, his response has been to increase his
production in the only way available to him--app1y to his limited land
greater quantities of capital, labor, and management per acre. The result
is an increase in yield per acre and greater returns. Up to a point
this is self-defeating in the aggregate because acreage has to be decreased
to maintain supply-demand balance. At the point of minimum acreage
allotments, it is no longer self-defeating unless price is reduced fur-
ther in an effort to maintain supply-demand balance. When price is
reduced to the specified minimum, it is no longer self-defeating unless
further controls are instituted or the program is abandoned. Assuming
the minimum price is a favorable one, growers will still seek ways to
maximize returns by adding additional increments of other factors of
Production to the land factor. This condition now prevails--minimum

Price at a level presumed to be reasonably favorable and minimum acreage
C=<>1nstitute the general policy.

The purpose of this study is to estimate the magnitude of

to tal production response to be expected between 1959 and 1965 under

as sumptions of minimum support price and acreage as specified by current

legislation; compare this estimate with prospective requirements for the
same period; and thus, derive quantities to be diverted from normal trade
channels by government action. in formulating these estimates, consider-
-ation has been given to variation of production conditions among the
seven major producing states which make up the three main geographical

areas of production.

Methodology

Subjective consideration has been given to the rate of
technological progress in each of the three prodUction areas in recent
years since this provides an appraisal of the additional increments of
capital, labor, and management the grower has available to apply to his
fixed minimum of land factor if it is profitable for him to do so as
an individual. Chapter III is devoted to this appraisal.

A limited statistical approach has been used to study the
form of the relationships of peanut acreage, yield, and production with
such factors as prices, costs, weather effect, and alternative crops.
Chapter IV has been devoted to a description of the analytical methods
employed. This is further amplified in Chapter V in which the variables
are described. The models may be regarded as non-structural, semi- but
indefinitely reduced, predictive equations9. Acceptable coefficients

-fttmn this type of equation are regarded as reasonably reliable for
.1’1?€ediction purposes; however, very little significance should be

at tached to the regression coefficients for individual variables.

9Memorandum from Glenn L. Johnson, Professor of Agricultural
geomomics, Michigan State University, April 15, 1960.

 

10

The probability that intercorrelation exists among independ-
ent variables is recognized; the degree of intercorrelation has not been
fully determined. Single linear equations have been fitted by least
squares procedures to acreage, yield, and production models for each of
the seven major peanut producing states.

The results of the analyses are presented for each of the
three geographic production areas, one chapter for each. Chapter IX
summarizes the production estimates for the nation, and proposes certain
subjective adjustments for recent technology. Projected production is
compared with projected requirements to the year 1965.

In Chapter X is set forth a discussion of the shortcomings of
the statistical procedures employed, the difficulties encountered, and
the manner in which the reliability of the parameter estimates may be
affected.

Before proceeding with the analysis, it may be helpful to

review generally the institutional background of the industry.

CHAPTER II
INSTITUTIONAL SETTING

The location of the production of peanuts is dictated by a suit-
able combination of soils and climatel. The requirements of a moderately
long growing season of 4 to 5 months, rather high temperatures and moder-
ate rainfall, and light—textured soil are found in the Virginia-Carolina,
the Georgia-Florida-Alabama, and the Texas-Oklahoma areas. The Virginia-
Carolina and the Southeast production areas are relatively compact and
contiguous among the states concerned. In Texas and Oklahoma, production
is more widespread. Maps of the principal peanut producing counties with-
in each state are included with the description of rainfall data in Chapter
V. In these areas are found the thousands of growers, and the comparatively
few millers and shellers, who produce and prepare the cr0p for its destina-
tion to end-use manufacturers who process it into forms preferred by con-
sumers. The location of end-users follows roughly the concentration of
the population: the megalopolis of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and
Baltimore; the Chicago and Detroit area; and the West Coast metropolitan
areasz. Some manufacturers are located in the producing areas, however,

as well as less thickly populated areas. A few large manufacturers per-

form an integrated function, i.e., they not only perform the milling and

l
J. H. Beattie, F. W. P003, and B. B. Higgins, Growing Peanuts,

13‘411etin No. 2063 (Washington: U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1954),
.F>jp. 1-4.

 

2Donald B. Agnew and Donald Jackson, Storage in Marketing
Earmem' Stock Peanuts, M. R. Report No. 88 (Washington: U. S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, 1955), p. 5.

 

ll

12

shelling operation, but also manufacture various consumer products to be
distributed at retail through their own firm's facilities, as well as the
usual retail outlets. So far as is known, peanuts are not grown under
contract between processors and farmers; at least not extensively.

Peanuts are sold to consumers in several forms. These include
cleaned peanuts (in-the-shell, ball park type), salted peanuts, peanut
butter, as a component of confections, and as a component of mixed salted
nuts. There are also peanut butter sandwiches and various peanut snacks.
The bits, pieces, and low quality peanuts which result from shelling and
processing are crushed and provide a high grade vegetable oil suitable
for cooking and commercial uses. During war-time scarcities, peanut oil
was much in demand and was manufactured as a primary product. In peace
time, under conditions of price supports, peanut oil does not competet
well price-wise with other vegétable oils. Notwithstanding the above
references, the peanut is classified botanically as a legume rather than
as a nut or vegetable. In some countries it is called a groundnut be-
cause of its characteristic of growing just below the soil surface.

There are a number of competitive products. These include
other nuts (but probably none as inexpensive), other spreads such as jams
and jellies, cheese, and components of confections such as sugar and
syrups which may be varied in amounts as price relationships change. Pop-
'corn and possibly sunflower seeds are also thought to be competitive.

“iith the exception of war-time consumption, the per capita consumption

Ilmas been quite stable, perhaps showing a slight tendency to increase as

<2: onsumer incomes increase.

13

Peanuts are not a homogeneous product; three main types are pro-
duced. These are the Virginia, Runner, and Spanish. The Virginia type is
typically large podded. The large Jumbo and Fancy grades are sold in the
shell for roasting. Production of these is confined to the Virginia-
Carolina area, although in recent years some Runners from the Southeast
go into the roasting market. The Extra Large shelled peanut is a Virginia-
Carolina area product and is in demand by the salted nut market, along”
with Medium size. The Virginia No. 1 and No. 2 sizes are primarily used
for peanut butter and candy. Normally, the relatively low oil content
of the Virginia type peanut makes them less desirable for this use.3

The Runner type is of medium size. Formerly grown for hogging
off, it is now a better quality product as a result of varietal improve-
ment (Appendix E). Its principal market is peanut butter and peanut candy,
although some are now sold salted, and some cleaned for roasting.

Salters, peanut butter manufacturers, and candy makers all use
shelled Spanish peanuts4. These are grown in the Southeast along with
Runners, and are produced almost exclusively in the Southwest. The
largest outlet is peanut butter.

The total and per capita consumption of principal peanut pro-
ducts is given in Table 1. It will be noted that the peanut butter sand-
‘Wich is now reported separately in recent years as a relatively new pro-

<1lact of rather substantial proportions.

3

Harold J. Clay, Marketing Peanuts and Peanut Products, Publica-
‘2 3K.on No. 416 (Washington: U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1941), p. 5.

4
Clay, Publication No. 416, p. 6.

 

«H

.NN .m .oomH .umnfimuomm .«dmn .noHuoouHm mHHo pom mush "mouoom

.%HHmooom wow: and muHmmo “mm woodman ApmHHmsmcov omnmmHo «0 amazon ¢.o uoonm azHHm:0Hqup<o
.xoomo oH mm: :36 now mumuouommooma an coma umuuon uoommm mopoHoan

.moaoHBpomm GH pom: Hmuusa uaommm mmpoHon ommH umownd

onoonmm .oommmm oqnmomH now ammoxm hoomo CH mm: :30 How muououomwooma %n moms umuuon daemon mmpoHoxmm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H a o.m~n H o mH H. m.mH w. m.H¢H o.H n.me H.~ o.oom u........mmaH
H.¢ ¢.~o~ H. ¢.mH H. o.oH m. m.mmH o.H m.owH H.N N.Nom u........wmmH
H.¢ H.omo H. H.mH H. m.mH w. H.an o.H o.HNH H.N H.nmm u........mmmH
m.m n.o¢o H. m.oH H. w.mH w. w.mmH o.H m.~oH m.H «.mum u........ommH
m.m H.000 H. m.m m. o.mHH m. m.o¢H o.N m.m~m u........mmmH
n.m n.mom H. m.m e. m.oHH m. m.m¢H o.H m.am~ u........qmmH
o.m ¢.Nmm nan w.m w. o.mHH a. H.a¢H o.H m.mmm u........mm¢H
o.m H.oon In- 5.0 w. «.mHH o.H ¢.n¢H m.H m.om~ u........~an
o.m n.m¢m nu: m.o m. w.o~H m. o.o¢H m.H m.m- n........HmmH
m.m o.mmn use m.o w. m.mHH m. n.NmH w.H H.0mm u........om¢H
¢.m m.Hom H. m.m m. H.¢NH w. m.oHH ~.H m.Hn~ u........m¢mH
mpaoom wwwoom. moooom amazon mpooom mpooom moooom moooom moaoom cocoon monsom mpasom “
ooHHHHz ooHHHHz oowHHHz iooHHHHS ooHHHHHH ooHHHHz“
muHmmou Hmuoe " muHmoou Houoe u muHamou Houoa " ouHmmou Hmuoa ” ouHmmou kuoa " muHmoo" Hmuoa " umown<
mom “ " Mom " " Ham " u Ham u " you n u mom a " onocHwon
oHouOH “ Honuo u monuasfioom " nmpnmo possum u monsoon omuHmm u ououuon uocmmm " was?

umuuon uncoom

 

.mmmhu HHo Hmuoa
.mm-m¢mH .auuopoun muoaHuo :H on: vouuoaou “Amooouw oHoHomv muocowm um-m£m
. a-

“ .2:

15

Relatively few peanuts are imported normally except in years of
extremely short crops. The usual estimate consists of about 1,000 tons of

imports and a like amount of commercial export. Peanuts, not shelled, are

subject to duty under paragraph 759 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified,
at 4.25 cents per pound (if from Cuba, 3.4 cents per pound). Blanched,
salted, prepared, or preserved peanuts are subject to duty at 7 cents per
pounds. Peanut butter is subject to duty at 7 cents per pound (except

Cuba, 5.6 cents). In addition, an annual import quota of 1,709,000 pounds
is in effect by Presidential proclamation. The quota may be lifted upon
occasion of appeal to the Tariff Commission and proclamation by the Presi-
dent .

Paralleling the industry at all points is an array of state and
federal agencies which determine the acreage each grower shall plant and
which enforce performance; influence the price structure from farmer to
consumer by offering to buy peanuts in unlimited quantities at Specified
Prices; collect and disseminate price and quantity information; perform
research and education in peanut production and marketing, regulate im-
ports; inspect for grade and quality; enforce health and sanitation regu-
lations directly and indirectly all the way from grower (pesticides)
through milling, storage, and manufacturing. Fees are collected for some
Of these services, but most of them are tax supported.

The various components of the industry are organized into

special county, state, and national interest groups representing growers,

\

U 5U. S. Tariff Commission, Peanuts, Syplemental Investigation

Wection 22,_Agricultura1 Adjustment Act, As Amended, (Washington;
- 8. Tariff Commission, February, 1955), pp. 1-2.

l6

Shellers and confectioners. These groups are influential in promoting

their product, supporting research and extension education, and in nego-

tiating with government agencies the terms and conditions of various in-

dustry regulations and legislative actions.
The nature and impact of acreage and price control programs by

government is of particular significance in this study. Such programs

have been in effect since 1933 and are described in detail in Appendix A.
A diagram of the principal economic, institutional, technolog—

ical, and physical forces and factors affecting the supply of peanuts is

presented in Figure 1.

From a small beginning in Sussex County6, Virginia, in 1844,

peanut production has gradually become an important cash crop in the

South. Not a specialty crop, it is a part of the regular rotation of

other important craps such as corn, cotton, and soybeans in the states

7

Wonderment, and sometimes concern , is

where the crop is well adapted.
often expressed as to why Congress should have designated peanuts as a
"basic," commodity when it is such a relatively small proportion of United

State-3 Agriculture value-wise8. However, considering the importance of

Peanuts in the cropping plans of the three areas of production, and the

\

 

6
Ba "Peanuts Aren't Just Peanuts", Monthly Review, Federal Reserve
ml: of Richmond, February 1958, p. 8.

v1 7Daniel D. Badger, "The Case for Peanuts as a Basic Commodity",
mum Econom1CS, No. 161 (February, 1960), pp. 9-13,

8
U. 8., Congressional Record, 84th Congress, lst Session, 1955,

C
fi’ N0. 73, 4699-4712, 4924, 4948-4951. (Proposal to Exclude Peanuts
om Basic Commodity List, So-Called Green Amendment -- Distributed by

t
he National Confectioners' Assoc.) .

NH

 

 

   

 

         
       

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

 

 

            
                          

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

muouomh
panama
Houuaoo .
oHuouovm uommnH GOHu
new moHuoHum> one new noan mmanHHsm
ecummmmm 3oz mmmomHa IHHuH unmEmHawm pnoH /\
; mawumoum
muonoum nuanum>ou
.I .. I - -._ so _ r ,
.quouo _ moHum .L /\
L .II. J I I c Emu
r. mamuH mmouo
III! I |_I :0 ac: on I“ .II I.| wnHuomBoo
fi.thHmod 4 w M m a. . 5 coal. 0
mHHme %moHon:omH m um U uHH _ m
_ new _ HHom _ mwmouod
.IIeOmHmL rIII I.
I_ _ r\ _
_ n (C
awesome ex Hu:mwmwmw<.a
Hanson: V 3233 mo 33% \ mumsomm I. neonates.
uumaHHo r. mo u mouo< I._ among: .
- ,x/x. III - r...... I..t
L V
muonoom mo
fl I IUmWI.I.J :OHuoopoum oHumofion I.I I I.I.J
. pom momma . av
”macaw mch: .b _ muHOQEH H
I I I I E335.

PFIIIu IIIIIIL
museums no aaaaam

 

.nuanuom mo AHamam m

 

ujmmu’
a wuomww< mounmnHNnH uowflZrI.H musmflm

18

Similarity to other "basic" crOps in terms of farm financing, labor use,
tenant and share crop arrangements, and the similarity of the type of
government programs that have been in operation, it is not astonishing
that an influential group of Southern Congressmen s..aould prevail in such
a decision. It should be kept in mind that a group of citizens of Enter-
Prise, Alabama, voted $3,000 in 1919 for a monument inscribed as follows9:

"In profound appreciation of the boll weevil and what it has
done as the herald of prosPerity."

The benevolence of the boll weevil consisted of destroying cot-
ton and shifting a major part of the agriculture to peanuts (as well as
t50 forestry and probably to large acreages of idle land which was "not
much account", an early day version of the "soil bank") .
The oil content of peanuts gave great impetus to their produc-
tion in the Southeast and Southwest during World War I and World War II,
not unlike, except in magnitude, the impetus provided by Civil War soldiers
Who came , saw them, liked them, took them home, and created a market. The
charts accompanying succeeding Chapters, and the tables in Appendix C are
ample eVidence of the growth of the industry.
Currently, another shift is occurring in Southern agriculture
Which is probably of even greater magnitude than any seen to date. This
is a migration of people from farms as well as a further shift within farm-
ing ‘ The impact of technology on farm production, some of which is de-

Sc
ribed in the next Chapter, is such that fewer and fewer farm families

are
needed to produce the same or greater quantities. The “nature of farm

\

9Clay, Publication No. 416, p. 3.

19

inputs as well as quantity and quality of inputs is changing. Fewer farm

produced inputs, more purchased inputs, larger volume of output with
Smaller net Operating margins are rendering the small scale farm obsolete

as a business, and providing profits on large scale farms only for those

capable of good to excellent management. Coupled with this shrink in

necessary manpower is a tremendous growth in industrial and related com-
mercial development which, in time, will provide more productive (and thus

better paid) opportunities for farm people caught in the squeeze of eco-

nomic adjustment. In the meantime, from observation and such studies as

have been made, it appears that farm families in the South are prone to
Seek for themselves and their children off-farm employment opportunities

as fast as they become available. They say that on their present farm

allotments, according to an unpublished studylo, incomes from cotton, pea-

nuts , and tobacco are inadequate and that further acreage reductions would

rePres ent hardship .

It is not likely that price support under the present scale and

organization of farming offers a remedy; probably only a holding position

until adjustments can be made. In addition to urbanization and indus-

trialization, a shift from crops to livestock is taking place. One of

the more dramatic introductions is that of the broiler industry, an enter-
Prise which flourishes where resources are few or of poor quality; but the

cattle and dairy industries are also showing steady growth. These changes

H.\

 

10
P): W. W. Harper and R. F. Anderson, "Agricultural Policy and
xogl‘ams as Viewed by Individual Cotton Farmers in Georgia" (Georgia
PeriJuent Stations, 1959), pp. 1-65 (mimeographed).

20

may mean less emphasis on the "basic" commodity programs in the more dis-
tant future as pressures develop for a reorganized farm production pattern

The first peanut processing plant was erected in New York City
in 1876 heralding the end of manu-facturing, another was established in

Norfolk Virginia the same year, and a larger one in Smithfield, Virginia,
in 1880. This was the beginning of peanut "agri-business". In the early

1950 8 there were about 27 shelling plants in the Virginia-Carolina area,

70 in the Southeast, and 36 in the Southwest reporting to Gilliland and

Smith in connection with a study of the industry”. There may be fewer

at present as attrition and consolidation may have occurred in recent

years . Buyers from these firms visit farms, buy peanuts competitively at
or about loan price in most years. Peanuts not sold to such buyers are

delivered to a c00perative marketing association (one in each area) where
they are held as collateral for a non-recourse loan to the grower under a

Program offered by the Commodity Credit Corporation, and administered in

the field by the cooperatives. If not redeemed by the association, the pea-

nuts automatically revert to the Corporation for diversion or re-sale

Financing of the purchase of the crop is a large item in the

operations of the sheller, and one which involves considerable risk A

fast turnover is necessary for most shellers. There is no futures market
to PrOtect values while peanuts are being processed. Shelling plant cost

and return data considered typical, as formulated by Moder and Penny,

\

 

 

11C. B. Gilliland and Thomas B. Smith, An Analysis of the

Whelling Industry 1950- 51 throggp 1952- 53, M. R. Report No. 134,
ashil'Igton: U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1956), pp 24, 27, 36.

21

suggest raw material cost (peanuts) as about $1,600,000 for medium plants

and twice this for large plantslz. Some large plants require much higher

levels of capital. The business is highly seasonal with most of the opera-

tions completed a few months after harvest. Total fixed investment in the

Moder and Penny study was placed from $325,000 to $477,000 for medium and

large plants, respectively.

A by-product of the milling process is the peanut hull. These

are useful as bedding for livestock or poultry, mulch, bulk in feed13, and

certain other uses, but none of these has a value more than just about

sufficient to pay the cost of packaging and transportation. There are

equally low cost competitors in these products. Hulls constitute 25-30

percent of the weight of the crop, depending on type, and comprise a dis-

posal problem at shelling plants. Peanuts from land infested with certain

nematodes cause additional problems of dirt disposal and fumigation of

bulls before shipment.

Peanuts are purchased from farmers on grade and quality samples;

only recently has an improved method of drawing unbiased samples been

developed. In the trade, transactions are on a grade and quality basis

by types, Price differentials prevail at farm and wholesale level.

\

 

12
J. J. Moder, Jr., and N. M. Penny, Industrial E$ineering and

W Studies of Peanut Marketing, Bulletin 286 (Atlanta: Georgia
“mu-Cute of Technology, 1954), p. 136.

13
F H. R. Thomas and C. M. Kincaid, Peanut Hulls for GrowinLand
‘ttenin Beef Cattle, Bulletin 501 (Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic

I‘mtitute, 1959), p. 11.

The use of peanuts in the home has been studied by Weidenhamerla.

She found that 7 out of 10 homemakers had used salted peanuts during the

year preceding the study, and 4 out of 10 had used roasted peanuts. Older

homemakers, and those with no children at home, and those in lower income

brackets were least likely to use them. The use of salted and roasted
peanuts, however, was infrequent by about half of the users. Regarding
Peanut butter, 84 percent of the homemakers used it and about two-thirds

8erved it every week or two. Eighty-two percent of the reSpondents

rfiported using candy containing nuts with a preference for almonds, peanuts,

and pecans .

\

 

14
Margaret Weidenhamer, Homemakers' Use of and Opinions About

Pe
wand Tree Nuts, M. R. Report No. 203 (Washington: U. 8. Depart-
t Of Agriculture, 1957), pp. i - ii.

CHAPTER III

RECENT IMPROVEMENTS IN THE TECHNOLOGY

OF PEANUT PRODUCTION

The status of peanut production technology has an important
There are many factors involved which do

lWaring on yields per acre.

not lend themselves to statistical analysis. Furthermore, the statis-

ti4:411 approach attempts to deal with the manner and extent to which one

fECtor is associatedwith one or more other factors; it has little to

“Y about causes. In this study, the effect of innovations in pest

Control , improved plant varieties, cultural practices and skills, and

harvesting methods is reflected in the time variable included in the
Several yield models; that is, the extent to which improvements in
technology are associated with the passage of time.-. Since the time
Variable may include also the effect of certain non-technological factors,
it 18 not necessarily a precise measure of technology. Accordingly, this
Chapter will outline some of the major developments in the field in order

to provide a limited basis for subjective evaluation of the influence of

the "State of the arts" over time on yields per acre. This has applica-

t

1°“ mainly to the most recent 10 to 20 years and attempts to offer some
e

xPlanatiou of why yields have increased recently, and why further in—

crea
Sea constitute a reasonable expectation in accord with the results

of this s tudy -

It may be safely assumed that new knowledge in the field is

quic
k1? made available to growers through the several state Extension

23

24

services, as well as through many mass information media. It is not
reasonable to assume, however, that experimental results are entirely
duplicated or fully applied in their extension to farm conditions. For
example, a pest control procedure which increases yields 30 percent ex-
perimentally will probably increase average yields by some lesser amount
when applied generally. Nevertheless, a continuum of experimental success
and its general application in dealing with yield depressing factors has
a steady yield increasing effect even though there is often considerable
lag in adoption of new technology. This suggests that growers are con-
tinually confronted with some degree of technological obsolescence, but
its degree is variable and unknown. When price-cost conditions and acre-
age limitations are such that rapid adoption is highly profitable, as in
recent years, the pronounced effect is worthy of Special attention.

This resume does not purport to be more than a modest and in-
complete review of the subject. It has been necessary to prepare it
without the opportunity of personal visits to the Southeast and South-
west production areas. Nevertheless, an impressive literature is avail-
able which, viewed comprehensively, describes the persistent efforts of
scientists over the years to apply new knowledge from many disciplines to
the particular problems of peanut production. Special mention is de-
served for the work of the Engineering Experiment Stationl, Georgia

Institute of Technology, and its project Sponsor, GFA Peanut Association,

 

l
W. A. Gresham, Jr., C. E. Collum, and R. J. Kyle, Bibliography

on the Technolggy of Peanut Production, 1896-1956, Engineering Experiment
Station Special Report No. 32, (Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology,
1957), pp. 1-250.

 

25

Camilla, Georgia, for the 250 page bibliography of peanut tEChHOIOSY. a
work which is now being supplemented through 1960.

Virginia-Carolina Area

Peanut yields per acre in these two states have shown the most
consistent and greatest rate of increase to the highest levels among the
three production areas. The reasons for the high level are beyond the
scope of this chapter which is concerned with change rather than the
comparative level of yields geographically.

A Virginia Extension publicationz says that the average yield

of peanuts in the state can be increased 25 percent in the next few years
through better production practices if growers will:

1. select good soils
2. select proper varieties
(a) Holland Jumbo (runner)
(b) Virginia Bunch (bunch)
(c) Virginia 56-R (runner)
(d) Georgia 119-20 (bunch)
3 use good seed
4 treat seed before planting
5 inoculate seed when needed
6. prepare good seed bed
7. plant on time -
8 closer Spacing for higher yields
9 fertilize adequately
10 apply lime cautiously

11. use gypsum for calcium

12. control weeds and grass

13. use pre-emergence chemical weed control
14. control insects

15. dust for leafspot control

16. control Stem rot by cultural methods
17. fumigate for nematodes

18. dig at the proper time
19. shock and cap well

 

2M. P. Lacy, Larger Yields and Better Quality Peanuts, Agricul-
tural Extension Service Circular 413 rev., (Blacksburg: Virginia Poly-
technic Institute, 1960), pp. 1-8.

 

26

20. cure before picking
21. use proper procedure for mechanical harvesting and curing
22. use a proper crop rotation

While few would fail to agree that complete and successful
attention to all of these practices by all growers "can" potentially
increase yields per acre by 25 percent (or! more), the problem of what
increase will be realized by 1965, still remains.

Some of the recommendations listed are not under full control
0f the operator (for example, weather may prevent digging at the "proper"
t11118) ; some pests, such as stem rot, have no complete control or methods
01‘- eradication. Some growers will be less than ideally successful in
apply ing one or more practices; some will skimp to reduce costs or to
devote limited time and capital to other enterprises. However, yields
°bta ined in experimental plots are often 75 to 100 percent above average
yie-1<is for the area, so a great potential increase exists.

Discussions with close observers in the area suggest a 5 to 10
perl’Qent yield increase over the next few years. There are some unknowns.
Chetllrlcal residues on crops are receiving closer scrutiny now than formerly.
On January 19, 1360, the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, published an order establishing zero

tolerance for residues of heptaclor on peanuts. This may be difficult if

not impossible to meet, according to Campbell and Boush3. The same
aluthors point out that "the southern corn rootworm has become resistant to

\

V 3W. V. Campbell and G. M. Boush, "Chemicals in Insect Control,"
minis-Carolina Peanut News, Vol. VI, No. 2 (Spring, 1960), p. 1.

27

aldrin and heptaclor in Nansemond County, Virginia". These two chemicals
have controlled the southern corn rootworm and thrips. 0n the other hand,
research workers are hopeful that. by careful. attention to Specified
methods of cultivation, a substantial reduction in the incidence of stem
rot can be achieved. This might add another 100 pounds to average yields
(5 percent) in the near future if all goes well in current tests and the
recormnendations are adopted generally by growers.

In comparing the rate of progress ianirginia and North Carolina,
clos e observers suggest that there was a comparative lag in North Carolina
in w ideSpread early adoption of improved technology, but now the rate of
yield increase in North Carolina will exceed that of Virginia over the
next few years. The comparative lag is attributed to a less compact
geographical area, more growers, and more acreage, as well as more com-
petition from other crops such as cotton and tobacco for the time, atten-
tion, and capital of North Carolina growers.

Some of the Specified practices listed above deserve some com-

ment in their relation to the study of future trend in yields.

Sefict fld soils: Since 1949, when acreage allotments became mandatory,
it Was assumed that the acreage contraction would be directed to the better
soils and would result in higher yields per acre. The yield regressions
confirm this relationship. Projections to 1965 assume no further acreage
reduction; consequently, little if any increase in yields would be ex-

DeQ-ted from this source if acreage is assumed constant from 1958 to 1965.

§e\1ect proper varieties: Varieties are bred not only for their high

28

yielding attributes, but also for certain marketable characteristics
Specified by shellers and end-users as a reflection of consumer demand.
An. ianportant consideration in the Virginia-type peanut, is the percentage
of Extra Large size nut because of the price premium in the salted nut
market. 2 Another important consideration is desirability for roasting in
the shell, characteristic of the large size Virginia-type peanut. The
'Hollalzad Jumbo and Virginia Bunch are relatively high yielding varieties
0f.lc>tng standing and are still grown extensively. Virginia 56-R.was
intr<><duced in 1956 not only because of its desirable marketing character-
istics in terms of a higher percentage of extra large peanuts, but also
for 1 ts higher yield. It is expected to account for about 75 to 80 per-
cent: «of the acreage in 1960. The Georgia 119-20 is currently being intro-
ducEECI. not so much for its higher yield, but for its desirable characteristics
f°r the roasting (in the shell) trade. The NC-2 variety was introduced
in Ii<>rth Carolina in 1954 for its much improved percentage of extra large
kerjhiils as well as for larger yields per acre.

Close and informed observers estimate the following peanut
var iety percentage distribution in North Carolina in 1954; Virginia
Bmun‘311, 65; Virginia Runner, 29; NC-l, 4; NC-Z, 2. By 1960, the following
peI‘Centages were estimated: Virginia BunCh, 8; Virginia Runner, 10; NC-l,
none (introduced in the interim period but not found acceptable); NC-2, 78;
and a new variety introduced in 1960, NC-4X, 4. The rapid adoption of NC-2
is 1Indicative of its increased yield and profitability. Its innovation
prc’bably explains much of the increase in yield per acre since 1956.

The following press release issued July 23, 1958, by the Virginia

29

Agricultural Extension Service provides a comparative evaluation of the

56 -R variety:

A new high-yielding, top quality peanut variety is gaining
pepularity in Virginia.

Agronomists at the Tidewater Research Station at Holland,
where the variety was developed, and reports from test plots throughout
the peanut belt, confirm the superiority of Virginia 56-R. This variety
was grown for seed increase in 1956, and certified seed were distributed

last year (1957) to producers in all the peanut-producing counties in
Virginia.

The yield of Virginia 56-R has been consistently high. During
a th tee-year period at four test locations, each year the new variety has

averaged 3,002 pounds per acre compared to 2,782 pounds for Holland Jumbo,
the check variety. This is an 8‘7. increase.

Virginia 56-R has been tested on a wide range of soil types and
has done well on light soils as well as medium heavy soils. For t0p yields,
this variety should be planted in rows 30 to 36 inches apart and 6 to 8
inc-‘-]’:).es within the row. This variety matures a few days earlier than Jumbo
I“Hitler varieties, and should therefore be harvested earlier to avoid ex-
ceSSive shedding before harvest, the agronomists say.

Classified as a Virginia runner peanut, the new variety has
moderately thin shells, and high meat percent. When grown in light sandy
:01 la, the peanuts are excellent for roasting in the shell for sale-ms

ha-11 park" peanuts. The average shelling percentage, based on unshelled

a-1‘tners' stock, is about 707°. The proportion of Extra Large kernels varies
from 257; to 45% with an average of 36%. The percentage of Extra Large is
fienerally a little lower on light sandy soils, and tends to be a little

Sher on the heavier soils. Climatic variations also affect the percent-
age of Extra Large.

Innovations often stimulate pride, fear, or rejoicing, depending

Upon their impact on interregional competitive interests. In Appendix E

are selected readings from a "Statement of the Virginia-Carolina Peanut
A8Sociation (a sheller organization) to Mr. J. E. Thigpen, Director, Oils
a“<1 Peanut Division, United States Department of Agriculture, Relative to

the 1958 Support Program for Peanuts, April 28, 1958".' The purpose of the

Statement was to obtain a price differential adjustment among production

areas; however, the testimony is highly descriptive of the impaCt of new

30

plant variety developments in the industry. This includes the subjective
evaluation of several growers and shellers which casts light on the reasons
for rapid adoption. Also included is a brief objective evaluation by

Dr. Gregory of the North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station who

developed the NC-2 variety.

Use good seed: A certified seed program has recently been inaugurated in
Virginia through the EXperiment Station, Extension Service, and the Crop
Improvement Association which is the foundation’seed stocks organization
for the state. The Peanut Growers Marketing Cooperative, Franklin, Virginia,
is al so coOperating in the program. If properly maintained varieties in
Pure form are more readily available to growers in the future, there may
be a yield increasing effect from this source.

According to Moore“, the area has "taken world leadership in
the development and utilization of tetrazolium for quality evaluation of
seed peanuts." This is a two-day method of testing germination by chem-
ical analysis of the seed's "breathing" ability, a factor associated with
life and growth. This technique might affect yields favorably through
better stands.

Improved seed shelling equipment and technique have been developed
in li‘ecent years, and sources of certified seed now exist in contrast to

t
he "seed selection and saving" custom formerly practiced by growers as

the

only source of seed. Shelling for seed use requires care that is

\

C 4R. P. Moore, "Tetrazolium Testing Seed Peanuts," Virginia-
wins Peanut News, Vol. v1, No. 2 (Spring, 1960), p. 12.

 

31

unnecessary for other uses.

Closer Spacing for higher yields: Research indicates that not as much
yield increase from this practice may be exPected for peanuts as may have
been the case for some crOps, such as corn. Shear and Miller5 indicate
that important considerations from the practical standpoint concerning
Close Spacing are the large quantities of seed required and the difficul-
ties in controlling diseases which affect leaves and branches. An acre

0f peanuts planted in 30-inch rows with the plants 1 foot apart in the row
would require 17,424 seed while an acre planted 6 by 6 inches would re-
‘Iuire ten times as many seed. As for disease control, close Spacing not
9913' increases the difficulty of effectively applying fungicides but appears

‘0 f avor the development and Spread of diseases.

Wlize Adequately: For many years it was thought that little or no
“espouse was obtained from application of fertilizer to peanuts. More
recently, fertility: studies have shown that fertilizer for peanuts may
be applied to the previous crop in the rotation or to cover crops, a
l“ractice which is equally as effective as applying .fertilizer directly
with the peanuts. Lime containing magnesium and gypsum (land plaster) are
also established practices. Improved application equipment and technique
coll1d effect some further increase in yields from this source, as well as

quat‘ntity applied under favorable price—cost conditions.

\

—v

5G. M. Shear and L. I. Miller, Influence of Plant Spacing of
EEEE_Jumbo Runner Peanut on Fruit Development, Yield, and Border Effect,
ronomy Journal, Vol. 52:125-127, 1960).

32

Cultivation: Control of weeds and grass is not now regarded as a problem

 

insofar as methods are concerned. Improved tillage equipment and the
herbicides developed in recent years are effective controls. Some of the

yield increase during the past decade probably derives from this source.

PASC Control: The organisms that cause disease of the peanut and insects
that attack the peanut are listed by the United States Department of
Agriculture 88 f0110W86: bacterial wilt, leafSpot, root rot, Southern
blight or stem rot, meadow nematode, root-knot nematode, sting nematode;
and corn earworm, fall armyworm, potato leafhopper, southern corn rootworm,
tobacco thrips, velvetbean caterpillar, and white-fringed beetle. Some of
these are more destructive than others. Effective controls have been
developed for some of these in recent years which have doubtless contri-
bu'ied substantially to the increase in average yields per acre since 1940;
hoWe‘rer, the scientist faces a continuous battle to find effective con-
trole and overcome the resistance that some organisms develop to controls
which are effective initially.

One of the most destructive diseases of peanuts is cercospora
leafepot. The disease was recognized early in the century, but accord-
ing to Miller7, farmers accepted the disease as a necessary evil and
\

s 6.1. H. Beattie, F. v. P008, and B. B. Higgins, Growing Peanuts
atTilers' Bulletin No. 2063, (Washington: United States Department of

Agriculture, May, 1954), p. 54.

1 7Lawrence I. Miller, Peanut LeafSpot Control, Technical Bulletin
90“. (Blacksburg: Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, October, 1946),
P ~ 3-5 .

33

many research workers believed its control would be impractical. Exper-

iments by Miller8 and others whom he cites indicate that, circa, 1940,

effective control by the use of sulphur dust was introduced. An Exten- '

sion Service leaflet9 says that dusting with sulphur "may increase

peanut yieldsJO to 30 percent." It is interesting that Batten and P003,

in 1 938, as cited by Millerlo, were primarily interested in controlling

1 eafhoppers and discovered that the sulphur and Bordeaux they used also

con trolled leafspot. They found that peanut yields were increased 25.2

and 29.6 percent by controlling these two peaks. More recently, DDT has
been used to control leafhoppers when numerous and causing injury.
Two other very destructive insect pests of peanuts are thrips,
and , ‘ ll
8 outhern corn rootworm. It has recently-.v-Been found, circa 1955 ,
that two pounds of aldrin or heptachlor per acre will control both of
Some

Chas e . Application is made as a dust or in a fertilizer mixture.

e
s t imetes indicate a 20 percent increase in yield as a result of this

the
8113 of control.

Southern blight or Stem rot is one of the most wideSpread and

de
8 tl‘nctive diseases of peanuts. It is caused by the soil borne fungus,

\

 

8Miller, Technical Bulletin 104, pp. 1-7.

Q—ul 9M. P. Lacey, Larger Yields and Better quality Peanuts, Agri-
tIlral Extension Service Circfiar 413 rev., (Blacksburg: Virginia

Po
lytechnic Institute, 1956), pp. 1-7.

10
En]. Lawrence 1. Miller, Peanut LeafSpot and Leafhopper Control,
Ma 1etin 338, (Blacksburg: Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station,

=- 1942), pp. 3-4.

11
Interviews with representatives of the Virginia Peanut and

he;
3
Growers Association, April, 1960.

34

Sclerotium rolfsii. A measure of control12 consists of covering the sur-
face litter 4 to 8 inches deep in preparing the seed bed; and cultivating
carefully to avoid throwing soil against the plants, together with herbi-
cide treatment to control weeds. These are measures based. on concepts by
L - If. Boyle of Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station. Agricultural Re-
search Service pathologist K. H. Garren and agricultural engineer
G - B . Duke, working cooperatively with the Virginia Agricultural Experi-
ment Station, conducted tests at Holland, Virginia, and obtained substan-
t ia 1 reduction of infection with yields substantially higher than for
Che ck plots where mulching and dirting were used. Plant breeders have
thus far been unsuccessful in developing varietal resistance to this
d 18 ease. Limited work has been done on developing varietal resistance to
d 18 ease, and practically no work on varietal resistance to insects. Stem
to t and associated peg rot cause the greatest loss late in the season”.
Wh i l e the disease is not pronounced during dry periods, nor in periods of
Very heavy rainfall, the loss is enhanced by moderately heavy rainfall
and may even extend to causing losses by discoloration of the pods in
w indrows or stacks, or in storage if moisture is high. This may be part
93 the explanation of why yields tend to be negatively associated with

1!:
Qinfall in the specified third critical month as discussed later in the

a
tatistical analysis. The negative coefficient of September rainfall may

\

12

l 95 "How to Control Peanut Stem Rot", Agricultural Research, April
9, p. 7.

13Beattie, et. al.,,No. 2063, pp. 28-30.

35

be reflecting the incidence of this disease. Wells14 suggests certain

rotations for control of rootknot nematode, but indicates that only soil

fumigation will control the sting nematode. Fumigation is said to cost

20—25 dollars or more per acre which suggests that many growers may prefer

the risk to the "insurance", depending upon their personal experience with

the incidence of the disease. Perhaps the practice could be regarded more

as yield maintaining than as yield increasing.

 

figrvestirgg: There is no available record of any peanut combine having
been sold in Virginia before 1957, and only 10 or 15 in North Carolina”.
In April, 1960, Duke estimated for Virginia that in 1957, 600 acres were

combined by 8 growers; in 1958, 1,275 acres by 18 growers; and in 1959,

1800 acres were combined by 25 growers“. Presumably, an increase on this

°rder is occurring in North Carolina. In contrast, 60 percent of the crop

in the Southeast, and probably 90 percent in the Southwest, was combined”

as 0f 1959. By 1960, Duke estimated that probably 80 to 90 percent of the

s"‘-":heast's crop is being combined and less than 5 percent in Virginia.

In the more remote past, peanut harvest was largely a hand oper-

8“1011; later, machines developed for other crops were modified to help

harvest peanuts. In recent years, the invention, development and manufacture

14.1. C. Wells, "Peanut Disease Control", Virginia-Carolina
W, Vol. v1, No. 2 (Spring, 1960), p. 14.

15George B. Duke, Progress Report on Harvesting Virginia-Type
322%, Agricultural Research Service ARS 42-11, (Washington:

United
States Department of Agriculture, July, 1957), p. l.

16

Interview with George B. Duke, Agricultural Engineer at
Virginia Tidewater Research Station, April, 1960.

17Duke, ans, 42-11, p. 1.

36

of farm equipment especially adapted to peanut tillage, planting, culti-

va ting, digging, and other stages of harvesting has arrived on the scene18

Th 18 also includes peanut curing (drying) equipment which, in the Virginia-

Carolina area, is a necessary accompaniment to the combine. The reasons

may be attributed mainly to the declining farm labor supply, higher labor

cost, and of course, convenient and timely Operation. The stack-pole

method from digging through picking and threshing, requires 38 hours com-

pared to 4.5 hours for the combine method19

, to the latter must be added
labor associated with the artificial curing necessary after combining in

the V irginia-Carol ina area2° .

Duke's research21 indicates an increase of approximately 3 per-

cent in pounds harvested by the combine method over the stack pole method
Accordingly, the apparent forthcoming increase in the use of improved and

specialized tillage, planting, harvesting, and curing equipment may be

 

 

18Manufacturers include Benthall Machine Co., Ferguson Mfg. Co.,
Is-‘i-lliston Implement Co., Roanoke Mfg. Co., Harrington Mfg. Co., Prick Co.,

ollthern Plow Co., Turner Mfg. Co., Long Mfg. Co., McClenny Farm Machinery
Co ~ , Bauer Brothers Co., Roger Pea and Bean Thresher Co.

19Duke, ARS, 42-11, p. 5.

George B. Duke, Machinery and Methods for Harvestigg the
v£ginia Type Peanut, paper No. 59-137, A report to the annual meeting
of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Ithaca, New York,

J“he 21-24, 1959, (Holland, Virginia, Agricultural Engineering Research
Division, 1959), p. 1.

21

G. B. Duke, Peanut Recovery Yields from Two Harvesting

Methods, Virginia-Carolina Peanut News, Vol. 6, No. 4, (Fall, 1960),
P. 14. *

37

regarded as yield increasing in this area. A considerable capital invest:-
ment is involved which suggests that the adoption rate for heavy equipment
may be rather slow, particularly as adoption moves from the larger to the
smaller allotment farms where labor may be less szarce than capital and
where costs per unit will be higher. Custom Operation, or dealer-grower
equipment leases might mitigate these costs; the latter arrangement is an
innovation being tried by some equipment dealers, but not necessarily in
the peanut area at present. Another aspect to the combine-drying method
in this area is one of earlier marketing, and earlier flow of peanuts to
end-users. This might mean some increase in gross sales from the area

Which now lags other areas by a month or more in time of shelling and

8hiptnent.

In sunnnary, the implications of the following statement make

c"leer that progress in peanut farm machinery and equipment is of recent

22
date, Writing in 1950. Barlow , et. al., describe the situation thus:

There has been little change for at least a century in the con-
Ventional method used to cure peanuts. Some important changes, however,
QVe taken place in the overall method of harvesting peanuts. In most
cflees, peanut diggers have replaced the single moldboard plow. Pitch-
Orks are now employed extensively for shaking dirt out of the nuts and
Vines, thus making the old handshaking technique obsolete. The process of
separating the nuts from the vines has been greatly expedited by the ad-

Vent of the mechanical picker, which has superseded the very slow, tedious,
a11d primitive process of hand-picking.

The advancements in the digging and the picking phases of
harvesting have not been accompanied by comparable progress in the curing
8tags. Peanuts are still stacked around poles to make shocks which

2
26. E. Barlow, E. T. Batten, and R. B. Davis, Jr., Peanut

Egrvestingand Drying Research 1947-48-49, No. 439, (Blacksburg:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute, June, 1950), p. 2.

38

normally are five to six feet tall and about three feet in diameter. These
shocks are allowed to remain in the field for a period of about three
weeks or more while the nuts and hay cure enough for picking and storage
without danger of Spoilage and excessive heating. During this period, the
shocks are exposed to weather conditions which reduce the quality of both

nuts and hay. The nuts are discolored while the hay turns brcwn and even
black in bad weather, which may occur at this time. of the year.

There is
l ittle doubt that many of the nutrients present at the time of shocking
have "weathered" out by the time the peanuts are picked.

The shocks are
also vulnerable to the attack of crows, blackbirds, rats, mice, and
squirrels. These birds and animals are usually present in large numbers
and cause much destruction during the harvesting season in the peanut-=—

growing section of Virginia. From these factors, it has been felt that
research work needs to be done in an effort to improve the curing of pea-
Inthsi.

Southeast Area

The foregoing statement regarding technological progress in the

Virg inia-Carolina area may be said to hold generally for the Southeast area

in direction and purpose. The type of peanut differs, but growers are

Conf ronted with the same, or similar problems of good seed, seed treatment,

leaf spot, stem rot, and various organisms. The windrow and combine method

°f harvesting prevails. A progressive research program and related exten-

Sign education, plus other active promotional organizations all suggest a

continuation of the yield increases and quality improvements which have

bagome evident statistically in the past decade. The statement in Appendix

E by Mr. E. J. Young, Stevens Industries, Dawson, Georgia, reflects a feel-

ing of progress which is doubtless justified. Accordingly, development of

new varieties will be discussed here as one of the main additives to a

YiEld increasing program. Since Georgia is the principal producing state,

it will be used as illustrative of the area to obviate needless repetition.

39

A breeding program was started in Georgia in 193123. Its primary

objective was to develop a Spanish-type peanut resistant to leaf3pot and

a tem rot. When this failed, attention was directed to yield and quality
(zlnaracteristics. Since 1941, more than 300 tests have been conducted. To
date (1955), Higgins reports that six selected strains of old varieties have
proven sufficiently superior for release to growers. These are: GFA Spanish,
Dixie Spanish, Southeastern Runner 56—15, Virginia Bunch 67, Virginia Bunch

G2, Virginia Runner G26, and one hybrid selection, Georgia 119-20 (see

V i rg inia-Carol ina discuss ion) .

Another factor in increasing yields is the shift from Spanish

to runner type. Higgins says that prior to World War II about 90 percent

of the peanuts marketed in Georgia were of the small Spanish type, but

t(Wiley (1955), 75 percent of the Georgia crop is of the small-seeded runner
tlips. The shift arose from end-user demand and the belief of growers that

higher yields were obtained. Hammonsz4 et. al., estimate the runner crop

in 1958 as 55 percent of total acreage. Of this acreage, they estimate 63
Percent Dixie. Runner; 17 percent Virginia Bunch-67, 14 percent Early Runner;
and 6 percent Southeastern Runner 56-15. They report that in 26 tests since
1948, the average per acre yield in pounds of pods was 2,145 for Dixie Runner,

2a406 for Southeastern Runner 56-15, 2,593 for Virginia Bunch-67 and 2,779

fOr Early Runner .

23B. B. Higgins, and Wallace K. Bailey, New Varieties and

§glected Strains of Peanuts, Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station

Bulletin N. S. 11, (Experiment: Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station,
1955) pp. 1-31.

24R. O. Hammons and others, Comparative Performance of Four

Egrieties of Peanuts in CooperativefiTests in Georgia, Georgia Agricultural
EXperiment Station Mimeograph Series N. S. 76, (Tifton: Georgia Coastal
Plain Experiment Station, 1959), pp. 1-7. '

40

It now appears that Dixie Runner may be replaced by these new
Varieties in much the same manner that Dixie Runner replaced, over the

past fifteen years25

, the old Southeastern Runner (Georgia Runner,
F lorida Runner, Alabama Runner, and North Carolina Runner). Foundation
seed programs for these new varieties are maintained.

In another report, Hammon526, et. al., indicate that the
Spanish Argentine, in 32 tests, exhibited a 10.3 percent increase over the
Iliarie Spanish. This variety came into the United States as a Foreign
Plant Introduction from Argentina in 1937, and was included in breeding
I’lcrts in Georgia in 1941. Certified seed is now available in Oklahoma,
Where the variety was released to growers in 1951; seed should be avail-
able in Georgia in 1962.

Progress continues; yields will increase; but the elusive goal

°f producing a Virginia-type peanut in the Southeast has yet to be

ace(amplished, although some progress is being made.
Southwest Area

Harrison27 indicates that (southern blight) stem rot is one of

the major problems in Texas peanut production, and that irrigation

25Hammons, Mimeograph Series N. S. 76, p. l.

26R. 0. Hammons and others, Comparative Performance of the

mnish Argentine in Cooperative Tests in Georgia, Georgia Agricultural
Experiment Stations Mimeograph Series N. S. 72, (Tifton: Georgia Coastal
I“lain Experiment Station, 1959), pp. 1-7.

27
A. L. Harrison, Terraclor for the Control of Southern Blight

Of Peanuts, Progress Report 2014, (College Station: Texas Agricultural
Experiment Station, Feb. 1958), pp. 1-3.

41

magnifies the incidence of the fungus. The necessary tillage practices
helpful in mitigating the losses expose the land to severe wind erosion.
Preliminary tests with Terraclor in 1956 and 1957 indicated that when
Sprayed around the crown of peanut plants, it may control stem rot. At
the time the study was published its use was not yet recommended except
on an experimental basis. However, Chaffin28, Oklahoma Extension Agrono-
mist makes reference to this study to the effect that it "can be used for
effective control of southern blight," and gives recommended procedure.
He deSpairs of its high cost as limiting its use. An earlier Extension
Service recommendation29 for Oklahoma, suggests only apprOpriate tillage
practices for control of stem rot.

Walton and Matlock30 report an exceptionally heavy and wide-

Spread infestation of the red-necked peanutworm, Stegasta basqpeella

 

(Chambers), Gelechiidae, in Oklahoma in 1957 and 1958. Matlock observed
a few Specimens in 1955, but no collection of the species was on record
for the state prior to 1957. The authors say that a collection of these
from Texas and Ransas was in the United States National Museum in 1903,

according to Busck31, The name derives from a wine-red band on the first

 

28Wesley Chaffin, Peanut Production in Oklahoma, Circular E-410,
(Stillwater: Oklahoma State University, June 1959), p. 18.

29Agricultural Extension Service, Higher Yields of Peanuts,
Agronomy Series No. 6, (Stillwater: Oklahoma State University, March,
1958), p. l. ’

30R. R» Walton and R. S. Matlock, A Progress Report of Studies
of the Red-necked Peanutworm in Oklahoma, Processed Series P-320, (Still-
water: State University of Oklahoma, April, 1959), pp. 1-5.

 

3LWalton, Processed Series P-320, p. l.

42

two segments behind the caterpillar's brown head. The body iS "greenish
or yellowish white". The caterpillars feed in or on the buds or within
the leaflet surface or eat holes in it. The authors make no recommenda-
tions, but their progress report on the tests conducted suggests that in-
secticides may offer a suitable means of control. Peanut literature ob-
tained from other states makes no reference to the red-necked peanut worm.
The peanut production and harvesting recommendations32 for

Texas and Oklahoma, published in 1950, suggest all of the practices com-
mon to other areas for dealing with common problems (with variations for
local conditions), including seed treatment, herbicides, combining, and
artificial drying; but significantly, no reference is made to irrigation.

Hughes and Magee33

say that no instance of peanut irrigation
was found in the 1948 inventory of irrigation in Texas, but in recent
years, peanuts have been added to the list of such crops. It is believed
to have begun in Frio County in 1949 and to have expanded from there to
other areas during the drought of 1952-1956. No opinion was expressed in
their study as to the extent of irrigation in Texas except to say that
scant water supplies and acreage allotments have limited the total acre-

age irrigated. Their study of five farms showed that wells of low capacity

could be used profitably. Development costs ranged from $146 to $301 per

 

2Staff-members of Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and
Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, A Handbook of Peanut Growigg
in the Southwest, Texas Bulletin 727, Oklahoma Bulletin B-36l, (College
Station, Texas, and Stillwater, Oklahoma, 1950), pp. 1-25.
33Williaml'. Hughes and A” C. Magee, Costs and Returns of
Irriggted Peanut Production, West Cross Timbers, 1953-57, Bulletin 917,
(College Station,VTexas Agricultural Experiment Station, 1958), pp. l-10.

 

 

43

acre. Operating costs were higher for increased quantities of seed, fer-
tilizer, cultivation, and labor. Yields more than doubled from the 14
bushels dry land, S-year average to 34 bushels on irrigated land along
with better quality and increased hay yields. The average total cost

.2: irrigation, including Operating and overhead, ranged from $38 to $63

 

per acre and averaged $47 per acre of irrigated peanuts for all farms in
the study. The 5-year average net return from irrigated peanut production
ranged from $40 to $60, equivalent to a return ranging from 19 to 33 per~
cent on capital invested in irrigation facilities. The figures are in
terms of added receipts, added costs, and net added returns attributable
to or associated with irrigation only.

In Oklahoma, the big story on yield increases is one of irriga-
tion. Chaffin34 says "peanuts respond well to irrigation" and indicates
that slightly more than 18 percent of the total peanut acreage in Oklahoma
was irrigated in 1957. The 19,942 acres of irrigated land produced 44
million pounds, or 51 percent of the total state production for one year.
This is a yield per acre of 2,200 pounds compared to the state average of
800 pounds in 1957, including irrigated production.

Matlock35 estimates the current (1960) level of irrigated acre-
age at 26,000 and suggests that not much further increase is likely because
of water supply limitations. Caddo County is the main center with some

irrigation in Hughes. Matlock believes 3,000 pounds per acre is about

 

34Chaffin, Circular E-410, p. 5.

35Interview with Ralph S. Matlock, Professor of Agronomy,
Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma, April, 1960.

44

average with some growers obtaining 4,000 to 4,500 pounds. While irriga-
tion was stimulated by drought in 1954 and 1956, rainfall was adequate in
1958 and 1959 and was mainly responsible for the record average yields;
irrigation was used moderately as needed. Commenting generally regarding
irrigation in Texas, Matlock suggests that irrigation may not receive as
much emphasis as in Oklahoma because of water.supp1y limitations.
Progress in the Southwest in developing new and higher yield-
ing varieties is comparable to other areas. In the 1950 joint state hand-
book36, Spantex is mentioned as a new variety developed in Texas along
with Oklahoma's Spanish 18-38 and Spanish 146. By 1959, Chaffin37 suggests
the Spanish Argentine is adapted to both irrigated and dry-land conditions,
and is superior to Spantex. The Dixie Spanish is similar to the Argentine.
It seems clear from this brief review of developments in the
Southwest that irrigation, and new varieties coupled with progress in
cultural practices and skills explain the recent increase in yields per
acre and point toward still higher average yields in the near future;
in fact, substantially higher, if irrigation becomes more widely

established.

 

36Staff members, Texas Bulletin 727, Oklahoma Bulletin B-361,

p. 12.

37Chaffin, Circular E-410, p. 9.

45

Footnote to Progress

Should one seek a perspective of technological progress dur-
ing the past decade, Hilkins38 may be consulted for a good description
of the "state of the arts" fifteen to twenty years ago. He toured the
three areas; he regarded much that he saw as relatively primitive. He
witnessed and described the initial stages of many methods, machines,
and practices which were under research at the time and which have since
become highly specialized tools of production and marketing. Occasion-
ally, he envisioned things to come; for example, electronic sorting for

color which is now in use in processing plants.

 

.vv'

38Charles Smith Wilkins, "An Economic Study of the Peanut
Industry," (unpublished Doctoral thesis, Department of Agricultural
Economics, Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas, 1949), pp. 1-117.

CHAPTER IV

INTRODUCTION TO STATISTICAL ESTIMATION

OF PEANUT ACREAGE, YIELD, AND PRODUCTION

The peanut industry consists of three distinct geographical
areas: Virginia-Carolina, Southeast, and Southwest. The division is
more than geographical; the products are differentiated and the end-
uses of the products differ in emphasis as pointed out in Chapter II.
Accordingly, it seems appropriate to organize the discussion of acreage,
yield, and production estimation around these three familiar areas with
due regard for the analyses by states within each area.

, This chapter will provide a general description of the statis-
tical methodology and hypotheses used in constructing the acreage, yield,
and production models which were, with some exceptions, applied to the
data for each state in each area. The results of the statistical analysis
will be discussed in detail in succeeding chapters: one chapter on acre-
age, yield, and production for each of the three geographical areas
(Chapters VI, VII, and VIII), and one for the United States (Chapter IX)
which summarizes the area estimates of production and considers certain
subjective adjustments to the statistical estimates regarded as essential
to allow for certain technological factors which are not taken into account
in the statistical estimates. ‘Following the statisti¢81 analyses, Chapter
X will deal with problems of inter-correlation of the independent vari-
ables and other shortcomings which are generally characteristic of the

statistical methodology used. Chapter X will also appraise the relative

46

47

usefulness of the models considered from the standpoint of their predictive
power.

This method of organizing the material is chosen in order to ob-
viate, as much as possible, tedious repetition; and to provide an analysis
centered on the three major divisions of the industry which are imbedded,
by custom, in the thinking of growers, processors, end-users, program ad-
ministrators, members of Congress, and scientists concerned with the indus-
try. Por some people, the estimates for a given area only are of particular
importance; for others, comparative area estimates are meaningful; while
for some the total picture, as well as its components, is of major concern.

A description of the variables employed in the analysis is
included in Chapter V together with some observations concerning their
selection, transformation, and lagging; much of the description also
constitutes an expansion on the statements of hypothesis contained here-
in, and should be taken into consideration therewith.

It is convenient at this point to make general reference to
the graphic presentations included in succeeding chapters since all of
the charts are of the same general structure for depicting the regression
relationships. Graphs other than these are regarded as self-explanatory.
Accompanying the discussion of the analysis for each state are graphs1

which show the relationships among the variables for regressions selected

 

1Richard J. Foote, Analytical Tools for Studying Demand and
Price Structure Handbook No. 146 (Washington: United States Department
of Agriculture, 1958), pp. 174-175, 205-206.

 

48

from the tables of analyses of variance which are included in Appendix B.
Graphs have been prepared only for the more useful equations or which are
instructive for other reasons. The first graph in each figure shows by
a solid line the actual value of the dependent variable as reported by
the United States Department of Agriculture. The comparative broken

line shows the value of the dependent variable as estimated from the
like-numbered regression in the appropriate table in Appendix B. The
vertical difference between the actual and estimated value is the
residual term of the equation. This is an estimate of the error or
disturbance and indicates the extent to which the equation failed to
predict the actual value of the dependent variable. These residual
differences are plotted at the top of the chart.

The second chart in each figure is the line of relationship
between the dependent variable and the passage of time after the data
have been adjusted for the influence of the other independent variables
in the equation. The dots represent these adjusted data and the figure
adjacent to the dot is the year for which the datum was estimated. In
similar manner, other graphs in each figure give the relationship between
the dependent variable and the specified independent variables. The slope
of the line of relationship (partial regression line) indicates the
nature of the relationship and the relative effectiveness of the coefficient

of the Specified independent variable.
Estimating Acreage

In view of the legislative chronology with reSpect to peanut

acreage (Appendix A), it may be concluded from the outset that the usual

49

economic factors which determine acreage in light of supply and demand
conditions have been heavily influenced, since 1949, by legislative and
administrative determinations. The terms supply and demand are here
used in the sense of schedules of prices and quantities. While they
are not "outlawed" as acreage determinants, the normal influence of
these factors is modified by law. Such is the purpose of the legis-
lation. Accordingly, no direct estimating equation for acreage has
been attempted for years in which mandatory acreage allotments are in
effect. The drastic acreage reductions accomplished during the past
decade are clearly defined in the illustrative charts which accompany
succeeding chapters.

As indicated in Appendix A, acreage reductions have now reached
the minimum allotments specified by Congress. At this level, production
has been ample to meet demand at support prices--more than ample in most
years. In a measure then, unless the current demand situation changes,
and assuming continued yield trends which approximate those projected by
this study, peanut acreage for the immediate future may be regarded as a
known quantity with one exception. The exception is that growers may
underharvest or overharvest their acreage allotments. The degree to
which growers are able, or willing, to comply with given allotments is
thought to be influenced by a special set of factors such that under-
harvest or overharvest may be subject to estimation.

Prior to 1949, as described in Appendix A, some price and
payment incentives for voluntary compliance with acreage allotments
were offered in some years, since 1933, by government programs. The

result, insofar as effecting adjustments in acreage is concerned, was

50

quite modest. The charts for the years in question Show no marked break
in the uptrend of acreage. The final adoption of mandatory allotments
further justifies the conclusion that voluntary acreage allotments may
be ignored as of little effec: in any general analysis of forces affecta
ing acreage prior to 1949. The isolated mandatory allotment year, 1941,
may as well be ignored since the adjustment was relatively small and
unsustained in succeeding years.

No period of long duration has existed at any time in the
history of peanut production when the economic factors associated with
acreage determination have not been disturbed by strong exogenous forces.
These include a rapid economic growth of the industry as it expanded
to new territory from the "old" Virginia-North Carolina area. Powerful
stimuli were provided by World War I, the boll weevil adjustment from
cotton to peanuts, $1322.1917’ the "great depression" of the 1930's,
World War II, and of course, the legislation referred to in Appendix A.
Any long-run analysis encounters these exceptions to the usual assumptions
of economic investigation. Perhaps the term, "unpredictable,"2 is well
chosen; although these forces are not uniquely applicable to peanuts.
The effect of exogenous forces has not been the same in all areas. For
example, acreage declined in the Virginia-North Carolina area during
World War I, and reSponded less during World War II than in other areas.
"Old timers" suggest that attractive alternatives, including high wages

in the Norfolk area shipyards, may account for this departure from logical

 

2W. C. Gregory, B. W. Smith and Yarborough, The Peanut--The

Unpredictable Leggme (Washington: National Fertilizer Assoc. 1950),
title page.

 

 

51

expectations suggested by high peanut prices during World War I. Oppor-

tunity costs for labor and management outrsn peanut price at this location.

Acreage Equations.--The purpose of this phase of the analysis is to make

a limited investigation of the degree to which peanut acreage is a function
of price-cost relationships and of adjustments in the acreage of alterna-
tive crops. No useful estimating equation is visualized for the period
1949 to date, exclusive of certain possible under- or overharvested acre-
age in relation to acreage allotments discussed below. Equations for prior
periods are presented as mainly of academic interest representing an in-
quiry into the nature of acreage relationships which might hold in similar
manner at some future time should similar conditions prevail. These may

be regarded as instructive but not directly useful for projection.

The general hypothesis regarding acreage is that it is deter-
mined largely by the following fundamental factors: (1) time which is
indicative of factors which account for long run growth (or decline) of
the industry, the extent to which certain factors of production, such as
.capital, have been substituted for land, and other influences not other-
wife taken into account in the model (this may include certain factors
normally associated with demand); (2) the profitability of production as
determined by the relationship between prices received for peanuts and
prices paid for production items; and the profitability of peanut produc-

tion relative to that of the next best use for the same resources, i.e.

opportunity costs.

Underharvest Equations.--A special set of factors is thought to influence

acreage harvested as compared to acreage allotted. These are: prices

52

received, prices paid for production items, Opportunity costs, rate of
monetary penalty assessed by government for acreage in excess of allotments,
and weather influence on abandonment of acreage or diversion to feed use
such as "hogging off."

Enforcement of current acreage policy is accomplished through
the exaction of penalties. A basic penalty rate per pound is assessed
on the grower's production based on acreage harvested in excess of his
allotment. For the period 1949-1955 the penalty rate was 50 percent
of the support price; since then the rate has been 75 percent. The
increase was designed to deter those growers who were finding it still
profitable, because of high yields per acre, to produce excess peanuts
after payment of the 50 percent penalty. In contrast to the voluntary
acreage allotment programs in the 1930's, the mandatory allotment pro-
gram has been effective in curtailing acreage. The first graph in each
of the illustrative figures on acreage accompanying succeeding chapters
defines the relation between the acreage allotment and acreage picked
and threshed, beginning in 1949, and designated on the graph as the
"Marketing Quota Period."- Inspection of these graphs for the seven
states indicates a tendency for growers to pick and thrash an acreage
less than the state allotment in most years. This differential between
allotted and harvested acreage is a factor in determining production
if it follows a pattern as a result of associated factors. It may also
be a consideration at times in determining allotments for a particular
level of production.

The purpose of this phase of the analysis is to appraise the

factors thought to be associated in a significant way with the differential

53

between acreage allotments and harvested acreage. The hypotheses are that
underharvest will be encouraged by the pens ty rate; that it will decrease
under favorable price-cost relationships; that it will be encouraged by
favorable hog prices in the Southeast; and that it may increase under unw
favorable weather influence. These concepts, and the methodology employed,
are similar in design to those used by Johnson? in his burley tobacco
study. Comparable considerations were involved in the acreage planted

model deve10ped by Hathaway4

in his study of the dry bean industry.
Interpretation of the expectations with reSpect to the signs of
underharvest coefficients need not be (but sometimes is) confusing because
a negative differential has been used in describing the dependent variable.
The logical expectation is that as price increases, underharvest will de-
crease and become over-harvest if not deterred by an offsetting change in
the penalty rate. The underharvest data used as a dependent variable are
derived by taking the state allotment as established by the United States
Department of Agriculture and subtracting from it the acreage harvested.
If the harvested acreage is less than the allotment, the difference was de-
fined as underharvest and denoted as a negative figure. If the harvested

acreage'wm;mnre than the allotment, the difference was defined as over-

harvest and denoted as a positive figure. This results in being able to

 

3Glenn L. Johnson, Burleerobacco Control Programs, Bulletin

580 (Lexington: Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station, 1952), pp. 36-44.

 

4 ~ - n
Dale E. Hathaway, The Effects of the Prise support Program on

Ehe Dry Eean Industry in Michigan, Technical Bulletin 250, (East Lansing:
Agricultural Experiment Station, Michigan State College, 1955), pp. 20n28.

 

interpret the coefficients of price, penalty rate, or other factors in the
usual way insofar as signs are concerned" Thus, a positive sign for the
price coefficient denotes that as price ircreasss underharvested acreage
decreases to zero and than increases in the form of overharvested screw
age. Similarly, as penalty rates increase, overharvested acreage will
decline to zero and then increase negatively as underharvest. This is
not likely to be a linear relationship beyond the penalty just necessary
to discourage overharvest, but is so regarded for purposes of this study
considering the range of the data. Similarly, the hog price relationship
should be negative since underharvest is encouraged as hog price increases.

Regarding the other dependent variable data, i.e., the ratio
of the acreage harvested to the peanut allotment, a ratio of 1.0 indi-
cates neither under nor over harvest; a ratio of less than 1.0 indicates
underharvest; and of more than 1.0 overharvest. As price increases, the
acreage harvested would be exPected to increase; the ratio would increase,
and therefore the logical sign of the coefficient is positive. Similarly,
a negative sign for the penalty rate coefficient is indicated; as over
harvest declines to the allotment, the ratio declines to 1.0 and then to
less than 1.0 as underharvest occurs.

Inapection of the data indicates that it may take growers
two or three years to complete the adjustment, a major one, from ”all
out" production conditions to one which is highly restrictive. For the
grower, this involves crop rotation shifts and rather precise acreage
measurements. These influences may obscure priceuccstmpenalty considerm

ations, causing greater dispersion of the data in the early years of the

55

adjustment. More important considerations which have influenced the
differentials between harvested acreage and allotted acreage include
(1) an undetermined number of l-acre peanut farms which are included
in harvested acreage estimates but which are exempt from.the acreage
allotment restrictions, (2) the provision for a twowprice system in
1950 and 1951 under which acreage in excess of the peanut allotment
was encouraged provided the peanuts were sold for crushing for oil,
and (3) diversion of peanut allotment to the "soil bank". These

and other considerations are discussed in more detail in the rele»
vant sections of Chapters VI, VII, and VIII.

Penalty rates fluctuate over a very narrow range. They are
never low enough to permit much profitable non-compliance and exert
no influence beyond the level just necessary to discourage non-compliance--
i e., if a 75 percent penalty is adequate, an 80 percent penalty can
accomplish nothing additional. This appears to limit its usefulness as
a variable helpful in explaining year to year variation. Furthermore,
the penalty rate is directly related to price. The pricing method under
the support program is "forward pricing"; hence, lagged values of price
are not particularly applicable. There will doubtless come a time when
underharvesc can be explained if it exists to any appreciable degree; at
present, the period of time for analysis is probably too brief to make
analysis of economic influences feasible.

For the investigation of these hypotheses, regarding acreage and
underharvest and related assumptions, a series of single linear equations
was fitted to the data by ordinary least squares procedures. A descrip-=
tion of the variables is set forth in Chapter V and the results of the

analyses are presented in succeeding chapters.

56

Estimating Yields Per Acre

The estimation of yields per acre constitutes the hard core
of this study. Prime interest centers on recent upward trends which,
in some instances, have been little short of spectacular. (For example,
Oklahoma). An administered price during the past decade, as described
in Appendix A, has removed much of the risk and uncertainty usually
associated with crop production returns to growers. The margin of pro-
fit has been such that the grower has every incentive to exploit fully
the resources he is permitted to commit to production, including his
highest level of managerial capacity. Since land is the only factor
of production controlled and restricted by successive government pro-
grams, the grower is free to apply additional increments of management,
labor (including his own as distinct from his managerial functions), and
capital in the form of machinery, fertilizer, irrigation development,
and the many other means implicit in the descriptive statement in Chapter
III on technology. Since land is restricted, it may be safely assumed that
the land employed will be that best adapted to production available to
the grower. Under favorable price conditions, the optimum combination of
resources probably exceeds the maximum permitted; hence, maximum yield
per acre becomes the grower's goal. The additional (marginal) returns
continue to exceed the added cost; and to constitute in many cases the
most profitable allocation of resources among enterprises. It might
be added parenthetically that price stability and ample supplies remove

much risk and uncertainty otherwise encountered by millers.

S7

The risk and uncertainty removed from growers and millers by
government programs are not eliminated; instead they are transferred to
government in different forms. An undernrealised estimate of a forth~
coming crop in terms of pe-mitted acreage and estimA’ed yield disrupts
the domestic peanut economy and may necessitate importation of peanutsm-
a "general welfare" course of action which incurs the wrath of growers
but which is regarded as necessary to meet the rormal needs of endn
users and consumers at reasonable prices. Thus far, a situation of this
kind has been generated only by generally adverse weather conditions,
and seldom occurs. (See Appendix A, midnl950's). An overmrealized eSw

.ive supplies which must

I]

timate of forthcoming production results in exces;

E

be purchased by government at support price and sold at a discount for
oil or export, an action which creates a loss for the Commodity Credit
Corporation. n order to protect growers from undue restrictions, Congress
has provided for minimum acreage allotments for the several states and
the nation. As yields per acre have increased since 1949, acreage allot-
ments have been administratively reduced to the Congressional minimum.
Supplies have continued to exceed demand in most years. Accordingly,
keen interest among polic «makers and administrators centers on future
yields per acre as an indication of forthcoming production from_miniw

mum acreage allotments, and the relation of such production to expected
supply requirements of the future. A similar interest on the part of
growers may be safely assumed because excess supplies are price dEpressa
ing under the provisions of the "sliding scale" legislation which relates

actual supply to "normal" supply to determine a supply percentage

58

(Appendix A). The supply percentage determines the percentage of parity
at which price support may be offered. Again, Congress has Specified that
price support shall not be less than 75 percent of parity, a level which
now prevails approximately as a result of imbalance in the supply-demand
relationship in favor of excess supply.

Congress makes provision for determination of a national "normal"
yield per acre--the average of the moat recent five years adjusted aub-
jectively for abnormal conditions. This normal yield applied to the
national acreage allotment establishes the national marketing quota in
pounda--a theoretical figure representing the national requirements for
all uses of peanuts. In 1960, for example, the product of the normal yield
and minimum national acreage allotment establishes a national quota in
excess of what the requirements are actually expected to become; accord-
ingly, realization of the normal yield automatically results in excess
.aupply. The United States Department of Agriculture says3 that the 1960
expected (real) requirements could be produced on 1,240,000 acres, or
370,000 less than the minimum acreage allotment of 1,610,000 acres required
by Congress as a minimum, an indication that "normal" yields, as determined
in accordance with the specifications of Congress, have exceeded expecta-
tions.

Inapection of the yield data for the seven states, as given in

Tables 1-7, Appendix C, and in the illustrative charts which accompany

 

3Agricultural Marketing Service, Fats and Oils Situation
(Washington: United States Department of Agriculture, Nov. 1959)
p. 42.

S9

succeeding chapters readily reveal that peanut yields per acre are subject
to considerable variation from year to year. It will be also observed
that during the period of time considered, 1909-1958, a general linear
upward trend in yields has occurred. The most rapid and consistent rate
of increase has occurred in the Virginia-North Carolina area. Gains in
recent years are mainly responsible for the more moderate long-run up-
ward trend in the Southeast where there was little change until after
world.flar II. In the subhumid Southwest, the long run linear trend in
Texas is slightly downward, but data for recent years show an increase.
Only a moderate upward trend has occurred in Oklahoma until irrigation
was introduced in the past decade.

The purpose of this analysis is to provide, by statistical
methods, an explanation of the manner and extent to which various factors
regarded as yield generating give rise to year-to-year fluctuations and
to the general level of yields per acre over a time period of fifty years,
1909-1958. This knowledge will be useful later in appraising forthcoming
supplies under specified conditions.

The general hypothesis regarding yields per acre is that they

are determined largely by the following fundamental factors:4 (1) the

 

4Glenn L. Johnson, Burley Tobacco Control Programs Bulletin 580

(Lexington: Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Stations, 1952), p. 45.

 

60

quality and treatment of soils both for the year in which peanuts are
planted and throughout the rotation, (2) the selection of types and
varieties of seed, particularly the introduction of improved varieties,
(3) cultural practices during the growing season, including improved
disease and insect control measures, and (4) the weather, more specifi-
cally the amount of rainfall received by the plants during the critical
"pegging" season and during the weeks when the crap is maturing.

With the exception of the weather, it is assumed that the
degree of influence of these factors is affected by the relative profit-
ability of peanut production; in turn, profitability is influenced by
prices received by growers for peanuts and prices paid by growers for
the items used in producing peanuts. A further assumption is made that
the quality and treatment of soils, and intensity of cultural practices
is inversely associated with the quantity of land. Since growers have
alternative uses for the resources they may commit to peanut production,
it is also assumed that the relative profitability of alternative crops
influences the allocation of certain specified non-weather factors which
are regarded as generating peanut yields per acre.

Observed data from secondary sources have been used to investi-
gate the extent to which prices, direct costs, Opportunity costs, acreage,
and weather may be associated with yields per acre. Other factors for
which no observed data are available such as the introduction of improved
seed varieties, better methods of disease and insect control, and modern
farm power and equipment, are assumed to be reflected in the calculated

time trend. These were discussed in Chapter III.

61

In order to investigate the hypothesis and related assumptions,
a series of single linear equations was fitted to the data by ordinary

least squares procedures.
Estimating Production

Production of peanuts is a function of acreage and yield per
acre. As implied in previous discussion, the main purpose of this study
is to find a reasonably reliable means of estimating future production.
Consideration was given to the following methods:

a) Development of a system of structural equations after
the manner of Footes, Fox6, Johnson7, and Hathaways.

b) A single linear equation fitted to production data by
ordinary least squares.

c) A single linear equation fitted by ordinary least squares
for predicting yields per acre which in turn would be
multiplied by the acreage allotment after either predic-
ting or making allowance for under- or overharvested
acreage.

Consideration of the quality of available data, the exogenous forces in-
volved and the changing structure of the peanut industry resulted in the

conclusion that adoption of method (a) would be impractical at this

juncture in peanut production history. Ideally, this might be the soundest

 

SFoote, Handbook No. 146, pp. 1-217

6
Karl A. Fox, Economic Analysis for Public Policy (Ames: The
Iowa State College Press, 1958), pp. l-288.

7Johnson, Bulletin 580, pp. 1—112.

8Hathaway, Technical Bulletin 250, pp. 1~71.

62

approach; it may become feasible in a few years if the economic structure
of the industry remains unchanged long enough to provide an adequate num-
ber of observations. There is a possibility that such a system might be
fitted for the years 1920=1940 in the Southeast area, usirg models des~
scribed in Chapter VII. Even so, the application to present conditions
would be debatable.

‘Hethod (b) was attempted but was not explored conclusively.
The results are discussed in subsequent chapters, but are not regarded as
particularly useful for prediction purposes. The presentation serves
the purpose of illustrating the effect of the exogenous forces at work
and the changing structure of the peanut economy, as well as to provide
a vehicle for descriptive information. The purpose of the analysis by
method (b) was to obtain in one equation a direct estimate of produc-
tion (by states). The models formulated were based on the hypothesis
that growers plan their peanut production in accordance with their ex-
pectations regarding prices (or values) of peanuts relative to prices
(or values) of competing crops, and related production costs. Relation-
ships to rainfall variables were also investigated.

Since neither method (a) nor (b) seemed to meet the need,
method (c) will be relied upon to estimate production beginning in 1949
when mandatory acreage allotments and marketing quotas were initiated,
nd to project production from 1959 to 1965. Considerations in selec-
ting the period beginning in 1949 were:

1) It is of current interest and significance with regard

to present and future policy formulation.

63

2) The economic structure of the peanut economy has been
relatively uniform in that annual acreage and price
data have been almost wholly determined by government.

3) The problem under study did not exist prior to this period.

4) It is possible to make quite reasonable assumptions about

immediate future peanut price and acreage in light of the
history of this period, although this does not imply com-
plete confidence that alternative programs under considera-
tion will not be adopted which would materially affect the
projections.

It is presumed that there are few econometric models that can
take into consideration all of the factors involved and serve as a com-
plete substitute for judgment. Accordingly, the production projections
promulgated in succeeding chapters are subject to certain subjective
adjustments to allow for factors which are not believed to be reflected
fully in the equations used. These are treated as encountered in the
relevant discussion. Anticipating subsequent discussion, subjective up-
ward adjustments in yields per acre for Virginia, North Carolina, and
Georgia may be advisable to take into account new varieties introduced
in the past few years. The effect of these varieties does not appear
to be adequately reflected in the yield estimating equations for the
50-year period. Also, irrigation in Oklahoma has develOped so rapidly
and extensively in the past few years that a rather substantial adjust-
ment seems indicated in order to make realistic projections for the

immediate future.

64

The problem of what assumptions to make is a matter of interpre-
tation of history, legislation, current administrative policy and attitude,
the essential facts, and doubtless the bias of the person formulating the
assumptions as a reflection of his thinking as to Lwhat is," or "what
ought to be." The future may be made to look bright or dim as points of
view differ. Assumptions for the immediate future are closely related
to the present situation. Acreage is based on minimum allotments and
price at minimum support levels approximating 75 percent of parity.

These are thought to represent current legislative and administrative
policy, and reflect the present and proSpective supply situation.

As to the merit of the statistical equations employed, an
evaluation of their relative usefulness and shortcomings will be dis-
cussed generally in Chapter X. This will serve to obviate needless
repetition from state to state and area to area. It would seem that
problems of estimating endogenous variables from endogenous variables,
and problems of intercorrelation, as they apply to this study, could
best be appraised by the reader after review of the analyses discussed.
Care has been taken to graph residuals and partial correlations as an
aid in appraising the relative merits of the models considered and to
help avoid the projection of accidental or historical situations which
would be inappropriate. At the very least, the form of the relationships
has been explored which is an essential prerequisite for the formulation

of structural models for possible use in later studies.

CHAPTER.V

DESCRIPTION OF VARIABLES AND TRANSFORMATIONS

' EMPLOYED IN THIS ANALYSIS

It seems desirable to devote one chapter to a discussion of
the data used in this study as a means of providing in one place a con-
venient reference to the symbolism used in the subsequent statistical
analysis. Additionally, since a mere listing of symbols and data fails
to provide adequate information as to why certain variables were selected,
or why they were used in a particular combination or transformation, some
comment in this regard should be helpful in evaluating the results of
yield, acreage, and production regressions discussed in the next chapters.
The description included here with reSpect to the use of time, prices
received and paid, and rainfall constitutes an integral and necessary part
of the statement of purposes and general hypotheses set forth in Chapter
IV. A listing of the data under consideration here is included in
Tables l-7, Appendix C, for each of the seven states, or is included in

tables accompanying relevant discussion.

Time (X1).--The period of time selected for study includes the years
1909-1958. The unit of time is the crop year. In all states, peanuts
are planted in the spring months. Harvest of the cr0p is completed
during the late summer and fall months of the same year.

In the estimating equations for yields, no years have been

omitted except as necessary for the use of lagged variables. It is

65

66

recognised that during the fifty year period several changes in the

, economic and physical structure of the industry have occurred which
might justify omission of certain time periods, or separate treatment

of such time periods. However, with regard to the estimation of yields
per acre, one of the purposes of the study is to take into account the
effect of such events as wars, depressions, inflation, government inter-
vention.with respect to price and acreage adjustment, introduction of

new varieties, improved methods of disease and insect control, improved
and new cultural prpctices, and regional adjustments among production
enterprises. For many of these events and innovations, no observed data
are available for use in estimating the extent to which changes in yields
are associated with them” Accordingly, time as a continuous variable has
been employed to provide a composite, but not necessarily precise,*measure
of the long-run cumulative effect of phenomena not otherwise described by
observed data.

Regarding certain estimates of acreage and production, three
tune periods have been selected. The first is the preumarketing quota
period, 1909-1948; the second is the marketing quota period, 1949-1958;
and the third is an inter—war period, 1921-1940. In the case of acreage
estimates for Virginia and North Carolina, the last named period includes
the several years prior to World.War I. A definite structural change in
the peanut economy occurred when mandatory acreage allotments became effec-
tive in 1949. This would also have been true for the year 1941 when
marketing quotas were in effect; however, there seemed little to be gained

by including this isolated year in the second time period, nor much

67

advantage in omitting it from the first period. Prior to 1941, govern-
ment intervention was mainly in the form of a voluntary price and acre-
age allotment programlwith less determinate effects. The nature of all
such programs, since 1933, is described in more detail in Appendix A.
There remains the possibility of developing synthetic variables,
or "dummy variables," consisting of arbitrary values and weights assigned
to the introduction of such technological changes as new varieties, suc-
cessful innovation of disease and insect control measures, or irrigation.
However, it was decided that the difficulty of assigning such values in
a meaningful way, considering the heterogeneity of soil and climatic con-
ditions and varying responses to be expected in each of the seven states
studied, would extend the cost and scope of the study beyond its original
intent. In lieu of this, a descriptive chapter on some of the more
significant technological developments has been included (Chapter III).
In summary, the use of the time variable may be regarded as
a means of taking into account the combined influence of technological

and institutional factors for which no observed data are available.

Yields (22).--The yield data for each state consist of the annual yield
per acre as estimated by the United States Department of Agriculture.
Attention was given to periodic revisions in such data and the latest
revisions published, as of 1959, have been used; however, the several
most recent years should be regarded as preliminary. For purposes of
statistical estimation, these data are regarded as observed without ;

error .

68

Peanut Price (X3), Peanut Price Index (X4), and Log of Peanut Price (X5).--

 

The seasonal average price received by peanut growers for the respective
cr0p years, as published by the United States Department of Agriculture,
was used in all estimating equations for all years. Attention was given
to the use of revised data, but the most recent several years should be
considered as preliminary. For purposes of statistical estimates, the
data are regarded as observed without error. The symbol (X4) was

reserved for converting price to index form; however, this transformation
of the price data was not used in the estimating equations. For certain
estimating equations the price per pound was converted to its logarithm
and in this form has been designated (X5). The price received in a
current year is influenced by the volume of the crop, the quality of the
crop, and in recent years by the price support program. It is, therefore,
generated within the economic structure of the peanut industry and would
be regarded as an endogenous variable not independent of yield and produc-
tion for the current year. To render the price variable independent of
the influence of the current year's yield, acreage, or production when
these are used as dependent variables, price has been used in a one-year
lag relation to the dependent variable. Accordingly, "last year's" price
has been used in relation to "this year's" value of the dependent variable.
This conforms to the usual hypothesis that the peanut grower responds to
an "expected price"--his expectation at planting time being that the

price he will receive this year will approximate that which he received
the preceding year. Intuitively, it may be reasoned that this is a greatly

over-simplified measure of the decision-making process and does not conform

69

to the real world. An attempt should be made to test the notion of the
distributed lagl. Another shortcoming of the one-year lag approach is
that, under support prices and marketing quota legislation, the support
price for the forthcoming crop is announced well in advance of planting
time. It may be reasoned, therefore, that the support price becomes the
"expected" price as a minimum depending upon quality and expectations

as to total supply. The level of support under marketing quotas has not
varied greatly with the exception of the down-trend in the most recent
three or four years; accordingly, in order to retain consistency in
handling the data throughout the fifty-year period, a one-year lag of the
seasonal average price was used.

The reason for the transformation of prices to their logarithms
is described by Johnsonz. It derives from the nature of the production
function which is assumed to conform to the law of diminishing returns.
Yields per acre, for example, would tend to increase at a decreasing

rate as competitive entrepreneurs respond to price increases.

Index of Prices Paid for Items Used in Production (X5) and the Index
Squared (X7).--One of the factors entering into the decision-making

process is that of costs. Ideally, some observed variable or variables

 

1Marc Nerlove, Distributed Lags and Demand Analysis for Agri-
culture and Other Commodities, Agricultural Handbook No. 141, (Washington:
U. S. Department of Agriculture, June 1958), pp. 1-277.

2Glenn L. Johnson, Burley Tobacco Control Programs, Bulletin 580
(Lexington: Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station, 1952), pp. 45-46.

70

that would directly reflect the yearwto~year change in cost of peanut
production by states would be the most useful measure of growers' response
to such changes. Unfortunately, no really satisfactory specific measure
is available. Costs encountered in the production of peanuts are highly
correlated with the costs associated with the production of all farm com-
modities. The United States index of the prices paid for items used in
production (X6), as published by the United States Department of Agricul-
ture, was used as a measure of the relative change in the cost of produc-
ing peanuts. In the estimating equations, the square of the prices paid
index (X7), was usually employed to make allowance for the assumed nature
3.
a

of the production function thus, yields would be expected to decrease

at an increasing rate as prices paid for items of production increase.

Composite Index of Costs (X3), and Composite Index Squared (X9).--In the
allocation of limited resources to the production of a particular commodity
there are two general types cf costs to consider: (1) accounting costs
which, for purposes of this study, are regarded as the prices paid for

the actual quantities of the various factors used in producing the com-
modity, and (2) opportunity costs which may be thought of as the income
which might have been earned if the same productive resources had been
allocated to their next best use. The variable "prices paid for items

used in production (X7)," previously described, was used in an attempt to

determine the manner in which changes in accounting costs are associated

 

3Johnson, Bulletin 580, p. 46.

71

with changes in peanut yields per acre, or acreage harvested. Since no
net income data for peanuts or other crops grown in association with
peanuts in the rotation are available, the next best measure of opportunity
costs is an index of the prices of alternative or competing crops. The
economic theory involved here is that, while accounting costs compared to
revenue indicate the profit and degree of economic efficiency and profit-
ability with respect to a particular commodity, they do not serve as a
measure of the profit which might have been gained from alternative com-
modities which could have been produced with the resources. These would
include land which is assumed not purchaseable for this comparison but
which is, nevertheless, reallocatable between enterprises.

The composite cost index was develOped in an attempt to obtain
in one series of data a blend of accounting costs and opportunity costs.
The latter are represented by the prices of competing craps such that the
manner in which changes in peanut yields, acreage, or production are
associated with changes in these costs could be determined.

The decision to use this combination, and the manner in which
it was effected, were arbitrary. One alternative would have been to_use
the prices of the alternative crops as separate variables. Aside from
computational considerations and loss of degrees of freedom, it would
appear that considerations other than price have been influential in
effecting some of the shifts in acreage of crops which compete with peanuts.
For example, it seems unlikely that the tremendous shift from cotton acre-

age in the Southeast was solely a matter of price considerationsé Another

 

éMichael J. Brennan, Progress Report on Cotton Productiop Response
ARS 43-72 Giashington: U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1958), pp. 3-4.

72

complication in measuring the response to opportunity costs is the matter
of crop rotation. A response to relative price changes which might be
logical pricedwise might be restricted by the necessity of adherence to
recommended or customary cultural practices. Without a considerable
expansion and intensification of the study to consider in detail the
nature and cause of shifts in acreage from one crop to another, it

seemed advisable to try an aggregative composite cost index.

In Virginia and North Carolina, corn and cotton for the time
period 1909-1958, and soybeans 1924-1958, were regarded as the principle
competing crops. Their seasonal average prices were taken as a measure
of opportunity costs. In computing the composite index, the relative
importance of the prices of competing crops was considered by weighting
them with the acreage of the respective crops. The relative importance
of the direct (accounting) costs of producing peanuts, as measured
by the United States Index of prices paid for items used in production,

. was weighted by the acreage of peanuts. Prices of competing cro s were
converted to indexes using the simple 1910-1914 average price equal to
100. One further adjustment was made: the opportunity costs (prices of
competing crops) were lagged one year (in form.t-l) while the prices
paid index was not lagged (in form.t). The composite cost index was
then computed as the sum.of the products of the prices paid index and
peanut acreage, the price of corn index and corn acreage, and the price
of cotton index and cotton acreage, and the price of soybeans index {ha
soybean acreage, all divided by the total acreage of peanuts, corn,
cotton, and soybeans. This is based on the hypothesis that at planting

time the grower considers the current level of the accounting costs of

73

producing peanuts together with the expected prices (and therefore returns)
thatLhe could obtain by devoting resources to crops other than peanuts.
He then makes a rational decision as to the most profitable combination
of enterprises for the current year. The "expected prices" are regarded
as those for the preceding year. It is not contended that this assump-
tion is necessarily valid for little is known about the peanut growerds
decision-making process. Neither can there be assurance that, assuming
he does in fact consider the factors in approximately the manner described
above, there are not other factors which enter into the process in an
important way such as crop rotations, credit, soil type, and available
labor which may cause non-response or considerable lag in his response

to costs and alternative opportunities. Also, other methods of combin-
ing the several indexes might have been chosen.

In Virginia, the acreage used in weighting the price of corn
was modified to include only acreage of corn in Crop Reporting District
Number 9, the peanut producing area of the state. A similar modifica-
tion was used in North Carolina by using corn acreage in Crop Reporting
District Number 3 for the same reason. Since data in this form are not
available prior to 1930 in Virginia and 1925 in North Carolina, arbitrary
acreage weights were assigned for prior years in rough proportion to the
total state acreage and census data. The main purpose of these modifica-
tions was two-fold: (l) to avoid excessive weights for corn price, and
(2) to avoid the use of state corn acreage which had declined over the
years in an amount disproportionate to change in corn acreage in the

peanut production areas.

74

In all other states, state acreages were used in weighting the
prices of competing craps as a measure of opportunity costs.

In summary, Table 1 gives the competing (alternative) crops
selected for the seven states for purposes of deriving a composite index
of direct production costs and opportunity costs.

Table 1 .-d8e1ection of craps which are regarded as competing with, or
Alternative to, peanuts in the seven major peanut producing states.

f

State Crgps

Virginia.................: corn, cotton, soybeans*
North Carolina,..........: corn, cotton, soybeans*

Georgia.................. corn, cotton

Floridaoss00.000.00.000... corn, COtton

Alabama..................: corn, cotton
Texas....................: darn, cotton, sorghum**

Oklahoma.................: corn, cotton, sorghum**

 

*soybean data beginning in 1925
**sorghum.data beginning in 1929

For use in the estimating equations, the square of the com-
posite cost index (X9) was used under the assumption that yields or

acreage would decrease at an increasing rate as composite costs increased5

SJohnson, Bulletin 580, p. 46.

75

Peanut Acreage (X10).--In the estimating equations the peanut acreage

 

data used is the "acreage of peanuts picked and threshed" as estimated
by the United States Department of Agriculture.

In the Virginia-Carolina area, the acreage picked and threshed
is substantially the same as acreage for "all purposes." Abandonment
of acreage is normally small. Accordingly, acreage planted and acreage
picked and threshed are substantially the same, particularly in recent
years, although a small acreage is still hogged off in North Carolina.

In the Southeast area, the acreage grown for all purposes,
including hogging-off, substantially exceeds the acreage picked and
threshed although the differential has declined in recent years. A
similar relationship holds in the Southwest area. Except for considera-
tion given to the difference between acreage allotments and acreage
picked and threshed, this study is concerned only with picked and

threshed acreage.

Peanut Production (X11).--The data consist of the total number of pounds

 

of peanuts picked and threshed annually, as estimated by the United

States Department of Agriculture.

Value of Peanut Production (X12).--The annual peanut crop values used

 

are those assigned by the United States Department of Agriculture.

Value of Competing Crops (X13).--The annual crop values assigned by the

 

United States Department of Agriculture to the competing (alternative)

cr0ps specified above under (X9) were summed for the respective states.

76

Acreage of Competing Craps (X14).--Except as noted under (X9) above, with

 

regard to modifications in corn acreage in Virginia and North Carolina,
the acreage used is the sum of the total acreages of the crOps Specified

under (X9) as estimated by the United States Department of Agriculture.

Rainfall in Critical Months (X15, X16, X17).»-The same notation and sub-

 

scripts (X15, X16, and X17) have been used in all states to designate

the critical months. A "critical month" is regarded as one in which the
amount of rainfall received will "make or break" the crop. In the process
of growth, the peanut plant goes through a stage referred to as "pegging".
As the vine grows and Spreads over the soil adjacent to the plant, "pegs"
emerge from the vine and enter the soil. It is from these pegs that the
peanut develops beneath the soil surface. Lack of adequate moisture dur-
ing the pegging stage inhibits the process and lowers the yield. Agrono-

6 have indicated that pegging occurs over a two month

mists in Virginia
period (July and August in Virginia and North Carolina) and that about
four inches of rain per month, reasonably well distributed, would be the
ideal norm. If pegging were inhibited in July by drought, however, a
good yield might still result from adequate rainfall in August. Agrono-
mists also indicated that relatively light rainfall in September would

be ideal for maturing the crop; heavy rainfall in September is regarded

as detrimental. Higgins and Bailey7 say "observations indicate that lack

 

6Interviews with Dr. H. L. Dunton and M. P. Lacy, Agronomy Depart-
ment, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, Virginia.

7B. B. Higgins and Wallace K. Bailey, New Varieties and Selected
Strains of Peanuts, Bulletin N. S. 11 (Experiment: Georgia Agricultural
Experiment Stations, 1955), p. 6.

77

of adequate soil moisture may be critical at three periods: at planting,
when gynophores (pegs) are entering the soil, and during development of
pods and seed. Too much rain at harvest time may favor losses-~through
seed Sprouting, decay of gynophores, and decay of nuts."

Agronomists in other States were not contacted. The same
general hypothesis was extended to each of the other six States, but
modified for difference in growing season. Table 2 Shows the critical
months selected for the reSpective States.

Table 2.--Months in which rainfall is deemed to be critical for normal
growth and maturity of peanuts in seven major producing states.

 

 

 

State 5 W Critical Months

..- ; -315 ; x16 I x17
Virginia................; July August September
North Carolina .......... : July August September
Georgia. ................ : June July August
Florida ................. : June July August
Alabama ................. : June July August
Texas ................... : June July August
Oklahoma ......... .......; July August September

A

In compiling the rainfall data for the reSpective months and
States, the records of the Weather Bureau were consulted. Monthly total
rainfall Since 1909 was tabulated for all meteorological Substations in
all major peanut producing counties in the peanut producing area of each
State insofar as the substation records contained a report for the desired
month and year. Relatively few substations provided a continuous fifty-
year record. Prior to 1930, less than half as many substation reports

were available in some states as for the period Since then. However, it

78

is believed that enough substation reports were available in each of the
early years to provide reasonably useful average rainfall data for the
area for each month and year.

An arithmetic unweighted average of the inches of rainfall
reported by all recording substations for each critical month and year
for each state's peanut producing area was then calculated. These
monthly averages are the observations designated as X15, X16, and X17.

2 The substation rainfall data used are included in Appendix C.
The accompanying maps, Figures 1 through 7_ , designate: (l) the
peanut producing areas of the seven major States, (2) the important
peanut producing counties within each state, (3) the relative intensity
of peanut production in the more important counties within each State
as indicated by county acreage for 1957, and (4) the approximate loca-
tion of each of the meteorological substations for which rainfall data
were available for part or all of the fifty-year period under study. An
exception was necessary for Texas regarding location of substations on

the map; instead, a list of substations by counties accompanies the map.

Profitability Ratio; (X18 and X19).--This series of data (X18) consists

 

of the ratio of the total value of the competing crops, described under
(X13) above, to the value of the peanut crop (X12). The variable (X19)
is this ratio squared. It is difficult to assign a rational theoretical
concept to the use of this ratio in terms of either costs or prices.

The original notion was that, as peanut crop values increased relative
to competing crop values, the ratio would decline at an increasing rate

and possibly be associated with changes in peanut yields or acreage.

79

 

0039 onww
3:069..ch ONO—33c c0

OmN;m
cotuEOfaom

n:

 
          

oon
2.2326

036
cocooO ouctn.

 

new

mZO_._.<._.mm3m .._<U_OOI_OmOuhw_2
mm_._.ZDOU J<n:UZEQ
<mm< ZO_._.UDOOmn_ ._.DZ<mn_ (2513

.H onnwam

.uAym

xuwzncacm

ooo.eoH . mmsmuo< mueum Hence

one - «essence tango

oem.moH . ozone umuucsou no
mouo< Houoa

"mmma opossum mo oweouo<

xonmom .

xuuom .
ensue menu .xuommam .

oaowmnuflfim
hounm .ooooahosom

no>H .
HHmSomom .
oncHHom .

oaaxomuh
manomam
condom

 

szHH<Hmm5w

 

awe

 

HNMQ’WQNQO‘S

H
H

80

ooo.HmH - mmmuuo< mumum Hence
0N~.mH u mofiucsoo porno
oma.~eu - eeoem mmuuesoo an «whoa Hence

    

"mmma muoamom mo owmmuo<

  

00

moons:
nooHoB
oOumoHSmmS
ouooumH

xooz nouauoom
undo: xxoom
oHHH>ooouu
vasomom
oouoovm
secuoawom

H

05.0
.cowaoom

 
 

 

       

0.0

HNMd’mONwO‘O

    

00m. m.
€0.0c2a6;

 

OOhfi.

Eta:

   

 

b 005.0.
35030.5

0

  

     
 

 

mZOHH<HmMDm

. 6:6;
00h n
Ear-56.9.".

m oo:om
. no :5

oonn. . I

/ B..Ow¢c01

/

 

0a

cows .0.
:25 8. o... mzoEfimmom 290049.852

3.22:5 3:238 .ZdGzEd
<92 2053095 525a <230m<o 582

.N madman

 

 

ooo.on . mwmmuu< mumum Hence
oo~.n - mmaucsoo umeuo
oom.~om - sebum mmauasoo an mmuo< Hence

 

   
   

on as mw

mQN.
O_OC.EUW
. _
03.9
e....rz

3.03m adiorh OVO.® ovmé.
xvoco caaouso

         
      

000.0N
:orufi J

. G
O.mnfl

 

   

On_.N_

O
.N *fk

 

"mmma pom monomom mo mwmouo<

81

   

000..

OQN.@ co.0c£n0>>

VJ ham

   

COGLUtwOW

mZOTPdFWmDm ._<U_OOJ_OmOw._.w§
mw_._.ZDOU J<&_UZE&
<wm< ZOCUDOOKQ FDZdQQ (.OmOuO

.m shaman

 

 

 

 

         

 

eon
unsavoos .NN
acumaa .HN
nowuoz .ON
«anaconda .mH
assess; .mH
Hon: neuuwmom .NH
SHHH>oon3e= .oH
museum ouch .mH
vaunownuqh .qa
ouauusm .mH
mHHH>oonHuoon .NH
season .HH
unoonuno .oH
mamvuoo .a
«Haaaso .m
cameo .m
uoaunm .o
saaxuam .m
owoauncaom .q
enoauoa< .m
saunfl< .N
oHHq>ooo< .H
mZOHH<Hmm=m

82

 

ooo.Nm u mwmmuu< mumum HmuOH
o¢0.m u mowuooou nonuo
oom.mq u ososm momuonoo om mouo< annoy

"mmma monommm mo omoouu<
05.. o"

coo _.o .
08 0mm 9,. 8 "mm. he;

Canasta XX 0
km. on. % 0? :0. :23;

mm.

 

 

 

 

 

coouo>

xoofloo

mHoommomm
oommooam .uz
oHHooHuooz
oowumum .mxm GOuHHz
H anaconda
xmom>flq

uooEmA

mmcwumm Swflm
oHHH>moono
mwomudm xmfioom on
oxoq mmdeoo
essence

mHHu>xumu
csoumoanon

OHNMQ’UWO
Hr—ir—dr—lr—lr—iv—i

m20_._.<._.mm3m J<U_OO.._OmOu._.u5_
mMFZDOU J<EUZEQ
<mm< ZO_._.UDOOmn_ #32405 <0EO..C

.q ouowwm

ON

r—INCfix‘flntohcn

 

 

mZOHH<HmmDm

83

ooo.mo~ - mmuuuo< musum Hence
oqu.m : moaucsoo uosuo
oo~.emu - storm smuuesoo an umuo< sauce

“unma muonoom mo owsouo<

%oue .¢N

 

DEOUOHM .MN OOHdN @flN “momma.“ V.. n Gm... OO
. . m

MHHNM “MPH“ .NN £0.25... .
XHUNO .HN hfir cowowsmmou c.9603u .

cousoz .om on mwné(MW~ 0: SN \Mlly .l

nouxooum smz .mH . . owm
:23 .2 an own .an
030mm fifidHfimHm .5.” rev...
demands: .oa o
mom coouo .mH
s>oamw .¢H .
Hosea noon some ooHum .mH
sandman .NH

onaumuounm .HH 009mm
snflm .OH qutom
cannon .m
saoanaoo
mwsqumm summon
scumuao
«masseuse
hoaunoum
mmdaumm moan
saunawoo<
SHHH>ono<

 

 

         
            

 

00 mam.

couscou

Om.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

ooca
.3216

HNMx'fl-nxohm

xcuECO.c02

 

 

 

mZOHH¢HmmDm

mzoifimmam 45.038035
8:238 imaged
fied. 20.5:oodd 52;. $24,244

.m ounwah

 

84

 

Noemm

OaOuaOo<

 

moms .mnd
c0+coO of;

 

 

65. mend «.005 CAL
$553.. conxocO 3.000 306.8}

 

U.Qno...0

 

 

awn;

 

 

 

Om...

aUtOW

Ham.emm mmsmuo< muwum Hence
mum.¢a moauonou nonuo
eem.mmm - storm mmuucsoo an mmuu< Hence

unmma museumm mo swoouo<

.mofiuoooo ho mcowuoumoom
Hmomonouoouoa «ma mo umHH wofimoodfioooo mom

 

 

 

: ~ ~CFHU

 

 

 

 

 

 

.VN QM
=Osoc0tm

 

 

 

mZO_...<...mmDm adv—OOJOEOMHMS.
mm....ZDOU J<nZUZEa
<wm< ZO..rUDOO¢n. #32433. @4qu

.o ouswam

85

TEXAS COUNTIES AND SUBSTATIONS

ANDERSON
Long Lake

ATASCOSA
Falls City
Jourdanton
Poteet

AUSTIN
Sealy

BASTROP
Jeddo
Smithville

BEXAR
Classens Ranch
San Antionio
Nursery

BLANCO
Sandy

BOSQUE
Clifton 9E
Kopperl

BROWN
Blanket
Brownwood
Byrds
Health Farm
Winchell

CALLAHAN
Cross Plains
McDonald Store
Putnam

COLORADO
Columbus

COMANCHE

Comanche

COOKE
Era
Gainesville
Muenster

DENTON
Denton
Lake Dallas
Lewisville
Little Elm
Roanoke
Sanger

DEHHITT
Cuero
Yorktown

EASTLAND
Eastland
Ranger
Rising Star

ERATH
Dublin
Morgan Mill
Stephenville

FANNIN
Bonham
Honey Grove
Telephone
Trenton

FAYETTE
Flatonia
LaGrange
Schulenburg

FRIO
Dilley
Frio Town
Pearsall

GILLESPIE
Car Ranch
Doss
Fredericksburg
Riley Ben Ranch

GONZALES
Dryer
Nixon
Waelder

GRAYSON
Denison Dam
Sherman

GUADALUPE
New Brounfels
Seguin

HARRIS
Clodine
CypreSS
Houston-Heights
Tomball

HENDERSON
Athens
Trinidad

HILL
Hillsboro
Itasca
Whitney Dam

HOOD
Lipan

HOUSTON
Crockett
Grapeland
Nogalus G S

JONES
Hamlin
Nugent
Stamford
Truby

LAMAR
Arthur City
Paris

LASALLE
Cotulla
Encinal
Fowlerton

86

TEXAS COUNTIES AND SUBSTATIONS (Continued)

LAVACA MILLS
Halletsville Goldthwaite
Provident City
Yoakum MONTAGUE

Forestburg

LEE Montague
Dime Box Ringgold
Giddings

PALO PINTO

LEON Brazos
Buffalo Mineral Wells
Centerville Palo Pinto
Jewett Strawn 8NNE

LIMESTONE SAN SABA
Mexia Chappel
Thornton Flying V

Richland Springs

LLANO San Saba
Castell Sloan
Ligon Ranch
Llano SOMERVILLE
Moss Ranch Rainbow

MASON STONEWALL
Capps Ranch ASpermont
Martin Ranch
Mason TITUS
Miller Ranch Mt. Pleasant
Pontotoc

WALLER

MCCULLOCH Hempstead
Brady Waller
Fife
Johnson Ranch WILSON
Neal Ranch Floresville
Placid

WISE

MEDINA Boyd
Devine Bridgeport
Hondo Decatur

Slidell

MILAM
Burlington
Cameron

Davilla

87

ooo.q- . mwumuo< Sodom Hmuoa

oHe.e -

mowucooo nonuo

omm.mHH - eeoem mmuuesoo as muuo< sauce

“mmma pom monocom mo Swoouo<

snow

/ .uz nuances
nxosmz
exasuos
suppose
owGHEonmaH

SHHH>hou=odm

moozmnm

commons. NHOd—Hawm
ouhmm

oouoaso

onwoum
oououoom
..muaaxo
uno
suxonnaz
oa>oaoz
nexus:
noumofl<oz
scans:
uuuoanuz
Hagnmz
nousoq
usooox
noumwaax

    

    

awmqu

06*5E£M3Q
a sruc OEOU

 

 

 

coo... 03.9
chagrin. 3503....

 

 

mZO.._.<...mmDm 4<U.OOJO¢Owa§
mm....ZDOU ..<n:UZ.m.n.
«mad ZOTKuDOOEn. HDZ<MQ («20141.10

 

.n ouowah

 

omam .QN
.Hm «HHH>=meHom .mm
.om sun consume .eN
.me eouenmom .mN
.ms Humans: .NN
.ae Scene .HN
.ee prov atom .o~
.me saunas .mH
.ee anemone .mH
.me acute .NH
.Ne. mono use .ea
.He unease .mH
.oq cocoon .¢H
.am tease .ma
.mm Amuse ..~H
.am meocssoo .HH
.em armeaoaro .oa
.mm emuooueo .a
.em nonsense .m
.mm . mouse .a
.Nm ea>amo .e
.Hm sausage .m
.om Hausmom .e
.mm axou< .mn
.mu unoseu< .N
.am oxuseec< .H
mone<Hmm=m

88

AS explained in the analysis, this variable did not prove to be useful.

Year (X20).--The symbol (X20) was used to denote years 1909-19581 Year

figures were used in some analyses as a measure of time.

Ratio of the Price of Peanuts to the Index of the Cost of Production

Items (X21).--The title of this variable is largely self-explanatory.

 

It is the price of peanuts per pound (X3) divided by the index of the
cost of production items (X6) to obtain as one figure a variable in

ratio form.which would reflect the combined effect of prices paid and
prices received. -This variable was used in one-year lagged form (t-l)

to reflect the growers "ex ected" rice—cost considerations.
P P

Ratio of the Per Acre Value of Competing Crops to Index of Cost of

Production Items (X22).--This is a ratio obtained by dividing the per

 

acre value of competing crops (X24) by the direct costs of production as
represented by the index of the cost of production items (X6). This
ratio was lagged one year in the estimating equations on the hypothesis
that the producer's expectations with regard to opportunities in the
current year would be governed largely by his observations about such
opportunities in the previous year.

1
Ratio of the Price of Peanuts to the Index of the Cost of Production

Items (X23).--This is the same ratio as for (X21). In certain regres-
sions it was used in unlagged form and was designated as (X23) to

distinguish it from the lagged form.

89

Per Acre Value of Competing Crops (X24).--This is a machine computed value

 

obtained by dividing the total value of competing crops (X13) by the total

acreage of competing crops (X14).

Excess Penalty Rate (X25).—-A penalty of 75 percent of the support price

 

per pound is assessed by Government (50 per cent for the period 194951956)
against growers who fail to comply with the peanut program by planting

acreage in excess of their farm allotments.

Acreage Allotment (X26).--National, state, county, and farm allotments

 

are established under the peanut price support program. Only State

allotments are used in this study.

Three-month Average Rainfall in Texas (X27).--This is the average of

 

June (X15), July (X16), and August (X17), rainfall for special use in

estimating underharvested acreage in Texas.

Price of Hogs (X28).--This is the annual average price of hogs in Georgia

 

andrAlabama as published by the United States Department of Agriculture.

Underharvested Peanut Acreage (Y1).-«From the state acreage allotment

 

is subtracted the acreage picked and threshed. If acreage picked and
threshed is less than the allotment, the difference is regarded as a

negative value; if not, a positive value.

figtio of Peanut Acreage Picked and Threshed to Peanut Acreage Allotment (Y2)

 

This is another means of expressing the relationship between the State

acreage harvested and the state acreage allotment.

CHAPTER VI

ACREAGE, YIELD, AND PRODUCTION ESTIMATES

VIRGINIA-CAROLINA AREA

Acreage Estimates
Virginia-Carolina Area

Variables Used and Models Considered:

.. Time X17... September rainfall
. Price of peanuts .X21... Peanut price-cost ratio (t-l)

.. Log peanut price (t-l) X22... Per acre value-cost ratio competing
. U. 8. cost index ' ‘ crops (t-l) '
. U. 3. cost index squared ' X23... Same as X21 but not lagged

. Peanut acreage (dependent) X25... Excess acreage penalty

. Acreage of competing crops ,Xzfi... State acreage allotment

. July rainfall Y1 ... Under harvested peanut acreage
. August rainfall (dependent)

Y2 ... Ratio peanut acreage to acreage allotment (dependent)

 

 

 

 

‘ ° Appendix B
‘ Time ‘ Table ‘ Equation Numbers
Models Considered 3 Period ‘ Number 3 Virginia:North Carolina
A. xlo§r(x5, x7) ............ f 1909-1958 1 146 240
s. -x10.£(x5, x7) ............ f 1909-1943 2 149 249
c. x10;f(x5, x7, x14) ....... f 1909-1958 3 160 260
n. xloa£(x5, x7,px14) ....... 3 1909-1948 4 169 269
E. x10e£(x5,,x7,x14t_l)....; 1909-1948 5 167 267
F' X10=f<¥1’ x21, x22,,x23,
c. = x . x x :
x10 f( 1’ x21’ 22’ 23’ ,
115, X16, X17) . . s a: 1909‘194‘8 6 164 264
I. x10=£(x1, x21, x22) ...... : 1909-1917 7 166m 266m

9 g ; 1923-1940-

.. fi

90

91

 

 

 

 

Continued . i _fi

2 : Appgpdix B ...

3 Time . Table : Equation Numbers

Models Considered : Period 3 Number ; Virginia:North Carolina

,J. Xlo-f(X26) ................. 3 1949-1958 none (subjective)
x. Y11-£(x3, x25)...........: 1949-1958 8 9-1-1 9-2-1
L. Y12-f(x3t_1, X25)........: 1949-1958 9 0-1-1 0-2-1
M. Y13=f(X21, X25) .......... 2 1949-1958 10 2-1-1 2-2-1
N. Y21=£(x3, x25) ........... 2 1949-1958 11 9-1-2 9-2-2
0. Y22-f(X3t_1, X25) ........ 5 1949-1958 12 O-1-2 0-2-2
P. Y23-f(X21, X25) .......... 3 1949-1958 13 2-1-2 2-2-2

 

ModehsA and B.--These two initial exploratory models provided such low mul-
tiple correlation.coefficients as to suggest omission of important variables,
and wide dispersion of the data characteristic of the changing economic
structure and exogenous forces affecting the industry. Omission of the
mandatory allotment period in Model B effected some comparative improvement
in favor of this explanation. -It is quite to be expected that acreage re-
Sponse to price would be stifled by allotments. Such is the purpose of

the program. During Wbrld War I, acreage declined when price increased,
probably due to an employment alternative exogenous to the industry. No
variable is included for this. At times, costs have increased along with
prices; accordingly, some degree of intercorrelation is likely involved
which reverses expected relationships. Both models were rejected.
Mpdelsgg,L D, E.--The addition of the acreage of competing crops increases
the multiple correlation coefficient, particularly for Models D and E in

Which the mandatory allotment years are omitted. Of the six regressions,

“.- .

92

five bear statistically significant coefficients of logical sign for com-
peting crop acreage suggesting a strong negative association between the
acreage of peanuts and the acreage of specified competing crOps. The use
of this variable would bear further investigation if other difficulties
mentioned under Models A and B above could be overcome. Reversal of signs
.from logical expectations is probably a result of including war years,
and concomitant intercorrelation of the variables; however, this problem
might not be completely overcome even if war years were to be omitted, as
is the case in Model I below. The use of a time variable and price-cost
ratio should probably be explored in a model containing acreage of compet-
ing crops. Since these models are inconclusive, they were rejected.
Models F and G.--These models were tested to explore price-cost ratio
relationship to acreage; the per acre value of competing crops in lieu of
acreage; and to see if there exists any relationship between peanut acre-
age and rainfall. No weather effect was really anticipated in the
Virginia-Carolina area where abandonment of acreage is negligible.

The comparatively low multiple correlation coefficients for
Model F suggest a poor fit with the mandatory allotment period included,
in manner similar to that experienced in Models A and C. Accordingly,
Model F was rejected. Since there was no Significant weather effect,
Model G was also rejected. Other relationships are discussed below in
connection with Model H.
Model H.--In order to investigate more thoroughly the nature of these
" relationships, residuals and partial regression lines of relationship
were computed for this model which is the same as Model G without the

weather variables. These are presented graphically in Figures 1 and 2

94

 

 

 

 

Virgtmo |66
X1245 Thowond Acres 21 “.7 as
picked is Thromfl q" .9 4.0 ,9 It: ' ~ 17 n 45
' ‘F‘ - . -er 15 42. 34,» 44 48 :43 47 -‘
52 5C 36 3:1 . 55 3.2 ‘37 ‘ [29“? :3 (3’5 46.20 .18
h a 4' ~ I s a d
33 34
'09 1 1 ' 1 1 1 1 1
1114111L11L11111 111111111111L1 1111 L111 1111

 

 

 

LO I5 20 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0

Logged Roho a.‘ Price of Peonuis 10 index 0‘ C051 of Produchon Hems X3

 

 

 

 

V1rgnmo |66
Thousand Acres
X2235 Picked cThreshed
q
a} as 7
2.’ so ’9 15 45 I. a? ’7
ISOr- ' ' ' _
r- 4
IOO 4B
4 1
5

 

 

 

L
Logged ROM: 0" [Der cre Value of Cor‘oehog Crops 'c Index 0‘ Cost of Pro Judror Hen-s X4

 

 

 

 

Virgmno I66
X 234 Thousor‘dAcres
I .
Pucked 8. Threshed
35521 27 16
:1 3.; a; . § . 444g '7
ISO 39 14.:615 '.0 4.5,“. .47 42‘: .~ . __+
3.;- . v 3.9 '58 3 -3.: 3' ”,T 1'" * _' .
32 2c, hC b '8 C .3 ea . 46
i- . 4" I? (.3 19 fl
)3 2,,
I001— - fiL
J‘ULJQ41111411111111111111111l1111i111111111111L1"
a

 

 

 

. c .5 3.0 .3. 5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
Unlogged Rain: 0‘ Peonui Prnce to Index of C051 of Produchor Items X5

Figure 1. Continued

93

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tt-puuond Acres Virgimo '66
Fir-(«d 8. Ihreghevi
.4“? "I
1 I 1 . I I 1 .
o ”1 .,, ,1], 111]“,1 .11- I.
25? 3.;
200*— MorkeIingQuoIo‘
Pernod
(Aciuol -1
' AIloIed
Acreage
«A
1’ 1’
5‘40 |9I5 I920 I925 I930 I935 I940 I945 l950 I955
V' " I66
X ThousandAcres Irgmlo
134$ Puke-d 8.Thre$heg[
2.728 45 ‘
.50.. .. 2,. 2., ‘29 .. ”...”...sea- 4298 4
m {415. .17 . . . . 5556 - ‘6 -—-1
’1 12 I8 1'9 ‘ 22 . 2.5 3.0 32 34 37 9‘
r I3 20 232.4 33 .I
IOO'Jt-ml_1111l141111111[111111111111111111111111111111111—I1E
2 7 I2 22 32 42 47
Year X2

Figure 1.

95

Noth Caroling 266

 

 

 

50

 

O

-50:—

Thousand Ac res
Fucked & Threshed .,
b I
IILI_ III 1 I 1 - III_.
' I I I ' T I I ""
+ l I I I .1
. . 1
. McanrkehngQuoIo-i
Period —-I

.BOOI-

250»

 

   

Einmofed}

  

\g

    

. I
‘ II \-

AlloIIed
acreage 4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

' OOIP 1 14_1 l 1 1 1 1 L 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 l 1 1 l 1 l I l I 1 l 1 l 4 l
ISIIO I9l5 l920 I925 I930 I935 l940 I945 I950 I955
Nor‘Ih Carolina 266
XL345 Thousand Acres ~45
300P1cked 8Thres 4.3 $4 ' . _
250 .
200 _
‘5') .
I00 _I
: 11111111111111]1411111111111111U1LL111I1LL11111
7 l2 I7 22 27 .32 37 42 47
Year X2

Figure 2.

96

Noth COIOIIDO 266

 

 

 

 

X1345 Thousand ACres
Fucked 8Thrvsncd
O _
45
II
. IS. [2 I? ' . 4‘8 45 4.7
‘ I" ‘b 4" .39 I4, L/’/
I . I'd I /’/42 2K
200»- 30 a ”’71?” :n ' 2; L8 d
//J':/ 3., 35 5 I9 20
. . 33
2t 4:
I 50" 3'3 4
AL L
1' :P
1J411111111111I1111I14L.I111LI11111111111111I1111

 

 

LO |.5_ 2.0 25 3,0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
Logged Raho 0‘ Price of Peanuts Io Index of C05? OI Produchon Hems X3

Nerfh :arollna 266

 

VIP -3 C Thousand Acre<
Puckea (SThreshe

 

 

.32
3f I6

250'" ‘ ‘ ' «

 

 

I50 I I220 "

 

LllllllllllLllllPLlllllliliLJiLLllllllLllllLllLL
O 0.5 LO l5 2 O 2‘) 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
K,

Loqgea ROIIO of Per Acre Value of draw") Gaps to Index of C05? of PrOducIIOn lIems X4

Nor‘n Carolina 266

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

X934 ThousandAcres
'10er 6.7 hrcsr‘e j d
L k a: ‘6
230 : . 4'5 1
- 1| 2» I5 n I? 43 24
3.9 ‘4 ' '.;(.\.l:97 . . 4'4
. (\ ' (
A, .- “f - . '48 ‘7 ”.146
200 1;“ _...-.‘°\ 5:5 l2 I42 —4
, w ... a. .
3'3 4|. ‘ . 23 .
I8 . '9
2-0 22
‘50 ‘II
@11L1111I1111I111111111I1111I11111111111111111114?
I-O LE) 2 O 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 50 5 5 .0

Unmanned Ra‘ e 3‘ Dude 0" Gear .Is to Index 0‘ CosI of Produchon Hems X5

Figure 2. Continued

97

for Virginia and North Carolina, respectively. Time is the only variable

for the area with a significant coefficient. There is doubtless inter-

Correlation among the independent variables peanut price, costs, time and

Far acre value of competing craps as these tend to move together over time,

part: icularly in war years. The behavior of acreage of competing crops

in Model E suggests that perhaps acreage rather than price or value of
competing crops might provide the more reliable coefficient.
33%

The acre-

rotation of crops for corn, cotton, soybeans, and peanuts (not

necessarily in this order) seems to suggest this possibility. Whether

or not. peanut acreage and acreage of competing crops are both associated

with time has not been investigated. Total crop land use in the area has

not. changed greatly. For example, the decline in cotton in Virginia has

been- largely compensated by an increase in soybeans. If peanut acreage
is associated with competing crops in some definite way in the rotation,

as Modem C, D, and E suggest, then perhaps acreage of competing crops

would have a more reliable coefficient than a competing crop value vari—

able such as used in Model H.

Much of the magnitude of the residuals may be explained by
World War I, the depression of the 1930's, World War II, and the single
mandatery allotment year, 1941. Acreage behavior during World War I is

contrary to the usual expectations suggesting that some exogenous factor,
perhaps shipmyard wages, offered attractive alternatives to farm labor
and

Perhaps farm operators. Competing crop acreage may have reSponded

Similarly, and thus been correlated with peanut acreage. It will be
recalled that peanut production was largely a handaoperation at that
time .. The acreage response in World War II was comparatively less than

98

in other production areas, as will be observed below. Considering the

limitations of the statistical techniques employed, it is likely that the

coefficient of time is overestimated with compensating underestimates

of other coefficients. A more refined technique seems necessary to eno

hence the reliability of coefficients. The hypothesis that absolute and

re lative profitability of peanut production is associated with acreage

can hardly be rejected, but the extent and manner of association is not

demonstrated by these models.

 

Model I.--This model is the same as Model H except for the time period

and the omission of the unlagged price-cost ratio. It was thought that

e1 imination of the war years might improve the measure of the relationships

The residuals are shown graphically in Figure 3 and represent no improve-

ment. in the coefficients.

Since the major disturbances over the long-run

Period have been removed, this suggests that some other acreage models

for the area should be explored.

310018 1.3 J -P.--Inspection of the accompanying charts (Figures 1 and 2)
reveal that the difference between the acreage allotment and acreage
Picked and threshed is small and random for Virginia, and is can»

Sistently an over-harvest in North Carolina in recent years. The differ-

ent-1&1 data may be inspected in the relevant production estimate Tables

1* and 1‘. below. In the southeastern part of the North Carolina peanut

Pmduetion area, several (4 or 5) thousand acres are grown for hogging
off'

9

however, these are not included in the acreage picked and threshed

”ti-mate. There are, however, in the same section for the most part,

In“: also elsewhere in the State, several thousand acres grown on what

".1
ay be termed "l-vacre farms". These peanuts are grown for home use as

99

Vngnna I66 IVV

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ThOusand Acres
SPIcked dThreshed
0 #7 r r1 I 1 g; %I I v I I I I f I Y 7 Y I 1 1 I
‘Zflt‘ ;
.EE'CDCH—
I ESIDP _
I CDCN- —4
I’ I I I I I I I I I I I L I II I I I I 14 LL Li I I_I Ill I I I I I L I I I I I l I II I I".
I9IO I9l5 I9 I925 I930 I935 I940 I945 IQSO I953
N Ih c I' I.
ThousandAcres or aro Ina 266 W
5 O Picked 8.Thres _+
O 1 L 1 I 1 l. I 4_1 L L L 1
T {I 1‘ TI ' I j j I I I
‘ES(3_. _.
1F 4.?
25 0— Actual\ Estimaied .—

    

20(3—

IE>(3t

 

IOQI—

VI . J.L.L__LL_1_L1-L-L-_L_L.LI-L_L._L_LJ.1_J i. I IJ_1..L.I I ii_i._i .I 1.1 4_1 I I l 1.1 I.-L_A_Lj
I9“: I9I5 I920 I925 I930 I935 I940 I945 I950 I955

 

Figure 3.

100

permitted by peanut legislation. This production is not included in the

commercial acreage allotment for the state.

However, the North Carolina
Crop Reporting Service1

does include this acreage in its determination of

picked and threshed production and average yield. The Agricultural Sta-
b :l'. lization and Conservation Committee, United States Department of

Agriculture, Raleigh, North Carolina, advises that2 as many as 6,774
l —=acre farms were reported in 1956; of these 5,043 had their acreage
measured. In other years, the number of reported farms ranged from
Z , 500 to 5,000. With regard to compliance with allotments on commercial

Earns, other reports3 suggest that growers collectively harvest an acre-

age as close to their allotments as is reasonably possible. Another

Source of variation in over- or under-harvest reported is suggested by
the North Carolina Crop Estimates Staff, namely, that of "rounding off"

the measurements such that small fractions are dropped. Even though

Such fractions are small (hundredths), it is believed that in total for

18, 000 growers, a differential between measured and estimated acreage

might amount to 500 acres from this source alone.‘I

A comparable situation exists in Virginia but lesser in extent.

because of a more compact production area composed of fewer growers and

les 8 acreage .

Interview by telephone with Olas Wakefield, North Carolina
Cmp Reporting Staff, Raleigh, North Carolina, May 9, 1960.

2Letter from H. D. Godfrey, Administration Officer of the
A31” ' cultural Stabilization and Conservation Committee, May 23, 1958.

Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation, 1956-59 Annual
32mm for Virginia and 1959 Annual Report for North Carolina (Washington:
Umlted States Department of Agriculture, 1951-1960) .

Telephone interview with Mr. Wakefield.

101

In the light of the above considerations, the six Models K,
.1” M, N, 0, P were set aside in favor of Model J, which is merely to
say that the best estimate of peanut acreage in the current and pro-
;fee<:ted period is the peanut acreage allotment. It was not anticipated
that Models K-P would be helpful in the Virginia-Carolina area. In-
spection of the data indicates that growers collectively plant and
harvest an acreage equivalent to that permitted by the peanut pro-
£§JCN£iun.
141 Summary of this Section.--It was decided that Model J would be used
without adjustment for estimating acreage in Virginia, and that Model J
wm:>tzjld be satisfactory for estimating acreage in North Carolina after
tak ing into account subjectively the consistent over-harvest from
1.-ai<:re farms. Accordingly, 9,000 acres will be added to the North
(zeazrcalina minimum allotment of 169,000 acres when estimates of production
firé considered in the relevant discussion below.

Yield Estimates
Virginia-Carolina Area

IE$bles Used and Models Considered:

- - Time X10... Peanut acreage
x2 X15... July rainfall
1" a -Time squared X16... August rainfall
x2'- - Peanut yield (dependent) X17... September rainfall
.15.. - Log peanut price (t-l) X19... Profitability ratio
x9°- e Composite cost squared

102

_4_1

 

Appendix B

 

 

 

 

Models Considered :Table: Equation Numbegs
Time Period - 1909-1958 :Numberz Virginia:North Carolina
A - xz-fixl, x5, x10) ................... 14 190 290
B - xz-fixl, x5, 1110, x16) .............. 2 14 100 200
C .. x2=£(x1, xi, x5, 2110, x16)..........; 15 100t2 ---
D .. x2=£(x1, x5, x9, x10) ............... 16 122 222
E: " Xt=f<xp x5, x9, 110’ x15’ x16’ 11”): 17 121 221
F - X24011, xi, :15, 1110, x15, x16, x17); 18 102 202
c- x2405, x5, x10, 1119).. ............ 19 132 232
H” x2‘“*1;,§?:.‘1‘I9:.’.‘I%:.’1‘%éi.‘i‘%2:....i 20 131 231

v—

Model A.--The coefficients obtained for this model are significant at the
1 percent or 5 percent probability levels except for price in North Carolina.
The multiple correlation coefficients are reasonably satisfactory. The
relationships are presented graphically in Figures 4 and 5. The history
0f "good" and "bad" crop years has not been traced in detail, but gen-
eral knowledge in recent years suggests that most of the large residuals
are weather generated. If adequate observed data for weather effect
could be developed, it could be most helpful in the determination of more
reliable and useful coefficients for the economic variables. It will be
recaL Jed that, in Chapter 1', reference was made to a comparative time
1‘3 in North Carolina regarding the achievement of higher yields in
tecfint years. The charts appear to confirm this; and it may offer some

e"‘Plalsation of the negative behavior of the coefficient of price in

north Carolina. Inspection of the respective yield-price lines of

103

V"Cpnm1|90

Pounds
soc—“mg ,

200

lDip-II ..IIIII - III II] II , I II I _ ‘
.100 I II III] IIIIII I .

 

 

 

 

- 200 —
-3oo .
- 4 oo .1
2 I00 ' ..
2 000 "
I 9 00 f" 1
I 800 , "- " -
I 700 If .
I 600 ll e
I 500 II _/ .4
I400 ,-.\ , 7
I .300 \_”.‘.‘! 4
' 2 0° EsIamaIed . ,’ ‘
I I 00 >3. ;\_/-~ - \I .
I 000 /' ’I‘ _,’ \ 1' "‘ .-I —.
9 CO I" I‘ ’1’ \l/ .4
8 00 ,1 \w- ,’ I AcIuaI __
700 "' ' \‘-"' .

6 00

IO II I9 0 I 5 I30 ° I". I94 I o I

X [.34 Pouads l Virginia I90
I806 Per cre

I7oQ_ . . 4

I500 .

I500

I400

I300
I200
IIOQ
I000
900 '

 

 

 

 

u ' ' LLngLLJJZELJJHLL;J_L?
I I7 47

Year X2

104

Virgunia I90

 

 

 

 

 

Price (cenis) X3

 

 

 

 

Pounds Vurqunia I90
A -I
fl
——I
700'- 4.5 4
6OOI'ILILI.I ililnliieI—II

 

 

1 1 ' J I. 1 I L I
I00 I06 “2 HS I24 I30 l36 I42 I48 I54 |60 I66 I72
Thousand Acres Picked and Threshed X4

Figure 4. Continued

105

Norlh CaroIIna 290

 

Pounds

    

 

3

G
o

o
I

 

/\ Eslimated
I; .

l‘\ A
\/ I \ I
\”

 
  

I9I0 I9|5 I920 I925 I930 I935 I940 l945 I950
Norlh Carolina 290

XL“ Pounds
IBOG per Acre I

I700
I600 49 5.2
|500

I400" %“
I300I 3,9 “Va/'31,“; 4.-
I200” 3" 35 . 50
“00 I' 3'5 ' .- 56 - 4.6 49
I000— 2' 2&2 '
900
800I
700 ' ,
600k— l.l I2

 

Y

4.2 4.4 4.8 _- ,

 

 

 

   
 

I

I I 1

 

I955

I
‘i‘
L J

IIIIIIIIILIIIIIIIIJ4LLIIIJLILLIlllJLLLIIJLLIIIIII

.tLJi

 

 

l2 I7 22 ? 32 37
Year X2

Figure 5.

47

106.

Norlh Carolina 2 90

 

 

 

s's _.

42 25 $6 "

23 4.4 .9 5752 _

6 '7 :9 ?0 I8 48 5|

2| 2‘4 4'3 20- $3

2.2 45 £7 5,4 -—I

4'6 so '*

4'9 ...

'. 55.

I . l . I . I . I . I . I . I . .1__'2I

 

 

5 6 7 8 9 l0 ll I2 l3
Price (cenls) X3

Nor lh Carolina 290

 

 

 

XLzs Pounds I so
'500 per Acre . q
....
5.0 97 4'3 _
5.5 49 4.5 as.
L I I I l "

 

 

 

-LL—I-—L—L~l——Ll I 1 Jt__1__J__l__L_.I._J_.I-_L_1
l24 l40 I56 I72 IBB 204 220 236 252 268 284 300 3l6
Thousand Acres PIcked and Threshed X4

Figure 5. Continued

107

relationship for the two states indicates that the period beginning about
1945 forms a unique configuration, differing from previous years, such
that a positive line of relationship could probably be fitted with a
much higher coefficient than that which obtains for the 49uyear period.
Since this configuration is applicable in both states, it suggests that
the mean of this later period in North Carolina is comparatively lower
than that which obtains in Virginia with reSpect to the pre-l945 period;
this suggests an explanation of the negative yield-price relationship
in North Carolina. Other than this, relationships appear no different
than in Virginia where the price coefficient is significant. The Special
configuration of the yield-price relationship since 1945 appears to be
the result of the contrasting drastic adjustments during the period:
(I) The high acreage and low yields of World War II, followed by (2)
the high yields and low acreage of the allotment period beginning in
1949. This is a situation which is not likely to be repeated in the
near future; therefore, this period was not selected for Special analysis.
It would seem the better part of judgement not to project this situation
into the future even though the coefficients of price might be highly
significant.

The yield-acreage response conforms to general observation.
The recent high yield--low acreage relationship, and the war time high
acreage-nlow yield relationships are clearly evident in the charts for
both states, but less pronounced in North Carolina. It may be observed
that removal of these two periods from the model would likely result in
a non-significant acreage coefficient. Yield is probably not greatly

affected by small changes in acreage; this is logical since it is unlikely

108

that there is any abrupt line of demarcation between well adapted and less
adapted soils, nor between the degree of intensity with which other factors
of production are combined with slightly differing quantities of land.

The yield-time relationship is highly significant. As a measure
of technology, this "squares" with the observations reviewed in Chapter
III. The "strength" of this variable sometimes leads the production
scientist to observe that "price doesn't seem to make any difference",
while the economist adheres to the view that price makes all the
difference. Taken literally, the coefficients of Model A appear to fav-
or the view of the production scientist particularly in North Carolina
where price is not significantly associated with yields, suggesting that
farmers will produce peanuts regardless of price, an obvious absurdity
in view of their interest in price legislation. The problem is doubtless
one of intercorrelation of price and technology suggesting that the price
coefficient is underestimated with compensating overestimation of the
time coefficient.

Model B.--August rainfall failed to enter the equation with a signifi-
cant coefficient; however, the positive relationship hypothesized is
given some support.

Model C.--In Virginia, the quadratic of time was also added to test the
seeming curvilinearity of the data. The variable was significant at the
1 percent level and the multiple correlation coefficient was increased.
No other coefficient was significant. These relationships are shown
graphically in Figure 6. This suggests a rather high degree of inter-
correlation such that the coefficient of time tends to be overestimated

with compensating underestimation of the other variables. Subjectively,

109

Virginia I001?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pounds
300 per Acre I fi
200 _.
IOOI- 4
0 IrII I.1 . -J,I II -.II III
400- I I I I I II I l .
-200 _
-300 n
-40 W
2I00 - 1
2000 I».
l900 ,- / ..
Isoo~ _ .I’ _
I700I- ," .
I600~ A f 4
ISOOI .” ' Esfimaled I
I400 , _.
I300 ' If" .
- /\/'
‘20 Aclua|\ _ I \' I 'I
|l00 ix ,’ _I -I
l000 V’ ‘ ' —
900_ \/ \/. .... .\ ,-" I‘M-xxx ' I q
800_ “/ ‘I 1
700L '1
6°°E....I....I....I.L..I....I...iI....I....I.t..I..r

 

I9I0 l9|5 l920 I925 I930 l935 I940 I945 I950 l955
Figure 6.

110

VIrgImo I001?

 

Xmsa Pounds - -_ 3.0.7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pb d --"”-‘~—-—-——-1‘
XI.2356 ”32c; J . . 5)
I50 “ 7
I400 3‘ 26 25 I9 I8 53 55 -‘
’ , 29 28 ' 58
'3 3? .436 37' '7 23 so 5‘ 5| 5
I200 342 335 I02' 27 48 - _
I 339 I3
”0 36 '5 .II "4 , . 44' '43 d6 20' . -‘
2 47 49 «4
00 38 . ‘ . I.
I 33 30 I2 24 -1
900 22 ‘
45 55 ‘
3° I I 1 . 1 . 1 I 1 I I . I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 . I '1
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO II I2 l3

Price (cenIs) X4

Figure 6. Continued

111

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      
    

   

 

 

Maia I00 I2
X "2346 piorurxzsre 52
I500 . ‘
I400 _
I30 4
I200 _
IIO ‘
I000 -1
900 , .
800 gs ‘1,
f l l l I 1 l 1 I I l 1 l l A J l l I l I I I I I '
I06 II2 II8 I24 I30 I36 I42 I48 I54 l60 I66 I72
Thousand Acres Picked and Threshed X5
X12345 P011225 J7 Virginia '00 I2
.500 per (C .52 4
40
I40 ..9 ‘9 2‘ 265.6- §3 3" 37 -|-I
I30 3? '7 2'9 2.5 I0. 2 . .58 d
.200 . I0 51. 3 57 4Q 27 —4
II , 4'2 . 1
I000 3’ ‘4 —I
9 5:5 I
800 ' .1
f 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 '0 II I2 I3 I4 I5

Augusi Rainfall (inches) X6

Figure 6. Continued

it seems advisable to reject this model because its relative effectiveness
appears to arise from the special conditions prevailing since 1940: (l)
The high acreage, low yield situation during World War 11 followed by (2)
the enact Opposite situation beginning in 1949. Repetition of this
special set of conditions in the near future seems unlikely; therefore,

a quadratic projection would appear unwarranted in this production area.
Model D.--The variable, composite cost, was added to the variables in
Model A, but in neither state was the coefficient significant. Price

also was not significant in this model. Again, this may be a problem

of intercorrelation since composite cost includes the prices of competing
craps which, over much of the time period,pr0bably move together with
peanut prices. Direct costs, also included, would likely move similarly.
It will be recalled that no special case is made that the composite cost
index is adequately conceived in its construction. It might be worthwhile
to try a model with separate variables for direct costs and opportunity
costs.

Model E.-—The addition of the three rainfall variables effected a slight
improvement but it was not significant. The signs of the rainfall co-
efficients are of interest in light of further investigation possibilities.
The August and September relationships conform to the hypotheses, but for
some reason July rainfall is negatively associated with yield in contrast
to expectations; the equivalent month, June, in the Southeast is of the
same sign suggesting that rainfall is in some way yield depressing in the
first critical month in the humid areas. This might be associated with
excessive grass, weeds, or plant growth; some observers postulate that

tall plant growth might inhibit "pegging".‘ Possibly the negative sign

113

arises from intercorrelation among the rainfall variables. If so, the
relationship is consistent among five states. The yield-rainfall rela-
tionship suggests that a considerable variation about the mean inches
of rain throughout the season does not measurably affect peanut yields
in the humid area. Small rainfall effects could be easily obscured by
uncorrelated effects of insects and disease, or lack of them. Serious
droughts, or heavy hurricane rainfall, both of which are damaging, do
not occur often enough, even in a long time-period, to influence the
size of the coefficient. A quite different response will be observed
later in the subhumid Southwest. A more refined, possibly weighted,
measure of weather effect for the humid area remains to be developed.
Model F.--The test for curvilinearity conducted with Model C was ex-
panded to the general case with this model. The response in Virginia
was about the same as for Model C, but no response to quadratic time
was obtained for North Carolina. This seems to be a further confir-
mation of the time-lag associated with technology in North Carolina,

as previously mentioned in Chapter III on technology.

Models G and H.--The performance of the "profitability ratio" proved

to be peculiar and unsatisfactory. These and all other models discussed
later which contain it were rejected.

In Summary of this Section.--Model A was selected as the most useful

 

of the group for projecting yields in the Virginia-Carolina area.

114

Production Estimates
Virginia-Carolina Area

Variables Used and Models Considered:

 

 

 

XI . Time X152... July rainfall
2 115 ... July rainfall squared
X1 .. Time squared X162. . August rainfall
X3 . . Peanut price (t-l) X16 ... August rainfall squared
X11... Peanut production (dependent) X172... September rainfall
X12... Value of peanuts (t-l) X17 ... September rainfall squared
113... Value of competing crops (t-l) X24 ... Per acre value competing '
X14... Acreage of competing crops (t-l) crops (t-l)
It : ' 4» Appendix B
: Time 3 Table 3 Equation Numbers
Models Cbnsidered ; Period : Humbert: Virginia:North Carolina
A- x11'f(112» x13, x14, :
X15,‘X16, X17) ..... .3 1909-1958 21 111 211
3- x11=£(x12, x13, x14» ‘
x15, x16, x17)......; 1909-1948 22 119 219
2 :
Co Xll-f(X1,Xl, X3, XZ4, :
1&5» 3&6, 117’ x15, =
X16, X17) .......... ; 1909-1958 23 103 203
.. 2 ;
D' X11'f(x1’ X1, x3, x24’2 :
x15, x16: x17, x15, =
xfé, xf7) ........... 5 1909-1948 24 104 204

 

Models A aggiB.--The concept

models was based on the hypothesis that the grower may consider the rela-

employed in formulating these exploratory

tive crop values of peanuts and competing cr0ps the preceding year,

evaluate his current prospective income in light of the previous year's

experience, and produce peanuts accordingly in the current year.

The

rainfall variables were included to determine their association, if

any, with the resulting production.

Other than to

fit the model to

115

the two time periods, this set of variables was not explored further.
I The use of a time variable was not intorduced, for example, nor were
other combinations or time periods attempted. The significant com-
peting crop relationships, as in the acreage models, seem to confirm
the notion that herein lies a useful variable worth exploring in additional
models. There may be a degree of intercorrelation between peanut and com-
peting crop values, and between value and acreage of competing cr0ps.
Inclusion of war years tends to distort normal relationships. The
significant reSponse to August rainfall in Virginia is of interest, but
the relationship fails to hold in North Carolina. It is of interest to
note that the signs of the rainfall coefficients are quite consistent
with those obtained for yield regressions on rainfall.

It is believed these results are inconclusive without further
investigation; accordingly, the models were rejected.

Models C and D.--These exploratory models were designed to take into

 

account the curvilinear aspect of the entire production period with the
introduction of the time squared variable; test the response of production
to price and per acre value of competing crops, and determine the linear
and quadratic association with rainfall, if any. It was assumed, of course,
that production would be positively related to price; that per acre value
of competing cr0ps would be negatively associated with production; and that
the same production-rainfall relationship would hold as was hypothesized
for yields.

Considering the history of peanut production which includes two
major wars, a major depression, a major inflation, and the intervention

of a major governmental program, it would be expecting a rather unusual

116

degree of "c00peration" from a single linear regression coefficient for
it to deal adequately with all of these exogenous forces. There are
also several possibilities of intercorrelation because production of
peanuts is not really a single dependent variable but rather the product
of two variables, yield and acreage.

In light of the above considerations, Models C and D are not
considered acceptable for production estimates. .Model C has been
graphed for purposes of illustration, and the production estimates
derived from it are included below, in Tables 1 and 2 only for illus-
tration and comparative purposes. The residuals and partial regression
relationships are presented in Figures 7 and 8. The principab objection
to Model C is the high level of the production projections derived from
it. These probably stem from the influence of wartime production in-

. cluded in the model. Secondary objections include illogical signs. A
comparison of Model C with Model D suggests that the reversal of expected
signs is associated with inclusion of the war years. Although all price
and value coefficients in North Carolina are non-significant, logical
signs are obtained when the mandatory allotment period is omitted in
Model D. In similar manner, the significance of "wrong" signs in
Virginia is reduced. Presumably, the normal reSponse of production to
price is stifled to some extent in these control years. Such is the
purpose of the program. Meanwhile, prices and costs have been increas-
ing, so intercorrelation may be affecting the expected relationships.

In spite of this variety of shortcomings, the residuals are not as

great as might be expected, especially in Virginia, after making
allowance for weather effect. The partial regression data does little

to encourage further investigation of these models even in time periods

117

 

 

 

 

 

_ MIIIIOQrfOUndS VirgInI'o I03

50 r j
07‘ r l1II IIAIIJIV.'#III II T III' "1‘4
I ‘ 111 I I 1 I I I I I I I ~
A
-50 '1.
.1
' [\ -l
‘ Eshmofed \’ \ I, I ....
, / I . .I J

200 , . .’ V 1 I,
Acfual ,, y «-
I, ’ / II :
I. V q
I50 I .‘ "\ _
__./\ ,/. \\’I' . \ :
fl. .’ \ ’ .- . _
I00 -’ V :I

I IO I9I I O I 25 I930 I935 I940 I945 I950 I955

Million Pounds Virginia '03 -
XI._4567:9'IcOkIIed 51%“ . 5.6 1
so 50+

20

 

‘51L111111111_11

 

  

I9IO I9I5 I920 l925 I930 I935 I940 I945 I950 I955
Years X2' X3

Figure 7.

118

MiIIIon Pounds ’ Virginia I03
PicI‘oel? &Threshed I

 

XI.235

 

 

 

 

Price (cen‘ls) X4

 

Millio Pounds Virginia I03

icked Threshed _,
53f.
4

 

XLZB m u

200

I50

 

I00

llllllIllllllJ

.33

 

1-

IO I5 20 25 3O 35 4O 45 50 55 60 65 70
Acre Value of Compeiing Crops (dollars) X5

Figure 7. Continued

119

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Million Pounds Virgin io '03
Pic Red 8. Thresheilj .1
X1. I 11 .1
200 Q“ —I
3.‘ 2.9 4o 5' 26 1.0 5-0 :
25 - . , 2 19
3-2 ° §°: LG 37 I I4; 27 - J 4'3 3’9 '3 . 3}:
I 53“" 3' . . . “T5 2'3 3“ 1'4 .‘3’55 —
507 f2 . 54 ‘7 42 2° 3. 2.2 4 50;
5° 55 2,4 53 4'9 ..
1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I J I I I L I J J 1 I 1 I 1 «I
W 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 II
July Rainfall (inches) X6 X7
Million Pounds Vigflia IO3
Pi ked Threshed 26 so 40-.
2 a a 3.. ‘29 —I
. Io “"‘
29 0 5| 37 ..
43 ;:5M9‘§f 45 If ' €6.55 - . ‘ ..
.50 32" o 7 035.1133I3 54 ($2.3 ‘30” ‘6 27 o o 53 ‘_-:
50 . “’4’, 4'5 20 57 33 4s 2
I2 0
m 12" 1 1 | E—A—i—A—uB—J—L—l—LAM-‘I
I 1 L L
2 3 4 5 6 7 I II l2 l3 I4 l5
Augusl Rainfall (inches) Xe X9
Million Pounds Vigflma I03
Picked &Threshed I
. 5%5 "
250 3.‘ 5'0 28 —"
'9 '- 2°"? is '9 ‘33 44 '9 ' .
3.9 4;: 43g: 52% oZI 37' ‘5 21052 I} .35"7 34 :
ISO /'5>L-J” . 5] . .42 . . _
£4 20 .471’2 4'5 38 'I
3.0 ‘33 ‘9 a: $5 .1
1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 H445
l 2 3 4 5 6 7

 

Figure 7. Continued

September Rainfall (inches) X10 XII

120

Mill Ion Pounds

Norih Carolmo 203

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PIcI-Cd 8. Threshed]

00 .i
50- _
0 III VII I , iI,.I, I jI I II I I I I I

I r H T I I U I I I ‘
-50_ _
-|OO-— _,
I= if
350— _
300L— . -\ . " ..I
,- \ \, / \./
- \ " I
,.\. \ \/ '
\
250'— ' .’ __
I
\I
\ I *Aciual
200— Esl ma? d I ‘1’ _‘
I e \5/.\ [I Iv
I"
l50— I-\ . -/ —
-/ \-
o’."/'
1111I11LLI111111111I1411I1111I1111I11|111111I11l
l9|O |9l5 l920 l925 I930 l935 I940 I945 I950 I955

Figure 8.

 

121

 

Million Peunds NorI'h Carolina 203
XI.456769FIocIl‘ed 8. Threshed I 48 5-6 59:

 

350

300

250

I50

 

I—
p-
p
1-
II-
-
I-
D
p
p
—
In
I-
I-
I-
P
D
r-
I—
I—
1.-
b
h
-

'9 I2 '5 22
I00 — I4

[9lO l9I5 l920 l925 l930 l935 I940 l§45 550 955

Years X2 X3

lIIIlII1L11I1111I1111I11111L

l

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Million Pounds Noth Carolina 203
Picked and Threshed] 1
Xuzmmou .I
40

: ’ .I
00’ 44 J
3 :- . ..
zsoL J
I' -I
I- q
3 I
200*- .—
‘ -I
: . 5° 53 j
ISO— . g4 _
I- 49 "
: 55‘
' 1 I L I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I 1 J 1 I L I I I 4 L j Ikr

l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 l0 II l2 l3

XIO
p

Pr ice (cenls)

Figure 8. Continued

122

Million Pounds

NorIl'I Carolina 203

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Picked 8. Threshed I
Xuzias‘lamou J
>- 49 1
30°F ‘5 4.8 -4
’ ~I
_ figs ,
2 . I
; ,0 :17 ‘3 39 a5 ‘33 ’23 1
' ° 55 47 “
25° - $ 3'. I6|2 '7 [£24 0 52 -4
" l3 °.—-I ' ‘
_. as“? M 2'1 5.9 2'5 is g, 4
P 3? 30"“.‘55 , 2.3 4.6 2.0 '2
200*- 3‘ 3.0 2' 5'0 5'3 '4
D é 5.4 . .1
"' 49 .4
'50 s3 55 -:
J._L.IL
I 2 30 40 50 60 70 0 90
Per Acre Value of Competing Crops (dollars) X5
Million Pounds Norlh Carolina 203
XI. 3‘PIc|k'e'd 8. Threshed
.40 4‘ j
300 ‘8 ’ 4
' I
42 e 5
. 29.25 5. 4.3 ~}7 6 .5 1
250 I? I? (3 4‘7 3.4 335 I7 1
27,35 2'9 539%?” 4'I 3'6 . mm:
0 /° . o
200 39 2' 3° 2° 34 5.0 35 I
5.4 4.9 2'2 4
ISO I L 5°: s3 1 I I j
I l l i 1 J. I
2 3 4 s H L Io II

Figure 8. Continued

6
July Rainfall (inches) X6 X7

 

 

 

Million Pounds

123

Norih Carolina 203

 

Picked 8. Threshed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

XI aam‘nm 1° ..
300: ‘34s _
' ss 42 ‘
> sI . . . .
" 43 25. 58 I6 3'7 '9 3. .I
P" ° 2.8 45 39 e _
250 ’1 .1 9 I9 24 n . 52 -‘
: '.2 ° '5 . ...‘6 37 A \ j
I- 33 36'; . 466 4| 23 35 50 $4 .1
:30 50 54 52 4.9 :
I- 55 d
'SOI'ILI.I.IiiIILIIII.III.III."i
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 ll I2 I3

Augusl Rainfall (inches) X0 X9

MIllIon Pounds Norih Carolina 203
X! 23 PIitfd 8. Threshed J _
I so 2
300- 48 34 .—
‘ 42 5.6 :
: 5" 4.3 37 ' 5.3 -
'- 25' . ° '9.3I 4.5 "
250:- I?” '0 U I3 I3 37 I1 -:
W212? "° 232353-35 . g7 \28

200— 39‘" 32 5:3 50 5°
- 54 .-
: 2'2 4'9 :
- ‘1
I50~ 3.3 ss 1
I I 1 I 1 I I L I I 1 I 1 L 1 L 1 I I I 1 ‘I 1 I 1 1
l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 Il l2 I3

Figure 8. Continued

Sep‘lember Rainfall (inches) XIo XII

124

when exogenous forces are not as influential, 1920-1940 for example.
Projections to 1965.--In the acreage estimate section of this chapter it
was concluded that, for purposes of projection to 1965, the acreage allot-
ment (Model J) would be the most valid estimate of future acreage in the
Virginia-Carolina area, subject to adjustment for l-acre farms in North
Carolina. Similarly, in the yield section, it was decided that Model A
(yield regressions 190 and 290 for Virginia and North Carolina, respec-
tively) would be the most useful estimating equations for projecting
yield. Applying acreage to these yields, actual and estimated produc-
tion have been considered for the mandatory allotment period 1949 to
1958, and projected for the period 1959-1965. The accompanying
Tables 1 and 2 set forth the essential information comparatively, along
with production estimates derived from production Medal C.

Projections were made under the following assumptions for
Virginia and North Carolina, respectively:

Yield-allotment equations:

1) price, 10.5 cents; 10.5 cents

2) acreage, 106,000; 169,000 plus 9,000 acres for l-acre farms

Production equations:

1), price, 10.5 cents; 10.5 cents

2) 1954-58 average per acre value of competing crops $51.64;

$55.66
3) mean July total rainfall, 5.5 inches; 6.0 inches
4) mean August total rainfall, 5.1 inches; 5.00 inches

5) mean September total rainfall, 3.8 inches; 4.5 inches

125

The above indicated values were assumed constant for the period with only'
time increasing, (1910 - 2 for yield regressions, and 10 for production
regressions). ‘

Comparative production data are depicted graphically in Figure
9, for each state and for the Virginia—Carolina area. In viewing these
data it should be kept in mind that not until 1957 did acreage and price
decline to the levels stated in the assumptions. The production equations
Virginia-103 and North Carolina-203, which are represented by a dotted
line, project to the future a reflection of all past influences. As a
matter of judgement, this injects a considerable (upward) bias. While
future production might conceivably be as high, it would not likely be-
come so for the same reasons; therefore, the production equation
I projections are not regarded as valid future estimates.

The production from allotted acreage in Virginia, and allotted
acreage as adjusted for l-acre farms in North Carolina, using the yields
per acre from the specified predicting equations, is represented by the
broken line in Figure 9. For comparison, the actual production for each
state and for the area is included in Figure 9 as a solid line, period
1949 to date, 1959.

Certain adjustments in the level of yield per acre in the area
appear desirable. These adjustments and a summary of production data for
the area will be presented in the summary chapter on national production.
The effect of such adjustments on production in this area is represented

by the "adjustment" line in Figure 9 for the projected period 1959-1965.

Million Pounds

 

 

V0 P'ckeddTh h a) fi
' I re
250 5°

 

p- l I T I
225L
C
I.
200—
I75;
fr
./ \
-j‘ \,
\‘\ xi
3 ;\
. ~ I \.
wt
area
00

575

550

525

500

475

450

425

400

[I111]!TTTIUVIIIIIUIIUVUIIfTTIIIIII'V‘I'I

 

P“ I

l
l949

1 I
l95l

Virginia and Norih Carolina: Aclual, Esiimaied. and Projecied

Peanuf Producilon from Specified Equa‘lions

Figure 9.

 

l

4tNC-
1350
................ /x Adjusied ‘
"""" /*/* -‘325
/*/*/x N.C .l90 :
. '5! ' */*/* ’ / ' NOCO. 290 'l
..... '. I I 'i
‘ l’\ ’ I .1300
‘e \ l/ -‘
., \ , ./ s
/‘ "‘ ’ ‘
\ / '4
—-/ ~Aciual 1275

 

‘Aclual

 

1

I 1 - A I 1 I I 1
I953 I955 l957 l959 l96l

 

 

l
l963

SummaIIOn «
Va.-IO3 -I
N.C.-203

IIIII

Summaiion ..
Adjusi menis ..

/* Va.-l90 ‘

* N.C.—290_':
Summaiion
/. Va.- I90
/’ N.C.-290

fi'

250

200

 

1 I i L
l965 l967

NNH

. .mcamiamaa pom aoauosuoua uoonoum cu mamas
.mmma you xuecwaquua mum mammnunmumm a“ mouswflm .mmmH sows omucv muamflowwmooo acummmumou onu a“ umonaosH mumau
.oom«>mmu
.auaouofimuoou Mom .nu manna .m xaoaoma< some
.nuao«u«wmoou you .ca manna .m navamam< some

 

 

 

mem.eH~

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oom.mm~ " u « muo.~ u ooo.eon "...mema_
ooh.me~ “ oeo.mau " " one.“ ” ooo.oo~ "...eemH
oom.me~ " eso.HH~ ” u Ham.H u ooo.eoa "...meaH
oom.He~ " mma.ao~ ” " mas.” " ooo.oo~ "...NemH
oom.~m~ " omm.eo~ m « nnm.H ” ooo.ooa "...Hoaa
oom.mm~ " . Nam.mow M « ana.~ " mooo.eoa . "...oema
AmHHVAone.mm-v ooa.mN~ " AHOHVAseH.a iv eH¢.mou "Aom~.emflvu aaa.n Aomm.nvu one I Aoma.moHv Aooo.moHvu..ummmH
Hen oom.H i oom.-« " «a ohm.mn oma.Hom uoooQoNN m mom.H ooo~.~ " new . www.moa uooo.moH "...mmmH
men emo.mH- emm.mm~ " ma eon.mn eom.ao~ “ oom.anu . Hom.H omo.u " can oem.moH ooo.eoH «...Nmea
sm Hmm.am mam.mo~ " em eaa.on «Nm.eHN " oee.me~ " mHm.H omo.~ “ Nom.mi mom.oma coo.mHH "...emmH
mHH nae.nui mnm.mo~ " eHH emo.mui one.oHN " oem.owH " eHm.H can.~ " ~m¢.~ oem.nHH ooo.eaa."nuimmma
eon mow.uni mmo.me " «an eme.mmi one.mma " om~.-H “ eem.a muo.H ” «a i «No.0on coo.eoH "...emmH
Non han.m I NH©.~NN " om cho.HN on~.~ma " ooa.mH~ " «an.n oom.a " com I oom.oaa ooo.o- ”...mmmH
mm Hum.ma asm.a- " mm omm.mm om~.eo~ " om~.o¢~ ” mmh.a oso.~ " hau.mi NH~.HNH ooo.wna "...NmoH
ma NNN.QH mma.HNN " ma osn.mn oem.e- u oma.em~ " oem.H one.H " Hme.ai Hme.asn coo.e¢H “...Hmoa
em waw.m~ NoH.mmH N no Nam.“ mee.o- ” oum.-~ " Hae.a oem.n ” ~mm.s wag.aea ooo.weH ”...omoa
can neN.Nni mem.m- H can mea.mfli wom.aau “ oo~.maH u emm.a ooe.H " see.m- see.aea ooo.mmn M...mema
monsom wncsom " mousom " mocsom "moaaom mvcnom" u
Uflm. MDOSH vim mDOFH u flfiw mSOFH u dad 9.538 n u u
Aw JMQMV me . 2 mx ” m>wn min 4" w<im u m<um " w u w n i.. n. .< u < ”
unmouamnofimwm "omumaqumm" uaoou Hmsmfimomuoomwgfiwwm" amouo< " vowwa u Hmsuo<u umo> "oouuoHad u Hmzuo< “
Iumm” " " Iumm" ” u " Iaumm " " Inna " u «
QMOH I .m> u domH I .m> " "OmHI.w>u u umvfiDu “ u Hflmw
scammopwmu acauosooum " coammmuwmu mama? " u u u u u u
. coauoavoum mama» I uddouq<u «

O. 0.

 

A .uonfimuaom one .umdw:<
.masn an Hammcfimu HmHOu some ummhioe was ”macho mcwuoaaou ooamauoam mo u=Hu> upon you umuuo>m wmaaiqmaa
“coo.ooa .mwamuou "mucus m.oH .moaua mo mnoauaesmmu have: usoaumswm coauosuoua van mama» unannooam magma

.memHImmmH .smuomfioua was «mmaaimsmn .eouqaaumm was Hanson

”manawuq> ca musamom mo acauonooumii.a manna

.momaimmmfi pow cowuosooua uoonoua cu pom: -maumw :muonIH: Baum acauosooua

pom mon>oua ou momaimmmfl mums» oSu now uawEuoHHm 6:50:08 on» a« some down an; ucoaumnmvm owned: muom 000.0 <m
.mmmH Mom mumcnaaHoua mun mammnuomuma an mmusmam .wmmH cud: popes nuaoqowwmoou noammmuwmu ozu an ommsfiunq mumno
.oomq>omu

.munmquammmoo you .mN sands an xqonoaa< sown

.munuuoumwuou.uom .da manna .m xqoaoma< some

 

 

 

 

 

 

no~.~em “ eho.oam “ m Nee.“ " ooo.man ”...noma
Heo.oem " Nam.eom u . eu~.~ " ooo.maa M...eoaa
~o~.~mm ” one.nom " " mo~.~ “ ooo.mau “...meaH
mne.emn " em~.oom " n has.“ " ooo.eua “...uomH
«mm.Hmm u ~mo.~m~ “ " one.“ " ooo.mha "...HomH
m~m.m~m " m~m.ma~ " " ane.~ " ooo.maa “...aoaa
end Ammo.oev mme.m~m m «ca Acme.mv eme.om~ "Aoom.em~0" mne.a Acoe.~0" uooo.man Aooo.mhno "..smmaa
as has.oa nom.o~n N am emm.ee «NN.em~ "oomo.finn " woo.a ooom.a u -0.m mam.me~ coo.mna «...mnaH
NoH m~o.m- n~m.man . ma «mo.o~ eeo.am~ " oo~.~om ” emm.~ ooe.a " “omen”. mm~.aeH ooo.HmH “...anma
mm amn.me mHm.aom “ em . one.ae wome.Hom " ooe.Hmm “ mmn.~ maa.a " emo.e enm.aaa coo.mma "...ean
Hen ~N¢.Nm- «NH.amN u Nee omm.mmi omn.mmm ” oo~.eo~ “ mam.~ .m~o.~ " amm.m «no.amn ooo.oeH "...anH
and oue.oe- ome.~s~.n men mea.omi mem.aa~ " ocm.omm " new.” , qu.a " mmm.e Noe.mea ooo.e- “...emaH
man HoH.em- Hoe.eom " HoH Hce.Hi Hom.HeN u oom.o- " man.a onm.~ " «Hm.~ emo.eaa ooo.mha “...nnoa
ooH awn- mma.eom " Na omw.m~ o5~.om~ " ooe.eom " eke.“ moe.a “ moe.~- moe.maa coo.HaH ”...ummd
em www.me m~e.m- “ as moo.a mme.nam " oom.-m " Ham.” can.“ ” cam.ei omm.mmm ooo.~m~ i...anaa
«Ha emm.em- mmm.ow~ " HNH emm.mmi emm.mom “ ooo.~m~ " mem.~ oH~.H " ma~.H «oh.mmm ooo.-~ “...ommH
mNH ~am.a©- Nao.mom ” mNH ome.HoI o¢~.scm " ooe.~em " mum.“ mmo.n “ see.nni see.me~ ooo.om~ "...meaa
moaaom moaaom " moasom mucsom u monsom "mocoom monsom « “
Vfiw mace—w fig 0 GOSH. u find. mSOFH vac 9.558 " wand 99059.. n u u
m\ " .mwm “ aw " mx@m .me " .w2nm. " M<Im ” M n V n . i “ r< “ .< "
uco " amsvammmuvoumaaumm" uaouuamaoqmom "woumaaummu Hmsuo< " pours u Hmauodu umo> " wouuo~fl<u Hmsuu< "
inmm" " u iumm“ " u “ Iaumo " u Inn: u u "
snow 1.0.2 a soda 1.0.2 “ "00~10.zu u noun: “ u a your
sowmmoummu sowuusooum " sownmouwmu vamqw " u u u u n n
In acauOSVOhm.li- " oHoaw " . owmuuu<

 

.uonfiuuaom use .umsw:< .hdSH an Hammnwnu Houow some umowime one «macho waauoaaoo oowmauoan no usam> ovum non
ommuo>m ommaiemma «000.o- omuouou mmuaou n.0H .mowua mo unoauaaammm noon: aficionado acauosvoua 0am oaoah ooumauoan
wean: .nomaimnafl .oououfioua one mamaaimqma .ooumaaumm one Hmnuom "mauaouwo fiuuoz an monsoon mo nowuosooumII.N «Hana

CHAPTER VII

ACREAGE, YIELD, AND PRODUCTION ESTIMATES

SOUTHEAST AREA

Acreage Estimates
Southeast Area

Variables Used and Models Considered:

X1 s.. Time X21... Peanut price (X3) deflated by cost
X3 ... Price of peanuts (X6); (t-l)

X5 ... Log peanut price (t-l) X22... Per acre value-cost ratio competing
X5 ... U. S. cost index crops

X7 ... U. S. cost index (squared) X23... Same as X21 but not lagged

X10... Peanut acreage (dependent) X25... Excess acreage penalty

X14... Acreage of competing crops X26... State acreage allotment

X15... July rainfall Y1 ... Under harvested peanut acreage
X16... August rainfall (dependent)

X17... September rainfall Y2 ... Ratio peanut acreage to acreage

allotment (dependent)

_A._

 

 

 

: ,Appendix B .
: Time :Table 3 Equation Numbers
Models Considered ; Period :Number2 Georgia:Florida:A1abamafi
A. X1o-f(X5, x7) ............ : 1909-1958 1 340 .440 540
B. Xlo-f(X5, X7) ............ : 1909-1948 2 349 449 549
C. Xlo-f(X5, X7, X14) ....... 2 1909-1948 3 360 460 560
D. X10=f(X5, X7, X14)... ..... 2 1909-1948 4 369 469 509
: I .
E. Xlo-f(X5, X7, X14t_1)....: 1909-1948 5 367 467 567
F~ xlo'f<xls x21, x22, x23, 3
X15, X16, X17)....§ 1909-1958 6 363 463 563
9' Xlo’£(x1v 321: 322: 323’
X15, X16, 117) 1909-1948 6 364 464 564
X 1909-1948 6 366 466 566.

a. x10-£(x1, x

21’ x22’ 23)':

 

129

130

 

 

 

 

Continued . i

Q E _' Appendix_B

: Time gTable 3 1 Equation Numbers 1

Models Considered .: Period :Numbers Georgia:Florida:A1abama

I. Xlo-f(X1, X21, X22) ...... : 1921-1940 7 3661w . 466IW 566Iw
J. Xlo-f(X26) ............... 3 1949-1958 none (subjective)
x. Y11-£(x3, x25) ........... a 1949-1958 s~ ”4 9-3-1 9-4-1 9-5-1
L. le-f(X3t_1, X25) ........ : 1949-1958 9 0-3-1 0-4-1 O-S~l
M. Y13-f(X21, X25) .......... : 1949-1958 ' 10 2-3-1 2-4-1 2-5-1
N. YZI-f(X3, X25) ........... : 1949-1958 11 9-3-2 9-4-2 9-5-2
0. Y22-£(x3t-1, x25) ........ : 1949-1958 12 0-3-2 0-4-2 o-s-z
P. Y23-f(X21, X25) .......... : 1949-1958 13 2-3-2 2-4-2 2-592

 

Models A and B.--Low multiple correlation coefficients and illogical signs
in Model A suggest omission of important variables and wide dispersion of
the data characteristic of the changing economic structure and the exogene
ous forces affecting the industry. Model B appears to fit a little better
as a result of dropping the mandatory allotment period. The inference may
be drawn from the data illustrated below for Model E that including the war
years is the principle cause of illogical signs for price and cost co-
efficients. The mandatory allotment period included in Model A would,

of course, stifle the normal response to price in line with the purposes

of the control program. Both models were rejected.

Models CA D, and E.--Acreage of competing crops enters the equation
with highly significant coefficients except in Florida for Models C and
E. The signs of the added variable are consistently logical, but are

illogical for price and cost in all but two of the six regressions. This

131

general reverbal of signs is probably associated with the same config-
uration of the data as is illustrated below for Models H and I. If so,‘
it arises mainly from including the war years in these models. The tre-
mendous upsurge of acreage in wartime is accompanied by increasing cost
and increasing price, along with some increase in cotton and corn acreage.
When all factors move together in one general direction, illogical
relationships are to be expected. The peanut acreage--competing crop
relationship appears to warrant further investigation in an interwar

time period such as is used in Model I below.

Models F and G.h-These models were designed to explore price-cost ratio
relationships to acreage; the per acre value of competing crops in lieu

of the acreage variable; and to determine the effect of rainfall, if any.
It was thought that there might be a weather effect in this area as aband-
onment or diversion to "hogging off" is of more frequent occurence than

in the Virginia-Carolina area. Although behavior of rainfall coefficients
is usually quite consistent among different models and in contiguous state
areas, judging by experience with yield regressions, the response in these
models is inconsistent, suggesting that the true relationships are obscured
by the exogenous forces acting upon the other variables. Weather effect
might be more accurately appraised if included in Models I described be-

low for the interwar time period. Accordingly, Models F and G were rejected.

Model H.--In order to explore more thoroughly the nature of these relation-
ships, the residuals and partial regression lines of relationship were

computed for this model which is the same as Model G without the rainfall

132

variables. The model is presented graphically in Figures 1, 2, and 3 for
Georgia, Florida, and Alabama, respectively. Time is the only variable
with a significant coefficient. Inspection of the graphs makes clear the
wide dispersion of the data arising from inclusion of the war years, and

. that these years are largely responsible for reversal of the signs of per
acre value of competing crops when this occurs. Price of peanuts and values
of corn and cotton tended to move in the same direction as acreage of pea-
nuts under the influence of exogenous forces. Inspection of the several
lines of relationship for the three states in the partial regression charts
will reveal that, if the war years are blocked out, new lines of relation-
ship of logical sign may be envisioned. Such is the substance of Model I
below. Model H is interesting for its comparative value with Model I,

but of course, is not useful.

Model I.--This model is designed to remove the forces which distort Model

H, namely, the initial formative years of the industry, world War I and

11 years, and of course, the mandatory acreage allotment period. The inter-
war years include the "great depression" of the 1930's but if all exogenous
disturbances are removed, there can be little analysis of the peanut in-
dustry. The unlagged price-cost ratio in Model H has been omitted in this
model. Model I is presented graphically in Figures 4, 5, and 6 for the
respective Southeast states. The signs of all coefficients are now logi-
cal, and seven of the nine are significant. Even though this model represents
a great improvement, the acreage-price relationship appears to be obscured
by either intercorrelation or the omission of some variable. _The residuals

for the year 1921 suggest that the adjustment following world war I had

1m“. rpuIAa‘v.
Pick. (1 R. Thleshrd

Cwonlmljbb

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

200 1
IOO— a
’ l H l *
I I | I T If I l I I I I l] I
400—- d
fl ?
MorkehngQuotr)
1' ' Pernod '4
IOOOF- ‘ —
’ l
900* 4
. "rAlloHed 1
‘ ocreoge
800— 1 H
r | T
700— .
600?
t
500-

400

300

200

IOO

 

'
I00 rjllllJAMLJllllLJll111L1i1411___lg_1_

IQK) HMS

 

 

 

 

   

 

-4

-4

1.4..L.II_L_J_L_J
|950 |955

 

134

Georguo 366

 

. ThOUtJr‘dACIC’S 4:. .43 48'

 

 

 

 

 

 

\ A“: Pukeo «‘1. T? vvshed
I050 / ‘
nooor I _
800- .—
L -+
700’— 4
* d
600*- ..J
t '1
500'— .1
400+— -
L- -1
300‘- _.
F- 56 d
200— ['8 ,r 1.. .4
l7 ‘
L- ° 2'0 ..
/
/
b / 4
s
Oru'o (5 A
. L/ 4
I3
lOOr— :2 I'd 1
i l L l 14 L 1 JJ‘L l 1 l l L l 1 L1 LLL L l 1 LL Ll 1_Ll l [J l l L l 144 l l l l J
2 7 I2 W 22 27 0 37 42 47
Year X2

Figure 1. Continued

135

GQOFQIO 36C)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

X1245 Thousand Acres
6 50 Fucked 8Threshed 43 ...,
600— ‘ fl
LB I7
h 2.4 .‘
550 — 42 2,. _.
500— _,
450— a
'- 4
I
400- —
350— 3.8 3-4 -J
35 2.6 ‘
L. 4.. .
3o. .37
300 Y 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1
1.5 2. 25 . . . , 4. . 5.5 so
Logged Ratio of Price of Peanuts To H~e Index of Lost 01 roductuon Hems )\3
Geormo 366
X1235 ThousandAcres , , '0 .
' Fucked 8.Thres 42 ‘3 ' I8 ‘
...1 ., -
b 3.2 d
SSOb _
1- 4
500- _
450- —
400- —
.. 2.7 3.3 1
as 54 8?
350'“- ' -<
3.5 50
b ‘
. 4.| 3.7
300 i-"k‘ 1 1 l l 1 1 1 l 1 J 1 1 l 1 1 L 1 1 1 1 1 1_ it.
IO IS 20 25 3O
Logged Ral'o 0" Pm AC"? VO'UC 0' {ompchrq Crops 1..“ in.‘ Iran of C “1 01 Flotmdlot |+--'- .. ‘4

Figure 1. Continued

136

 

 

Georgia 366

X1234 Thousand Acres J
Picked 8.Threshed 4'2 ‘
650T- 4.3 _
b '9 d
600 - 3.2 ..

al 17 u
550 - ° 1’s - . _
500 - -I
450 - -
" 'I
. 39 .
:54 2‘6
350 - 35 . -+
. 41

h 3.7 3'0 ‘
300 '- q

 

 

“1111141111L11111111111111111111111I11111111111111

 

 

" LS

3.0 3.5 4 O 4.5

Unlagged RoIio of Price of Peanufs Io Ihe Index of CosI of Prod

Figure 1. Continued

5.0 5.5

uchon IIems

Xs

137

 

 

 

 

 

    
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                   

Thousand Acres Florudo 466
Picked 8.Threshed q
2°” 1 I I "
0'- rl _ I 7 l L 1 g I 1 H :
LT'ITII 'IIIITTIT II] I' TIr 4
-20; Morkefing 1
I20 Quote: "I
I00 . - PerIod _:
80 \'/,AHoHed ‘
ocreoqe ‘j
60 s.-. -
40 . AcIuol ‘
20 EinmoIed 3
o 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111‘
|9|0 |9|5 l920 I925 I930 I935 l940 I945 I950 I955
FIorido 466
X1345ThousondAcres .
PIcked aThreshJ ‘2 “9 46
I00 40 , '-
~ ' 4546 ~
__ ° Morkehng _
80!- QUOIQ -I
50:- Period —
I4OF' -
20- ..
o'- 1 1 1 '1 I 1 1 1 1 q,
2 7 l2 I7 2 27 32 37 42 47
Year X2
ThousandAcres Florida 466
80 Picked &Thresh§ 2" I9 4.2 I]. go '9 _,
:- 32 «,49-39 43 . ‘95): —— _1
6°. 3?- 3"6° 3,. We» 23 25 I. I. IO e..-55143:“ .
1— 3'3 3432‘ 37 2.1 ‘4 "‘
C T
o o. 5 m I. s 2.0 3. o 3. s .o

   

Logged RoIio of Price of PeonuIsIo Index ofCosI of Produchon IIems . X3

Figure 2.

138

 

 

 

ThousandAcres Florida 466
.\I 2:1850P1cked &Thresh {I 4.2 4.3 20 .9 1.7 '9 _
60 32 4.0 3.9 €23 (3 g". 55 I60," 4.4 16‘ r ...-I
40? 3'3 38 546 543' 25 £29 2137 5‘3 47:: '5‘5é6 Io (:3 Is-’" I.
20 ...
OF {#L 1 J I l 1 1 l l I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 l 1 L‘

 

 

I l
4 5 6 8 9 IO II '50: 13 I4 I5
Logged Ratio of Per Acre Value of Competing Crops to Index of t of Production Items X4

 

 

 

 

 

 

XI.234ThousandACres Florida 466
80Pucked 8.Threshec{ 2" 2.0 '9 4.21.9 ..., 13 _
60F— ,12 30:19 32 r 43 44 _"'
I. 5, 29-330 . 33, 3.9'28 4I' 249w . I'o 2371563 123345 .
40— 7 35 332,532; 2'6 '5 47” 1'4 13 _
20— ;
0+111111lllllLllllllllJJlLLllLlelJljjllllllLllllL#
0.5 L0 L5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5

Unlagged Ratio of PrIce of Peanuts to Index of Cost of Production Items X5

Figure 2. Continued

 

139

A JICOI“ J 566

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

'2 .01 v4».....m»a
‘ -.3 _ ‘ _‘__I
r‘ .
200',— ! I _.
I" I I -I
l . I
IDOI— I I
! ‘I
a f . l -I
O I T T Y . I I I I I , , I j TTV 1 I T v . , , I 1 Y
I I I I . I I I . I I III I I
P I ' . ‘ I l I T
. I
-IOOI— ‘ -I
a A?
6OCr- :—
__ Mark etmg Quota _
PC'IOd
500— 4
»- -I
f I ‘(Allotted
I. / I atreage .1
i I Estimated ' ‘
300% , W \fl.’ 3
P ’1 \ I." "\\/'\-,’I\’.’ / “
2009 , I A / 1 ' '_.
I" x ‘ \ I, \v ’5 1 V
I" ‘ \‘I ‘1’. \ .-
I . V
lOOI—«' ’ —
>- —/ ’// ..
O I 1 1 I4 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I4 L4 1 I4 14 1 I 1 14 1 I 1 L4 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 14
I910 I9I5 I920 I925 I930 I935 I940 I945 I950 I955

Figure 3.

140

 

‘ Alabama 566
Xmas Th0usondAcres

550 Pucked 8. Threshe 4.3 d

4:2

 

 

500_' , ._

450

400

350

300

250

200

ISOL-

IOOI—

 

 

 

 

50" 1.5
'0‘...“ I»
OI'" I3 _
-50 1111I1411I1111I1141I4111I1111I1111I1141I1111I111
I7 22 27 32 37 42 47
Year X2

Figure 3. Continued

141

Alabama 5.551. 1 4
X. 235 The-us-md Acres . T

PIcked 8.Thresked ‘.7

 

 

450b I
l9
2: I 4.3
400~ fl
4:2
230
350% -I
‘6 44
4— 2.2
300 '— 3? —I

45

  
  
 
 

3'1 3'6
250 P :55

39 .
40.3. 3334'“29

.IO 23
67'
° 20 H
I_ 33 23. - _
200 Ԥ . .26
2‘? 3° ‘2

I} 2?: 34

 

 

111l11111[411111411111111111LI1114111411L11111111”

O 0.5 LO L5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Logged Ratio of Per Acre Value of Compeiing Crops *0 Index of Cost of Produdlon Items X4

Alqbomq 566

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thousand Acres
I. 4 .
X 23 Pucked 81Threshed
500 0 —l1
US
1.7
450- I
- '.9 «13
400— 4' —
2'0 4'2
350'" 'I
'5’ £4
22
300— ' 4.5 "‘
3.2
3‘. - 4."
. 36 , *-
250" 35 47 "I
zyJefi
.39 2.5 49
3.7 ' ' ° ll
40 4! 2:4 to ,
200» , :23 2-6 2'3 '*
3O és - ' 5
27 w ;
'3 I4
IE11|_1I111LLI1111I1111I1L11I1114I1141J1144L_L4__L_‘|_l_1__1_.L_1__1IIi

15 075 I0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.
Unlugqeo Roho of Price of Pconuis to Index of Cost of Produchon Hems X5

Figure 3. Continued

142

 

Alabama 566
X1245 Thousand Acres .
O Picked 8. Thresh '6

 

 

450—- .

4.3

400 *- —I
42
. 4.4

350-

300*-

250»

200—

r

 

l50

3.3

 

    
 

     

 

     

 

mg
0

   

     

     

 
 

. I. I. 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Logged Raiio of Price of Peanuts {0 Index of Cost of Produch'on Hems X3

Figure 3. Continued

143

Georgia 366 IW

 

Thousand Ac res
soPicked &T|nres

 

 

 

-50
400-

700 -
eoo -
sock
400»

300+-

 

200—
II’IIH,|....|,...|....|....II...I.,..I....lHHIHII:
1910 |9l5 I920 I925 1930 I I o 1945 1950 I955

Georgia 366 IW
X134 ThousandAcres 4'0
Picked 8.Threshed

 

 

 

 

 

600 I-

b

500 r-

400'-

300h

200 -
‘ i

111114111L414111111IL1411L411I11441111111114111

7 l2 I7 22 27 32 37 42 47
Year X2

 

 

 

[I

 

Figure 4.

144

Georgia 3661“

 

Thousand AC ’ca
\124 p. . 7
men A Hester)

600 ‘

 

 

550

500

rri

450

T

400

I

4

 

 

-—-1
2'5 2'4
1
/
/ "
x /
fi
-

 

 

350*- -1
I- .1
300— 3.3 ‘
'Pl 1 j l l l 1 14 1 1 l l J l 1 1 l 1 l4 4 1 141 L 1 .l l l l .l 4 L l I L4 LI 4 l .l I J 14 4 l I
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Logged Ratio of PrIce o‘ Peanuts 10 Index of Cos? of F3roduchon Hems X3

Georgia 366 IW

 

 

 

X: 23 'Thous )nd Acres
Picked 8. Thresr
600 . .1
32
— I
550 — _
I. 4.0 'I
\
50 0 I— \\ 3,1 _
59> \~~\
I- \. ‘6 -1
33 -
o \.\ 2"
4 5 O - ~ -I
1- 2; ‘\\ 24 2.5 ‘I
3'0 "‘— '
400 - 2.. Fr 2-8 _
I. 3,5 3] \. ‘ -I
35 O I- “ '3
,_ ‘-‘ 2; “~ 1
I- '-. . ‘ -I
30
300 l

 

tagged 921'“ 913' Acre

Figure 4. Continued

IE,EI_1_J_.._I___J_.11_1_1__1__11111 -11;1 1111
.o 7.0 5.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 170 18.0

 

 

l9.0
. aloe :‘ Compehr‘g Crocs to Index of Cosfof Production "ems X4

145

Florida 466 IW

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

Thousand Ac res
9 P1cked 8.Threshed
..O .1
OI;— 144 v 1 4 v4 7 v 4 L 1 l 1 -I
_ I T I I ' ..
-201— —<
I 4’
IOOE- 5
80*— ACIUOI\ ,- _:
60L kESIIMOIed :1
40*- _
ZOP- L
OPILAIIIIIIILIILJJJJJII111111111[11111111L111111414‘
t9l0 l9l5 1920 I925 |93O t935 l940 t945 l950 t955
X134 ThousandAcres Florida 466 IW
Picked &Threshe ’
° 1
80:- 394'0 —-1
I‘ -1
SOI— _.
40— _ L
I- 24 -1
20— _
0:111111I1141I1111I1111I1111I1111I1141I1111I1111IL11d
2 I7 27 47
Year X2
X124 TtiousandAcres Florida 466 IW
Picked ‘8. Threshed
0L 30 4 '1
601— 22909 383M -«
F (I - “ 26"‘K35 ~27 25 .54 q
40’" 3'? . 34 r
" 33 ‘I
20r- —.
(DI-1111I1411I1111I1111I1111I1111J4111I11_11I1111IJ411.I
'3 2 .0 2.5 3.0 4.0 4.5 5.0
Logged Ratio of Price of Peanuts to Index of Cost of Production Items X3
X1. .~ Th0u50nd ACreC F Florida 466 IW '-'*--‘--""-—1
Picked 81ThreshedI
O 21 ..I
l- __ 40' 3922‘ 36. -1
60— 32 —_-4_-\..g35 341333 3,7 2.3 fl
1' i3 34- 35"31 W‘i-14“_ -1
40f 2“ 277 25 xi? «... j
20’— j
C:- .F1 4 .4 4 1 I 1 I 4 I 1 J ",1 I 1 I 1 I 1 4 4 I 1 I
4 5 6 7 8 IO H I l I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Logged Rati: «3‘ Per 1311 12 Value Of COfT‘pC‘I' ’J C' K“. IO Index 0‘ C0»? of Production “1:" x X4

Figure 5.

146

Thousand Acres A'°'°°"“° 555 'W

 

50
0

00 Picked 8.Threshe4

I. _ 71.1 1II11 I
I '7

 

~50
-IOO
350
300
250
200

ISO

1

I

T

T

 

 

 

1 00:

I--11111I11111111111111I1111I|11llllljljllllllllllll‘r

 

X1.34Thou sand Acre s
50Picked &Threshed

300

250

200

I50

t9l O t9l5 l920 l925 l930 l935 l940 l945 1950 l955

Alabama 566

[11141441111141]

 

TIIITTTTITTTUTTTITIIrT

 

 

IOO

LLJLLLLJI

1111L1111I1411J1111I111141111L1111I4111I11111111

 

2 7 l2 I7 22 27 32 37 42 47
Year X2

Figure 6.

147

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JOOPickeddThreshed .4
2t .1
l
250 J
..
200 L
I50 .2
33 ‘
111I1111I11L’1I1111I1111I1111I111111114IJ111I1111I
0.5 L0 L5 2.0 2.5 . 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5
Logged Ratio of Price of Peanuts to Index of Cost of Production Items X3
X123 Thousand Acres Alabama 566 IW
Picked &Threshed
350_ 2' "
r- d
300- _.
1 1
1- -1
I- 4
250t- ...
- -I
- -t
- -I
200? A
. I
I. 520 25 _I
I.111141111111111111261241141I1111I111111111I111111111-IF
0 0.5 L0 l5 2 0 2.5 3.0 3 5

. . 4.0 .5
Lagged Ratio of Per Acre Value of Competing Crops to Index of Cost of Production Items X4

Figure 6. Continued

148

not been completed and that this year should be omitted. The large
residuals for 1933 may be largely weather generated, as well as associated
with generally discouraging price levels.
While these relationships are of considerable academic interest,
similar conditions are not likely to be repeated. During this period,
and in subsequent years the entire southern agricultural economy ex-
perienced a drastic structural adjustment in which peanut acreage played
a prominent role in the changing land use. More recently, emphasis is
moving in the direction of a livestock economy and rapidly expanding
industrial development. This suggests change in opportunity costs and
in the nature of the alternatives. These considerations appear to indicate
that the interwar period analyses would not necessarily fit the current
situation even though government intervention were to be discontinued.
Accordingly, Model I is regarded with interest, but is set
aside for purposes of this study. It could be revisited and probably
improved by further investigation, and perhaps would be a useful component
of a statistical model for the simultaneous equation approach to production

estimates for the interwar period.

Models J-P.--Models K, L, H, N, 0, and P failed to provide useful analyses
of underharvested acreage. All were rejected. Signs of coefficients are
illogical, all coefficients are non-significant and multiple correlation
coefficients are low. The differential between the acreage allotments and
acreage picked and threshed is shown graphically in Figures 1, 2, and 3
for the respective states. The relevant underharvested data are included

in the tables of prodUction estimates in the production analysis below..

149

In recent years of the allotment period, underharvest in
Georgia has been less than in the early years of the period. Therefore,
an underharvested acreage in line with recent years has been subjectively
determined as approximately 13,000 acres less than the minimum allotment
of about 528,000 acres. Accordingly, Model J will be used less an esti-
uated 13,000 acres for purposes of projecting production to 1965 for Georgia.

In Florida, the differential is comparatively negligible, so
Model J will be used for projection.

In Alabama, Model J less 8,000 acres for underharvest appears
to be a reasonable approximation of acreage expectations.

Some additional investigation was made regarding factors which
might be associated with underharvested acreage. A considerable acreage
of peanuts is hogged off in this area, although less than in earlier years.
It may be logically reasoned that if the price of hogs is high, it may be
more profitable to divert acreage of peanuts to hogs than to pick and
thresh the peanuts for other uses. To explore this hypothesis, scatter
diagrams of the relevant data were prepared; these are presented in Figure
7. If the relationship exists, the logical expectation is that as hog
prices increase, underharvested acreage would increase as less acreage
would be picked and threshed. Inspection of the scatter diagrams for
Georgia and Alabama suggest that the years 1950 and 1951 are heavily
influenced by other factors, since the data are widely dispersed. The
magnitude of this dispersion in the Southeast area (and other areas also)
may best be understood by reference to Appendix A for the crap years
1950 and 1951. A two-price system was in effect during these two years

under which the grower could harvest, and market without penalty, acreage

150

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Georgia 5' Shousand Acres
Thousand Acres Alabama nderharves4tsd
Underhar vested I 5'0
so 5, 3°
40 "' o O
56 . 5.8
20 L 5.0 $7 . T-ZO
55 53
0 - ~40
$5 , . 58 59 .
~20» 55 5752 $4 52 d.50
- 40$ 49 5.4 '1 '80
q, I 1 1 . 1 1 1 4 1 “’- 1 r
14 m l8 1 20 l 2 4. m I 1% ‘?%'_*_'AF_‘
pruc e of hogs—dollars per hundredweight pnce of hogs-dollars per undredweight
Thousand Acres 00““! -Alflbm Thousand Acres
Underharvested Md
40 51 51 140
20 1- 59 8) 4 20
0 0
5:5 :37 56 ° .58 o 5.6 o :23 .53
- Zor 5'4' 59 52 53 55 59 54 .1 -20
June
"WI 1 1 1 1 43’1 . 1 1 1 1 1 1 .4? 1 . 1 . 1 434°
5. O
40- 1 a -40
ZOT 59 5.0 .1 20
0 0
5.6 539' 537 .55 2;: ~ 57
-20 ~ 59 541 '52 59 54‘ '52 - - 20
July
-40» 49 Q9 -40
“ l 1 l 1 l 1 L 1 l l 1 J 1 l 1 l 1 I l
51 .

4o - 5' - 4o
20" 59 5:0 1 20
035:, ~56 5.6 .5. °

.'§5'53 52 53’ §7-'55
-20 1- 59 '54 ' 5'2 59 53 - -20
'40 l' “.9 Aucwst 4'9 7 '40
J l l l l 1 l l J l L l I l l l i L 7
51 °
40 r 5' - 4o
20* §° so ‘20
C 59 565} 5‘7 ’58 56. 5° '57 54 0
5 O O 0 . .

-20 54 53 5'2 2:33:33: 55 5953 52' --20
40 49 I 4.39 .. -40
{f l 4 l 1 l' 1 L l A!

2 4 5 é IO 76' 78° 80° 8 ' 4'
Inches ot’ Rainfall Temperature

Figure 7.

151

in excess of his allotment providing the excess peanuts were marketed at
their value for crushing for oil or meal through an agency designated by
the United States Department of Agriculture. As indicated in Table 8a,
Appendix C, 68 and 194 million pounds were marketed in this manner for
the years 1950 and 1951. This provision was applicable in all three areas
but had its greatest effect in the traditionally oil producing areas of
the Southeast and Southwest. Insofar as the analysis of underplantings is
concerned, it would be necessary to either eliminate these two years, or
make subjective adjustments indicating what underplantings might have
been if excess acreage hmd not been permitted. An additional consideration.
is the drought of 1954. This probably resulted in an abandonment of acreage
which just happened to coincide with a high price for hogs. However, the
favorable hog price could well have influenced this diversion. flogging-off
would be a more profitable outlet for poor quality peanuts coupled with high
per-unit harvesting costs under poor yield conditions. If these three years
are eliminated, or even if they are included, there appears to be a tendency
for underharvested acreage to increase as hog prices increase in both Geor-
gia and Alabama. The observations appear too few in number to draw more
than this tentative conclusion. The following analysis from Ross1 in Ala-
bama suggests some additional considerations:

....my peanut study indicates that growers here do not under-
plant (their allotment), in fact, they tend to overplant and hog off
the residual acreage.... Weather is perhaps the largest factor in that
some growers may have to abandon a portion of their peanut acreage due
to excessive weeds resulting from too much rainfall during the growing

season. Also growers are faced with the uncertainty of rain squalls
from tropical storms during the harvest months of August, September,

 

1Letter from Jack S. Ross, Department of Agricultural Economics,
Alabama Polytechnic Institute, Auburn, Alabama to R. 0. Russell, V.P.I.
in reSponse to an inquiry, June 24, 1959.

152

and October. This is especially a critical problem to those pull-
type or combine operators that harvest from windrows or small piles.
The worst storms tend to damage peanuts in the stack.

Another reason contributing to smaller acreage harvested than
total alloted acreage might be those small allotment owners (say less
than three acres) which merely do not plant their allotment or they may
be in a situation where they are unable to rent out to other farmers.

A 1957 mimeographed report from the state ASC office showed
there were 1,950 allotments distributed throughout Alabama other than in
the eleven major peanut producing counties. These allotments are undoubt-
edly small. Peanuts produced under these allotments more than likely
are sold but we are not sure how they are sold. Some may be sold on
fruit and vegetable markets such as the one in Birmingham. No doubt
some of the peanuts are used by the family on the farm where produced.

In this way some of the acreage harvested may not be reported. For
example, Blount County had 201 farmers with peanut allotments in 1957.
We do not know where these farmers sold their peanuts.

Dr. Yeager and I are in agreement that no one factor in partic-
ular influences lower harvest acreage than total allotment acreage, but
combinations of several as I have mentioned. However, we believe weather
is the most important.

We also feel that prices of hogs would have little if any effect
in changing a growers planned intentions of harvesting unless the crap
fails and he does so as a last resort.

The possible relationship of underharvested acreage and rain-
fall was examined by the scattergram method, and also for temperature
which is inversely correlated with rainfall. The expected correlation
would be a positive relationship for rainfall and negative for tempera-
ture.

These relationships are presented graphically, along with the
hog price scattergrams, in Figures 7 and 8 for average monthly rainfall
and temperature at Blakely, Georgia; and Dothan, Alabama. Also presented
are scatter diagrams for the relationship between underharvested acreage

for Georgia and Alabama and the rainfall variables X15, X16, and X17 in

Figure 9. Inapection of these graphs suggests that further analyses

153

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thousand Acres Blake IL Georgia Thousand Acres
Underharvestel] 1Under harvested
51 ‘
4o» 50 “ 4o
' 52°
20 d20
01 O
560 5.8 . 56 . 5.8
-20 3,3 57 55 57 £33 ...20
55 . ’ o
-40 59 59 4-40
. 52
-60 1 5:2 -‘ '60
'3°’ 5.4 Ju n . s4 ‘ ‘30
L11 111 1 5‘1 1 1 .11 1 1 119. 1 . 1 .1 1. .1
40> “ 5' -40
59 5.0
20* ~20
o 56’ .55 O
- 20 » 5'7 58 58.53 '57 < -20
53 55' 55’
’40 “ $9 $9 'I '40
-50. 52 $2 .. .50
Jul
'30 " 5.4 y 5.4 “ '80
l 1 l .4 l 149'l 1 l L l 1 l l 1 1‘2 1 l 1 l g
40» 5' é 440
50 50
20» ° ~20
0 0
'20 " 5" '53 5357 ‘35 ‘ '20
- 4 0 I- 59 59 a -40
-50L 52 52 -1 -60
80 __ 5.4 August 5.4 . -80
l 1 l 1 l '49 l 1 l 1 J 1 L l 1 1:49 # L 1 I g?
40» 5 Q A40
51° 5.0
20 I- .. 20
0 5'6 5.0 55:56 0
-20 1- 5.7 .57 ‘ '20
'3 s5 5'5 53
-40.. 5'9 5'9 - -40
-601- 52 5.2 .. -60
3 month
-30 1- 5: average 5.4 - -80
49 49
£1.11 4 J 1 l L . 1 1 l 1 l 1 L L 1 . 1 AL L 1 l 1 JL
l 3 5 7 9 I I 76‘ 78° 80° 82 ° 84"

Inches of Rainfall

Figure 8.

Tern per ature

154

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thousand Acres 5 oraia Alabamg Thousand Ac res
Under harvestedl . underharvested
40 ~ 5" 60
so 51
20 _ June ‘4(
O . . +20
56 57 58 so
020. §5 .53 §5 56..” o
-40 - 59 5'2 '54 5’9 53 37 1 -20
~60 - 5'2 4, 1-40
‘BOF {’4 49 “'6C
-100 1 1 1 : L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
40 - 5' 5, 160
so .
20 " July 40
0 '56 5.0 29
-20 1- 87 58 . o
59 53 .55 5.7 so 56 . 5'5 7'8
-40 *- 52 ' 5'4 53 ”2‘3
s2
'60" 4.9 "40
~80L 5‘4 '4 '60
49
1" l 1 l 1 l .1 1 1 l l 4 L 1 l 1 L 1 1 I
40- 5' s' . 60
so
20 P August .4 4O
0 . so so a 20
55
5'7
55 54 o ..:53 5.2
'40 ' $9 ' ‘7 59 “20
~60. 5'2 1,9 1-40
'80 '- 54 '60
° 49
4' L 1 l 1 ° 1 1 l 1 l L 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l I
40- m 160
5.0 5‘"
20 I- -1 40
O 5‘. 5.0 +20
- .. 57- sis O
2° 55- 53 57.5" ..55 .5a
-40- 59 54- 5'9 52 53 1-20
‘60 '- 5‘? 3 month 59 "40
average
-80 P 54 .4 '60
- 49
l .1 l 4 L l 1 #L l

 

 

 

 

 

“‘f‘l s‘H‘w—z“

Inches of Rainfall

4 6 8 [0

Inc hes of Rainfall

Figure 9.

would not be rewarding until a longer time period can be used. The above.
explanation of the large dispersion of the data for 1950 and 1951 is
applicable, and the remaining years appear rather indeterminate. It is
possible in some cases to construct a line of relationship through the
data favorable to the hypotheses; however, it is believed that inspection
of the diagrams reveals about as much definite information as might be
gained by other methods considering the small number of observations
remaining after allowance for the effect of the two-price program. Another
difficulty in attempting to analyze underharvest has general application.
A facet of this was discussed in the preceding chapter for the Virginia-
Carolina area with reSpect to overharvest in North Carolina. The difficulty
is one of variation in crop estimates among sources. An example of this
is illustrated by comparison of the underharvest data used for this study
and the tables accompanying the discussion in Appendix A for the 1952,
1953, and 1954 crOps as prepared by Mr. Davis, Oils and Peanut Division‘
based on data from State offices of the Commodity Stabilization Service.
The estimates of underharvest are quite different. When a sufficient
number of observations become available over time, it would seem advisable‘
prior to attempting any analysis of underharvest, to make a careful and
thorough appraisal of acreage estimates year by year and state by state

in order to obtain more precise underharvest data with respect to allotted
and unallotted acreage, and unallocated allotment. Small errors in
aggregate estimates which may be disregarded as offsetting in aggregate
data may be greatly magnified in data such as underharvest because of

the residual nature of the data. Unless extreme care is exercised, it

is doubtful that observed data can be obtained that would lend itself to

 

 

I}ltl till

156

reliable economic analysis, particularly when observations are few in
number.

Another variable associated with underharvest is acreage
placed in the acreage reserve and conservation reserve of the "soil
bank" program. The program is of recent date and may not enter the
data of this study appreciably. In 1956, according to estimates of
the Commodity Stabilization Service, 6,144 acres of peanuts were
taken out of production in the Southeast area, and 37,840 acres in
the Southwest area. For the United States, 1957 soil bank acreage of
peanuts was estimated at 39,000; 1958, 69,000; and 1959, 133,000.
These are cumulative totals, since soil bank contracts are of more
than One year duration. Quantitative and qualitative appraisal of
these estimates by states seems indicated in deriving suitable ob-
served data for underharvest. Such acreage is included in the state
allotment legally, but the effect is comparable to a reduction in

allotment.

In Summary of this Section.--It appears that the most useful acreage
data for projecting production consists of the acreage allotments ad-
justed subjectively, as indicated above for Mcdel J, for underharvested

acreage.

° N 157

Yield Estimates
Southeast Area

Variables Used and Models Considered:

 

 

 

 

X1... Time X10... Peanut acreage
1... Time squared X15... July rainfall
X2... Peanut yield (dependent) xl6--- August rainfall
X5... Log peanut price (t—l) X17... September rainfall
X9... Composite cost squared X19... Profitability ratio
; ; Appendix B
Models Considered : Table : Equation Numbers
Time Period - 1909-1958 3 Number : Georgia:Florida:Alabama
A. Xz-f(X1, X5,'X10) ........ f 14 390 490 590
B. Xz-f(X1, X5, X10, x16)"'f 15 300 400 500
. C. Xz-f(X1, X5, X9, X10)....E 16 322 422 522
D. x2-£(x1, XS, X9, X10, :
X15, X16, X17) ..... f 17 321 421 521
2 I
E. Xz'f(xl, X1, X5, x10, :
X15, X16, X17).....: 18 302 402 502
r. x2-£(x1, x5, x10, x19)...: 19 332 432 532
G. Xz-f(X1, XS, X10, X15, ;
X16, X17, 119).”..3 20 331 431 531

Model A.--The coefficients obtained for this model are each significant

at the 1 percent probability level for Georgia and Florida, and are of

logical sign. The regression fit in Alabama is not as good since acre-

age is non-significant. These relationships are presented graphically

in Figures 10, 11, and 12 for each of the states Georgia, Florida, and

Alabama, respectively. Inspection of the yield-time and yield-acreage

200
l00
0

158

' 0
Pounds Georg: 39
per Acre

J

 

-I00
-200

1 l

I '

l1l ll11
I

bllII1llH - ,1
1 ‘I‘III"“‘

-

 

-300

-400
1200

”00

l 000+-

900
800
700
600
500

‘I

A/Estimoted ,Acluol
_/ \ .........

‘ "‘
'."

I ....

 

400

l9I0

X 1.34

l-
lllllllllllllllllllLLlllALLllllllLlllLl1111111111

19l5 l920 l925 I930 1935 1940 l945 1950 I955

 

Pounds Geogia 390

per Acre

 

 

 

1100
I000
900
800
700
600
500

    

2'02'1' .
22 24

és

 

40

mL-U
2

1'9 2'3 25 28
I I 1 L 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 '1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1
7 l2 I7 22 27 32 37 42 47

Year X2

.1

11

 

 

Figure 10.

159

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

X124 Pounds Georgia 390
.A
.000 per cre $8 5.6
900 40 II 13"4 18 510.53 55
800 363a '0 '9 5:2 4.3 . .5. ' d
700 “"3737 bmé? 45115 47 :48 45°57
3. . 29 '
600 33 212‘ 39 ' 3° 23 '9 2‘ —1
500 52 2-3 28 25
5'4
400: l L l 1 l 1 J 1 l ‘_I__L I l l 1 I l 1 l l y
I 3 4 6 7 8 9 l0 ll 12 '3
Price (cents) X3
XI.23 Pounds I 690330—390
"00 per Acre
H300

900»-
800
700
600
500

 

4o°1t'11111111

100 200 300 400 500 600
Thousand Acres Picked and Threshed

Figure 10. Continued

54

1

l 1

l

l

l 1 J 1 l
700 800 900
X4

1

l 1

I000

l
"00

 

l
l200

 

 

Pounds
per Acre

160

FlorIdQ

490

 

 

 

200
H30-

IOOr
ZOO-
309;
Il00-
1000—-
900-
8CKN-
7001-. _
600—

500~

4oqk

|9l0

 

X 1.34
H000

900b
800—
700-
6001—10”
5001

 

011.

l
1915

Pounds
per Acre

'15

11

l
l920

I

111'11

--~ ...-

I
1925

 

26

I
rt11*T* I

. Estmnated
J

J
1930

3,.13.
24. . ég I 32 34
2:3 25 2725 .

I
1935

1940

Florida 490

3'7

3'9

4.3

1945

Q6

Acluul

950

4'9

      
 
 
 

1
1955

  

 
 
 

54

2.111111111111111l1¥11l111111g11l1111111111L1M1111

 

.1

 

 

Figure 11.

Year

X2

47

161

 

 

     
 

Florida 490
X124 Pougds I
per cre
I000 59 $3 56
900- 43 5'3
4p 17 sé .
goo.- ” 4.3 is ' so "T
‘l U 10/4214':3 2149 . 5'7
70° ' . 9° "° . " "2 is 2'. 4'4 ‘9 '5‘
600 .‘ .2325'27 ’5
28 .
500 33 3b 46
400:?11'411ll111114111'1114I111_11141111111111L11L1111

 

 

12 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO II
Price (cents) X3

 

 

 

 

 

Flor'da 490

X ‘23 531973er I

900 a
800 4.0 -1
700 7
600 “:3 -1

5‘ 4'9 \45.‘\~ 48 42
500‘. 3.9 4'4 4'7 \ '1
400- -
46

300£ 1 J l l l l l l l l I I l l 1 JL 1 l l l 1 4i

 

I I I
0 IO 20 .30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 I IO I20
Acres Picked and Threshed X4

Figure 11. Continued

162

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alabama 590
Fbuggs I
200 per cre _
1 I 11 1 I 1 1 1
0 I11 :1TTTrT i IPI1I1I1II II I l ,
, .
4001 I‘ll H I [I I I1
-200— J
.300. a
11001 I
IOOOF- _
9001' . d
8001- ‘ Actual [..- “’ .1
W1“ 4531'???“ _ 1
600__.—’““. L" _/\‘>’ I \.‘\/- ___/ \, J
500* /—\J 1
40 7L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1»
1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955
Pounds J Alabama 590
l00 per cre so 52 5:
. 5.6
900'- 3.6 38 4. 48 5.3 55 'I
800- 1.7 3, 4o ‘9 - 9°
700-10" I? '9. 3"“

 

 
 

 

 

 

GOOI— . _ 2.7 303323
'6 {9.9. as 39 4'5 57
SOOI- 20 22 54'2'5 3’5 34 5,4 .1
40 11111111111111111111I1111I1111I1111I|...|.||||lIl-‘:I
2 7 l2 I7 22 27 32— 37 42 47

Figure 12.

Year X2

163

AIabama 590

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P d C - fl
IOXOLC? pgrugcge :
900 5% Q0 56' 7
. a; as.
800 48 '49 7
700 ¥ * "
600 , , 5' 55 ‘
500.5293 . 23? 3° 2'6 2° - is . . q
00 5° 23 5"
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 '0 "
Price (ceMS) X3
Alabama 590
X123 P°Unds
per Acre J 53 .1
:2: I321?“ 15 52:5“ 383's" 7°! 17
1— ' O . A
J
300 1 1 1 1 1 J 1 1L

 

 

 

l l 1 L l
0 50 IOO ISO 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
. Thousand Acres Picked and Threshed X4

Figure 12. Continued

164

relationship for the years 1909 to about 1925 suggests a period of acreage
expansion in the formative years of the industry together with an accompany-
.ing yield reduction which is beyond the competence of a linear regression
for the long-run period. This gives rise to the non-random configuration
of the residuals in this formative “era" of the industry. The line of
relationship passes through this period at about its mean; hence, the
long-run fit is largely unaffected as far as its prediction value is
concerned.

A similar but opposite effect occurs toward the end of the
time period beginning with the low yield-high acreage of warld War II
years and progressing into the high yield-low acreage mandatory allotment
period. A linear regression for the long-run period fails to deal with
this "era" adequately. This is most noticeable in the yield-price re-
lationship, a situation previously encountered and discussed in the yield
section of the Virginia—Carolina area, Chapter VI. These relationships,
characteristic of the area, are accentuated in Alabama and account for
the relatively poor fit. As explained in the Virginia-Carolina discussion,
it does not seem appropriate to project to the future the trend developed
beginning with war-time generated low yields and highacreage on through
the apposite conditions prevailing in recent years. While no detailed
3 investigation has been included, general knowledge indicates that most
of the large residuals are weather generated.

Since these models are reasonably satisfactory for prediction
purposes, they are not rejected. Somewhat better models for Georgia and

Alabama are discussed below.

165

Model B.--The addition of July rainfall to the Model A variables brought
the acreage coefficient for Alabama into significant focus and effected
an increase in the multiple correlation coefficient from .37 to .Sf.

The rainfall variable itself is not significant at the 5 percent level
but is of logical sign and effective in improving the over-all relation-
ship. Otherwise, Model B is presumed to have the same characteristics
as Model A. This model for Alabama is presented graphically in Figure

13.

Mbdel C.--This model is designed to test the effect of including the
composite cost variable with the variables in Model A. Composite cost
enters all regressions with logical sign but is significant only in
Georgia. There are doubtless problems of intercorrelation which obscure
the effect of cost since, as a composite of prices of corn and cotton as
well as direct costs, it may well be intercorrelated with other independ-
ent variables. The model is a somewhat better fit in Georgia than
Models A or B, but no better for Florida, and not as good in Alabama.
Model C for Georgia is presented graphically in Figure 14. A quadratic
acreage variable would probably reduce the non-random residual effect in
the early years, but the added usefulness for prediction purposes is open

to question.

Model D.--To Model C were added the three rainfall variables. As in the
case of the Virginia-Carolina area, it seems evident that an average
monthly total rainfall is too crude a measure of weather effect since none
of the rainfall coefficients is significant. A rather wide variation in

rainfall about its mean can evidently be tolerated by peanuts. A shortage

166

Pounds AIO bamg 500

1' Acre

I, II1

 

 

  

q

.1I1I III“ ..I II II I

 

    

 

 

 

 
  

 
 

 

 

 

[I] I II' I I 7
-100 I I I I I I I I I I I I .
-200 _
1
I000 _
900 Acfual ‘ ‘
800 ,«° ,/ _
Esilmaied ..
70 ’ ‘ /'\ .,-\.’.‘\‘.~'. ..... /' .-.“ \. q
60 ‘°\_/ \...- \. ’,°\.‘.\.’/ \.‘ I]. ’ \ - -_‘
500 ° ‘
l9l0 l9l5 l920 l92 O I [940 |94 I l
x1345 ”Heads I ~be
IOOO‘ 52 u
5.0 ' 5’ 5"
900'- 3,6 4.1 q: 5.3 5.5 ..
8001— .2 M ..., 3.5 3.7” 49 ‘9“
700*- ” ' 1,5 ,8
1p . 39 i2
600 39 ' 2'7 31 53 39 q. - _
'3 ' 2'53 2475 58.29 ' 54
‘50on 1.:11 IZI3L12‘O61 LL . 1
2 7 12 17 22 27 3 37 42 47 ‘

Year X2

Figure 13.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

X poljfids Alabama 500
L245 per Acre I 55’°52 ,§° 59-1
) [7 l4
SOOI— 3,: 9, 1;.)1 - L5 3 ,9 49 51:1“ 51
36:49 .1: ,15 ,
7OOI 34' 35 37 O ' 4.4 45 2'0 4'7 7
600 ' . ,. gl —1
500 .3? 2&1 - 1'6 25 2.4 4'6 5.7
‘ J: 1.3 3.1 26 2.3 54 -i
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0
Price (cenls) X3
'Jounds Alabama 500
Xl'235 per Acre r
900 J? 1.4 5558 ~
(‘1 0 , 56. 4' so '7
800 '0 15 5; {,5 3.7.39 . . —
700 '3 %3 u
42
600 2.6 2% 2311.24 °|6 3| 5"? 20 o 4.5 _
500 2'3 5'7 3'9 ‘7 44 1
1 1 115‘ 1 9° "'
1_111 jllllLJ IJLJIII 141lllllll144411111111411111
I00 200 300 400 500 600
Thousand Acres Picked and Threshed X4
Ala bama 500
Pounds
Xl-234 per Acre I
900 - ss 17 so ‘
Sf. 56 0‘ 4" 0.36 o
500'“ [2 ... ' , l 58 40. 19 5.5 '33 4s 4. -1
700 '41.13 i 3.7 43 54' 4g 55 .49 . .1
boo . 4].. 972952,..‘1044- 5[2| 43 45 37:9 _
'V) 22 25 2'28 5'1 24. .26
500» 39 2-3 46 'I
4003;1éi1 1954111 11 1511111111L11111111
5 4 5 6 7 9 l0 ll l2 l3 l4- l5 l6
July Rainfall (inches) X5

Figure 13. Continued

Pounds

per Acres [J

'°,IL111I

IOOI
- ZOO
~300I’ F

"00*-
lOOO—

 

     
   

Pounds
X1345 per Acre

Esflmaled“

168

Georg1_a 322

 

I11

""I1Il' I"” 'L I '

Acfual

fiv

 

 

1930 1555 1540

Georgia 322

1945 1&50

1955

 

 

 

 

 

1000L-
900-
800-
7001.
600
500

 

Figure 14.

3'9

32

Years X2

414,8

$7-

 

169

Georgia 322

 

Pounds

X1245 per Ac re

IOOO
900

800
700
600
500 °

 

 

 

T

2.0 4s "

4.7

 

 

 

 

Price (cenls) X3

Georgia 322

 

   

 

LllJJljlllllllllllllJlllllJLlLlJl

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

75 IOO |25 ISO I75 200 225 P50 P75
Campos? Cost Index X4
‘ 3
Pounds Georgm 22

4

.1/ .118
475.1,. 7
1 l 1 i l 1 l 131 l 1 L 4 1 1 L 1 l i L J __I_ l L .1
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 IL'OI‘

Thousand Acres Picked and Threshed

Figure 14. Continued

Xs

170

in one month may be offset by an ample supply at another time. The net
effect in many years may also be obscured by numerous other factors such
as disease or insects, or lack of them. Extreme and persistent drought
or hurricane rains which are equally damaging do not occur often enough&
to measure the effect even in a general long run regression. The signs
of the rainfall coefficients are consistent and in agreement with the
weather hypotheses except for June. In some way, rainfall is negatively
associated with yield. The rationale may be excessive grass, weeds, and
plant growth as discussed in the Virginia-Carolina area.

The attempt to develop an adequate weather index for the
humid areas may be regarded as unsuccessful in terms of mean total. rainfall

by months.

Model E.--Inspection of the charts accompanying this section suggest a
long-run curvilinear time trend. A quadratic time trend was found to be
significantly different from linear in a previous analysis of Southeast
area data.2 The effect of adding quadratic time obscures the effect of
other variables for the most part. This probably arises from intercorre-
lation. While the regression fit is improved, it is probably the result
of special conditions which will not likely be repeated. These are the
formative "era“ period and the late period "era" discussed under Model A
above, particularly the latter period which includes the high acreage -
low yield of Wbrld War 11 followed immediately by the high yield - low

acreage of the mandatory allotment period. Since the projection of these

 

2D. Upton Livermore, "Trends in Peanut Yields," Virginia Farm

Economics, No. 154, (May 1958), pp. 9-18.‘

171

conditions into the future in this area appears unwarranted, Model B is
set aside. It is not rejected because it might have uses for one year

projections especially if re-visited with current data.

Models F and G.--The pecularities of the profitability ratio behavior

 

subject these models to rejection without further consideration.

in Summary of this Secgign.--The following models may be regarded as
reasonably adequate for projection purposes: Models A or C in Georgia;
Model A in Florida; and Models A or B in Alabama. 0f the choices, Model
C in Georgia, and Model B in Alabama seem preferable and will be used
later in the projection of production estimates.

Production Estimates
Southeast Area

Variables Used and Models Considered:

 

 

 

 

X1 ... Time X152....July.rainfall
2 X15 ... July rainfall squared
X1 ... Time squared X16 ... August rainfall
X5 ... Peanut price (t-l) X162... August rainfall squared
X10... Peanut production (dependent) X172... September rainfall
112... Value of peanuts (t-l) 117 ... September rainfall squared
X13... Value of competing crops (t-l) 124 ... Per acre value competing
X14... Acreage of competing craps (t-l) crops (t-l)
: : 'Appgndix B
. Time :Table ‘ Equation Numbers _
Models Considered : gfiPeriod :Number: GeorgiazFloridazAlabama
A' 311‘f(x12’ x13, 1‘14’ :
x15, X16, X17) ..... : 1909-1958 21 311 411 511

3- x11-£(x12, x13, x14:

X15, X16, X17) ..... 1909-1948 22 319 419 519

 

172

Continued

Appendix B j
Time :Table : Equation Numbers
Period ;Number: Georgia:Florida:Alabama

Models Considered

‘I .0 .0 O

 

 

2
C. xll-f(x1, X1, 13, 124,

x15, x16’ ‘17' xis’ f

xié, 1:7). .......... 1909-1953 23 303 403 503
D' xil'w‘v xi, 13’ x24,

x15, 116’ x17’ x15; f

11%, 1:7)... ........ 2 1909-1948 24 . 304 404 504

 

Models A andf§,--The concepts under which these models were formulated

are stated in the production estimate section of Chapter VI. The multiple
correlation coefficients in Model B are higher than in Model A, suggesting
that Model A, which includes the mandatory allotment period, does not fit
the data. The production trend over all years is not linear. Accordingly,
Model A is rejected. Model B has little to offer other than to say that
peanut production is associated with the value of the peanut crop in the ‘
ipreceding year in Georgia and Florida but not in Alabama. In Florida, the
coefficient for value of competing crops is significant; but in Alabama,
only the coefficient of acreage of competing crops is significant. Rain-
fall data fail to enter any of the equations significantly. Problems of
intercorrelation probably associated with the war years, and general in-
effectiveness suggest rejection of Model B as inconclusive pending further

investigation.

173

Models C and D.--Comparison of the multiple correlation coefficients for
these two models suggests that Model D, which omits the mandatory allot-
ment period, is the better regression fit. Inspection of Figure 15 for
Model C in Georgia suggests that a time period ending in 1948 for these
models would probably have smaller residuals during World War II. A sub-
stantial distortion is introduced by including all years in.Mbdel C and
allowing the full effect of exogenous forces to enter the equation. While
there are a number of significant coefficients in the regressions for
Model C, inspection of the relationships in Figure 15 leads one to the
conclusion that they are of doubtful validity since they are clearly the
cumulative product of a series of abnormal situations. As stated above
for Virginia-Carolina, it is expecting too much of one equation to c0pe
with all of the exogenous forces for the long-run period. As will be
illustrated below, projecting production with these models provides
illogical estimates. Accordingly, Mbdels C and D are rejected. Residuals
for Florida and Alabama are also charted in Figures 16 and 17. The pro-
duction estimates derived from.Model C are included in accompanying Tables

2 and 3 only for comparative purposes.

Production Projections.--In the acreage section of this chapter it was
concluded that, for purposes of projection to 1965, the acreage allotment,
Model J, would be the most valid estimate of future acreage in the South-
east area. This conclusion would obtain after taking into account
subjectively an estimated underharvested acreage. Similarly, in the yield
estimates section, it was decided that Model C in Georgia would be pre-

ferred; Model A in Florida; and Model B in Alabama.

174

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

Million Paunds Geo'qio 3:03
Picked & Threshed r 1
—200
1. —IOO
I- d
I ~. I I1I|I1 1 11:,
1H“ II II II IIII II III I
.I d
800*— d-IOO
I- .1
700~
I-
6001-
1
500»-

 

400

 

300

200

 

 

I00
I‘Esiimaied for |9IO=- I782
IQ" = - 37.3

        

 

o|9|O l9I5 I920 I925

Figure 15.

M1llion Pounds

175

Georgia 303

 

Pic ked 8. Threshed
X 1.4567e91011

750

 

 

700

650

ITTT Tij'T'Yr
I I I

600

v—v—

550

500

uTIITTTI

450 '-

' I

400 ‘—

350 ~

fiv v v 7*
.

.300

250’“

200

IIUITITTI

I50

I00 -

4'3 4'5

47
O

QO

 

If

llllllljlillllllllllll

lllllllLLlllILlllJl[AllllillllllllLlllLlLlllllllllllli

 

 

r- . 1
..1 I213

lallJLillllLllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

.1

 

 

IO I5 20

Figure 15. Continued

3O 35 4O 45
Years X2 X3

50

55

Million Pounds

Picked 8. Threshed
X123567s91011 I

700
650
600
550
500
450
400
350
300
250
200

I50

I'UIFIIjIIIIIIIIITTIUIIIIITTIII'TTTI'I‘I[I'FIIITITY'IIIIII

 

176

Georg1a 303

4'5

'3'1‘

 

100k- *2
I.111111 1.11111111_1111
l23 567 BXQIOII

Figure 15. Continued

Price (cenis)

\

1111111111141I1441LL1lillx

 

llliiLLI'

 

Million Pounds

177

Georgia 303

Picked 8. Threshed] 4i
3

X1234507s91011

 

 

 

 

 

1
.1
600 1.0 ...l
4.2 1
550 _
‘.° 3
4.4 .1
500 4., 48 j
36 :1
' 1.1 .1
as
450 4.. y I] 45 .
2.8 4's :
400 1;. 2.5 '-° -
33 1'6 2
$9 22 1'3 2': 4
3'2 '2 -
55 s :4 1‘ -I
37 ° ‘
$0 53,0 .1
s. 2'9 I
300 ..1
2'3 5s 1
250 5' 5
27 . so .1
l9 :
2’6 4'9 «
20 1
5’5 "
q
4
I50 -
5.3 .1
$7 :
I00 $2 .1
50— _1
C 1‘
0 s4
111111111111111111111111111111111111111111411111111111111111111'I
7 ll l5 I9 23 27 3| 35 39 43 47 SI 55 59 63 6 7 7|
Per Acre Value of Compefinq Crops (dollars) X5

Figure 15. Continued

Million Pounds

Picked 8. Threshed
X1.234ss91011

178

Georgia 303

 

I

 

600

IUIIII

550 4'8

500

450

400

350

300

250

 

'UI'II'I'I'IIUI'IUIUIIIIFIIIIIIIIII

200

I5

I00

—.:

l

j

45 4,6

is

1111];

4.2

 

L A

lllLllllllJLillll‘lllllllliilllLJLlllllll11111111?

 

 

O
N

Figure 15. Continued

I

l
3

4 5 6
June Rainfall (inches)

1'44

Xs X7

@—

Million Pounds
Picked 8. Threshed

I

 

 

X112345571011
4'3
600
I
550 9
r 47 44
b O O
'- 42
500— ’
1- 4?
' I8 46
C ' ’ .40
450- V
P
I 1,1
L as
400- .53.. 3.8 5.6
3%5 3’ .1. 3°
350- 2‘
P 51--12 . 2.4
s .3 '
'5 1'4 43°
300 22 3;! °
39-’ $3 ,
2:, ss
52
O . 32
20
250 :24 5.3
2'3 57
200 57 .
as
I50
I00 5:.
4 5 6 7

Figure 15. Continued

179

Georgy 303

 

0 I I I4 I I.
July RoinfullIinchesI Xs X9

llllllllLlLlllJilLlllllLlllllllllllllllllllllllLllllll

 

.350

‘3 00

450

400

350

.500

Million Pounds

Picked 8. Threshed I
3456789

43

 

 

180

Georgia 303

47
44
42
'9
. 45
4'6

1111111111111111141111111111111I1111l11111411

 

 

250
28
200;. 5'7
150—' _‘
‘l- 1 I 1 l 5%} I I 1 I L JL 1 I 4 l 1 l #1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO

Figure 15. Continued

Augusl‘ Rainfall (inches) X10 X11

181

 

 

 

 

    

MIIIionPounds Flor'd0403
Picked 8. Threshed
25" .1
11 1141L+1
0 rrfii irIiIIIIIIIT‘iHlll 11TII] '11*'1
-25-
IOOI-
50—
1111111L1411111111111111111111111111111411111

 

 

 

I9IO I9I5 I920 I925 I930 I935 I940 I945 l950 I955

Figure 16.

Million Pounds
Picked AThreshed
ISO —

IOOI-

SO-

 

 

182

Alabama 503

 

 

 

 

ClIIIII

'50I—

-100L-
1

400~
350+
300»
250—

200‘-

I50" I II

100I» ,-’
.l
I

bOI- "

 

IIIIII

 

 

 

 

19L 4

l

 

O LlllLlJlLLluLLlLJJlllJ;

--1-
1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 L1935 1940 1945 1950 ‘1955

Figure 17.

 

183

Pursuant to this appraisal, actual and estimated production
have been considered beginning with the mandatory allotment period in 1949
to 1958, and projected for the period 1959-1965. The accompanying Tables 1
2 and 3 set forth the essential information. Projections were made under
the following assumptions for Georgia, Florida, and Alabama, respectively.
Yield-allotment equations:
1) price, 9.0 cents; 8.5 cents; and 8.5 cents
2) acreage, 515,000; 55,300; and 210,000
3) square of 1955-58 average composite cost, Georgia only
38,005
Production equations:
1) price, 9.0 cents; 8.5 cents; and 8.5 cents
2) 1954-58 average per acre value of competing craps:
$48.12; $29.37; and $59.71 (See footnote, Table 23,
Appendix B regarding coding.)

3) 49—year mean inches total rainfall:

Georgia Florida Alabama
June 4.35 5.80 4.31
July 6.19 7.52 6.29
August 4.84 6.63 4.98

The above values were assumed constant with only time increas-
ing, (1910 - 2 for yield equations; 1910 = 10 for production equations).

Comparative data are presented graphically in Figures 18 and 19
for selected equations for each state and for the Southeast area. Again,
it should be recalled in viewing these that not until 1957 did acreage and

price decline to the current levels on which the assumptions are based.

184

The production equation (Model C) projects to the future a
reflection of all past events, particularly the high W0rld War II pro-
duction and the recent decline. As a matter of judgement, the declining
production projected by this equation may be disregarded as illogical.
This is represented in the charts by a dotted line.

Regarding an adjustment for underharvest, the yield per acre
from the estimating equation has been applied to 515,000 acres in Georgia,
or about 12,000 acres less than the allotment; in Florida, no adjustment
for underharvest was estimated. In Alabama, underharvest is estimated at
8,000 acres, so the yield per acre from the estimating equation was
applied to 210,000 acres. The estimates of production are represented
in Figure 19 by a broken line and may be compared with actual production
data which appears as a solid line from 1949 to date, 1959.

Certain adjustments in the level of yield per acre in certain
states appear desirable. These adjustments and a summary of the data for
the area will be presented in the summary chapter on national production.
The effect of the adjustments on production is represented by the "adjust-
ment" line in Figure 19 for the projected period 1959-1965. The yield

level in Georgia only has been adjusted.

.mnma Mom mumawawaoum mum mwmonucouma ea mouawam

1n
('0

.momaimmafl coauosuoum wawuuofioua Ham mambo
.man rags mouse mud0a0qmmooo noammouwou on» :« oovaauna woman
.uoo«>omo
.muauwuammoou now .mm wanes .m Naoaoma< some
.uuaoaoammooo now .oH wanna .m xwunonm< some

 

 

 

 

 

 

oomamam " n-.mom ” 1 Ham " coo.nam a...moma
ooa.nan “ mNH1~om “ u mam " ooo.nam «...3oma
ooa.-m 1 o~m.mae " a was “ ooo.nam “...noma
oo~.mum " mam.ema " " Hem " coo.nam a...~oma
oo~.m~m " mNm.Haa “ " mmm “ ooo1man “...Hema
oo~1Hnm " o~N1mm¢ ” u was “ mooo.mam "...ooma
as .Ama~.mav ooa.mmm " mm Aoaa.aav mao.smq "Amam.ummvu Ham Amma.avuasom.am-v som.w~n Aooo.aa¢v "..smmaa
as omH13m ooa.whm " mm mma.~HH meo.00n "oomm.uao " Ham coma.a " sew.-- eem.a~m oooo.mam "...mmma
has coo.mua- ooa.nmm " ace oso.~m1 o3a18aa " ooa.¢8e " «as cam " mmm1aa- mmm.-m ooo.oam ”...amaa
as om~.AH ooa1Hmm " ca o~3.am oom.aam ” omm.m8m " owe oao.H " mm81n1 mmo.hum ooo1N~m «...8moa
«Ha om~.mm1 oom.aao " em omm.m~ . oaa.sma " onm14~m " on mam " om81~N1 mmo.n8m ooo.wmm s...mmma
man oo8.88~1 oom.~am " .mna omm.oeai o~a1~Ha " ooN188~ " was mom " a3~1~mi a¢~.a~m ooo.oes "...emaa
«Na on1HNH- ooa.mno " am em~188 ow¢.om3 ” oma18Hm " mam cam » “ cam18ui omn.m¢m coo.mmm “...mmaa
was oom.oa1 coo.mce ” 80H N«8.NN1 Nm~.8aq " coo.mam " sew com . " sem18m- eem.msm ooo.~m¢ “...Nmma
Nos oom.MH1 oos.oam " ma ome.mm 3H31~3m " ooa.oam “ 4mm cos . " aho.ms mum.~¢m coo.Hse "...amaH
as ow~.m oo¢.~a8 " Na oas.~m ¢8N.mmo " om8.oma “ new mam m oo8.o~ ooa.aoa ooc.m~a 1...omma
odd o8m1H81 ooH1Na8 “ Nod Hmo.qsi Ham.nm8 " oea.oao “ saw one. . nac.ma1 n~o1mam ooo.mm~ “...asaa
mUa30M1.. moaaom " moaaom mafiaom u muaaom "amazon avasom u ”
unamaoaH vammaonH" .Uammaose Usmmaosau vammaonau " "
m\m» .mum Aw " exam mwm ” sand. ” m<um " w u w u A u .4 a <1 m
undo" Hmauwmomauoumaaumm" ucouu Hmsnfimomaoommrdumm" Hmsuo< u oowwa “ Hmnuo<u umo> abouuoHad " Hmnuo< u
than: . " Ihmmn u u u lwumm u u Ihmfi u u "
anon 1 .46 ” «mum - .so " “awn-.sou " uses: " a 1 new»
neammauwMM acquoauoum " acqmmouwmu bamaw “ a u a a a u
1 noduusuoum u uHofiN " wwwokud

O. O.

 

 

.unsw:< use .mfisn .ossn ea damn

inflow Houou some nemmima can undone mafiumaaou ooamwooam m0 o=Hm> snow use ammuo>m mmmaiamma mumoo ouamoaaou oweuo>m
mnmaimmma “mouom ooo.mam .owmouom «mused o.m .oowum mo oaoHumasmmm nave: meaumoam acquusooum use eaouh dogmauoam
wean: .momAiommH .uouuonoum one "mmmaimqma .uoumaauuo use Hodges "ouwuomo aw musamum «a newuuaoOHMii. H manna

.mmmH Mom humauawaoum one mfimosueoumm Ga mouawam

owa

.nomfiimmma ao«uosvoua wnauuonoum now moose
.wmmH sues moves uuaowuammoou aoamnuuwmu man s« vousaueq dunno
.vou«>smo
.musoguammuou Mom .mu manna .m navaoma< some
.uunowuummoou now .4H.0Hnma .m xavnomm<.oums

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

sam.om . aaw1nm . . aka . oon1nm .....noma
«ma1Hm " aom.nn . . «as . oom.nm "...4oaa
one.~n . s~m.~m- “ u mam . oom.mn .....noaa
aas.nm “ was.~n . . «ma ” con.mn ....«oaa
¢¢H14m . «an.«n . . 84a . oom.mn ....aoaH
aom.¢n m uno.«n . . ass . «com.mm ....ooaa
was “cam.m-v 833.mm H can Ao88.s-v soa13n "Aoso.~sv . was house "Aomm18wv smm.nn Aooo.aso ...8mmma
ms Hmm1om mm8.a~ . em NH3.8 www.ms "oo¢~.mm . «no ooNH.a " mam.mi nam.nm oooo.~m "...wmoa
HNH o551m- omm.mm m oaa Na¢.¢1 . Nm~.om . oo~.ns . was com " ~n¢.m1 am31mm ooo.~m ....amoa
an 1-8.~a man.~¢ . mm «mm18 .mon.mm " oo~1o8 . «mm who.” u and- aha.om coo.on ....omaa
8A ”mum.sa m~818¢ . Hm on.m om8.mn . oom1Ho . mum «No.4 " can- omn.oo ooo.oo “...man
as na~.H. hm~.me . was mm8.81 mo~.Hn . omm.ss . Ham can u an- ~mo.mm ooo.mm ....qmma
ma .Haa.aa mmo.s¢ . Na Nam.q mwo.an . ooo.on . mus ooo1H . ca~.~1 caN.on ooo.om ....nnma
Hm nm¢.a nam.o¢ . as No“ mam.a¢ . onsemq " «Ha mum . mnm.m1 mmm.am ooo.¢m a...~mma
on oaa.n~ oss.an . ooH mmai mea.om u omm.om . new can . uno.n nqa.ao obo.mo ....Han
88 nmm.o~ a¢~.os . ooH «an- sam.as . oo~.H8 . man can ” om~.a- on~.ns ooo.~a ....omma
so www.ma mam.~m “ mas “N418- am8.am m o8~.Hm “ as» men . «Nm.8ai -w.nm ooo.~o ....meaa
weapon amazon “ meadow muaaom “ amazon "moaaom eunuch" «
vammaonh mammaosH" mammaoss unawaonhu mammaosyu “ u
12m." .7 m 4N3 . 1:8." aim . arm n 32.1...“ n w u s . . 1.. . .4 u .4 “
ufimo" HQDUHmOM. .Umu ummu ufimo" Hmfififlwmm mvmugfi mm“ Hd3u0< u vw “E u Hwfiu0¢u umm> «woquHH¢ u Hwflugfi u
than" u than“ a “ Iauma u u suds “ _ n n .
nos 1 .sHm. " some 1 .mHm ” "omaimamu a waves. a u. u use»
condemn an nowuunvoum .. noammouwmn mama» " u a . u a u a
11 coauosooum n mama» " mumwuo< .

 

 

.umsws< and .mash .uash a“ Hammeaon Houou some uoazrac one undone maauoaaoo nonmauomu mo usao> onus non oneno>01

was? «was .omuoa oom.un

.sufiulo ea monsoon mo soauosuoumii.

.uwoouuu .uunmo m. m mound mo muoauqabmmm have: maoauosdm noauuauoum one mama» voawwuomm
«can: .mosaianaH .eouoohoua was .mnaaimsma umuuaausu was Hanged

«..aaaa

emu . .. .1m
. 1 .moaaidmma :aauonooum waauueqoum now nouns
.mmoa now Aumufiafiaoumaoum muwmnusouma sq mausmam .wmmH £u«3 moons mucouowmuoou sawmmouwmu osu ad vovsaoaw sauna
- .euaapomo
.nueoquammoou pom .mu wanna .m xauaoaad some
.muaowuawmoou you .mH manna .n Navnoam< moms

 

 

 

 

 

 

mma.moa . ona.ama " . mam ooo.o- ....noaH.
Nm¢.aoa . oom.8ma " u can . ooo.oHN “...eooa
mam.¢aa . ooo.owa . . 8mm . ooo.oH~ ....mama
ma81maa . oao.mma " 1 Ham . ooo.oau ....Noaa
moa.sma . oom.mma . u can . ooo.oH~ ....Hsaa
Nau.mma . osm.~ma . . Ham ., . «ooo1oaa ....osma
ous Asm81~m-v 8m¢.moa . man Aoam.amiv. oho.NmH .Aoom.ooav. New Aoomv . nm81aa- mno.mam ooo.aou ...8mmmH
mm mmmnma amm.aow . mm osm.oa sam1oma .ooem.a- . 88m oooo.~.. Nao.ai «Ha1mau oooo18o~ ....mmaa
and ans.asi amm.oaa . mNH mam.kn1 mam.~aa . oom.mmH . new com . 88a1mH- oo~.w- ooo.no~ .....amaa
an mom.am moa.~aa . mm com.mm amm.sma . oo~.s- . 38w odo.a . mmm.¢1 mmo.mam ooo.sam ....8mma
and 9841a»- 48u1mm~ " ma mmH.mH ma81mma . oom.n- . new ono . mmm.oa1 amm.mmu coo1n- ....meH
was moo.ma1 mo~18ma . and mam.am- @431oNH " coo.oaa . mam 0mm u o8o1ma1 08o1aau coo.aou ....amsa
was oem.4m- osm13mm . No mos.aa mmm1mma . ooo.oou . mmm omm . Nom.na- Nom1mmm coo.mH~ ....mmma
man osm.mm1 831.14N . Hm mam.om mo~.ooa . ooo.mo~ . New ooo.H . mmm.mas mam.amm ooo.¢om ....Nmma
Has wmm1H~1 me.a~N . 83H smo.mm1 eAN1amu . ooo.no~ . now oma . mm81Nm mom.mqm ooo.mmw ....Hmaa
“on mma.¢~1 mma.a¢m . mm mN814¢ mam.oa~ . oo01m~m . mam: cam . “N8.ma mam.mam coo.mmm ....Omma
ma som.ma 8mm.eam . mm m5a14 mam14m~ . oom.mm~ " sow omm " Hum.831 Hum.mmm ooo.mmm M...m¢aa
m Uflaom mfifizom u Evan—0m mvfisom " mfififiom 1. mUCfiom mvfidom u "
vfim mSOSH. UGQ $30 .13. u «1.1.96. mason? vfim mica—1H. u USN mfiofifi u u "
m\®u .mwm ” m. . m\mu m1m “ m<wm " m4mw “ u w u 1 . u .4 u 4 .
undo" Hmavamomuvoumaaumm" uamwa Hmmmamomucouwfiaumm“ Hmauu¢ ” omwra a Hmsuo<a uma> ” nouuoHH<u Hmauu< “
iuomu a ” iuomu " u “ ifiumo " a sums « a a
snow 1 .834 . «com 1 .834 . "oon14a4. . “use: a a u .
cadmmouwau acauunuoum " Gowmmouwmw uaauw u u a a a u a poor
coauuavoum a vamqw a owomuo¢ 1 "

 

.umsw:< one .hash .oash sq Hammsqou Huuou some umomiaa use “muons manuomeoo voamaoomm mo on~u> upon you
omuuo>u mmafliamma “coo.oHN.ommouuo nausea m.» .muaum mo maoauaazmmo nova: naoaumsuo soauonvoum can mama» coauaommu.
menu: .noaaimnma .vmuuofioum use ammoflimqma .owuoaaumo use Hmnuou "uaonoa<.aa unnamed mo coauoavoumii. n manna

Million Pounds
Picked8.Threshed I j I r I 1 l l I I l I l l l
I r I

 

 

 

600 — \ ‘1,

\ :' .' “ Adjusled
\‘g 5 ‘- " : wax-’4‘ Georgia-322

.... ‘ /.\ ...—I-fl'.
SOOI— 1, ./ . -—'\ ,,,,, Georgia-322

4OO '-

\Aclual

3OO *-

jafi
n

300-
250-

200 1-

'50 I' Alabama-503 j

 

 

 

 

 

l 1 1 4 l 1 I 1 | 1 I 1 _l 1 I 1 L 1 1
I949 l95l l953 I I957 I959 I95I I963 |965

Georgia; Alabama: Actual, Esiima‘led, and Projecled

Produclion of Peanuts from Specified Equafions

Figure 18.

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Million Pounds
PackedaThreshJ I ' I ' IA; |r ' I ' I ' r
.l” T ("Hf-“Lit.-.“ Fig—3'9
50 v- ----- ‘- "' F
Vii—Honda 403
25 '
IOOO
900*-
Summaiion of
F Adjuslmenis
Georgia 322
Florida 490
AIabamaSOO
800F- fi/X
’7‘"
A x—r""‘ gummoiiog
' 7:... eorgia O3
“--...‘/ FI'orida 403
l' "-;‘q‘§,9. ama 503
c'SummaIion
700b Georgia 322
Florida 490
Alabama 500
——Aclual
600-
500 b '
L I 1 I 1 I I 1 L 1 l 1 l
l949 l95l l953 I955 l957 l959 I I I l

Florida; Georgia, Florida. and Alabama: Aclual. Esiimaled.
and Projecled Peanut Produclion from Specified Equalions .

Figure 19.

 

CHAPTER VIII

ACREAGE, YIELD, AND PRODUCTION ESTIMATES

SOUTHWEST AREA

Acreage Estimates
Southwest Area

Variables Used and Nbdels Considered:

m

11 ... Time x21...'Peanut price—cost ratio (t-l)

X3 ... Price of peanuts - 122...-Per acre value-cost ratio competing
XS ... Log peanut price (t-l) g crops (t-l)

16 ... U. 8. cost index x23... Same as x21 but not lagged

x7 ... U. 3. cost index squared x25... Excess acreage penalty

110... Peanut acreage (dependent) x26... State acreage allotment

114... Acreage of competing crops x27... Three month average rainfall

115... July rainfall in Texas

116... August rainfall Y1 ... Under harvested peanut acreage
117... September rainfall (dependent)

Y2... Ratio peanut acreage to acreage allotment (dependent)

 

I '1'

 

 

 

‘ 7' Appendixgg
‘ Time 5 Table ‘7 Equation Numbers
Models Considered : Period ; Number ; Texas : Oklahoma
A..x10-£(xs, x7).. ........... : 1909-1958 1 640 740
Be x10-£(x5, x7).....’........:, 1909-1948 2 649 74?
C. x10-5(x5, X7, 114) ....... .3 1909-1958 3 660 76?
D. 110-f(X5, X7, x14) ....... .3 1909-1948 4 669 769
B. xIO-£(x5, x7, 114t_1).....: 1909-1948 5 667 767
1" xlo'w‘v 321' 322' x23’ 5
115, 116, X17).....; 1909-1958 6 663 763
9' ‘1o'f0‘1’ x21, 122' 123' 1:
x15, :16, x17) oooooo x 1909'1948 6 664 764
x
H. x10-£(x1, x21, 122, 123)..: 1909-1948 . 6 666 766
I. xlo-Hxl, x21, x22) ....... 1921-1941 7 666m 766m

 

w' i fiv— TV

190

191

 

 

 

 

Continued
. 2 Appendix B 41*
: Time _8 Table 3 Equation Numbers
Models Considered ; Period 3 Number 3 Texas : Oklahoma
_ a _

J. Xlo-f(126) ................ .3 1949-1958 none (subjective)

. . - ............. ; 1949-1958 8 9-6-1 9-7-1
K Y11 f(KS’ X25) .

. - .......... g 19 9-1 9 0-6-1 0-7-1
L le f(X3t_1, X25) . 4 958

. - ............ : 19 9-1 8 10 2-6-1 2-7-1
M. Y13 f(121, 125) . 4 9S

. - ............. : 19 9-19 8 11 9-6-2 9-7—2
N Y21 f(X3, 125) . 4 5

. - .......... : 19 -1958 12 0-6-2 0-7-2
0 Y22 f(X3t_1, 125) . 49

. - ............ : 19 9-1958 13 2-6-2 2-7-2
P Y23 £(x21, x25) . 4
Q. Y1 =f(X27) ................. : 1949-1958 (Table given in text.)
R. Y1 -f(116).................; 1949-1958 (Table given in text.)

 

Models A and;§.--Low multiple correlation coefficients and illogical signs
in Models A and B suggest omission of important variables and wide disper-
sion of the data characteristic of the changing economic structure and the

exogenous forces affecting the industry. Both models were rejected.

Models CL_DL_and E.--Acreage of competing craps enters the equation with
significant coefficients of logical sign, but it is not known that this
relationship would hold if a time variable were to be included. The signs
for price and cost are consistently illogical suggesting that there may
be intercorrelation as these variables move together over time. This may
be associated with the large upsurge of acreage in WOrld Wars I and II.

It is difficult to be definite about these models without graphing the
relationships; however, the intercorrelation inference is drawn from

behavior of the coefficients in models discussed and illustrated below.

192

As indicated above for other areas, acreage of competing crops might
prove to be a useful variable, perhaps more so than price or value of
such crops. However, further study of the relationships is needed for

adequate evaluation.

Models F and G.--The time variable in all acreage equations is highly

 

significant. While this relationship is not particularly objectionable
for short term prediction purposes under relatively stable conditions,
alone it fails to be helpful in appraising probable reSponse under
other assumptions. Model F may be ruled out as an inappropriate time
period for the data which is non-linear for the period. Models F and
G were mainly used to test relationships, if any, between acreage and

rainfall. Since none were found, Model G was also rejected.

Model H,«~This model is the same as Model G with the rainfall variables
omitted. These relationships are presented graphically in Figures 1 and
2. The multiple correlation coefficients are relatively high. The un-
lagged price-cost ratio is significant but inspection of the graphs
suggests that this has little more merit than its lagged counterpart.
Observation of the data in the partial regression charts indicates that
favorable priceuoost ratios prevailed during the war years and less
favorable at other times. This is also true for the ratio of per acre
value of competing craps to cost of production items, probably account-
ing for its illogical sign. Presumably, the ratios favored peanut
production, or peanuts are more easily expanded, or quite possibly there

is ample room for expanding all crops when price—cost conditions stimulate

193

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ThousandAcres Texas 666
Pic Red 8. Threshed] ..
300~ :
i I
200— J
- '1
IOO:- _‘
oh 1 1' J l ,7 J , vv 1 d
: " “ll Hm I I‘ll
400;
C
~20mr
‘I-

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

IOO

IIII TIFI IIII IIIIjIII IIII IIII IIII III
I I l I I l I I I

 

 

 

 

 

I
I
I

I
I
I

 

  
 

Markefing
Quota
Period

LiAmnmd

acreage

\I
llllnll111lilLLLllllllJlllllLlIllllllllllllllllll

lllJljll1.1111]LllllllllllAlllllllLll

lllllllllllllUlll

T

 

 

Figure 1.

4
l9IO l9l5 I920

l930 l935 I940

l945 l950 I955

194

X1345 Thousand Acres Tex as 6 66 '

 

 

 

Picked 81Thres “2

 

900

8’00

700

'IIIII'IIIT'IVII

600

$00

400

200

IOO

O
'IIlIllIIlIIIIIIIIIIT—IITI'IIII'IIII

IIII

i3

 

 

4.3

111111111111141

lllllllllllllllll111111111111]lllllllllllllllllIllJJJll

 

 

-ZOO11111J1111111141111111141I1114l11
2 7 27 32

I2 I7 22
Year X2

Figure 1. Continued-

195

 

 
    
 

'Xizas Thou sand Acres TeXO s 656
O Picked 81Thre 32
550
q
500 .9
‘9

450
400
350

.300

mj'IlI'j‘I'IjIIIrFIIIIII

250

200

I50

 

I00

III'IIIIIIIIIIIUIITIII
alllillllllllll11111111111111111I‘LllllllllllllLlllllI111

 

 

arLljllLlllllllllllllllllllllLJflilllLlilllllJliilj
I 5 2. O 2.5 3. O 3 5 O 4. 5 5 .O 5.5
Logged RaIio of Price of Peanuts Io lnd4ex of Goal of Production lferns X3

L

 

Figure 1. Continued

196

 

 

Xi.23sTh0usand Acres Texas 566
Picked &Threshed 4'2

600E-
5 50

43
5500 .
450 V

I8
4400 §
3.2
I6

.350

300

250

200

I50

 

2'3

IOO

ITIT'IIIII—TIII—TTIIIIIIIIIIIIIrIIII'IIIITT—FITFIIWIIIrT

 

50

N
a

ULllJlllllllljlllllllllLlLlrllllllllllllllllllllllillllLLLllll

 

O L. 1 l L i 1 1 l 1 L L 1 1 4 A l
5 I0 I 2
Logged RaIio of Per Acre Value of Compe?ing Crops lo Index of God of Produclion Hem: X4

Figure 1. Continued

197

 

 

Xi.234ThousandAcres Texas 666
600 Picked aThreshJ ‘2
43
° I7
550 .
500
up

450

400

.350

300

250

200

I50

 

 

"LliLlnlllliLili11LLi111111L1111liliinnllLiiliulliLL1l

rTIIlTIIIIITTTTfTIIIIITTTIIIIIIj—rITTIYIIITTIIIIIIIIITI

 

I k 111141111111lillLlllll1111111441111i114111

I 5 2 .0 2.5 3 .O 3 5 4 04.5 5. O 5 .5
Unlagged Raiio of Price of Peanu+s Io Index of Cosl of Produclion llems X5

Figure 1. Continued

198

Oklahoma 766

 

Thou sand Ac re s
00 Picked 81Threshed

 

 

50

ITIIIIIIV

 

 

 

 

LlllLlllll

 

III

11 r ,, l I.,
n 1111mm! [III]

(p
o

A

mIlT—IrIITTTIT'IIVVIIIIWTIf"[ITII

.300

250

200

 

  

 

 

 

Markeling
Quola
Period

 

 

pAllllLLllllllllllJilLlllliJLlllLJJlLLllllut[1111

 

ISO
I.
I
IOO I]
50
Aclual
: \\ .I
0— [I ‘.\ II,
: ' V
.. i\.l
-50'- I,
r- I
..I
b!
-l 114i1lillllilliln11111111111111111111111LL1
I9|O I9I5 I920 I925 I930 I935 l940 I945 I950 I 55

Figure 2.

199

Oklahoma 766

 

Xmas Thousand Acres
Picked aThreshedf

4.7
4.6

 

250

200

IIIII'IIIIITIII

  

l50

11LL1111I111111111I

IOO

50

-50

rITIlIIIIIIIIIlIIIIIIIII
e

i111111111ii1111L11l1

 

 

-IOOlllllllll'lllilllllllllllllllllllllll1111111111;
I7 22 27 32 37 42 47
Year X2

Oklahoma 766

 

X1145 Thousand Acres
Pic ked 8ThresE

'50F to 4.5

. 4,2

4'7

.;

lOO

m1

50

 

'lIll'lII
llJllllllllllljlll4

'37

.201,||IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlllllgéllllllLlLlllijll"111L1

 

 

 

I.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5
Logged Rolio of Price of Peanuls Io Index of Cosl of Produciion Items X3

Figure 2. Continued

200

Thousand Acres Oklahoma 766

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

XL?” Picked 8Threshedl 4'7
I50_ 1.0 4,2 4,8 "*
100 :- 31? I? '-‘ .3 .2‘
r ' .
1- .
50 l’h :1
I. . as :
I- 59 4.‘ 2.724 1
ol— 3.7 38 ..
- 20 L I 1 l l l 1 I 1 l L l J I 1 l 1 I q
0 so so 90 1.20 1.56 1.80 2.10 2.40 2.70
Logged Ralio of Per Acre Value of Compeling Crops Io Index of Cosl of Produclion Ilems X4
ThousandAcres Oklahoma 766’
Picked &ThreshecJ 4' '0
15 ' —
1oo -:
C I
50 — -
1..
0:- .1

 

 

 

 

-so ,, W""‘ZI§T‘WW"
I5 2.0 2.5 o 4.0 4.5 o 55 6.0

Unlagged RaIio of Price of. Peanuts: Io Index of Cosl of ProducIIon lIems X5

Figure 2. Continued

201

it. In a comparable study for the Southwest (combined data)1, significant
price coefficients were obtained only when World War II years, 1943-1948,
were combined with the period 1920-1940; but not when the latter period
was used alone. The configuration of these data appear to agree with the
study by Badger, although the variables differ. It would appear that
reSponse to war-time prices is great, but at other times prior to 1949,

a lesser reSponse is obscured by other factors not adequately accounted

for.

Model I.--Inspection of the charts for Model H suggests that if war
years are removed, the lines of relationship for acreage-price, and
acreage-competing crop values would have slopes little different from
zero for the 1920's and 1930's. This proves to be the case in Model I
for the inter-war period. Time is the only significant coefficient.
The residuals for this model are presented graphically in Figure 3 for
Texas and Oklahoma. Possibly the price-cost ratios for peanuts and per
acre value-cost ratios for competing crops are intercorrelated and off-
setting. The notion persists, however, that something more than
intercorrelation is involved; weather is an influence on harvested acre-
age as will be shown below. There may well be other influences not

considered in these models.

Models J-P.--The underharvested acreage models K, L, M, N, O, and P

 

failed to provide any conSistent or logical explanation for the rather

 

1

Daniel D. Badge and James S. Plaxico, Selected Supply and
Demand Relationships in th Peanut Industry, Processed Series P-338,
(Stillwater: Oklahoma Stath University, 1959), pp. 12-16.

202

Texas 666 IW

T hou sa nd Ac re s
Picked 81Threshed
so I
I i

 

 

I
U"
C

I
1

 

d

0%
I9IO I9I5 I 20 I925 I930 I935 I940 I945 I950 I955

 

 

Oklahoma 766 IW

ThousandAcres
Pic ked 81Thres

 

 

      

 

     

O
I9IO l9I5 I920 I925 I930 I935 I940 I945 I950 l955

Figure 3.

large differentials between allotted and harvested acreage. Accordingly,
all.wsrs rejected in favor of Model J with underharvest handled subjectively
for purposes of projecting production. Models Q and R below indicate

that rainfall should be included in underharvest models if economic factors
are not to be obscured. Again, reference is made to the two-price system
and excess acreage program for 1951 and 1952 whereby growers could market
excess production for oil and meal uses, (Appendix A). The underharvest
data for Oklahoma suggest participation in this program since 1951 and

1952 are the only years when overharvest occurred. There was no overhar-
vest in Texas, but the effect of the oil program may have been obscured

by weather effect. Another factor which renders economic analysis diffi-
cult in terms of accurate observed data is the acreage reserve and
conservation reserve of "soil bank" legislation. Even assuming an accurate
quantitative appraisal of such land were readily available, a qualitative
appraisal of such land would be difficult. It is presumed that it rep-
resents land considerably less productive than average. Accordingly, the
net effect on production is difficult to appraise. As indicated in the
discussion of the Southeast area, 37,840 acres of Southwest peanut scra-
aga were withdrawn under soil bank provisions in 1956. The 1959 figure

for the United States suggests that by 1959, perhaps twice-this amount-
might have been included in the Southwest. The effect on production is

probably less than average, and unknown.

Model Q.--After some investigation, it was found that an average of the
rainfall for the three critical months combined (June, July, and August)

.in Texas was significantly associated with underharvested acreage. The

204

analysis for this single-variable regression is given in the accompany-
ing Table 1. This relationship combined with a 30-day weather forecast
for Texas might be helpful in appraising the prospective peanut cr0p
well in advance of harvest. The suggestion has not been tested. It
would be desirable to appraise more thoroughly some of the non-weather
factors, such as those discussed above, before accepting the rainfall

coefficient. The observed variables might need some adjustment.

Model R.-~An association comparable to Model Q was found between under-
harvested acreage and August rainfall in Oklahoma. An untested suggestion
is offered that this might have similar use in appraising the prospec-
tive crop in non-irrigated areas of the state if used in connection with

a 30-day weather forecast. The analysis for this relationship is given

in accompanying Table 2. The shortcomings of Model Q are equally

applicable to Model R.

in Summary of this Section.-—None of the above models is useful for
projection purposes other than Model J when adjusted subjectively;
accordingly, this model will be used with an adjustment for under-
harvest in Texas of approximately 66,000 acres, and similarly, 18,000
acres in Oklahoma. These are rather large differentials but are rough
means of the past few years since minimum allotments have become
effective. Year to year variation appears highly associated with
rainfall, but projection involves assumption of mean rainfall con-

ditions.

205

Table 1.--Underharvested acreage (Y1) expressed as a function of 3-
month average of rainfall in June, July, and August (X15, X16, and:
X17). Texas, 1949-1958. '

 

 

 

. . . Estimated
:Underharvested : 3—month : by .
Year : acreage I average I equation : Residual
' . ; rainfall : A‘ ' A
Y1 X : Y1 Y-Y
Thousand Inches Thousand - Thousand
acres acres acres
1949 ..... : -112.8 2.76 - 40.1 -72.7
1950.....: - 9.9 3.13 - 21.0 11.1
1951 ..... : - 63.2 2.22 - 68.1 4.8
1952.....: -134.0 1.02 -l30.1 - 3.9
1953 ..... : - 85.6 2.16 - 71.1 -14.5
1954.....: 7 75.8 1.18 -121.8 46.0
1955 ..... : ' 5.4 2.70 - 43.2 48.6
1956 ..... : 7181.9 1.03 -129.6 -52.3
1957.....: s 69.7 1.66 - 97.0 27.3
1958 ..... : L 49.7 2.47 - 55.1 5.4

 

The following values apply:

9 - -182.9 + 51.7364x
SS regression : 14,236.347

88 error ..... : 13,649.713

MS error ..... : 1,706.214

F—Test value. : 8.34
32 .......... : 0.15
s .......... : 17.91

206

Table 2.--Underharvested acreage (Y ) expressed as a function of August
rainfall (816). Okldhoma, l949-1958.

 

 

 

============================:: teeeeLV; A—Ir -
: z ’: :
:Underharvested : August : Estimated
Year : acreage : rainfall : by : Residual
: Y1 : x16 . equfition Y-§\
: Ihousang 7 Inches Thousand Thousand
.2££££ SSESE £££2§
1949.....: -18.3 1.62 {40.6 22.3
1950.....; 28.4 5.53 14.4 14.0
1951.....; -64.2 1.32 -44.8 -l9.4
l952.....; -31.7 1.51 -42.1 10.4
1953.....; -25.4 2.85 -23.3 - 2.1
1954.....; -38.0 1.62 -40.6 2.6
1955.....; -15.2 3.34 -16.4 1.2
1956.....: ~68.3 0.81 -52.0 —16.3
1957.....; ~29.3 1.80 ~38.1 8.8
1958eeeee: “14.2 5.03 7.4 ”21.6

 

The following values apply:
a
..Y. = -63.4092 + 14.0736X
SS regression ; 4,686.0122
SS error. ..... : 1,998.5438
MS error . . . . . .: 249.8180
F-Eest value,,: 18.76
R ...........: 0.70

8b e eeeee eeee: 3e25

207

Yield Estimates
Southwest Area

Variables Used and Models Oonsidered:

 

 

 

 

XI . . Time X15... June rainfall, Texas
2 X16... July rainfall, Texas
X1 ... Time squared x17... August rainfall, Texas
12 ... Yield of peanuts (dependent) 115... July rainfall, Oklahoma
XS ... Log price of peanuts (t-l) X16... August rainfall, Oklahoma
... Composite cost squared X17... September rainfall, Oklahoma
110... Peanut acreage 219... Profitability ratio
3 . Appendix B
Models Considered : Table 3 Eguation Numbers
Time Period 1909-1958 I Number = Texas 3 Oklahoma
A. x -f x x O O O O O 0 O O O O O; ...... f
2 ( 1. 5, 110) .. 14 690 790
spx-rx x x 1 o
2 ( 1. 5. 10. x16) : 5 60 700
c. zafx x x ......... ..I 16 622 722
2 ( 1’ 5’ 9’ x10) °
D. x -f x x x x '
2 ( 1’ 5, 9’ 10, :15, ..
X16, X17) .......... . . . . ....... 3 17 621 721
2 3
E. XZ'f(xl, X1, x5! X9, xlo, 3
115,x16,x17).,..............: 17 621t2 "~-
2 :
F. XZaf (X1, XI, x5, X10, 2
X15, 216, 117)................: 18 602 702
G. X2'f(xl, X5, x10, X19) . . .......... .: 19 632 732
H. X2'f(xl, X5, 110, X15, 3
. x16, x17, x19) ................ f 20 631 731

, Model A.--This model establishes that the long run linear yield trend
in Texas has been slightly negative, and that it has been only slightly
positive in Oklahoma. Inspection of the charts presented below suggests

that these results are in accord with essential facts, but do not take

208

into account effectively the upturn in recent years. Low multiple
correlation coefficients suggest that important variables have been

omitted. Accordingly, the models were rejected.

Model B.-9The addition of the rainfall variable in the second critical ‘
month had little effect in Texas, but was highly effective in Oklahoma.
This clearly illustrates the need for an adequate weather index before
firm conclusions can be drawn from the behavior of the coefficients of

economic variables when analyzing production responsez. These relation-

ships are presented graphically in Figure 4, for Oklahoma.

Model C.--Composite cost entered the equation significantly in Texas
but not in Oklahoma. The reason for this difference is not known. The
charts accompanying this section include a line of relationship for
yield-composite cost in Texas. (Figures 5 and 6.) The cost index in-
creased substantially in war years, as did price, and of course, both

' have increased in recent years. Accordingly, intercorrelation may
affect the relationships; prices of competing products are included in

the index which lends support to this explanation.

.Model D.--This is the same set of variables as Model C with rainfall
added for the three critical months. The behavior of the composite
cost coefficient is the same as in Model C. August rainfall in Texas
enters in the equation effectively. Evidently, August weather is
highly influential in both states. The Texas relationships for this

model are presented graphically in Figure 5.

 

James L. Stallings, "weather Indexes-Notes," Journal of Farm
Economics, XLII, No. 1 (February, 1960), pp. 180-186.

 

209

OHohomo 7OO

 

 

Pounds
2°C per AcreJ 4

I00-

 

 

 

 

.100- 1 l I i

-200- '—
-300-
-4OQT
I100"-
I000— /
900+ A 1
800 ./'\ ,Acmol
700
600
500 -
400
.300L
209?: 1 1

  

. Eshmoied

I, \/ ' ./ '/ \ /:
i I VYVJxT / x
\ l V, I, \ "I
' I
/ V '/
l J

l l l

 

 

 

l l
|9|O . I9|5 I920 l925 l930 I935 I940 l945 I950 l955

 

Oklahoma 700

 

 

 

 

Pounds
X1345 per Acre r 58
900‘ 59 as "
800 33 49 57 _‘
7oo "6 25236 33 ' 3;. 38 .6 4.2 438' ”.39... a
. . //-——’:'
6C) '9 a: 34 . w ._
I9 H 1.2 . 23. 27. 28 29 ' 4| 4.44.5“
5m 17 I6 20 2'2 . . . i6 .37 39 4.3 'w .1
400 .g6 g w3‘ 3‘ 52 _
S4
30°llllillllLllillliLlililljlilLiillLLliLJLliuiliLi
2 7 l2 I7 22 27 32 37 42 47
Year X2

Figure 4.

Pounds
per Acre

210

Oklahoma 700

 

 

 

 

5.3 55

 

 

Pounds

Price (cenls)

X3

 

 

 

 

Oklahoma 700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

fi
400 44' , 51' 1 48 47.4
52 45 . '45
.300 54 43 .
200 . so 7
j 1 1 1 l 1 1 l 1 l l 1 1 4 1 l 1 1 J l 1 1 1 J r
so lOO I50 200 250 H5
Thousand Acres Picked and Threshed X4
Pounds Oklahoma 700
x'-234 per Acre
900 ‘
800 .1
700 J
600 '-
500 n
400 . —
300 .
ZOOJ 1 L 1 l l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l l 1"
0 I 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0
Augusi Rainfall X5

Figure 4. Continued

Pounds
per Acre
200

'°§'l 1|

f

211

Tegs 62I

 

 

 

 

400+
-200
90&—
800- :-
7oo- / \
6001— “-’
soo- '
400

300
|9l0

VT

 

l9l5

X1.34567s Pounds

700 1.0 I" ['2 l3 I6

600 ; 1'7

500 _. 1'4
400 1-
300

 

l920

l925

l930

J1 11 ll jl l
‘ 1111 1l 1111117111

I935 I940 l945

Texas 62|

 

I950

lnlJ

1

 

WALL

1955

 

perAcre [

19 2'0

2.223

24-

3.3
35

4-0 47

338 as as
39 4' .45
44°

4950
4.3

53

51

55

111111111111llliliLlllliiLLllLL11L111111_14111111[Li-gh

5s...

 

 

2 7

Pounds

X1.24567s
per Acre

700
600...
soo—
400—
300—
200— 1

l2

T

22 27 32

Years X2
Texan 62|

37

42

47

50-1 - '
4.8 «9 53 5.7 5.3

55

 

 

 

O l

Paunds

. 7
X12356 s perAcre

800
700T-
6001-
500'-
400 -
300

114111

 

J

Prucc (cents)

Texas 62l

11411

1 l

4 1

 

 

 

 

L l 1
I50 2 a
Composde Cost Index

550

212

 

 

           
 
 
    
 
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

X1234678 P°Und5 Texas 62'
800 per Acre J—
” —-1
700’ b10||'.:.3| l6 )9 53 58 ~
600'- 2’3; .22 27 .28 " 1.7 . ' 4O 5‘ . .49
500— 25;,“ 2| 33.? s 3 52 . 5.7 . . so —1
20 1’9J 3'0 2951.16 38 3.9 f‘ {8 47 fl
4001— 34 5 ‘6 .
3O 1 . 4 4'3 ‘42 ""
0‘ A 1 1 l l 44 .5
o 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 00 1000
Acreage Picked and Threshed X5
Pounds J Texas 62l
_ per Ac re
700 H 3.3 3.3 '.0 “23:50 49 35 _1
600 O I]? ".7 231: 4:15:36 6 77:25:13 272'8 . ‘ 49 “
25 1:54 2:: 36'1‘3 7 3'9 1 2°. .-
400 54 3‘5 “" 50 3' éo 4’5 5| {9
300 .7
1 l 1
O | $ 1 ‘13 1 l 1 l 1 ‘6 g l 1 l d"
June Ramfall (inches) X6 8
X12345“ Pounds Texas 62|
800 per Acre J
7001. 35’ —
600 L2 '0' "3 5854 49 .635 17.11 5.0 _4
5001: 43775.122 2'2 5525? 4° 2] t 2.6 '4
15 ° ' °
24 ,5- Hfiis 514 44 gs 57' 21-‘3 “.2:l 421.35 3.6‘ _
400 r' 1 301 $1 1 1‘ £0 F321.”
0 1 2 3 . L i l 5 1 6
July Rainfallhnches) X7
Pounds Texas 62|
2534567 per Acre I
700 a
500 4" ac —l
400 —l
300)
o 1 1 1 1 1 L 1 ‘l
l 2 3 4 5 6 7 i8

 

August Rarnfall (m1 1 es '1 X9

Figure 5. Continued

213

Model E.--A previous study3 indicated that yield trends are curvilinear
in the Southwest. Inspection of the data in the accompanying charts
suggest a long-run decline ending with World War II, and then an upturn
for the past decade. To test this, quadratic time was added to Model

0 for Texas. The results are illustrated in Figure 6. Time and quad-
ratic time become highly significant but the coefficients of price and
cost are decreased. IThe coefficients for rainfall are also increased.
Time (technology) and price are doubtless correlated; the time co-
efficients are probably overestimated with correSponding underestimates
for price and cost. Both June and July weather enter the equation
quite effectively. vIt was this effect which led to the investigation
of the 3-month average rainfall association with underharvested acre-

age discussed in the acreage section.

Model F.--Quadratic time is introduced in both states without composite
cost. Otherwise the model is the same as Model E. The results are

about the same in Texas as Model E. Not much change occurs in the

model for Oklahoma; the effect due to time is mainly a result of a decrease
in other coefficients, presumed to be the effect of intercorrelation as

-indicated above for Model E.

'Models G and Hs--As for other areas of production, these models are
rejected because of the peculiar and ineffective behavior of the pro-

fitability ratio variable.

 

3D. Upton Livermore, “Trends in Peanut Yields," Virginia Farm
Economics, No. 154 (May, 1958), pp. 9-18.

214

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    
    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

p Te xas 62 l )2
ounds
per Acre j
'00 1 11 l l 1 l ‘
i l. j 1 JJ 1 a J [J l l
O r T l ll 1 T1v [11T11rtfl 1' I [F
-I00r ..
-2007 _
soo— ,. j’
700.— I/‘ \\, \\ ,\/Eslimoled ' d
I '\ I '\ AClUOl
600)- \_ / ‘-\ ..
500 / "- // \'-h\ ' \' . .\ _"/ \\. II“ ' ./. I. / v' ...
‘ _.’ .— / \ I '\ '
400 . I \-‘,’l \ _
30°21 1 1 ‘1 1 _L 1 _1 1 1 A)
1910 I9I5 I920 I925 I930 I935 I940 I945 I950 I955
' 2
x1...... My: 1.... 63' '
' r cre
80“ pew ._
7 (0.3. 39'” 5'3 :5 5".
600 " ea 3.3 _
0° . 25.29 :27 125 4° 44‘? -‘° 52 5, 577
5 '8 .2021 24 29° . . - , ° , , 54 '
19 3° 3' 32 3736 ‘24:! “ -
400 . .0” 3‘9 o 5' -l
34 41
3° 1 1 1 1 1 l #14 1 l 1 1 L 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l L 1 1 1 l 1)
2 7 I2 I7 22 27 32 42 47
Year X2, X3
Texas 621 12
Pounds -
X1.2356789 per Acre 5949
700 38 . 5:3 ‘
600 — 3'3 41540 2.2 " 3 :‘9—17 2'7 as 4'7 7° 56 5‘52.—
. , ~57
500* W 21"“ ‘91. 1‘5 éo ‘2 1- “ 5° ‘
4oo 9"“ ‘2 ‘3 "I '46
1 1 1 1 1 13 1 . 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a 1 1 1 11
O I 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 II l2
Price (cenls) X4
P Texas 62I #2
X 1. 23 46 789 pg? “Ecsre
80 33 .-
700 ' 4o '9 3-5 '3 2:8 22 2-7 26 5-0 ‘9 d
600 - 42.33 {39:25:} °,.. 4&6 ' as :13 “
500 . 33,137 “'0 " 5"“ 43° 59 .24 4'7 . 5531 .
19--51 a) $4
300 n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ‘1

 

 

l l I
fir 50 75 ICC 125 ISO I75 200 225 250 275 300 325
Composile Cosl Index X5

215

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

Pounds Texas 62| 1?
”£35789 per Acre I ‘
600 13? 272: 3.5 §3 5959
500 4§.46 4.7 . fi 1
400 4'4 4.5 «'34? _
30° 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (h
o 1 600 700 800 900
Thousand Acres Picked and Threshed X6
2
”70.34“ Pouxdssa . Texas 62l 1
”Per Cfe 5.0 « 212.8 35 4o 1
17. 25 47 23" “41613356 4 o
- «2 41 '
Wm 431.33 3733,7139 2° ‘5 5' ..g, 2' ‘
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
June Rainfall (inches) X7
2
Xl2345679 Pounds Texai 62H
'700 per Ac re 4926 33 5.0 26 .1
5? 35 - '
50° 47 .2 46 £51.22?- 581541)" 7‘37 # 5
500 ‘52 37' '15 233' 43'1'1 553' 5° 3'6 1
s .—
300 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1
O I 3 4 6
July Rainfall (inches) Xe
T 62! l2
X12345”: Poufis ”as
re
700 ‘
50 .—
so 1
4 29 52 5263;? 35 '3 __
u _,
3 1 A 1 1 1 a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L1?
0 I 2 3 7 8

 

 

4 5 6
Augusl Rainfall (inches) X9

Figure 6. Continued

lngummary of this Section wwln contrast to other areas where the long-
run yield trend was differen: than in this area, it seems advisable to
use yield models which include quadratic time Some of the same configura-
tion of the data which seemed to preclude the use of quadratic time in
other areas is also present in the Southwest, but the abrupt changes are
not as pronounced preceding the mandatory allotment period; nor is the
quadratic effect as great1 Additiorally, the presence of significant
coefficients other than time help to modify the curvilinear effect.
Additionally, the recent technology in the area, primarily irrigation,
lends credence to rather rapid increases in yields in the near future
such as would be projected by quadratic time.

Accordingly, for projections to 1965, Model E for Texas and
Hbdel F for Oklahoma are used1 For estimates under differing assumptions,
it would probably be better to use models less dependent upon time, al-
though the reliability of individual coefficients in this type of analysis
is always Open to question1

It will be noted that the general hypothesis regarding rainfall
in the humid areas does not apply entirely in its application in the
Southwest aubhumid area1 All relationships for yield and rainfall should
probably consist of positive expectations rather than an expected negative
relationship in the third critical month as was hypothesized for the

humdd states.

217

Production Estimates
Southwest Area

variables Used and Models Considered:

 

 

 

x1 ... Time X162... August rainfall, Oklahoma
2 X15 ... August rainfall squared,
*11 ... Time squared Oklahoma
X3 ... Peanut price (t-l) X17 ... September rainfall, Oklahoma
X11 ... Peanut production X172... September rainfall squared,
(dependent) Oklahoma
X12 ... Value of peanuts * X15 ... June rainfall, Texas
(t-l) X152... June rainfall squared, Texas
,113 ... Value of competing X16 ... July.rainfall, Texas
crops (t-l) . v 3162... July rainfall squared, Texas
X14 ... Acreage of competing 117 ....August rainfall, Texas
crops (t-l) X172... August rainfall squared,
_1152... July rainfall, Oklahoma Texas -
‘115 ... July rainfall squared, X24 ... Per acre value competing
Oklahoma crops (t-l)
: Appendix B
. Time I Table : Equation Numbers
Models Considered ; Period ; Number : Texas : Oklahoma

 

A- xll'f(x12: x13, 114: =
X15, x16, X17) ..... 3 1909-1958

3- x11-£(x12, x13, x14»
115, 116, X17) ..... : 1909-1948
2 .
C. 111-f(xl, X1, X3, XZA,
x15, x161 x17,

2 2 2 :
X15, X16, X17)...1.: 1909-1958

2
D. 111-f(X1, X1, X3, x24’
x15, 116’ x17,

X2 2 Xi7)....:: 1909-1948

15’ X16’

21 611 711
22 619 719
23 603 703
24 604 704

 

218

.Models A and B.--The concepts under which these models were formulated
are discussed in the comparable section of Chapter V1 for the Virginia-
Carolina area. They are exploratory and inconclusive. Exclusion of the
mandatory allotment period in Model B provides a better fit, as might be
expected, considering the change in structure which occurred in 1949.

The significant relationships for value of peanuts and competing crOp
acreage or value are not unexpected considering probable intercorrelation,
but it was thought there might be more rainfall effect than was ob-

tained. The models are not regarded as useful.

Models C and D.--These models break down rather completely because of
the changing structure of the industry, inclusion of war years, and in-
clusion of formative years prior to World War I. The distortions thus
introduced are again more than can be dealt with in one equation for one
time period. Further investigation for selected time periods might be
rewarding in the area; but in their present form, the models are not
useful.

For purposes of illustration, Model C has been presented
graphically in Figures 7 and 8. Strangely enough, Model C projects
future production which is not far from that derived by other means,
but this does not lend much credence to the usefulness of the model.
~It would be interesting to fit this model to the mandatory allotment
peribd, but there are about as many variables as there are degrees of

freedom.

Projections to l965.--In the section on acreage estimates, t was concluded

that acreage allotments adjusted for underharvest would be used in projecting

219

"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1910

 

w
.

d1 q
—d~——q-qq—q_q—.q-q—qquu—1qu—qduu—uqeqqdqouqq-.quuquqq—uqq-—.q—Tfi4l_«a 1a
ril /
,1,
III
I
I
3
O
6 IA”
m. i
X Ill!
9. .
T
.l
rl '1,
e l
r
C
.A 11111111
r
m 1
5 [ll
.0 l.
n l
U
o I
P l
n—U W..-O.~.. b.._—._.-_s_._-...—._.—_._—____.._-__.__-.._.. _ lllll
O O o o o 0 up bh-n hub
m. m s s o s x m. m w m w c
4. .4 .2 a. .I .1

l925 l930 | 35 l940 l945 l950 I955

l920

EN5

Figure 7.

220

thfflgfiikamgsd
c e lhmn1e
X1.4ss7s91o I

Texas 503

300

25

2C”)

I50

21.

' IIIVIIIITFII

lOO

11%

'5

50

YIUU'I

   
  
  
  

55

0‘

N
UN
5

W.
U
U".
01

'3‘

U!
a.
11111111111111

A

L1

 

-50

TIIIIIWUT

 

"col—11111111115011.1111..1...1111111111111111111111111).

1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940

Years X2 X3

l945 I950

Figure 7. Continued

l955

 

221

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Million Pounds Texas 603
Picked d. Threshed .
X12 91011 4.8 so ‘
500 46 47 T.
4.2 - ' 1
950 I] -1
F d
i' .1
” -1
£00: 5.7 551—7;
: 5.3 534 :
ISOE- 5. gig:
*' .1
b .
IOO- I:
i" .1
5°_ . :11 23. 1
1. 35 d
:13. 3.9 1
0L 3'7 3'1 _
-50’1 i?- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 1 1‘
2 3 14 5 6 7 8 9 l0 ll

Price (cenis)

Figure 7. Continued

X1.2

300

250

200

ISO

IOO

5O

-501

222

 

 

 

    

 

 

Figure 7. Continued

 

Million Pounds Texas 503

_ Picked 8. Threshed
14§7391911 ..
- 4'2 J
: d
- 1. 1
T '2
l- 1.7 .1
t . -1
46 -1
’ 40 '9 1
I ° ‘3 1

44
t ° 1
L 4.5 18 'l
: ° .... a
1- 5' . 11
5'33 55 322 39 5°:
'- , 4' 27 :
'- 3'9 IS 30 -1
I. 29 ‘
.3? 31 57 j
r- -(
i I
: 5.2 .
r 29 . 5:» -”_‘
t SI 56 . .1
. s; 5‘ I
56‘ d
9 l3 IS 23 28 33 38 43 48 53 58
Per Acre Value of Compeling Crops (dollars) X5

  

 

223

Texas 603

 

Million P unds
2 Picked 81 fhreshed

o42

 

 

300

250

200

ISO

 

IOO

50

Figure 7. Continued

 

11111
4 5 6

June Rainfall (inches)

1
7

Xs X7

1

 

JilllllllllelllllllLllLllllllLL

 

224

Million Pounds .
Picked 8. Threshed J .42

X123 7111

300

    
 
   

 

.43

I]

250

200

l50

IOO

50

Figure 7. Continued

Texas 603

l 1 l 1 Jr
7

5
July Rainfall (inches) X8 X9

1 l
8

1.
10)-

1.

 

LlilJLl .1

225

 

 

 

 

 

 

.Million Pounds Texas 603

X12345 71§9ked 8.Threshed J £2 fl
I :
b d
300- 3° .1
b 17 5&0 t7 ‘*
250- ° 4.4 1
:93 4.8 I
200- J
_ I
I507— _:
IOO ;
2.9 3
so _‘
1

, 1 I 1 l 1 I 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1

O I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Augusi Rainfall (inches) X10 X11

Figure 7. Continued

Million Pounds

 

226

Oklahoma 703

 

 

 

Picked &Threshed
set .1
1| [1 I 1 ,1 1 . ' A
c "I” ml 1m .. ”‘I'l H‘
-50- _
150i’- 4‘
.\ \ I
lOO— /’ ‘ VI \1/ _
A iual 1’ ' ‘-’
C N /'\ I I
I" ’ \j \I
50 '- i‘ O“. Eslima‘led _
,‘ . 1'\. l
I.’ \\ I \ ,’ \\_/ .\ I \\
. ’ /".\_, I.\.I ‘ \x' I’
O- ’/'\._./ I \I’ V "i
' l l l l l l JLI l l 1 L1 I l l l l l l 1 l I l 1 l
l9|0 l9|5 I920 l925 l930 l935 l940 l945 l950 l955

Figure 8.

 

 

production. Similarly, in the yield section, Models E for Texas and F
for Oklahoma were selected. Pursuant to these decisions, the yields
projected by Mbdel B for Texas have been applied to a prospective har-
vested acreage of 290,000 for the period 1959-1965. This assumes an
underharvest of about 66,000 acres. In similar fashion, the yields
projected by Medel F in Oklahoma have been applied to an acreage of
120,000. This assumes an underharvest_of about 18,000 acres.

The accompanying Tables 3 and 4 set forth the actual,
estimated, and projected production beginning in 1949 when mandatory
acreage allotments were initiated. Also included in the tables for
comparative purposes.only are the estimated and projected production
data for the production equation, Mbdel C discussed above.

The assumptions under which projections have been made are,
for Texas and Oklahoma, respectively:

1) Price: 9.5 cents; 9.5 cents

2) Acreage: 290,000; 120,000

3) Composite Cost: 1955-1958 average: (226)2, Texas only

4) Per acre value of competing crOps: $55.37; $35.29

5) 49-year mean rainfall in inches:

Texas Oklahoma
June 2.90 July 2.74
July 2.21 August 2.78
August 2.22 September 3.32

The comparative production data are presented graphically in
Figures 9 and 10. The solid line represents actual production from 1949

to date, 1959. The broken line represents production as derived from the

228

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

co nv R. nu
.,n mu m m Kw w
17. a 4 a .11
i 9. l
m
r 3 a 1
l .. 0 7 . 0 16M
l'. 2 7 A. a ’1“ m n
1. ad.» m m o
f 1| 2 I. 0 all 1 e
O ..., 6 Mm. .a 3d
1 6 .7 s oi .....H , 1% e
s ..z a Md 10 , I:
m ”I x .A n ' c
Y a e o x. 4 e
e ..l T .. ’ .WJ
rfl/llm I Ill/Wm , “M r
I .... V... , 191p
. a, ,w . . m.
w z I. x" . .3 a n
. / O ’0 a ’0
. u 5di
.l 111 ......... \\. d 4.. s. .19 21m
1111111 \ \1 I
1 .s 11111111111 A . .\ 1 ..mu
...................... / x 7mm
........... 51
T ..... L sd
.... mEe
.. . .m..m
5 uc
51. e
T 1 co.
mwAXb
. m
m
.3 m m
.1 1% m1
.l a n
n “H.m
.... ..om
am 1%.md
mm low
T ._ sP
A o
.m 1 «a
m 1w1
MP p P — p — — L _.— L
O O O O 0..
o 5 o 5 w
3 2 2 I

Figure 9.

229

 

 

Million Pounds
Picked &Thresh

Y

I

Summalion

//x
,1
fit-1
I’M

0“.$
,.-'.,_/

... .mmm
am Mam
.u m u o
.m. chHa
m

’0

I

h

Summaiion

/

Texas- 62Hz

Oklahoma - 702

/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

300%
250i—
200~

 

l965

l953 |955 l957 l959 l96| l963
Soulhwesl Area: Aclual, Esiimaled. and Projecied Peanui
Produciion from Specified Equalions

l95|

l949

 

150

Figure 10.

230

product of acreage less underharvest and yields estimated from the
Specified yield equations. In similar manner, the dotted line gives
the estimate derived from the specified estimating production equation
from Model C .

To be discussed in the summary chapter on national production
are certain subjective adjustments. These are represented by the
"adjusted" projection line in the summary chart, and pertains to adjusted

data for Oklahoma only.

.mmmH you hudnaawaoua mud mamoauaouua cw muuamfim

Hmm

.mcaa1mnaa .ao«uo=voua wnauoofioua you pause.
.wmma fines pupae nuaowuqmmuou nowunouwou may ea ouusaua«_uueav
.vu.«>o¢u
.nunouuummoou Mom .nN sandy .n Navaoam< some
onuaoquumwuoo you .NH manna .n Napauam< some

 

 

O. O.

one.-a

 

 

 

 

 

 

~m~.aau . mom " ooo.om~ ....noma

smo.o- “ oem.oH~ " n can “ ooo.co~ "...eoma

ooo.¢- “ om~.ca~ " " man “ ooo.oau pa...noaa

enH.~H~ ” oe~.qo~ " u was " coasoam ....Noma

can.ac~ n. on~.mmH " u “no " ooo.om~ u...HsaH

noa.oo~ " oao.eaa “ a new " mooo.om~ . "...ooaa

Hon Ammn.a-v ~m~.so~ . «a nomu.mav ooo.ama “Aoom.~ouv..«ms flock V . mw¢.ao- ne¢.smn Aooo.mm~v "..emnma

NNH oao.me1 oom.m- “ as maw.ma mm~.oam “uoHH.¢NN . nae coma . Hso.a¢1 Hoo.omn oooo.aon ”...mmma

mNH oo~.an- oom.¢ma " eon .mma.m1 mmm.mma " ooh.oma . ham «mm " aso.moi aeo.omn ooo.~m~ "...Nmaa

«Hm ooo.~m1 ooa.mma " oHH ooa.a1 coo.om “ oom.am " «mm com " mom.amau mom.omm coo.nna ....ommH

nan con.oe1 oom.a- . ma HmH.nH moo.ouu " oo~.amu “ Hom., mac " mmm.n Hao.mmm ooo.amm u...mmaa

med ooh.am- oom.mmH . can mam.u~- mamuema " oom.ooa.u use can “.nem.m~1 mem.enn coo.Hm~. "...emaa

oma ooe.mw1 oom.mom ” em «Hc.mm mmm.cna “.ooe.aaa ” sun mac “ ooo.mm1 ooo.-m ooo.~m~. ....mmma

can oom.o¢- oo~.a- " sea moo.m1 mom.ea . ooa.mm . man mane. . omo.¢nai omo.a~m ooo.nn~ “...ummfl

men coo.om- oo~.maa . mna omm.ae1 0mm.amH u oom.maa ” use ommwu “ emu.mou em~.Hoe ooo.mmm ....Hmma

so ooH.sHH cox.oau " Hm oma.mo omo.no~ " oom.omm ” new mac “ mam.a1 mam.ome ooo.oae ....omma

am oom.~m coo.oa~ . an som.m~ oam.~n~ " oom.m~m ” «as oao “ mwa.~«a1 mm~.m~o ooo.nam "...aeaa
amazon evcnom " monsom ovaaom " cannon "mpanom ovaaom a. "
paemaoza vaumaosyu vaumnO£H vaunsonau vcmmaonan » n
ma. mum " m. u m}: a...“ u wanna . inn " w u w u u .4 n 4 .
unmo" Hmacwmomuvuumaaumm” and“. Honpwmmmncoumafiumm“ Hmsuu< " mamas " Hmauu<u umo> “vmuuoHH< u Hmauu< "
1uom" " u 1uom" ” u u 1Humo u a 1nd: « u u

snow 1 .xma . suaamo 1 .xma u " manna " u have: u u a snow
aoammouwmfl coauuavoum " aoammmuwmn vaoaw " u neme u u u n "
iii noduunvoum ii, " mama» " .mwwouu4 “

 

 

.umaws< one .maah .onah
a“ Hammnfimu HauOu some numh1m¢ use «macho mafiumaaoo voamaoomn mo o=Ho> opus Mom owuuo>e mmmH1¢mmH mumoo ouwmoaaoo
omenm>m mmma1mmma .ooo.om~ owuouow “munmo m.a using no meoauaasmmm nova: unoauaaao noauoavoua one pawn» omamwuoau
magma .moafiimmmfl .vouoonoua one “mnaa1aeafl .pouesaumo one Hanuum "nexoa ea nuanced mo :o«uu:pouh1iwmu manna

.mmmH now muenfiaaamum one masonueouua :« mounwah

Ll 1

Nmu

.noaa1amma .nouuospoua uawuuUHoum Mom poops
.wmmH nu“? nouns uuaoquwmuuoo doaumouwou unu nu vovnauaw dunno
.eouaeoMo
.nuaoauauuooo sou .nu manna .n maunuane sump.
.uuaoauauuooo you .ma manna .n assumes< ammo

 

 

i

 

 

 

 

u u u a u
men.nma ” omm.oaa “ ”News ». ooo.o- "...moaa
msm.oma " owe.moH.u . «ca u ooo.oua ....eoaa
moo.-~ " oo~.ooa " a mam . ooo.omfi ”...moaH
moo.eua ” oeo.soa “ a New, " oco.o~a ”...Noma

. oea.aua ” omm.HoH “ a man " ooo.o~H ....Hsma
omw.maa “ o-.mm " ” Ham “ oooo.oNH ....osma
Aamv Amea.haa Nma.maa . Anne AoN¢.mmv omo.aa "Ao0a.mmavu saw Aooa.avn aoN.~H1 Aao~.mmav Aooo.amav ...emmsa
as man.“ mmo.oma “ as som.om omh.~oH “ooom.mmH ” mNm umao.a som-.¢H1 m-.me oooo.ema "...mmsa
mma mom.mm1 mow.oma " mm “He.a mmu.mm “ oom.am . awn com ” eo~.mm1 so~.mnH oooumoa an..~mma
man Hmn.mm1 Hmo.om " Hod com- ooa.om . oo~.om " was mma " aem.mo1 m¢m.mma ooo.o~ "...oan
mm «mo.a semanma." mm Nea.m~ mme.moH “ ooo.m~a “ awn ooa ” ham.ma1 ~H~.oea ooo.¢mH u...mmaan
«mm cae.sm1 oao.mm .” ass oom.mm1 ooa.ao " oou.ae " use one " mHo.mn1 mac.mma ooo.ooH ....emoa
soa “mm.o1 amH.HNH " mm aom.o~ Hmm.mm ” oo~.eaa “ mm“ coo . aam.mm1 aam.eea coo.maa "...mmoa
men wom.H~1 mom.mo " HnH one.q~ oao.~a " coo.~¢ " mes mmq " aua.am1 a~5.msa ooo.~aa "...Nmma
Hm mN~.oH Nua.soH . “on on.a1. omm.-H . oo¢.eaa " own cum. “ mma.¢o Nam.mma ooo.o- ....Hmma
om «No.ma who.maa " mmH oae.me1 oem.moa . ooH.mNH " man can “ ooe.mm oos.muH . ooo.~HN "...omaa
mm Noa.aa mao.~m " om owa.ma omo.mm . ooo.maa “ can .omo “ mmm.ma1 manawma. ooo.o~a "...mama
mpeaom mpcnom “ mpsacml monsom " mpeaom “mpnaom moanom u "
unemaona veumsosau vammaozH onomaosau vnmmsonfiu 1 z u: a u , u
is. m1 a a . mE. m1 m . <16 " inn " 1w “ w u 1 1 u .< u 4 u
out“. Holmamom. voumMmumm. undo. HeDqumm. vmmmagummu Hmauo< u wanna u Hmnuu<u umo> ”vouuoHH4 “ Hmauu< ”
imam. . " iuom. . u “ 1Huoo " “ 1Ho£ u u u
amok 1 .maxo a. «mom 1 .maao . u. mac“ n . guns: n u u was»
Godunonwaflraoauuspoum u dofimmoummu macaw " u umaxo " u u u n
. acauunuoum " macaw " uummwud "
1w . iiii .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.uonfiouaom use .uoaws< .hfiah Mom Haemaauu Huuou some can "maouu mnauoaaou vowmauoao mo enam> onus
uma mma~1¢ma~ “coo.oua .mwumuuu “munmu m.o .ooqua mo mnoaumasmmm Home: mooauuaao nowuuavoum one Vang» umamuomam
magma .mcmH1mmmH .pwuumhoua use ”mnma1mqma .uouqaaunm one Hanuoo "oaonmaxo ea musnnoa mo noduuavoum11..u canoe

CHAPTER IX

ESTIMATED PEANUT SUPPLIES

AND REQUIREMENTS, 1959-1965

As indicated in Chapter I, the purpose of this study is to
project the magnitude of total peanut production reaponse for 1959-
1965 under Specified assumptions regarding price support, acreage
allotments and related factors; compare this estimate with prospective
requirements for the same period; and thus derive prOSpective quan-
tities to be diverted from normal trade channels by government action
in the market. The production estimates for the seven major producing
states, as discussed in Chapters VI, VII, and VIII may now be summarized.
An additional source of supply will be taken into consideration, namely,
production from a number of minor states which were excluded from the
analysis. Also, the small quantity of imported peanuts will be considered
at the appropriate point in the presentation.

The time of the problem under investigation was established
in Chapter I as 1954 and succeeding years. The present economic and
institutional structure of the industry which gave rise to the problem
was established in 1949. Accordingly, the summarization and analysis
of peanut supplies and requirements will deal with these time periods.

It should first be emphasized that projection always con-
tains hazard no matter how refined the tools of estimation. Some
variable may have been overlooked entirely, or some usually obscure

factor may assume sudden prominence. (Cranberry growers, jet plane

233

234

manufacturers, and statesmen attending summit conferences have
experienced such occasions, to cite examples). Peanut program
administrators have occasion most every year to be conscious of the
abnormal situation.which forestalls realization of the most carefully
drawn projection charts which take into account°events of the past
and experienced judgements about the future. Nevertheless, judge-
ments about the future must and will be made, either formally or
informally. Short and long range planning by business and government
requires this exercise of human thought which leads to action. With-
out it, progress might be random.

The kind of projection envisioned here is not one that
attempts to specify actual production in a particular year, but
rather one that establishes a level of production and a rate of
change under assumed policy courses of action and expected responses
to such action. Year to year deviation from these norms is anticipated
but does not obscure the general trend of events toward hhe expressed

or hmplied goals of the individuals, firms, and agencies concerned.
Supply Estimates and Projections

The tabular data presented in the three preceding chapters
provide the actual, estimated, and projected production for each of
the seven major states. Included in these data are two sets of
estimating equations:

a) yield equation estimates applied to acreage allotments

. after subjective allowance for over- or underharvested

acreage,

235

b) equations designed to estimate production directly.

It was indicated at the close of each chapter that certain
subjective adjustments would be desirable to take into account certain
technological progress which has occurred mainly since 1956. This
recognizes that the time period for the yield equations is 1909-1958
and that therefore the influence of the data for the last three years
of the period would likely be substantially less, proportionately,
than the magnitude of the technology would seem to warrant for pro-
jection purposes. Discussion of these adjustments was deferred to
‘this chapter in order that they might be viewed in the national con-

text. First, the unadjusted data should be examined.

Unadjusted Projections.--In accompanying Table l are summarized the
following production data for each state and area:

a) production as estimated by the respective yield
equations when applied to actual acreage harvested,
1949-1958;

b) projected production as estimated by the respective
yield equations when applied to acreage allotments
after subjective adjustments for under- or overhar-
vested acreage, 1959-1965;

c) actual production in "other" states 1949-1958, and
projected for 1959-1965 as the mean of the 1957-1959
production;

d) actual production, for comparative purposes, 1949-1958

with preliminary data for 1959 included parenthetically;

236

e) _residual differences (and percentages) between actual
and estimated production, 1949-1958.

These data constitute the arithmetical summation of the data
presented in the relevant production sections of Chapters VI, VII, and
VIII, but include for each area and for the United States the production
in other specified states which is relatively minor.

Total production for the United States increases from
1,529 million pounds in 1959 to 1,635 by 1965. The rate of increase
is approximately 17 million pounds per year, or about 1.1 percent.

The 1956-1959 average actual production is about 118
million pounds more than that estimated by the yield equations as
_applied to acreage allotments after adjustment for estimated over-
and underharvested acreage. Comparatively, for the first four years
of the period, 1949-1952, the residual differences are nearly in
balance. The interim period is difficult to assess or include with.
the others because of severe weather conditions in 1954, and 1955, in
the humid areas for which no satisfactory weather variable was found
for the estimating equations.

All large residuals in the period 1954-1959 resulting from
overestimation of the actual production are in the Virginia-Carolina,
and Southeast areas, with the exception of 1954 in the Southwest which
.is fairly well accounted for by rainfall coefficients in the estimating
equations. All are believed to be associated with adverse weather.
Accordingly, after allowing for adverse weather, the yield equations
appear to underestimate production in this period in a manner not

characteristic of earlier years. In consideration of these data and

1"

‘ «j! .. 1.. 1 y
u .-..”

 

soauounoua .e.fie<

 

 

 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 N 12212
Bonn ucoaumanvc
mom m2 ~22 end 2m «22 22 ~22 Hesood\mueaaumu
2.2«1 H.m52 e.m~1 ~.nnm1 2.2m2 «.2m1 n.me 2.em1 Heseammm .m .2
2.2me.2 h.m22.2 m.nnm.2 2.22a ~.¢nm.2 2.2mo.2 «.mmo.~ m.eom.2 Hesuo< .m .2
o.~w¢.2 2.2ee.2 m.moo.2 2.N~m.2 o.u2e.2 «.2mo.2 n.a2m.2 e.¢m2.2 Aummv Hence .2 .2
n.n1 e.o1 n.2m 2.2m1 m.me H.m¢1 n.2m 2.2a mm Haneammm
m.me~ e.me2 a.mnm o.nm2 n.22m a.~e~ 2.22s «.2me mm Henso<
2.~m~ 2.2m2 2.mmm 2.22m o.~m~ H.Nou “.mqe m.eom an fiance
¢.HH «.2 2.2 2.m 5.5 «.22 H.2H m.~H newsman mango
2.22 2.2m m.m22 N.22. m.mm m.NNH m.222 2.22 esoseaxo
2.2m2 2.22 2.2mm n.¢mH «.2m2 m.mm2 H.~2N «.mmm mmxma
umwumfifiu mm
2.¢m1 H.e22 m.2m H.2mm1. N.~2 q.e1 2.222 H.2e1 mm Assamese
w.mmo o.aow 2.222 n.22m m.~m~ «.mmw m.2mo.2 n.22a mm Hesuo<
e.ema m.soa 2.20N n.2ee m.m¢o m.amw «.mma o.eao.2 mm Hence
m.eH o.m2 “.22 2.5 n.m m.e2 «.ma 2.52 nmwusum nacho
m.~»2 a.emH n.2o2 m.252 «.mwa m.om~ e.onm m.emu wasnsfie
N1om .e.Mm- “.mm ~.2m n.2m m.em n.2o a.am «undone
n.2me 2.22m o.mas N.N2e m.2me ¢.Nem n.2uo «.mmo samnooa
"mmuwfiwumu
«.22 «.22 m.mH21 N.¢e1 H.2N «.mm 2.mm1 n.221 21> Hespwmmm
m.m~m e.aam 2.22m m.emq c.2me o.~cm H.mwe m.mm¢ 21> Hmsuo<
2.22s 2.m2n n.m2n n.2oe _ n.2ne «.2em u.2mm n.2mm 21> Hence
m.~ m.N 2.N «.2 «.2 H.~ 2.~n 2.¢ mousse nonuo
2.nmN 2.N2m m.m2~ o.HNN m.2- m.m2m 2.22m m.eom smnfiouso euuoz
n.22N m.eHN “.2HN m.m22 «.2a2 2.e- n.2«m 2.~2~ macawua>
"mmueaaumm
1 cocoon cowHHHE 1
swam " 2m22 u mama u «mad H mmmfl " «mad " Hmmfl “ 2mmH u mama
.noaaimema .mmueum emu2s2 ens .usmue unuseusom .umso

122202 .mcHHoueoimaagwuw> .ommH ocean mmoumona Hmuwwofioonoou Mom unmaumsfiom manna: season cowaafia 2.22H menace“ some
vouuonoum .emnoHueDao woauoavoua emanaooam Bonn pouusaumo we once and uvflowm cu vquaae one umo>umnuopca one 1uo>o
now commence munoauofiao owemuoe scum oofiuoavoua wouoofioua was .moumaaumo .Hmouuw "nuanced mo nouuuaooumi1.fi oHeeH

mmm
.002xmz 3oz pom mcm222=oq .memaexu< .22222222222 .eeHHOHeo susom .ounmmeomH now 2c02uoofioua now 2222
2022022022 uwmuo>m vouaw2oz 2m221nm22 .ch2umoao we2um8222u 22222 :2 povaHUe2 no: :nuuuum nonuorn

.122121222111 you 22 .22 .22 .22 .22 112212 .2 22221222 112 .222 15121222
221 .22222 11212 .222 1212122 .222 1222222 .222 1222o12 .222 12221212 22212 .222 1222212>1

 

 

2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 1 2122112112 .2.222

.2.222 2.222 .21222 122222 2.222 22222 2.222 1 2 12212

8022 unoeumnno<

1 1 1 1 1 1 2222 22 21221<\11122112

1 1 1 1 1 1 22.222 2.222 21222112 .2 .2

1 1 1 1 1 1 22.222.22 2.222.2 212214 .2 .2

2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2,222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 22122 21102 .2 .2

1 1 1 1 1 1 2.22 2.22 22 21222112

1 1 1 1 1 1 22.2222 2.222 22 212212
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 22 21212
2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2111121 11212
2.222 2.222 2.222 2 222 2.222 2.22 2.22 2.222 12121222
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 11212

"mmugfiumm

1 1 1 1 1 1 2.22 2.222 21222112

1 1 . 1 1 1 1 22.2222 2.222 22 21:11<
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 22 21212
2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2112121 21222
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 1222122
2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 1221122
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 1222112

"mmumédumm

1 1 1 1 1 1 2.221 2.22 21> 21222112

1 1 1 1 1 1 22.2222 2.222 21> 212112
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 21> 21112
2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 112121 11222
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222. 2.222 2.222 1M221212 22212
2.222 2.222 2 222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 1222212>

"mound—Hum”

1 amazon :022228 1
2222 2222 ".1 2222 n 2222 n 2222 2222 . 2222 n 2222

 

A22222uaoov11.2 22229

239

yield residuals as~shown on the charts for the same period in preceding
chapters, it is believed that recently applied technology is not adequately
reflected.

Regarding the rate of increase in production, this is a
reflection of the long run rate of increase in yields per acre and
is a slower rate than has prevailed in recent years. As pointed out
in each of the preceding chapters, it does not seem advisable to
project the rate of recent years without evidence of higher prices,
lower acreage, or new technology as yet unapplied, such as a "break-
through" on direct application of fertilizer, or control of stemrot.
This is not to say that the current rate will not continue, but
merely that until the evidence is clear the more conservative rate
seems the better part of judgement at this time considering the length
of the projection period. Comparative data are depicted graphically in
Figure 1. Actual production is represented by the solid line, and pro-
duction as estimated by the yield equations applied to acreage allotments

adjusted fOr over- or underharvested acreage is shown by the broken line.

Adjustments for Recent Technolg51.--In light of the above considerations,
reference is now made to Chapter III on technological progress, and to
the related Appendix E with respect to recent varietal innovations in
the Virginia-Carolina area, and the Southeast area. Attention is also
directed to the description of the progress of irrigation in the South-
west area, particularly in Oklahoma. Review of the yield regression
charts and residual yields for recent years for each of the states as
presented in Chapters VI, VII, and VIII is also invited in this connec-

tion.

Picked 8. Threshed

2000

IQOO

IOOO

I700

I400

IJOO

IZOO

H00

I0001F—

'L‘IgZTLI SI

M ”Non Pounds

240

 

 

2

P

F

 

—Aciual

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1.

1
I

   

l95
Unifed Sfofes: Actual, Esfimafed, and Projected Peonui Production

from Specified Equaflons

/

1
.... ‘0. .00
....-------°'"°"*/* KSam'm'aaflon

I03- 703

I.
I
I
I
l

, I “(Summafion I9012901

J
l96|

322, 49015001 52 I T‘.
702

l l 1 I 1 I
l963 l965

 

241

The introduction of varieties 564R and NC-2 in the Virginia-
Carolina area would enter the predicting equations (as a time factor)_
for no more than 3 of the 50 years of the yield analysis. It is
believed a similar situation prevails with respect to new varieties
in Georgia. Irrigation in Oklahoma began to become a highly signi-
ficant factor around 1955 or 1956. In consideration of these principal
advances in technological progress of recent date, it is believed that
production may now have achieved a higher level than the estimating
equations suggest._

Accordingly, a subjective increase in yield, for the pro-
jection years 1959-1965, of 100 pounds for each of the states Virginia,
‘ North Carolina, and Georgia; and 200 pounds in Oklahoma is indicated. I
These additions and the resulting production for the respective states
.are set forth in Table 2. The annual increase in total production as a
result of these adjustments appears at the lower right of Table 1 as an'
addition of 103.9 million pounds to the production projected by the yield
estimating equations. The upward adjustment in the Southeast is perhaps
more conservative than for the Virginia-Carolina area since no change has
been made in Florida and Alabama. The evidence does not seem as clear
for these two states although perhaps some adjustment should be made. On
' the other hand, for the area as a whole perhaps the adjustment in Georgia
with none in Florida and Oklahoma will be adequate on balance. It is
difficult to appraise adjustments of this kind from literature without
‘111121111123 discussions with close observers in the area. The method
of computing the adjustment in Oklahoma is given in Table 2. It is not

clear that a similar adjustment is warranted in Texas at this time.

.mouom ooo.¢m

ma2a2mfimu 2:2 02 mocsom 002 one .mmuom omumw2222 ooo.om 02 voHHddm coon m>m£ monsoa ooo.m .xawd2vuoood
.vmosooeuew some 20: pm: c02umm2222 M2 mvdsom ooh mumfi2xouddm wasos vam2% mmmum>m mmasmm<m

 

omma uoonm ouc22
hmoHoe£UMu 32: mo Sam

eowumw2uuH
mo2um22m> 302
2122 221221>

2122 221221>

222.222.222
222.222.22
222.222.22
222.222.22

000.000.02

 

moasom

JOOH

 

amazon

222.222
222.222
222.222

coo2ooH

 

mouo<

...mmudum fiMuHGD
1......1Q8036HXO
1.1.1....NHwHOQO
..wCHHOHQU SuHOZ

sous-seemfianfimhfl>

 

ucmaumsnvm
How common
Hmd2oc22m

mmmouoe2
eo2uooooum
uoz

muom 2mm
2212> c2
mmmouoaw
221222222222

22204

mumum

 

.222212222 .mmuwum 2022:: use .eaonm2xo .m2wuomu .es22oumo nuuoz .mwc2wu2> :2 «nonwoud
2202m020cnoou m>Huomdmoud use ucoomu now soHHQ ou muumaumofivm c02uosvoud was v202m o>wuoonn=m11.m o2an

243

These adjustments are depicted in Figure 1 beginning in 1959 with the

dash-X line.

giggct groduction Estimates.--In Table 3 is presented, in manner simi-
lar to Table 1, a national summary of the results of using the selected
production equations. As indicated in previous chapters, the derived
estimates are contrary to that which is considered logical when viewed
from state to state as presented in the relevant production sections of
Chapters VI, VII, and VIII. However, the error among states is largely
offsetting giving national data at a nearly constant figure toward the
end of the projection period. As indicated previously, the model is not

useful. In Figure 1, these data are represented by a dotted line.
Projected Requirements

Consideration may now be given to prospective consumption

and other uses for the period 1959-1965. Requirements center on two
main kinds of data: the national population and the quantity of pea-
nuts consumed per person. As a so-called demand shifter, the rate of
change in the total quantity consumed is, in the case of peanuts, closely
associated with United States pOpulation. The amount consumed per person
is, in the aggregate, associated with price of,peanuts, price of closely
related commodities which may be complementary or competitive, and dis-
posable personal income per person.

V Since current and prospective pOpulation is available from
the census,the remaining factor to determine is per capita consumption.

-There are two methods: (1) determine the current rate of per capita

2222a

 

 

 

222 22 222 222 222 222 222 22 222 212212212122222
2.2221 2.22 2.2221 2.2221 2.2221 2.2221 2.2. 2.22 2.221 21222212 .2 .2
2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222 2.222.2 2.222.2 22222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 212212 .2 .2
2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 22222 21212 .2 .2
2.221 2.222- 2.221 2.2221 2.221 2.221 2.221 2.22 2.22 32 22122212
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2. 222 2.222 2.222 2. 222 210122. 2.2 212212
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 32 21212
2.22 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.22 2.22 2.22 2212122 21222
2.222 2.22 2.222 2.22 2.222 2.22 2.222 2.222 2.22 11121222
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 21212
"mmumEHumM
2.222 2.22 2.2221 2.2221 2.2221 2.221 2.21 2.2 2.221 22 21222212
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.2222 2.222 22 212212
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.2222 2.222 22 21212
2.22 2.22 2.22 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.22 2.22 2.22 2212122 21222
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 1212122
2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 1222122
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 1222112
1 "mwumEHumm
2 221 2.22 2.2221 2.221 2.221 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.221 21> 21222212
2 222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 12.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 21> 212212
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 21> 21212
2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2- 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.22 2.2 212122 21222
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 1m221212 22212
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 1222222>
“moueawumu
u meanom :022228 1
2222 2 2222 . 2222 2222 2 2222 2 2222 2 2222 2 2222 2 2222
.momanmema .mmumum v022== mam .mmone umoszuaom one .uumoSuoom .mc2202201m2n2m22>
. mcoflumsuu cowuosvoum vmwmwummm 802m vmuomhoum use .vmumawumm .Hmnuom "unnamed mo cowuosvoumuu.m manna

d

. m¢N

.oo2xmz 322 2:2 22:2222304 .mmmcm&2< .2m922222222 .mGHHoumo nusom .mmmmoccma you :02uomnoum

now 2223 2022232022 mwmum>2 vaunw223 mmmH .2d02umavm wa2umEHumm :2 vvaHUGH 20: :222222 22320: a
. .mua022222000,202 mu «HnMH .m x2vammm¢ 22m

.222 11121222 .222 21212 .222 1212122 .222 1222122 .222 1222112 .222 11221212 22212 .222 1212222>1

 

 

1 1 1 1 1 1 222 22 21121<\121e2222
1 1 1 1 1 1 2.221 2.22 21122212 .2 .2
1 1 1 1 1 1 22.222.22 2.222.2 211212 .2 .2
2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 2.222.2 22222 21212 .2 .2
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 22 21122212.
1 1 1 1 1 1 22.2222 2.222 22 211212
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 22 21212
2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2212122 21222
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 11121222
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 21212
"mmuafiumfl
1 1 1 1 1 1 2.221 2.221 22 21122212
1 1 1 1 1 1 22.2222 2.222 22 211212
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 22 21212
2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2212122 21222
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 1112122
2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 1222122
2.222 2.222 2 222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 1222112
Human—3222mm
1 1 1 1 1 1 2 221 2.2 . 21> 21122212
1 1 1 1 1 1 2.222 2.222 21> 211212
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 21> 21212
2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2212122 21222
2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 .2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 11221212 22212
2.222 2.222 21222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 2.222 1212222>
"mmugwumfl
u mwaaom :OHHHHE I
2222 2 2222 n 2222 2 2222 n 2222, 2 2222 2 2222 2 2222

 

2211122111211.2 12212

246

consumption, note trends, and make assumptions about its future behavior
and apply the assumed quantities to population data to determine proSpec—
tive total requirements for edible consumption, (2) obtain an estimate of
per capita consumption using a demand function which establishes the per
capita consumption relation.with factors which generate it, such as price
of the commodity, price of competing products, d15posable income; and a
time factor. In either case, projections involve assumptions. Under (a)
above, the assumption deals directly with the future behavior of per
capita consumption. Under (b) above, assumptions deal with the future
behavior of the factors which generate per capita consumption.

As a matter of interest, both methods will be used. Both
are subject to the limitations inherent in the judgement of the esti-
mator as decisions are made about either the future of per capita
consumption directly, or about the future magnitude of the factors to
be applied to the coefficients in a per capita consumption estimating
equation. Furthermore, the per capita estimating equation may have

shortcomings.

PrOSpgctive surplus supply under an assumed per capita consumption
Egtg.--In addition to edible uses, other uses for total supply need to
be considered. These include annual uses for seed, home use by growers,
quantities which may be fed or lost, exports, shrinkage and loss in
storage, quantities in commercial hands for processing and manufactur-
ing, and carryover of surpluses. In the course of the discussion in
Chapter I, Table l was introduced. This gives the relevant data for

these items for the years 1954 to 1959, with estimates by the Oils and

247

Peanut Division for the marketing years l9}9~1960 and 1960-1961. In-
cluded in this table are the data for total commercial edible and
crushing use, i.e., the quantity consumed annually by the population.
In this case, commercial crushing for oil is a residual byproduct of
the shelling and manufacturing process. In Table 4 are presented these
quantities converted to per capita consumption rates for the years
1954-1960. For the projedtion period 1961-1965 an assumed per capita
consumption rate of 7.25 pounds, farmers stock basis (155 percent of
kernel basis), has been applied to the projected population to obtain
the consumption requirements for the period.

Using the data from Tables 1 and A, prospective supply and
disappearance of peanuts has been determined for the years 1959 to 1965
-as presented in Table 5 under the specified assumptions regarding in-
ventory, which cancels out since ending inventory of one year is the
beginning inventory for the next; imports which equate with exports;
and seed, etc. which is relatively fixed from year to year. Production,
edible uses, and excess supplies are then the remaining year to year
variables. The residual represents excess supplies to be diverted
from'the commercial market by government purchases, and sales for ex-
port and crushing uses.

Recalling that the annual rate of increase in production is
projected at slightly more than 1 percent, and considering that pop-
ulation is increasing at about 1.7 percent annually, it will be seen
that excess supplies would tend to decline over time, as indicated in
Table 5. If the projected per capita consumption of 7.25 pounds is

underestimated, excess supplies would, of course, be lower.: This

.woumafiumm wcfinmnuo
HmwouoEEoo new wenwvm ammo» cwmuno Om mowumasmom Om owwammm moaanaomfl you mm.“ mo some quDmm<o

.umwm down no Homfl .H memosmh wean: unwound n.H we
masseuse Hw:CCm cm um vouowmoum mum memo momHaHomH .ooaH .w Hanm< .ESUQMnoemz .<.n.m.D ..m.z.< .coflma>an
mowfiocoom ”menqunHuw< .Lccmem swag Hound com cowumfinaom Bush .mmmmuo>o moouom voau< weavsaoaHn

.ooaa .mN nonsense no me ..<.e.m.=
.wofi>uom cofiammwaanmum mquoEEoo .conwpwa common one mafia Scum voawmuno oomauqmaa moumEHummm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mN.N ORaNaH nfiwmfin¢aH ........oooo.ooooomoafi
“Ne“ °°Nn¢mfl OWGQNE no. ooooooooooooaseqo¢fl
MN.“ OOOAHGH OWNQ‘VQMAH no. .....oooooooosomoGH
“No“ oomnNmH onmnflonnfi us. ......o-oo-oeooNoaH
mN.n oo~.¢w~ muo.¢nn.a 0.. ...............HomH
NH.N OOOanH OOO.¢ON.H u.. ...............OOGH
“No“ m¢Na¢NH OOOAQONnH nuo ......oooooooooam¢fl
NH.N zoooamkfi Oo¢ammNAH ”.. ...............®MGH
em.m oo~.-~ ooo.HNN.H ".. ...............mmo~
mm.o oom.¢oH oou.m¢H.H ".. ........... ...ommH
mn.o cowaooa oom.mmo.H “ . ...............mmm~
whee OOOQqQH OOOANOHaH u... ouoooooaooooasoqmafl
mvcnom monomnonH mwmmmm vnmmnona "
u , umu% " mwcfiSmnuo "
common use ” wcwuoxumz " HmficuoEEoo one u H umnmn< wcficcawwn
ocowudanmsoo u wo H xumncmh " magnum Hmuoe " use» wawumxumz
” neoaumfinmom ” "

.nomauqmma .mouuum vouqca .naomn xoouo
mnmaumw .omn wmfizmnno Hmwonoeaoo one magnum now monsoon mo noauqanmcoo nuance you vmumsfiumuuz.e oHan

.Ho>mH voEnmmm .mn0ucw>cfl cowumnomuoo ufivouo huavoeaoo was mxoOum HmwonoEEoo Soon momnHoGH
o

.<.n.m.= .mmo acama>aa unease ecu mane an emumaeumun

.m~.e .moma-aema ”NH.N .ooma mo~.a .mmma Assesoav momma aooum unmanmmm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a.ema e.omH «.mma e.oo~ m.mo~ m.mm~ o.eH~ magnum mmmuxu
m.mmm.a m.Hma.H m.mom.H e.mmm.a H.mem.a o.mam.H o.o~m.a muemsmmaammsn Hmuoa
o.ooe o.ooe o.ooe o.ooe o.oos o.oos o.ooe _ omxuosm menses
m.mmm.a a.amm.a m.wom.a e.mme.a H.moe.a o.mae.a o.o~¢.a mm: esumaus was menses swoon
o.-a o.~NH o.NNH o.N~H o.-a o.-a o.-a .oum .mms use: .emmm
.o.~ o.~ o.~ o.~ o.~ o.~ o.~ uuoaxm
o.Hme.H a.eoe.a m.emm.H o.Hom.a H.mmm.a no.sa~.e no.0mN.H magnum use
wcfinmnuo Hmaouoaaoo
moamnmonmmmwn
o.oea.~ m.-H.~ o.eoH.~ N.omo.N - m.moo.~ m.amo.~ m.smo.N aaaaam Hence
o.~ o.~ o.~ o.~ o.~ o.~ o.~ mocoeeH
o.mm~.a m.o~n.a o.~o~.a ~.¢me.a o.eoo.a m.aee.a m.~mo.H consumeoum
o.ooe o.ooe o.ooe o.ooe o.ooe o.oo¢ o.ooe _ masons meaeesmmm
hammnw
I cocoon :oHHHHa u
mean “ «ems " mean u «can n Home " case " amen swan

. C O . O 0
tr bl D

.mcoHumEnmcoo nuance Hom.vaMHoon can mmmoH mam meow .mm: @805 .voom now amazon :OHHHHB NNH

«weanmnuo Hmflouoaaoo amazon :OHHAHE NoH “monomxo cam monomaw amazon coaHHHa N ”muouao>cfl Hoodoo
amazon noHHHfiE ooq mo m:0uumanmmm Home: monsoon mo nowumanmcoo mam nowuonvouq vouoohoumuu.n manna

250

procedure and related assumptions project per capita consumption at a rate
but slightly higher than that which has prevailed for many years, except
in time of war.

In summary of the above estimating procedures:

a) Production increases at about 1 percent annually.

b) Total consumption increases about 1.7 percent annually
as population increases, with per capita consumption
possibly maintaining, at 7.25 pounds, a somewhat higher
level as a result of lower peanut price in part, but
also as a result of prOSpective increases in consumer
disposable income, considered subjectively.

c) Excess supplies tend to decline but the decline is not
sufficient to modify current surpluses appreciably;
diversion will be necessary at an annual level approx-
imating 200 million pounds, representing an annual loss
of about $10,000,000 to Commodity Credit Corporation,
assuming sales for crushing and export are made at a
loss of 5 cents per pound.

The implications for the grower are that (1) minimum acre-
age allotments will remain in effect for the next several years, and
(2) the price support level will probably be adversely affected by
excess supplies, probably remaining below 90 percent of parity. The
latter is partly determined by administrative policy concerning the
handling of government owned stocks. Since the drought of 1954 which
necessitated large imports, Commodity Credit Corporation ending in-

ventories have been maintained at a rather high level until the succeeding

251

crOp is assuredly adequate. These stocks are included in the computation
of the supply percentage in price support determination, thus they ad-
versely affect the price support level. One of the basic legislative
concepts of the support price programs 18 that of "assuring adequate
supplies." Under the circumstances of the "sliding scale" support
price provision, there are differences of opinion as to the "adequacy"
of the amount of Commodity Credit Corporation ending inventory.

In conclusion concerning this estimating procedure, it might
be observed that the rate of yield increase is probably conservative;
the assumed static rate of per capita consumption may be regarded as
conservative considering the peanut price assumptions made under an
expanding general economy; therefore, it is not likely that the cost
of the program for diversion, on the average, will exceed current levels.
Should yields per acre increase at a somewhat faster rate, it is

possible also that per capita consumption might exceed the assumed rate.

graspective surplus under equation estimated_per capita consumption
Eggggw--Badger and Plaxicolrecently developed a per capita consumption
.estimating equation which will now be used to predict consumption of
farmers stock peanuts per capita as a function of the passage of time,
the farm price of peanuts, per capita disposable income, and marketing
charges. In conference with the senior author, data for these variables
for the projection period, 1954 to 1965, have been deve10ped so as to

have as close comparability as possible to the data used in their study

 

1Daniel D. Badger and James S. Plaxico, Selected Supply and
Demand Relationships in the Peanut Industgy, Processed Series P-338,
(Stillwater: Oklahoma State University, 1959), p. 29.

252

since the necessary information was not provided in the publication.
The authors fitted a least squares regression to the above indicated
data for the period 1920-1956. The coefficient of price was signifi-
cant at the 5 percent probability level, and except for the time
variable which was not significant, the other coefficients were sig-
nificant at the 1 percent level.

For the projection period, the price of peanuts received
by farmers has been assumed at 9.5 cents, the same as was used in the
yield estimating equations. Disposable persOnal income has been pro-
jected from $316 billion in 1958 to $417 billion in 1965 as of Hurch l
of the marketing year. The marketing charges index, constructed by
Badger to reflect changes in transportation and labor costs, was pro-
jected from a level of 235 in 1958 to 258 in 1965. These data were
transformed to suitable indexes appropriately deflated and are presented
in Table 6 beginning with the year 1954. Farm peanut price was de-
flated by.the wholesale price index and'per capita consumer disposable
income was deflated by the consumer price index. The wholesale price
index was projected from an index of 225 in 1958 to 231 in 1965, 1935-
39 index basis; and the consumer price index from 206 to 211, 1935-39
index basis. The per capita consumption of farmers' stock peanuts
estimated by these data when applied to the Badger equation are also
presented in Table 6. Consumption increases from 6.24 in 1954 to
8.60 pounds in 1965. This suggests a new peace-time rate of consump-
tion. In view of the new high levels assumed for consumer income
coupled with a relatively low farm peanut price, the results seem

quite logica1.except for one thing--the stickiness and relative

.suauHSUHuw< mo ucufiuummsn msumum vsuwCD .mmo accumwmwn
uncmsm use muuo he psussuums mm .H usunsno .H sunny cu sump mcunmnuo was sunuvs Hanou Baum ps>uusp sumo

m

.cOuuanmom Ou psuunmm cOuunEnmcoo saunas use no sumauums cOHumnvs Eouw vs>uusas

.momuuammu uou mucso m.m .souun Busw psanmm<

.cOHuonuumcoo uom a sumsa ssm

v

.couumnvs wcuumsuums s>ons Eoum ps>uusoo

 

 

 

 

 

n
.am .a .ou manna .u.ou caucuses .muumsm>aea manna macaques
.oouxsam .m msEmh new usmpmm .n usucmn .NMumsocH unassm sac cu mQASmcoHumHsm vcsEso was hummnm psoummww.soum .Axsvcu
amass messages mod 33.0 - €35 meoufi woS $26 + Asset: 82a mo: 33.0.. A253 28. + 03.: u «a
-- H acm.mae.u oom.uau oe.w H o.mm~ o.nmu u.m~u as m memu
-- H ecu.ume.u oo~.sau me.m H o.mm~ o.oau u.m~u me " eeau
-- H ono.uam.u ooo.umu mn.m H o.omN o.omu u.n~u as . moan
-- H Nmo.mmm.u oom.umu au.m H o.ms~ o.nmu ”.mnu ms H «sou
-- H mnu.mu¢.u ocu.swu ma.u H o.ee~ o.ku u,mNu as H usau
~u.u H one.ome.u coo.umu Ha.“ H o.oe~ o.muu u.mmu us H ocau
ma.“ H emm.uwm.u ms~.auu an.“ m o.mm~ o.muu u.m~u as H amen
uu.u H oou.oe~.u ooo.nuu ou.u " o.nm~ o.ouu ¢,o¢u mm H mmau
on.“ H Hue.mem.u oo~.~uu n~.u . o.~m~ u.ouu u.emu mm H amen
uu.e H euo.muu.u oom.meu Na.e H o.om~ n.0au m.~mu an m emau
mm.o H eem.uao.u oom.oeu mm.o H n.o~m m.eou u.eeu on “ mmmu
mule m oom.m~o.u ooo.seu s~.e m u.muN o.amu «.muu mm “ emau
" .Immmmmml mocsmnonfi. mvcnom " u
" memenone " n
" "essence assua " assesses " oouuam-nmmu ” oouumn-nmau " u "
uncuumanmcouu sGOHuQEnmcoo" wcupsflocH " cOHugfismcoo " xsch “ Hmu >n psusuwsp " oeuzmmsmmmu u "
muudmo usm" usumfiuumm " Gownsunmom ” sounso usm ” sswumzo u saoocH Hscomusm " AssocH souum u sEuH " umsw
Hmnuo< ” Hmuoa “ Hmuoa " psumauumm ” wcuusxumz ” anmmommun suummo " unassm Eumh " u

.0“

usm mo xsucH

 

.mswumdo wcwusxuma mo Nsvcu use .xsocu souum usanmcoo

snu an ususumsv saunas use scoocu unaccusn sunsmommuv .xsocu souud sHsmsHocs snu an ususuusv monsoon mo souun susm
mo couuocnw s as AHuo mcupnaoxsv muncmsn xUOum musfiusm mo mGOHuQEnmcoo mounds usm vsuosnoua was usumfiuummuu.o anmH

254

fixity that per capita conSumption of peanuts has exhibited in the past.
There is the added consideration of Kromer's observation as cited in
Chapter I; the lower farm price may be offset to a greater extent by
higher marketing margins than this equation reflects. Actual per
capita ponsumption as given in Table 6 for 1954-1958, based on data in
Table 1, Chapter I, does show a tendency to increase but not at as

rapid a rate as for the prediction equation.

In Table 7 is presented projected supply and disappearance
based on per capita consumption rates from Table 6. Supply is the same
as that used before in Table 5 based on the yield estimating equations as
adjusted for technology. The increase in per capita consumption rate over
the period 1959-1965 is sufficient to eliminate all excess supply by
1963, and draw down commercial and Commodity Credit Corporation stocks
to a level of about that which is needed for commercial carryover only.
In summary of the above estimating procedures:

a) Production increases, as before, at about 1 percent

annually.

b) Total consumption increases at a more rapid rate not

only because of an increase in population but also
because of an additional impetus from an annual in-
crease in per capita consumption.

c) All excess supplies disappear by 1963.

The implications for the grower are that (1) minimum acreage
allotments will not be adequate beyond 1963; allotments will have to
be increased, or (2) support price of peanuts can be increased which

will tend to increase supply and reduce requirements, or (3) a

mmN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--- --- --- u.s~ ~.ao o.Ha u.mmu suaaam mmuoxm
n.0uu.~ m.~Nu.~ o.s0u.~ .u.~oo.~ u.mmm.u m.oom.u e.uua.u museummaaeaua usuou
m.ma~ e.uom o.mxm o.ooa o.ooe o.ooe o.oos mucous menses
m.~um.u u.uou.u o.muuww u.~oe.u u.amm.u m.oem.u e.uum.u mm: emumume was museum umuou
o.~Nu o,mNH o.NNH o.-u o.NNu o.~Nu o.-u .Uam ,mm: use: .emmm
o.~ o.~ o.m o.N o.N o.N o.~ mouomxm
m.mme.u u.uma.u o.Ham.u u.mmm.u u.mue.u m.ome.u e.umm.u meuemsso
: was sacums HmuousEEou

socmussmmmmun
n.0uu.m m,NNH.N o.a0u.m N.cmo.~ m.mooemh m.umo.m n.smo.N euaasm assoc
o.~ o.~ o.N o.~ o.~ o.~ o.N manoaeH
o.mmu.u m.omu.u o.~o~.u N.meo.u a.oeo.u m.meo.u m.~me.u couuoaeoum
u.mumu o.oos o.oos o.ooa o.ooe o.ooe o.ooe masons meueeuwmm

haaasm
u amazon GOHHHuE u
momu m seas m mama m «emu m Heau m coma m amau amen
.e «uses an

usumuosnm cOHumnvs mcmEsp sum up Uscuaususp ms couumanmcoo suumso usm was mmmoH was .vssm .smn
s80: pssm uom nuance cauHHuS NNH mmuuomxs was muuomau mvcnom acuaaua N mmvcnom couHHuE ooq mo
muoucs>cu Hunccs Hmuuucu mo sOHumEnmms uspc: muscmsn mo cauumanmcoo pas cauuonpoum vsuosnoumuu.m anmH

256

combination of price and acreage change could be made effective.

The advent of either of the supply-demand situations projected
above, the one of continuing but slowly declining surplus and the other
of rapidly disappearing surplus, leaves unresolVed certain questions con-
cerning program policy. Should a surplus be permitted to disappear? If
not, what should be its normal magnitude? How should a calculated sur-
plus be distributed among areas and types of peanuts? Is the minimum
acreage allotment legislation of 1951 (Appendix A) a "fair" distribution
of the right to produce peanuts? If not, should the advent of an acre-
age increase be used to correct inequities? For example, why should
Virginia have an allotment of less acreage than it had in 1910 in con-
trast to all other states? Why should surplus be centered largely in
one geographic area? Should a calculated surplus be insulated from
supply percentage determinations? Should growers carry the surplus,
instead of government, by means of a two-price plan, one for edible
use, and one for crushing, such that crushing use peanuts could be
diverted to edible use in case of a short crOp? Should importation of
peanuts be substituted for a calculated surplus as a less costly means
of assuring adequate supplies for consumers? Should a federal marketing
order system of multiple pricing be introducéd as a substitute for
parity relationship pricing and the present means of handling surplus
including acreage control?

The examination of these questions would form the basis of
additional investigation. It is h0ped that this study may have made
some contribution to the understanding of the form of the relationships
involved to the end that the industry will plot a wise policy course of

action in the future.

257

As indicated earlier, elements of uncertainty always
accompany observations about the future. As the leaves of the calendar
fall, the estimates deve10ped in this study should be re-visited in
light of future developments in economic conditions, institutional changes,
and technological progress.

There is also room for refinement of the data employed, the
models constructed, and the statistical method. These considerations

are reviewed in the concluding chapter.

CHAPTER X

EVALUATION OF THE STATISTICAL METHODOLOGYl

An economic analysis is seldom so precise as to exclude certain
”feelings" about it as the work progresses. There are discussed in this
chapter certain conclusions concerning the shortcomings of the procedures
employed and difficulties encountered. These are necessarily intuitive
and possibly tentative pending further study. It is not possible to de-
monstrate or substantiate all of the considerations set forth. The exper-
ience gained in this study corroborates the view frequently stated by
students of economic problems that methods of prediction need to be based
on a profound knowledge of the industry, and careful subjective appraisal
of the economic and psychological factors which give rise to a necessity
for constant adjustments to change. Time series analysis alone would
seem inadequate as all statistical and analytical assumptions are seldom
met in full. There are enumerated below several problem areas which, in
any further comparable studies of the industry, should receive more
thorough consideration:

1) The pace of technological progress is so rapid that it is
difficult to appraise without on-the-scene observations and discussions
with growers and industry representatives. The current work of research
workers should be known and appraised. Accordingly, research time and

travel should be allocated for these purposes, or adequate provision

 

The author gratefully acknowledges substantial contributions
by Dr. Glenn L. Johnson to the substance and language of this chapter in
order to strengthen my modest econometric training and experience, and to
provide a more useful reference for students who encounter similar prob-
lems of economic measurement.

258

259

made for obtaining comparable results through a team approach by the
experiment stations appropriately concerned. "Long-distance" appraisals
are subject to uncertainty, error, and omission.

2) This study has not eliminated sufficiently the errors in
measurement of certain variables. Expost appraisal suggests that least
squares procedures as applied to "underharvest" acreage models had little
likelihood of success because of unaccounted for changes in institutional
arrangements and "errors" in the data. Some of these defects have been
discussed in preceding chapters and should serve as a basis for initial
work in any further analysis.

3) Regarding acreage data in general, a more thorough attempt
to identify meaningfully associated variables and psychological factors
should be made. Time as a variable adds little to basic knowledge when
it assumes a primary position in the analysis.

4) It is unlikely that supply parameter estimates that are as
useful for policy purposes as would be desired can be developed until a
more adequate index of weather effect is available. The variance due to
weather obscures the effect of economic factors.

5) An aggregate production cost index seems inadequate in its
application to the variety of conditions in the separate production areas.
The ratio of prices received to prices paid does not necessarily reflect
the appropriate change in profitability when other important factors have
changed. Possibly some combination of time series data and cross sec-
tional data would be an improvement; or cost accounts, if maintained con-

sistently, would assist in obtaining a more adequate measure of variation.

260

6) The method of least squares analysis fails to provide
results useful for all purposes unless certain basic assumptions with
regard to time series data are met. These conditions will be discussed
below in some detail since they are of considerable importance regard-
ing interpretation of the results obtained. Unfortunately, it is seldom
that, in economic analysis, the assumptions underlying least squares pro-

cedures can be met in full.
Least Squares Assumptions

The Markoff Theorem specifies the following conditions for a
least squares regression of the type used in this study:

y ' a f bxl1 } bxzi... f bxni... f “i

l) The probability density function of the residual term u1
can be arbitrarily specified. The usual specification is that of normal
distribution with mean zero and finite (unchanging) variance.

2) The “i must be independent of the x1 and the “i must
be mutually independent.

3) The xi must be known values which are observed without error.

Quenouille2 points out that to the degree these assumptions do
not hold, invalid conclusions may be drawn with respect to estimates of

the parameters.

M. H. Quenouille, AssociatedAMeasurements, (Butterworth's
Scientific Publication, London, 1952), p. 153.

261

Errors in the data. With respect to above item (3) of the Markoff Theorem,

 

inepection of the observed data for acreage and yield in the early years
suggests the possibility that estimating errors may be greater in early
years than in later years, although the degree of error in either period
is not known. Additionally, as has already been explained, considerable
uncertainty surrounds the determination of "underharvest" data. In

further studies, omission of the early years should be considered.

Specification biases in the equations. Regarding items (1) and (2) of
the Markoff Theorem, it is not known that all important variables have
been identified and included in the equations. In fact, it is quite
certain that some important variables have been omitted. Some of these
omitted independent variables are correlated with the independent vari-
ables under consideration. As a result, the deviations from the
regression lines are not of the same variability throughout the range of
certain variables and some of the regression estimates are biased. In
the long-run, yield regressions, for example, it is known that important
changes in economic and physical structure have occurred. To an even
greater extent, this condition prevails among the acreage and production
regressions. It is doubtful that the assumption of an unchanging normal
distribution holds. Further, it is probable that "last year's", unex-
plained residuals are sometimes associated with "this year's", and those
of two years earlier. Accordingly, problems of serial correlation are

often inherent in the data.

262

Hald3 indicates that correlation (r) between two variables may
be unreliable when one or both of the series are serially correlated since
this condition may indicate lack of independence among included and omit-
ted independent variables. For such indication as they may provide,
correlation coefficients for several variables are presented in Table l
for certain time periods, mainly the entire range of data.

Durbin4Watson tests for serial correlation in the residuals

for Specified yield regressions are set forth in Table 2. Friedman and

4

Foote describe the Durbin4Watson test as a "method by which the unexplained.

residuals from an equation fitted by least squares may be tested to see
if successive values are correlated", i.e., serially correlated. The
following statistic is computed:

N 2
2:01,; "' dt-]_)
d'.B t'2

 

where dt is the unexplained residual for observation t, N is the number

of observations in the analysis and k' is the number of independent or pre-
determined variables in the equation. A table prepared by Durbin and
Watson is used to obtain the critical values for a 2-tailed test at the

5 percent probability level. The values of d' and 4-d' are computed and

referred to the appropriate value for dL and dU in the table. The two

 

3Anders Hald, Statistical Theory with Engineering Applications,
(John.Wiley & Sons, Inc., N.Y., 1952), pp. 613-614.

4Joan Friedman and Richard J. Foote, Computational Methods for
Handling Simultaneous Equations, Agriculture Handbook No. 94, (Washington:
United States Department of Agriculture, November, 1955), pp. 77-78.

new

 

 

 

III-l -..-I. III-I. u “#0 u 3. cm. no a a a o o o oggwfig

ND. Ill all-l. n ma. .0“. n HQ. NO. “econoOQOoooamH

III-l Hm. ¢No u ON. u ”N. no. uooooooooogpmfid

"' mm. No. H “N. H H”. ”O. ”OOOOOOOUOfivflHOHh

RR. on. N”. u Nmo Hm. u 3. No. "cocoooaoagflwuouu

In: us: nus A «o. A @o; co. A..msH~ouoo nunoz

«0A ut- uan A om. om. A mm. mm. A........wus«wu«>
msmA-oAAA A A oesA-onA A A A A A
Amway “moo A . A Amway smog A A mmmA-oAaA A mmaA-aomA A A
on «nose A oemA-o~sA A on nacho A mmaA-oAsA A AoAxV A AoAxv A mmaa-aomA A

mnquogaoo moA ax mags Amcauomaoo moA ox umoo A owmouo<. A ammouo< A AHNV name A woman

osHo> ouu< A A msHm> ouo< A A unsoom A unseen A A
mom mo oaummA . Auom mo oaummA A A A A
AHNNV oaumm umoonouwum H Aanumxv moaum m Amxv mowum m.

 

.moHanum> uamvnmnovsa mo

muflmm‘mouooaom Mom munmflowmmooo noaumHoHHOUn1.H manna

«om

 

s>Am=AucouaH NA.A mo.~ mm.A mm. m om A A A A A ......sHooe-ssunaA<
o>AmaAucoucH wo.m No. mm.A mm. m om A A A A A ......zHooe-ssAsoAm
m>Am=AocoosH No.~ mm.A mm.A am. m ON A A A A A ......mHoom-qusomo

Anecdumsoo smocked

coAumfiosuoo oz ca.H om.~ «o.H om.H q me A A A A A A ...........msoemfixo
aosumfiuusoo oz ~A.~ mw.A «o.H om.A e M A A A A M ........oom-sssnme<
:osusfimuuoo oz mA.~ mm.A mm.A sm.A m as M A A A M ........omm-qsmnmfi<
aosumflmssou oz Am.A mo.~ am.A sm.A m as M A A A M ........os¢-wesuofim
.w>Am:HunoucHn ms.~ mm.A sm.A sm.H m ms M A_ A A M ........osm-mamuomo
conumflmsuoo oz mH.~ Nm.A «o.H om.H q as M A A A A M ........-m-««msomo
cosumflmuuoo oz Am.N sa.A am.H em.H m as M A A A M ....oo~-msAAoumo .z
coausamuuou oz e~.~ oN.H mo.H 0N.A m as M A A A A A M .....NuooH-AA:AmuA>

m>AmsAoaooaH es.~ om.A mm.A sm.A m as A A A .......omA-AA=Amsa>

Amsowumsvo mama»

Nu Ame oAx oAx ax AA-uvmx Ax Ax

N .

N

 

[1|

:3
p-J

muasmom muonasz

A cowumawm scammmuwom

.vuq .m . w . v A .M z . moanmfium>

 

26S

computed values relate to the two tails of the sampling distribution: d'
relating to positive serial correlation, and 4nd' to negative serial cor-
relation. If d' or 4-d' is less than dL, residuals are assumed to be
serially correlated, either positively or negatively. If both d' and
4-d' are greater than dU, no serial correlation is assumed. If neither
of the computed values is less than dL, but one of them lies between dL
and d“, the test is inconclusive. The limits dL and dU are regarded as
only approximate when applied, as in this instance, to equations fitted
by least squares containing a lagged endogenous variable.

In Table 2, it will be noted that the test has been applied
for the most part to selected yield equations. Other equations were not
tested extensively because they were not regarded as useful in drawing
conclusions from the study. For the equations tested, the results suggest

either no serial correlation, or "inconclusive" results.
Effect of Shortcomings on Forecasts

The primary use of regression analysis in this study is to

5

obtain production forecasts. Johnson suggests that in a least squares

model such that y = f(x1, x2, x3 x4, x5)-» u, where u = f(x6, x7.... X“):

a knowledge of high intercorrelation between x 7&5) does not

1’ x2’ (r12

interfere with the forecasting usefulness of the equation. However, the

reliability of the estimates of the regression coefficients of x , and x

l 2

is reduced; and if one coefficient, b1, is overestimated, the other, b2,

 

Glenn L. Johnson, Professor of Agricultural Economics, M.S.U.,
Interview, April 15, 1960. Also see Quenouille, op. cit. l99f.

266

is likely underestimated and vice versa. "Outside" information is re-
quired as evidence of over- or underestimation. The estimates of b1
and b2, however, are not regarded as biased.

Knowledge of high intercorrelation between xi and xj(rij;r.5)
may be cause for more concern though, again, the predictive power of the
regression equation will not be reduced by such correlation so long as the

xixj relationship does not change. If x6 is omitted, the estimate of bi,

however, would be biased as its estimate would reflect the influence of
both xi and xj, a consideration not reflected in the estimate of the stan-
dard error for b1.

As an example, r1237'.5 could be the case for the independent
variables price, x1, and a measure of technology, x2, used to predict yield.
Price and technology are positively correlated in the first instance. Tech-
nological advance is expected to be related to yield. Price is also expected
to affect yield. The regression coefficient for price would not be regarded
as a reliable measure of the influence of price on yield if the high r12

increased the standard error of b unduly. The same would be true of the

l
coefficient for technology. Yet the resulting prediction of yield could
be reasonably accurate. The standard error of estimate of the function
could be small, as overestimation of b1 could be offset by underestimation
of b2 or vice versa. Though overestimation of b1 is offset by underesti-
mation of b2 and vice versa, the estimates of b1 and b2 are regarded as
unbiased. If b1 or b2 should be-greatly over- or underestimated, reversal

of logical signs could result. The situation is different if price and

technology are assumed to be negatively correlated.

267

As an example of r26.4:-.5, consider the case for the independ-
ent variable price x2 and a hypothetical omitted variable for poor land,

x Price is expected to be positively related to yield while expansion

6'
to.ppor land could be expected to be negatively related to yield. The
estimate of the regression coefficient for price could be decreased or:
offset by the effect of poorer land. In this case, the regression co-

efficient for price b may be regarded as biased downward; however, the

2
predictions from the equationSare unbiased.
As a further example, consider r27 :7.5 where x2 is price of

peanuts and the omitted variable x7 is price of competing crops. The
price of peanuts x2 will be positively related to acreage of peanuts while
price of competing crOps will be negatively related; the regression co-
efficient b2 will be biased upward; however, predictions from the equation

would be unbiased.
In Summary

Both subjective appraisals and objective analyses could have
been strengthened by more profound first-hand knowledge of conditions
and practices in the several geographic areas. The attainment of more
reliablecparameter estimates awaits better observed data for both
weather effect and cost factors, and a means of placing less dependence
on time as a "catch-all" variable. Although statistical shortcomings,
such as knowledge of high intercorrelation among independent variables,
do not interfere with the forecasting usefulness of the equations, the
parameter estimates do not provide the measures of elasticities most

useful for policy-making decisions.

APPENDIX A
CHRONOLOGY OF PEANUT LEGISLATION AND MARKETING PROGRAMS

In each year since 1933, with the exception of 1936-37, the
Department of Agriculture has had a program in effect to support the
price received by producers for peanuts. Details of the programs have
varied greatly from year to year, reflecting changes in production
trends and in the relative demands for peanuts for direct use in edible
products and for crushing for oil and meal. The principal provisions
of the program in each year are outlined in the following paragraphs
very briefly for the early years, but in more detail beginning in 1949
when mandatory allotments and marketing quotas became effective.

1933 Greg - Under authority of the Agricultural Adjustment
Act, approved May 12, 1933, a marketing agreement and license for peanut
millers became effective on January 27, 1934, well after the marketing
season for the 1933 crop had started. Processors of peanuts agreed to
pay growers not less than minimum.prmces varying around $60 a ton.
Processors soon discontinued purchasé on the grounds that they were un~
able to sell at prices based on $60 a ton for farmers' stock peanuts.

 

, 8The following chronology of legislative and administrative
programs from 1933 through 1950 and a part of 1951 is condensed from
Banna, Armore and Foote, Peanuts and Their Uses for Food , Marketing
Research Report No. 16, BAE, USDA, 1952, 99 pp., and is included here
as a matter of convenient reference. A more detailed description of
the period is included in a study by Sydney Reagan entitled Peanut Price
Support Programs, 1933-1952, and Their Effect on Farm Income, unpublished
Doctoral Thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1953.
The unpublished statements for 1952, 1953, and 1954 crops were prepared
by Joe F. Davis, Agricultural Economist, Oils and Peanut Division, CSS,
USDA, at the suggestion of the author. For later years, 1955 through
1960, thessequence of legislative and administrative events has been
condensed from the periodic announcements and deacriptive detail which
have appeared in successive issues of the Fats and Oils Situation of the
Agricultural Marketing Service, United States Department of Agriculture,
for each of the crop years and related marketing years discussed. While
the description does not purport to include the full details for each
year's program, the information given is regarded as an adequate refer-
ence for purposes of this study. Details of allotments, quotas, support
prices, government purchases, sales, and relatedl items may be found in
the tabular data included in Appendix C.

268

269

, 1934 Crop - On April 7, 1934, by an amendment to the Agricul-
atural Adjustment Act, peanuts, along with certain other commodities were
designated a basic agricultural commodity. On September 29, 1934, an
adjustment program for peanuts was announced. This program was .designed
to support the price of peanuts by diverting a part of the 1934-crop into
crushing for oil and meal. It was designed also to limit the acreage.

Acreage picked and threshed in 1935 was reduced one percent,
but owing to an increased yield per acre, production in 1935 was four-
teen percent higher than in 1934.

During the 1934 season, approximately 154 million pounds of
farmers'stock peanuts were diverted to crushing for oil.

1935 Crop - The diversion program for peanuts produced in 1935
was essentially the same as for the 1934 crop.

The production-control and processing-tax provisions of the
Agricultural Adjustment Act were invalidated on January 6, 1936, by
the Supreme Court' 3 decision in the Hoosac Mills case. Diversion pay-
ments on peanuts were resumed in 1937, however, with funds authorized by
Section 32 of Public Law 320, 74th Congress, approved August 24, 1935.
During the 1935 seasonL approximately six percent of the pro-
duction of peanuts picked and threshed was diverted to crushing.

1936 Crop - In 1936-37, prices of peanut oil and meal were
high enough to permit crushers to bid in the market for lower-grade
peanuts. .No diversion program was put into effect for the 1936 crop.

Under the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act, which
became effective in.February 1936, peanuts picked and threshed were des-
ignated a soil-depleting crop.

Cooperative Marketing Associations - In 1937 four regional
growers' cooperative marketing associations were organized to partici-
pate in the peanut-diversion programs. In 1940 these associations were
reduced to the three -- one for each of the major sections.

These associations were authorized by the Secretary of Agri-
culture to buy peanuts from growers, up to a stated maximum.quantity,
at a schedule of prices established by the Department of Agriculture.
From 1937 to 1940, these prices returned an average of 3.3 to 3.4 cents
a pound to growers.

Peanuts acquired by the cooperatives and not disposed of to
cleaners and shellers were sold for crushing for oil. This involved a
loss, which'was abborbed by the Department of Agriculture, together with
reasonable allowances based on costs of handling and storage. ‘

1937-40 Crops - Payments to growers for diversion of acreage of
peanuts picked and threshed to soil-conserving crops were continued. In
addition, penalties were imposed upon growers who harvested more than their
base acreages.

 

These payments and deductionS, which applied only to farmers
who participated in the agricultural conservation program, kept partici-
pating growers from expanding their acreage of peanuts picked and
threshed. However, nonparticipants brought about an expansion of acre-
age, particularly in the Southwest. .

1941 Crop - This experience led to the enactment of new legisla-
tion on April 3, 1941, which amended the Agricultural Adjustment Act of
1938 to authorize marketing quotas for peanuts and re-establish peanuts
asua ”basic Commodity". .In a referendum held on April 26, 1941, growers
approved marketing quotas for the 1941, 1942, and 1943 crops.

1942 Crop - The entry of the United States into war in December
1941, made it imperative to’ increase the output of oils and fats from
domestic materials. In setting up production goals for oilseeds in 1942,
the Department of Agriculture proposed that the acreage allotment for
peanuts for direct edible use be maintained at the 1941 level of 1.9
million harvested acres, but that an additional 1.9 million acres of
peanuts be grown for 011. On January 16, 1942, the total acreage goal
for peanuts was further increased to five millionzacres.

1943 Crop - In view of the national emergency, the national'
marketing quota and acreage allotment for 1943-crop peanuts was terminated
on June 10, 1943, and a war-crop goal of 5.5 million acres was established.
A single schedule of support prices for all peanuts of the 1943 crop was
announced, based on 90 percent of the parity price. In June, 1943, CCC
Order 4, making the Commodity Credit Corporation the sole purchaser of
farmers' Stock 1943-crop peanuts, was issued.

1944 Crop - On August 23, 1943, a departmental committee again
proposed a goal of 5.5 million acres of peanuts to be picked and threshed
in 1944, and the support price for peanuts was placed at $140 to $150 per
ton, depending upon type. On March 4, 1944, this support price was raised
to $145 to $160 per ton. Food Order 100, superseding Order 4, was issued
by the War Fbod Administration. This order again made the CCC the only
authorized buyer and seller of 1944-crop peanuts.

_ 1945 Crop - The 1945 peanut program was essentially the same as

in 1944. Although hostilities ended in August 1945, domestic demand for
peanut products continued strong. Production of many foods was up from
wartime levels, but with export demand for these foods continuing strong
and price ceilings in effect even though rationing was discontinued, many
foods were difficult to get in retail stores. Peanuts, however, remained
plentiful and easy to obtain.

271

1946 Crop - In accordance with the policy of discontinuing war-

.time regulations and controls, exclusive authority of the Commodity Credit
Corporation to buy and sell peanuts was discontinued for the 1946 crop.

On December 12, 1946, the Department of Agriculture announced the termina-
tion of War Food Order 130, as all peanuts from the 1945 crop had been
diaposed of. The price of the 1946 peanut crop was supported by purchases
through designated cooperative associations, as before the war, at 90%

of parity.

1947 Crop - The 1947 crop-support program was essentially the
same as that for the 1946 crop. The acreage of picked and threshed peak;
nuts for the crop-year of 1947 was 3.4 million, the second highest on
record. Production of picked and threshed peanuts was 2.2. billion
pounds, about the war-production level. However, domestic food uses for
1947 were twenty-seven percent lower than the average for the war years
1942-45, but increased exports of shelled No. 2 peanuts for crushing
abroad more than offset the decline in domestic food uses.

1948 Crop - In a referendum held October 9, 1947, peanut
growers voted in favor of marketing quotas for the 1948, 1949, and 1950
crops. However, on January 2, 1948, the Secretary of Agriculture termi-
nated quotas for the 1948 crop in view of the critical world shortage
of food fats and oils. The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, as
amended, gave the Secretary of Agriculture authority to terminate or to
increase quotas in case of a national emergency or if it was determined
that export demand for peanuts had materially intreased.

1949 Crop - In anticipation of a vanishing demand from Europe
for United States' peanuts for crushing, and the consequent reduction of
the export market to a relatively small quantity for edible uses, acre-
age allotments and marketing quotas were proclaimed for the 1949 crop.
On November 30, 1948, the Department of Agriculture announced a market-
ing quota of 1.7 billion pounds of 1949-crop peanuts and a national a1-
lotment of 2.6 million acres. This was twenty-one percent below the
1948 national acreage of 3.3 million acres.

In 1949, 2.3 million acres were picked and threshed, and produc-
tion totaled 1.9 billion pounds. Support prices were established for
base grades, with discounts and premiums for other grades. To be eligi-
ble for the full support price, a producer could not pick or thresh pea-
nuts in excess of the allotment established for his farm. If he picked
and threshed in excess of his allotment, he was ineligible for price
support on any peanuts produced. Moreover, he was subject to a penalty
of fifty percent of the basic price-support rate on the marketings on his
excess peanuts.

Exports of peanuts in the 1949-50 crop-year declined to 131
million pounds (farmers' stock basis). Disappearance into domestic food
use remained about the same as a year earlier, at slightly more than 900
million pounds. '

Two Price System: 1950 and 1951 Cr0ps

1950 Crop - On November 30, 1949, the Department of Agriculture
announced a marketing quota of 1,286 million pounds of 1950-crop peanuts
and a national allotment of 2.1 million acres, a 19-percent reduction '
from the 1949 acreage allotment. Public Law No. 272, enacted in August
1949, provided that the national acreage allotment for peanuts picked and
threshed in 1950 could not be less than 2.1 million acres. The allotment
was later increased to 2.2 million acres by Public Law 471, approved
March 31, 1950. The support price remained at 90 percent of the parity
price. Penalties at half of the support price were assessed against
.marketings in excess of established quotas.

A two-price system for peanuts, similar to that in effect for
the 1941 and 1942 crops, was established for the 1950 and succeeding
crops by Public Law No. 471. Under this System, so long as a farmer did
.not have a larger picked and threshed acreage than in 1947, he could mar-
ket peanuts, without penalty, for acreage in excess of his farm allotment,
provided the peanuts picked and threshed from the excess acreage were
marketed at their value for crushing for oil and meal through an agency
designated by the Secretary of Agriculture. Oil peanuts grown on "excess"
acres could be scld by designated agencies for crushing for oil under a
sales agreement approved by the Secretary, for edible use at prices not
less than those established for quota peanuts under any peanut-diversion,
peanut-loan, or peanut-purchase program, or for seed at prices established
by the Secretary. If it was determined by the Secretary that the supply
of any type of peanuts was not Sufficientfto meét’the demand for edible
use at prices not less than 105 percent of the support price for edible
use, plus reasonable carrying charges, he was authorized under the law
to declare such types in short supply and to sell such peanuts at not
less than this price. The profit realized from these sales was prorated
among producers who delivered peanuts of the types in short supply to the
designated agencies. Prices of peanuts produced on the allotted acreage
were supported at 90 percent of parity by means of producer loans and
purchases through CCC receiving agencies and by purchases by shellers
operating under contracts with the Commodity Credit Corporation.

Production of picked and threshed peanuts in 1950 was 2.0 bil-
lion pounds, including 125 million pounds produced from excess acreage,
an increase of eight percent above that of the previous year. The in-
crease mainly reflected the all-time high yield of 893 pounds per acre
harvested. Total purchases of peanuts by the Commodity Credit Corpora—
tion and its agencies through December 31, 1951, amounted to 840 million
pounds (farmers' stock basis).

273

1951 Crop - The Department of Agriculture announced on October
26, 1950 a marketing quota of 1,300 million pounds of 1951-crop peanuts
and a national allotment of 1,771 thousand acres. On December 14 of
the same year, as previously announced by the Department of Agriculture,
a referendum on marketing quotas for the 1951, 1952, and 1953 crops was
held. Approximately 71 percent of the peanut growers who voted in the
referendum favored the marketing quotas. To be effective, quotas must
be approved by a two-thirds majority vote. The national quota of 1,300
million pounds for 1951 represented the quantity of peanuts equal to the
average quantity harvested for nuts during the 1945-49 fiveuyear average,
adjusted for current trends and prosPective demand.

The 1951 peanut acreage allotment was increased by Public Law
17, approved by the President, April 21. This had the effect of increas-
ing the 1951 national peanut acreage allotment (as announced October 26,
1950) of 1,771 thousand acres to 1,889 thousand acres. Most of the in-
crease in 1951 allotment came in Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama, and
Texas. The new law revised the method of distributing the national acre-
age allotment among the various states and provided authority for increas-
ing acreage allotments for types of peanuts which would otherwise be in
short supply. The two types of adjustments were provided for in the fol-
lowing way:

(1) The 1951 national peanut acreage allotment, less the
national reserve for new farms, was to be apportioned among the states on
the basis of the larger of the following for each state: (a) The acre-
age alloted to the state as its share of the initial 1950 national acre-
age allotment of 2.1 million acres, or (b) the state's share of 2.1 mil-
lion acres apportioned to states on the basis of the average acreage
harvested for nuts in each state in the five years, 1945-49. However, no
state allotment could be reduced below that already announced for 1951.
The result of this provision was to add 34,900 acres to the total national
allotment, with most of the increases going to Alabama and Texas. For
any year subsequent to 1951, the national allotment for that year was to
be apportioned among the States on the basis of their share of the national
acreage allotment for the most recent year in which such apportionment was
made.

(2) In authorizing acreage increases for production of types
of peanuts which would otherwise be in short supply, the Secretary of
Agriculture was to determine the extent to which allotments, for the
states producing such peanuts, must be increased to meet the demand.
However, the state allotment could not be increased for this purpose above
the 1947 harvested acreage of peanuts for that state. Acreage increases
for the production of peanuts which would otherwise be in short supply
were to be taken into consideration in computing future state allotments.
The result of these provisions was to add 83,266 acres to the 1951 national
allotment with most of the increase going to Virginia and North Carolina.

274

Prior to this legislation, a farmer whose picked and threshed
acreage was no larger than in 1947 could market peanuts without penalty
from acreage in excess of his farm allotment, provided the peanuts from
the excess acreage were marketed through agencies designated by the
Secretary of Agriculture. Under the new amendment, 1948 was the year to
be used in those cases where no peanuts were harvested on the farm in 1947.

Under the former legislation, designated agencies paid pro-
ducers the prevailing oil value for deliveries of excess peanuts of any
type in short supply and subsequently distributed the proceeds from
sales of these peanuts among the producers. Under the new amendment,
the Secretary, as an alternative, would authorize peanut buyers to pur-
chase excess peanuts from producers at prices not less than those at
which such peanuts could be sold for cleaning and shelling by CCC. When
authorized by the Secretary, producers would have the option of either
delivering these peanuts to designated agencies or selling them to approved
peanut buyers.

Farmers' stock peanuts produced in 1951 on allotted acreage were
supported at an average price of $230.56 per ton, equal to 88 percent of
the August 1, 1951, parity price. The support price was the minimum level
determined under the sliding-scale provisions of the Agricultural Act of
1949. Under the Agricultural Act of 1949, the support level for 1951 crop
peanuts, if acreage allotments or marketing quotas are in effect, must
fall between 80 and 90 percent of parity. The minimum support percentage
within these limits, however, is determined by the relationship of the
estimated total supply of the commodity as of the beginning of the market-
ing year to the normal supply. The support level may be set at a rate
higher than 90 percent if the Secretary of Agriculture determines after
a public hearing that an increased price support is necessary to prevent
or alleviate a shortage of a commodity essential to the national welfare
or to increase or maintain a production of a commodity in the interest of
national security. As in previous years, prices for such peanuts were
supported by means of producer loans and purchases and by purchases by
shellers operating under contracts with CCC. However, the 1951 sheller
contract did not include a No. 2 shélled-peanut-purchase program.as pro-
vided in preceding years. As in 1950, a two-price system prevailed
under which peanuts produced on excess acreage by eligible producers and
delivered to the Commodity Credit Corporation were paid for at a price
equivalent to the previous market value of peanuts for crushing for oil
and meal, less the estimated costs of storing, handling, and selling.

Program for 1952b - Legal Basis - During the crop year 1952, an
important change was made in the legal basis for the acreage allotment

 

 

b
Statement for 1952 crop prepared by Joe E. Davis, Agricultural

Economist, Oils and Peanut Division, CSS, USDA, 1959.

275

and price support program. Subsections (f), (g), (h), and (i) of Section
359 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, as amended were repealed.
These sections had provided the basis for a two-price system. They had
permitted the production of peanuts in excess of edible requirements and
marketing by crushing into oilfiand meal. Because of their repeai. price
support for the 1952 crop was on the basis of edible uses only.

. Between 1940 and 1952, the importation of peanuts in either
'shelled or farmers' stock form wane regulated by Section 104 of the
Defense Production Act of 1940. For the crop year 1952, no importation
’ was;permittedAngith the expiration of the Act, new restrictions were
necessary. This was accomplished by Presidential Proclamation of June
8, 1953, which established the annual import quota for peanuts at
1,709,000 pounds aggregate quantity shelled basis (approximately 1,200
tons farmers' stock basis). Unshelled peanuts were to be charged against
this quota at the rate of 75 pounds of kernels per 100 pounds of un-
shelled. The regulation established August 1, 1953, as the effective
date; consequently, the program became effective with the crop of 1953.

Acreage Allotment and Marketing Quota - The national acreage
allotment and marketing quota for the 1952 crop were announced on
November 25, 1951. This announcement provided for a national allotment
of 1,673,102 acres, a national marketing quota of 650,000 tons and a
normal yieldtof 777 pounds per acre. (1,673,102 x 777 - 1,300,000,000
pounds of 650,000 tons). The marketing quota was calculated by adding
to the estimated commercial edible use for 1950 (this was calculated at
475,000 tons) an estimate on increased consumption because of population
growth (13,000 tons) and an allowance for home use, seed, lost, etc.
(162,000 tons). The apportionment of the allotted acres to the states
is indicated in the Table 52-1 attached.

On January 28, 1952, an increase of 32,639 allotted acres
,(30,249 acres for Virginia type and 2,390 acres for Valencia) was an-
nounced under a4dgtegmi§ation of short supply for those two types
(Section 358, lot] 1'2_j Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 as amended).
This action raised the national allotment to 1,705,741 acres and the
national marketingmquota from 650,000 tons to 670,000 tons. For this
purpose the average yield of Virginia and Valencia types was estimated
to be 1,223 pounds per acre. The apportionment of these new acres to

the respective states is also indicated in Table 52-1.

Peanuts marketed from non-allotment land were subject to a
penalty of 50 percent of the loan rate. The average penalty for all types
was six cents per pound.

Two methods were provided-for the apportionment of the state
allotment among eligible peanut-producing farms. Authority for selection
of.the method was vested in the ASC state committee.

276

Method 1 - The state allotment, less a reserve for late or missed
farms, correction of errors, etc., was apportioned to counties in the state
on the basis of the past acreage of peanuts harvested for nuts in the
county during the five years 1946-1950 inclusive. The county allotments
were then apportioned to peanut-producing farms on the basis of the
adjusted average peanut acreage for each such farm determined in the
manner described under Method 2.

Method 2.- The state allotment, less a reserve for late or missed
farms, correction of errors, etc., was apportioned directly to eligible
peanut-producing farms on the basis of the adjusted average peanut acre-
age for each such farm. The adjusted average peanut acreage for each farm
was obtained by determining the average of the 1949, 1950, and 1951 acre-
ages of peanuts and the 1951 farm allotment. Provision was made for ad-
justment in the peanut acreage for any year for which such acreage was 1
low because of abnormal conditions affecting acreage. The allotment for
each farm was determined by multiplying the adjusted average peanut acre-
age for the farm by a factor obtained by dividing the state allotment,
less applicable reserves, by the state total of the adjusted average pea-
nut acreage for all farms in the state.

Production Realized - realized national production of 1952 crop
peanuts was 678,000 tons or only 8,000 tons above the estimate made in
the short supply docket. Production of Virginia and Valencia types, how-
ever, totaled almost 281,000 tons or about 76,000 tons more than the esti-
mate. The reported average yield for all states was 940 pounds per acre
or 163 pounds above the docket estimate. Average yield in the Virginia-
Carolina area in 1951 had established an all-time high of 1,477 pounds
per acre. This record was exceeded by the 1952 crop with an average of
1,765 pounds, an increase of almost 300 pounds per acre over the previous
high and 371 pounds above the pre-war high realized in 1940.

For the Southwest area 1952 was an exceptionally poor crop year.
Awerage yield per harvested acre was only 400 pounds, the lowest in ten
years. Total production in the Southwest area was 72,000 tons, the smal-
lest crOp after 1937 and about 1/4 the size of the 262,400 ton crop pro-
duced in l946.'.As the harvesting season advanced, the good crop in the
Virginia-Carolina area and the poor crap in the Southwest became apparent
as shown in Table 52-2. Data regarding acreage, yield, and production by
types and areas are given in Table 52-3. '

Support Program - On March 19, 1952, it was announced that "...
price support will be available to producers of 1952 crop farmers' stock
peanuts at a national average level not less than $239.40 per.ton. This
.... is 90 percent of the February 15, 1952 parity price of $226.00 per
ton....". The parity price in August was unchanged, consequently, the
support price was established at the announced price of $239.40 per ton.
This was about $9.00 above the 1951 support prices.

277

Public Laws 429 and 585 were passed which required that peanuts
and other basic commodities be supported at 90 percent of parity through
the 1954 crop as long as producers did not disapprove of marketing quotas.
Before these acts were passed, minimumgprice support levels were determined
by a sliding scale based upon such factors as the relationship of the
estimated total supply of the commodity at the beginning of the marketing
year to the normal supply.

Public Law 585 which'was approved by the President, July 17,
extended the present method of determining parity for such basic commodi-
ties as peanuts through the 1955 crop (an additional two years). This
meant that (dual) parity prices would be computed according to the
methods provided by both the Agricultural Act of 1948 and the Agricultural
Act of 1949. Whichever price was higher would be used. Until this law
passed, the method provided by the 1949 Act was to have become mandatory
after the 1953 crop.

The level of price support for each type was annpunced on June
23, 1952, and is given in Table 52—4. Differentials were determined from
a twenty-year (1931-1950) price series with two adjustments for unusual
conditions. One adjustment was to eliminate from the series the two
high and two low indices of relative prices for each type. The other
was the deduction from the price of Virginias as computed from this
series, the sum of $3.00 per ton and adding this to the price of Runners.
The justification given for the latter adjustment was that the quality of
Runner type peanuts had improved so that it had become competitive with
the Virginia type for some uses.

For price support purposes, any lot or load of peanuts that
otherwise would have been classifiedPVirginia" was called "Runner" if it
had less than 20 percent of fancy grade. The comparable requirement for
the 1951 crop was 16 percent. Valencia type peanuts suitable for clean-
ing and roasting, i. e., with less than 25 percent discoloration and
damage, were supported at Virginia prices except that there was no pre-
mium.for extra large kernels. Those not suitable for cleaning and roast-
ing were supported at Spanish prices applicable to the area in which they
were produced.. The support price for any lot or load was computed from
specified premiume and discounts from the basic price per too. The base
grade ton of both Virginia and Runner types had 65 percent sound mature
kernels, the Spanish types 70 percent. Screen size used for determining
the percentage of sound mature kernels for the Virginia type was 15/64
x 1 inch, Spanish, 14/64 x 3/4 inch, and Runner and Valencia types,

15/64 x 3/4 inch. Premiums and discounts for sound mature kernels above
and below the base grade Specifications are indicated in Table 52-4.
Virginia type peanuts received a Special premium for extra large kernels
of $1.25 per ton per percent for each full 1 percent above 15 percent.

The discount for foreign material was $1.00 per ton per percent
from 5 to 10 percent inclusive and an additional $2.00 per percent from

_278

11 to 15 percent inclusive. VLots with 16 percent or more foreign matter
were not eligible for price support.

Peanuts with 7 percent or more damaged kernels were not eligi-
ble for producer loans. They could, however, be supported by cooperative
loans or purchase agreements. For the first time a graduated schedule
of‘discounts for damaged kernels was made a part of the pricing syStem.
In previous years, discounts varied among types, but increased arithmet-
ically within the range of acceptableapercentage damage. The schedule
for damage discount for the 1952 crop is given in Table 52-5.'

, Loose shelled kernels were not included in the pricing system
but were included in the farmers stock weight. Prices were based on
percentages of clean weight, i.e., gross weight minus foreign material,
excess moisture and loose shelled kernels. Payment however was for net
weight, i. e., gross weight minus foreign material and excess moisture.
This had the effect of giving the loose shelled kernels a value at the
same price per pound as was paid for clean weight farmers stock. There
was no discount for a large percentage of loose-shelled kernels.

Grade factors used for determining support prices by types
were based on grade data for the three years 1949-1951. These were the
three years that inSpections had been made by the United States Depart-
ment of Agriculture. Because of poor crops, data for 1949 were deleted
for the Virginia type and for 1951 for other types. Thus, in reality,
the grade factors used for pricing the 1952 crap were based on inspec-
tions in two of the preceding years. For each of the types the realized
percentage sound mature kernels was less than expectation. To this
extent, effective support prices were less than those announced in the
price support schedule. For the Virginia type the somewhat small per-
centage of sound mature kernels offset by a larger than expected percent-
age of extra large kernels. Anticipated and realized grade factors are
given in Table 52-6.

. Methods of carrying out the price support program were similar
to those employed before the war. Principal reliance was placed on loans
to peanut cooperative associations and to a considerably lesser extent on
direct contacts with producer, 1. e., farm loans, warehouse loans, and
purchase agreements. Loans were to mature on or before May 31, 1953.
Producers were required to pay carrying charges until May 31, the maturity
date. The Associations were permitted, in fact encouraged, to sell
farmers' stock peanuts to buyers. Prices at which they could sell were
graduated upward until March 1953, when they reached 105 percent of
support plus reasonable carrying charges.

Warehouse loans, although authorized, were not available to all
producers. To fill some of these gaps, CCC built 52 warehouses and rented
them to the Associations. Of these, 35 were in Virginia, 13 in Texas,
and 4 in Oklahoma. ‘

279

Results - Data on the movement of the peanut crop through the
loan program of CCC vary considerably depending on the source. With CCC
operating data, there is a relatively short time lag from the completion
of a contract until the fact is recorded. Data obtained by the Crop
Reporting Board have a greater time lag because of the time necessary to.
issue orders and move stocks into and out of warehouses. CCC fiscal data’
have even more time lag because of the time required to complete the '
records after a sale has been made and the stocks actually moved; For
this report the attempt is made to present data that will mesh into and
be comparable to data in the "Peanut Stocks and Processing" report of AMS.

On August 1, 1952, CCC held about 73,000 tons of farmers' stock
peanuts. Of these almost 55,000 tons were Virginia type, about 10,000
tons Runner, and 9,000 tons Spanish. During the year all of the Runner
and Spanish peanuts were sold mostly for domestic crushing. Of the.
Virginia stocks, 6,000 tons were sold for domestic crushing and 5,000
tons for domestic edible use. The remaining 43,000 tons were carried
over into the 1953 crap year.

Prolonged drought caused a poor crop in the Southwest area, and
all of the production there was absorbed by the commercial market. In
the other two areas however, about 52,000 tons were placed under Associa-
tion loan, 3,000 tons under farm stored loan, and 4,000 tons under pur-
chase agreement. Operating and fiscal records of acquisitions and sales
are not in complete agreement concerning the tonnage acquired and sold
but do not indicate the amounts that came from Association, warehouse
loans, from farm stored loans, or from purchase agreements. Fiscal
reports indicate the takeover to be 50,000 tons, almost all of it from
Association loans.

Of the 1952 crop acquisitionsZ approximately 44,000 tons were
carried over into the 1953 crop year. This combined with 43,000 tons of
1951 crop peanuts still in storage made a total carryover of 87,000 tons
on August 1, 1953. During crop year 1953, all of the 1951 and 1952 crop
stocks were sold; 5,000 tons of Virginias for domestic edible use, the
remainder for domestic crushing and export.

Fiscal reports indicate that the total value of leans on 1952
crop peanuts amounted to 11.8 million dollars, an average of $219.50
per ton. Of these, about $0.9 million were redeemed and the balance
sold for a total of $7 million.

 

 

smsA .AN espouse
season mammauodtawuwoum

mmo .noam«>«n unammfi van mafia

 

 

 

 

can

 

 

 

 

 

 

.asuou no unsouom one mo «Huguenon
.anA .muwauaanun .ANV on Ann eoAuomm .aAouqu> you can. N can mess «AaAmuAs soc queue sea. emu A

.oooqmuo mason scum duced..

 

 

egos Assam

mmA.A «No.msA c.omnaaem s.nom.nom.A o.AeA.mc~.A ono.un NoA.n~o.A suuuum sagas:
- - o.~m . o.~m um son.m m.o>uonoe
mmm. nAn.os m.voA~o~ o.~mm.e~n A.m~s.omm sew.A AmA.m~n souA Amuseusom

- N o.om~ - o.om~ - mmu Assumes:
- - - o.sAs - o.mas - Ass «AesocAAao
u m o.~o~ n o.~¢~ n cos mnowwud
m moA m.Amo.A s.mA~ s.smo.~ - coo.“ sesamasoa
AA Nos s.~oo.~ m.sso.m A.~oo.a swm.A mso.m oases: suz
mom wmm.m~ m.AAm.emA o.mAH.oA~ s.omo.Aan - oms.msn nexus
moA Am~.mA m.moA.mm m.on.moA A.A~A.mea . mo~.~sA «soasAAo
o «co o.soa.m o.AsN.A o.AAe.e - men.e sumessn<,
.mmw som.mo n.mAm.o~A e.mma.mma A.om~.omm ooAAA. mma.omm sou< Ausssuaom

m AosAA A.msn.o «.mmmAA o.Aom.A - ,nmAAA Assaasssnaz
oNA snm.ou o.oaa.m~ m.waa.wsA «.mmm.5- nmA mom.o- usuauAA
so smm.m s.Asm.s A.Hss.ss A.smn.5m Am «Na.on sesqus
mom omo.mn s.nen.ws m.moa.mee N.ssn.men mos ANA.mem «Assume
a mme.N ~.o-.a m.oss.a o.AAm.eA saw «muqu aeAAouuo Assam
meA mom.s~ c.5oa.sA e.ma~.ss~ o.oms.mAm mesAmu AAm.mmN uau< neAAouaouuAeamua>
oA Ace e.ms~.m o.sss o.wmA.s can eoAAm «masseuse
noA Aso.oA o.mHAtsA o.oss.NwA o.noo.msA Anm.AA sws.maa «AAAouuo auuoz
um amm.s ~.m¢n.m m.sem.mAA o.AA~.ANA oNo.AA mso.moa. «AasuuAs
smz vac A oouoo>hm£ A .Uoumo>uom A Assam A «hammumA Houdmwuo A mono one woman

A . sea A . A . A uuosm A A
musoauoHHs A scones mouuoHH< A muooauoaadi .«

 

«mod .musoauoHHo nous mfihmm one mouoo ooumo>um£ .oouoo mouuoHdd

‘4‘

Assamese--.A-~m «Anna

281

Table 52-2.--Peanuts: production by areas compared to C88 preplanting

estimate - 1952 Crop

 

Estimate from 5 ° Crap Reporting Board estimate
preplanting and of production

 

O. O. O. C. 1

 

Are; short supply : August 1 : Final : Change
fifidocket : : :

1°22 3222 29312

Virginia-Carolina NA 211,125 274,438 [63,313

Southeast HA 271,150 311,200 $60,050

Southwest NA 103,857 72,262 -3l,613

United States 669,912 586,150 677,900 {91,750

Oils and Peanut Division, CSS
Program Analysis Branch
October 27, 1959

282

Table 52-3.--Peanuts: estimated acres harvested, yield, and production by
types and principal producing areas in 1952.

 

 

 

 

Area and type Acres harvested Yield Production
1,990 acres Pounds Tons {gross wt.)

Virginia-Carolina:

 

 

 

Virginia‘ 309 1,772 273,826
Runner - - -
Spanish 1 682 507
Valencia2 _;_ 760 105
Area total 11 1,765 274,438
Southeast:
Virginia1 10 900 4, 500
Runner 513 910 233,381
Spanish 248 751 93,163
Valencia _;_ 810 156
Area total 771 859 331,200
Southwest:
Virginia - - -
Runner - - -
Spanish 357 392 69,942
Valencia __J§ 1,120 2,320
Area total 361 400 72,262
United States:
Virginia1 319 1,745 278,326
Runner 513 910 233,381
Spanish 606 540 163,612
Valencia 5 1,080 2,581
Total 1,443 ’ 940 677,900

 

1 ' - '

For price support purposes the definition of Virginia type
peanuts has changed from year to year. In 1952, Virginia type peanuts
with less than 20 percent "Fancy" grade were called Runner type.

2 _
Less than 500 acres.

Oils and Peanut Division, CSS
Program Analysis Branch
October 28, 1959

283

Table 52-42-4Peanuts: support levels and premiums and discounts for sound
mature kernels by principal types, 1952 program

 

 

 

° type}
Item. . g : ~ :Southeast g'Southwest
. Virginia , Runner , Spanish 3 Spanish
Support price:
Average grade ton $252.71 $227.90 $245.33 $233.52
Base grade tonl $231.00 $215.00 $236.00 $232.00
SHK perdflhtage, base grade ton 65 65 70 ‘ 70

SMK premium.and discount
per percent -
Deviation from base grade 3 3.60 $ 3.30 $ 3.40 $ 3.30

 

a, v v r~

1Average support price per average grade ton, all types $239.40
which was 90 percent of $266.00, the effective parity,

 

Table 52-5.--Schedu1e of discounts for damaged
kernels, 1952 crop peanuts.

 

 

 

 

: Lg, - Percentage damagedfkernels
Type : 2 : -3 : 4 : S : 6 :- 7 y : 8 and
z : : 1 z : :‘ : over
Virginia $3.60 $7.20 $14.40 $21.60 $35.00 ’855;OO .‘$120.00
Runner 3.30 6.60 13.20 19.80 35.00 55.00 120.00
Southeast
Spanish 3.40. 6.80 13.60 20.40 35.00 55.00 120.00
Southwest
Spanish 3.30 c6.60 13.20 19.80 35.00 55.00 120.00

_Ag_. A A—

7 f 0119 and Peanut DifiaTon, 1333*—
Program Analysis Branch
November 6, 1959

“5
Mu 'v

.3“.-

 

3mm

mmas .3 nuga0>oz

seamen nauhama< sapwoum
$03333“. unseen use 3.8 .333 u an @3303 uozn
uoxuon uuoamsu uuwum NmoHH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“3.3 -.a H~.~- 3n.* om.* n~.n- oucmuomman
33.3 wo.o~ a~.o~ no.m «o.H no.mo _ susuueu.
mm.o .omna cm.- ao.n nH.H m~.mo euuooawn
”mausoau>
-.- o~.* . 3o.~- «3.- on.- ao.~- mucououmsn
no.h oh.e 33.35 nn.3 om.o -.me Haauuc
no.» oo.o m~.o~, «o.n an.“ o3.o~ uouuuaxm
”nuacoam .3 .m
om.n mN.H$ n~.¢n «o.Hm m3.* 3w.on mucouommqn
33.3 Hm.n nc.n~ n3.n an.~ No.mo 333303
no.“ no.3 mn.m~ a~.n «3.3 o~.N~ euuooaxu
”sausage .u .m
mo.~- am.* n~.~- so. x on.. om.n- ooamuoumsa
Ho.o an.3 oo.~a on.m Ho. mm.mo Husuu<
33.5 ma.n nH.3n ma.n Nu.“ Ha.me couuoaxm
"gunman
“3: x 33.- HH.\ so. - so.‘ ao.- 3e. . mucouommso
33. N mo.oh on.» sm.~ N3.o~ 3m.~ 3o.H 3m.oo Hanuo<
3H.o~ . . V 3a.» o~.~ mo.- aa.~ ma.H m~.~e emuuuaxm
"musfiuuw>
" M43 3 human ”ousumgoz” 2m " New; ” new u no u an " Mzm " _suuH (I:

 

mono mama monwammu mam Hmouoomxo .thuomm omen» “muscmoMnu.onNm manna

285

Program for 19530- Legal Basis - Between the beginnings of crop
years 1952 and 1953, there was no major change in the legal basis for the
program. ‘

Acreage Allotment and Marketing Quota - On November 17, 1952,
the national acreage allotment and marketing quota were announced. The
marketing quota was set at 663 thousand tons, the acreage allotment at
1,678,481 acres, and the average yield at 790 pounds per acre. The market-
ing quota.was the sum of: commercial edible uses, 510 thousand tons; seed,
75 thousand tons; home use, feed and loss, 54 thousand tons; exports, 4
thousand tons; and damaged kernels_unfit for edible use, 20 thousand tons.
’ The increase in estimate of commercial edible use over the preceding year
was based on an increase in population only.

On April 2, 1953, an increase of 658 acres was announced in
allotments for the production of Valencia type peanuts. This increased
the national total to 1,679,139 acres and raised the marketing quota
about 400 tons. Acres allocated to each of the states are indicated in
Table 53-1.

The basic penalty rate for overplanting was 5.9¢ per pound, or
50 percent of the base support rate.

As in 1952, two methods were provided for apportioning the state
allotments among farms, 1. e., through the establishment of county allot-
ments or by by-passing the county organization and making the allotments
directly from state offices to individual farms. However, one new provi-
sion was added. The 1952 farm allotments were used as the "base" for
computations of allotments for 1953. County committees were empowered to
make adjustments.

Production Realized - The 1953 crop of peanuts was good in all
three areas. Average yields per acre in both the Southeast and South-
west areas reached all-time highs while in the Virginia-Carolina area the
1953 yield was second only to 1952. In 1953 for the first time, average
yields per acre for the United States as a whole exceeded 1,000 pounds
per acre. The average yield was 1,030 pounds per acre, or 30 percent
above the docket estimate. Total production was 787,078 tons, or 19
percent‘above the marketing quota. The Crop Reporting Board estimates
of production increased in each area as the reporting season advanced.
For the United States as a whole, the estimate increased from 688 thousand
tons in August to 787 thousand tons, an increase of almost 100 thousand
tons or 15 percent. Data on yields and production by areas are given in
Tables 53-2 and 53-3.

Support Program - The pre-planting price support announcement
was made on April 24, 1953. This set the minimum support level at $237.60
per ton which was 90 percent of the effective parity of $264.00 per ton.

‘ Computations back of the determinations were as follows:

 

cStatement prepared by Joe B. Davis, CBS, USDA.

286

Total supply: Tons
Carryover 181,200
Production 663,310
Importsv none

Total supply 844,510

Normal supply:

Domestic consumption 637,000
Exports ' 2,000
Carryout (15 ‘7.) 95,850
Total 734,850
Percent

Supply percentage; 844,510/734,850 114.9

The minimum.level of support with a supplybpercentage of 114.9
was 86 percent of parity. The announced level was 90 percent of parity,
as provided by legislation. ' .

On July 27, price supports by types were announced and price
‘support schedules were made public. Since effective parity was $264.00
per ton, or down $2 per ton from preceding year, the support price for
each type was reduced $2 per ton from.the 1952 support price. The average
level of support was $237.60 per ton. A summary is given in Table 53-4.

Premiums and discounts for each percent SMK above or below the
base grade were identical to those in effect for the 1952 crop. The
*premium for ELK on Virginia type also remained unchanged at $1.25 per
percent of each full percent above 15.

- Three changes were made, however, in the values incorporated in
the pricing system. First, the fancy grade requirement for Virginia type
was increased from 20 percent in the 1952 crop to 25 percent for the 1953
crop. Second, the schedule of discounts was changed to reduce the dis-
counts between 4 and 7 percent damaged kernels and to make peanuts with 8
percent or more damage not eligible for price support. The schedule for
1953 is given in Table 53-5.

The third change had to do with discounts for foreign material.
For the 1953 crop, the discount was set at $1 per ton for each percent
from 5 to 12 percent inclusive. Peanuts with 13 percent or more foreign
material were not eligible for price support. For the 1952 crop, peanuts
with as much as 15 percent foreign material were eliglble for price support.

The schedules of discounts for damage and foreign‘material came
under close scrutiny by the industry after the pricing system for 1952 was
announced. The discount problem was discussed at length at a general

287

meeting held at Albany, Georgia, on January 27 and 28, 1953, and at sub-
sequent meetings in each of the areas. The schedule of discounts for
damage between 2 and 7 percent was unanimously agreed upon by the comp
mittee appointed for this purpose, but there was no agreement on 8 percent
or above. Later it was agreed that farmers' stock peanuts with more than
8 percent damage would not be eligible for price support. The schedule
recommended was accepted and incorporated in the pricing system for the
1953 crop as shown in Table 53-5.

Grade factors used in the pricing system were unchanged from
the preceding year. That is, they were based on two of the three crop
years 1949-1951. The realized percentage of sound mature kernels (SMK)
for Southwest Spanish was close to the forecast but for other types was
less. See Table 53-6. For the runner type, the realized percent of SMK
was 4.6 percent below the estimate, and the effective support for Runners
was about $13 per ton less than the announced support price. For the
Virginia type, the realized percentage SMK was 1.8 percent below the
estimate, but the realized percentage extra large kernels (ELK) moved up
to 30.41 percent or 4.27 percent above the estimate. Thus for the Vx
Virginia type, the percentage SMK in the crop resulted in the support
price $3.60 per ton below the estimate, but the percentage ELK resulted
in an increase of $5.00 per ton above the estimate. With one factor
'partially off-setting the other, the effective support price for the
Virginia crop was a little above the estimate given in the price support
announnement ‘. : . .

Administration of the price support program for the 1953 crop
was substantially unchanged from the preceding year. The loan program
was handled primarily through the three producer associations. Surplus
peanuts were sold for domestic crushing and export.

Results - Under the 1953 program, 228,555 tons of farmers'
stock peanuts were placed under loan. Of these, almost 80 thousand tons
were redeemed and 148,643 tons acquired by CCC. .In relationship to the
787 thousand tons total production, about 29 percent of the crop was
placed under loan and 19 percent acquired. 0f the total acquisitions,
137 thousand tons were sold before August 1, 1954, of which a little more
than one-half went for export, the balance to domestic crushing. The
carryover into the 1954 crop year amounted to approximately 11,361 tons.

The 1954 crop was poor and CCC was able to sell almost 1,500
tons of 1953 crop peanuts for unrestricted domestic use dufing that crop
year. The remainder was sold for domestic crushing or export. Runner
type peanuts oonstituted 115 thousand tons, or 77 percent of the total
acquisitions of 1953 crop peanuts. Spanish type made up about 31 thousand
tons, or 21 percent. Virginia made up the remaining 2,500 tons, or 2 per-_
cent. Total loans amounted to $48.5 million, and an average of $212 per
ton. Acquisitions were reported at $30.4 million or $205 per ton. Fiscal
reports indicate that total sales amounted to $19.3 million, an average

288

of almost $130 per ton. Losses totaled $11.1 million exclusive of carry-
ing charges, or almost $75 per ton.

Sales of peanuts held by CCC were made on a competitive bid
basis. With the small exception noted above, CCC sales for domestic use
were restricted to crushing for oil and meal. Buyers were required to
show proof that stocks bought were used for the designated purpose. This
proof of use was required on all sales whether for domestic or export
destination. Furthermore, provision was made for inspections of peanuts
sold for domestic crushing to see that they were crushed and did not
become channeled into the domestic edible market. Inspection was pro-
vided by the Associations and by the Commodity Office.

This method of selling with only minor changes was continued
until December, 1955.

mama .o Hmango:
325.5 3932.3 Emumoum

mmo .eoaaa>ae unease ecu «ago

mmu

.uuscmoa mama swoson> uoma

.QGOHHHO OUQUO BORN Quan—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3
ans a3m.enH c.mom.mmu a.mmm.nan.s o.amH.aao.s was Hm3.mae.a magnum eases:
III «on.» vacuum
mmm. No3.n3 3.33H.moa m.oo~.~em H.53m.omm mmm. mam.oun umu< unusauaom
- H m.em~ m.o o.en~ - cam atsommaz
- no o.~HH.H - o.~HH.H - one nacsoeaauo
a n o.a3e - o.m3~ - «3“ neonate

,3 33 n.3mo.~ a.mn o.omo.~ - k3o.~ «anemone;
ma mn3 n.3nn.e m.o~3.3 o.nna.n - nHH.m ocean: smz
cma men.3~ «.mae.naa o.o3m.on~ o.mmo.~em mam oea.oam enema
33a oaa.ee o.3oo.am m.nan.noa n.aem.33a - 3oa.m3s «guesses
he won m.3w3.n n.o~a c.3n3.3 - aan.3 nonaaxua
mmm. a3n.33 m.3m~.~oa a.o~3.a3a o.Ho3.anm mm. 3a3.mnm aos< “someone”

3 an“ m.neu4~ ~.amo o.mom.a - new.“ announces“:
one 3aa.aa n.nea.-~ m.m~a.eo~ n.~¢m.m- 3m onu.-~ gaunaa<
3aH mom.m a.~3~.m n.a¢3.m3 o.3au.mm «N aoa.en aessoam
and oa3.on 3.omm.~o a.moo.mm3 m.oam.m3m m mum.33m newness
«a m3a.a 3.3Ho.e o.Hee.k o.wmm.3a m mun.3a uaaaosao ensue
moo nmk.m~ e.nem.3e .oam33NN H.omm.omu .mm o3~.mm~ omu< «aasouao-aaaamua>
H o3n “.Noa.n n.mma o.mmm.m Na eaa_m «manuaaue
3w mua.aa a.~ma.e 3.mma.moa H.3me.oea - mom.maa «aeeouuu euuoz
oN mHH.m m.mmm.n ~.a~m.ooa o.eon.oee - Hmo.oae aaaswua>
302 . 3° . monomers; panama—mm Hugh ” ”been; " Hmswwuuo “ .

m uoz L n ” ....uuosm ” " mono one woman

mucus—ooze Hmmuoo oouuozd " 36253.2 "

an“: 93mm

Table 53-2.--Peanuts:

290

production by areas compared to CSS preplanting
estimate, 1953 crop.

 

 

 

 

 

: CSS 1 : Production estimated by

: pre- : Crngeportigg_Board

: planting : : :

Area . . .
' .and short ‘ August 1 ° Final ° Change
: supply : : :
:estimates : ,1 . W : g
‘ (Tons;

Virginia-Carolina NA ‘ 212,325 , 245,195 732,870
Southeast NA 369,757 391,210 721,453
Southwest NA _ 106,410 150,683 {44,273

United States

663,310 ‘688,492 '787,088 {98,596

 

fiv

Oils and Peanut Division, CSS
Program.Ana1ysis Branch
November 9, 1959

291

Table 53-3.--Peanuts: estimated acres harvested, yield, and production
by type and principal producing areas in 1953.

 

—v
C O
O , O
O
0

Area ahd type : Acres harvested

 

 

 

 

Yield : Production
1,000 acres .87 fiPounds ..' Tons {gross wt.f

Virginia-Carolina: fl; “;,_‘Pu h- LJ¢,213
Virginia1 290 _ - ;_1,688 .244,773
Runner . - - -
Spanish 1 633. 312
Valencia2 ' _;;_ 683 h 110 ‘

Area Total 91 1,685 245,195

Southeast: _

Virginia1 12 930 5,580
Runner 572' 1,020 - . 291,792
Spanish 223 840 93,669
Valenc 162 - 890 169

Area Total '86! - ~ 968 , 391 .210

Southwest:

‘ Virginia - - -
Runner - - -
Spanish 412 ‘ 719 148,183 .
Valencia __:g 1,255 2,500

Area Total 416 724 150,683

United States: ,
VirginiaI 302 1,658 250,353
Runner 572 1,020 291,792
Spanish 636 ‘ 762 242,164
Valencia 5 1,110 2,779

Total ‘ . 1,515 1,039 ; 787,088

 

1For price support purposes, the definition of Virginia type peanuts '
has changed from year to year. In 1953, Virginia type peanuts with less
than 25 percent "Fancy" grade were called Runner type.

2Less than 500 acres. '

Oils and Peanut Division, CSS
Program.Analysis Branch
November 12, 1959

292

Table 53-4.--Peanuts: support levels and premiums and discounts for
sound mature kernels by principal types, 1953 program.

 

 

 

h : fl Typel
Item : : :Southeast:Southwest
21 : Virginia : Runner : Spanish : Spanish

Support price:

1...... g;.a. tea $250.71 $225.90 $243.38 $231.52

Base grade ton $229.002 $213.00 $234.00 $230.00
SMK percentage, base

grade ton 65 65 7O ' 7O
SMK premium and discount

per percent deviation

from base grade 3 3.60 $ 3.30 $' 3.40 $ 3.30

 

1Average support price per average grade ton, all types $237.60,
which was 90 percent of $264.00 the effective parity.

2Does not include premium for extra large kernels.

Oils and Peanut Division, CSS
Program Analysis Branch
November 12, 1959

j 1 3 4
1-111: :II" a,

Table 53—5.--Schedu1e of discounts for damaged kernels.

 

Peanuts containing : . : :Southeast: Southwest
damaged kernels of: : Virginia : Runner : Spanish : Spanish

muo‘mbuw

percent $$33.60" $ 3.30 $ 3.40 a $ 3.30
percent 7.20 6.60 6.80 6.60
percent 12.60 ' 11.55 11.90 111.55'
percent 19.80 18.15 18.70 18.15
percent 27.00 24.75 25.50 24.75
percent 37.80 34.65 35.70 34.65
percent and over Not eligible for price support

 

0118 and Peanut Division, css
Program.Ana1ysis Branch
November 17, 1959

mom

amaa .NH uaeaa>oz
nocmum mamhamc<eamuwoum

mmo acoauapam uscmum use mafia .uoxoon uuommsm ocean mmmHH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a3.* m3.* a3.H- a~.- mH.- 3o.H- aeaeeemman
mm.o 3m.m Ho.Hn um.~ mo. 3~.~o assume
wm.o om.“ om.N~ mo.m mH.H w~.we Hmmuoomeg
."maocoaub
Ho.u mN.: oa.~s m~.Hu HH.- 3N. mucmummmao
33.5 mM.@ No.nu mn.n ¢H.H o~.o~ Heauu<,
mo.w oo.o m~.o~ ~o.m on.H o3.on Hemuomaxm
"neaeeam .3 .m
03.: 3N.* No.Hu 3m.u no.* mn.Ha monogammao
c~.~ RN.3 on.n~ m3.m om.~ H3.H~ Hmsuuaq
No.5 no.3 mm.mu a~.m mm.H ou.- Huououaxm
unmacmmw .m .m
om.u wH.* mH.~- n~.Hx H~.Hx mm.3a muemuommao
oH.n. o~.3 oo.mn ma.m w3.~ 3m.3o Hm=u0<
oo.n mm.m ma.3a ma.m a~.H Ha.wo Heauumaxev
“noccnm
e~.3* em.* Hw.e a3.a- eo.- o3.* Hm.u- auaaaemoan
H3.om mm.wm oH.m Hm.m Ho.mo fl~.N mn.H nm.m Hvsuo<
3H.om 3m.w oh.~» mo.Hm NN.N mH.H mH.~o Hemuuwaxm
"wHfiHwHH>
Mam «wwocmm "ousumwoz" 2h “ Mmqu 0MB " Mo " Mn ” MZm "

 

.mouo mmma .oouaamou ecu oouoomxm .muouomm huHHmsV "muscmmmun.osmm manna

s n'.
n- .
FI

294

Program for 19544- Acreage Allotments and Marketing Quotas -
The national acreage allomment and marketing quota for 1954 crop peanuts
were announced on October 1, 1953. This announcement placed the acreage
allotment at 1,610 thousand acres, the minimum permitted by law.. The
apportionmenttfif these acres to the various states is indicated in Table—
54-1. Normal yield was set at 837 pounds per acre and the national
marketing quote at 673,785 tons. Except for the minimum.acreage provi-
sion, the quota would have been set at 647 thousand tons and the acreage
allotment at 1, 545,998 acres. The total estimated requirement for 1954
crop peanuts was the sum of: 527 thousand tons for commercial edibI8;
purposes, 68 thousand tons for seed, 28 thousand tons for home and local
use, 7 thousand tons for livestock feed and loss, 15 thousand tons for
damage to otherwise edible grades that would make them.unsatisfactory'
for edible use and 2 thousand tons for export for edible use.

This marketing quota could not become effective without a
referendum of growers because the preceding referendum was for the crops
of 1951, 1952 and 1953. Consequently, a peanut quota referendum.to ‘
cover the crops of 1954, 1955, and 1956 was held on December 15, 1953.
There were 64,433 votes cast of which 62,637 or 94.3 percent voted "yes".
This was substantially above the two-thirds vote necessary to makermhrfy‘
marketing'quotasteffective.‘TThus,qquotas became mandatory for the three
designated years. .

._ The program.for 1954 was unique in one respect. It was the_
first and only year after the enabling act was passed prior to the 1951'
crop that there was no determination of short supply for any type or "
‘types.

The basic penalty rate for overplanting was set at 6.1a per 3
pound, or 50 percent of the average support price for the crop. '

For the 1954 crop the state allotments went directly tO"
eligible peanut producing farms. County allotments were not established.)
The "base" or starting point for determining the allotment for an indi-
vidual farm was the allotment established for that farm.for the preced-
ing year. Individual farm allotments were determined by multiplying the
farm "base" by a factor.obtained by dividing the state allotment less
reserve By: the: t6talrof all "base" acres of eligible farms in the state.
The reserve for new farms was one-half of one percent of the United
States total, or 8,050 acres.

Production Realized- Drought during the growing season caused
the crop to be poor, especially in the Southwest and Southeast areas.
Total harvested production was only 504,248¢tons, the smallest in twenty
years. Average yield in the Southeast was only 602 pounds.per acreg‘
down 38 percent from the 968 paunds average for the immediately pre-
ceding crop. In the Southwest average yields were less than 400 pounds
' per.acre or a little over one-half of the.average of the preceding year.
In the Virginia-Carolina area also,_the crap was poor but relatively

 

dStatement prepared by Joe F. Davis, CSS, USDA.

295

better than in either of the other two areas. The average yield per acre
in the Virginia-Carolina area was 1,495 pounds, down 190 pounds from 1953
and 270 pounds from 1952.

The seriousness of the short crop was not recognized generally
until the marketing was well advanced (Table 54-2) and so prices paid to
farmers did not fully reflect the shortage. Data on yields and produc-
tion by types and acres are given in Table 54-3.

Imports“: Quota Lifted - When the smallness of the crop became
evident, the industry requested that provision be made to permit importa-
tion of peanuts from other producing countries. The apparent supply and
demand situation was analyzed and subsequently was held by the Tariff
Commission. On March 9, 1955, by Presidential Proclamation, the limits—
tion on permitted annual imports, namely 1,709,000 pounds shelled basis,
was increased by 51 million pounds with the additional imports subject
to a fee of 2c a pound. Subsequently, this increase did not seem.adequate
and another proclamation on May 16 removed all limits on imports for the
balance of the marketing year ending July 31, 1955.

With the dikes broken, the flood of peanuts started to arrive.
Almost 418 million pounds of shelled goods were reported as imported in
March; 11.4 million in April; 25.2 million in May; 38.6 million in June;
and 39.2 million in July. Thus, 119.2 million pounds of shelled goods
were reported as imported during the five months, March through July,
1955. In the first three months of the crop year 1.7 million pounds
had been imported which made the total imports for the year almost 121
million pounds. About 1 million pounds, however, were re-exported so
net imports during the year were 119.3 million pounds. Brazil and India
with more than 34 million pounds each and Mexico with more than 29 mil-
lion were the three principal countries of origin.

Apparently, there was some time lag or confusion in reporting
the arrival of some peanuts which resulted in their being reported in t
the 1955 crop year rather than 1954. The reported imports in 1955 were
3,350 thousand pounds or 1,641 thousand pounds above the legal maximum.
Assuming that this apparent average did, in fact, arrive before August
1, 120.8 million pounds of peanuts were imported in the five months
because of the modification of the quantitative import restrictions.

This unusual import situation is here dealt with at some length
because data on stocks as of August 1, 1955, and data on disappearance
of edible grades of peanuts during the 1954 and 1955 crop years sometimes
appear incongruous. With available data, it is difficult to accurately
follow the flow of these imported peanuts into stocks and ultimately into
edible uses or crushing for oil.

Support Program - The minimum average level of support for 1954
crap peanuts was given in the preplanting price support announcement on

April 7, 1954. The level established was $243 per ton or 90 percent of
$270, the effective parity on March 15. The calculated supply percentage
was 115.6 percent which would have permitted a minimum.1evel of 86 per-
cent of $270 or $232.20 per ton. Determination of the supply percentage
was as follows:

 

 

Total Supply - tons Normal Supply - tons
Carryover 148,000 Domestic consumption 637,000
Est. production 701,000 Edible exports 2,000
Imports 1,000 Statutory allowance

for carryover 96,000

Total 850,000 Total 735,000

The estimated production was the product of the estimated
yield (926 pounds per acre) and the estimated harvested acres (1,513,400
acres or 96 percent of 1,610,000 acres, the total United States allot-
ment).

The Agricultural Act of 1954 provided for the transition from
"old" to "modernized" parity for peanuts at the rate of five percent per
year beginning with the 1956 crop. The "old" parity was designed to
maintain the purchasing power of individual farm commodities in terms of
things farmers buy the same as it was in the base period which in the
case of peanuts was 191051914. The "new" parity was designed to main-
tain a purchasing power of agricultural products in general in terms of
the things farmers buy the same as it was in the 1910-14 base period;
however, the new parity uses the relationship.among prices of individual
farm commodities in the most recent ten-year period. Prior to the pas-
sage of the act of 1954, the entire shift in parity, a drop of about
20 percent, was to take place with the 1956 crop. Thus, under the new
act, the full transition to the modernized or new parity wouhd not be
completed until the 1959 crop.

The legislation provided that the sliding scale would go into
effect for the 1955 peanut crop. The 1954 act continued support at 75
to 90 percent of parity, except that the support for the 1955 crop cauld
not be less than 82.5 percent of parity. The sliding scale provision
means that the minimum.1eve1 of support is based upon the supply percent-
age; that is, the relationship between estimated and normal supply for
the coming year. For example, if‘the estimated supply of peanuts is
expected to be not more than 108 percent of the normal supply, support
would be at 90 percent of parity. If the supply percentage is more than
130, then support would be not less than 75 percent of parity.

On July 29, 1954, it was announced that a No. 2 peanut purchase
program would be in effect for the 1954 peanut crop. This program was
reinstated because of the belief that it would reduce costs to CCC by
diverting low grade rather than high grade peanuts. The program was

designed to complement rather than replace the primary program of producer
loans through growers' cooperative associations.

The final support level and the price support schedule for 1954
crop farmers' stock peanuts were announced on July 30, 1954. The national
average support price was established at $244.80 per ton which was 90
percent of the August parity of $272 per ton.

Support prices for the four principal types were established
to maintain differentials approximately as they had been for the 1953
crop. The average support price per base grade ton was $7.20 per ton
above the price for 1953 when the increases were converted to average
grade ton by type. Some uniformity was lost due to the rounding of the
data, and increases per average grade ton ranged from $7.04 per ton for
Southwest Spanish to $7.39 for Runner type. A summary of the average
prices is given in Table 54-4.

With one exception, the method cf computing the value of any
individual lot of peanuts was similar to that used for the 1953 crop.
Premiums and discounts for sound mature kernels above the base grade per-
centages were increased 10¢ per percent over the preceding year. Dis-
counts for damaged kernels was increased slightly because of the high I
level of average support (Table 54-5). Discount for foreign material
remained at $1 per ton per percent in excess of 4, but the upper limit
for Runners eligible was reduced‘from‘12_percent to 10. For Virginia
type peanuts the premium for extra large kernels remained at $1.20
above 15 and the damage for the types remained at 25 percent base grade.
Valencia type peanuts suitable for cleaning and roasting once more were
supported with the same schedule as Virginias but without a premium.for
extra large kernels.

The principal change in pricing had to do with loose shelled
kernels. In previous years, loose shelled kernels had been ignored in
the pricing system although they did not enter into the computed value
by being a part of the net weight. It was felt, however, that loose
shelled kernels tended to reduce the value of farmers“ stock peanuts
by adding to milling coats, increasing milling losses and adding to
storage problems. Consequently, a discount of 50¢ per ton was established
for each full one percent of loose shelled kernels in excess of 5 percent.

Grade factors used in the pricing system remained unchanged
from the 1952-53 crops. The drought in the Southeast and Southwest areas,
however, caused the percentages of sound mature kernels for Southwest
Spanish, Southeast Spanish, and Runner types to be substantially below
the estimate. For the Virginia type the realized percentages of sound
mature kernels was one percent below the estimate, but the percentage of
extra large kernels was 31.34 percent or more than 5 percentage points
above the estimate. Grade (or quality) factors estimated and realized
are given in Table 54-6.

298

Grading Method v Grade factors reported for farmers stock pear ‘u
nuts are often misunderstood because the percentages cannot be added to-
gether. Beginning with the crop of 1949, the grading system.has been
comparable for all years except one. During these years, foreign material,
excess moisture, and loose shelled kernels were calculated as percent-
ages of gross weight. The weights of foreign material and excess mois-
ture subtracted from the gross weight left "net weight" which was the
net weight used to calculate the value of any lot. The price per ton
or per pound was multiplied by the net weight to give the value. Net ,
weight less the weight of the loose shelled kernels gave "clean weight“
or "net weight less loose shelled kernels".

Percentage of extra large kernels was also calculated as a
percentage of "clean weight" but the weight of the extra large kernels
was a component part of the sound mature kernels of the Virginia type
only.

Total kernels in a lot (TKO) was the product of the sums of
percent SMK, DK, and 0K times net weight. This implied that the propor-

tion of loose shelled kernels that could be reCOVered was moretapproxi-

mate1y_equal to the“ ro Mr, ,n ofwcleanpweig t that could be recovered
as one over another in of ernel in the m ling process.

Except for the crop of 1956, this system of grading applied to
all crops up to and including 1959.

Results - Early in the marketing season before the seriousness
of the poor crop was generally understood, 7,156 tons of farmers' stock
peanuts were placed under loan. All of these subsequently were redeemed
by the trade. All of the 1953 crop held by CCC (11,361 tons) was sold.
There were no purchases under the No. 2 program. At the close of the
year (July 31, 1955), there were no peanuts of any kind held by CCC.

man_.mH umoem>oz
nocmum mammamc< amuwoum

mmo acoamq>ao uscmmm one edge

.ucoonom moo mo «Hmcuocou
.mmoammo mucus Boum mumnH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~e3.~ mmm.a~H Hme.HHm a3m.ma~.H oo.oHe.H omo.m ooo.oHe.H aeeaem sauna:

I I I I I I One—w Nwzmmum
a3~.H e33.mm ame.H3H mN~.eem mHa.aom 03m.~ m33.mon ease aaeaeeaom
o H a3~ H m3~ N e3~ Haaoaasz
NH o a3m mam m3a m o3a «HaeooaHau
mH o eon mHN owe m aHa aaoaaaa
N 03 oNa.H mm maa.H oH amemmH eaaHaHaou
oH N33 em3 ma3.3 Hna.3 mN eca.3 . ooHaaz.aez
3mm aka.H~ ~mm.~oH n83.3mm a3m.amm 3ma.H meo.mmm aaxee
ooN ema.mH moH.~m moa.moH mHo.mmH oae .mun.amH aaeaaHao
mH 3m3 Nun.m aHa H3N.3 HN o-.3 aaeaexaa
oHH.H ~em.am mua.amH mmm.~ee ee~.-w mHH.3 mme.mHm aeaa aaaaeaaom
a mHN memes Nam mam.a mm amm.a aaaHaeaaaHz
emu aaH.oH mem.am Hae.HmH oeo.aH~ mao.H mea.aHN eaeeaH<
3o3 omm.m mmu.a 3ma.e3 ~mo.nn mam aae.3m aeHeon
Hem Hoe.mm me.mHH mma.mH3 a3N.a~m ane.~ HHe.3Nm aHmeoeu
an e33.H o3e.3 NaH.a «Hm.nH; as m3a.mH aaaHoaao eaaom
moH omo.a~ nmo.oH mw~.aem eHm.ae~ ,smm.H aHa.NAN aaea aaHHoaao-aHanea>
wH em3 mnm.~ "Ne mmmrm . mH 3on.m summonses
we mae.aH 3m3.m maH.eeH Nee.aeH a3m mHm.meH aasHoaao eaeoz
NH Has.» 3am.m ma3.~oH Nao.eoH omm ~3m.ncH_ eHeawaH>
302 a mac accumumwmnu mmumm>um= " Hmcwm u menmm" Hmcwmmwo

“ - uoz u 32 " duh“ Ufld madam
mucuauo~am nuws_maumm .Hmouom mouuoHH< “ cucmEuoHH<

 

.omaa .mucuauoHHm cuflz maumm one mouse omumo>um£ amonom vmuuoHHm

"mussmmmII.HI¢m manna

Table 54-2.--Peanuts: production by areas compared to CCC preplanting
' estimate, 1954.

 

 

 

 

: CSS : Crop Reporting Board
Area , :preplanting ‘13 estimate of gproduction
: estimate, : August 1 f: Final : ChggL
Virginia-Carolina NA 229,845 212,250 ~17,595
Southeast NA 322,792 .2L4,320 ~108,472
‘Southwest ' NA 81,338 77,678 «3,660
United States 701,000 633,975 504,248 -.129,727

 

 

Table 54-3.--Peanuts: estimated acres harvested, yield, and production
by type and principal,pnoducing areas in 1954.

 

 

 

 

 

Area and type :Acres harvested: Yield Production
1,000 acres Pounds Tons ross wt. V
Virginia-Carolina:
Virginia _ 283 1,497 . 211,798
Runner - - -
Spanish 1 687 292
Valencia2 ‘_;_ 775 160
Area total 28 6,495 212,350
Southeast: -
Virginia1 9 - 750 3,420
Runner 451 -. 615 138,679
Spanish 251 574- 72,031
Valencia _;;_ 775 190
Area total 71 602 . 214,320
Southwest:
vVirginia - - -
Runner - a -
Spanish 388 390' 75,698
mutant is ___3_ 1 ,280 1 ,980
‘ Area total 391 397 77,678
United States:
Virginia 292 1,474 215,218
Runner 451 615 138,679
Spanish 640 463 148,021
Valencia 4 1,165 2,330
Total 1,387 727 504,248

 

‘IFor price support purposes, the definition of Virginia type pea-
nuts has changed from year-to-year. In 1954 Virginia type peanuts with
less than 25 percent "fancy" grade were called Runner type.

2Less than 500 acres. Oils and Peanut Division, CSS

Program.Analysis Branch
November 20, 1959

301

Table 54-4.--CCC peanut program: support levels and premiums and dis-
counts by types, 1954

 

 

. TypéI—B
Item : : :Southeast: Southwest
: Virginia': Runner : Spanish : Spanish

 

Support price:
Average grade ton
Base grade tonz
SMK percentage, base grade
ton 65 65 70 70
SMK premium.and discount '
per percent deviation
from base grade

$238.56
$237.00

$257.99'
$326.00

$233.29
$220.00

$250.66
$241.00

$ 3.70 $ 3.40 $ 3.50 $ 3.40

 

1Average support price per average grade ton, all types $244.80
which was 90 percent of $272.00, the August effective parity.
2Does not include premium.for extra large kernels.

 

 

Table 54-S.--CCC peanut program: schedule of discounts for damaged
Kernels, 1954.

Tym-z
Peanuts containing :Southeast: Southwest

: Virginia : Runner

 

damaged kernels of: : Spanish : Spanish
2 percent $ 3.70 $ 3.40 $ 3.50 $ 3.40
3 percent 7.40 6.80 7.00 6.80
4 percent 12.95 11.90 12.25 11.90
5 percent 20.35 18.70 19.25 18.70
6 percent 27.75 25.50 26.25 25.50
7 percent 38.85 35.70 36.75 35.70

8 percent and over

Not eligible for price support

 

Oils and Peanut Division, CSS
Program.Analysis Branch

TNovember 20, 1959

Non

mama .om H36362
gunman mfimaaoc<.asumoum
mmo .aosms>nn assume 6:6 mafia s
.umxuon uuoamam monks «mmau

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oH.H* mo.ux no. - oo.- as.* no. - monouuuman
m¢.a Hm.m mm.n mw.Ha _ o~.~ om.s s~.mo Huauu<
mm.o om.a - om.ma a¢.m m~.a m~.mo composes»
. "caonmac>
a¢.H* a¢.ax nm.o- , ~m.~* 60.- mo.m. mucoumumsa
«m.m ao.m H~.N mn.ca an.a s~.~ aa.as Hashes
no.» oe.o - ma.oa No.n on.“ os.oa scouumaxm
"Swansea .3 .m
~N.- mm.H* No.¢- a6.w o~.\ oo.n- mommuommsn
as.“ mm.m nm.¢ 35.na o¢.e ao.~ oa.a6 Husuo<
No.a mo.¢ - mm.ma ma.m . mm.H oa.~a Humuomaxu
. ”pudenda .u .m
«e.- on.s* so.m- em.H* . o~.x s¢.m- monoummman
Nu.a mo.m m~.N aq.oa s¢.n no.“ mm.~s Hugues
so.“ ma.m - «H.6a m¢.m a~.~ Ha.me Humuomaxm
, “Manama
o~.n* oH.* s¢.* nu.a-. «e.- «e.- as. - consummmsn
«m.sm oH.ms swam «H.m om.H ma.mo mo.~ HH.H aH.os Huauo<
«H.o~ ..H «a.» o~.~ - mo.aa ha.~ as.“ ma.as Heuuomaxm
. "mansmuss
m Mum. u mucus” massages“ 2m " .uwu " may 1 Mo " an “ mzm. " _smuH

 

.nouo «mad .Hssuoo use vouommxm .auouoom huaflusv ”ousssomne.or§n sassy

..--'-

 

 

 

1955 Crop - The original plans for 1955 production contemplated
practically no change from the previous year in the acreage to be planted
to peanuts. The national allotment was set at the legislative minimum.of
1,610,000 acres. However, on May 4, the Department of Agriculture an-
nounced a 7.5 percent increase in the marketing quota and acreage allot-
ments for the 1955 peanut crop. The increase applied to all areas and
types of peanuts. The decision to make these increases followed an in-
vestigation and hearing, as required by law. It was also announced that
prices for the 1955 crop peanuts would be supported at a national average
minimum.level of $244.80 per ton, the same as the previous year. This
reflected 90 percent of the April 15, 1955 parity.

This was the first year under the Agricultural Act of 1949 as
amended that 90 percent support for peanuts was not mandatory (as long as
farmers approved of marketing qubtas). Support for the 1955 crop could
have ranged between 82.5 to 90 percent, based upon supply-demand condi-
tions. However, on the basis of the then current supply-demand condi-
tions, support at 90 percent'of parity would be required for the 1955 crop.
The principal provisions for the 1955 program were essentially the same
as those in effect for the 1954 crop.

As the season progressed, it became apparent that the supply of
peanuts would again be in surplus. By January 1956, about 300 million
pounds of Spanish and Runner type peanuts, 19 percent of the total 1955
crop, had been placed under loan. The crop in the Virginia-Carolina area
was severely damaged by heavy rains and output was down seven percent
'from the previous year and the smallest since 1938. Prices to farmers
for Spanish and Runner type peanuts had averaged about the same as the
year earlier. However, prices for comparable quality Virginia type nuts
were higher than the year earlier. CCC announced a purchase program for
No. 2 shelled peanuts, which are the lower quality edible nuts, at speci-
fied prices for diversion into oil or export.

Through May 15, 1956, CCC sold about 135 million pounds, in-
cluding No. 2 peanuts, for domestic crushing. In total, CCC acquired 270
million pounds or 17 percent of the 1955 crop.

Meanwhile, the message of the President of the United States
to Congress recommended that Congress eliminate the fixed national
minimum allotment for peanuts.

1956 Crop - In November 1955, it was announced that the 1956
national allotment for peanuts would be 1,610,000 acres, the minimum.set
by law. With average growing conditions in 1956, yields were expected to
be high enough to provide a moderate surplus of peanuts above the probable
food and farm uses. It was announced on April 24, that the national aver-
age minimum support price for-1956 crop peanuts would be 11.4 cents per
pound, one cent less than for the 1955 crop. The decline reflected the
lowering of support from 90 to 86 percent of parity and a shift from "old"
toward "modernized" parity.

304

Current legislation provided for the transition from "old" to
"modernized" parity for peanuts at the rate of five percent of the "old"
parity price per year beginning with January 1956. Thus, the 86 percent
support was applied to the "transitional" parity, which was five percent
lower than the "old" parity. By types, the average support price per
pound in 1956 crop quota peanuts was: Virginia type, 12.1 cents; Runner
type, 10.6 cents; Southeastern Spanish type, 11.5 cents; and Southwestern
Spanish type, 11.2 cents. The national average support was 11.4 cents.

Although the 1956 national allotment was first set at legal
minimum, it was subsequently raised by 40,000 acres for Virginia and
Valencia types because of a short supply during the 1955 crop year. In
addition, in order to alleviate the shortage of large kernel peanuts,
import restrictions were temporarily lifted by Presidential proclamation
for this type nut from.August 30, 1956 to September 10, 1956. However,
a fee of seven cents per pound of shelled kernels (but not more than 50
percent advalorem) in addition to the regular seven cent fee had to be
paid on these imports. It was estimated that about two million pounds
were imported during this period.

A total of 390 million pounds of 1956 crop peanuts were placed
under support. This was about twenty-five percent of the crop. Most of
the peanuts under support were acquired by CCC as there was little price
incentive for farmers to redeem loans. Through September 15, 1957, CCC
had called loans on about'244 million pounds and diverted them to crush-
ing and export. About 25 million pounds were redeemed from.loan and sold
for domestic edible uses. CCC shelled and placed in cold storage 110 .
million pounds of the 1956 crop to carry into the new crop year. CCC
also diverted 14 million pounds, farmers' stock equivalent, of No. 2
peanuts. By September 1957, CCC had sold about 34 million pounds of the
110 million in cold storage, primarily for export.

Prices for the 1956 crop were near support level in the Virginia-
Carolina and Southeast areas. Severe drought in the Southwest reduced
output and prices were somewhat above support.

Another factor in determining the support level for the 1956
crop was the "sliding scale". This is based on the relationship of
estimated actual supply to the normal supply. The sliding scale went
into effect with the 1955 crop but the supply percentage, as estimated,
kept the support at 90 percent of parity. If the estimated supply made
up of carry-in stocks, production, and imports, is expected to be not a.»
more than 108 percent of the normal supply, support would be at 90 per-
cent of parity. If the supply percentage is more than 130, then support
would be set at not more than the minimum of 75 percent of parity. Nor-
mal supply is defined by legislation as the estimated domestic consump-
tion and expected exports plus a carry-out equal to 15 percent of the
two. In this manner, support for the 1956 crop was determined to be 86
percent of parity and this percentage was applied to transitional parity
which was five percent lower than the old parity.

1957 Crop - On November 9, 1956, a marketing quota of 725,305
tons of 1957 crop peanuts and a national allotment of 1,610,000 acres
for picking and threshing was announced. This was the minimum.market-
ing quota and acreage allotment permitted under existing legislation.
The type increase of 40,000 acres.for Virginia peanuts in 1956 was not
continued for 1957; however, Valencia type peanuts, which were in short
supply, received an increase in allotment of twelve percent.

On December 11, 1956, in a referendum on marketing quotas for
the 1957, 1958, and 1959 crops, peanut producers voted favorably for
their continuation. Thus, quotas will have been in effect since 1949.
The stage was therefore set for price support to be continued at some
level between 75 and 90 percent of parity. Had quotas been rejected,
support would have been at 50 percent of parity to cooperators.

On April 29, 1957, CCC amplified its earlier general position
of sales policy regarding CCC cary-over stocks of 1956 crop peanuts.
Any farmers' stock peanuts the Corporation carries over into the market-
ing year beginning August 1, 1957, that are offered for sale for edible
use would be sold at prices not less than 105 percent of the 1956 or
1957 crop support price, whichever is higher, plus actual carrying
charges to the date of sale or October 1, 1957, whichever date is
earlier. Any shelled peanuts carried over and offered for sale would
be sold on a similar basis. CCC contracted to shell about 110 million
pounds of 1956 crop peanuts and hold them in cold storage into the next
crop year. This was done to assure adequate edible supplies in the
event of a short crop in 1957. If not needed for edible purposes, the
carry-over would be diverted at the appropriate time to other uses.

- Price support levels by types and areas for 1957 crop quota
peanuts were announced in early August. They were based on‘n national
average support of 11.1 cents per pound or $221.40 per ton.' The sup-
port level was equal to 81.4 percent of the parity price of 13.6 cents
per pound as of the beginning of the crop year. This compared with the
support price of 11.4 cents the previous year which reflected 86 per-
cent of transitional parity. Loans on the 1957 crop were made available
to individual producers and to growers associations from the time of '
harvest through January 31, 1958, with a maturity date may 31, 1958, or
earlier on demand by CCC. Support prices by states were: Virginia
type, 11.8 cents; Runner type, 10.3 cents; Southeastern Spanish type,
11.2 cents; and Southwestern Spanish type, 10.9 cents. The loan value
was the support price less charges for storage, inSpection and grading,
and for expenses of the cooperatives that market the peanuts. The deduc-
tion is usually about one—half cent.

U. S. farm prices averaged 10.3 cents per pound, 0.8 cents
less than the national support rate and one cent below a year earlier.
Lower prices this crop year reflected a lower support price and a lower
quality. Heavy rains in nearly all producing areas during the peanut

306

harvesting season and severe freezes in the Virginia-Carolina area
damaged a significant quantity of peanuts. On January 7, 1958, CCC
widened eligibility of 1957 crop peanuts for loan to include damage
above seven percent with discounts for the degree of damage, and also
extended the loan period from.January 31 to February 28, 1958. About
240 million pounds of peanuts were placed under support, nearly seven-
teen percent of the crop, but approximately 145 million pounds were re-
deemed. Much of the surplus acquired by CCC was of relatively low quality.

1958 Crop - A marketing quota of 826,000 tons of 1958 crop
peanuts and a national allotment of 1,610,000 acres for picking and
threshing was announced on October 28, 1957. This was the minimum. : 1
marketing quota and allotment permitted by legislation.

The Agricultural Act of 1958 required that peanuts be sup-
ported between 75 and 90 percent of parity, depending on the percentage
relationship of estimated supply to normal supply. By this method, the
national average support level was set at 10.7 cents per pound ($213.20
per ton), 0.4 cents less than in 1957 and reflecting 80.8 percent of the
August, 1958, effective parity price. Support prices by types per ton
were: Virginias $224.97, Runners $200.50, Southeast Spanish $217.69,
Southwest Spanish $209.69, and Valencias $220.17. Loans were made avail-
able to producers and grower associations through January 31, 1959 to
mature May 31, or earlier as demanded by CCC.

The principal provisions of the 1958 programmwere similar to
those for 1957. The transition from "old" to "modernized" parity was
continued.

. The supply of peanuts in the 1958- 59 marketing year ended
July 31, 1959, was 2, 200 million pounds (farmers' stock basis), about
16 percent above the previous season. Growers placed about 265 mil-
lion pounds under the support program; most of this was acquired by CCC.
In addition, CCC acquired about 88 million pounds of peanuts (kernel
basis) from shellers under the No.2 program*which provided that shellers
could offer No. 2 grade peanuts and below at the rate of 200 pounds per
ton of eligible farmers' stock peanuts purchased.

Prices received by farmers averaged 10.6 cents.

1959 Crop - On November 3, 1958, a marketing quota of 886,000
tons and a national allotment of 1,610,000 acres was announced. This
was the minimum permitted by legislation.

Parity prices, which had been in process of shift from."old"
to "modernized", completed the change with the 1959 crop. The "sliding
Scale" method of computing the effective percentage of parity was con-
tinued. This is the relationship between estimated actual supply and
normal supply. It was announced on March 4, 1959, that the 1959 crop of

' w

5.-

 

 

 

 

307

peanuts would be supported at not less than a national average level of
9.7 cents per pound ($193.50 per ton), reflecting 75 percent of the

March 1959, effective parity price. Loans and other provisions of the
program were similar to the previous year. Support prices by types per
pound were: Virginias, 10.3 cents; Runners, 9.0 cents; Southeast Spanish,
9.9 cents; Southwest Spanish, 9.4 cents; Valencias, 10.0 cents.

As of mid-March, 1960, farmers had about 215 million pounds of
1959 crop peanuts under price supports, nearly 80 percent of which were
in the Southeast area. Season average price to farmers is estimated at
9.5 cents per pound, 1.1 cents less than in 1958.

1960 Crop - The 1960 crop will be supported at not less than
the average level of 10.0 cents per pound ($201.24 per ton). This is
78 percent of parity compared with 75 percent in 1959.

Principal provisions of the 1960 program are similar to those
in effect in 1959 -- non-recourse warehouse storage loans to grower
associations and non-recourse farm storage loans to producers and purchase
agreements. Availability of price support will also be subject to the
$50,000 limitation on non-recourse price support. Any peanuts produced
in violation of leases restricting production of surplus crops on
federally-owned land will not be eligible for price support in 1960.

On December 15, 1959, producers voting in referendum approved
marketing quotas for the 1960, 1961, and 1962, crOps. This made
effective a 1960 marketing quota requirement of 934,000 tons (1,868
million pounds) and a national acreage allotment of 1,610,000 acres,
which had previously been announced on October 6, 1959. This is the
minimum quota and allotment permitted by law. If the minimum-allotment
provision had not been in effect, the national marketing quota for
1960 would have been 720,000 tons and 1,241,000 acres, reflecting the
excess supply situation.

APPENDIX B

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLES
for

REGRESSION MODELS CONSIDERED

308

309

sons Ho>mH mafiaanonoum Assv unsound H no Asv ucooumm m ecu

.coausaouuoo we ucoaowmmooo oHAHuH320

.xmaueums cannon no camcam he pousoavca on

us onus Bonn usonMMfip mausmoamaswqm

n

afovmoum mo moonwonm

 

 

 

 

 

 

m 000” OHFOLOODOON“
e a o.~nm.nus me . .Huuoe
50.0 0000.0 0H00.0: .....mx u 0N.5Hm.a 0.0mn.nHH 0s " .....uouuu
NN.N momN.Nm maom.um ..... N » qm.a m¢.wa.n oumon.u N u cowmmoummm
“ u on“ g .o .z
N 80" OOOOOOOONM
m u 0.¢00.HH as . .HsuoH
mm.H nooo.o «coo.o .....mx “ as.anu m.unm.os as « .....uouuu
um.n 0Hn¢.ma «onu.0ms ..... N u 00.H H0.m0¢ N.Hnm N a soqumouwem
a a 3 .. .s>
4 a.tr »
u a u u n u a « coausansp
a House u u a u a n . «0 season
ochPIm u unannoum a osHs>uc u oHcoHHd> a nosas> » sheave « concave « u Hanan:
mucnaowmmmoo M m H can: N no 850 H sup N sowumsvu

vouovamcoo mascoa coqmmouwmu mo

B

owcsaus> mo mamhanqd

 

.wmau.soas;.xaxv.aoauuseoua as can: «sous
Mom 3cm 30.7.3 .05 Maps.“ noucum 03.2.5 guohuflfiubnunnomfiwxvhusom coo “comma." canon use mundane mo mound
one no scufiuswofi one no co«uocsm o as unencumxo AoHNV pozmuunu new poxoam nuanced mo ammouodrn.H panda

310

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u 00”” ”Huuuuqumu
" o.mmm.~an we “ .smsom
a~.~ ssoo.o smoo.o ......ax “ sm.nem.ms o.aao.s~a as “ .....nouum
«H.o “mao.smH mamm.om- ......mx " ¢~.~ 00.0mm.mm o.~Hm.Ha N “ cosmmoummm
u t. u Dawn I . QH<
m NN. m I o O 0 O O 0 0N“
" o.Hom.em we " .Hmuoe
sens.os sooo.o «Hoo.o ......ax " ma.amm “.Nma.a~ as " .....nouum
oo.m «oeu.s~ s-m.~s- ......mx “esmm.s so.ssm.m m.m~a.e N " cosmnmnwmm
" " ass - .uHm
" mo. 0 O O o 0 C 0 0 ON“
" o.oeo.mmm.s we " .Hauoa
ae.o «soo.o amoo.o ......ax " s~.mo¢.sm m.ses.ems.e as " .....uouuu
22.0 mNHm.mnm mmo«.ess ......mx " no.N cu.aa¢.sas «.mam.wan N " coammonwms
" u can - .mu
£05H6>u HOHHw " u u n u u u GOHuflHHfl>
h “ pumpsmum ” enam>an " macmfium> u nosHm> " menace " mmumsvw “ u mo wouson
" u u u h " com: n no saw “ one " paces:
mucoaofimmmoo " n u " coaucsum

 

Anessfiusoovsn.a canoe

311

 

h
N

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a
. u «N
. w a . o.aen.ann as u .suuos
.an.n nooo.o asoo.o .....nu . oo.nao.n a.uaa.ssu as " .....uouun
oo.o enca.na muse.“ ..... x .gaan.» oo.aua.he «.san.na « a ensue-nugs
. u can . .uaxc
a u
u 1 u
a so ceases.
. so H one
a . o.soo.nns.u as “ .Huuoa
sn.c nuoo.o naoo.o .....wx . sn.o«n.on o.~«o.~an.u as ” .....uouun
on.o nusn.s~n mana.eaa ..... u.“ an.« oo.oun.ana o.o¢o.«s« N “ sensuous-e
. a see . .nua
LP hr
a a a a a a a u 833.3»
a nouns u a u u u a a mo season
enas>lh u nuanceum « esanetc « encsaum> . nosHQP u chance a censors » u Hanan:
augususmuooo M m H , anus” H «6 ass N «we H guesses:

 

Aeoaasuaoovua.a oases

312

on can? Ho>oH mufiflqnmnoum Aksv accuses H no Asv udoouom m ecu as ones Scum ucmnmwmwp maucmogmwcmem

scouusnounoo mo ucoaoammsoo caeauaszw

.xeanounc cannon no camswm an neumoancu

n

sopoouw wo.moonwoof

h

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M HH.” OOOOOUN“
a “ o.m~a.aas an ” .Huuoa
iso.e nooo.o nsoo.o- ..... e.. He.aom.u s.ooo.eos on " .....uounu
eeo.s onH.oa sHHo.H¢H .....nx . wa.~ mo.oms.o ¢.Hs~.ms N “ cosmmmmmmm
a u mew n .o .z
m NHsu seeesUNm
" o.n-.m an n .Husos
~«.o nooo.o Hooo.o- .....mx ” sm.mms H.mmm.¢ on u .....uouum
an.“ Hmms.oH moa¢.a~ ..... x ” Ho.~ m¢.~om a.¢~a N u cosmmmumos
u u a: I 66>
u nouns a u u u a u w coausuud>
osHm>tm " oumccmum « msHm>nn u mannaum> » nonam> u menace » mmumswm u “ mo season
« .0. u u m u can: H No saw u one u pecans
mucoaoammmoo u u a u u coaumsvm
constamnou maopoa conmmumoH mo mocmqum> mo mqmzamnd

 

pawn mousse mo sons“ moumum pecan: ecu mo macaw. ecu

O

mqmaamoma .Amxv coauosvone cw poms name“ now

so “Anxv use» ono pmwwma venom

can no Ecuflumwofl ecu mo coauoosm m we commoumxo Ao NV ponmounu was Umxoam museums

\
\

use unnamed mo mound
mo omcouo<un.u sandy

313

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m 0“.“ sessOUN“
“ o .eme.¢m on “ .Hauoa
ss00.0 m000.0 0H00.0 .....NN u N0.¢0~ n. ¢¢M.mm 0n n .....nouuu
ee.u Hass.nn omsa.ss- .....mx ”seee.s ms.snm.e n. mos.m N u nonsmouwme
“ u ass I .sHm
u a
u no.” .....oud
” u
N u o.qu.Heo.e an ” .Hsuoa
“moo NMOOOO m.—NOOOO Osceomx u mmsfiqwamHH #OHHnQQNNGq on u OOOOOHOHSHM
s0.0 mmmm.mn¢ 00n0.ma ..... N u un.H m~.mHm.HmH 0.HMO.N0m N ” coammmummm
« a men - .ue
” nouns » u a u a n u coausqns>
esaspcm u pnopcsum « eus>sn a mannans> a msHm> u sheave » encode u a mo condo»
« a u a m a neon“ a mo sum u sup n Hones:
munmaogmmooo m m m a « coaumsnu

 

Aeasasuaoov--.~ oases

314

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“ 0“ 00000
" cu ” cue
» u
“ o.oso.ow~ an u .Houos
eao.m sooo.o ouoo.o .....NN H em.nn¢.s m.man.~m~ on m .....uouuu
«s.o nmsm.oss seem.am - .....mx a ¢¢.e mn.nno.m« a.ss~.em N m coammmumae
a u see - .usxo
u l.
“ CH.“ OOOOOON“
e W o.eos.¢oa.~ mm m .Hmuoa
an.o Nmoo.o muoo.o .....mx . am.~m¢.as m.u~n.m~¢.~ om . .....uonnu
on.o aosa.o~s mouu.a- ..... x “ so.~ No.5Hn.amH «.4mo.me~ a " cosmmauwoe
m m sea - .xoa
0 ON.” OOOODON“
a “ o.~mm.ama mm " .Husoa
nm.m asoo.o nmoo.o .....nx ” ~¢.oem.OH u.nmm.oas on ” .....uonuu
no.0 «wom.HeH nomw.us ..... x “ seam.e oe.ms¢.¢a m.omw.mss N ” aosmmmuwoe
« u as. .. 62
u HOHHm a u n 1 u u u u- down—.9219?
oaHmPIN n unavamum ~ OSHQPIA u mHanHd> u QGSHGP " mudnvm u mumfivm « n no mahvgfi
” .r n, u m u ones. a no sea a sup “ Henson
munoHOHmmooo « u u u « coaumsvu
« u u u u

 

Apossuucoovus.u manna

 

315

coHeeoumen no usoHonweoo oHeHanzw

.quuouns oHcsov no oncHu ha cousoanH

om coca He>oH huHHHnsnoum Achy espouse H no Asv accused m ecu no ouon scum economme mHuomoHMstHmn

.aonoeuw mo moeuwuno

 

 

 

 

 

 

M MN 0" O O O O ION“
isss.NH ousmo.o anamo.o - ....esx . o.anm.mas as ” .Huuoe
e«.H saaaooo.o eosmooo.o . .....mx » no.0HH.N «.mas.¢a me ” .....uouuu
oH.o ooeH.am mmao.ms- ..... x.” scam.¢ ou.m~n.m m.mem.w~ m " cosmmmuwam
. , a “ 00a 1 .0 “2
Ln L.
H O n O O O O 0
u n
aw.o NNHHo.o «HOHo.o - ....qsx ” o.esw.ss we . .Hsuos
esm.m na-ooo.o mseoooo.o - .....mx.« ma.-~ “.muo.os me u .....uonum
Hm.~ mama.ms mmum.m~ ..... x ” ma.~ oe.NHo m.wmw.H m “ cosmmoumoe
a ” 00H n .s>
u nouns . a m u u a m. oOHuoHnm?
nosHs>nm u pudendum u ost>sc u oHanum> u nmstn " museum » concave u u no cannon
u h. u u h A one: u no saw " emu u senses
mud—GHOHWMCOU u u u u u AHOHHUHHUH
» u u u ”

 

pouovasoo mHopoB sOHmmonmu mo oosmHuo> mo mHn>qu<

 

 

mmoHnmomH .AsHNV maono wsHummBoo pmHMHoomm mo smocked man was «Aan cOHuospoum oH poms
msmuH How anm mooHum mo xenoH museum pouHcD one mo unease ecu ”Anxv use» one powwsH venom use «unseen mo
ooHHm mo afiuHudon can no GOHuoasm m we pommmumxo AoHNv cosmoucu pom voonm museums mo ammmuqdnn.m oHan

 

16

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ON C C O O O .0"“
egsu.e aeumo.o nnmmo.o- ....ewx o.amo.~ma we .Huuoa
an.H ausmoo.o monuoo.o- .....nx ” cm.emH.¢H «.Hmo.ems me ” .....uouuu
Ho.o aeso.ems seem.as ..... x “ «as.m s~.msm.sm m.a¢m.mms m “ cosumauwas
M m can - .use
“ ”H O“ C O O C .0““
u "
em.H aummo.o noeso.o - ....ewx u o.How.em me ” .Hsuos
mN.H moomooo.o mmo¢ooo.o .....mx . ms.nao s.non.om me n .....uouuu
em.o mo¢m.m~ monm.su- ..... x a nu.“ sn.msn.s s.mnm.¢ m ” cosmmmumoe
H n cos . .uHm
m mm C“ O O O . .ONM
«aaa.mn «mmuo.o maes.o - ....ssx ” o.o¢s.mnm.e as ” .Hauoa
es.m Nesmoo.o moo~oo.o - .....mx ” Ho.mms.m¢ s.mae.oms.~ me u .....uouuu
oa.o moNH.NNN seem.auu ..... x ”samu.ms ms.mmm.ewm e.¢sH.mms.N m u cosmmmumme
m m can . .uo
u mouse a u u u u u u oOHumHum>
ost>nh u pudendum a osHo>tn » oHAoHns> u msHm> " menace. u mundane u a mo cannon
a. .r b r a b m A new: a mo :50 u up » songs
35.33.0500 u u s n con—nova

”O.

O...

 

Heoaasuaouva-.m «Hana

 

317

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u u
N “no“ OOOOOOLNM
u u
seem.m nasaoo.o ammuo.o - ....ewx ” o.e¢n.amm me ” .Huuos
“Ne." H¢DH°°OO OOHHOOOO esteem” u Nmsgwan @OHHHGWNH MIN u essseuogu
ss.o soou.ea omse.uou ..... x . cama.ms Ne.mae.ss s.mm¢.¢mu m u cosmmanwoe
u n cos r .ume
a u
M 0“.“ OOOOOONM
amm.n nemso.o amuse. - ....emx ” o.aos.mmm.~ me u .Hsuos
he.“ H moanoo.o ooomoo.o .....mx ” w~.ano.a¢ s.e~s.eHH.~ me u .....uonum‘
as.o «Hoa.ua~ n¢mu.mu~- ..... x “ eguu.m ~H.Hss.new «.mwm.sme m u scammmummm
" u 000 .. 53H.
a u .
u nouns “ u a a a u u ooHumHnsp
nesHo>sm u pnoncdum a osHoPnn ” oHanud> » nosHm> u mumsvm u mmnmswm u u mo season
“ u u a m u cums“ » mo 55m u sup » Humans
musoHOHmmoou » u u u sOHumsvn
» u n u

.0“

Heoaesuaoovnn.m «Haas

 

318

.COHumHoHuoo mo uomHonmooo mHaHuHDZU

.meuoumm posoc no onch hp pmumonsH
om secs Hm>mH huHHHnwboua Assv scooped H no Aav unwound m msu um ouou Scum uomummch hHunmonstHmc

.Eonomuw mo mmouwoon

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

musoHchwmoU

m 00.“ eeseeeeUNm
eem¢.mm 0H0m0.0 oomH.0 : .....st “ 0.0mm.nHH mm u .Hmuoa
n®.H mommooo.o «HNHoo.o ......NN " «H.0mm.H o.mmN.m¢ mm " .....uouum
os.m cawo.sm mmNe.Nm- ......mx.msem¢.es so.emm.mm o.mao.0a m “ cesmmmswme
, " mom - .u .z
m Hmem seseesOUNm
ems.m smmmoo.o omeo.o - .....ssx " o.mme.m mm “ .Hmsos
00.0 mmmmooo.0 memooo.o ......mx " . 00.NHH m.mmm.m mm “ .....uouum
mH.0 nomm.¢H wmm¢.m ...... N usamm.m Hm.mmm n.0mN.H- m u cOHmmmuwmm
” " 00H : .s>
usHm> " noses a u u u u n M soHumHum>
n m u whencmum » msHm>sn " oHanuw> u emsHm> u mumsvm ” mmHmDWm " u we meadow
u u u ”a m u c002 u mo 85m u mun u uspfind
« - u u u ” coHumsUM

O

 

noumnHmcoo wHwnoE conmmHWmu mo muomHnm> mo mHnNHms¢

 

 

.mqu : momH .quNV muons mewummaoo cmHMHomamfiwo swooped mnu pom “Anxv soHuosnoua 0H new:
mauuH new pwmm mmoHua mo chsH mmumum nmquD ocu.wo.vnmdvm mzu unmxv ummm one nmwme meson use mundane mo
ooHsm mo enuHueon mnu mo GOHuoosu m we vommmumxmmAOHNvmconmmHSu new poonm musomma mo mwmmuo<zn.¢ mHnsH

319

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u NR." soesseOONm
seam.um N00~0.0 «NeH.0 . .....st u - 0.Nnm.0nn .mm " .HmuoH
eH.m 0H0H00.0 0H0000.0 ......ex " mm.0mH.0 m.~mm.¢sm mm " .....uouuu
m0.H me0e.m0 0040.0NH- ......mx ” eeaq.0~ s0.0m0.HwH N.0a¢.nsu m " cosmmmnwms
u m 00m - .sHa
W aqsm assessOONm
e00.0 00000.0 0HOH.0 - .....sax “ 0.0me.0m 00 ” .Hsuoa
**05.ms Hem¢000.0 H00H00.0 ......ax ” 0s.00m n.0H0.aH mm ” .....nonnu
weN~.m memm.0~ nwom.00- ......mx ” eemH.HH NA.HHO.n «.mmm.0H m " eonmmuwmm
” u 00s - .uHs
u u
u owe” soossesUNM
eeH0.HHH e00H0.0 «0000.0 - .....0Hx " 0.m¢H.H00.e 00 « .kuoa
es0.0 5H~000.0 m¢0~00.0 ......mx ” N0.H0a.0a H.0¢0.0m0 m0 " .....uouuu
00.0 0000.00H H00m.~0- ...... x " ee0a.0a 00.n0H.0N0.H 0.000.¢m0.0 0 " cosmmmuwme
" ” 00m . .00
n—mflHd? u .HOHHO 4. u u u u u u defluwwudar
m u unecomum a osHm>sn u mHanus> u cmusP " sheave u essence u u we mUHSOm
" u u u h u use: a mo Sam "can ” Hanan:
muooHonmooo m m m m m oOHumdvu

 

Auosasuaouv q ounce

320

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m HR.“ assessooN“
u J
100.2 20000.0 0020.0 - ......Sx " 0000.03 0n n .033
#¥00.0H «HNH00.0 nmm¢00.0 .......NN " mm.mwm.u 0.00m.mw mm " .....uounu
sum.¢ 005m.50 mmmu.0mHu .......mx ” #a00.0~ n¢.0~m.00 ¢.HOH.00N m u conmmummm
" a 005 n .sto
m gem eseeseoUNg
«smm.a 00~H0.0 0mmmo.0 . .....eHx a o.~0¢.¢0~.~ mm ” .Hsuoe
es00.0H nn0moo.0 NABH0.0 ......mx u 00.an.mm m.m¢0.0m~.H mm « .....uouuu
2.0 080.20. 003.0%- x ” 1.00.2 00.30.03 5.51000; 0 1 0030303
n u moo I .XOH.
nosHm> » nouns . u u u a u u oOHumHus>
m u unaccoum u osHm>an u oHanus> u nosHm> u mumSVm u mundane u u no season
" u u u m u use: u no 55m u mun u Hogans
musoHonmoou m m H m m oOHumswm

 

noosoHucoovun.¢ mHan.

321

I .coHuwHouuou mo acoHonmmoo onHanzu

.eruuuus oHcsoc no uncHu he pouoUHpsH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

om cons Hm>oH >UHHHcscoum Askv unsound H no Asv uncouom m one us once scum unouumqu mHucoOHstmen
.aopooum mo mmoumono
m mm. “ ..COOOOONN
«em~.~m m0~0.0 000H.0- .....esx " "
0m.s 0H00.0 HH00.0 ......ex " 0.0N0.AHH 00 " .Huuoa
mm.m NmHH.Nm 0H00.00I ......mx ” Nm.¢H¢.H ~.H0m.0¢ mm " .....nonum
IIIII III-III: 0050.0«0 ......ox “ eka.0H «0.wom.mm m.0~¢.wo m m connmumom
" . new I .o .z
m N“. m ......OUNM
e05.n m000.0 ~0N0.0- .....eux " u A
n~.0 m000.0 «000.0 ......nx " 0.0Nn.m mm " .Hmuoa
0~.0 s0m0.e~ NH00.0 ......mx " 00.0HH e.m~0.m m0 " .....uonum
IJIII IIIIIIII NHmN.00H ......ox " seam.m ¢¢~0H0 n.0sm.H m " coHnmmnwmm
" s 50H I .s>
coch> u nouns " u u . u u u " soHumHus>
m ” nuancoum u msHo>In ” chsHus> " nosHm> " season " concave " ” mo season
a u u u m a new: “ mo saw u «up " Hones:
ausmHOHmmmou " u u “ soHuosvm

 

.pwuooncoo mHoooa conmomwwu mo mosmHno> mo mHmmmnc<

 

 

.wsmH I momH

.Aquv new» oso vmwme maouo wcHuonEoo pmHmHommm mo smashes ecu new "Anxv

MmEouH soHuusvoun «a neon onu mo NopoH moumum nmuHca ecu mo menace ”Anxv new» one pmwme mason use mussmoa mo

moHum ecu mo anuHucon ecu mo ooHuossm m we pmmmmnmxm AoHNV monmounu use pmonm nuanced mo wwmmno<nn.m oHcsH

322

 

no. m ....... m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 . ON
«020.00 0000.0 2002.0- .....020 2 n
02.0 2000.0 2000.0 ......20 2 0.000.000 00 2 .20260
00.0 0000.002 00000.02- .... . .022 2 00.002; 0.020.000 00 2 .....2800
--- 0---- 0000.002.2 ......00 2 «000.00 20.000.002 0.000.000 0 2 0020000000
2 . 2 ~00 - .020
2 20. -2 .......600
22.0 0000.0 0000.0- .....020 2 2
«020.02 0000.0 0000.0 ......20 2 0.000.00 00 2 .20000
000.0 000n.0~ 0000.20- ......00 2 00.000 0.020.02 00 2 .....00000
--- -------- ~000.a22 ......00 2 0020.02 00.000.0 2.020.02 0 2 0020000000
2 2 200...02n
2 .00. 2 .......600
0000.002 0000.0 0000.0- .....020 2 2
00.0 0000.0 0000.0 ......20 2 0.002.200.0 00 2 .20000
00.0 . 0000.202 0000.002- ......00 2 22.n00.00 . 0.0n0.22n 00 W .....06000
--- ---- 0200.0nn.2 ......0x 2 0000.00 00.200.000.2 0.020.000.0 0 2 0020000000
2 2 200 - .00
nonHuN-2 nonno 2 2 2 2 2 2. 2 :OHuans>
h 2 vnsvcsum 2 osHs>Ic 2 oHannm> 2 nmsHm> 2 onmsun 2 amnmsvm 2 2 mo monsom
2 2 2 2 m 2 use: 2 mo_asm 2 emu 2 names:
musmHonmoou aOHumsuu

AvescHucoov m eHAsH

323

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 22. .......000
0000.02 0000.0 0000.0- .....020 2 2
0020.02 0200.0 0000.0 ......20 2 0.000.000 00 2 .20200
002.0 0200.00 0002.022- ......00 2 02.220.0 0.200.00 00 2 .....20220
--- ---- 2002.000 ......00 2 0020.00 02.000.00 0.000.000 0 2 0020002000
2 2 202 - .0220
2 20. 2 .......000
000.0 0020.0 2000.0- .....020 2 2
0000.02 2000 0 0220.0 ......20 2 .0u000.002.0 00 2 .20200
020.0 0000.020 0000.000- ......00 2 00.000.20 0.200.220.2 00 2 .....20200
--- ---- - ”0020.000 ......00 2 0000.02 02.000.000 0.002.000.2 0 2 0020000000
2 2 New I .KwH.
cosHs> 2 nonno 2 - 2 2 2 2 2 2 ooHumHnn>
m 2 Unspnsum 2 msHm>In 2 mHanno> 2 nmsHo> 22 unmade 2 monssum 2 2 mo oonson
2 2 2 2 .m 2 flaw: 2 MO gm 2 “WV 2 Hmfigfl
uncmHonmmou 2 2 2 2 2 ooHuesum

 

ApmsoHusoov 0 «Hana

324

.mOHnsHonnou no uceHonmooo onHanzc

.wanouun eHcson no ondHu he pounqucn o0
sons_Ho>oH nuHHHnsnonm Astv ucoonom H no Asv nsoonon m one us once Bonn ucsnoanv mHucsonchHmw

sopuonm no noenwenn

.0>HmsHosH .000HI000H voHnon can now 0000 opsHocH anonussvo
nmnuo HH< .o>HmsHosH .mm0HImomH poHnoa one now snap opsHocH :00: an wchco unseen: GOHnmsvuo

.moHanno> HHmmswdn mvsHucH no: on :00: :H weaves mnonBsn oOHunsvuc

.mHopnnooemon AnNNu use .Auaxv .AHNNV moHndHns> ms pouscmeop one chHntnowmcmnn enema .o.n.e

 

 

 

ll 1

 

 

 

u GN.» ...-.00.. m
20.2 0200.2 2000.2 .2000 22x 2 2 00
00.2 0022.0 0200.0 ..000 02x 2 2
00.0 0020.0 2000.2 .2200 020 2 2
20.2 0020.0 2000.0- ......000.22 2
0000.02 0200.0 0000.2 ......000 2 2
000.0 2002.0 0200.2- ......200 2 0.000.22 00 2 .20200
. 02.2 0002.0 0020.0- .......20 2 02.000 0.000.0 20 2 .....2022n
. --- 2000.002 .......00 2 000.0 02.000 0.020.0 2 2 0020002000
2 2 002 - .0>
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ecoHueHns>
2 nonne 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 no cannon
wm5Hm>Ih 2 vnmvcdum n OSHNPIA 2 mHannd> 2 moaHd> 2 mnmsvu 2 monmadm 2 2 nonabd
ansOHonmooo m m m cam: N no sum m mun M conunmvu

 

ponmvacoo mHopoa conmonwon mo oooane> mo mHthmcd

 

 

. >Ho>Huoommmn .ANHNV was .AoHNv .AmHNV mnucoa HsoHano voHMHooma cH HHmmsHsn mo nococn 20A0Nv naouH
coHuowponn mo umoo can no HovsH any he no mHmmn Ava museum“ no moHnm on» 2naHIu 0 v mamuH GOHuosvonm mo
nmoo can no sopoH sun %A pousHmov .AHIu 0 Nw mmono onuoaBoo mo owsmnou men on AHI MHNV umono mnHuomEoo
voHMHoeem no msH0> man no oHnsn can 2saHIu NV macaw coHuosvonm mo anon on» he poudHuop AHIn nNV eussnoa

no ooHnn «AHNV maHu no soHuocsm s as vommmnaxo A HNV vocmonsu new 003020 muscson no ownenudaI.0 oHcsH

325

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 n
2 2 ........
20.0 0000.2 0200.2 - ......000_2 00 2 0022
00.0 0000.0 0202.0 ......000 2 2
02.0 0000.0 0000.0 - ......2m0 2 0.002.0 00 2 .20000
0000.02 0202.0 0000.0 ....... x 2 00.022 0.00220 00 2 .....00000
---- ------ 0002.002 .......00 2 0000.0 00.000 0.00022 0 2 0020000000
u . u ”OCH Iod>
H 00 2 000
02.0 2000.0 0022.0 .0000 220 2 2
00.2 0000.0 0202.0 ..0000020 2 2
00.0 2000.0 0002.0- .2200 020 2 2
00.0 0020.0 2000.0- ......000 2 a
20.0 0000.0 2020.0 ......000 2 2
00.0 0002.0 0020.0- ......2m0 2 0.002.0 00 2 .20200
000.0 2022.0 0000.0 ....... 0 2 02.022 0.00020 20 2 .....20000
---- ------ 2002.202 .......00 2 020.0 00.200 0.002.0 2 2 0020000000
2 2 002 : .0>
n n
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 oao2uuaum>
2 woman 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 no 000300
05Hd>nh 2 2022202022025 2 0222202722 2 0.3.3.2.; 2 wonaflr 2 0.2350 2 0.322200 2 2 0022022222
3220000330 M h H can: H mo 82.6 2 who 2 22322.33

 

..........

20000220000--.0 02000

326

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 2
00.2 0000.2 0220.2 .2000 220 2 00 2 22022
02.0 2000.2 2002.0 ..000 02x 2 2
22.0 2000.2 0000.0 - .0200,020 2 2
00.0 0000.0 0002.0 - ......000 2 2
00.0 2020.0 0000.02- ......000 2 2
00.0 0002.2 0000.02 ......2m0 2 0.000.222 00 2 .20200
0000.002 0000.0 0000.0 ....... 0 2 00.020 0.000.02 20 2 .....20220
--- --- 0202.002 .......00 2 000.00 0.000.02 0.000.202 2 2 0020002000
2 000-.o.z
. n on ....0...
00.0 0000.0 0000.0 .2000 22x 2 00 2 000
00.0 0000.0 0200.0 - ..000_020 2 2
00.2 2000.0 0220.0 .0200 020 2 2
20.0 0022.0 0000.0 - ......000 2 2
20.0 0000.02 2020.02 ......000 2 2
00.0 2200.02 0202.0 - ......200 2 0.000.002 00 2 .20200
0000.00 0000.0 0000.0 .......20 2 00.000.2 0.000.02 20 2 .....20200
--- --- 2202.222 .......00 20000.0 20.000.0 2.000.00 2 2 0020002000
2 2 000 - .0 .z
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 occauoaud>
- 2 00000 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 no 000300
wmnad>cm 2 vuuvcwum 2 onaw>-n 2 oHAu2Hu> 2 woaau> 2 000300 2 000500 2 2 Hanan:
020020202000 “ 0 U 000:. H 20 000 H 220 M 00220000

 

00.00002000250 02002.

327

 

.0 .0 .0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

00.0 0002.22 0020.00 ..000 220 00 2 000
00.0 0020.02 0020.0 .0200 020 2 2
00.0 0222.00 0000.02 .0000 mwx 2 2
00.0 0000.20 0000.02- ...... x 2 2
00.2 0000.02 0220.02- ......000. 2 2
00.2 0020.00 2202.20 ......200 2 0.000.000.0 00 2 .20202
0000.00 0000.0 0020.22 .......00 2 002000.00 2.000.000.2 20 2 .....20020
--- --- 0000.222- ....... 0 20000.0 00.000.000 0.000.200.0 2 2 0020002000
2 2 000 - .00
2 2
n T O O“ 00......
00.0 2002.0 0000.0 - ......000 2 00 2 000
02.0 0002.0 0020.02- ......Mww 2 2
02.0 0020.0 0000.02 ...... 2x 2 0.000.222 00 2 .20200
0002.002 2000.0 2000.0 .......00 2 20.000 0.002.22 00 2 .....20222
--- --- 0020.222 ......._x 2 000.00 02.000.00 2.022.002 0 2 0020002000
2 2 000 - .0 .z
N n
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 cucuumwud>
2 00000 2 2 2 2 2 2 .2 mo oouzom
wosam>sh 2 unavawum 2 osHu>nn 2 oflpa2uw> 2 w0520> 2 «00:00 2 000900 2 2 Hanan:
020020222000 M 0 m 000:“ M 20 000 m 220 m 00220000

 

. 22200020200022-30 .2002.

 

no 0‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

¢m.u M
o o "N . 5N
no H NOON o Nona.o~ ..... x . .
mm.“ «Hn~.¢ mmmo.m .....Nux_u "
mm.~ mnmfi.¢~ mama.nm .....HNNVH o.n¢H.qu.q mm " .Hmuoa
¢*om.¢¢m ofiom.fl nooh.flm ......Hx “ o.m~w.n m.¢om.mom «m ” .....nouum
omaooonmu ......ON «*flnm.mma d.mmw.mmo.H m.mn¢.mnm.¢ q u scammmuwmm
" m com - .uu
.mw u u -
.5 Hm.o <a¢a.n some.m- .ma4 max ” «a.u ........n~m
oa.o n¢H~.e ¢oo~.o- »H=u wax u «
wo.o oeqh.oa e¢¢fi.u- .oaau Ma » u
HH.H m¢~m.- mnmo.mN ..... x.“ ”
oa.~ “Nom.¢ mHo¢.m .....NNNV” "
N~.H mmam.m~ mmmm.mm .....Hax " o.m¢H.H¢m.¢ an ” .Huuoa
¢go¢.¢on mhfiq.fl n¢¢w.~n .....wa ” mnwauumwp. o.~aa.mm~ Hm « .....uouuu
---:1- ------ n¢Ho.~o¢- ...... x ”ggma.o~ aflumnnmmuo o.o~o.omm.¢ n " aoammmuwmm
” u «on - .mw
LP LV
u o . u u u u u u acouumwuu>
« noun» a u u u n u u no condom
. wmaamanu vudszum » aaam>un u manwaum> « monam> u mumsvm ~ oHNDVm “ u umnafia
» h u cum; u mo fibm « mmv « cowuwsvm
u u u u u

mucoaoammmoo

 

s?3§3..:3 as:

 

oom¢.o

owud< BHN

cocoon-o m

 

 

 

329

 

 

 

 

5N. w¢¢m.o « u gm
«0. Hmm¢.o omna.o- »Hsn OHM u ”
mm. mqma.o Hamm.o- mash me ” u
mo. Hflom.n «ono.a .....nmx " u
no. Num©.~ Hma~.o- .....me " u
on. fiwum.¢ mno¢.n ..... «x u o.mn¢.¢m ” .Huuoe
:wmomOH OWMNoO NquoN oooooon u {floNOH OQOGHQM u octooHOHHu
------ ------ o~¢~.ur ......ox u *¥mm.¢u «m.omfl.¢ «.No~.m~ u aofimmmuwmm
. n m ¢o¢ . .uHm
mu.m mom~.H aa¢~.~ .m:< Bax " “ ........n~m
¢¢.o qum.H omom.o mash on u a
Hm.H o~o~.H ma¢~.~- mean man u “
NH.H mme~.~ HH¢~.H- .....nux “ u
mm.m mafio.fi moum.n- .....Nux ” H
mm.“ «5mm.¢ con.h .....Hux ” o.oom.¢m. " .Huuoa
*¢~H.Hn N~H~.o “HAN.H ......Hx u “o.Hnm «.mmN.mH “ .....uouum
...IIIII ItIII... OANnoou M . . . . . .ON u gn.N ¢o.mowoN o.HNoamH n Goammouwmm
” u ncq - .mHm
u u u u u u u u adequaaud>
u uouum u u u u u u u we cannon
wost>um u unavadum ” 05Hu>un u mHanHd> n wmaaw> " mudDVm u aud=Vm u u umnaad
353338 m . =32 H mo .56 .3335

 

 

acquaoov-.o «Haas

330

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

«*o~.m Hmmn.o Numm.mfi .ws¢ sax " an." st
«$.N nm~o.h NH¢H.~H xaaa mfix « u
0H.o nHHm.¢ Noao.n- «can x u “
NM.H ~m¢u.- meom.Hm¢ .....mux ” u
«o.o «amm.fin amoN.NH .....Nax ” "
m~.o aooH.Hm moo¢.- .....Hax . o.mwa.~a~ m¢ ” .Huuoa
g¥en.m ofimq.a mmn~.¢ ......Wx " oo.nmm.a~ «.NNN.Bm¢ He " .....uouuu
uuusun ------ afl¢o.mu ...... x ”taco.n am.aoo.n¢ n.nou.mom n u coaummumom
“ ” mom - .aH¢
« u
” O“ 0.000...
Ho.o oHoH.n mmu¢.o .....n«x_n mm “ nag
Ho.o Haa~.fl noofi.o .....Nux , "
an.o mauo.m «Hm~.~ .....me u o.nn¢.¢m an " .Houoa
ggso.ona aomfi.o H¢N¢.« ...... x « m«.nnfi m.¢h~.n «a u .....Houuu
------ ------ H~H«.m- ......ox “gyem.o¢ n~.mm~.~ H.n~H.mN q ” codmmaumoa
u » 00¢ u .uHh
u u r
u u u u u u u “ onofluwand>
. « uouuo u u u u u u n ma cannon
mosaupnh » unavauum ~ o=Hu>un u «Hauauu> u waaadp u oud:¢u » anunVu u r Haney:
aumwaoammoou r H m m ‘ can: N no sum w «mu H aofluasuu

 

Awwxmmwgauv-.o oHnua

331

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u u
«o.o ommo.mH son«.¢ - .....mux ” No.” ... ... mum
0H.o mmmo.m¢ ou¢m.-- .....NNx ” n .4
NH.N HNHH.mN mmHH.N¢ .....me “ o.~mm.mn~ an “ .Hauoa
««um.~¢ QNH¢.H mHH¢.OH ...... x , «o.qu.m ¢.nmm.om~ «m u .....uouuu
..-}..- 2.2:... 83.3.. . . . . . .ox “$3.2 353.“: 0.09.3.» q u 833%.;
H u can - .ua<
4% on
on.” HHmH.o «mom.m .m:< Nax ” Ne “ ........n~m
m~.o ommn.o mo~m.m mash cam u "
H¢.~ cum¢.m Humfi.nfl- auan.mflx.u u
so.o maun.m~ n~m~.o - .....max.“ ”
no.0 «moo.om ommm.m - .....Nux “ »
mH.N wa.m.~N o¢HN.H¢ .....me." . o.~mm.mn~ an ” .Hmuoa
«¢m¢.¢n mmmo.H NmNm.m ......ox ~ nm.mmo.m n.Hh¢.om~ an “ .....uouuu
------ ------ «moo.mn- ...... N “*ama.w mm.¢¢o.- ~.ooQ.mom N u aofimmmummm
u u «on - .uH¢
» m
u « u n u u u » occuuuguw>
u uouuo » u u u u u u no cannon
Imwnawpnh u vuavawum u oaaa>un « manaauu> u wasad> " mauan u and:Vm " « Hanan:
nuaowoamuoou H h m awmzp m mo Bum. m mmv m coauusvu

 

Avwmmwwwmvv-.o «Hana

332

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

» u
Hm.o ommm.¢fl mNnm.h .w:< “an ” «a u ........n~a
«m.o owqm.o~ oumm.- mfian me u "
mo.o amon.~H munm.u- mash aux u ”
«he.m cosm.an m-~.¢m ..... x u ”
oa.o ~¢¢H.m momm.a- .....mwx u ”
oh.H maqo.um N¢nm.mo ..... x “ o.mom.oHQ.N on " .Hauoa
«am@.mnH ammo.” «Hom.¢u ......Hx “ oo.Hq~.¢H ~.om¢.mu¢ mm ” .....uouuu
------ ------ mofio.umm- ......ox u¢*mH.HN Ho.anm.fidm m.an.NmH.~ N " scammopmom
“ u «we - .xoa
mo.o Hwow.H~ Nm¢o.na .m:< max.” o¢ ” ...... .num
N¢.o mon.Hn ¢m-.H~ afian wax ” ”
no.0 en¢¢.wH mnuo.~ «can max ” “
om.H name.oo om~¢.~m .....nau » “
N~.H «mH0.HH mw¢~.nH - .....mmx ” “
m~.o oomn.fim mooo.¢m ..... ax ” o.mn~.oqs.~ oq " .Huuoa
*;Ho.om onNN.N mm-.- ......ox ”A mfi.m¢m.~n m.m~o.om¢.fl ¢m ” .....uouuu
------ ..... - onflo.~«m- ...... x u¢¢~h.¢ No.wmw.omH N.oHN.oou.H N u aoflmmunwmm
. u u moo - .xoa
" u u w u u u w oaowudauap
" uouum u u u u u u u no cannon
monaw>tm u unavawum u oaaa>un ” manmwuu> » monad> " macaw» u andava u u Hanan:
macaquflmmoou H m m anus“ H «a sum m «an m coauuavu

 

s?§§§.:s :3

333

J

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

00.0 0000.0 0000.0- 0000 000 0 00 “ ........ 000
00.0 0000.0 0000.0 .0:< 000 u n
00.0 0000.0 0000.0 0000 000 0 n
00.0 0000.00 0000.0 .....000 u n
00.0 0000.00 0000.00 .....000 u 0
00.0 0000.00 0000.0 .....000 u 0.000.000 00 0 .00000
0000.00 0000.0 0000.0 ......00.u 0.000.0 0.000.000 00 0 .....00000
------ ------ 0000.000- ......00 “0000.0 00.000.00 0.000.000 0 n 0000000000
. u u 000 - .0000
u u
u on
000.0 0000.00 0000.00 .....000 u 00 u ........000
00.0 0000.0 0000.0r .....000 u 0
00.0 0000.00 0000.00 .....000 ” 0.000.000.0 00 0 .00000
0000.000 0000.0 0000.00 ......mx 0 00.000.00 0.000.000 00 0 .....00000
------ ------ 0000.000- ...... 0 “0000.00 00.000.000 0.000.000.0 0 n 0000000000
0 u 000 .000
0 0 u 0 n 0 0 0 «08000000090
0 Hanna 0 0 0 u 0 0 0 mo cannon
wmsaflrnm 0 00.000.03.04 0 0000000700 0 30.00.0000 0 woa0w> 0 9.800000 0 0.300000 0 0 00000500
muaouoamwmoo m h m cams. H mo 85w m mun M coaudsvu

 

8000000000..-. 0 000a

334

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M O” O o 0 o o O o o
«00.0 0000.0 0000.00 .....000 u 00 u 000
00.0 0000.00 0000.00 .....mmx . N
00.0 0000.00 0000.00 ..... 00 . 0.000.000 00 0 .00000
0000.000 0000.0 0000.0 ......00 . 00.000.0 0.000.00 00 . .....00000
lat-...! III-ii .005." .NmNu . . . . . . N ugw.¢n om .OON0wm. w. mom0NMN .0 u flowmmouwom
. u m 000 - .0000
00.0 0000.0 0000.0- 0000 00x 0 00 u 000
00.0 0000.0 0000.0 .000 000 . 0
00.0 0000.0 0000.0- 0000.000 0 n
«00.0 0000.00 0000.00 .....000 u .
00.0 0000.00 0000.00 .....000 n .
00.0 0000.00 0000.0 .....000 . 0.000.000 00 " .00000
«000.000 0000.0 0000.0 ......wx . 00.000.0 0.000.00 00 . .....00000.
-..-.... --- 0000 .000- . . . . . . 00 ӣ0.00 00.000.00 0.000.000 0 n 000003030
0 u 000 -.0000
0 0 u 0 0 0 0 0 mac-300.2800
0 90000 0 u 0 0 0 0 0 «o «00:00
wmsau>xh 0 vudvawum 0 03.20070— " 0.3.3.300 u wanna.» 0 00800000 0 90.000000. 0 0 00000500 ,
mufimwoawmooo . m h m cues. N no 85m m mwv m acauwavu

 

avaiwwuowv... .- . 0 00 0.90.

335

.GOHumeuuoo ucwwogmmmou mamwuaszm

.xm0umumm «Hanov no mHNch he vmuuowua0
om amss Hm>mH >u000nanoum A¥¥v unmouma 0 no A«v unmoumm m 050 um oumu 800m ucmummmav 00ucm00m0aw0mc

.aoummum mo mumpwmau

.mHm>0uommmmu .ANNNw van AHNNV mmanmau¢> mm vmumcmemw mum mGOHumEuommsuuu ommnfiw.m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

" 0m. 0 .......m~m
00.0 0000.0 00000.00- .....000 u .
m0.o -anmwo NNm¢.N .....HNx 0 o.w¢¢.¢m mm 0 .Hmuoa
*0mm.¢m o~m0.o omom.m ......0x 0 qo.mm~ o.0~o.m mm 0 .....uouum
nun-u unuuunn- mao¢.000 ......ox " ¥0mm.0m oo.moo.m o.0~w.w~ m " scammmuwmm
" "semen - .o.z
" m0 0 «NM
N040 mem.o mo~o.o .....NNN 0 u
0N.o omNm.¢ ammo.0u .....me 0 o.¢o~.m . mu 0 .Huuoa
m0.~ momm.o n¢a¢.o ......0x 0 oo.mm0 ¢.mm0mm mm 0 .....uouum
nun-u nan-nun: w¢¢n.-0 ......o% 0 00.0 om.NNN cameo m 0 nowmmmuwmm
0 0 suooH - .w>
v0500> 0 00000 n u 0 u n 0 0 acquwaum>
m " vumvawum 0 maaa>nn 0 0000000> 0 v0900> 0 mum:¢a 0 mwumsvm ” 0 no 000900
0 0 u 0 m 0 cum: 0 mo Bum 0 out " hopes:
mucm0owmmmoo 0 0 0 u aoaumavm

 

.vmumuHmcoo mamvoa cowmmummwu mo 0050000> mo 000N00n<

 

 

H

 

 

 

 

.muaum “mauo

scum pom oqmanamma mac00ouwo nuuoz vcw 00c0w00> new o¢maummm0 .NHmH-@om0 .AAHnHoNV 08000 :OHuoavoum no 0000
mAu mo xmucfi mnu hp vmuwammv AHIH¢0xV macho ma0ummaoo mo mmmmuow mnu ou Aa-Hmaxv macho wsaumaaoo vmamqommm

mo m30u> mfiu mo oauwu mcu mafia-Hoxv 08000 :00uozvoua mo umoo mo xmvca mmumum vmuaca 0:» hp vmumammv Aauamxw
munawwm mo 000um “Aaxv mawu mo a00uuaam a ma vmmmmumxm AOHNV vm£0mu£u van Umxoam muscmmm mo mmmmuo<nn.~ manna

336

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

" 00. u .......000
0000.00 0000.00 0000.00- .....000 0 0
000.0 0000.00 0000.00 .....000 " 0.000.00 00 0 .00000
0000.00 0000.0 0000.0 ......00 ” 00.000.0 0.000.00 00 0 .....00000
--- ---- 0000.000 ......00 ”0000.0 00.000.00 0.000.00 0 n 0000000000
0 0 30000- .000
u 00. n .......000
0000.0 0000.0 0000.0- .....000 u 0
00.0 0000.0 0000.0 .....000 " 0.000.0 00 0 .00000
0000.00 0000.0 000000.0 ......00 H 00.00 0.000 00 n .....00000
--- ---- 0000.000 ......00 "0000.00 00.000.0 0.000.0 0 0 0000000000
0 0 30000- .000
u 00 u 000
000.0 0000.0 0000.00- .....000 u 0
000.0 0000.00 0000.00 .....000 " 0.000.000 00 0 .00000
0000.00 0000.0 0000.00 ......00 " 00.000.0 0.000.00 00 0 .....00000
--- ---- 0000.000- ......00 ”0000.00 00.000.000 0.000.000 0 0 0000000000
0 0 30000 - .00
u00~0> 0 00000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000>
h 0 0000:00m 0 0000>nn 0 0000000> 0 00000> 0 000000 0 0000000 0 0 «0 000000
0 0 0 0 h 0 000: 00 00 Sam 0 000 0 00080:
0000000wm000 0 0 0 0 0000000m

 

00000000000 0 00000

337

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

" no. " .......uNm
oo.o «Nam.m «mmuo.~ .....me ” "
n~.o n¢mo.¢ o~m¢.~ .....HNN " o.mmo.n ma " .kuoa
**o¢.na mmqn.o Namm0.m ......Hx " mN.on m.~mo.~ 0H " .....uouum
nu--- ---unnnu Nom~.a¢u ......ox ur*ua.m mw.woo.H m.ooo.m m “ :oqmauuwmm
" u 3Hoo~u.aaxo
“ mm. ” ........m~m
wo.o No¢m.m mahuo.fl- .....Nux " "
no.0 ammo.nu mom¢.m .....HNN “ o.m~o.nm~ oH “ .Huuoa
*¥mo.oq ommm.H mmmwo.ma ......Hx " ma.mwN.H m.¢~m.o~ 0H ” .....uouum
nuns: ununnuun #mmm.o¢au ......ox u¥¥mo.mm oo.moa.wm N.¢om.¢HH m " scammmuwmm
“ “ 3Hooon.xma
vm=~u> " uouuw " u u u u n ” cowuuwum>
m " unavGMum u maam>nn “ manuaum> " vmafla> " muaavm " monasvn " a mo mouaom
" n u u m u now: " mo Saw u out " Hanan:
muaoaoammuOUquq w u u u " coaumaum

 

Acuaafiuaoov 5 «Hana

uaoaoaumooo coauuHuuuoo onHuanzw

Hawuoudafid and aao>oa hugmaAdAOHmn

aouoouw mo muouwonw

 

 

 

338

 

 

 

 

« om » can
‘ u a.moh a u .fiuuoa
«H.«¢ NH~H.~ <«H«.h ....nmwfl. H¢.H m.oa h “ .....uouuu
m¢.«~ aoa¢.~ n¢n«.n ..... . “o.Hu nm.on o.HHo N u aofluaoumam
» » Minna no .2
u u
n W“ 0.0000!
n ma u «an
n u
m u N.~¢ a n .Hduoa .
co.o Nuna.o «monoo.o .... mm a H~.a o.mo h ” .....uouun.
«cud onaH.H onmo.H ..... N.“ ONoH H9.HH NonN N n cowuaouuQfl
u u Huasa u .u>
4 x 4 », u
. u a. n u u » acquuahlp
u uouuo . u n u n n u «0 conuOi
Imwnaubih « unaccuuu ~ -osunPtn a canuqn¢> . nunan? u «gnaw» . aouu:v» u u Hanaua
nuuoaoamwoou m h u anus“ . «0 3%» H mmv H coauunvn

u A u u
vouavandoo «Hovoa.:aqnnouwon mo ooaaaun> mo adamadq<_

r

.mnma-o¢m~ .Amuxv cusp amfiucom
mmdoxo can .Anxv muaddam mo oouun «nu mo acquoanm u an A My owduuou uuauom vaung>uunuovnpzs.m «Hana

339

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u u
” HH.“ 00.0.0.0N“
» u
an “ n.m¢me m u .Hauoa
«H.o HNHo.m ehnn.u .... «x a mu.mom m.h~oo u a .....uouuu
eh.o aon~.mfl n¢¢H.oH- ..... x u «e. mn.umm o.mo~ a ” aoflmmonwom
u u H.m-a .uH4
u u
u u
M ‘.NH.« OOOQOOOUN“
u u
nu ” o.«o~ m “ .Huuoa
“o.H Heom.H nmdo.a .... an « n¢.~n «.NNN N « .....uouuu
oo.o aou~.~ mahuo.u ..... x » mm. Hm.ha o.mn « u ..aowuuuuwom.
u u wé$ .3.—
» u
a i u
N p g.’“ .OOOOOOON“
« n
nu « «.mnnma m “ .Huuoa
Hm.o «omH.«H nonm.o .... «x . nm.maou n.5moefi h u .....uouua
«o.H aumfi.~m «5mm.n¢- ..... x “ no.H um.ouau ~.o¢N¢ « n coaummumam
u “ Hgnum .uo
4‘ b ‘n ‘4
u u ” u u n u . 3.3382,
n uouuo . u u u u u a mo oonnou
noggin“ 3353 a «3.275 a 333.“; a 3.33 “ 9.8:: . «38:: u n “.335
uuaoauammooo H n .m H 50x N no saw a «mu H 8.33:5

 

Avunawuaouornom «Hana

340

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

uuaowoammooo

u on.“ O 0......0Nm
nu ” o.¢nfl.- a m .Hauoa
«N.o omfim.¢ Nom~.ofi- .... an n hm.n¢N H.~o~.H h . .....uouuu
o~.om Hooa.m mhmh.~m- ..... x « mm.H~ hn.mHN.n n.~N¢.oH N ” coauuoumom
» n Hsnxa .uaxo
« u
u Ho.“ 0.0.00.0”
” u
“ ¢.¢Ho15«o.« o « .Huuoa
no.o aamo.o¢a um-.o« ....nmx ” o¢.ooo.omu m.~ou.ooomu N ” .....uouuu
no.0 Hmoo.mhu “an“.mm- ..... x u qo. h~.mo¢.oa o.HHm.o~ N u aoflmuonmom
a « Hawtm 33H.
u h
u ~ “ . u u u « aoaumaunp
» uouuo a u u u a u u no condom
unaw>shu vuwvcmuu a oaam>sn “ canmwud> . gonad? « .ouusvu ” maydavu u « Hwnaud
« h u awn: a mo 55“ u «mu» soauadwn.
u u . u »

 

Avosaauaoovnn.m Ianda

341

ucufiuamwooo fieduuaouuou onHuanxw

Hawuouuaaq ohm mam>mH muaaanunoum

n

eovomuw mo nomuwond

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u #0.” OOOOOOOONm
N N
mu N «.moh a N .Huuoa
an.oa oomo.a ~o¢¢.n .... nm_N on.om «.Nmu N N .....nouuu
n¢.o amen.“ moanon ..... N oa.o mu.ouu o.~n< a N aonmouwom
N N Hnuuo .o .2
L N N
114 1‘ N 11 N N .
~ #0.” ......OON“
2 N «.3 N N .38.

ma.o «mum.o mom¢.ou .... «N.N n¢.«~ «.NQ N N .....uouun
No5 NSNA 32.? . . . . . N N S. 34 NJ. N N 833%}
N N Huauo .u>

N N N N N N N N aoNuuNug>

N gonna N N N r N N N N no cannon

+bwaau>ah N vuvewuu N ouaw>un N oanmwnd> N nasad> N macaw» N unaware N N nonaua .

4 uuamaoamwooo M . h H cums“ M NO 85m H dun” doaudavfl

wouovqmaou maovoa scammmuwou mo oocuauu> mo mammamdd
£2725 . ANNE 33. SEEN :85 Ea . A735

“mum oco gammaa «unsung mo oouum anu mo coauoadm a mu ANHVV unwound panama vaumo>uusnouap:u.a candy

.I

 

m
P91

1
I. .-

 

 

 

342

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M q a o o o
N and
NN N m.N¢N.N N N .NNNON
on.o NNNN.N noen.¢ .... “_N om.NNN «.Now.n , N m .....Nouuu
oN.N NNNN.NN moNo.NN- .....nx N No. oN.NNn N.¢mo.N N N aoNNmoumam
N m Num-o .NNN
a
in o u o o o o o o 9
u ..vH u ON“
n u
nN N N.NNN m m .Nmuoa
oN.N NNNN.N OONN.N .... an N NN.NN N.NNN N H .N...Nouuu
No.0 NoNN.N Nomm.o- ..... x N on. oo.NN N.NN N m conmaNNom
N N N-q-o .uNm
“ qo.” 0......0Nm
mN N N.NNN.NN m N .Nauoa
«N.o NNoN.¢N NNN¢.m .... nx N NN.NNN.N «.NNN.NN N N .....Nouuu
«o.o NNNN.NN oooN.N ..... x N «N. N¢.Nqn N.Nmo N N aONmmmuwaN
N N N-m-o .No
1 1 u N
N N N N N N N N coauwaum>
N Hanna N N N N n N N no monsom
PonHmNrsm N 3333.» N 03275 N m." 32.; N nosaflr N 0.32% N 3.3:: N N nun—add
mucoNuNmmooo. M m m can: N no Bum H umvn aoNuuavu

\

AuoaaNuaouvu:.m .Nnae

343

I.»

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a“ 0 O O O O O O 00““
N N
3 N 92:33 a N 4.38.
NN.N NONN.N Noo¢.NN- .... an N oo.N¢N.N «.NNNNN N N .....Nonuu
om.o NNNN.NN NNNN.N.-. ..... N.N NN.N oN.ONN.N N.o¢¢.m N N aonNuumoN
N N N-N-o .uNNo
u Ho.“ DOOO..O°NM
N N - .
mN N ¢.¢No.NNo.N N N .Nuuoa
No.0 NNNN.NNN NNNN.NN .... «N N oo.nNo.NmN m.nmo.oNo.N N N .....Nouuu
No.c NNNo.NNN NNNO.NN ..... N.N No. o<.NmNNm N.NNN.ON N N NOwamemm
N N 70:0 Jam.
h P
N N N N N N N N couuufiudp
N Mouuo N N N N N N N mo cannon
fiosamNrnh N 3.33de N «3.273 N 3n3uw> N amid; N 0553 N 353 N N Hangs
massage H .N m 5% w No 3 m E.” 823%

4

AwaaaNuaouV--.m «Name

344

.ucuwuammuou‘coNuuHuunoo mumuuanzo

.Nwwuoumaaa who mNu>oH huaawnnaoum

a

.aovuoum mo numumunu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u ”N. u QOQOOooUNM
N N.NNN.NN m N .Nmuoe
ca.o mmmN.NH ¢on.N ......mux N o mm.¢No.m m.¢oHN¢H N N .....uouum
NN.N NNN¢.NN NNNN.NN- ......NNx N mo.N NN.NNN.N N.NNN.N N N conmmNmmN
N N Humnu n .uu
u qw- M oooOOooUN“
N N.NoN m N .Nuuoa -
oo.em moNN.N NNNN.N ......NNN N NN.NN NNNNN N N .....NoNNN
«N.oN NNNN.N NNNN.oN ......NNx N oN.NN NN.NNN o.NNm N N aoNNauNwaN
N . N HaNnN .o .z
H “N.” ......QONm
N N.Hm m N .Hmuoa

00.0 H¢o¢.o w¢meoo.o .....mmx N ¢¢.m H.oc n N .....uouum
NN.N NNNN.N NNNN.N .....NNN N NN.N NN.NN N.NN N N aonmmNNmN
N N HnHuN .u>

amaflu>N uouuw N N N N N N N coaumwum>
m N vumucmum N maam>un N oNnmNum> N nmnam> N muuavm N mmumswu N N mo muuaom

N N N N m N :mmz N «0 85m N mwv N umnaaa
mucmNONmmmoo N N N N N :oNumsvu
.vmumvfimcoo mamvoa :onmouwmu mo moamwum> mo mNmewc<
.wmmHJoan .Amwxv mumu muHmamm mmmoxw vcw.NAHNNV mamua coauosvoum mo umoo mo Kmvcu mmudum wmuNaD

msu ou muaawmm mo muwum msu mo ogumu mnu mo GONNUGSM a ma Amawv mmmmuom panama vmumm>udnumvaann.oH wands

345

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NN N .oNN
. N N.NNN.NN N N .NmNoN
NN.N NNNN.¢ NNNN.NN- .....NNN N NN.NNN N.NNN.N N N .....NoNNN
mo.om ¢o¢¢.ua nmoN.wou .....HNN N om.HN mo.HHNNm H.NN¢N0H N . :owmmmuwmm
. N N N N-N-N .meo
N «.NNo.NNo.N N N .Nmuoa
No.o NNNN.NNN oNNN.NN .....NNx N NN.ooo.NNN N.NmoNuNo.N N N .....NoNNN
No.0 NNNN.NNN NNNN.NN- .....NNN N No.o NNNNoN.N N.Noo.NN N N coNNNNNNoN
N N N-N-N .xma
N NN. N .......oNN
N m.NNN.o N N .Nuuoa
No.o NNNN.N NNNN.N .....NNx N m¢.NNN o.NNN.N N N .....NoNNN
NN.N NNNN.NN¢ NNNN.NN- .....NNN N NN.N NN.Noo.N N.NNo.N N N aoNNNmNNuN
N N N-N-N .aN4
N NN. N .......oNN
N N.NoN N N .Nmuoa
NN.o NNNN.N NNNN.N .....NNN N NN.oN N.NNN N N .....NoNNN
on.o NNoo.m. ommm.m-- .....NNN N NN.o ON.NN N.om N N aoNNNmNmoN
N N N-¢-N .NNN
nmaam> N uouum N N N N N N N coaumwum>
m N cuuvcmum N msam>nn N manmNum> N nw=Hm> N mum:Vm N mmumnvm N N mo mouaom
N N N N m N smut N we Sam N «mu N noneda
augmNUNmmmoo N N N N N aoNumavm

 

NumsaNNaoov oN «Nana

346

.ufimNonmmoo aoNuwHuunoo «Hmwuanzw

.auaumumEBN who ua0>ma huNNNnunoumn
.aovuuum mo «command

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m S. "P ......OOON“
m N.Noq N m .NNNoN
NN.o NoNN.N NNoN.o .....NNx H em.q¢ o.¢NN N H .....NoNNu
NN.N NNNN.N NNNN.N- ......Nx H NN.N 0N.NN N.NNN N H aoNNNNNmoN
H H N-m-N .mu
N am. " ...OOIIUNM
N o.NN N N .Nuuoa
mo.om oNN¢.o «Noo.m .....me N NN.N N.N N N .....NoNNm
NN.¢N NNNo.o NNN¢.N ......Nx N NN.NN NN.NN N.NN N N aoNNNNNNmN
N N N-N-N .o .z
n «N. " OOOOOOOQN~
N o.N¢ N N .Nauoa
oo.o NNNN.o NNNNo.o- .....NNN N NN.N N.NN N N .....NoNNm
«N.N NNNN.o NoNN.N ......Nx N NN.N NN.N N.NN N N aoNNNonom
N N N-N-N .N>
amaam> N uouum N N N N r N N N aoNumNum>
m N Unavamum N o=Hw>nn N manuaum> N nm3Hm> N mumaam N mmumsvm N N no muuaom
N N N N m N cum: N we saw N «at N umnaac
muaowuammmou N N N N N coaumncm
.vmuwvwmaoo mawvoa nonmmuwuu mo oonmwum> mo mammamq<
.mnNHnman .Amaxv wumu muaucmm mmmoxm vac Anxv musnumm mo moaum mo
aoNuo::m

m mm AHNMV usuauoHHw mmumuou uscmmm o» vmsmwunu cam vmxogm mwumuow uaamon mo oNumMun.HH wanna

347

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H mm. “ ......OONM
NN N N.N¢¢.m N N .Nuuoa
.NNN.N NNNN.N onNN.N- ..... x N NN.NN N.NNN N N .....NoNNN
NNNN.NN NNNN.N NNNN.NN- ......Nx N NN.NN NN.NNN.N N.NNN.N N N :oNNNmNNmN
N N N-N-N .NNNN
u HN. H ......OUNm
N «.NNo.N N N .Nuuoe
NN.N NNoN.N NNNN.N- .....NNx N NN.NNN N.NNN.N N N .....NoNNN
NN.o NNNN.N NNNN.N- ......Nx N NN.o NN.NNN N.NNN N. N aoNNNNNNNN
N N N-o-N .xma
N «N. N .......on
N o.¢NN N N .Nnuoa
No.o NNNN.N Nooo.o .....NNx N NN.NNN N.NNN N N .....NoNNN
«o.H oNNN.N oNNo.N- ......Nx N NN.o NN.NN N.NNN N N soNNNNNNNN
N N N-N-N .NN<
H H-H. u ......OUN“
N N.NNN N N .NNNoN
NN.o NNNN.N NNNNNN .....NNx N NN.oN N.NNN N N .....NoNNN
oo.o NNNN.N. NNNN.o. ......Nx N Nq.o «N.oN N.NN N N :oNNNNNme
N N N-¢-N .NNN
amnam>N uouuo N N N N N N N cowumNuu>
m N unavawum N wadu>inp N manuauw> N nmaam> N mumsvm NN moumsvm N N no muusom
N A N N N h N 532 N no 85m N wmv N H0955
nucmqummooo N N N N aoNuuavu

 

NvuacNNaooN NN «Nana

348

.uauNonmooo aoNuuNouuoo.onA«uH::o

.NmNuouuaEN mun nau>ua huuawaanoumn

.aovuuuu mo ououwona

 

fl

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o no.” 00.00.. m
. . 0N
N N.NNN N N .Nauoa
No.o NNNN.N Nomq.o ......NNx N NN.¢N N.om¢ N N .....NONNN
No.0 NooN.e NNNN.N .......Nx N oN.o NN.N N.NN N N aoNNNoNNmN
N N N-N-o .Nu
N No N NNN
N N.NoN N N .Nuuos
oN.NN NNNNNN NNNN.N ......NNx N «N.N N.NN N N .....NoNNN
NN.o NNNo.N NNNo.o .......mx N NN.N NN.NN «.NNN _ N N :oNNNoNNuN
N N N-N-o .o .z
N No. N .......oNN
N N.NN N .N .NNNoN
NN.o «NNN.o Noqm.o- ......NNx N : NN.o N.N¢ N N .....NoNNN
No.o NoNN.o NNNN.o- .......Nx N NN.o NN.N N.N N N aoNNNuNNuN
N N N-N.¢ .N>
nmsam> N uouum N N N N N N N coauuwum>
h N vumvcmum N 09Hw>un N manwauw> N pmSHm> N wuwavm N mmumSUm N N no mouaom
N N N N m N nwuz N no 85m N «mu N umnaac
nuaMNuammmoo N nowumavm

 

wouovamcou mamvoa scammmuwmu mo

mocmaum> mo mNuNHma<

 

 

.mmmaumqu NAmNNv mush huauamn mamuxm can Aauumxv
aofiuuasm a mu Amuwv NamauoHHm mwmmuum Nassau ou vmnmmNSN

Ham» mco vmwwma muacmmm mo muwum we
can vmxuam mmmmuum uacmwn mo oNuMMII.NH manaa

349

 

Hm. ......OON“

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N N.N¢N.N N N .Nuuoa
HH.N MNmm.© hNfl‘oe . . . . . ..me u ”Annfim Mefibhnn m u . . . o. oHOHHm
om.o NNON.N NNNN.¢- ........Nx N NN.N NN.NNN N.NNN.N N N aoNNNonmm
N N N-N-o .NNxo
N 0N. N .......oNN
N «.mNo.N N. N .Nuuoa
NN.N mmoN.N NNNN.N- ......m.x1 N No.0NN o.¢NN.N N N .....NoNNN
oawo . NNNN.N .NNNN.N: ....... x N mm.o . oN.NaN N.Noq N N uoNNNmNmmm
N . N N-o-o.xma
N -¢._. M.-Ls.....uu.m
N o.qu N N .Nouoa
oN.o NNNN.N NNNN.N ......NNx N NN.NNN «.NNN N N .....NoNNu
NN.N «coo.N NNNN.N- .......Nx N No.o oN.NN N.NNN N N coNNNNNmmN
N N -N-N-o NNN<
N Na N cum
N N.NNN N N .Nmuoa
NN.o .NNNNNN NNNN.N .....NNx N NNN.oN m.omm N N ....NNoNNm
No.o oNNN.N NNNN.o ......Nx N Nq.o No.NN N.N¢ N N coNNNmNmmN
N N N-¢-o.NNN
amaaw>N nouuwl N N N N N N N noNuwNum>
m N vumvamum N msam>nn N mHamNum> N maam> N mumsvm N mmNQDUm N N no mousom
N N N . ..m N cmmz N mo 85m N amt N umnadc

 

1

wucmNuNmmmou

GoNumavm

Numanuaoov NN NNNNN

350

.uamfiuammmou acaumawuuoo manauanzu
.Huwuwuuaaa mud me>mH auwflanunoumn
.Bovmoum mo nomummnu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m NN. m ....o UN“

m N.NNN N m ‘Nuuaa
No.0 NNNN.N «mmN.o .... me N NN.N N.NNN N N .....Nouuu
NN.NN moNN.N Noeq.oN- .... NNx N NN. No.N N.ooN N N :onmmNmmN
N N N-N-N .mu
W mm.“ 00.0.00 N“

N m m.NoN N m .HuuoH
NN.NN NNoN.o NNNN.N .... NNx H NN.N N.oN N H .....Nouuu
NN.NN NNNN.N NNNN.N .... NNx H NN.NN NN.¢N N.NNN N H aoNNNmume
H H N-N-N .o .2
H ONO " 0.0...” a“

N N.NN¢ N N .Nuuoa
oo.o Nmmo.o oNNNo.o- .... NNx N No.m N.nn N N .....Nouuu
NN.N NNNN.N NoNN.N .... NNx N NN.N NN.N N.NN N N aoNanmumou
N N N-N-N .u>
nmaaa> N uonum N N N N N N NJI.‘+N coauuwnu>
m N unavchm N msau>nn N manmwum> N anHm> N mumawm N mmumavm N N no wuuaom

N N N N N N N h N cam: N mo 85m N «mu N umnsas
muamaoammmoo N N N N N soHumaum
vmuwuamaoo mamvoa scammmumou mo muawflum> mo nHmNHuq< J.

 

.NNNN-NNNN .NNNxv Nun“ NNNuauN

mmmuxm van NAHNNV mamua GoHuoavonm mo umoo mo xmvca mmumum kuacs mnu ou muaamoa mo moaum msu mo caumu
mnu mo coauuanm a mu Ammwv uauauoHHm unammm ou vmnmmunu can vmxowm mmumuuw usawmm mo oaumm|n.ma magma

351

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N NN. N .......uNN
N m.m¢¢.m a N .Huuoa
No.NN NNNN.N Nomq.N- .....me N Nm.ooN N.NoN N N .....Nouum
NN.NN NNNN.N NNNN.NN- .....NNN N NN.NN NN.NNN.N N.NNN.N N N GONNNNNNNN
N N N N-N-N .aNxo
N NN. N .......oNN
N ¢.mmo.~ N N .ku09
«o.H NNNN.N NNNN.N- .....NNx N NN.NNN N.NNN.N N N .....Nouum
No.0 NNNN.NN NNNNNN- .....NNx N Nm.o NN.NNN N.NNN N N aonmmNNmN
N N N-N-N .uma
N NN N . oNN
N o.NNN N N .Nmuoa
oo.o NooN.N NNNN.o .....NNx N NN.NN N.Nmo N N .....Nouuu
om.N NNNN.NN NNNN.NN- .....NNN N NN.N: NN.oqN N.NNN N N :oNNmmuNoN
N N N-N-N .NN<
N NN. N .......uNN
N N. NNm N N . N38.
No.o oooN.N NNNN.N .....NNx N NN.N¢ N.omm N N .....Nouuu
NN.o NNNN.N NNoN.N- .....NNN N 00.0 NN.NN «.No N N nONmmmuNNm
N N N-N-N .NNN
nm=Hm>N uouum N N N N N N N coauuwuw>
m N vuuvcmum N m9Hu>In N mandHuu> N nw5Hd> N mumsvm N mundava N N mo mouaom
N N N N h N Gnu: N mo 83m N mmv N amass:
muamauqmmmoo N N N N :oauuavm

 

NuoaaNuaoov NN uNnua

.GONNuHmnuoo mo NamNugmwwoo manauafizu

.xuwuouud canaov no mawcum an vmumoflvcw on
Gaza Hm>mH muNHNnNAOHA Atty ucoouom H no Atv ucaouom n mnu ua onus Baum uaoummew mfiucmoNMNcwqm

n

.aovmouu mo mmmuwmnd

 

 

 

 

352

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N N ONM

«NNN.NN NNNN.N- ....oNx N N

NN.o NNqN.N¢- .....mx N o.N¢¢.NNN.m N .Nmuoa

NNNN.NN NNNN.NN ..... N N NN.NNN.NN N.NNN.Noo.N N N .....Nouum
----- Noo¢.NNN.N .....ox N oo.NNN.oNN N.NNN.NNN.N m N conmouNmN
N N ONN : .o .z

N N
u u 0 O O O O O DON“

*Nmo.mN NNN¢.N- ....oNx N N

NNN.N NNNN.NNN .....mx N o.Noo.Nno.N N .Nuuoa

Ngoo.NN NNNN.NN .....ox N NN.NNN.NN N.NNN.NNN.N N N .....Nounu
----- NNNN.NNN.N ..... x N oN.NNN.NNN.N N.NNN.NNN.N m N aonmmuwaN
N N NNN - .a>

N b.
N N N N N N coaumauuP
nosaw> N N N N N N no mouaom

m N vudvawum o=Hw>un manuwuw> N N N moum=Vm N N Masada

N N N no Bum N N cofiudsvu

mufimflUHmmmOU u u u u u

vaumvaaoo mawvoa scammmummu mo mocwwua> monmfimzauq<

.mmmHINONH xv wonmaunu wad vmxuam musawmm mo ummouuu cad NAnxV Much ado vowmwa vcaon uma nusammm mo

madam msu mo Enufludon Nfiaxv 08“» mo cowuoanm a mu commoumxm Auxv one“ Ham nuacwom mo vaoflw13.¢a manna

353

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NN
” m0.” OOOOOOOUNM
«NNN.NN Nomo.o NNNN.N- ....omx N wa
«NNN.NN NNNN.NN nmnN.¢Nm ..... N N o.NmN.oNo.N we N .Nuuoa
«*NN.NN NNNN.N NNNN.N .....Nx N NN.NNN.N o.¢oN.NNN nN N .....Nouuu
----- ------ oomo.on .....ox N «*NN.NN NN.NNN.NNN o.NmN.NNN N N aonmaNNNN
N N oN¢ . .uNm
N N
OH « m‘Von .OOOOOOONM
NNNN.oN NcNo.o NNNN.o- .... Nx N N
NNNN.N oNNN.NN NNoN.NmN .....NN N o.NNo.NNo.N NN N .Nuuoa
«NNN.NN NNNN.N NNNN.N .....ox N NN.NNN.NN «.NNN.NNN NN N .....Nouuu
----- ------ NNNN.NNN ..... N_N *«NN.NN NN.NNN.NNN N.Nqo.moq N N aonmoummm
N N NNN - .um
N N N N N N N N doaadapd>
o=Hw> N uouuo N N N N N N N no cannon
n h N nuuvcmum N o=Hd>an N manuauw> N nasam> N oun:v« N mmudswm N N Hanan:
mucoauammoou H m m can: N no as» m «no N :oNuuavu

 

AmoncaudouYn.¢H canda

354

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m Om.“ cocooooONM
«*NN.N NNNN.o NNNNNo- ....NNN N N1N
NNNN.NN NNNN.NNN NNNN.NNN .....Nx N o.oNN.NoN.N NN N .Nmuog
No.N NNNN.N NNNN.N .....NN N NN.NNN.oN N.NNN.NNN NN N .....Nouuu
----- ------ NNNN.NNN .....ox N NNNN.N NN.NNN.NNN «.NNNNNNN N N aoNNNNNNmN
m N NNN - .aNxo
M n O I O D O I O
N NN." ON“
NN.N NNNo.o Nqu.o- ....oNx N N
NN.N NNNN.NN NNNN.NNN .....Nx N o.NNN.NNN NN N .NNNON
NNo.N NNNN.N NNNN.N- .....wx N N¢.NNo.NN N.NNo.NNN NN N .....Nouuu
us--- ------ owmm.mqm ..... x N NNNN.N NN.NNo.No N.NNN.NoN N N aoNNNaumom
N N NNN - .Noa
N N
INI O” O O O O O O O
N NN N oNN
NN.N oqNN.o NNNN.o- ....oNN N N
NNN.N NNNN.NN NNN¢.NNN .....Nx N o.NNN.NNo.N NN N .quoa
NNNN.N NNNN.N NNNN.N ....NNN N NN.NNN.NN ¢.NoN.NNN NN N .....Nouuu
----- ------ NNNN.NNN .....ox N NNNN.N NN.NNN.NNN N.NNN.oNN N N aonNNuNoN
N N omn .. .34
N N N N N N N N coNuuNuflr
05H“? u HOHHO u n u u u u u HO OOH—Jon
n m N vumvcmum N o=Hm>In N manwaud> N noDHu> N «Hanan N amuwsvm N N nonadc
muaoNonwmoo M H cum: N no Bum «mu aofldavm

 

AuaaaNuaNnv-.¢N «Nana

355

1“|1"‘Il(l‘l. u(

Iqlc‘ficnuuuli

P .

.‘lq PN.§F1

.xnwuuuud «unnov no mamnfim an Umuaoavcw
on Guns Nc>oa huwaqnunoum Akkv uauuuom N no n¥v unmouom n «nu um cums Baum uauummwuv mfiuaaonNcmNmo

.Eoumuum mo mmuuwonn

.NHooa a «Nauwnu> voudauauav noauaavu on» :N «NaNmuN> you Nana oNnmuNHnm¢r

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NN.N NNNN.N oNN¢.NN N.N:<v NH» N .N .......
NN.N NNNN.NN NNNN.N- ......oNx N NN N oNN
Nc.o NNNN.NNN cNNN.¢N .......Nx N N
NNNN.NN NNNN.o NNNN.N ......NNN N N.NoN.NNo.N Ne N .Nuuoa
NN.N NNNN.N oNNN.NN- .......NN N N.NNN.NN N.NNN.NNN.N NN-N .....Nouum
----- -------- NNNN.NNN.N .......ox ‘N NNNN.NN N.NNN.NNN.N N.NNN.NNN.N N N aoNuuoNNuN
N N N83 .. .u>
N A” u ONm
NN.N NNNN.N NNoN.NN N.N:<v NNN N N
*«NN.NN NNNN.N NNNN.N- ......NNx N o.NoN.NNo.N .NN N .Nuuoa
*NN.N NNoN.NNN NNNN.NNN .......NN N No.NNc.NN N.NNN.NNN.N «N N .....uouum
NNNN.oN NNNN.N NNNN.NN .......NN N «*NN.NN NN.NNN.NNN.N N.NoN.NNN.N N N «ONuuouNuN
N N coN - .N>
909HQ>N uouuw N N N N N N N :oNuwNuu>
h N oudvauum N msfld>un N manmwua> N nmnflu> N uuuawm N mouuavm N N no cannon
N N N N m N can! N no aim N dmv N “045::
ausuguauuuoo N N N N N cowuuavm

.

 

woumvunaoo oaovoa

:oNnmuuuou mo ooamNun> mo .Nuhawnd

 

 

.mmOH-oeofl .Amfixw cuaoa fiqufiufiuo «no aN NauunNau mo nonona cam NAcHxv vasouusu

N8 BN3: :3qu No NNNNNNN .43 Ni 38 a3 E8 E EEEE E E m E §E§

«NNNNV NNNNNN. uaNN NANNV gaNN No NONNNNNN . a. NNNNNNNNN NNNN «you NuN «unequm No NNNNN--.NN «Nana

356

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N m©.m. .......UN&
NN.N NNNN.N NNNN.N NNNNNNNNN N N
«NNN.NN NNNN.o NNoN.N- .....oNN N o.NNN.NNo.N NN N .Nuuoa
«NNN.NN NNNN.NN NNNN.NNN ......Nx N. NN.NNN.N N.NNN.NNN NN N .....NoNNN
«NoN.NN coNN.N NNoo.N ......Nx N«¢NN.NN NN.NNN.NNN N.oNo.NNN N N NONNNNNNNN
H N. ooN - .NNN
H 0“.” OOOOOHHONM
NN.o NoNN.N NNNN.N NNNstNNN M NH
*Nou.o~ mono.o mnN~.ou .....oNN N o.nmo.Nmo.N wN N .Ncuoa
NNNN.N NNNN.NN NNNN.oNN ......NN N NN.NNN.NN N.NNN.NNN NN N. .....Nouum
NNNN.NN NNNN.N NNoN.N ......NN NNNoN.N NN.NNo.NNN N.NNN.NNN N N aoNNNuNNmN
N N mmmlulqmm
. N an N .. own
NN.o NNNN.N NNNN.N NN=NNNNN N N
«NoN.NN NNNN.o NNNN.N - .....oNN N o.NNN.NNN.m NN N .Nauoa
NN.o NNNN.NNN NNNN.NN- ......NN N No.NNN.NN N.NNN.NNN NN N .....Nouuu
NNNN.NN oNNN.N NNNN.NN ......NN NNNNN.NN NN.NNN.NNN N.NNN.NNN.N N N :oNNNoNNmN
N N ooN u .oNz
NaaNN> m uoNNo w “W N N N N N aoNuNNuN>.
w H wawvamum H wsflm>un H oanmaum> N nmdam> N mmuuswm N mwuuava N N mo «auscuN
. numowuawmmou Nr N m N cums. N «a sum N mmv N nonazaN
N N N N N coauuavu
u N N N N
‘1.
If! i1;
Awmscwuaoov .nH Manna

357

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NNNo.cN NNoN.oN NoNN.NN N.N=NN NNx N NN.N .......uNN
NNNN.NN NNoN.o NNoN.N- .....NNN N N
NNNN.NN NNNN.NN NNNN.oNN ......Nx N o.oNN.NoN.N NN N .NNNoN
*NN.N NNNN.N NNNN.N ......NN N NN.NNN.NN o.NNN.NNN NN N .....Nouuu
----- -------- NNoN.NN ......ox NNNNN.NN NN.NNN.NNN o.NNo.NNN N N NONNNNNNNN
N . N ooN - .meo
N NN N uNN
NN.o NNNN.NN oNNN.NN NNNNNV NNN N N
NN.N NNNo.o NNoN.o- .....oNx N o.NNN.NNN NN N .Nuuoa
NNo.N NNNN.NN NNNN.NNN ......Nx N NN.NNo.NN N.NNN.NNN NN N .....NoNNN
NNN.N NNNN.N oNNN.N- ......NN NNNNN.N NN.NNN.NN N.NNN.NNN N N aonmmNNmN
N N NON - .xoa
NN.N NNoN.N NNNN.oN NNNNNV NNN N oN N oNN
NNN.N NNNN.o NNNN.o- .....oNx N N
NNN.N NNNN.NN NNNN.NoN ......Nx N o.NNN.NNo.N NN m .NNNON
NNNo.oN NNNN.N NNNN.N ......Nx N NN.NNN.NN N.NNN.NNN NN N .....NONNN
----- -------- NNNN.NNN ......ox N NNNN.N No.NNN.NoN N.NNN.NNN N N =0NNNNNNNN
N N ooN - .NNN
Qua—HUN? N .HOHHm . N 4‘ N N . N N N N fiOHudHHQNr
h N vumvauum N u=Hu>nn N maanum> N noaawbu N mumaum N mmnmavm N N mo mounow
N N N N h N can: N we saw N «mu N uwnasa
muamNuNmmuou N N N N N floauusum
{I N
. magma
AvuanquaooV ma

358

.noHuuHmuuou mo uaowoammuoo mHQNuHsZO

.xmiumumm wanaov no oawsqm ha vmuuuwucfi

on Guns Hm>mH huaawnmnoum A%*v unmoumm H no A¥v unmoumm m mfiu um oumn Eoum unmummmwv hauamofimaswamn

.aovmmuw mo mmuuwmnw

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N NN.N .......u~m
*NNN.NN Noom.o NNNN.N- ......oNx N N
Nn.N NNNNoo.o mmoNoo.o- .......mx N .o.~NN.mmN.m mN N .Nuuoa
Nm.o o~m~.NmN NNNN.oNN .......mx N «N.Nom.N~ m.~om.on NN N .....Nouuu
**N~.Nm NNmm.N NNmo.mN .......Nx NNNNm.NN Na.Nmm.on N.¢NN.NNN.N N N :onmmemm
N N «am - .u .z
u ow.” OOOOOOOUNm
«NNN.NN «NNN.N mooN.o- ......oNx N N
No.o mNNmoo.o «NNmooo.o- .......ax N o.~am.Nmo.N mN N .Nuuoa .
om.~ omom.NNN oNNN.anm .......mx N No.oaN.~m m.~on.a~N.N NN N .....Nouuu
*NNo.NN NmN~.N NNNN.NN .......Nx NNNum.mN om.aom.NON.N ~.mmo.omo.m N N aonmonmm
N N NNN - .m>
nmaam> N uouum N N N N N N N acauufiuu>
h N unavawum N maaw>ln N manwauu> N Amaam> N mumavm N mmuwnvm N N we mouaom
N N N N m N cum: N mo 85m N wmv N Hanan:
muamwoammmoo N N N N N aofiuaavm

 

.vmnmwfimcoo mamvofi aofimmmummu mo muamaum> mo mgm%awn<

 

 

mmaN-m0¢N .NoNxv umsmouNu can Nuong

«unawom mo mmmmuom mnu was NAva xmvaa umou muwmomaoo can mo muaavm mhmxv numm one vmmwmfi ucaom “mm %
mo moan“ man mo afiuaumon NAaNV mafia mo coNuuasw a ad vmmmmumxm Auxv «you umm muacuma mo v mu==mo

H 1
mg» no~ owawh .

359

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M HNNoM oooooooUNM
NN.~ NmnN.o onNN.o- ......oNx N N
mN.~ NomNoo.o Nonoo.o- .......¢x N o.N~¢.mNo.N mN N .NNNoa
N¢a.o NNom.~mN mmNm.omm .......mx N No.NNN.NN m.NN~.mNo NN N .....Nouum
*NNN.NN mmmm.N NNNN.m .......Nx N NNNN.N om.m~NNooN ~.moN.m~N N N conmwNwmm
N N Nun - .NNN
N mo N . . cam
*NNo.NN mNoN.o ooNa.~- ......oNx N N
No.0 NNNNoo.o NNmNoo.o- .......ax N o.omm.owo.N mN N .Nmuoa
NNNN.NN aamN.NoN NNaN.oam .......mx N nN.NNNNN m.omm.NNm NN N .....uouum
*NoN.NN NNam.N MNmo.m .......Nx N *Nmm.m~ NN.oN~.NmN N.¢NN.mNN N N aonmmeum
N N NNN - .aNm
*Nmo.m NNMNo.o omuu.o- ......oNx N on N cum
NON.N awNNoo.o NNNmoo.o- .......mx N N
NNoo.~N umNo.m~N NNNN.mNN .......mx N o.m~o.Nmo.N mN N .Nuuoa
*Noa.mN NNmN.N ONNN.N .......Nx N No.NmN.NN «.mN~.NNm NN N .....uouum
----- -------- «www.mNN .......ox N N«mm.oN oN.No~.a~N m.oom.NNm N N aonmmeom
N N mum - .No
nmaam> N uouum N N N N N N N noNuwwum>
m N unavamum N 05Hm>nn N manuaum> N nmnam> N muwsvm N ..mmumavm N N mo mouaom
N N N N m N sum: N mo abm N mwv N nugaac
madmaowwmmoo N N N N N coauwavm
A

flwfiflHUGOOV _
0H 0H
nay

360

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. on.N .......u~m
NNNN.N ooom.o Nooo.N- ......oNx N N
oo.o NNmNoo.o ooNNoooo.o .......ax N o.om~.¢om.N mN N .quoa
Nam.m moNN.mNN mmmN.mmN .......mx N mm.m¢N.ou n.NNmNNNm NN N .....Nouum
Na.o mmmm.~ NNmN.~ .......Nx N *NNN.N NN.mmm.mm N.~mm.N¢m N N nonmmummm
N N NNN n .uNxc
u on u 0 O 0 UN“
NN.~ mNmNo.o NNNN.o- ......oNx N N
NNN.N NNNNoo.o NNm~oo.o- .......mx.N o.Nmm.mNN mN N .Nmuoa
¥¥m¢om GHOH.H¢H Om¢Non¢¢ .......omN N wmoNNNuOH w.®OOa¢h¢ #6 N .....HOHHM
Noo.N omom.N NNNo.n- _ ........Nx N N¥N~.o om.omNNNo ~.nNa.moN N N aonmmNmmm
. N N «no - .xma
nanaw> N uouum N N N N N N N coauwaum>
nm N vuuvawum N o=Hm>ln m manuaum> N nonad> N muusvm N mmuw:Vm N N mo condom
L N N N N N h N cum: N no 85m N «mu N umnaba
uuamfiowmwmoo N N N N N acquuaum

 

/

335503 3 .
wHAdH

361

.QONumeuuoo mo uamwowmmmou manquHQZU

.xafiumuwa «Haaov no «Hung» an vuuwoavaw
om :mn3 Ho>mH huaflanqnoum Atkv unmoumm H van A¥v unmoumm m mnu um cums Edam acmnmmmav mauamowmwnwamn

.Eovuuum mo mmwumwna

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

na.o NNNN.mN NNmm.~N. Aummmv NNx N N
Nm.N Nom~.a mNom.oN A.m:<v NNx N .N .......
No.“ NNNN.N maoo.mN- ANNsnv me N «a N cum
«No.oN noNN.N oNNo.n- .....oNx N N
o~.o mmNmoo.o NomNoo.o- ......ax N o.~oo.mmo.~ mN N .Nauoa
Nuo.N mmm~.mN~ Nomm.NmN ......mx N om.Nmm.om m.amo.Nmu.N NN N .....uoupm
*NaN.Nm NNNN.~ NNmo.NN ......Nx N*«NN.NN mN.NNm.m~m «.NoNNNom.m N N aonmmummm
N N NNN . .u>
nmafla> N uouum N N N N N N N aoaumquw>
h N vumvawum N usHm>un N managum> N nmsHm> N onusvm N onMQUm N N mo mouaom
N N N N m N cam: N no Sam N «mu N awash:
mucmwuwmmmoo N N N N N coaudnvu
vmumwamaoo mamvoa scammumwmu mo moamaum> mo mauwwwq<
.mnmN-aoaN .NNN>NNomnNmu NaNNxv cam .AoNxv

.AmHNV .mnucoa HmuNuHHo vmamwoumm a“ Hamwcfimu mo mmnonfi van NAoHNv vmnmmusu van vmxofim muacmmm mo mwmmuuu

Nfimxw,xmvc« umoo mugmomaou mzu mo mumavm NAva “mom 0:0 vmwwwa canon awn muacumm mo mowum ecu
Nmmxme ca ANHNV nonunvm mafia NAHNV mafia mo coNuocnm a mu vommmumxm ANNV muou Hum cassava mo vaHMo Bauwummo~
I! .NH ”Haw“

362

 

cmuo.ms

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nm.~ mNaN.m A.m:<v NNx N N
m~.N oNNN.m oowN.c AmNanN oNx N N.N ....... a
Nm.c «NNN.n «mom.N- Aoaanv an N N N on
*NmN.oN anoN.o ammm.~- .....oNx N N
NN.o .NNNNoo.o nmNNoo.o- ......mx N o.ommNNmo.N mN N .Nuuoa
*Nmn.NN «wmm.moN Nooa.~nn ......nu N on.m~N.N o.NNm.Nom NN N .....Nouuu
*«om.oN omNm.N a¢on.m ......Nx N«*No.mN Nm.NmN.NNN o.mo~.~m~ N N aoNuaouwum
N N NNN - .NNN
aa.o NoNN.m mmoN.a- A.m=<v NNx N N
NN.o ammN.N NNNN.N NhNanv NNx N Nm.N ....... m
oo.o nNNm.NN NNoN.~- Nuaanv me N N cu
«NNN.N NmNNo.o oNN~.o- .....oax N N
NN.m mnmNoo.o newuoo.o- ......ax N o.nuo.Nno.N wN N .Nauoa
*«on.m «Nan.mmN NNoN.moN ......mx N mN.nNo.~N m.nom.maN NN N .....Nouuu
NNNN.NN NNom.N uon.c ......Nx NmNNN.N mm.moN.NN N.NNN.0Nm N N aonuuumum
N N Nam - .No
NN.N. NNNm.N oNam.m- N.Ngumv NNx N N
om.o mmeN.a momw.o N.m:<v NNx N .N .......
No.o omoo.cN NmmN.N- NaNaav me N oN N cum
NNmm.NN wam.o «NNN.~- .....oNx N N
Nn.N NmNNoo.o mmouoo.o- ......mx N o.~NN.me.m «N N .Nuuoa
No.o NmmN.NwN «moN.omN ......mx N no.mom.- «.NNNNNmN NN N .....Nouum
«NNN.NN NomN.~ oNnm.NN ......Nx N**om.mN N~.mmN.NNm N.NNm.mo~.~ N N aonmNNmmm
N N NNN . .u .z
noaau> N nouum N N N N N N N N aoauMNum>
h N vuuvauum N 09Hu>ln N manuwum> N nusHu> N mumavm N mmuwSVm N N we mouaom
N N N N m N nag: N no Sam N and N pagans
nucoaoqwmoou N N N N N cogucavm

 

1

A
"U
0
3
fl
0"
u
I:
O
0
V
N
H
0
we
13
[—0

 

363

NgeN.mN mNmN.m amNN.Nn N.m:<v NNx

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

at
.0
.0

NN.o NmmN.NN mNNm.NN NNNauV oNx N N
mm.o NNmm.N NNNN.N Amaan meN N . N ....... m
«NmN.N NNmNo.o NomN.o - .......oNxN N an N 0N
N¢a~.N NmNmooo.o NNNNoo.o - ........mx N N
NNNo.NN NNNN.NNN NmnN.NNN ........nx N o.Nma.nNN mN N .Nmuoa
mm.N oon.N mmnn.N - ........mx N ma.mNn.N N.wnN.oNn NN N .....uouuu
NONN.NNN ........ x NNNNN.N NN.NNN.NN o.mNN.nmN N N aonmmuwmm
m m NNN - .xaa
NN.o NNNN.N onau.n N.w:<N.NNx N N
mn.N Namm.N NNNN.N NNNauV NNN N NN. m ....... a
mo.N NomN.oN NomN.NN- Aoaanv an m N am
mm.n NNNN.o mnmn.o - .......oNx . H
mN.N NNmNoo.o Noouoo.o - ........mx H o.NNm.NNo.N NN H .Nuuoa
NNNN.N NOON.NmN mmNo.mNm ........mx N NN.mwm.nN N.NON.NNN NN H .....Nouuu
NNNN.NN NNNn.N NNnN.m ........Nx NNNNN.N 0N.omm.mo N.NNN.NNN .N m NONNNmnwmm
u u HNW I odH<
noaad> N uouuo N m N m N m N ao«uuaud>
h N vuuvcuum N o=Hu>sn . mandaud> N nmzaw> . ouuavm N mouw=Vm . N no monsom
N N N N N m N amfiz N no 85m N wwv N umnaba
muamNonumoo N N N W N N aoNuuauu
N .
o

 

7!.

asflwudoav
NH OHnt

364

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ao.N NomN.N ouNN.m N.Naomv NNN N N
Ngom.oN wom0.NN mNNN.NN N.m:<v NNN N Nm.N ....... m
mo.o mmmn.a NNNN.N NNNNNV me N N om
NNNN.NN «mom.o NNNN.N - .......oNx N N
No.0 NomNoo.o mmmmooo.o ........mx N o.om~.mom.N mN N .NNNoa
*NmN.m NNNm.mmN moNo.mNN ........mx N NN.ONNNNN N.Nmo.Noo NN N .....Nouum
Nm.m Noom.N wam.m ........Nx N «Nom.m mo.NNNNNoN N.NNNNmoN N N -NONmmmummm
. N. e. . N . N..c;.,. mafifi. . .. :_. sNx , . m HNN I .waO
Nxmo.ou oon.N mNNo.mn N.w:¢q%NNx N N
mo.n ONNw.oN NNNo.mN NNNawV NNx N N
*mo.N ONmN.N mNmm.mN Noaswv me N N
{wNoNV wamOAu wHNHoO I .......OHN N thN ......o M
NN.m amNmooo.o NNNNoo.o - ........mx N N 0N
Hm.o mNNm.mNN Nmmm.mNN ........mx N N
NNNm.mN mmumo.o NNNm.o .......wa_N o.mmo.mNN NN N .NNNON
NNNN.NN NNnm.N NNNN.o~- ....... Nx N m.NNN.m m.NNNNNON oN N .....Nome
..-..- 1.: a -.. ooNo.mwm ........ox N NN.NN N.NNNNNN m.NNo.mmm m N aONmmmemm
N N NuHNo I .on
N N
05H“? N HOHHw N N N N N N N .GOHudHHdP
n m N vuwvawum N mst>nn N manwaum> N anamfi N muman N mwudsvm N N we m0950m
N N N N a .m N NN.—$02 N no 83m N wmfi N Hangs
muaoaowmmmoo m m N m m aowuwsvu

 

NwoscNNaouv NH manna

365

ow :mn3 Hm>mH zuNHNAmnoum A**V

unmoumm a no

.coauoamuuoo mo usuaowmmooo mamauaazu

.xmwumumw mansov no mawawm an voumuavcfl
A¥v unmoumm m mgu um oumn Scum uamummmwv Nauamofiwfiawamn

.aovmmum mo ammumonm

 

 

 

 

 

 

oo.o mmNN.NN NNNNo.m- Nugmmv NNx N N
NN.N NNN~.m NNNN.oN N.ma<v NNx N N
No.N oaao.» NNNN.NN- NNNNNV max N .N .......
Nm.N nnmm.N muon.N- .....oNx N an N umm
NN.o mNNN.mNN NomN.wN ......mx N N
*NN¢.N NNNN.o oNoN.o .....NNN N o.NNo.Nmo.N «N N .Nuuoa
NN.N NNNN.N NNNm.oN- ......Nx N mm.mNN.NN m.NNm.mNo.N NN N .....NoNNu
----- -------- omNoo.mNNN ......ox N N¢.Nm NN.mmo.mom N.o0N.NNo.N N N aonmmemm
N N NoN - .N>
awDHdNrN HOHHw N N N N N N N . NHOHHQHHQP
h N vudvfiwum N mfiHderA N andflN—dkw N AmSHri N wudflvo N mmhdn—Um N N MO mob—flow
N N N N .m N Gum: N MO 83m N wmfi N #095:—
mucmaowmmmou N N N N N coauuavn
vmumvamaoo «autos coammwuwMMxmo oocaauw> mo mammadad
.mquumomH .ham>auoummmu NANHXV can NAonv .Amaxv nausea HmuNuNuo Umamwummm aw HHmmcamu mo mmnoaa

NAoHNv vmnmmusu van vmxuNm muscwmm mo mwmmuom mnu NAmxv paw» mac vmwwma muscmmm mo moaum man no anuauwon
NANHNV mafia mo mumsvm mnu NAaNV maqu mo coauucsm a mu vmmmmumxm Amxv muom umm musammm mo vamawuu.wa manna

366

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ON.N NONNO.N NNNH.O- N.Na<v NHx N N
NN.O NNON.O NHNO.N NNHanv OHN N N
NN.O NNONO.NN NNON.N- Amasnv me N NN.N ....... N
NNN.O NONN.O HHON.H- ......OHx N N UN
NN.N ONNN.NN NNON.HNH .......lx N N
«*NO.O HmOH.O NHNN.O ......NHx N N.NNN.ONO.H ON N .Hmuou
NNN.N NNON.O mNON.HH- .......Hx N OO.ONO.O O.NHO.ONN HN N .....NONNN
----- -------- OmmN.HON. .......Ox N HN.oH On.NNO.OHH N.ONN.NNO N N conmmNmmN
N N NON - .NHN
Om.O NNNH.N OHON.N‘ N.Ns<v NHx N N
NN.O ONNNNO mmOm.m NNHNOV OHx N N
NH.O NNONO.OH ONOO.N- NmaaOV MHx N .N .......
OO.O ONNmNuN NNHOO.OrNa ......OHx N NO N UNN
m0.0 OOHN.OO NNON.ON-, .......mx N N
NNNN.NH HONH.O OONN.O ......NHx N N.NNNNNNO.H NN N .Hmuoa
«*NH.N HOOO.O NONO.NH- .......Hx N NO.NON.N m.HHN.NNN HN N .....NONNN
----- ------N- HmOm.HON .......Ox N NN.N NN.NNNNNN O.ONO.NNO N N aoHNNNNNwN
N N NON - .NO
OH.H HNNH.N OOON.N- NNNNOO NHx N N
ON.O NONN.O OOON.O N.N=<N OHx N N
N0.0 mNOO.OH ONON.H- NNHOOV me N NN.N ....... N
NNNN.HH NNNO.O HNNN.N- .......OHx N N 0N
NO.O ONON.NNH OOON.HN- ........mx N N
OO.O OONH.O mNONO.O .......NHx N O.OON.ONH.N NN N .HNNON
OO.N OONONN. NNON.OH .......NHx N NN.NON.NN N.NNN.NNO HN m .....NONNN
----- -------- HOOO.NOHH ........Ox N HN.NH OH.NNN.NHm N.NOn.HON.N N H aonmmummm
N . NON - .O .2
39.5ri N Hon—um N N N N N N N Gowudfithr
h N unavawum N m:~d>nn N manmfium> N nmaam> N mumsvm N mmumavm N N mo mouaom
N N N N h N ado: N mo_asm N «mu N nonasa
muamaoammmou N coauanum

.. O.

 

NuwsaHuaoov NH «Hana

367

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NN.O NNHN.N NONN.O N.NNNNO NHx N N
NNNO.OH OONN.OH NNNN.OO N.N:<V NHx N N
ON.H NNNH.O NHNN.OH NNH:OO.NHN N .N .......
NNNO.HH OHON.O NONN.O- .......OHx N On N oNNH
NHH.N NNNO.OHH NNON.OON ........Nx N N
NNH.N ONHH.O NOON.O ......NNHN N O.OON.NNN.H NN N .Huuoa
OO.N ONON0.0 NNON.N- ....... Hx N NN.NNNNNH H.NON.OON HN N .....uouuu
------ -------- NNNH.ONN_ ........Ox N NN.N mm.OOO.OOH O.ONN.ONN N N =OHNNNNNNN
N N NON - .NHNO
NNNO.OH NNOO.N NNOHNNN N.Na<v NHx N N
NN.N ONOOO.HH NNHH.NH NNHNON OHN N N
NNN.N NNON.O NOON.OH Amannv.me N .N .......
HO.O NNOOO.o NNHH.O- ..N....OHx N ON N ONN
OO.H NNON.ON ONNN.ON- ........nx N N
NNNO.NN HONNO.O NOHN.O .......NHx N O.NNO.ONN NN N .HNNON
NNNN.NN mNNN.N ONHN.NN- ........Hx N NN.nmm.m O.NON.NNN HN N .....NONNN
------ -------- NNOm.OON ........ox N NN.NH H0.0mm.NN N.OmN.HNm N N aOHmNmemm
N N NOO - .xma
mm.O HNON.N NONN.N N.N:<v NHN N N
NO.H NNON.m mNNHO.N NNHanw OHx N N
OO.H NHON.O OmmN.O- NuaaOO.NHN N .N .......
NN.O NOOH.O ONNOO.O- ......OHx N mm N oNN
NH.O HHNN.NHH ONNN.ON- .......mx N N
NNNO.N NNNH.O HHON.O ......NHx N O.OON.NNO.H ON N .Huuoa
NOO.m nmNN.N OONN.OH- .......Hx N NO.NNN.NH N.ONN.OON HN N .....NONNN
------- -------- ONmO0.0NN .......Ox N Nm.O NO.NOO.HN O.ONONNON N N aonmmNmmm
N N NON - .NHN
noaam> N uouuu N N N N N N N :oNuwHuu>
m N vuuvnuum N waam>tn N canaauw> N nmaad> N «Nazca N wmuuavm N N we uuuson
N N N N h N ado! N we aim N «my N Hogans
N N N N N noauuavm

NNaNNoNNNuoo

 

NuuaaNuaoov NH «Hana

368

cmss Hm>ma huwawnmnoum A*#v uamuuwm

.cofiuuaouuoo mo unmaoammooo vanguaszo

.xmauoumw manaov no mawcan ha wouwoavaw om

H vcm ANV unmoumm m mnu um oumu Baum uamummmaw mfiuamuamwawamn

.Eovmmum mo mwmuwmnm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m m OOOOOOOONM
ON.O ONNHO.O ONOOOO.O- .....me N N
*NHN.OH NONO.O NNNN.N- .....OHx N O.NNN.NNH.N N .Huuoa
HH.O NNNH.ONH ONHO.ON- ......mx N ON.NHN.NN N.NN0.000 N .....Nouum
NNNN.NN OONm.N NONN.OH ......Hx NNNNN.NN Nm.HON.NNm O.OOO.NOH.N N aonmNNNmm
N N NNN - .O .z
u u ......OON“
ON.O NNHHO.O NNOHO.O .....OHx N N
«NHN.NH NHOO.H ONON.O- .....OHN N O.NOO.ONO.N N .HNNON
NNN.O OHON.ONH mNON.NmN ......mx N NN.NNNNHO O.OON.OON.H N .....NONNN
*NNN.mO mNmN.m OOOm.ON .....Hx NNNHN.NN OH.NNN.NHN.H N.NOH.OmO.m N aonmmuNmN
N N NNH - .u>
nman> N uouum N N N N N aoNumNum>
m N unavamum msaw>In N manwauw> N nmzaw> N mumavm mmumsvm N N we mUHSOm
N N N N m N flaw: mo Sim N N umnafic
muamNUNMMMOU N N N N N coauaavm
vmuovwmcoo mamwoa aowmmumwuu mo mocwwum> mo mammawa<

 

 

.wmaH I aomH

 

 

E

 

 

.AmHNv Hawk mac vmwmua .muscmmm mo o=Hm> mnu cu macho wcauwmaoo vawNummm mo maam> mnu mo

xmvcfi mnu mo oqumu m£u van NAoHNv vmnmmusu van vmxofim madammm mo mwmmnum NAmNV uwmm mac vmwwma wagon mum
munammm mo.mowum mo Ehuaumon NAHNV mafia mo noguoasm a mu vmmwmumxm Amxv whom hum musammm mo meNwIImH manwa

369

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . . .. :2 N NN.N N
NN O ONNOOO O NOHHO O x . .-. 0N
Nmup. OONH.O ONOH.O- .. ..OHx N -IN

NNH.N OONO.NO OOON.NNH .. ...Ox N O.HNO.ONO.H ON N .HONON
«NOO.OH OONN.H OONN.O .. ...Hx N OO.NOO.OH O.OOO.HHO NN N .....NONNO
--- ---- NOOO.OOO .. ...Ox N NOOO.N N0.00N.OOH N.NOO.NON N N OONOOONOoO
N N NON - .OH<
N OO N oNO
OO.H HOONOO.O HOOOOO.O .. ..OHx N N
«NOO.OH HNNO.O HONO.N- .. ..OHx N o.OOO.OOO.H ON N .HONON
*«OO.ON HOOO.NO ONNO.OHO .. ...Ox N NO.OOO.N O-OOONOOO NN N .....NONNO
NNNN.OH HOON.H OOON.O .. ...Hx N NNON.NN HO.NON.NOH O.OOO.ONN N m NOHOONNOOO
N N «MN I .uHm
NNOH.O NONNOO.O NONOOO.O .- ..OHx N NO N oNO
«NON.O OONO.O NNHN.O- .. ..OHx N N
«OO.O NONONON ONOONOON .. ...mx N O.ONO.NOO.H ON N .Hmuoa
NOON.NN HOHO.H HONO.O .. ...Hx N ONNOONNOH N.HNO.HNN NN N .....NONNO
---- ---- HOOO.NON .. ...Ox N NNOH.OH OO.ONN.ONH O.OOO.NOO N N aoHOOoNOmO
N N NOO - .OO
amaau> N uouum N N N N N N N coaumano>
h N unavamum N o=Hm>In NN manuaum> N nwsam> N «Hanan N Omumaam N N no muuaom
N N N N h N cum: N no 53m N mud N HmAEbn
nuamqoqmmmoo N N N N N couuwnuu

 

NNNNNNNNOON NH NHNNN

370

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N Hm.“ ...-...ONM
O0.0 ONONOOOO0.0 ONHNOOOO0.0 ......OHx N N
NNNO.N OOOO.O NONO.H- ......OHx N O.OON.OOO.H ON N .HNNON
NNOO.NH NOOO.OHH ONON.OON .......Ox N NO.NOO.ON O.NHO.OOO NN N .....NONNO
HO.H NOON.N OHON.N .......Hx N NOOO.N OH.OOH.OOH NeNONNOON N N OOHOOONOOm
N N NON - .OHNO
N ON N ONO
NN.O HOOHOO.O ONOHOO.O- ......OHx N N
OO.H OHNO0.0 OOHH.O- ......OHx N O.NO0.0NN ON N .Huuoa
Om.n HNN0.00 ONNO.NOH .......nx N OH.NNH.NH O.OOO.nOm NN N .....Nouum
NOO.O OHOO.H OONH.N- .......Hx N NNON.N OO.NNO.NO N.OON.OON N N OOHOONNOOO
N N «no I uxma
nmsau> N Houum N N N N N N N acquwauw>
h N unavamum N maam>In N mHacaum> N noDHd> N muwdvm N mmuuflvm N N mo mouaom
N N N N h N cum: N no.5:m N amt N umnsba
3.5.“ u.“ #500 N N N N N coauuswm

 

NumsaNunooN OH «HOON

371

.soHumeuuoo mo uawHonmmou quHuHQZu
.meuman oHnsov uo wchHm mp vmuaoanH

on amns Hm>mH huHHHnunoum A¥*v uamuumm H Ho A¥v unmoumm m mnu um oumu Baum uamumHMHv hHuGNOHMHamHmn

.aovmuum mo noouwmnu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NN.O NNNHO.O OOHOOO.O- ......OHx N N
ON.H ONOO.O ONOO.O- NuOuOv NHx N .N ........
HO.O OOOO.OH NNOO.O N.O:<v OHN N OO N ONO
OO.O OONH.OH OOOO.H- NNHOOV OHN N N
NNNO.NH OONO.O ONNN.N- ......OHO N O.NNN.OOH.O ON N .HONON
O0.0 OONN.ONH NOHH.O- .......Ox N N0.00N.ON H.OON.OOO HN N .....NONNO
*«OO.HN ONOO.O OOOO.OH .......Hx N «ONN.OH NN.OOONHHO O.ONO.NNH.N N N noNOOONOoO
N N HON - .O .z
NN.H OOHHO.O OONHO.O .......OHx N N
OO.H OOOO.NH HHHO.OH- NNOOOV NHx N .N .......
NN.N OOON.O NONOO.OH N.O=<N OHx N OO N oNO
NN.H NNOO.O OOON.NH- NNHOOO me N N
«NON.NH ONOO.H NONO.O- ......OHx N O.NOO.OOO.N ON N .HONON
NNON.O OONO.ONH NNNH.OOO .......Ox N OO.ONO.ON N.OHN.OHN.H HN N .....NONNN
NNNO.OO NOHN.O OOOO.ON .......Hx N «NOH.ON HH.OOO.NOO O.OOO.NNO.O N N aoNOOmNOuO
N N HOH - .O>
nmsHu> N uouum N N N N N N N aoHumHu¢>
h N unmvnmum N mus>In N mHadHum> N nmaHm> N mnwsam N maumsvm N N we meadow
N N N N m N cam: N mo 85m N mmv N amasna
OuaoHonmmoo N N N N N cowumnvm

 

vmumvaaou mHmvoa GoHOOummwu mo

moauHum> mm.OHMNHmn<

 

 

.mmmH I momH .AmHNv ummh mac UmwwaH .musammm mo maHu> mzu cu macaw waHumaaou UmHMHommu mo mnHu>

msu mo xmvaH mnu mo OHumu msu van .mHm>Huommmmu .ANHNV van .AoHNV .AmHNV unuaoa HOOHuHuo vaMHommm aH
HHmmaHmu mo OmnoaH NAOHNV vmsmmunu dam vmonm nunnmmm mo mwmmuom Nanxv Ham» mac vmwme canon you madammm
mo mUHum msu mo EnuHumon NAHxv uaHu mo aOHuossm a mu Ummmmumxm Amxv «you umm muscwmm mo vaHuonN mHan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NON-N ONNOOO-O ..NOOHO.O ......OHN N N
NNON.O HOOO.~ OOOa.NN N.O:<O NHx N ON.N ....... O
NONN NOOH.O. ONOONOH NNHOOO OHN N N 0N
NO-H. HNNO.O ONOO.ON- Nauanv OHx N N
aON.O _OHOH.O NOOH.O- ......OHN N O.HNONONO.H ON N .HNNoN
_ NON.N OOO0.00- ONnn.HON .......mx N NN.OHONOH N.NOONONm HN N .....NONNO
NNNNNO OHNN.H NONO.O- .......Hx N ON.O OO.NnO.HN O.OOONNOm N N aoNOOONOoN
N N NwO - .OHN.
NN.H OONNOO.O NONOOO.O ....N.OHx N N
ON.O ONNO.O ONHO.OH- H.O:NO NHx N .N .......
NH.H HOOO.O OOO0.0 HNHOOV OHN N ON N NNO
NN.O HONN.O ONOO.N- Amasuv OHN N N
NNON.OH HNOO.O OONN.N- ......OHN N O.OOO.OOO.H ON N .HONON
NNON.HN ONOO.NO NOOO.OON .......ON N NO.ONN.N O.HNO.NON HN N .....NONNO
Nu NNNN.OH HOON.H OOOO.O .......Hx N NNNO.OH OO.ONO.NHH N.NON.OON N N OONNOONOOO
q. N N HON - .OHN
NOON.O NOONOO.O -OOOOOc.O ......OHx N N
HH.H OONO.O OOOO.O- N.O=<V NHN N N
OO.H OONN.O OONO.N NNHsnv OHx N OO.N .......uNO
HH.O ONOO.OH OOHO.O- Nmasnv OHx N N
NOON.N OONNO.O NOOH.O- ......OHN N O.ONO.NOO.H ON N .Huuoa
NON.O HONO.ON NOOH.NOH .......Ox N NN.NHONOH O.OOH.OON HN N .....NONNO
NNOO.ON OONO.H NONO.O .......Hx N «OO.O OO.OOO.OO N.NOO.OOO N N aoNOONNOoO
N N HOO - .OO
QOSHdNr N HOka N N N N N N N GOHUNHHdNr
h N findflfidum N mfiHdern— N QHQNHHQ> N Amide! N mud—HUG N mwhwflvm N N HO mahfiow
N N N N h N .802 N we Sam N 9: N nun—asa
3 :33 «.300 N N N N N :3 unaum

 

NwmaaNNaouv ON «HOON

373

 

m~.o ww¢oooooo.o «NHmooooo.o

......mHN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OH.H NHON.N OOON.O N.NONON,NHN N .N .......
NNOO.OH OOOO.HH OOHN.NN N.O=<O OHx N NO N UNN
«NN.O HNOO.O OONO.N NNHNOV OHN N N
NNON.OH OOOO.O ONOH.H- ......OHN N O.OON.OOO.H ON N .HONON
NOON.ON OOOO.NO OOOO.NNN .......Ox N OO.HOO.NH N.HOO.OOO HN N .....NONNO
OO.O ONOO.N NNOO.N .......Hx N NN.O OO.NHO.HOH O.OOO.OHN N N OONNOONONO
N N HON - .OHOO
O0.0 HNNHOO.O NNOHOOO.O ......OHx N N
NNOO.OH OONO.O ONON.OO N.O:<O NHx N HO.N ....... O
ON.O ONO0.0H NNON.O HNHOOV OHx N N 0N
OO.H NHON.O NOHN.OH Hmaauv OHx N N
«NO.O ONONO.O OHOH.O- .....OHx N O.NOO.ONN ON N .HONON
OO.O HONO.OO HNOO.ONH ......Ox N OO.ONO.O O.HOO.OOO HN N .....NONNO
OH.N- OOON.H HOOH.N- ......Hx N OO.O OO.NOO.OO N.NOO.NNO N N OONNOONONO
N N HOO - .xma
nmJHm> N uouuw N N N N N N N coHuwHuw>
h N wuwvcmum N msHm>In N mHanum> N nmsHm> N mum96m N mmum:VO N N no mouaom
N N N N m N cum: N . mo 85m N «mu N Nunez:
OucmHUmemoo N N N N N :oHumaom

 

NOmacHuaoov ON OHOON

374

.noHuuHouuoo mo uaoquwmuooo onHanze

.xuuuouuu oHnnov no unaHu a an vouoowvcH
0O cons Ho>oH auHHHaunoum AO¥V acmuuum H van NOV uncouum n onu um ouou Bonn uauuoHMHv hHuaouHchmHmu

.aovuouw mo nonhuman

.amouo unquomaoo mo :oHuuaonxo you axou 00mm

l[

 

 

 

 

 

N0.0 OOOO.H OHOO.O- H.OOOOO NHO .N .......
«OO.N NOHN.H OONO.N N.O:<O OHO N ON N ONO
OH.O ONON.H OOON.O- NNHOOO OHO N N
«NON.OH OONNO.O NOOH.O- ......NHO N H.NON.HO ONNN .Huuoa
Omm.¢ omHmooo.o mmmoooo.o ......me N NmNHmm H.0HmNNN NOON .....uouum
No.o oHHoo.o mmomooo.o- ......NHx N *OoN.H~ NmNmNmNHH c.0NHNmo o N GOHOOmume
N N HHH I .O>
umnHu> N nouwm N N N N N N N GOHuuHum>
m N vumvcmum N mbHu51n. N oHanum> N omsHm> N mumavm N umumawm N N we wouaoO
N N N . N N m N cum: N «0 Hum N nmv N amass:
OucmHOHmmmoo N N N :oHumsum

 

vmumvacoo OHmvoe aonmmummu mo muamHuw> mo mHthmq<

.mmaHI¢omH

[P

.sz>HuummOmu .AnHNv van NAonv NAmeV nausea

J

 

HOUHuHuu vaMHommO GH HHumaHmu mo OmnucH NOANHXV Hum» mac vmwme amouu waHummEou vawHommm mo mwmmuum mgu
NmAmHNV Mam» mac umwme macho mcHuwmaoo vaMHome mo mnHm> osu NANHxv Hum» mac vmwme vmnmmunu van vwona
Oundmmm mo mus> mnu mo :oHuoasm O OO vmmmwumxm AHHxV vmzmmunu van vaOHm Ouzswmm mo coHuoavoumII.HN manH

375

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HO.O NNHOO 33.? NONE NHO N OO.N O
ON.O ONNO.O OOON.O NNHOON OHO N N ON
OO.H HNNH.O NHNO.HH-NOOOON OHO N N
NO.O OOOO.O NHNOO.O ......NNO N O.OOO.NNO.H ON N .HONOH
NN.N ONOOO0.0 NHOHO.O- ......OHO N OO.ONO.OH N.OOO.HNO NN N .....NONNO
OONO.OH NNNHO.O OHONO.O ......NHO N N0.0 OO.NOO.OOH O.ONN.HOO.H O N OONNOONOOO
N N HHN - NOHO
NN-H OONO.OH OOOO.OH N.OO<O NHO N .N .......
OO.O OOHO.O HNON.O NNHOOO OHO N NN N ONO
NH.O HONO.NH OOOO.N NOOOOO OHO N N
OO.H OONNO.O ONOOONO- ......NHO N H.OOO.NON.N ON N .HOOON
ONO.N ONOOOOO.O OHONOOO.O- ......OHO N NO.NHO.OH O.ONO.NOO NN N .....NONNO
«ONO.HH NHOHOO.O ONNOOO.O ......NHO N NOON.ON O0.000.000 O.OOO.NOO.N O N OONOOONOOO
N N HHO - .OO
OO.H OOON N ONOO.N-N.NOOON NHO N OO.N ....... O
O0.0 OOON.O NOOO.N N.OO<O OHO N N . ON
NO.O NNNO.O HONO.N NNHOOO OHO N N
NO.H OOOO0.0 OOOOO.O- ......NHO N N.NON.ONN ON N .HONON
OOO.O ONONOO.O HOOOOO.O- ......OHO N OO.OON.N H.OOO.NHH NN N .....NONNO
OOO.O HNONOO.O NNONOO.O ......NHO N NONO.O HN.OOO.ON O.HON.OOH O N OONNOOOOOO
N N HHN - .u .O
09.5de N HON—Hm N N N N N N N GOHHGHHmS
h N vumvcmum N msHm>IAN N mHanum> N umsHm> N mumsvm N OmumauO N N no mouaom
N N N N m N Qua: N we 85m N nmv N umAfiau
muawHonmuou N N N N aoHuaavm

 

NOOOONOOOOV HN OHOON

376

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ON.N OHON.H NNON.N N.NOOOO NHO N .N .......
NO.H NNON.N OOOH.O N.OO<O OHO N ON N ONO
HO.N NHOO.N NNHO.O NNHOOO OHO N N
ONNN.HH OOHOOO.O HNOHO.O- ......NHO N N.NOO.NHH ON N .HONON
OO.N ONOOOOO.O NONHOO.O- ......OHO N OO.ONO N.OHN.ON NN N .....NONNO
NONH.HH ONOHOO.O HNNNOO.O ......NHO N NO.ON OO.OOO.OH O.OHO.OO O N OonmmuOoO
N N HHN - .OHOO
NN.H NNON.N HNOO.O N.OO<O NHO N OO.N ....... O
NN.N OOHN.OH NNOO.NH NNHOOV OHO N N ON
NH.O NOH0.0 OONN.N NOOOOO OHO N N
ON.H ONHOO0.0 OHOOOO.O- ......NHO N O.NNN.HOO ON N .HONON
NO.O HHOHOOO.O NNOHOOO.O- ......OHO N NN.OOHNO N.HNO.NHN NN N .....NOONO
ONNN.OO NOOHOO.O OONOOO.O; ......NHO N OO.NH ON.NONNNO N.ONN.ONO O N OONNOOOOoO
N N HHO - .OON
«ON.N OHNO.N ONNO.O N.OO<O NHO N .N .......
NHN.N OOON.N OONO.O NNHOOO OHO N OO N ONO
NH.O ONNN.O ONON.N- NOOOOV OHO N N
NNOO.OH OONHO.O NONOO.O- ...N..NHO N O.NNH.ONN ON N .HOOON
HO.O OOONOO.O NNOHOO.O- ......OHO N OO.HOO.N H.HOH.NON NN N .....NONNO
«NN.N HNONOO.O OONNOO.O ......NHO N ON.N OO.ONO.OO N.ONO.OON O N OONNOONOOO
N N HHO - .OHO
omsHm> N uouum N N N N N N N aoHuuHum>
m N Unavawum N maHm>In N mHnuHum> N omaHm> N muwavm N moumsvm N N no 00u30m
N N N N m N Gum: N mo Sam N nwv N panes:
OuauHonmooo N :OHuwsvm

 

NOOOOHNOOOV HN OHOOH

377

on nonz Hm>oH NnHHHnononn A¥*v naoonoa H no NOV

.ooHOOAmnnou mo uaoHoHuuoou onHanzv

.menouOo oHnoon no onoHn an vuuuonoaH
unoonom m on» No onmu Eonm noonoMMHo mHnaaOHwOanmo

.aovuunm mo nounmonn

.Omono waHnogaoo mo nonuuaonxu nom axon comm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OOONOO.O NHHO.N NONH.O- NNOOOV NHO N N
OONO.O OONO.O NOHO.HH N.O:<V OHO N NN. N ........ONO
NHOH.O ONNN.O ONON.H- HNHOOO.OHO N N
NNONO0.0 OOOOO.O ONNOOO.O- .....NHO N O.ONN.OHN OO N .HOuon
NOOONO.OH NOONOO.O NOOOOO.O- .....OHO N NO.OOO.H H.ONO.NO NO N .....NONNO
«OOONO.OH ONHNOO.O OOONOO.O .....NHO N NNON.OH HO.NHH.ON O.ONO.OOH O N OOHOOONOoO
N N OHN - .O.z
OONH.O ONON.H OONO.O NNOOOV NHO N . N .......
OOOOOO.O ONHO.H ONOO.N N.OO<V OHO N OO N ONO
NNON.O ONON.H OOOO.O- NOHOOO OHO N -N
«ONOOO.HH OOONO.O ONOO0.0- .....NHO N N.OH0.00 OO N .HOOON
ONON.H OOONOOO.O NOOOOOO.O .....OHO N NN.HON H.NON.OH NO N .....NONNO
.NOHNOOOOO.O NNNNOO.O HOOOOOOOO.O- .....NHO N OONO.OH HO.NOO.O N-NHONOO O N OONOOONOOO
N N OHH - .O>
ooDHm> N nonno N N N N N N N aoHuOHnm>
m N onwwcuum N oaHu>In N oHnownd> N oosHu> N onusvm N nonmavo N N no oonsom
N N N N m N com: N mo Bow N nmo N nonana
OuooHonmooo N N N N :oHnmaum

 

.vmnooHnaoo OHmooa :oHOoonwon mo

muamHnw> mo mHm%Haq¢

 

.mdeImomH

.mHo>HuommOmn .ANHxV was

.Aonv NAmeV manaoa HOOHano vonnommO GH HHOmaHon mo mosooH vow NANHNV nmmm oao vowme Onono waHuomaoo
omHMHoomO mo omnonoo NoAmHNv nwoh moo vowmmH Onono wannomaoo vonHoomO mo msHo> NANHNV nmmh oco oomme
Ouocwmm mo oon> osu mo coHuosom o Om ommmmnmxm AHHxv vonmmnnu wad woOOHm Onoaomm mo coHuosvonmII.NN oHAwH

 

«mum.H

ono.¢ MHHm.n

NOB; NHO

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOOH.H ONOO.O OOOH.N HNHOOO OHO N HN N .\ ONO
ONHN.H OOON.O ONNN.O- NOOOOV OHO N N
«OOONN.OO HOOHO.O NHHH.O- ......NHO N O.OOO.HOO OO N .HONON.
OOON.O ONONOO.O HHNNOO O- ......OHO N OO.NOO.O O.OHH.OHH NO N .....NONHO
NOON.N OONOOO.O OOOOOO.O ......NHO N OOOH.OH OO.NNN.ON O.ONO.ONN O N OOHOOONOOO
N N OHO - .OHO
HOOO.O OONO.O NHHO.O- N.OO<O NHO N . N .......
OONH.O OHHO.O OOOO.O- NNHOOO OHO N HN N ONO
OOON.O OOHO.O HONO.O- HOOOOV OHO N N
OOOO.N NONO.O HHOO.O ......NHO N O.NOO.HOO.H OO N .HOOON
OHOO.NH NOOOO0.0 NONN0.0- ......OHO N O0.0NO.NH O.NON.OON NO N .....NONNO
mm OONONO.OO OOONO.O ONNH.O ......NHO N NNOO.NH HO.OOH.OOH O.NOO.OOO.H O N OOHOOONOOO
NJ N N qu J .lo
NOOO.O NONO.O OONO.O N.OO<O NHO N . N .......
OONHOOO.O NOHO.N OOOO0.0- NNHOOO OHO N OO N ONO
NONOOO.O NOOO.HH NOOO.O- NOOOOO OHO N N
OOOONN. OOHNO.O NOHNO.O- ......NHO N O.NOO.OON.N OO N .HONon
OOO0.0. NNOHOO.O NHONOOO.O- ......OHO N OO.NHONOH O.NNH.ONO NO N .....NONNO
OONONO.N HONNOO.O HHONOO.O ......NHO N ONNN.ON ON.HON.OHO N.NNN.NHO.H O N OOHOOONOOO
. N N OHO - .OO
UGO—HQNO N NO.H-H0 N N N N N N N “OHuflHHdP
h N onov:6nm N maHu>In N oHnoHnd> N omsHo> N onoswm N monoavu N N mo oonooo
N N N N h N fldmz N MO 55% N Away N Hwngfl
OucoHonmoou N N N N :oHuoovm

 

NOOOONOOOOV NN OHOOn

379

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ON.O NONH.O NNHH.O N.OOOOO NHO N N
OO.N NOOH.O OOON.O N.O:<O OHO N OO. N .......ONO
NH.O OOOH.O OONOO.O NNHOOV OHO N N
NNOO.N OOONO.O OOOOO.O- ......NHO N O.ONO.ONO.O OO N .HONon
HN.H OOHOOO.O NOOOOO.O- ......OHO N NO.OOONOO O.NNN.NNO NO N .....NONNO
OONN.NO OOOHO.O OOOO0.0 ......NHO N OONO.OO OH.OOO.ONO O.HOO.ONO.O O N OOHOOONOOO
N N OHN - .OHOO
O0.0 OOHO.O OOHO.O N.OO<O NHO N ON. N ....... O
OO.H NNON.O NOOO.OH NNHOOO OHO N N ON
O0.0 OHHO.O OHON.O NOOOOO OHO N N
HN.O ONOOOO.O NOONOO.O- ......NHO N O.HHO.ONN OO N .HONon
OOO.O OOONOOOO.O NOOHOOO.O- ......OHO N NO.OON.O H.ONO.OHH NO N .....NONNO
NNOO.NO OONHOO.O NNHHO.O ......NHO N OOHO.OH ON.ONONOO N.HNO.OOO O N OONNOONOOO
N N OHO - .OON
. P
umsHo> N nonno N N N N N N N :oHuoHnw>
m N onOOGOnm; N oaHu>In N oHnoHno> N ooon> N unmovm N Oonusvm N N mo oonoom
N . N N N m N coo: N mo 85m N nmo N nonann
an:OHonmooo N N N N :oHuooum

 

NOOOONNOOOO NN OHOOn

Hoouom cm£u nmsumn o>HumHmn onw akonm moon>-n .NchHonooo<

.mmon>

.oousaaoo onms HHx mo moon> HHuo: wovoozs

NHoumHaBoo on uoc oHooo mHnmu OHnu GH mumv omumHon wow OnomHonmooo man .mHuaosvmmcoo Noon mma aoHOmonwmn
msu oon3 omvoo mHuoonnoo uoo onoa OoHAMHnw> meow cH OHmaHomo man maHoomumnooosmHE m anonaa
.coHanonnoo mo namHonmmoo onHuH32o
.xOHnmumm mHnsoo no meaHm m On omumoncH
om omsa Hm>mH muHHHnmnonm AOOV udoonom H com AOV uaoonom m man no onmu Eonw uconomev mHuamoHnHomeo
.Eooomnm mo moonwman
.Omonu waHuomEou mo coHuwammem now uxou momm

Nouoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ON.O ONON.N OON0.0H- ......NNHO . W
N0.0 HHNO.N OHO0.0 ......NOHO H H
mo.o wam.m «moo.o I ......Nme M M
ON.O OOHO.NO OOHOO.NHH NNOOOV NHO H H
OO.O NNOO.NO NNON.ON N.OO<O OHO H H
NO.O NONO.NO ONON.O NNHOOV OHO H .
OONO.HH OONO.N OOOO.OH .......NNO M NO.” ..N....ONO
m «OO.N NOON.HO 22.2.. ...-3...? H -N
Na OO.N HONN.O OONO.O ...-...NHO H O.NHN.ONH.O ON H .HONon
NO.O OOOO.NH ONNN.N - ........HO H HN.OOONON H.NNN.ONONH OO H .....OONNO
--- ---- «www.mmN ........oN H OOm.NH mo.wmmNomm m.owm.momNN oH H :onmonwmm
H H moH - .m>
oonHw> . nonno N N N A, ooHumHno>
m N unmoamum N osHm>-n N mHannm> N ooon> N mnmowm N Omnmst N N mo monDOO
N N N . N m N com: N «0 sum N nmo N noses:
OuomHonmooU . N N N N coHnmoum
vwnovHOooo OHmooa oonOonwon mo moooHnm> mo OHmema¢
.mmmH - momH .NH0>HuomaOmn .AmeNv vow .A onv NANmev oonmovm Osnaos HOOHano omHMHommm :H HHmwaHmn mo

mmsooH vow NzHo>HuomoOon NAOHxv vow
moo oommoH ammono waHuomaoo omHMHommO wo mon> mnom non
ownmsvw oaHu NAHNV oBHu mo aoHnoaom a mo vmmmanXo AHHNV omfimonnu can voonm muoomon mo coHuua

NOHOO .NOHO

w Onuooa HmoHano OOHMHoomm oH HHmonmn mo monocH

mfimxv nmmm moo omwon Ouoomom mo muwnm ecu

OONO-.O~ omnma

NANNxV now»

.4 H5

381

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OHO.N NOHN.OO OOON.OO- ....NNHO N N
OO.O HNOO.NH OHHN.O- ....NOHO N N
NO.O OOHO.OO ONON.HO- ....NOHO N N
«OO.O NONO.OON OOOOO.OHO N.OOON NHO N N
OH.O ONHO.OON ONHN.ONH NNHOOO OHO N N
NH.H OHNN.NHO NOOH.OOO NOOOOV OHO N ON.N ....... O
HN.N NOON.NO ONHN.OO- .....NNO N N ON
OO.N ONON.ONH NNOH.OOO ......OO N N
NO.O OONN.H NNOO.N- .....NHO N O.OHO.OON.ONN ON N ..HOOON
ONON.NH ONNN.OO OOOO.NHO ......HO N OO.NONNNON.H O.OON.OOO.OO OO N .....NONNO
--- ----- OHON.NNOO- ......OO N NNON.NH OO.ONO.OOO.HN O.OON.OOO.OHN OH N OOHOOONOOO
N N OOO - .OO
NO.H HNNN.O OOOO.O- ....NNHO N N
NO.O NOOH.O NNOO.N- ....NOHO N N
OH.O NONO.O OHOO.O- ....NOHO N N
NN.O NNOOO.OO ONOO.NO NNOOOO NHO N N
HO.O ONNN.OOH OHNH.OO N.O:<V OHO N N
OH.O OOON.OOH HONO.NN NNHOOO OHO N .N .......
HO.O OHOO.HHH OOOH.OH .....NNO N ON N ONO
NO.O OONO.NN HOOO.OO- ......OO N N
NO.O ONOO.O OHON.O- ......NHO N O.NNN.ONO.NN ON N .HONOO
NOO.O NNNN.OO OOOO.NO N......HO N OH.NHN.HOH O.OON.OON.O OO N .....Nounm
--- ---- NOHN.ON- ......OO N ONNN.NH ON.ONO.OOH.N O.NON.OOO.HN OH N OONNOONOOO
N N OON - .O .z
omon>N nonnm N N N N N N N GoHuoHnm>
m N vnoOGOum N osHm>In N oHnanw> N ooaHo> N unwavw N monosuo N N mo oonaom
N N N N m N coo: N mo 85m N nmv N noaaaou
OuooHonmooo N N N N N GOHuosvm

 

NOOOOHOOOOO ON OHOOn.

382

 

 

 

 

 

 

NN.N OOON.OH ONHO.ON- ...NNHO N N
HN.O NOON.OH NOHO.NH- ...NOHO N N
ON.O HNO0.0N OONO0.0N- ...NOHO N N
HONH OONN.HOO OONO.NHN H.OOOO NHO N N
ON.O OHON.NNO ONHN.OOO HOHOOO OHO N N
N0.0 ONHN.ONO OON0.00N NOOOOV OHO N ON.N. ....... O
NO.O NOOH.OO ,NOOO.O ....NNO N N ON
HN.O NNHO.NOH OOON.OOH .....OO N N
ONN.N OONN.H OOOO.N- ....NHO N O.OOO.OON.NOH ON N .HOOon
«OHO.HH OHONO.NO OOON.OON .....HO N ON.NONNNONNH 0.0N0.00N.ON OO N .....NONNO
----- ----- OOHO.NOOO- .....OO NOOOO.HH OO.ONONHOONOH O.OON.OHO.OOH OH N OONNOONOOO
m N OON - .OHO
ooon> N nokno N N N N N N .m- noHuoHnm>
m N onooooum N osHm>In N oHnoHnm>N omoHo> N onmsvn N monooum N N mo oonoom
N mummwwmemoo -n m m N cum: N mo 85m N nmo N nonaba
. N N N N :oHuuaum

 

NOOOONNOOOV ON OHOOH

383

¥H0.m q¢mw.n mome.man ... max N N

 

 

 

 

QH. O . . . . «NOHN n n
«NN m NNNN N- N . .
No. mom¢.NN NNNN.N- .N.Nme . .
NNON.N omom.oNN NNON.NNN A.Na¢v NNx N N
om. NNNN.NNN NNNN.NNN ANNsav oNx N NN.N .......uNN
Noe. «NNN.¢NN NNNN.NN- Amaan.me N N
NN.N NmN¢.omN omNm.NmN- ....NNN N N
NoN.q moom.NoN Nomw.mmN .....Nx N N
NN.N ooom.o mNoN.N- ....NNx N o.mmq.NNm.q¢ NN N .NNNON
NNON.N NNNN.NN Nwa.omN .... Nx N NN.NNNNNNN o.oNN.wmm.mN mm N .N...Nouum
------ --------- NNNN.NNNN- .....ox NNNNN.Q ON.NNNNNNNNN o.mqm.am¢.NN oN N conmmNmmm
N N mom - .NN4
umsflm> N uouum N N N N N N N coNuwwum>
m N vumvcmum N msaw>nn N manmfium> N umaam>N mumDVm N mmumswm N N we wou90m
muawHonmmou N m N can: N we 85m N nmv N umnada
N N N N N coaumzum

 

AcmaaNuaoov NN oNnma

4'

Ibi'

J“ "-

‘—¢-—.-.--

 

384

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NN N NNNN.N mmoo.mN‘ ....NNNx N N
oo o NNNN.N NNON.N- ....NoNx N N
oN.o NmmN.N NNNN.N- ....Nme N N
NN.N onm.oN NNo¢.mNN A.ugamv NNx N N
NN.O NNON.NN NNNN.NN A.N:<v oNx N N
NN.O NNNN.NN moom.NN ANNaNV me N NN. N ....... m
NN.O NNmm.No comm.mm- .....NNx N N cN
ON.N momm.Nm NNN¢.NN ......mx N N
NN.O omaN.o Nmomo.o .....NNx N o.NeN.mmN.NN mq N .Nmuoa
mm.o NNNqo.oN onm.NN ......Nx N NN.OON.NN N.NN©.Nmm.N mm N .....NoNNN
----- -------- qum.mmm- ......ox NNNNN.NN NN.NQNNNNN m.amo.mNm.m oN N aonmwNwmm
N N NON - .NNxo
NN.N NNNN.NN mowN.oo- ....NNNx N N
NN.N moNo.NN NNNN.NN- ....NoNx N N
NN.N «mmN.Nm NNNN.NN- ....Nme N N
«oo.q NNNN.NNN ONNN.N¢N N.Na<v NNx N N
NN.N NNNN.NN¢ NNoN.Nm¢ NNNaav oNx N N
NN.N omm¢.NmN Noom.omN Amasnv me N . N .......
ON.N NNNN.NN NNON.NN- ....NNx N an N uNN
NN.N oo¢m.NoN NNNN.NNN .....mx N N
NN.o moNN.o NNNN.o-_ ....NNx N o.NNN.qNN.Nm «N N .Nauoa
NO.H NNNN.NN NNON.NN .....Nx N NN.NNNNNNO o.Nmo.mNo.¢N an N .....Nouuu
----- -------- NomN.¢moN- .....ox NN*Nm.m ON.NNN.NONNN o.omN.mNo.mm oN N aonNmemm
N N moo - .xme
um5Ho> N uouum N N N N N N N coauwauw>
m N vumvnuum N maam>nn N manmwuu> N ous~m> N mum36m N m¢u¢fi¢m N N mo mousom
N N N N m N cum: N mo aflm N And N umnasn
muawaoammmoo N N N coauuavm

.
C. I.‘

 

AumacNuaoov NN «Nana

385

.mwaad>

Hmauom amnu umaumu o>NumHmu mum sauna mmsam>un .mawafivuoou< .couszou mumz Haw mo mwsfim> kuc: vmvoucs

mHoumHmEoo on uoc vasou manna manu :« mama vmumaon dam muamauwmmwou any Nmaucosvmmcoo Nan» mwS coammmuwmu
«nu c053 cavoo mauompuoo uoa onus mmHanuw> «Bea a“ mamaaomv wnu wcfivadumuoucamfié m swaoune Nmuoz
.GONumeHuoo mo uaofiofiwwmou meHuHDZv

.xmaumumd manaov no mNMSNm m kn vmumuavcfi
ow cm£3_am>ma muwaflnmnoum Ak¥v unmoumq H vcm A*v unmouom m wnu um oumu Baum uamuwmmwu hausmowmacwfimu
.Eovmmum mo mmmuwann
.mmouu wcquomaoo mo coauwnmaaxm now uxmu mama

 

 

 

 

 

oo.N NNON.N NNNN.NN- ......NMMN N N
mm.o NNNn.N NNN¢.N ......NNNN m N
NN.O NNOO.N ONNN.N ......N xv. N
NN.N NNNN.NN Nowo.NoN A.Nmumv NNx N N
NN.O NNm¢.wm oooo.¢N N.N:4w oNx N NN.N ....... N
mm.c anm.qm NNN¢.NN- ANNan NNN N N uN
NmN.o NNo¢.o momN.oN .......¢Nx N N
NN.N NNmm.mm «NNN.NQ- ........nx N N
NO.H ONNN.O NNnm.o .......NNx N N.NNNNN¢NNN mm N .Nmuoa
NO.O NNNN.NN NNNN.N - ........Nx N NO.ONONNN «.NNNNNNONN NN N .....Nouuu
---- ------ NNNN.omN ........ox N N«o¢.a NN.NoNNONN ¢.Nmo.mom.m oN N aONmmmummm
m N «ca - .u>
u u u u u u u u flown—NH.H“?
GOSHM> u HOHHG u u u u u u u mo GOHSOm
m N vuovcmum N osfiw>un N manmfiuw> N oosaw> N muwavm N awkwacm N N Hanan:
mucmNOHmumou m h m can: N no 85m N nut N aoaumsvm

 

umnmvwmcoo mHmvoa scammmuwmu mo oucmHuw> mo mammfimnd

 

 

.m¢mau¢oma .mHo>«uow&mou .Aunam~ wad .%N0HNV .Aumawv wouwDVm nausea Hwoaufiuo umwmaommm ca Hammawdh mo

mmnoafi wad NmHm>Huommmou .An NV wad «A NV .Am NV mauaoa.amoHuwuu voamqommm ca Hammsfimu mo moauaa NA¢NNV amok
mno vamwma ammouo waaummaoo vmamaoonm mo msHu> muod Ham NAmNV Hawk 0:0 vowwma muaaumm mo coaum «nu NANHNV
woumsvm mafia NAHNV mafia mo doauoasm a ma vmmmmumxm AHHNV wonmounu wad vmxoam musamom mo coauusvonmtu.¢u candy

386

 

NAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u N
OO O NNON.ON OOON.NN- N N N
ON.O ONNN.O NNOO.N .....NONN N N
N0.0 NONN.¢O OONO.O .....NONx N N
NN.O NOOO.ONN ONNN.OO A.w=<v NNN N N
N0.0 NONO.NON Nom¢.mmu ANNsnv OHM N O.N ....... m
OO.O ONNO.NNO HONO.NN- Amasnv me N O N ON
NN.O NNOO.NN NOON.N ......qu N N
NN.N NNOO.ONN NNON.ONN .......Mx N N
NNNO.O NONO.N NNNO.¢ ......N x N ‘O.ONN.OOONONN OO N .Nmuoa
OO.O NNON.ON OONO.NO- .......Nx N NN.NNONOON O.OOO.OOO.O ON N .....NoNNu
---- ------ HOOO.ONN .......Ox NNNON.O OO.OOONNOONNN O.Omm.mNONmNN ON N :oNaNonmm
N N NON - .No
N N
NO.O NNON.N NNNO.O - .....NNNx N N
ON.O ONON.O OONO.¢ .....NONN N N
ON.O «ONO.N ONOO.N .....NNNN N N
NO.O NONO.NO OONO.ON A.NNmmO NNx N N
N0.0 NNON.OO ONOO.ON A.Na<v ONN N N
ON.O OmOm.ONN HONN.OO- ANNsOO me N HO.N ....... m
NO.O ONNN.OON ONNN.ON- ......qu N N ON
ONOOOO.O ONOO.ON ONNN.O .......mx N . N
NO.O NNON.O ONNN.O ......NNx N O.NNO.NNO.NN Om N .Nmuoa
ON.N ONNO.ON NNON.NN .......NN N .NO.ON¢.OO O.NNO.NNONN ON N .....NoNNu
---- ------- NNON.OOO .......Ox NNNNN.ON OO.OONNOONNN O.OOO.¢OO.ON ON N NONNNNNNNN
N N «ON - .o .z
u u u u u u u u GOHHQHHN?
uu=Hw> N uouum N N N N N N N no mouaom
mw N vuavcwum N oaaw>sn N caanHm>LlN oosaw> N muwavm N moudsvm N N waned:
NUHHQHUHWWGOU « h u GU02 u MO gm u n—va u COHUUHHUM
u u u

0.

O
O

 

l“

$953609: . ¢N 35mm.

387

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NON.O ONO0.0 OONN.ON- ....NNNO N N
NO.O OONO.N ONNN.O ....NMMO N N
ON.N OONN.ON OONN.NN ....N O N N
ONO.N OONO.OON NNOO.NON N.O:<O NNO N N
NO.O OONO.ONN NON0.0N NONOOO ONO N .N .......
ON.N NNNN.OON OONO.OOO- NOOOOV ONO N ON N ONO
NO.O OONO.NNN OOON.OOO- .....ONO N N
«ON.O ONNN.OON OOOOO.NOO ......mx N N
NO.N NNNO.N ONON.N .....NNO N O.NOO.OONNOO OO m .NONON
OOOOO.O NOOO.OO NNON.N ..... x N NN.NOONOON O.OOONOON.O ON . .....NONNO
---- ------- NNON.OON- ......Ox NOOOO.ON OO.OOONOOONO O.OOO.OOONOO ON N OONOOONOOO
. H m «on - .ON<
ON.O NONO.ON OONO.ON- ....NMMO N N
NO.O NNOO.NN ONOOO.ON- .....N O N N
NN.O OOOO.ON OONN.NN- ....NONx N N
ON.O OOON.ONO ONOO.OON N.O=<O NNN N N
NO.O NOOO.OOO OOON.OON NNNOON ONO N .N ....... O
NN.O OONO.ONO NNNO.NON NOOOOV wwx_N NO N ON
OO.O NNON.OO NNOO.NO ..... x N N
NO.O ONOO.OON OONN.OO ......Ox N N
NO.O NNOO.N OOONO.N .....NNO N O.OON.OONNOON OO N .NONON
OO.O OOOO.NON NOOO.NO ......Nx N ON.NOONOOONN O.OOO.OOO.ON ON N .....NONNO
---- ------- OONO.OOON- ......Ox NOOOO.NN OO.OOONOOONNN O.OOO.OOONONN ON N OONNOONOOO
N N OOO - .ONO
N N N N N N N N coaumNuw>
oonadp N Houuo N N N N N N N no mouaom
m N vudvcmum N 05Hd>un N oNnmNuw> N omsNd> N mud:¢m N mouwsvw N N Humans
N m N am N 0 35m N N cowumduu
ONOONONONOOO «z. N N N ONO N

 

 

 

AmmsaNuao .. . NNN man—NO.H

388

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OO.O OOOO.O ONOOO.O- .....NNNO
NNOO.O OOOO.O OOON.O- .....NONO
OO.O OOON.O ONON.N- .....NONO
OO.O NNON.OO NONO.ON N.NNOOO NNO
NN.O NONO.OO NNON.ON N.Os<v ONO
OO.O‘ OOON.OO OOOO.ON NONOON.ONO OO. ....... O
NO.O OOOO.OO NOOO.OO ......ONO N N ON
OO.N NOON.ON OOOOO.NO .......OO N N
OOON.OO NNON.O NOOO.N ......NMO N N.NNO.OOO.O OO N .NONOO
ONOO.ON OONO.ON OONO.OO- .......OO N NN.NNNNON O.NON.OON ON N .....NONNO
---- ------- ONOO.ONN ....... O NOOON.ON OO.ONO.OOO O.OON.OOONO ON N OONNOONOoO
N N OON - .ONOO
N N
n M
OO.O ONNN.ON OOON.ON- .....NNNO N N
ON.N ONNO.OO ONOO.OO- .....NMMO N N
OO.O OOON.ON OONNO.O- .....N O N N
OO.N NOONO.O OONNO.O N.O=<V NNO N N
ON.N ONONO.O OONOOOO NONOOO ONO N N
OO.O OONNO.O NNOOOONO NocsOO ONO N .N .......
NN.O NNNN.ON OOO0.0 - ......ONO N OO N ONO
NO.O ONOO.NON OONO.NON .......mO N N
OONO.ON OONO.O NNON.O ......NNO N O.NON.NOONNO OO N .NONON
ONNN.O NOON.NO OONO.OON- .......OO N NO.ONONNNN O.NOO.NOO.N ON N .....NouNO
---- ------- OOON.NNO ....... O NOOON.ON OO.ONONNNONO O.OONNONN.OO ON N OONNOONOoO
N N OOO - .OON
N N
N N N N N N N N 8.33.3».
GOSH“? u .HOHHO u u u u u u u MO @OgOm
h N wuwvcmum N wnaw>un N mNnmNNw> N omst> N mumavm N moudsvm N N Mosaic .
nualuoauuuou m m m awe: N no 35m . nmv N SONumsvu

 

OOONNNNNNNcowIJN «NOON.

APPENDIX C

DEPENDENT AND INDEPENDENT VARIABLES AND
RELATED DATA, SEVEN MAJOR PEANUT PRODUCING STATES,

AND UNITED STATES

389

390

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INA'E l.--Yiu.d, pr :1. dcrracc, prulcNtxon, and value of pranuta; 1. S. index of priccs paid for production xtcms; cumpusitc
cast .ndtxa. acreagv and V8.0t u: xpctiriud cunpcizng crops", 30... AcgNst, and Scptcmnur aruragc rainiall at 5U.c¢[td wrathcr
stations, and ”profi:an1.1£, ratio” -- indrx oi ratio of thy vaLNc ox competing crops to the value of peanuts. Virginia,
19H9~.958.
. : ”_— _"I"Fm: .1
Peanut: :____ Costsd Cumflctinfi Crops : AVtrafit RJIn1311 : Ratxu
. ' . 1'. S. : ' - - ~
Yrar : YIILd . Pricx : ; - Value : Indra : ,Cum- : : ; : :
Pcr : Ptr : AcrcsC : Produc- : at 2 Pruduc-z DQSILC :Acruagt : Va1ue : July : August : Sept. ; Prof1t
Acre : Pound ; : tionC ‘ Pruduc-z LIun : Index : z : : ; : Ratio
- tii>n : Itrwns - '
1.000 1.000 1.000 1,000 1,000

Pounds Cans Acrvs Lbs. Do11ars Acres Dollars Inches Inches Inches Indvx
1909._,,,; 680 4.4 145 98.600 4,338 100 100 1.886 31.333 5.40 4.79 2.58 93
1910.....: 920 3.8 135 124,200 4,720 97 99 1.953 33,293 6.91 4.53 1.50 91
1911 . 830 4.0 130 107,900 4,316 98 92 1,913 34,059 2.16 5.27 1.97 102
.912 ...... 700 4.3 130 91.000 3,913 102 102 1,864 29,133 2.92 2.38 4.66 95
1913 ...... 920 4.4 120 110.400 4.858 101 9b 1.847 39,838 8.12 3.78 5.34 105
1914 ...... 805 3.5 140 112.700 3.944 102 105 1,795 32,909 7.55 3.48 2.65 107
191) ...... 850 3.6 136 115.600 4.162 104 106 1,885 39,641 5.40 6.18 1.98 122
1916 ...... 930 4.9 150 139,500 6,836 115 106 1,864 61,424 3.75 4.90 3.41 115
1917 ...... 900 8.4 150 135.000 11.340 156 162 2,096 96,305 10.44 2.10 6.18 110
1918 ...... 1,050 7.2 140 147,000 10,584 180 217 2.045 90.020 3.32 4.13 6.64 110
1919 ...... 1,058 10.3 133 140,700 14,494 195 213 1,913 87,455 10.79 3.35 1.27 77
1920 ...... 830 «.6 133 110,400 5,078 195 231 1,837 46,197 6.34 5.22 3.22 117
1921 ...... 800 4.3 153 122,400 5,263 128 124 1,731 28,936 3.30 1.64 2.84 69
1922 ...... 660 6.4 130 85,800 5,491 127 109 1.669 40.535 10.00 5.50 .28 95
I92 ... . 990 6.1 124 122,800 7,448 138 134 1,691 52,587 6.05 5.43 4.61 90
1924... . 720 6.1 120 86.400 5.270 140 159 1,558 47,151 4.59 4.22 7.31 115
1925 ...... 1,050 4.3 138 144,900 6,231 145 169 1,776 40.779 1.97 3.31 2.72 84
1926 ...... 1,060 4.9 144 152,600 7,479 141 138 1,709 37,455 5.06 5.87 2.20 65
1927 ...... 900 5.1 162 145.800 7,436 141 119 1,602 43,527 6.07 7.56 4.36 75
19‘s ...... 1,020 4.8 162 165,200 7,932 148 140 1.596 42,168 3.51 5.34 8.66 68
1929 ...... 1,030 3.4 153 157,600 5,358 146 140 1,563 41,596 2.90 2.83 1.97 100
1930 ...... 720 3.1 138 99.400 3.080 135 133 1,605 18,447 2.60 1.22 .92 75
1931 ...... 1.160 1.4 149 172,800 2,420 113 110 1,616 18,959 2.59 7.88 3.92 100
1932 ...... 1,070 1.5 137 146.600 2.199 99 66 1,554 14,928 1.44 1.87 2.26 85
1933 ...... 950 2.7 117 111,100 3.001 99 71 1.621 25.777 5.12 6.82 1.87 110
1934 ...... 1.025 3.5 140 143,500 5,022 114 93 1,494 29,612 6.36 4.40 7.28 75
1935 ...... 1,050 3.2 142 149.100 4.771 122 109 1,578 31,813 11.78 3.08 6.10 86
1936 ...... 1.030 4.3 144 148,300 6,378 122 104 1,471 34,161 8.24 2.86 2.34 69
1937.. 1.260 3.4 141 177,700 6.040 132 123 1.567 27.706 3.94 9.01 3.72 59
1938 ...... 940 3.5 145 136,300 4,770 122 91 1,435 23,534 7.94 1.52 6.80 63
1939 ...... 1.210 3.6 148 179,100 6,447 121 89 1,449 27,087 9.79 12.13 .99 54
1940 ...... ..36) 3.5 158 215,700 7,548 123 95 1,429 29,883 4.12 15.24 2.12 51
1941 ...... 1,265 5.4 134 169,500 9,154 130 98 1.351 32.999 6.60 3.10 1.89 46
1942 ...... ..150 7.6 148 170,200 12,935 148 121 1,457 45,483 4.57 8.29 4.52 45
1943 ...... .,140 7.4 150 171,000 12,654 164 133 1,445 52,896 8.34 1.90 4.13 54
1944.....: 1.180 8.9 154 181,700 16,173 173 160 1.376 52.864 4.33 3.53 5.87 42
19;3.....: 940 9.2 159 149,500 13,750 176 165 1,263 64,761 11.85 3.84 6.44 61
1946.....: 1,275 10.5 150 191.200 20.081 191 175 1.170 76,630 5.40 3.57 3.86 49
‘ 47 ..... 1.220 10 9 162 197,600 21,543 224 210 1,185 89,158 4.28 3.38 4.35 53
19~8.....: 1,435 11.0 164 235.300 25.887 250 233 1.204 70,156 5.55 7.18 2.22 35
.949 ...... 1,.00 11.1 138 193,200 21,445 238 175 1,161 64,276 6.84 10.61 4.27 39
1910 ...... 1.s40 12.7 148 227,900 28,946 246 172 1,138 83,821 8.57 3.58 5.76 37
19~1 ...... 1.630 12.2 146 238,000 29,034 273 201 1.155 85.596 4.80 5.14 2.15 38
.932 ...... 2,040 11.2 118 240.700 26.961 274 203 1,158 66.899 5.30 3.79 2,48 32
1953 ...... 1.990 12.0 110 218,900 '26,268 253 194 1,117 52,096 2.10 6.35 4.42 26
954 ...... 1,025 13.5 106 172.200 23.254 252 192 1,113 59.203 3.71 3.35 1.90 33
9a; ...... 1.560 13.2 116 181,000 23,887 249 180 1,082 55,200 3.54 11.32 7.78 30
.93” ...... 2,080 12.0 118 245.400 29.453 249 160 1.108 68.277 5.33 5.99 5.70 3D
957 2,030 10.8 106 217,300 25,583 258 151 898 41.087 2.45 5.57 4.16 21
956‘ 2,150 11.0 106 227.900 25.069 264 156 1,023 68,749 3.00 6.00 4.00 47

 

“AVcrage of current Indcx of cost of production items and previous year indexes of prices of corn, cotton, and
suuhrans, Ht1ghlcd b; acreage. 1910-1914 = 100 for corn and cotton, 1924-1928 3 100 for Soybeans. Soybean data beginning in
1924. Svc text for {urihrr explanation.

bstfllr acrvngv of cotton and soybeans. Scuthcast crop reporting district acreage of corn. Corn acreage pro-ratcd

{nr ,vars prior to 1926 to provIdc data on district bBSIS.
CPICPtd and thrashed.
41910-1911. = 100.

*‘I'rrlimumrju RmnxaII data an- vstinutvd.

lABlE 2

stations; and ”profitability ratio" -- index of ratio of the value of competing

391

.-- Yield, price, acreage, production, and value of eanuts; U.

1909--1958.

\
1'-

index of prices paid for production iteml; composite
cost index“; acreage and value of specified competing crops ; July, August, and September average rainfall at selected weather

crops to the value of peanuts. North Carolina.

 

 

 

 

Profit
Peanuts Coatsd Competing Crops AVEIQfie Rainfall Ratio
U. S. : : :
Tear Yield Price : Value Index Cam-
Per Per AcresC :Produc- of :Produc- :posite :Acreage Value July August Sept. Profit
Acre Pound tionc :Produc- tion Index Ratio
tion Items
1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000
Pounds Cents Acres Lbs. dollars Acre. dollars Incheu Inches Inches Index
1909.....: 675 4.1 180 121,500 4,982 100 100 3,668 72,250 5.28 5.17 1.20 89
1910.. 880 4.2 155 136,400 5,729 97 117 3,771 84,590 4.48 7.62 2.27 90
1911 .. 770 3.9 155 119,400 4,655 98 118 3,940 87,930 4.49 5.34 2.98 114
1912 ...... 815 4.0 150 122,200 4,890 102 90 3,819 81,170 3.26 2.71 4.77 101
1913 ...... 900 4.0 140 126,000 5,040 101 103 3.757 88.940 5.15 2.70 6.34 108
1914 ... 835 3.9 155 119,400 5,048 102 111 3,655 74,160 6.44 3.07 3.57 89
1911 ...... 813 4.1 172 140,200 5,747 104 78 3.569 77,860 4.88 3.97 3.22 82
1916. ..... 910 4.8 195 177,400 8,518 115 102 3,743 111,280 7.14 5.33 3.41 79
1917 ...... 950 8.3 153 145,400 12,064 156 158 3,957 178,480 10.42 3.68 9.39 90
1916. . 1,023 8.0 136 139,400 11,152 180 239 3,865 211,990 6.45 5.25 4.27 116
1919 ...... 1,124 10.4 126 141,600 14,729 195 241 3.717 233,990 11.81 4.81 1.62 97
1920 ...... 1,011 5.1 126 127,400 6,497 195 298 3,679 117,680 6.49 5.65 3.41 109
1921 ...... 1.010 5.4 141 142,400 7,690 128 131 3,573 100,340 3.76 2.05 3.36 79
422. . 900 h.1 45 130,300 7,960 127 141 3,654 145,000 7.95 5.20 1.72 110
W43. 1,100 6 7 160 176,000 11,792 138 195 3,635 198,030 6.51 4.80 4.85 102
192. ...... 950 6.5 190 180,500 11,732 140 278 3,887 142,230 6.51 5.14 11.12 74
1925 ..... : 1,130 4.1 190 218,500 8,938 145 191 4,031 149,180 4.68 3.56 2.02 101
19;" ..... : 1,030 4.6 .93 200,800 9,239 141 165 3,997 112,170 4.82 3.93 .86 74
;4_7.....: 1,030 3.n 2‘0 220,300 12,348 141 114 3,733 126,250 4.74 7.18 2.29 h;
9-x 1,030 5.; 2J0 210,000 10.7.0 148 163 3,746 118,690 4.56 3.83 13.09 67
.949 ...... 1,0:0 3.; 2:0 224 .00 7,n30 146 158 3,712 103,410 5.32 3.61 3.11 83
L933 ...... 57% 3.4 205 ‘75,»00 6,064 135 143 3,809 71,150 3.36 1.65 1.16 7.
p73! ...... 1.10) L ' :30 275,000 4,400 113 90 3,685 42,040 6.19 9.02 3.58 )7
L93; ...... 901 . . 3.3 -2 .500 3,213 99 57 3,688 42,970 2.47 3.44 2.09 83
455 ,,,,,, 9‘. 0 L90 .80,500 3,4') 99 63 3.572 69.660 6.47 5.37 2.89 79
43. ...... 0nu 3.. 238 232 300 8,578 114 93 3,311 76,820 7.43 6.55 5.57 w:
.5. ...... 1,.: 3.- -24 251,000 8,064 122 106 3,323 69,010 9.5; 5.25 3,7; .4
‘43- ,),. N,2 :43 256.000 0 636 122 96 3,N)1 82.530 8.25 2.90 2.07 Nu
,917 ,3-‘ 1. 232 307,400 10,452 132 113 3,377 66,060 6.89 3.69 2.69 38
‘3: ..... ,330 1.: 237 24N,;u0 5, .N 122 H: 3,;n Nu,100 6.43 ;_;1 9_5l 5,
. ,,,,,, 1. ‘HI J.' ;.s 19;,vnn. .11 196 121 79 3,3n3 58,860 03.0; 7.72 1.63 34
v ........ 1.«37 1 .1? 3~7,%uu -.OMJ 113 on 3.4w0 72,650 4.75 L2.30 2.43 3~
. ,,,,, '; 0 . _ u _7;,xuu .-,n39 130 nr 3,.3 9n,090 7 .1 4.30 1.36 39
w L ,2 ‘ 2‘0 33n,>ul _.,37: 746 :3; 3.410 133,~80 3.66 7.34 3. 7 32
a.) ,,,,,, '12 7 3% 307,530 ;_,7~5 .H4 52 3,422 142,620 6.07 2.35 1.94 15
. ' ...... ,: ‘ ‘ ..V‘ 3‘0, 1.1") 3., )N 173 1" 3,:«7 .7)",:.':) '.l .17 3.70 7.52 5.
;4 ______ 1 1+ _ 5_ . )qN, qr. ; -thr 7v 7; 2.¢95 137,130 .0.07 5.6; 7.57 30
4." v- 2 _*~ _T-, 4. N 7'13 19. 5 -.9‘2 n.,'uflJ 'a .4 3.0 . ‘.26
...: ...... .13: . -w, ... ‘ 35 .-. -- :3- 3.0: N2 .‘Ju ' 7' N 31 7 7n N
‘. ,.‘ -4 3N , 37,-)' 2 1 _.. 3,;.‘ :N ,9CU N 50 N . 4.00 33
79.: ..... . . ~ -xw «-.-u. .n - ' ;3~ _ T 3.345 1~%.n~0 ~." 9.26 v .N 5*
4 1 ..... . 2 -- N N 117: 3. Io.‘ .‘a' N N 3... 1':l,')"1') 9. 4.1". «.52 3.
' ....... 59. 2 5- 3.. ‘u. 34. _ -‘3 . 3 .9; -33,‘60 ‘. 3.7; ;.NJ 57
7 . ------ u "’ 1 ‘. 3- .' 7'1 1‘ ‘A-. .174 N“. 3 3.12 -.‘.,.‘.U “I n .1) j_,“4 '5‘,
1, ., _ '7 7.37 3- .3 2 3 - l 3..~- 77,.37 .7 - - 7 3:
‘ 1 ..... .o. 1 . i» 2 .,601 33,-07 .‘2 -37 2, 7 .~.,;WJ 3.7 O 51 1 74 ;4
4- . 7 a o _ N,_.l .T,.N 2N9 -35 2 J. .‘ .zTN '.V- .14 LJ 77 3
... ...... 7 ‘ 4~ 3 ,..» N.,Ni; NN9 :1. 2.124 176,330 9..; .33 ’2 3
4w. ,7 . - - 307,700 33, 39 -~h r 2. . .3%,.~0 ..nn ~ -6 7 7. _
... .- ...... .« - .. 3 .:m 129.- - ;. 7 .’ ~ 4r ' 7 -
‘1 .vi.. .2 c.rre inJV 0: cos: O: proiuczion izlns and prnuious :mar 1nJrIr5 o: prLr‘s of curn. coti.n: JnN
st -an, 2.12"~J ‘ N.'.a.. 9 - 9.. = .'u :ur -orn anJ cotton, 19;~-.9_: = 1J0 :or Su‘htdua. >6.hran data n...nn.'.
1' . .‘ " ' ‘ ' 1' 1" " 1
bCurn, cu':on. and SO UrdHS.
cl-1s‘rkd tl111 11.113 txi.
J191IJ'1Ԥ.~ : _am).
‘1'1- . 'i'.n.r ~1_. 1 4.12.4.11'. nail 4.11.

TABLE 3.--Yie1d, price. acreage. production, and value of peanuts; U. S.

392

index of prices paid for production items; composite

 

 

 

 

 

 

cost index“; acreage and value of specified competing cropsb; June, July, and August average rainfall at selected Heather sta-
tions; and "profitability ratio" -- index of ratio of the va1ue of competing crops to the value of peanuts. Georgia, 1909-1958,
: : Profit
Peanuts : Coated : Competing Crops : Average Rainfall Ratio
Year ; - . U. S. : : : : :
' Yield Price : : Value Index Com- . . : g 2
Per Per Acresc :Produc- : of :Produc- :posite :Acreage : Value June July : August : Profit
: Acre Pound tionc :Produc- : tion Index - . patted
tion Items
1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000
Pounds Cent! Acres Lbfl. dollars Acres dollars Inches Inches Inches Index
1909.....: 700 3.5 45 31,500 1,107 100 100 7.934 159,805 3.21 5.63 3.82 174
1910.....: 750 4 1 35 26,200 1,076 97 114 7.999 157.185 7.11 5.36 2.24 175
1911.....: 800 5.4 40 32,000 1,728 98 110 8,408 174,812 3.38 5.18 5.95 122
1912.....: 750 5.4 45 33.800 1,822 102 93 8,120 138,234 5.49 5.39 6.30 91
1913 ..... : 800 5.5 50 40.000 2,200 101 102 8,241 192,326 4.81 6.16 3.68 105
1914.....: 825 5.3 65 53,600 2,842 102 112 8,667 141,007 4.68 4.71 6.02 50
1915 ..... : 700 5.2 80 56.000 2.912 104 81 8,468 149,526 2.79 3.97 4.12 62
1916.....: 725 5.4 110 79.800 4,306 115 100 8,872 223,998 4.26 17.81 1.86 62
1917 ..... : 750 6.9 260 195,000 13,455 156 151 8,771 367,514 2.93 6.97 6.88 33
1918.....: 775 6.4 315 244.100 15.624 180 224 9.223 403,687 4.32 4.71 5.13 31
1919.....: 575 9.8 201 115,600 11,326 195 230 9.152 393.159 6.12 10.87 7.02 42
1920 ..... : 720 5.1 226 162,700 8,299 195 265 8,492 177,657 3.74 4.52 6.41 26
1921 ..... : 660 2.8 221 145,800 4,084 128 137 7,851 105,621 2.37 7.36 3.15 31
1922.....: 600 4.7 183 109,800 5,161 127 111 7,068 129,376 5.43' 5.10 3,31 30
1923 ..... : 510 6.8 210 107,100 7,283 138 154 6,510 133,493 8.11 4.80 6.42 22
1924 ..... : 600 5.4 400 240,000 12,960 140 183 6,616 164,865 4.83 7.34 2,21 15
1925.....: 510 4.5 362 184,600 8,308 145 163 7,053 154,231 3.46 3.31 1,97 22
1926 ..... : 575 5.6 243 140,900 7.889 141 147 7.230 133,173 4.15 6.33 5.35 20
1927 ..... : 710 5.1 320 227,200 11,587 141 105 6,680 152,097 5.83 5.38 5.22 16
1928.....: 500 4.7 389 194,500 9,142 148 142 6,674 126,931 5.81 5.93 10.78 17
1929.....: 650 3.9 375 243,800 9,506 146 147 6.808 151,985 5.51 4.93 3.01 19
1930.....: 665 3.7 315 209,500 7,751 135 130 6,995 106,725 4.05 7.02 2.19 16
1931 ..... : 630 1.6 495 311,800 4,990 113 91 6,949 57,221 1.42 5.10 6.42 10
1932.....: 490 1.5 535 262,200 3,932 99 56 6,773 47,417 6.00 5.37 6.92 13
1933 ..... : 590 2.8 430 253,700 7,104 99 58 6.205 83.137 2.50 6.91 4.13 14
1934 ..... : 615 3.2 475 292,100 9,348 114 86 6,541 91.173 4.75 5.19 5.24 12
1935 ..... : 725 3.2 467 338,600 10,834 122 101 6.774 91,123 2.44 8.52 5_37 10
1936 ..... : 750 3.6 575 431,200 15,525 122 87 6.479 104.397 3.39 5.45 7.85 a
1937 ..... : 730 3.3 523 381,800 12,599 132 120 6,864 95,507 4.89 6.20 7.14 9
1938.....: 795 3.3 572 454,700 15,006 122 78 6.632 65,186 5.08 6.33 3.24 5
1939.....: 550 3.3 670 368,500 12,160 121 71 6.275 71.657 5.78 4.99 8.49 7
1940.....: 825 3.3 730 602,200 19,874 23 86 6,151 83,759 5.64 7.16 4.69 5
1941.....: 750 4.5 650 487,500 21,938 130 87 3.780 88,066 6.2“ 6.27 4.16 5
1942 ..... : 4 630 6.5 1,060 667,800 43,407 148 115 5.201 127.265 7.30 4.61 5.76 4
1943.....: 700 7.2 1.127 786,900 30,301 164 145 5,271 159,781 4.11 4.49 3.51 3
1944.....: 675 8.0 1,030 708,800 36,700 173 180 4.740 131.606 2.69 5.13 5.31 3
1945 ..... : 675 8.1 1.070 722,200 58,102 176 183 4,58? 152.372 4.18 7.88 5.17 3
1946...”: 670 8.9 1.070 716,900 63,811.“. 191 169 4.419 171.031 4.90 0.71 5.11 3
1947.....: 693 20.1 1,124 782,100 78,899 224 231 4,318 194,536 4.34 3.69 5.90 3
194a ..... : 700 10.6 1,169 816,300 86,740 230 250 4,303 178,886 2.33 9.61 4.43 2
1949 ...... 780 10.; 703 610,700 63,317 235 -02 4,664 155.429 4-97 0-91 5.31 3
91% ...... 93) 10.7 728 680,700 72,833 246 93 4,289 179,943 3.21 6.62 4.44 3
1931 ...... 900 9.7 441 576,900 3;,939 273 223 4.506 270.338 2.36 5.14 3.46 n
1912 ...... 800 10.6 492 393,600 41,722 274 243 4.351 206.374 2 4b 3.41 b.68 0
‘9>3 ...... 990 10.8 322 516,800 55,812 253 245 4,295 217,247 4.76 7.53 3.78 5
1934 ...... 605 11.2 440 266,200 29,514 232 213 3,865 160.826 2.02 3.89 3.46 0
.931 ...... 97) 11.4 335 524,600 99,799 249 220 3.690 196,943 2.73 0.11 2.96 4
916 ...... 1,090 10.5 522 569,000 61,450 249 183 3,546 173,432 3.90 7.11 2.32 3
‘977 ...... 910 10.4 510 464,100 45,20h 2)8 167 3,308 152,623 4.86 3.66 3.02 4
19 at ..... 1.190 10.6 513 612,800 64,962 264 188 3.092 170,363 4.00 6.00 3.00 3

 

3Average of current
1910-1914 = 100.

wrighttd by acreage.

bCorn and cotton.

cPicked and threshed.

d1910-1914

‘Prrliminary.

100.

Rainiall data

are estimated.

index of cost of production items and previous year indeXes
See text for further explanation.

of

prices of corn and cultun,

393

 

 

 

 

TABZh v."11\1d, pr1C1, dcr1agr, production, and valuv o: peanuts, indvx of prLCvs paid tor production xtvus; corpoaliv
c051 xndmx“_ dcrndgr and va1uu u: sprc11ird COflprL1n5 crops”, Junr, July, and August avrragr rdlnIaLL at Sclvuc1d wnuznnr stu-
onns, anJ "proxx:ubnlil; ratxo” -- xndrx of rat1o of [hr yalu¢ of COmprLlng crop: Lo th valuv ox planuts. Florida, L909-.958.
YruXLL
Peanuts Costsd ComeL1657Cr02§ Avcrqfic RdlnxaLZ Katxu
P. S : ' '
Ytar Yield Price : Value Indux Com-
Pcr Per Acresc :Produg- of :Produc- :posxtc :Acreagr Va1ue June July August Plutla
Acre Peund tion‘ :Produc- Lion Indrx Rat1o“
(Lon 1Lcnm
1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000
133mg Cents Acres 1.63. (1011812 Acres d011nrs Inchrs Inches Inches 1ndvx
1909 ...... 650 3.9 15 9,750 380 100 100 872 10,729 5.75 9.10 6.04 109
1910 ... 700 3.6 12 8,400 302 97 104 882 11,688 11.41 10.43 6.05 148
1911 ...... 725 4.1 13 9,420 366 98 108 904 11,269 4.65 6.42 8.28 11
1912 ...... 700 4.6 13 9,100 419 102 93 813 9,144 5.54 6.74 6.78 83
1913 ...... 750 4.6 14 10,500 483 101 101 807 10,352 7.37 7.49 5.02 82
1914 ...... 740 4.4 15 11,100 488 102 98 848 11,767 4.62 4.68 5.23 93
1915 ...... 650 3.7 20 13,000 481 104 99 878 9,335 4.31 5.04 5.53 74
1916 ...... 675 3.9 25 16,880 658 115 90 913 12,937 5.61 15.50 4.93 75
1917 ...... 750 6.1 50 37,500 2,288 156 125 932 20,927 4.68 7.70 6.99 35
1918 ...... 675 5.1 60 40,500 2,066 180 193 990 20,258 4.05 5.16 8.30 38
1919 ...... 675 6.9 55 37,120 2,562 195 200 913 16,366 4.44 8.95 7.68 25
1920 ...... 625 5.0 64 40,000 2,000 195 179 888 11,577 5.04 5.75 8.68 22
1921 ...... 675 2.5 55 37,120 928 128 131 854 6,852 3.92 8.32 5.24 28
1922 ...... 625 3.8 43 26,880 1,021 127 73 829 10,012 6.72 4.91 6.67 37
1923. 600 5.7 40 24,000 1,368 138 103 809 8,939 12.51 7.32 7.93 25
1924 675 4.7 42 28,350 1,332 140 134 687 10,299 6.42 9.12 3.52 30
1925 ...... 650 3.8 36 ' 23,400 889 145 133 724 12,245 4.92 5.70 4.13 53
192 ... 680 4.3 32 21,760 936 141 116 728 9,171 5.80 7.28 10.70 38
1927 . 640 3.7 38 24,320 900 141 99 689 8,168 10 18 5.47 5.40 35
1928 ,,,,,, 575 4.1 49 28,180 1,155 148 120 754 9,328 6.72 7.51 9.16 31
1929. .. 625 3.1 51 31,880 988 146 125 770 9,304 8.36 7.57 5.90 36
1930 ...... 520 2.9 51 26,520 769 135 112 801 7,900 4.30 6.25 2.46 39
1931 ...... 570 1.0 55 31,350 314 113 98 871 4,557 2.44 7.40 7.04 55
1932 , 1.15 1.2 58 24,070 289 99 60 847 3.477 8.10 4.45 10.09 46
1933 ...... 505 2.5 51 25,760 644 99 55 863 5,686 2.88 8.50 5.37 34
1934 ...... 550 3.0 57 31,350 940 114 4 809 6,633 6.04 7.04 6.81 27
1935 ...... 610 2.9 63 38,430 1,114 122 94 878 7,178 2.80 9.4 10.98 25
1936 . 650 3.3 72 46,800 1,544 122 86 813 8,943 3.32 8.63 8.98 22
1937 ...... 575 2.9 68 39,100 1,134 132 118 850 7,232 5.83 5.28 10.09 25
1938 ...... 750 3.0 75 56,250 1,688 122 88 815 5,814 6.20 7.52 4.02 13
1939 ...... 440 2.9 85 37,400 1,085 121 75 793 4,986 9.72 6.45 14.78 18
1940 . 760 2.8 90 68,400 1,915 123 90 797 7,021 5. 1 10.29 5.14 14
1941 ...... 680 4.0 85 57,800 2,312 130 86 781 7,365 6.89 10.30 5.25 12
1942 ...... 570 5.1 115 65,550 3,343 148 104 762 9.688 8.75 6.59 6 31 11
1943 ...... 680 7.0 110 74,800 5,236 164 129 781 14,715 5.23 6.35 4 24 11
1944 ...... 625 7.5 100 62,500 4,688 173 178 748 13,574 3.73 8.07 8.48 11
1945 ...... 660 8.0 100 66,000 5,280 176 187 642 12,589 3.74 8.90 7,40 9
1946 ...... 465 8.3 100 46,500 3,860 191 199 671 13,249 6.08 10.60 7.56 13
1947 ...... 660 9.4 105 69,300 6,514 224 222 654 17,627 6.02 4.89 5 71 10
1948. .. 775 9.9 110 85,250 8,440 250 249 652 12,894 3.65 12.26 6.59 6
1949 ...... 765 10.0 67 51,260 5,126 238 204 619 11,927 7.1 9.36 8.16 9
1950 ...... 850 9.5 72 61,200 5,814 246 167 644 15,568 3.68 9.60 7.82 10
1931 ...... 870 9.4 65 56,550 5,316 273 188 663 22,880 5.13 5.82 4.58 16
1952 ...... 925 10.2 54 49,950 5,095 274 200 697 23,426 2.88 3.33 8.74 18
1953 ...... 1,000 10.1 56 56,000 5,656 253 215 670 20,424 7.99 7.41 5.43 14
1954. . 810 10.6 55 44,550 4,722 52 185 611 19,035 2.59 5.30 3.0) 1)
1955 ...... 1,025 11.1 60 61,500 6,826 249 187 633 17,446 3.56 8.23 6.20 10
1956. . . 1,075 10.7 56 60,200 6,441 249 146 610 16,450 7.25 8.64 3.65 10
1957 ...... 880 8.7 52 45,760 3,981 258 152 577 17,715 8.38 6.09 3.85 .5
19581.... 1,100 9.8 54 59,400 5,821 264 157 588 19,522 7.00 8.50 4.00 13

 

 

aAvvragc of Current 1ndex of cost of producl1un items and previous year 1nders of

Wtixhlod by acreagv. 1910-1914 =
bCorn and Cotton.
cPickvd and thrvshcd.

111910-1914 = 100.

100.

50c

[ext

"Prrliminary raintall data are estimated.

for furthrr explanaLiun.

pr1c:s 61 corn and COLKQH.

394

lABLE 1.--Ylvld, prtcv, acreagc, producllon, and value of pvanuts; U. 5. Index of prices pald for production items. cump05llr
Cust 1ndvxd, acrragr and value of Speciflcd computing cropsb; June, July, and August average rainfall at selected urarhcr sta-
tlona, and "profxlabllity ratio" -- 1ndcx of ratio 01 the value of computlng crops to the value of peanuts. Aldhunm. 1909-1936.

 

 

 

 

 

. . Pl‘ulll
Pvanuts : Costsd : Compvtlng Crops : Average Rainlall ~ Rdllo
. : . U. S. ~ - ~ 7
Year 1 Yield : Prlcu : : : Value : lndvx : Com- . . : : -
- Pvr : Per : Acred: :Pruduc- : of :Produc- :posltc :Acreagc : Value : June : July : August : Profit
Acrv : Pound : : txonc :Produc- : tlon : Index : : : : : 2 Rul1od
' ' - Lion : Itcnw -
1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1.000
E33233 Cents Acres Lbs. Dollars Acres Dollars Inches Inches 1nchcs 1ndvx
1909.....: 650 4.1 60 39,000 1,599 100 100 b.055 97,840 7.92 5.50 3.h8 104
1910.....: 700 3.1 50 35,000 1.A35 7 110 0,190 115,220 b.4b 7.b0 1.75 130
1911.....: 750 h.& 30 37,300 1,650 98 109 0,583 117,020 $.45 6.10 3.b2 121
1912.....: 7&0 5.0 33 40,700 2,035 102 92 b.331 108,140 5.79 3.02 7.40 90
1913.....: hSO 4.8 b0 39,000 1,872 101 101 0,200 129,5h0 2.36 7.09 2.13 118
1914.....: 750 3.0 70 52,300 2,025 102 113 b,001 96,490 4.25 2.h9 7.02 nl
1915.....: 700 4.1 110 77,000 3,157 104 83 0.308 92.050 3.84 3.82 $.76 30
l91h.....: 573 4.5 223 129,400 3,822 113 97 5,8bQ 87,900 3 42 lb «2 3.74 2h
1917'_,,,; 738 5.9 373 271,900 16,041 136 153 5,803 159,090 2 b8 b 20 7.31 17
1918 ...... 000 3.3 #00 240,000 13,720 130 199 6.069 167,930 3 S 2 91 n 3 33
1919.....: 330 7.9 300 103,000 13,033 193 217 5,920 208,100 3.98 8.93 n.79 2,
:9:1).....: 5‘10 3.3 318 124,900 3,772 193 :30 5.51111 101,090 3.52 2.111 1, 13 '51)
1941.....: ,5” 3.5 2h} 140,700 4,050 128 133 3,500 84,070 1.49 b. 2 3 49 35
i9:J.....: 500 a.7 190 95,000 4,3n3 127 112 3,791 13!,1v0 3.21 3.30 2.2; 3;
1913.....: 370 h.1 la9 70,000 4,272 130 1h0 5,829 130,000 5.34 1.2: h.H9 a:
XQJQ._'_.~ 330 3.2 202 111,100 3,777 1&0 201 5.789 1)H.hn0 0.00 7.39 2.99 4]
1933“,“. +111 3.: 133 113.2110 3.1% 1’0 151 11,02; 1419.020 2 70 «.39 2.11; 91
‘u:h ...... 910 3.0 129 ‘ u&.400 3,418 1A1 112 ”.130 137,190 7.03 7.7H 3.53 NJ
.1927. .. 11-1 4.: 174 11.111.151.111 4,3111% 11.1 109 5,931. 117,550 3 £18 «.32 3.71 19
19:5 ______ 310 0.2 192 105,h00 4,435 1&5 .32 0,017 23;_\uu 9 h} ..91 a 9; ,J
.919 ...... gnu 3.; 213 117,200 3,983 140 153 h.190 :~u,qwn n n2 . 7. ;.Hj :.
111,511) ...... rif‘ ,,9 ihl 92,001! 2.“?‘3 l31 lid) 0,7401) 95.11“) ..' 57 W ) Z ‘4'. ‘1'}
1”,; _____ .“U 1.3 :3} 1L0,MUU 1,n87 113 95 0,343 >a,s9u l 11 “_1h 4 13 ,b
‘1’}.- ...... ,1() 1.5 ..‘5'1 124,000 l,hl9 ‘79 1: h,_'l5 «9.971) ) 1‘12 ‘3. '9 “1 “111 1;
1“,, ...... 110 1 n ;nq 95.000 £,&17 99 no 1,401 h1,«hU 3.0m 5.70 1.1;
UH. ...... .1 U _f}; .‘ 11 1035,8111) 4,807 114 91'. 3.78..) 93,112!) . 21’. o. ,‘h t, .5 jg
‘H- ...... $110 _' '5 :91) 305,000 3,111; .‘2 11111 3,9111 91,4511 3 1.111 7, '15 1. . g,-
,,H ~~~~~ “an 5.3 100 $37,000 7,104 1;; 91 ).741 1.3,;Hu 2 15 H,«I w - ,w
,‘1: ..... ,VU ._q _;u ;sn,1011 ),40$ 15: 119 01,098 JlJ.;JU . 32 <.HI ., 1 1,
L“1* ~~~~ . 5,. ,_u :51 _JH,WUU 0,40) 1:; 50 ),hhu 71,510 5 :9 9.0; Q_1u 4
95” ...... ;;~ 5.; sun 1.5,100 5,.15 131 7‘ 3.)”4 'J.5/U {.19 k.*~ .-.1. 3.
No.1,) .... : 3,. 3.0 .131.) J_'1,"110 11,5 1“ 1.) m. 1,4110 MHmJU 11.9.9 [,...{1 _ x-
11h, _____ ”,1. .H‘ 313 _‘1.;‘,:1111) 10,15; 13() 91 1.11.9 1111."...9 ,. .\_ ,1-1 M,“ ‘
11.1 . 1 1. -. 1:1. 55 .1111 111.47.? 141% :m 4.3.; .meu 7... :.1 ~ .....1. ;1
-,‘1:':::: f_1, - .1) 1].. !.l'-,L')H 4:1“,113 l'm l‘l 'e,.‘\.'2 ,njfljt") “11;, 3‘5; ‘1'». ‘
4 ,, . . , ._11 5 1; 71'“) ;'.,\u1L1 L. 3 1 19 7;, 3117 ; T; _h :11 5, . . .. ; 1,_,,*
1.1,”,w-J '9 m; 5..11.*J1)1) £1,951 Z"! 1“: -«.L73 .."»,1"1HJ 2.1“, 7.5- 1,.0»
. ' .1 - . , _ _.1‘uuu 41,50h 19. .*F 4,131 £13..9U 7.19 7 ma 1 4
a. . 1., w 411 gw_,inu $5.7.1 ;;? J-fi 4,;J7 _5n, kw ~ 13 5_,; 5 ,, .
'1: 1. .1. ,1 1.1111; 11.1.1111) M“ 4.41“ 411.12% 5.117 111.31 .. 5.
..u m1 29.4 1.1 _f‘“,“|L- ;‘1‘-,'1 T JJh 4119 MW} -”j.‘-!' HHH - .‘1
'7’ ‘1 ‘ .,._ .1 g:,'.,1,; {...-5.1 £7.11 .11: 5.9 1. 199,950 2.;11 U,_11 - ,1} ‘
I ..... I a ‘ .fl . H,” ‘q‘}>fi -'; >1! 5.70111} ."'.'o') 3..” v.'J‘ -.3. .-
. 1 1 3).. ,9» .uw.uwm ....09 :14 4‘9 ~-."l"'l 31-.5¥¢ -.-~ J.Hw ..‘M
' ‘ """ "' ’ 41 - _-11_,'1111. ‘9‘“, _‘ 1} .14 5.91.: ..‘39.“U11 «.35 '1. U ‘1. ‘ .
1 . 1 1 1 ,1 w _, 1 . _ :11 1.13. .7;,;70 -.n; ~ 4. ..u- g.
.‘ ‘ , ,1,- ‘V’ ...1.'2W 45.1”] ..1, ___‘,-, 3,311" £1115ou 3...‘ 11,; 3.»: 9
a a ': ": ,, ‘ _“_J -. _ L» ~.’ ,, 4‘1‘. ,, _..9 at 3,- 19 .115, u U 1.. 1 ... -.c .
1 .. 1 «.5 - .1 .r11: .., F5 ; n 4- -,9;? 1 ”'-‘4” -‘~ 5.31 L.“3 -
3.12.2.1” : . .:11:.'. .11-:- .: 0 -s' -1 pu'f'xf 11-11 111““ (HM Pn‘-l"“5 H” llld“3‘1"> Of 1” lCt'b 111 141111 11: 1 1.
:1: 1.11.1.1 .“.1-.:'.. I . 5.1 1...}, ;.1* : ,11'1r 1-..;1.dl1.11.0n.
1' 1. .1 1 .v
L1 ”1‘ 1w
4 - w ‘ 2 1

{Alli E '-. --'111V. 1

v

pr 1(1- , .IC 1‘1‘36‘1' ,

pi aduc t ion ,

395

and ‘.'d.t1t'

oi pi'élltJlfi', 1'.

S

1ndcx oi pricvs paid tor pruduttion iicmb,

5011111115 1 £0

 

 

 

 

 

cost 11111. ‘-:", a; r1.i,.:1 and multm 11: apt-cit it‘d Cs'n‘pt : ing. crops", lunr, 311.}; and A1.,;..>t an ratx ramiall at St‘lt‘kll‘d wt-ati'vi sta-
tivn», and “profitabilitw ratio" -- inde of ratio of thy valut oi computing crops :0 thr valur oi prdnuts. lvxds. 1909'1925-
Pxoiit
Ptdnuts Costsd Compgginfi Crops Avvrngr Kdiniall 88110
: 1'. S. : ' '
Yvar : Yir.d Pricv : Value 1ndtx Com-
Ptr Per Acrrschioduc- of :Prnduc- 2p081l0 Acreage Value June JUlF A“N“31 P'01‘L
Acre Paund tionc Produc-: tion lndvx Hallo
tion ICK‘I‘JS
1,000 1,000 1.000 1,000 1,000
Pound: Cents Acres th. Dollars Acres Dol1ars luchvs Inches inchvs 1ndvx
19119 ..... : 5‘0 3.5 4 20,401) 1,003 100 100 15,064 223,068 3.40 2.02 1.95 118
1910.....: 650 4.0 40 26,000 1,040 97 113 15,532 289,284 1.54 1.39 1.04 19b
1911 ..... : 700 4.9 45 31,500 1,544 98 113 16,471 263.827 .56 2.78 2.77 91
191: ..... : 750 4.9 46 36,000 1,764 102 99 l6,264 347,078 3.35 .88 2.47 103
1913......- 723 5.1 43 32,600 1,1154. 101 915 17.132 3211.911 3.41 1.49 1.10 105
1914...”: 773 4.8 3 34.900 1.07:. 102 .11 16,420 223,343 1.26 .87 7.16 73
1915.....: 800 4.3 55 44,000 1,892 104 76 15,453 251,869 2.60 1.95 6.90 70
1916 ..... : 725 4.9 120 87,000 4,263 115 98 15,654 397.717 2.59 2.33 2.75 49
1917.....: 600 7.0 260 156,000 10,920 156 145 16,089 495,124 1.03 2.67 1.54 24
1918 ..... : 450 6.9 210 94,500 6,520 180 233 16,601 512,810 2.41 .77 1.57 43
1919 ..... : 575 8.6 90 51,800 4,450 195 262 16,000 682,037 5.91 5.16 4.00 81
1920 ..... : 600 6.3 81 48,600 3,062 195 272 17,255 464,860 3.44 2.57 5.68 80
1921.....: 535 3.8 93 49,800 1,891 128 14 16,542 250,369 6.93 2.33 .68 70
1922.....: 560 4.6 67 37,500 1,726 127 126 16,890 420,184 2.79 1.70 1.16 129
1923 ..... : 585 6.4 56 32,800 2,097 138 17’ 18,963 673,212 2.46 1.56 2.33 170
1924 ..... : 405 6.5 61 24,700 1,606 140 228 20,745 635,729 1.80 .49 .95 210
1925.....: 495 4.6 53 26,200 1,207 145 201 20,108 459,548 1.13 1.64 1.44 200
1926.....: 625 5.5 59 36,900 2,028 141 180 21,353 410,909 2.87 4.78 1.94 107
1927 ..... : 600 5.1 106 63,600 3,244 141 113 20,555 507,816 5.03 2.65 .69 2
1928.....: 630 5.2 129 81,300 4,226 148 164 21,315 518,048 5.20 2.29 1.88 07
1929.....: 420 4.6 142 59,600 2,743 146 150 22,827 412,917 1.32 2.77 .27 80
1930.....: 415 4.3 12 49,800 2,141 135 148 22,417 258,557 1.91 .85 1.51 64
1931.....: 500 2.5 133 66.500 1,662 113 92 22,042 190,356 2.13 3.19 1.90 “U
1932.....: 525 1.7 146 76,600 1,303 99 51 20.890 179,77 2.56 2.45 3.30 73
1933.....: 600 2.8 135 81,000 2,268 99 53 18,210 269,822 .77 3.06 2.61 63
1934 ..... : 305 3.0 190 58,000 1,738 114 87 16,610 194,476- .5. 1.93 90 59
1935.....: 560 2.9 175 98.000 2,842 122 120 18,039 231,908 5.85 2.46 1. 2 43
1936.....: 420 3.2 215 90,300 2,890 122 92 18,102 256,453 2.40 5.11 1.27 47
1937.....: 440 3.1 210 2,400 2,864 132 119 19,516 284,986 2.78 1.92 2.12 53
1938.....: 450 2.8 263 118,400 3,314 122 82 15,776 173,870 2.83 4.21 .83 28
1939,,,,.; 415 3.1 322 133,600 4,143 121 70 15,457 179,926 3.19 2.39 2.39 23
1940.....: 580 3.2 335 194,300 6,218 123 83 15.562 227,508 7.82 2.35 2.55 19
1941,.,,.: 470 4.1 340 159,800 6,552 130 87 15.102 295,960 6.03 2.85 2.66 24
1942 ,,,,, ; 480 4.7 870 417,600 19,627 148 126 15,958 381,469 3.19 3.19 3.89 H
1943 ..... : 330 6.8 850 280,500 19,074 164 148 16,851 440,280 2.47 2.71 25 12
1944 ..... : 450 7.5 680 306,000 22,950 17 181 16,013 419,987 1.38 1.46 4.47 10
1945,,,,.; 430 7.7 750 22,500 24,832 176 176 13,076 325,415 4.13 3.14 3.09 7
1946 ..... : 515 8.6 767 395,000 33,97 191 200 13,587 448,324 3.02 1.09 3.80 7
19A7_,,,,: 425 9.6 836 335,300 32,188 224 268 14,776 743,089 1.98 .69 2.9’ 11
1948.....: 400 10.2 752 300,800 30,682 230 298 15,642 622,125 2.67 2.23 L.37 1.
1949.....: 640 10.0 513 328,300 32,832 238 255 17,077 997,055 3.82 2. 2.‘7 16
1950.....: 675 10.3 490 330,800 34,067 246 235 17,901 795,755 3.46 3.54 2.39 12
1951.....: 350 9.8 338 118,300 11,593 273 263 17,983 907,152 4.62 1 29 74 41
1952 ..... : 375 ll.3 237 88,900 10,043 274 304 15,691 784,773 1.16 ..56 .33 41
1953.....: 625 10.9 287 179,400 19,552 253 295 13,608 781,252 1.35 2.09 3.05 2.
1954.....; 380 11.7 281 106,800 12,493 252 265 15,479 853,476 1.33 1.24 9h 36
1955 ..... : 615 11.6 389 239,200 27,751 249 266 11,186 804,3.8 3.41 2.03 2 us 11
1956.....: 500 11.0 175 87,500 9,625 249 224 12,808 22,288 .99 .97 1 14 46
1957.....: 525 10.5 287 150,700 15,821 258 245 14,938 820,571 3.13 .85 1.10 -3
1958.....: 725 10.5 313 226,900 23,827 264 212 14,846 999.999 3.50 2.00 3.00 J:

 

aAverage of current index of cost of production items and previous acar indexes of prins of

sorghum, weighted by acreage.

1910-1914 = 100.

bCorn, cotton, and sorghum.

cPickcd and threshed.

d1910-1914 =

cl‘rt-liminary.

100.

See text

Rainfall data are cstimatvd.

{or further explanation.

corn, Cotton,

.111

396

. __"», . , _ . , , t . .. a . . . . - ' ‘ . . . . .

..\.1 - , 1 .l ..., t). .. , (10.! .121, p11 . .. .01., «111.1 .d..1l C: ,1! 1L. .5. ., J 11111tg. t-X pl 1‘. .8 pd;d :,\:‘ p:\ :11“: .01; _1.‘ \_ _,1"‘,,151‘,
4 d ~ 1 . . . 1 . ... . ,, fl, - . _ ‘

t s '1 1 .1t1- .110 t .1 d ..- \r‘o - .. .- .. .11 ,11 . .... 6.11;“ . ,. . $151.31, and bt‘pit-r‘m .' uncragt' l'd.:i1d. . a'. 505.! 211.1 ‘dLJ‘. .- :‘

~ 1 .1125, .13; ,7:~.: '.'..1)‘..'.'. 1.11:0 -- ....2-- .-1 (421.1 .3 ' 1 '..1...L- .12 tempt-1111,; crop: to 1:. ya, ,1 ”1 Pt .1-1,,;‘_ 11,“, .17.,

 

 

 

 

 

Pr61.:

 

 

 

 

 

1 u. 5 13.13139 Ln 1 {1:15 ('rwpa : [Rag-111).} ~.111:11.~1.1 8.11.
. '. S. 4
1td1 . '121.J 1r161 . : 1dl11 1n41x 1;on- .
hr 1'1 r ' Putts :1rv.1-.~.- ' a: '. 1'1-11.c-: posmr ‘ Act‘tdy : Value : .11.. ‘.-'\......:s'. ; S1pt. 1'111111
Acr1 ' Pound : , tzun‘ ‘rruduc- : t;nn - 1ndmx - nat1u“
.... ’ 1011 11.1 b
,‘ 1111; ;,1__1 1 1,111} 1.11011 1.11111)
14:2115 QLELE Aurxs I 6:. 01..st Aer-3 luvLLars Intfivs lncmvs Inthan 1ndvy
.w19 ,,,,, - .\» 1.7 1 «00 17 L01 .00 7.913 9;.6;U 1.03 ..5w .45 ;,Um7
4 0 ,,,,, ~10 . 3 ‘ ..H 24 97 .0. ‘.~34 108.120 3.03 3.32 1 2‘ 3311
‘y. . ..... 1‘1 1. 1 hat :9 98 90 5,496 71,000 4.31 3.9? 3.29 1,944
;9; ,,,,,, v‘ 4.7 l 700 32 102 103 7,487 103,920 1.02 4.14 1.76 2,300
9;, . .-. ,'3 «00 27 10. a; 7,382 81,100 2 04 45 6.03 2.200
.01. ,,,,,, n‘w 3.; 2 1..Hu 70 10; 1.5 0,320 73.:60 1.24 7.23 2.20 746
-915 ..... T 0 4.9 3 :,;~1 0 '14 49 5,398 93,550 2 3) 8.38 5.40 6:)
0;n ,,,,,, n‘w 6.2 7 4.710 293 1L5 9‘ 6,048 120.020 .53 1.05 2.00 309
.9L7. . 700 7.5 .0 7,000 525 .‘01 .64 6.152 “19.220 3.54 4.99 1.91 234
'9.n.. 4;, 3,0 1: 3,:00 490 :80 348 0.031 114.920 .84 1.00 4.12 1::
:9 9 , “90 9.8 8 5,500 541 19% 203 5,141 255,720 2.05 3.05 1.47 343
9-0 ...... T 0 ".0 7 5.200 368 195 278 5, 127,270 2.44 3.61 3.13 252
9;; ...... g; ”_5 , 6,900 468 128 106 5, 34 74,220 2.7 1.50 1 94 110
.92; ...... 52‘ 5.4 1. 5,800 312 127 104 6,205 ‘08,340 5.22 1.09 97 253
1923 ..... 530 6 4 3.000 317 138 134 0, 28 123.520 1. 1.27 5,2 ;52
.934...__ 7)0 5.9 5 3,200 192 140 204 6.665 218.110 1.56 2.02 2.09 82
L923 ..... : D‘U 4.8 0 3.900 187 145 180 7,54“ 186.200 4. 2 1.25 7.30 720
1926 ..... - 500 5.9 8 '6,400 378 141 171 0,904 134,890 6.17 4.27 0.41 239
1927.....: 700 6.4 19 13.300 851 141 106 6,778 150,520 6.7 4.65 3.91 134
1928.....: 050 0.0 37 24,000 1,443 148 155 7.057 150.810 3.62 3.39 .82 76
1929 ..... : 500 4.9 50 25.000 1.225 140 145 8,092 137,660 2 20 .86 5.20 82
1930 ..... : 423 a 5 24 10.200 439 135 144 8.115 61,060 .92 1.83 1.4 101
193.,,.,,: 425 2.1 32 13,600 260 11 93 7, ’ 48.850 3.49 2.36 .77 25
1933,_,_,; 530 1 o 29 16,000 255 99 48 7,622 51,400 2.00 3 02 1 2 143
1953.... ' 025 2.0 3 2 .600 536 99 49 7,200 77,300 3.04 5 61 4.07 105
1934.....: 300 3.3 55 10,500 544 114 91 5.049 34,570 .58 2.32 6.57 40
1933.....: 600 3.2 45 27,000 864 122 139 5,343 53,410 1 09 3.22 2.47 45
1936 ..... : 270 3.8 38 10,300 390 122 110 4,7 2 30,600 .80 .17 9.00 58
1937 ..... : 473 4.1 25 11,900 487 132 140 4.967 49.320 1.81 3.7 2.28 74
1936.....: 530 3.5 38 20,100 705 122 2 4,175 42,880 2.70 1.16 1.63 44
1439,,,,, 4,5 3.4 53 22.010 748 121 79 4.317 41,490 1.52 2.50 .22 40
L9.0.....: 350 3,” a: 45,100 1,624 12 94 4,591 63,160 4.71 3.19 2.03 28
l9~1.....: 525 4.2 72 37,800 1,588 130 91 4,176 84,420 2 4 3.59 3.04 39
;9.2,,,,.; 530 4.9 218 119.900 5.875 148 131 4.512 101,410 1 09 4.77 4.70 13
1943.....: 220 6 5 200 52,000 3.380 104 150 4,065 07,830 .80 .40 3.35 15
1944.....1 475 7.7 178 84,000 6,510 1.3 192 4,083 104,140 3.20 2 94 2.10 12
1945 ...... 475 8.3 185 87,900 7,294 176 180 3,053 64,700 5.45 2.72 7.85 0
1946 ..... : 530 8.7 221 1.7.100 10.190 191 200 3.016 86.050 .91 3.96 1.89 6
1947, , -‘u 9.0 53w 146.200 14.035 22; 259 2.683 103.170 1.96 1.30 2 94 3
1948 ..... 0. 10.: 30m 133.000 16.005 250 289 2,661 90,440 4.20 1.52 .42 4
g;g ,,,,, n40 0.2 170 115.600 11.791 238 243 2,950 119,640 1 2 1.02 4.79 7
.950 ______ ,0” 0.0 3;; ;;5_,Ug 12,508 :46 228 2,770 96,530 9.99 5.53 4.21 6
La) ,,,,,,, .41, 5_n ggu 114,400 9,815 27' 255 2,517 138,440 2.81 1.32 4.13 10
9,: _____ _g_-', 11.3 1,: 4km“) 3,379 "74 274 2,531 60,531) 3.14 1.51 .94 9
,9;; ,,,,,, gnu 11 1 1 9 114,200 12,081 253 294 2,151 85,400 7.27 2.85 1.82 5
9‘4 ...... 4 1 11.6 00 41.200 4,750 252 261 1.837 58.n60 .71 1.62 1.37 9
9 1 ...... QMU 11.2 .3. 1‘8.nwu 14,408 249 270 2.231 91.040 1.66 3.34 3.14 10
_9»: ,,,,, 7;. ,.,2 70 20,700 3.664 249 221 1.023 52.070 1 71 . 1 2 7
191;.....: 500 10.3 109 87,200 9,7;0 218 :31 1,696 54,190 1 43 1.80 0 9. 2
‘9'",1 ..... 1'1} ,1, 1,) ) 1.10 [BQ‘UIJU 13,1392 2114 211-0 1,42 77,9151) 3 U1) 3.00 3 ‘0 '
dAy,rd#r 0! ,hrr,“1 ;nJ.x ox gust oi produttiun itums and prvv1005 \rJf induxes of prlcrs oi corn. cotton. and

scrghnm, 4:116:18 h. dCf\dgt. 1929-.933 - 100. $66 tuxt tor {urtLvr explanation.
i’1,‘ui 11, 6 .1t ti~11 , .11111 5 111 g ‘113:_
“v.6.11 JnJ tri1$“rd.
“119.0-19‘... = .00.

‘1929-.9$3 = 100.

111.1:.nar.. Ruln1u1. data 416 1911matrd.

397

 

 

 

 

 

 

TALL! 8a.--Peanul acreage, yield. marketing quotaa, penalty ratea. and product1on, farmera atock baats. Fnired States, 1909-1958.
Acreage 8as1c Producrxun

Grown : Lega1 1 of th1d Norma1 Market-z Penalty Exccss

Year Alone Picked : I Picked: . thi- A11ot- Per Y1e1d : 1ng Rate Picked 'Prrurnl Acruax.
For and : and A11ot- - mum ment Acre Per Quota Per and of bU.J
A11 Threahed- Threshed: ment Allot- :chhed 6 : Acre Peund :Threahvd Quulu for

.Purpouea ~ ment :Thrcshed - H;

1.000 1.000 1.000 Hillxon ¥.;;;cn

Acrea Acres Aurel POunda Pounda Pounds Cents P(;ndb
1909 ...... -- 537 -- -- -. -- 660 -- -- -- 353 ~~ --
1910 ...... -- 666 -- -- -- -- 827 -- -- -- 384 -- .-
1911 ...... -- 472 -- -- -- -- 775 -- -- -- 366 -- --
1912 ...... -- 680 -- -- -- -- 753 -- -- -- 362 -- --
1913 ...... -- 665 -- -- -- -- 826 -- -- -- 382 -- --
1919 . -- 526 -- -- -- -- 801 -- -- -- 421 -- ~-
1915 ...... -- 617 -- -- -- -- 779 -- -- -- 681 -- ~~
1916 ...... -- 878 --- -- -- -- 758 -- -- -- 666 -- --
1917 ...... -- 1.316 -- -- -- -- 752 -- -- -- 989 - --
1918 ...... -- 1,326 -- -- -- -- 713 -- -- -- 9&6 -- --
1919 ...... -- 957 -- -- -- -- 719 -- —- -- 688 -- --
1920 ...... -- 995 -- -- -- -- 699 -- -- .- 69n .- --
1921 . -- 980 -- -- -- -- 692 -- -- -- 678 -- --
1922 ...... -- 821 -- -- -- -- 637 -- -- -- 523 -- --
1923 ...... -- 797 -- -- -- -- 713 -- -- -- 568 -- --
1924 ...... 1,396 1.086 78 -- -- -— 658 -- -- -- 713 -- --
1925 ...... 1,279 996 78 -- -- -- 725 -- ~~ -- 722 -- --
1926.. 1 156 860 74 -- -- -- 770 -- -- -- 662 -- --
L927..... 1,689 1,086 73 -- -- -- 777 -- —— -- 8~~ -- --
1928 ...... 1.636 1,213 74 -- -- -- 695 -- -- -- 896 -- --
1929 ...... 1.627 1,262 78 -- -- -- 712 -- -- -- 898 -- --
1930 ...... 1.433 1.073 75 -- -- -- 650 -- -- -- 697 -- --
1931 . 1.773 1.660 81 -- -- -- 733 -- -- - 1.056 -- --
1932 ...... 2,062 1,501 74 -- -- -- 627 -— -- -- 961 -- --
1933 ...... 1.717 1,217 71 -- -- -- 673 -- -- -- 820 -- --
1934 ...... 2,015 1,516 75 -— -- -- 670 —- -- -- 1.016 -- --
1935 ...... 1,972 1,697 76 -- -- -- 770 -- -- -- 1.153 -- -~
1936 ...... 2,127 1,660 78 -- -- -- 759 —- -- -- 1,260 -- --
1937 ..... 1.967 1,538 78 -- -- -- 802 -- -- -- ‘ 233 -- --
1938 ...... 2.236 1,692 76 1,330 -- 127 762 -- -- ~- ..289 -- --
1939 ...... 2.563 1,908 76 1,365 -- 162 636 -- -- -- 1.213 -- --
1960 ...... 2.599 2.052 79 1,507 1.610 136 861 -- -- -- 1,767 -- --
1941 ...... 2.651 1,900 78 1,610 1,610 118 776 -- 1.256 3.0 1,675 11? ‘ 7
1962 ...... 4.329 3,355 78 1.610 1,610 208 65k -- 1,256 3.0 2,193 1«5 Q09
1963 ...... 6.775 3,523 74 1.610 1,610 19 617 -- 1.256 -- 2,176 173 ~-
1946 ..... 3.851 3,063 80 -- -- -- 678 -- -- -- 2,081 -- --
1965 . 3,853 3,160 82 -- -. -- 6&6 -- ~- -- 2.092 *~ ~-
1966 . 3,883 3,161 80 -- -- -- 6&9 -- -- -- 2,018 -- --
19a} ...... 4,69a 3,377 82 -- -- -- can -- -- -- 2,182 -- --
1968 ...... 3,826 3,296 86 2.359 -- -- 709 656 1,520 -- 2,336 154 ~-
1969 ...... 2.762 2.308 86 2,629 1,610 88 808 651 1.700 5.3 1,865 110 --
1950 2.633 2,262 86 2.200 1,610 103 900 665 1.286 5.4 2,035 158 vb
1951 ...... 2.510 1,982 79 1.889 1.610 105 837 734 1.300 5.8 1.659 128 ;94
1952. . 1.838 1,663 78 1.706 1,610 85 940 777 1,300 6.0 1.356 LUn --
1953 ...... 1,796 1.515 84 1,679 1,610 90 1.039 790 1,326 5.9 1.576 119 --
1956.....' 1.826 1.387 76 1.610 1.610 86 727 837 1.368 6.1 1.008 73 --
195) ...... 1.898 1,069 88 1.731 1.610 96 928 920 1.592 6.1 1,598 97 --
1956.....: 1.860 1.335 75 1,650 1,610 84 1,160 899 1.500 8.5 1,608 ;47 ---
1957..... 1.777 1.431 83 1.611 1,610 92 970 901 1,65. 8.3 1,<36 99 --
1958 ..... : 1.736 1.323 88 1,612 1.610 96 1.205 1.026 1.652 8.0 1,836 '.1 --
1959.....: 1.653 1.4n1 88 1.612 1,610 91 1.097 1.101 1,772 7.2 1.712 97 --

Sourcee: Fara and 011a Sltuatlon Reporta, t.S.D.A., part1cu1ar1y FOS 186 and 192. Peanuta and Thrll Fees. Mntlrl

 

Reaearch Report 16, 1952 U.S.D.A.. Acreage. Yle1d, Production. Dtspoallion. and Value Reports, U.5.D.A.; Peanut Harkrr1ng Quura

Informallon for Cannltteemen. C.S.S., U.S.D.A., October.

1956;

Federal

Reg1ltcr.

Augull 23,

1958.

398

Table 86.--Avera;e Price per Pound and Col-odity Credit Corporation Traneactiona.

 

: Average Price Per Pound

Received :

 

 

farmere' etock peanuta by theae cooperativee in order to facilitate e aurplue-removal program of the Department.

: Suzzgrt‘ : by
Year . Percent : Par-era
Per
Pound of for
Peritzrz Seaaon
Cente Percent Cente
1909..... -- - 6.1
1910....: -- - 6.0
1911....: -- - 6.2
1912....: -- - 6.6
1913....: -- - 6.5
1916..... -- - 6.2
1915.... -- - 6.1
1916.... -- -- 6.8
1917....: -- -- 7.0
1918....: -- -- 6.5
1919....: -- - 9.6
1920....: -- -- 6.7
1921....: -- -- 3.8
1922.... -- -- 5.6
1923.... -- -— 6.6
1926....: -- -- 5.8
1925....: -- -- 6.3
1926....: -- -- 5.0
1927....: -- -- 5.2
1928....: -- -- 6.9
1929..... -- - 3.7
1930....: -- -- 3.5
1931. .. -- -- 1.6
1932....: -- - 1.5
1933....: -- - 2.8
1936....: -- - 3.3
1935....- -- - 3.1
1936..... -- - 3.7
1937....: -- - 3.3
1938....: -- - 3.3
1939....: -- - 3.6
1960....: -- - 3.3
1961..... 6.6 68.0 6.7
1962....: 6.6 90.0 6.1
1963....: 7.1 90.0 7.1
1966....: 7.3 90.0 8.1
1965....: 7.5 90.0 8.3
1966....; 8.6 90.0 9.1
1967....: 10.0 90.0 10.1
1968 ...: 10.8 90.0 10.5
1969..... 10.5 90.0 10.6
1950.... 10.8 90.0 10.9
1951..... 11.5 88.0 10.6
1952. .. 12.0 90.0 10.9
1953.... 11.9 90.0 11.1
1956....: 12.2 90.0 12.2
1955....: 12.2 90.0 11.7
1956....: 11.6 86.0 11.2
1957....: 11.1 81.6 10.6
‘19ss....: 10.7 80.8 10.6
1959....: 9.7 75.0 9.5
1960....: 10.1 78.0

 

 

CCC Traggaggionab

 

 

 

 

 

Value of : :
: Produc- : Quantity: Produc- : Saiea Loeaee Gaina :
tion Pledged : tion : Edible : : Per per Total : Total
Picked 6 {or : Acquired : 6 :Cruahing : Export : Pound Paund : Loseee : Caine
: Threahed L922: - Seed - - .

1,000 Million Million Million Million Million Million Million
Dollare Pounde Pounda Peunde Pounda Pounde Cente Centa Dollara Dollar!
16,669 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
15,398 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
15,675 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
16.053 -- ~- -- -— -- -‘ -- -- --
17,266 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
17,809 -- -- -- -- -- -- -— -- --
19,886 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
32,209 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
69.678 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
61,597 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ~-
66,002 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -— --
33,053 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
26,020 -- -- —- -- -- -- -- -- --
27,929 -- -- -- -- -« -- -- -- --

, 36.653 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
61,187 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
30,836 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
33.382 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
63,670 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
61,183 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
33,533 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
26,662 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
17,166 —- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
16.587 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -— --
23.328 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - --
33.293 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
36,181 -- 73 -0- 73 -0- .6 -0- 3 -0-
66,931 -- -O- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -O- -0-
60.630 173 166 5 161 -0- 1.6 -0- 2 3 -0-
62.126 263 253 1 252 -O- 1.3 —0- 3.3 -0-
61,226 26 69 16 56 -0- 1.0 -0- .7 -0-
58,850 60 558 223 327 -O- 1.6 -0- 7 9 -0-
68,766 -- 379 215 157 -0- -0- -0- -O- -0-

133.199 -- 899 676 609 -0- -0- -O- -0- -0-
155,030 -- (1,778) -- -- -- -- -- -- -~
167.352 251 (1,765) -- -- -- -~ -- -- ~-
168,878 309 (1,718) -- -- -- -- -- -- --
185,366 600 55 18 36 -0- -0- 1.1 - .6 .6
220.210 333 528 -o-c 250 275 .7 -o- 3.5 -0-
266,180 683 1.167 19 685 656 2.2 -0- 25.6 -0-
193.696 365 763 36 685 165 5.2 -O- 39.7 -0-
221.881 552 860 132 582 61 2.0 -0- 17.1 -0-
173.260 253 530 106 390 6 1.8 -O- 9.6 -0-
167,511 107 6 16 55 -0- 1.5 -0- .1 -0-
176,762 657 -0- 10 189 238 -O- -O- -0- -0-
122.792 16 -0- 3 19 8 -0- -0- -0- -0-
185.160 300 16 -0- 186 1 5.2 -0- .7 -0-
179.887 . 366 26 -0- 170 99 6.6 -0- 1.1 -0-
168.901 263 9 8 89 65 3.2 -0- .3 -0-
129.262 266 126 -0- 250 59 5.0 -0- 6.3 -0-
152,891 317

‘From 1937 :6?6E;h 1960, CCC made nonrecouree loane to peanut cooperativea to finance purcheee, atorege. and diveraion or aale oi

bPernera' atock baeie.

ahrinkage.

Scurcee:

Economic Statietician, Statietical and Hietorical Reeearch Branch, A.M.S.. U.

cLeae than 500,000 poundl.

The difference between purchaeea and eelea ie eccOunted for by inventory adjuatmente. principallv normal
Government purchaae progrena for peanuta in 1963 to 1965 were for purposea other than price eupport and hence are included here
in parentheeie.

Pete and Gill Situation Reporta, U.S.D.A.; apecial tabulation of dete beginning in 1935 prepared by G. H. Kramer. Agricultural

S. D. A., and Oila and Peanut Divieion. C.S.S.. L.S.D A.

1A8LE dc.--Peanuts:

399

Supply and disposition (kernal basis), United States, 1909-1955.

 

 

 

Suppl} and Disposition Kernal Basis

 

 

Cun- . . 2 2
Ver- :Produc- . : Crueh-: Crush—t Pro- : Per
sion Lion Begin-z . Psed ings lugs Oil ”11 duc- ; Capita
193‘ :Fa“°r 3P15k9d :IWPOTt’: nlng 70(31 IEXPOFIS: for Resi- Food :Farmcrs: oi : Total . Pro- Yield tion Con-
Sh911 3 5 : Slotkfit SuPply: Seed dual Use Stock :SheIled:Cruahed. duc- per 011 ; Sump-
“) IThreshedt : : Stock tion cur Mea1 21.."
:Kernal - - . .
H111ion
__ Milligggrounde £21; Lbs. L23;
1909....: 66.67 237 21 -- 258 6 26 7 221 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.6
1910....: 66.67 2 6 12 -- 268 5 26 7 230 -- -- -- -- -- —- 2.;
1911....: 66.67 266 11 -- 255 5 27 8 215 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.3
1912....: 66.67 261 18 -- 259 6 28 7 210 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.2
1913....: 66.67 255 39 -- 296 7 31 6 250 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.5
1916....: 66.67 281 18 -- 299 5 35 7 252 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.5
1915....: 66.6? 321 26 -- 365 9 66 8 286 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.8
1916....: 66.67 666 62 -- 686 19 53 10 286 118 -- 118 60 36.2 5 2.8
1917....: 66 67 659 67 -- 726 2 55 10 636 215 -- 215 73 36.2 2 6.1
1913....: 66.67 631 28 -- 659 13 67 11 296 296 -- 296 101 36.2 ,2 2.3
1919....: 66.67 659 125 -- 586 11 50 11 686 7 17 23 8 35.8 16 6.5
1920....: 66.67 666 39 5 508 12 50 66 321 50 26 75 28 37.9 23 1.0
1921....: 66.67 652 15 6 666 12 66 38 293 56 21 7 30 39.7 23 2.
1922....: 66.67 "69 35 2 386 6 63 13 303 9 12 1 7 '6.2 16 2.
1923....: 66.67 379 69 -0- 623 3 56 - 8 365 1 11 12 6 35.3 4 :
1926....: 66.67 675 70 2 567 3 51 25 603 7 39 66 15 33.2 30 3.5
1925....: 66.67 681 38 19 538 6 7 5 618 5 28 33 12 35.? 22 3.6
1926....: 66.67 661 61 31 ‘ 513 6 57 16 398 1 22 23 8 36.2 16 3.3
1927....: 66.67 563 62 17 622 5 61 - 8 673 13 28 61 16 36.6 26 3.9
1923....: 66.67 563 35 50 668 5 63 16 655 5 33 37 13 36.7 26 3.;
1939 ..... 66 67 599 10 76 683 3 57 - 6 699 19 61 81 2. 33.6 6 6.1
1930 ..... 66 6‘ 665 6 67 516 2 69 6 392 8 38 66 16 33.5 3” 3.2
1931....: 66 6 :06 1 1 706 5 78 29 553 6 29 36 12 33.7 -2 6..
1932 ..... 6h 6 627 -0- 7 636 3 68 - 2 518 6 33 66 15 33.2 30 4.'
1933 ..... 66 6‘ 567 -0- 3 550 1 77 -17 655 2 28 30 10 2.6 20 33
1936....: 66.67 676 -U- 6 680 -0- 30 12 626 106 56 160 56 6.8 in 3.3
1935....: 66.67 ‘69 -0- 6 773 -0~ 86 29 516 106 39 163 66 6..1 92 6.0
1936. . . .: 66.6‘ 860 2 1 863 -0- 80 6 590 110 56 166 75 66.1 112'. ...n
193 ....: 66.6' 822 3 3 828 1 88 18 566 116 38 152 67 66.1 96 3 3
1938 ..... 65 ‘5 86 6 97 951 1 95 33 56? 171 26 197 85 63.1 130 . 3
1939 ..... 6+ 18 82 6 58 91 l 99 9 578 69 32 81 32 An.» nn 6 q
1966 ..... 67 67 1.192 6 166 .362 l 116 - 18 655 376 30 606 176 62.9 269 u H
1961....: 67 96 1.002 1 182 1,185 6 192 5 633 162 28 170 73 62.9 111 .
1962.. 68 58 1.506 3 129 1.636 3 217 13 906 250 38 288 123 62.6 184 h.‘
1963 ..... 67 37 1.666 1 211 1,678 23 171 31 886 288 6 329 160 62.6 J? 6.3
1966....: 69.37 1.666 38 260 1.72- 19 181 25 978 97 205 303 121 39.9 20- .0
1965....: 69.30 1,627 23 216 1.66) 6 176 17 896 63 216 2?? 111 39.” 183 h .
1966....: 69.06 1.606 -0- 256 1,663 173 186 20 766 179 189 369 15H 60 n 2;) . ”
1967 69.92 1,526 -0- 171 .697 337 176 36 656 201 133 336 139 61 1 263 .
1961....: 69.91 1,633 -O- 166 1.797 507 133 12 672 112 219 331 161 62.5 235 3 ‘
1'69 ..... 71.06 1.325 -0- 162 1,667 122 121 33 613 19 6 6 636 186 62.6 778 . 1
1930 ..... 70.37 1,632 -0- 166 1.576 68 113 39 690 39 603 662 186 62.1 295 1 .
1951....: 69.76 1.157 -0- 266 1.601 6 81 18 708 138 163 301 130 63.1 Jon .
1952....: 68.27 926 -0- 287 1,213 2 73 30 638 —- 133 133 55 6 .1 8. . 1
1953....: 68.91 1.085 -0- 287 1.372 165 76 26 701 -- 209 209 83 60 0 1? 2 .
1956....: 67.12 677 121 195 993 6 83 11 686 -- 72 72 26 3.56 6 6 '
1955....: 70.90 1.098 3 137 1.238 6 78 36 677 -- 113 183 75 60.9 1"9 3.1
195n....: 71.62 1,152 6 260 1,616 73 78 37 737 -- 186 136 In 61.1 13 4.5
1957....: 70.56 1,013 2 305 1,32 36 78 62 767 -- 168 1h8 07 39.9 10: 4
1958....; 70.56 1.300 1 238 1.519 66 782 -— 217 237 a
1939....: 1.136 351 1,685 50 -- i M

APPENDIX D

RAINFALL DATA FOR SEVEN MAJOR

PEANUT PRODUCING STATES

400

401

mn.1

no.~

ac.“ «c.: .E . xn

wo.~ "a.“ a“ A mm
90.. “9.“ a:.. .

_-
q
o
n
Pl
*0
4

I! II II I
II II II I
II II OI O

o~.~ so.“ ~m.c aw
o~.~ o” N co.n

on.¢ Om.o Oo.¢

un.~ no.q _o.a
oo.~ n¢.a on.n

“a
'4
‘l

.
n

.Js..sn .;:uae: .a.o~

06.94

no.3_

ac..—

40.:

._

..1.; :2..::

.‘H
.3.. ..3: 5:31;: .... $72?“

c~.: ~¢.n x0.~ .c.u

ea.q
do.m

fl_.a
on.u

.a;.-z: .u.afl-_.o. “z“

2.— lgcjc.) c. a. data

...Z .. ...; .1

v... 35.21....

rap: 3

.4: c.1795

qq.m

 

~no~

«no.

o~o~

mm?“ 4.0“ ” m~o~ . nu

.9mo~

@—

_uo~ U Quad

00:"

.-_=.uu4>

DHDM

mwowx1hpow

1 111'

tHDH . much .‘Pwo—

.uuzabunom ac. .u-aua< .p_:fi

J

hflow

6‘ -:o_.n.an:- ~nu.w3~:»o;uae toguo.on hou vauuonau -c_:_uh ac aazucu omn.o><--.~ man<~

.... ‘ ......m

.....c:< ¢_c. . Z

. ..c.

;

.r;

do.o.;
.I..._ ..

l CI 0
I OI .
0 II I

I II I
I I- I
0 II 0
I II 0

. n:.. ma
4 ,a.~ .4

1‘ Ili‘l‘lll'l‘l'l’o‘

h%bw . Hwbw

_cuhr-«w

4 ...

.u

. C

. .. ~12

I.

ESLTEJV. .12...:.> .. 3:32.15

a:

xu.._;.. ..fl >
{5,}, ..‘hTQ
m‘m..: _ ..uaur«r
J. ...A... . a
.<.a.n ..
J. hunt...‘U

‘—.A .1:

. ~192ML2I VV ..21 Cl.

f1...o .fp...r<

.- .;. 3m

.. ...:m
-. .....h ”7n
-- _‘.“m:..tv
n1... #2:... u... I
A.“ .,>“
.u .4... A. ....
.- E...» ...:

.. :_u‘:e.m
.. 1:2..F.
.- .....LQU

a £7,473;
3...» ,..,<

.. xunram
.. .3...me
.. ;.;_~:m
-- v.;~_L.”Ew
.....a.l_>c:3:
uc>~

.. «MP-Lao:
:2

u. c.41ce_m
u- 37.15:.

OI mar—F;

-. :.:.....J
H~v.:_;<

.....a......><

.- xaqnam
.- xauhzm
-- ‘«:__:n
.. vau.—L._Lm
aach>czsz
56>—

.u flgahxazx
I- qvcr._g::
-- c.<4:e.m
-. a._:aem
-- czbnsu
>E;fi

 

DMD»

‘1

uDPH

arc_h<kufipm

402

oa.~

o~.o

_o.0

.35

40.0

Oo.~

4o.~

u~.n

oA.~

No.n
OO.H

an.“

m_.o

oo.-

0n.m

n.w
om.n

ow.~
_n.n
a~.n

a~.—~
ca.n

n~.o

ao.-

ao.¢_
~N.~—
no.n—

o~.__
~o.-
~0.o

oo.n

no.“
n«.-
~N.0

«q.o~ oQ.N ao.n ~n.n

an.n no.c 00..

nn.. on.n «a.»

oo.~ oo.n oc.c

so.N ON.N Oo.¢

q~.o om.- on.o

Oc.o n~.n_ om.o

00.0 ~Q.n . m_.n

salua><

non-an
Eu.
anomalm
322.11
Bud-Ihalac
nov—
:31...
1'23.
aa~alnun
cube-Ii
cousin
"anal-hula

ouc..»<

louqaa
zuuam
A~ouuau
v.0.uauuln
«vaulsalau
nov—
-oao;on
slnuuol
34.13...
1.9.5
OOuqu
urnauad

uncuotd

 

 

mwo~

amo—

o¢ou

“EH

nqoa u

 

 

0&0“ u mnog ” «nag

 

 

.voscuaoou --.. nan<~

403

 

mo.~ oo.~
do.m mn.~
fin. mo.~
o«.~ mm.”
n¢.~ we.“
wa.~ ¢~.~
so.“ ~¢.~
am.m mn.n
hm.m «q.n
mn.o~ Em.¢
oo.~ om.n
oo.a ~n.~
m~.¢ ac.“
mm.o «o.n
nq.n m~.~
no.“ o~.q
~¢.o ~¢.N
-.m hm.~
No.m Hm.~
OM.» nm.n
so.m om.m
om.n an.~
om.m mo.“
mm.m ma.“
.nn nmm~ ” NHO~

mm.n

ow.~
o~.~

oo.o
mo.n

¢M.m
n~.#

o~.o

mm.0~
_o.n
«o.m
a~.m
oo.o
n¢.~
ON.N

ca.“

no.a
qo.

~N.~
m~.~
so.
Om.~
on.

mn.m
ou.n
oo.n
no.0
mn.~
n¢.~
~q.~
om.~

 

~m¢~ “ chog “ mmom H wmofl

 

 

 

 

 

 

H~.n oo.n~ a~.~ on. No.~ -.- mm.¢ -.~ om.n ~¢.n ~o.~ -.¢ OH.O “q.n NN.H “m.n «n.o -.a mo.~ NN.N ON.“ uwuhw><
mm.m Aq.q~ “n.“ ¢_.~ oo.~ Hn.- co.n ao.n #¢.4 ”o.m o¢.~ ~q.a o¢.n~ o~.n do.m -- -- -- -- -- -- «scams
0H.~ no.n~ ms.“ No. nn.~ mo.n~ mo.N no. am.~ o0.” mo.~ oo.o _o.¢ o~.¢ co." o~.n mn.q ¢m.¢ No.n ca." Hq.~ conawz.
nn nn nu nn nu nn fi~.m mm.~ om.n nn nn nnn nn nn nn n- nn nn nn nu n- acumcflnnua
m~.c m~.H~ EN.“ No. mo.fi no.“ oo.¢ am.” we.“ EN.” a~.~ Nh.~ oo.- mo.~ am.n nq.n NN.N m~.m n~.q oo.~ om. ouonhaw
om.“ ~m.o ¢m.~ Rn.H om.~ m~.a HO.O co. o¢.~ no." mm. ~n.~ g~.o ¢~.n mm.~ mq.n cm.m no.0 ah.” ”m.~ ma.“ xuuz chfiuoum
«0.0 mn.n~ ~o.~ o“. 40.” mo.m~ o_.~ «a. o~.n oa.n .Ha._ mm.n co.“ Gn.¢ no.~ mo.~ mn.m m~.m mm. mm. -- “ago: xxuom
H~.n om.- Eq.n me. am.“ OH.OH o~.o m¢.~ B~.m o~.o om.~ so.“ n_.4~ no.~ -.¢ N~.m _n.m oo.q mo.¢ no.0 OO.N aflfifi>c-uo
o~.¢ o~.m~ OO.N o~.~ OO.N o~.- no.0 mm.d "a.” oq.m co.~ o~.¢ oq.h H~.n No.m o¢.~ m~.m hm.m on.H no.H -- vflofiwcm
ofi.o om.q~ mc.n oo.~ oe.~ on.“ m¢.~ ON.N ~n.n mn.n oo.fl om.e om.- Na.” OO.N oo.q ow.“ mm.m mm.q m¢.~ mm.” caucoum
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- oo.~ ~m.¢ no.“ o~.~ «o.q ¢_.o o~.n om.n ~0.n om.o o¢.¢ qo.~ an. OO.H caouufimqm
. "meXMHmmm
do.n ma.n ad.“ no.n om.n q~.m om.¢ o~.m mo.~ mo.m ~m.¢ n~.m mo.n an.m ho.n no.” o~.~ H~.~ «m.m No.“ N~.m unsha><
oo.n ON.N o¢.m o¢.m mo.¢ -.m “m.o No.0 Km.n ao.o~ as.” an.o~ om.m mm.m o~.m -- -- -- -- -- -- «coca»:
a¢.¢ o¢.n qw.~ mm.n um.~ om.~ mH.n w~.c mm.~ oc.¢ -.o oo.m no.“ ah.n hm.m om.q om.~ Nm.~ od.¢ ao.n ~¢.m conga:
nn nn nn nn nn nn n~.o @o.m ON.N nu nn un nu nu un nu nn uu nu nn nn COuwcaLmuB
No.n o~.q m~.m oo.n ¢¢.m ~e.¢ no.” o¢.n m~.~ me.“ c¢.m nq.a n~.~ Em.o ma.n NH.m oq.q no.¢ o~.m No.0 ao.o ouonuqy
mm.~ mo.n an.» m~.n ~m.~ on.“ No.n as.“ oh.~ on.¢ no.“ oo.~ hm.n nn.q o~.~ cg." OO.N «n.~ mo.n co.m No.0 xuwz chfiuoUm
ON.N 00.0 o~.o oo.q o¢.q -.n on.“ HN.H om.” on.“ co.» ma.” on.“ N~.q o~.n on. co.n mm.~ om.“ -.¢ -- ”ego: xxuom
qo.¢ Am;m o~.n h¢.¢ «o.H a~.m mo.¢ m~.q on." on.m oo.e ma.~ o¢.m OH.O an.“ m~.n nq.m m~.n mm.n om.“ mo.~ ofifiq>=~ouu
no.¢ "o.¢ Nh.m Nm.n oa.m “H.q ON.O a~.¢ o¢.~ oo.¢ «a.n ~¢.q mg." “0.4 mm.m co.” ~m.a oh.~ no.m -.o -- ofiafiwcm
mo.~ o~.n fin.m mn.n mo.o Nm.o m~.¢ co.“ cm.~ m~.o Kn.“ mo.~H oo.¢ cm.n O¢.~ Nm.m mm.m oo. mo.c m~.m 00.0 caucuvm
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- No.5 OO.N no.m No.n oo.~ m~.o mm.o mm.n ~¢.~ qn.~ oo.m oo.w oa.¢ mm.m czouudmam
“Hm203<
~n.m om.a q~.q ~m.q mo.q ”m.o Em.o mo.“ o~.n a¢.o Em.~H no.0 ~e.od ca.“ mm.q ee.o n~.m o~.m oq.¢ mq.¢ m~.m umauu><
om.m m~.n NN.” o¢.m -.n o~.o~ 5;.m mo.m on.o co.» Hm.o HN.- oh.mH ~¢.~ as.“ -- -- -- -- -- -- guano:
~m.¢ ~n.¢ co." "o.H ~¢.¢ -.m n~.o o~.o~ m~.m no.m mn.nd ~m.« m~.n~ Hm.o e~.n Ho.a oo.e ao.~ N~.m mo.~ No." covfiea
nn nn nn n- nn un mm.w ON.N m~.~ nn nn nn nn nn nu nn nn nu nn nu nn caumcHLmqa
“m.c am.o Hm.o mo.m mm.o mo.m mo.n -.o m~.m oh.“ hm.o~ om.q ~n.o no.“ “N.” En.“ De.“ ho.q m¢.m oh.“ ho.q chonhah
hm.¢ ~n.¢ m~.q ¢o.~ om.m q".m a0.“ m~.¢ NN.N no.a ¢o.o~ nd.¢ oo.m an.“ Ho.¢ 00.0 am.c m~.~ Nm.n nm.¢ mH.¢ Jumz ccqguoum
hm.o no.“ mm.c o~.n mm.H o¢.« ~¢.~ «n.o «o.n ~n.¢ mm.- on.“ «a.o ow.m an.“ oq.m m~.e no.~ mo.n om.q -- ”ago: xxuoz
“G.“ om.¢ 0m.¢ #0.; mo.m mo.o mm.“ o¢.¢ o~.c om.m oo.o o”.o mo.- on.» oo.¢ hm.o mm.n oh.n mo.q "H.m o~.e~ og_«>=uu.u
mm.m “q.n oo.~ n~.q HN.H no.o m~.¢ no.» on.“ NN.O o~.n~ we.“ nd.o no.“ n~.q «0.0 mo.e mn.~ no.n ofl.n -- nfiofiucm
m~.m OO.O mm.o co.“ ow.o om.m em.o o~.H~ mfl.n ON.N nn.¢~ m~.o o~.n~ om.n n¢.¢ oo.m an.c m¢.¢ oa.~ om.n o~.¢ caucwvm
-- -- -- -- -- -- -. Nfl.- oH.n nn.o oo.n~ n~.m A~.ofl o~.o ¢H.n oo.m mm.m na.n no.0 mm.n ME.~ czouofiwam
“>gpn
“Nod omod muod “ qwofl nmmfl ” “Nod " Emma cmofi ” ¢~¢H H oHoH “ “Hafi ”nmawfi mdww ” «Hod " mmwfi H Naod ” wdod oHoHanmon u n monF<ammpm
.anoanoood .ncuflou-u zuuoz .uonaounom we. .unsms< .xasn

c“ acoEu-unnao «godmOEOEOwuoe vouuoaoo ho“

vouuoaou fifiawcuau uo ao;uc« owouo><nn.~ mqm<w

404

 

 

 

 

 

 

mm.n oq.~ m~.o ~m.m NN.OE cm.~ nfi.c ao.n n¢.~ ~o.q ¢n.m 00.4 oh.n w~.n mm.“ an.“ ac." hn.n on.“ nN.~ mm.~ ~n.o oo.~ no.~ ~n.m nn.m uwuuo><
.u .n nn -- -n nn -n nu nn un nn nu nn nu nu .36 on. 3... «ad 24 NN.N 3.2 34 :3 SJ 8..“ 2.23:
NN.; ow. o~.m oo.n OO.N no." n~.¢ n~.~ oa.~ o¢.o an.c H~.¢ h~.¢ co.“ us.» on.o «n.n oo.n ma. nn.~ oc.~ «0.0 os.n «o.d o~.o no.n gouge:
no.q on N o~.o ~n.m mc.m~ mo.~ no.“ ~o.¢ OO.H no.e as.“ -.n am.c~ on.“ nn un nu nu nn nn_ nn.n wo.o nn nu nn nn cauucaanh
mo.~ oq.H oq.o Am.m q¢.- o¢.H ma.c ~o.~ o~.N o¢.n oo.¢ a~.n on.o no.c an.o oo.o we.“ nn.~ so.” oe.n an." oo.o o~.~ No. o¢.n no.c cuonu-H
on.n no. no.n om.m oo.- Ho.H mo.c ~c.~ co. ow.~ od.< mm.n no.“ “9.: o~.o on.“ oc.~ oo.n no. oo.~ o~.~ ~c.o o~.n mn.~ nn.m no.5 goo: ch~uoum
.24 NN.H no.0 S; 36 .24 8..” 3.~ 24. 8... 3.“ SJ nu nn .. nn -n n. n- n- n- n- -n n- n- n- 252.. .28..
~m.¢ m~.n -.o oo.n no.n_ an.“ on.¢ a~.o nu. «o.c nn.n oo.c ~o.- o¢.o nu.“ no.0 ¢¢.N as.” nu. ma." on.~ o~.o ~n.~ hn.u mq.c no.“ o-~>=uouo
oo.q oh. o~.c mo.q o¢.o c~.~ do.~ ~¢.~ oc. o~.~ oo.n un.n o~.n no.n on.» an.o do.~ on.c co. oe.~ mm.” co.n o¢.~ an. no.0 no.n vguuucu
~n.n o~.~ cm.“ om.m m~.o~ ofi.n mo.n NN.N Na." an.“ 00.0 00.: an.“ an.m Ho.n nn.o ~q. Au.“ on.~ no.~ ma." -.- o¢.~ no.~ ~¢.c no.4 caucouu
nn nu nn un un un nn nn nu nu nu nn nu nn . nu nu nn nn un nu nn nu nn nu nn nu cucuoaucu
"munxuhkum

«m.n so.o mH.¢ nn.m cm.- ~m.¢ -.n o¢.m «n.n ~o.~ o~.o do.¢ Hm.c no.n ~o.n o~.n nn.~ «n.n an.a ow.- an.“ EH.“ mo.n oa.~ m~.n mn.o usuuo><
.. nu nn nu n- nn .nn nu nu nu nn nu nn nu un no.n «a. co.» n~.~ No.- no.n oo.< on.n -.~ om.n no.o «coco:
co.m no.m m~.n oo.n o¢.m ~n.~ en.n mo.c 00.4 on.o mn.m ~n.m ¢¢.~ o~.n a~.n a«.n an. co.n no.n Ac.n~ n¢.n~ cc. oo.o n¢.¢ e~.o -.n aovdon
om.q on.o mn.e qfl.¢ no.nfi n~.¢ mm.o m~.o on.n no.” oo.n om.~ oo.n nu un nn nn nu nn nu en.¢ on.“ nn u nn un . nn cauncfizons
n~.o oo.- -.o NH.O Eo.n~ oo.o m~.n a~.~a o~.~ an.n ~n.o cm.c on.¢ oo.c no.q no.“ on. c~.o on.“ «E.c~ nn.o nu.” no." o~.~ u<.n on.o anonuua
no.~ mm.o mo.q on.m no.~_ cm.n oo.n gn.o oo.n nm.~ o~.o oo.c q~.¢ o¢.n ~n.n no.n ma.“ oo.o oe.n oo.- n~.n odwu oo.¢ NN.N #o.n -.¢ sou: vacuuoom
mafin mm.: 09.» :3 2.: 83‘ «mi. mod «5..» c~.~ 00.: 36 nu nu nu nu nu nu nn nn nn. un un nu nn nn 250: 3.001.
~o.¢ no.0 no.0 mo.n oo.- on.H ao.4 ~o.og <w.~ o~.~ o~.~ nn oo.¢ no.¢ mu.“ co.” um.o oo.¢ ~o.~ o¢.o fig.“ co. on.n NN.N no.0 mo.n o~_a>:ouuo
mq.n Hm.“ om.~ mo.m No.0 mo.n o~.¢ mw.oH on.n oo. ed.o~ «A.c no.~ no.~ oo.¢ oc.n no. no.9 mn.¢ no.4“ no.5 nn.n “A.“ n~.¢ no.“ n~.o v~oaucm
~m.¢ o¢.o -.~ cm.m mm.nd o~.o do.“ no.n no.c om.n c~.n~. an.~ co.“ ~¢.¢ n~.o No.n .on.n o~.~ cm.n no.m n~.o~ <m.n nc.o Ed.n na.~ no.5 caucuuuvu
n- nn un nn n- nn nn nu nn nu nu nn uu nn un un nn nn nu nn nu un nn nn nn nn an an
HHwDU=<

-._H oq.n oo.~ -.o No.0 mu.n nn.~ om.m so.n -.a oo.o on.¢ os.m ¢~.o no.o~ -.o 50.0 no.n «~.n m~.¢ ~o.o~ n¢.o oo.o m~.o «o.o ma." cucuo><
un nn nn nn nu nn nn nn nn nu n- nn nu nn nu hm.“ ON.O ~o.n ~¢.c No.n an.o do.o sn.n no.“ o~.o a~.o dcocoz
mo.- mo.a qm.n H~.m ¢¢.~ do.~ an. ac.“ no.4 na.o no.~ -.¢ ~n.¢ on.m mm.» on.n ac.o ~n.¢ o~.o ¢~.c ~o.o~ no.“ ¢~.¢ c¢.n «a.o o~.o cacao:
nq.N~ mo.m cm.~ w¢.o~ q~.o~ no.¢ ~m.¢ nm.m co.h o~.- nu mm.m -.m un nu un nu nn un un an.“ oc.s nu un un nn cauucazniz
00.0 mm.~ oo.n on.“ No.q on.¢ wo.~ 05.0 n~.n no.c N~.n nn.n no.0 oo.~ do.- o¢.n ~o.c no.e o¢.o sm.¢ oo.o no.n -.< oo.- o~.o ~¢.~ ouonuuh
no.0" qo.~ H~.~ oo.m no.~ H~.n NN.H oo.n o~.q NE.“ ¢o.o oe.¢ nn.< no.0 Ho.N~ no.0 -.o ~o.~ -.o “5.0 an.o on.c -.o no.0 oc.o no.“ Joe: vanguOum
mo.q~ on.fi no.~ no.nq -.om -.n o¢.~ mo.HH no.n o~.n m~.¢ no.¢ nu nn nu nn nu nu nu nn un nu nn nn nn nn acne: axooz
8.2 :5 3; 9.: 2... 2.4 34 36 :2 no... 34 -n 8.0 2.2 8; 8.0 on.“ 26 35 SA 2;: 3; 26 :6 2.2 no.» 3:2.qu
m~.o~ m~.n Kw.n cm.“ mH.n qq.~ on. -.m m~.~ 00.0 -.o nu.~ on.n -.e ma.“ oo.o oe.o No.n we.» No.n "9.0 u~.o no.” sn.o an.o no.“ vanaucw
Om.o oo.q oo.~ mo.o oo.n o~.m Ho. o~.m no.~ s~.¢~ «n.n mm.n on.o <0.“ Hm.n~ o¢.n o~.o Au.n oo.n nn.~ on.~fl so.“ no.- o~.o~ oo.o~ "o.“ canmwflmvm
uu uu nu uu uu uu nu uu In II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II 1w
In- Ju :52.
32 H 32 U :2 ” £2 Hflhflnuuwnmlflnnuxlmflnulmi “ an?” 82 u 3.2 U 32 u G: u 33 n 33 u 32 u 32 n 32 n 32 u 32 n :2 u 82 n :2 u 32 H 22 ".5: " «83¢»QO

vascuuBOUnnN canah

tucus

 

 

 

 

 

:0 0:005100090 0-uuuo0ouOOuul 005000.. 505 00559005 00.5u0cu 50 000065 oucuc><nn.5 uAn<5

 

 

00.0 55.0 50.5 50.0 05.0 05.5 00.0 00.0 50.0 50.00 05.0 50.0 00.50 50.5 00.0 05.0 00.0 05.0 uwuuu><
nn nu nu un nu nn nn nn nu un nn nn un nu nu nn .nn un 8:0 0.530.002
55.0 05.0 50.0 50.5 05.0 50.0 00.0 05.0 nu un nu nn nu nu nn nn 50.5 nn :05005
nu nu nu nu nu nu nn nn nn nu nu nn nu nu un nn 00.5 00.5 c-wuoz
00.0 00.0 05.0 05.5 00.5 00.5 05.5 05.0 50.5 50.5 00.5 00.0 00.50 05.0 00.0 00.0 50.0 00.0 uaanuucox
.. nn n- n- n. n. nn n- nn nn 00.5 50.0 05.00 8.5 05.0 05.5 00.5 05.0 5.353
nn nn nu un nn nu un un nn nn nn nn un nu nn nn nu un 000: nvquwo:
00.0 00.0 05.5 55.0 05.0 05.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 00.0 05.5 05.0 55.00 00.0 05.0 50.0 50.5 00.5 0000>nc0xziz
00.5 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 50.0 50.0 50.5 00.0 50.50 00.0 55.0 00.55 05.5 50.0 00.5 00.5 00.0 50:010 ouch
00.5 50.5 50.5 nu un nn nn nu nn nu un 00.0 nu nn nn nu -n -n 3365305
55.00 05.5 00.5 00.0 00.5 55.0 05.5 00.0 00.0 00.0 50.5 00500 00.00 00.0 00.5 55.0 .05.5 00.0 cuaunnu
nu nn nu nn nu un nn un nn nn nn nn uu nn nn nn nu nn 0000>con0acoa
nu nn nn nn un nu nu nu nn uu nn un un nu nn ul nu nn 00.3.0
nn -n -n nn nn nn nn nn nn nn nn nu un nn nn nn 00.0 05.0 3.3520
un nn nn nu nu nn nn un nn nu nu nu nu nn nu nn nn nu 0000.000
nn n- nn un nu nnn un nu nn nn nn nn nn nn nn n.n nn nn 100.50
50.5 55.5 nn nn nu nu nn n- nn nu nn nn nu nn nu nn nn nn 9:5
05.0 00.5 00.5 00.0 50.0 05.00 50.5 50.0 05.5 05.00 50.0 00.0 00.50 00.5 00.0 50.0 05.0 00.0 uo0uan
05.0 50.5 00.0 50.0 00.0 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 00.00 00.5 55.0 55.05 50.5 nu nn 00.5 00.5 5000-00
00.0 05.5 50.0 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.50 50.5 05.0 00.00 55.5 00.0 05.0 05.0 05.0 omv0u0a0nn
05.0 50.5 05.0 50.0 05.0 00.5 55.5 00.0 00.0 50.50 50.0 50.5 00.50 00.5 00.0 00.5 50.5 50.5 nau0u¢a<
05.0 00.0 55.0 50.0 00.0 00.00 05.0 00.0 00.0 55.0 05.0 05.0 00.05 50.0 00.0 00.0 05.0 00.0 5cun0<
00.50 05.0 00.5 05.0 05.5 05.0 50.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.5 00.0 05.00 50.0 50.50 50.0 00.5 55.0 ~000>000<
.52.

00.5 00.0 05.0 00.0 50.0 50.0 00.0 50.0 05.5 50.0 55.0 50.5 05.0 05.5 00.0 00.0 50.5 00.5 ownuo><
un nu nu nu nu nu nu nu nu nn nn nn un nu nu nn nn u. 5.0 05:50.50:
55.0 50.5 55.5 55.0 3.5 3.0 55.5 8.5 nu nn nn nn nn nn nn nn 8.5 .n 83:.
nu . nu nn nn nn nn nn nn nu nn nu nu nu nu nn un 05.5 05.0 0.500:
00.0 ~0.0 00.5 55.0 00.5 00.0 05.0 00.0 00.5 05.0 55.5 00.5 05.5 00.0 00.0 50.0 50.0 05.5 «3:590:02
nn un nn nn nn nu nn nn nu nu 00.5 05.5 00.0 00.0 50.5 00.0 00.0 05.0 c010830
nn nn un nn un nu nn un nu nn un nu nn nu un nn nn nn 00.0: avg-0.300:
05.5 n00.0 05.5 00.0 00.0 55.0 05.5 00.0 00.5 00.0 05.5 50.5 00.0 00.0 50.5 50.0. 50.0 55.5 20035.16:
55.5 55.5 00.5 50.0 00.5 05.0. 55.0 50.0 50.0 55.0 00.0 50.5 50.0 05. 55.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 358 :20
2.5 2.5 50.5 nn nn nn nn nn nn nn 8.0 00. nn nu nn nn nn nn 33303:
55.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.5 55.0 00.0 00.5 05.50 00.0 5.5.5 50.0 00.0 50.0 00.0 00.0 55.0 clan-u
un nn nu un nn II II II II II II II II II II In In In 000520-5152:—
un uu nu II II II II II II .II II II II II II II In II 60030
n. un nn nn -n nn nn nn nn nn un nn nn un nn nn 55.0 55.0 335:0
nu nu un nn nn un nn nn nn un nu nn nu nn nu nn nn nu 00.0.5050
nu nn nu nn nu nn nu un un nn nn un nu nn nn nn nn nn 0000650
00.5 05.: nn -n n. nu nn nn nn un nu nn nn nn nn nn nn nu 3:0
05.0 00.5 00.0 05.0 00.5 55.0 00.5 50.0 00.5 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.0 05.0 55.00 50.5 50.0 .500520
00.5 00.5 55.5 50.5 55.5 50.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 55.0 05.5 00.5 50.0 00.5 un nn 50.0 05.0 50ox-00
50. 55.0 55.0 50.0 00.0 05.0 00.00 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.5 00.5 50.0 000.5 00.0 05.5 00.5 50.0 «5335.5
3.5 05.0 50.0 05.0 00.0 00.5 55.0 00.0 05.5 50.0 50.0 05.0 00.5 50.0 00.0 55.5 00.5 50.5 33522
00. 00.0 50.0 05.5 55.0 50.0 55.0 50.5 00.5 00.0 05.0 00.0 50.5 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 50.0 5:300
55.5 50.5 00.0 05.0 00.0 50.5 00.0 50.0 00.5 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 05.0 05.5 00.5 00.5 00.5 30030.2
unnl “5205
. 5500 5500 0500 0500 5500 0500 n 5500 5500 n 0500 n 0500 5 000 n 0000 n 5000 n 0000 n 0000 n 5000 n 5000 0000 n 0000 mm005055000

«550-5050 .nuauono .uuaua5 no. .5035 5.:35 .

406

 

 

55.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.5 50.5 00.5 00.0 50.0 00.0 05.0 00.5 05.0 00.5 05.0 00.0 00.0 55.0 00.5 00.0 55.0 05.0 00.0 50.0 00.0 .0-uo><
nn n- -n -n 05.0 50.5 50.00 u- n- n- nu nn nn nn -n nn nn nu un nu nn nn nn un .n nn 300 00:00ooa
05.0 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.5 55.5 00.5 00.5 00.50 50.5 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.00 50.0 50.5 00.5 00.0 50.00 50.5 50.5 05.5 05.5 00000 55.5 couu05
50.0 50.0 n. 55.5 nn nn un nu nn nn n -u -n nn un nu un nn nu nu nu nn nu nn nn nn nn c0000:
00.0 50.00 05.5 00.5 05.00 50.0 05.5 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.5 50.00 55.0 50.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 05.5 00.0 00.5 00.5 00.0 50.0 50.0 00.5 00.5 nauseocoz
55.0 50.0 50.0 -n -n -- n- n. -n -- n- nn -u nu .n nn nu -n nu nn .n un nn -n nn nu 0005530
nn nn 50.00 00.5 00.0 00. 05.0 05.5 50.5 50.0 55.0 50.0 00.5 05.00 00.0 05.0 00.0 05.5 50.5 50.0 nn nu uu un nu .n 000: 005-0000
55.0 05.5 55.0 05.0 05.0 05.0 05.5 05.0 00.0 nn 05.5 50.5 50.5 00.0 05.0 55.5 05.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 05.5 55.5 00.5 55.0 05.0 00.5 0000>0C0xanz
00.0 55.0 05.0 00.0 00.5 00.5 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 55.0 00.50 05.5 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 05.0 00.0 00.5 00.5 55.50 05.5 05.0 50.0 00.0 0~c0su 0000
00.0 50.0 50.0 00.5 00.0 00.5 50.0 50.0 50.0 00.0 nu 00.0 00.0 nu 05.00 00.5 50.0 55.5 00.0 05.0 00.0 00.5 .50.5 00.0 50.0 05.0 0000000000
00.5 05.0 50.5 50.0 05.0 50.5 00.0 00.5 00.5 00.0 05.0 00.0 00.5 50.0 05.0 05.0 50.0 00.5 00.5 00.0 05.5 00.0 05.0 00. 00.5 50.0 :qeuq-m
05.0 00.0 00.0 55.0 00.0 05.5 50.5 00.0 50.0 50.0 00.0 05.50 n- nn 55.0 50.0 55.0 05.0 nn nn nn nn n- nu nn -- 9000>=oa0uco0
50.0 55.0 05.0 50.0 00.0 05.0 0.5 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 un nn .n nn nu nn -- coon-0
00.0 50.0 00.5 05.0 05.0 00.0 50.0 00.0 05.0 00.0 05.5 nn 05.0 00.0 05.00 nu .nu nu nl nn nu nu nu un nn nn 05005030
nn 05.0 nn 50.0 05.5 00.5 00.0 55.0 00.5 50.0 50.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 50.0 00.5 00.5 05.5 55.0 50.0 55.5 00.0 55.00 50.5 05.5 00.0 0000000
00.0 05.0 05.5 55.00 50.5 00.5 05.5 00.5 50.0 00.0 00.0 55.0 05.5 00.5 00.0 05.0 50.0 05.5 05.0 00.0 05.5 55.0 n. -n nn nn .000e-u
50.0 00.5 50.0 00.5 00.0 50.0 00.0 50.0 05.5 50.0 05.0 50.00 55.5 50.0 00.0 50.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 50.0 05.0 00.0 50.5 00.5 00.00 55.5 0.000
00.5 00.5 00.0 00.0 50.0 00.5 05.00 00.0 05.0 00.0 50.0 50.00 nu 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 nn nu un nn -u nu nn -n .. “000:0
50.0 05.0 50.0 05.0 50.50 00.0 50.5 00.0 50.0 05.00 00.0 05.00 50.0 50.5 50.0 00.0 50.5 00.0 50.0 05.0 50.0 00.0 05.0 55.0 50.00 00.0 5000.00
05.5 05.5 00.0 00.5 50.00 05.00 00.0 00.5 00.5 05.0 50.0 50.0 05.0 50.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 50.0 00.0 00.5 50.0 50.5 00.0 0000000000
5o.5 00.0 05.5 00.5 00.0 05.0 00.5 50.0 50.0 00.0 05.5 00.0 00.5 05.0 00.5 50.0 05.0 05.5 05.0 50.5 50.5 50.0 00.0 05.0 05.5 00.0 .au0uua<
00.5 05.0 05.0 50.0 00.5 00.0 05.0 00.5 55.5 00.5 00.5 00.0 00.5 50.0 50.50 50.5 05.5 50.5 05.5 55.0 00.0 00.5 05.0 50.0 50.0 00.5 500000
55.0 50.5 05.0 05.5 00.0 00.0 50.5 50.0 00.0 50.0 05.0 50.0 00.0 05.0 05.5 00.5 00.5 50.5 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.5 50.5 00.5 00.00 00.0 0000>000<
“>000

05.5 55.0 00.0 00.5 05.5 50.5 05.0 00.5 00.5 05.5 50.0 55.5 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 50.0 05.5 55.0 00.0 05.0 00.0 00.0 05.5 00.5 05.0 o0auo>¢

nn nu nn nu 00.5 nu 00.5 -n nu nu nu un un nn uu nu nu nn nn nn un nn. un un nu nu Eva nuauvooa
00.0 50.0 00.0 55.0 50.5 00.0 50.0 00.0 50.5 50.5 00.5 50.5 00.0 05.0 00.0 05.5 50.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 55.0 00.5 00.5 50. 50.5 000005
00.5 00.0 -n 50.0 00.5 nn nu -n nn u- nn nn nu nu nn nu nn un nn nn nn nn nn nn n. un 00000:
05.0 00.0 00.5 00.5 55.5 50.0 05.0 00.5 00.5 00.5 50.5 55.0 05.5 00.5 00.5 00. 00.5 00.5 00.0 05.0 00.0 05.0 00.5 50.5 50.5 00.5 0:50.000:
50.5 00.0 05.0 nu un nu nn nu nn un nn nn nn nu nu nu nu nn nu un un nn nn nn nn nn c000a00
nn nu 00.5 05.0 00.5 55.0 05.0 00.5 00.5 50.5 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.5 50.0 55.0 55.5 05.00 05.0 55.5 nu nn nn un nu nu 000: 005.00 x
00.0 00.5 05.0 05.5 00.0 00.5 50.5 00.5 00.0 00.5 00.0 50.5 05.0. 00.5 50.0 00.0 55.5 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 05.0 05.0 50.0 «000:0000000
00.0 55.5 50.5 05.5 00.0 50.5 00.0 05.5 05.0 00.5 00.5 00.0 nn 00.0 00.5 05.5 00.0 00.00 00.5 55.5 00.0 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 50.0 0000-0 0000
00.5 00.5 55.0 05.0. 55.5 00.0 00.5 50.0 00. 00.5 50.5 05.0 00.5 00.5 05.5 50.5 55.0 55.0 00.0 00.5 50.0 50.0 55.0 05.5 55.5 00.5 0005-05000
05.0 05.5 00.0 55.5 05.5 50.5 00.5 05.0 00.0 00.0 05.5 05.0 05.0 00.5 05.5 05.5 50.0 50.0 00.0 0 .0 50.5 00.0 00.0 55.0 55.0 05.5 00:00.0
55.0 50.0 00.5 55.0 00.0 00.5 00.0 00. 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 nu nn 55.5 00.0 55.0 00.00 un nn nn nu nu nu nu un 0000>=ou01c00
50.5 00.0 00.5 00.5 55.5 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 05.5 55.5 05.5 55.0 55.5 00.0 50.0 00.0 55.0 nn nn nn un . un nu nn un 0003-0
50.5 50.0 05.5 00.5 05.5 05.5 50.0 50.5 00.5 00.5 00.5 nn 55.0 00.0 00.5 nu uu nu nu nu nu nn nu un nn nn 00.00030
00.5 05.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 50.0 55.5 50.0 00.0 05.5 .05.0 05.5 05.5 50.5 00.0 05.5 00.5 05.0 00.0 00.5 50.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 05.0 nn 0000000
00.0 50.5 00.0 00.5 00.5 55. 00.0 50.5 nn 05.5 50.0 05.5 00.5 05.5 55.0 55.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.0 55.0 00.5 nn nu nn. nn 0000310
00.0 55.5 55.0 50.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 55.0 00.0 55.0 00.0 05.5 50.0 50.0 00.5 05.5 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.0 55.0 50.5 00.5 50.0 00.0 00.0 00000
00.0 00.0 50.0 00.5 05.5 05. 00.0 00.5 nu 00.0 55.0 nu 00.5 50.0 05.5 50.0 00.5 nn nu nu un nu uu nu nu nu 500030
50.0 05.0 00.0 00.0 50.5 05.5 00.5 00. 05.5 05.0 00.0 00.5 00.0 00.0 55.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 05.5 05.0 00.5 00.5 05.5 00.5 05.0 05.0 5000000
00.0 05.0 50.0 50.5 05.0 05.5 00.0 00.5 un 55.0 50.5 00.0 00.0 00.0 50.0 50.0 00.5 50.0 55.0 05.0 05.50 00.0 00.0 50.5 00.5 05.0 o0v0unc010
05.5 50.0 50.5 00.5 00.0 00.0 55.0 00.5 00.5 00.5 00.0 05.0 05.0 00.0 00.5 05. 00.5 50.0 05.00 00.5 05.5 00.0 00.5 00.0 50.0 05.0 oao0uoa<
00.0 00.5 00.5 50.5 05.5 00.5 00.0 00.0 00.5 00.5 50.0 50.0 00.5 55.5 00.5 50.0 00.0 00.0 50.0 50.5 00.0 00.0 00.5 00.5 00. 50.0 5ccn0<
50.0 00.5 05.0 00.5 00.5 50. 00.5 55.0 00.0 00.0 50.5 00.5 00.5 00.5 50.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 05.0 05.0 05.0 00.0 50.0 50.5 50.0 05.5 0000>unn<
. nnuln nn nun un. Human
F5050 . 002 502 0050 002 u .00.: 502 502 0 0050 0 000.0 32 350 . 505.0 n 0000 0 000600 5050 u 002 u 300 n 5.52 n 0500 u 552 n 052 0 055.0 0 052 0 0085.003

 

 

 

 

voac0ucouuu5 00005

407

 

 

 

 

 

 

oo.n no.0” No.0 mn.~ 0o.N 00.0 no.0 no.0 07m 00..» 00.0 00.0 :0 2.0 n~.0 3.0 ~06 05.0 00.0 o0.0 oon ¢~.n «To 0o.n ~90 0N0 omuuo><
-- -- -. .. on.n -.q on.“ -u -- u- -- u- -- u- -u -u .. .. uu .. - u. u- -u u- u- .. aqo uuauvoo:
n0..y n0.~ 3.0 on; «no 006 um.“ 0n.n on.~ on; n0.o ~00. 90.0 0o.n 01¢ 0.30 No.0 05..» 0n.N 2.0 0o.o~ NN.N Tin no.n o0..~ 3.0 .3002.
00.0 -.~ u- on.~ uu u- -u u- u- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu -- -u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu cannon
o~.n -.~ no.0 00. 00. 00.0 no.~ NN.: 0N.n om.0 50.0 ~0.~ 00.0 “0.0 nn.n “N.“ go.~ Nn.n 0o.n 0N.0 0H.0 on.~ 00.0 ~n.0 on.0 00.0 qaauuuco:
on.“ uu «0. u- uu -u u- uu u. u. uu uu -u uu uu u. u- uu uu uu uu u- uu uu uu uu cuxnaan
uu uu 00.0 00.~ 0m.~ 00.0 «0.0 on.0 no.0 o~.0 u0.n 40.4 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 n0.~ 00.0 no.0 00.0 0~.0 uu uu uu uu uu Hafiz nun-nnoz
oa.q o0.~ nn.q 05.0 «0. m~.~ oo.n no.0 on.~ 0o.n ~0.0 no.0 -.o~ 00.0 00.0 on.~ 0o.~ «0.0 0n.~ o0.n oo.0 o~.n NN.0 Hm.n 00.0 -.q u0~n>oc«x3¢=
o0.n “on ~0.~ 0o.n «0.0 3.0 0n.” :.o 00.0 00.0 no.0 00.0 00.0 3.0 on.0 o0.n 0n; 00.0 «N; 3.0 3.2 QNJ 0~.¢ 2.0 05; nn.on .2516 0.3.—
~0.n no.0 q<.u n~.m no.0 0o.n ao.~ 00.0 00.0 uu 0~.n 00.0 00.0 uu 00.0 00.0 05.0 0~.0 00.0 00.0 -.n 0n.n 00.u n~.n No.“ n~.m vHuuonuuah
O0.0 00.n 00.x 00.0 o0.~ o~.n 0H.0 00.0 oo.0 o0.¢ 00.0 no.0 <0.o 00.0 «0.0 no.4 0~.~ Nn.o no.0 «0.5 -.0 0~u~ co.o on.~ nn.n H~.0 cqluocm
$4 oo.~ 00.. :d 2.20 $.N 36 8.0 004 3... 3.0 0o.n -u uu -u :3 noé 3.0 3.0 uu u- .. uu u- -.. u- 3:28:32.
am.” no.0 0n.“ no.~ -.N no.” no.~ 05.0 on.~ 0o.~ o~.0 no.0 00.0 -.0 NN.: 00.0 on.~ O0.0 -.0 uu u- u- u- uu u- u- cont-n
no.~ «0.0 -.n H0.~ 0H.q N0. 50. 00.5 nu.” “0.0 00.0 uu 00.0 on.0 no.0 uu .. -u uu uu uu uu uu u- uu u- uuonnuau
n~.n nn.~ dq.~ No.~ do.“ 0o.~ 00.0 no.“ 00.“ No.0 0~.0 u- 0o.n 00.0 00.0 n~.0 00.~ 50.0 00.0 “0.0 0m.m n~.~ nn.¢ 0n.n NN.N 00.0 «Hovuoo
00.0 on.~ ~0.~ o~.~ n0. 00.0 on.n _~.n -u «0.0 no.0 00.~ 00.0 nn.o nn.0 on.n 00.0 00.5 no.0 00.~ “0.0 H~.4 uu uu uu uu 1000310
04.“ 0n.0 mo.~ o0.n n~.0 no.0 no.5 00.- 00.0 0~.0 05.0 «0.0 00.0 -.n «0.0 ~n.0 00.0 «0.0 «0.0 n0.0 no.0 on.0 ~0.o 0o.n «0.5 00.0 cue-u
0~.« fl. 2.~ o~.~ o0.~ 00.0 2.0 SJ no; 2.0 no.0 S.“ 3.0 -u .33 no.0 nod uu uu uu uu uu uu -u u. uu .533
no.0 n~.n 00.0 00.0 0~.n o0.~ 0o.0 do.~ 00.0 00.0 -.0 00.0 0o.n ~0.n 00.00 m~.o~ -.~ on.“ «0.0 «0.0 50.00 «0.0 00.0” nn.o o0.~ NN.; anoxunn
o0.~ No.0 0n.~ oH.~ nn.0 nn._ 0_.< 00.0 00.0 00.0 ¢~.e nn.n an.0 c¢.n n¢.n 0N.0 00.0 an.n no.0 «0.0 0~.o 00.0 on.- n<.n no.0 -.0 onvuuncacn
n0.0 00.0 oo. 0n.H oo.~ un.n 00.0 ms.“ ~0.~ 00.~ nn.« H~.n -.s 05.0 on.~ O0.“ n_.0 00.0 N~.0 no.0 oo.s 00.0 ~e.0 0~._~ 00.5 o0.0 nnoduua<
00.0 00.0 00.~ ~o. nu. no.0 00.0 o~.n «0.0 an.~ on.0 no.0 00.0 «5.0 00.0 0o.0 ~N.0 o0.¢ 00.0 No.0 0o.n NN.N O0.0 ¢~.o~ 00.5 00.0 ounn~<
«n.0 No.“ 0o.n no.0 an.0 00.0 00.0 ON.N nn.~ Nn.n Nn.n cn.~ «0.0 00.“ nn.0 0o.n n~.0 nn.n hu.~ 00.0 fin.o 00.0 o~.e «0.0 ”0.0 no.0 o-~>onn<
“H0392
o0oH nnog u “mod " 00o” ” 00oH ” 00o0 00o“ «mon ~0oH ” 00oH oqofl “ neon ” mood “ oeon " 00o“ coon neon Neon ~0o~ o0o~ " ono~ " nnon u «mod " 0no~ ” 0no~ “ 000“ “ monH<Hmnzm
n~.0 ~o.0 No.0 o~.~ uo.n n~.o~ ~N.0 00.0 no.~ -.~ «0.0 ~n.n 0~.n ”0.0 Na.“ n~.0 nn.0 0n.~ -.0 No.0 n0.n no.0 0o.0 0~.~ an.n unnuo><
uu u- u. u uu uu -u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu and «mauvoos
on.~ #0.“ 55.0 an.n o~.n 00.0” 00.o o~.0 co.“ -.n 0H.0 -.N uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu no.0 uu uu couuup
uu uu u- uu uu uu uu u- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u- uu uu uu uu uu uu -.~ ON.N annual
00.0 «0.0 o~.0 0n.“ «0.0 0~.0 no.0 00.5 ~0.~ ~o.~ H~.o 00.0 No.“ 00.0 no.“ n~.0 do.0 0N.~ no.0 00.0 an.~ «0.0 00.0 0~.n 00.~ Ilsuoucoz
uu u- uu u. uu u- uu uu uu uu -u uu uu uu uu -.0 nn.0 n0. 0n.n no.0 no.0 0o.0 no.0 0o.~ n0.“ :«xnaaq
uu u- uu u- uu uu uu uu u- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu Add: nun-n00:
0n. No.0 «0.0 00.0 ~0.~ no.- 00.0 on.~ o0.” o0. on.0 00.” -.~ «0.0 as.“ 05.0 no.0 ~0.~ 00.0 an.n ~0.N «nun N0.n 0h.~ no.0 o-~>ocaxziz
0H.0 on.- 50.0 0o.n fin.“ 0~.0 No.0 no.0 0d.” n~.~ nn.0 No.0 n0.« no.0 no.0 0n.0 o0.- 0o.n -.n no.0 <~.~ ou.o H~.n 0o.n 0o.0 nccaqo yuan
nN.~ 0~.0 0~.~H no.0 uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu 00.0 «0.0 uu uu uu uu uu uu uu 0o.n vdouonuuuh
“a.“ 00.0 00.0 50.0 0o.~ nc.n_ -.0 ~o.~ 00.0 00. nn.n o0.” 50.0 no.0 n0.n 00.0 oH.0 nn. 50.0 00.0 ~¢.n no.0 «0.0 so. n¢.n snug-In
uu uu -u uu -u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u. uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu o-0>=000q¢oa
uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu ..u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu £02.50
.. -- -- u- u- .- -- u- u- u- u- -- -u u- u- -- -u u- u- u- u- .. oo.« «o. “0.0 uucnsuao
uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu onuvuou
uu u- u- mg.” 00.~ 00.0 so.~ NN.N om.“ «0.~ no.0 0o.~ 0o.n on.o ~0.~ u- u- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu unauldu
o¢.o no.0 on.“ -- -- -u -u -- -- -- -- -- -- .- u- -- -- u- u- u- u- uu uu .. .. cud-u
uu 0n.0 0o.n 00. an.0 O0.0" 00.0 on.~ «o.~ nn.~ “0.0 oo.n Nn.n 00.0 as.“ nn.~ no.0 N~.~ o~.0 No.0 NH.¢ no.0 0~.0 0o.n on." nonuan
00.0 00.0 No.0 Ao.n o0.~ ~0.0 00.0 0~.0 n~.4 on.~ as.“ co.~ 00.0 ~n.n ~N.o oo.0 05.0 00.« 00.0 no.0 uu uu 00.0 0o.n 00.~ znoxa~n
«0.0 o0.0 n0.n -.~ 00.0 ~«.- 50.0 an.n no." 0o.~ 40.0 0~.q «0.0 -.~ 0~.o «n.0 ~0.o n~.n HH.0 no.0 0n.n oc.o~ 00.“ no.0 0n.n onvnuncucn
00.0 oo.0 00.0 On.~ «0.0 an.n No.0 “0.0 0n. 00.n 00.0 00.0 NH.0 0o.n 00.0 00.0 0N.0 «n. nn.0 0o.n 00.0 00.0 00.5 ~0.~ co.~ usouu¢l<
00.0 00.0 oe.o~ -.0 o~.0 no.“ nn.0 04.0 o4.“ na.~ no.4 mo.q 00.0 05.0 nn.0 no.0 -.s nn.~ oo.n 00.5 an.n 50.0 00.0 00.N o0.~ a:-0~<
«N.n n~.0 «0.0 0H. 00.~ nn.- n~.0 00.0 no. mo.~ H0.o 00.0 qo.~ ~n.n -.~ on.n no.0 no.0 us.n 00.0 no.0 «0.0 su.o em." oo.0 o-u>000<
"hung:
" nnon “ «mod ” anon " omoH u oNofl “ n~o~ “Nod emon 0No~ anon IMNoA NNoH ” -od . o~o~ o~o~ nuon “do" 00o“ 0Ho~ " 0~o~ n n~o~ “ «nod " "How " o~o~ " ooofl n monH<Hnnplll

.uoaauunouu-.n can-u

 

 

 

00 0 00 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 orahu><
o0.n 00.0 00.0 0o.0 00.0 n«.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 oo.0 uu uu 0o.n 0o.n 00.0 on.n o0.0 00.« n«.0 00.0 00.0 u- 00.00 -u «n.m coc0~>
0~.0 00.00 o0.0 0_.0 00.0 00 0 00.0 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00 o 00.0 «0.0 -u u- .- -- u- -- -- .- 000030
uu uu -u 0o.0 00.0 n«.0 00.0 0«.00 oo.« No.0 o0.0 00.00 o«.m 00.00 o0.00 o0.0. m0.o 00.0 00.0 n«.n «0.0 0«.0 0N.“ o0.0 00.00 ¢0OUCacom
0o.n 00.o 00.¢ o0.0 «0.0 o0.«« 00.0 o«.o no.0. 00.0 00.00 oo.n 0o.0 no.0 00.0 uu o0.0 nn.0 n0.« 00.0 uu 0o.0 0o.n «0.0 oo.0 0009000coz
00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 «0.0 00.0 00.0 _0.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.~ 00.0 “cm-uu00 .0:
uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u- uu uu uu uu uu u- uu uu uu uuu uu uu u- uu uu .cum .oxm 00000z
uu ««.00 ~0.«0 o0.0 n0.n 00.0 00.« no.00 0o.0 00.« no.0 no.« «0.0 00.0 00.« n«.n n0.n 0o.0 no.0 n0.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 No.0 .0 .0 0::10uuz
-- -- -- -- .- -- -- -- -- 00.0 -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- 00.0 -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- -- 00.00 -- xuou>00
--- u- u- -u u- -- u- -u -u u- -- u- .- u- u. -- u- -u -u -u -u .u u- u- .. 0005.0
u- uu uu uu uu u. u- uu uu uu u- uu uu uu uu uu u- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u- anc0uom nn0=
00.0 00.0 No.0 00.0 00.0 0o.00 n0.0 00.0 00.0 o«.n 0o.n 0«.0 «n.« 00.0 «0.0 0«.o0 00.0 «0.0 «0.0 no.0 no.0 00.0 00.0 «n.o 0n.0 u0002:0010
0o.n 0o.o0 0«.n 00.0 «0.0 o0.0 0o.0 oo.o uu no.0 00.0 0o.n 00.0 o0.00 0o.u 00.n 0n.0 00.0 n0.0 00.0 00.0 n0.0, 00.00 -u nn.o omc0uom xa0camuo
o«.0 o0.0 00.0 uu uu u- uu . uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u- -u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu .0 01-0 unqosou.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -u u- -- u- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0u00000
00.0 00.00 00.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -u -u -- -- -- -u -- u- u- u- -- u- -u u- -- -- ~000>0uuo
00.0 00.00 00.0 0o.n nn.00 o0.0 0n.0 0n.00 00.0 0«.« oo.o 00.« oo.0 ON.N uu 0~.n nn.o 00.0 uu uu on.0 -u 0o.0 uu 00.0 axon-062000
. "Hmoo:<

o0.n 00.0 00.0 0«.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 n«.n 00.0 «0.o «0.0 0o.0 «n.n 00.0 0o.n 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 n0.0 o0.0 00.0 «0.0 00.00 o0.o unqua><
oo.~ 00.0 0o.n 00.0 00.0 0«.0 «0.0 no.0 0«.0 on.«0 uu uu 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 0o.o0 no.n0 00.0 0n.0 o«.m uu o0.0 00.00 00.0 cocuo>
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0«.n 00.0 00.0 oo.0 00.0 00.o 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 n0.o n0.0 00.0 uu -u uu uu uu u- uu u- 000030
-- .- -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 «0.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 ~0.~ 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 «0ou-ncom
««.0 o0.0 00.0 00.00 0n.0 0n.n n«.0 00.0 00.0 «0.0 «0.n 00.n s0.o 0o.n . «n.00 u- 0n.0 0«.00 o0.0 on.n uu o«.0 00.0 oo.« 00.o o00ou0ucoz
nn.0 n«.« 00.0 «0.0 On.n o0.0 uu 0n.0 0o.n no.0 00.0 00.0 ~0.n 0o.n o«.n 00.0 0«.0 00.00 on.n 00.0 nn.~ 0«.0 no.0 00.00 00.00 usuana0m .0:
uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu .num .axm =0000x
on.00 0n.« «0.n 00.0 0n.0 oo.0 00.0 «o.0 no.0 o~.o 00.0 «0.0 o«.n No.0 00.0 on.0 0o.0 0n.n0 o«.0 00.0 «0.0 0«.o0 00.0 o«.00 0«.o .m .0 1::00uqx
-- -- -u -- -- u -- 00.0 -- u- 00.0 -u 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 .. u- -u 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 .. xnou>00
u- -u uu uu .. -u u- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u- uu uu u- u- uu uu u. -u u- 0005.0
u- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu unc0unm nn0:
n«.0 o0.0 00.00 o0.0 0«.0 n«.o 00.0 no.0 00.n 00.00 on.« oo.0 00.00 00.0 o0.0 00.0 00.0 0o.n 0n.n «o.n on.o no.0 00.0 on.0 00.00 ~000>n=0¢o
0o.o 00.0 no.n 00.0 o0.o0 n«.«0 0o.n 0n.o0 uu «n.o0 on.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.«0 0n.0 n0.n0 00.0« 00.o o0.0 n0.n 0o.n 00.0 00.00 0o.0 nm=0uom xa0camoo
on.o 00.0 n0.n uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu .0 0x10 0.11800
uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu 000o0£u
0~.~0 00.0 00.0 -- -- u- -- -- -- -- -u -- -- u- .. -- -- -- -- -- -- -u -- -- -- ~000>0000
nn.n 00.0 on.0 n«.o «0.00 ««.0 0o.0 o«.n o0.0 oo.0 00.o oo.0 0o.“ 00.0 uu 00.0 n0.00 00.00 00.0 uu o0.0 «0.0 00.0 uu «0.00 aneuaucao0n
“>000

mn.« o0.n 00.« 00.0 0m.n «0.0 00.00 on.0 «o.0 «0.0 00.«0 «0.0 «o.n 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 «0.0 an.“ 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 unquo><
No.0 «n.n no.0 n«.« 0n.n n0.0 «0.0 00.00 n0.n 0o.0 uu uu nn.« 00.0 oo.« 00.0 uu 0«.0 n«.« 00.0 o0.0 uu 00.0 0n.n n«.0 cocuo>
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 -u -- -- -u -- u- -- -- 000020
-- -- -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.~0 00.0 00. 00.0 00.0 00.~ 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0~.0 00.0 «0000.000
0o.« «0.n 00. 00.0 00.0 n«.o 00.o 00.0 00.0 so.o n0.o 0o.n 0o.n 00.0 uu «0.0 00.0 00.0 «0.0 No.0 uu o0.n oo.0 oo.n0 om.o 000000uco:
00.0 oo.0 0n.« 00.0 «0.00 «0.0 uu o0.0 No.0 00.0 00.00 0n.« o0.0 00.0 00.0 o0.0 00.0 oo.h 00.« «n.0 o0.o0 00.0 00.0 0o.o 00.0 ucqnqu0m .0:
uu uu uu uu -u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu .auw .nxm c0000:
00.0 «0.0 nn.« «0.0 0o.0 00.0 0n.n 0n.0 nn.« n«.0 «n.00 no.0 00.n 00.0 00.« o0.« no.0 o0.0 0n.0 0o.n 00.0 oo.n n«.n O0.o0 0o.n .m .0 accu0uaz
-- -- -- -- -- 00.0 00.00 -- -- 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- -- 00.0 «0.0 00.0 00.0 -- 00.0 00.00 -- snoo>00
uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu 0:9610
uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu . uuu uu uu uu uu u- uu uu uu uu uu an=0uom nn0=
«0.0 oo.o0 00.0 no.«0 0o.n 00.0 00.00 0n.m 0n.0 00.0 00.«0 no.0 o~.0 oo.0 nn.n 00.0 on.« 00.0 «0.0 «n.0 00.0 00.00 0o.« o0.00 n«.0 0000>nc0qu
o0.0 00.0 00.0 00.« nn.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 uu 00.0 0«.«0 «0.00 nn.n 0o.o o0.0 nn.« 00.0 00.0 «0.0 o0.0 00.0 ««.n 00.0 00.0 00.0 0wc0uom 000::muo
00.0 00.0 00.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- .- -- -- -. .. -- -. -- -- -- -- -u -- -- -. .0 00.0 00.0500
u- u- .. uu -u -u u- -u u- uu u- .. uu u- u- . uu u- uu u- uu -u uu u- u- u- 0000000
00.0 00.00 00. -- -- -- -- -- -- u- -- u- -- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ~000>0000
«0.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 «0.0 00.00 o0.0 oo.« 0o.0 uu 00.0 ~0.o 00.0 00.0 uu 00.00 00.0 u- u- 00.0 canyaucao0n
“ u n u u u . . n . o n 0 . o o 11 u 0 "mg”

.11000 0000-- 0000 omww. 0000 0000 . 0«o0 . 0«o0 . 0«o0 . 0«o0 . 0«o0 . «~00 . 0«o0 . o«o0 . o0o0 . m0o0 " 0000 . 00o0 . 00o0 H 00o0 ” 00o0 H «0o0 " 00o0 u o0o0 “ ooo0 ” mzo0w<wmmDM|l

 

 

.o0o0uooo0 .av0uo0m .ucans< van .0050 .ucso
=0 0n00unu-0ao 0.00no00uoouca 0000000.
uuu vouuooou 00qwa0uu no nozuc0 onuuo><uu.0 000:9

409

00.0 00.0 0m.m 0o.n o«.0 0o.n m0.0 00.x m0.0 «0.0 00.m o0.0 0«.0 00.0 00.0 m0.m 0«.0 0n.0 0«.0 00.0 00.00 «0.0 oo.o0 mo.m mo.o0 0m.o uwauw><

 

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- 00.0 00.0 «0.0 00.0 -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 000000
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 000030
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00. 00.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- .- -- -- -- -- 000000000
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 o00mu0ucox
00.0 -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00 00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00000000 .0:
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00. 00.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- .000 .0x0 00000:
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00. 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 .0 .0 0000000:
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00. 00.0 00.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- xuo~>00

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 -- -- 000500
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 . 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0000000 000:
00.0 00.0 -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 «0.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 ~0.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 0000>m=000
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 0000000 00000000

-- -- -- -- -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 .0 0000 0000500
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 -- -- -- -- -- 0000000
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0000;0000
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 03000000000

”00003
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0~.~0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 ~0000><

--- -- -- -- -- -- -- 00.0 00.0 00.«0 -- -- 00.0 00.00 00.0 -- 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 cocuw>
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 000000
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- «00000000
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.00 No.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 000wu0ucox
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00000000 .0:
00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 . 00.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- .q00 .0x0 000002
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 «0.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 .0 .0 0:000002
00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- xao~>00

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- w- -- -- 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 -- -- 000200
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0000.00 000:
00.0 00.0 -- 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 «0.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 0000>nc000
00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 0~.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0000000 00003000

-- -- -- -- -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 .0 0000 0000500
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- -- -- -- -- 0000000
00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 0000>0000
00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00 00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 03000003000

“0000

00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00000><

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- 00.« 00.0 00.« 00.0 -- 00.0 0«.0 00.0 -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 o«.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.« 00.0 00.0 cocuw>
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 000000
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00. 00.00 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 000000000
00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 000000000:
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 .00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00000000 .0:
00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- -. -- -- -- -- .- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- .000 .0x0 00000x
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 «0.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 .0 .0 00:0000x
00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- xmom>00

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- -- 000500
00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- 00.0 00.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- . -- -- -- -- -- 0000000 000:
04.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00. 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0000000000
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0«.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00. 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0000000 00003000

-- -- -- -- .- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 .0 0000 0000500
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 04.0 -- -- -- -- -- 0000000
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 -- 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 04.0 00.0 00.0 0000>0000
00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0~.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 cso0nucao00

“0200

0000 n 0000 n 0000 U 0000 n 0000 n 0000 h 0000 n 0000 H 0000 n 0000 n 0000 fl 0000 H 0000 n 0000 U0.000 H 0000 M 0:00 “ 0000 n 0000 H 0400 n 0000 H 0000 U 0000 0 0000 n 0000 0 4000 H 02000000000L

 

. .umzc00cou--.r 00000

0

410

-.q an.o n~.o _¢.n am.o mm.~ om.m on.fi o~.ofi m~.o~ cm.n m“ u ON a
hm.¢ no.¢ o~.¢ ¢o.m mo.m ON.” “a.” oi.” «o R an.~“ a0.“ No a oq.n
4~.¢ 0Q.o no.¢ mn.n 40.4 ao.~ nq.o Nn N 40.5 qm.o~ ca.m OO.H on m
“fl.“ ~n.o -- -- -. -- -- -- -- -- .- -. mg.”
do.“ a~.o -- -- -- -- -- -- -- .- -- .- -.

 

 

ownuu><

rank

nEouofim
.Hdnm ua>.x
xhuuo

cog)»:
acuxuo~n )az
uuu£1uog

«so: van—:1“:
vacancy:

zit casuo
I>ucau

.030? week sumo cog-h
Igaousu
anguauaucw
Inga

cucuoo
can63~ou
nwcdunm tuuuou
co~>c~u
omu.vcahm
»o_uc¢»n
ulcduam bsfim
afloa~avc<
ufifiu>cnn<
h>;:n

sacuu><

wank

n50uo~m
u~.¢u ko>qz
xuuuo

couluz
couxuoun :hz
guuszOA
HHO: vcn~£w«:
vc¢~v1a=

xdn conuu
I>ocou

ofiacuam
inauguugcm
Imam

congoo
ndnizfioo
auciunm oouuou
cou)a_u
swvuvcaun
mu_uc-un
nxcuuam yuan
Ia. u3~IUC<
u~d¢>onn<
“wzuw

 

[I'll],

nn.m mm.n on.fi on. co.n ca.- oq.a _~.n oo.~ no.m afi.n oa._ o~ mn.a o~.n wk.“ co.“ om.n ”N u m=.m afi fl Nd.” mm.¢ mo.c mN.o_
-.4 mm.q so.” -- .- -- -- -. .. -- .- -- .. .- -- -- .- .- .- -. .. .. -. -. --
ma.“ q~.~ no.H mn.~ ~q.o o~._‘ mm.o do.q no.¢ oA.o mm.o “o.~ oo.g cm.” oa.~ we.“ a. n no m :5.“ on.“ on ¢~.o an.” on.“ co.m
A«.~ 4m m ao. m~.q «m.o o~.o -- .- -. -. .. -- .- .. -. -- .- .- .. -- -. .. -- -- --
ma.n so.m o~. om.~ ~¢.q ~o.o o~.o ~n.a m“. Ho.q cg.“ an.“ do._ oo.~ No.” on n 91.” ’0.“ mo.4 a: ~ cu m oc.c _~., on.c o~.-
o~.m q~.o m~.# .- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- .- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -. -- -- -- -. --
-- -- -I -- -- -- -- -- -. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- .- -. -. -- -. -- .uJOH vcom sumo no.1;
on." cm.q oN. no.~ an.“ am.o no.~ an.« no.q om.“ ma.q on.“ em.“ mm.~ an.“ ~4.n ‘q q c_.n w~.m ,c.z oo.n x~.¢ co.“ an.“ m_.q
mo.q ac.» no.“ oo.fl -- -. -. -- -- -- -- -- .- -- -- -- -- .- -. .. .- -- -- -- --
qm.~ Nm.o ON.N -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- .. -. -- -- .- -- -- .- -- -. -. -. .-
mo.m so.“ -._ -.¢ o~.n on.“ “a.“ am.n hm.n «o.o -- .. .. .- .- -. .. .- .. -. .. -. .. -. .-
mo.~ nn.a mm. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -. -- -- -- -- -- .. -- -- -- -- --
em.“ Hm.~ on. -- -- .. .. .. -. -- -- -- .. .- -. .. .- .- .. .. -. .. .. -. .-
no.a OH.O anA~ -- -- -- -- -. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- .. -. -- -. -- -. -.
mmod mama Iammw Ono“ onafl w~oH ”Hog o~o_ mno. quo_ m~o~ NWo” Ana“ 3“,“ mng- n_o~ “ “Mom---qud-wmw;wg.J.q_:. .NaN; umaoauJ ”How. o_o~ coo“

 

.om¢« - 03o“ .us-a-«< .unaz:< we. . _ae .acgm :_
acouucynnan alu~x0~0uoauufi suguaflun no“ vouyoav» ”A-.c-L w: ougu:. a:u.a><-..r was.”

mzo-<~mm;m.1

f

411

 

 

 

ow.¢ o~.o nn.n “a.“ Nd.o -.n on.o oo.n nn.n od.o oo.o on.o~. "a,” om.n No.5 m5.“ do.n mg.“ an.“ mg.“ no.¢ no.¢ on.e o¢.o mm.” m~.o omnuo><
“a.“ o~.o~ oo.~ so.¢ -.~g no.n na.o an." no.n 95.0“ n¢.o o~.¢ mn.~ no.“ on.» mm.q om.¢ oc.¢ o~.o ow.» mo.“ no.0 am.n o¢.o co.“ co.” hank
Nn.4 a.» on.” oh.n we.“ oo.o ad.” n- n- n- n- n- -- .. nn .- -. -- -. n- -- n- -- -- n- -- paouofim
on.o hm.flfl en.“ mg.» om.” ca.“ on.o no.” go.“ o..- «m.o~ on.o on.” oo.o o¢.h «¢.n h5.o om.“ no.n~ ao.o «N.n no.ofl ~o.~ No.0 no.0 m~.h .--m .u>flm
.. no.m o~.n n~.o on.“ oa.n o~.o -.~ no.0 oo._fi nn.o on.e~ on.” oo.o c~.- n~.~ NN.H on.“ ~_.o on.“ No.4 -.- n~.m ao.o om.o oo.¢ xhnuo
¢H.4 an.” n¢.4 o¢.n no.“ oq.¢ -.« ed.“ nn an.o ~n.o me.“ ac." “5.0 nn.q on.n _~.¢ q~.~ co.“ mm.“ mm.“ om.m _o.¢ ma.» o~.o o~.n no.3»:
nu In an 0.. II ‘0 It. I. II II at II II II II II In In In In nu In tn II II II COuXUOhn ’02
no.n ma._~ ~;.~ oo.o no.» “0.. o~.o ~n.¢ «e.~ “o.ofl “5.0“ “N.“ nn.n do.og oe.o nn.o~ n..o .. n- -- .- n- -- n- -- -- uh-gxuoa
mo.q on,o n~.n ~m.n m~.~fi _m.a on.o an.“ o~.a mo.od dc.” co.” no.c no.5 od.¢ on.“ ~h.n an.- a~.o No.“ co.» m~.- No.fi 03.0 an.“ 0H.m 020: ucnfignas
no.” mm.” -.q on.o no.oH as.“ c..¢ -n nn -n -n n- nn .. n. -n -n n- n- u- -- n- n- n- -- .. vc-Mv-ox
«as 2... end 2.0 2.“ 3..” nn nn nn un nu nn nn -n nn .n -n nn n. n- n- n- n- n- nu n- >1. 596
oo.n aw.m ~_.H oo.o “a.“ on.n na.¢ no.“ a... an.a co.o on.o n~.n nn.h co.“ oo.o -.« on.¢ oh.o Ne.o nq.q -.o ~o.n no.“ no.“ ma.“ a>ocou
“a.“ mn.o~ an.“ an.o mo.» o¢.~ no.“ No.0 kn.“ a~.~fi .. n. n- -- oo.o od.o ma.o ¢~.o~ n4... -.n~ -- -- u- -- n- .. hunch ucom cuao ou~nm
n¢.o m4.» mfiu‘ ea.“ on.o co.“ ~¢.o~ en. o~.n oo.h so.“ no.n~ co.“ o4.o~ n~.o nn.a o¢.n me.“ "n.o “an“ ”o.e om.o~ oo.¢ oo.m no.“ an.- uflsuwau
mo.n mo.A~ o~.m we.“ .. -- .- n. n. -n -n .n n. .n -n n. n- n. n- n- n. n. n- n- n- -- e.uumhou=m
«m.q mm.n~ ~o.~ mo.“ no.a ~q.~ an.“ _q.c on.“ nn.g~ an.o u. do.# oa.¢ _~.~ no." no.9 4d.o ~n.n on.» Hm.~ ~o.o_ ma.o Ho.o~ o~.o~ Ne.n gnaw
an.n mfi.o ~fl.o _n.n co.“ o0.0 Ha.“ o¢.o oo.e Ne.“ on.o n..- om.~ no.o ~n.o cu.“ n~.n -.a no.o~ on.o fio.n on.“ am.o oo.- on.“ -.m cuguoa
hm.4 “0.0 ”A." n“._ aq.o “5.“ OH.” oq.a .. ao.m n¢.o No.9d oc.h ca.“ an.o no.“ oo.n nn.¢ ~n.o on.“ an.“ na.o m~.o nw.o mo.~. -- .«naafiou
as.“ m~.o on.n “5.0 o~.o o~.n 4~.q o~.n o~.n co.“ .. flo.a o~.n on.” a~.o no.0 nn.- dn.o on.o cg.“ ~o.n n~.o mo.o ~n.¢ oc.m “m.o .wcd.gm newuou
No.0 on.a on.n ON.O oo.¢ no.n nm.¢ o~.~ une.e an.q no.“ uh.o~ ~n.~ no.“ o~.n oa.¢ o~.¢ ~o.¢ «n.n n- on.» mo.o an.m oh.n~ a¢.n~ aw.“ cog».~u
“a." o~.nfi oh.n on.“ no.n~ no.“ 40.0 ~o.n nn.o oh.o~ ¢~.o oo.o ~«.n on.» on.“ o¢.o -.« oo.¢ ~n.¢ fin.» oo.~ mo.¢ oc.n me.o ~n.¢ nn.n omvavcahu
qu.4 o».o ¢~.~ o~.a o~.a om.o so.” -.¢ mg.“ no.“ om.- no.0 oo.n we." oa.a on.“ -.h on.” so.“ "a." mm.n oo.na om.n om.o oo.o “0.0 xofiucnua
.n -n ~c.~ m~.o n~.n nn nn nu nu nn nu nn nu nu un nn nn nn nu nn un nn nn un nu nn unadunm mafia
an.“ n~.N~ no.n on.o 0e.“ o~.m an.“ ac." «a.o n¢.o h~.o u- na.~ hh.g~ na.o flu.“ mo.o .. o¢.o o~.o oo.¢ «o.~ -n n- -- .. nuuafinva<
¢~.q on.“ 05.; n_.« no.“ u. n- -- -n ,.- n- n- -- n. -n -n .- -n n- n- n- -- n- -- -- -n ogfifi>~nn<
Urqun
n~.o on.m 4m.n mg.“ -.n No.~ nn.¢ a~.~ oe.n o~.~ _h.m mo.n no.“ on.“ ho.~ mc.n oo.¢ me.“ an.“ no.0 a~.n o~.n ~n.¢ nn.~ oo.n ¢~.e ounua><
no.“ «5.4 4o.m No._ as.“ on.~ ea." oo.d -.~ no. no.” no.n no.a nn.n ¢o.n an.n on.n on.¢ H~.~ no.a oo.~ no.# ea." h~.~ ow.n wq.a kc.“
~N.n o~.n o¢.¢ ~o.a oo._ -.~ oe.m .. n- n- n n- .n -- n- -- -n n- -- -- n- n- -- -- -- -. -- naouofim
on.“ -.o 90.5 00.0 05.“ go.“ no." so.“ no.“ no. o~.n oo.n «o.q ~n.¢ MN.“ «~.n n~.e NN.O o~.« om.n oq.o on.” mo.~ em.~ qo.~ on.m .dfl-m nu>i¢
NN._ «0.; m~.~ w~.o n~.m an.“ an.e am._ so.“ no»_ ac.» nn.fl no.“ mh.e h~.~ “a.” ac.“ «n.a om.“ ~n.¢ cm.od “a.“ ch.” n~.~ so.“ m~.m Juana
mm.~ oq.q ofi.o he.“ «a.« no.“ m~.~ NN.N -n o“. o~.¢ no." o~.n no.e oa. m¢.~ n~.~ n~.o No.0 aw.” oa.~fi ac." mm.n ma.“ NN.N oo.¢ couanz
nn n- nn nn nu nu nu nu nn nu nu nn nu nn nn nu nu nu uu nn nn nu nu un nu nu coaxUOua :0:
no.0 mo.n o~.o mq.o oo.~ ~<.~ Ho.a no.u oo.n «n.N an.o on.~ n¢.o nn.o~ {o.é oo.o ~N.a nn nn nu nu nu nn nu nu nu uuqcxqu
00.4 no.“ no.0 ho.q oa.n ofi.~ fid.o me.“ ~o.¢ do.“ n- om.m on.“ so.¢ an.” ac." ¢~.n no.m ca.n oo.- «0.» nn.~ no.“ mo.” ~o.¢ om.n «so: ucnfinmfix
am.” a.“ No.q “a.“ -.~ co.q on.n .. n- .. un .. u- n- -n n- u- .- -- -- n- n- -- -. -- -- ucnflvnnz
om.m ao.o we.“ gm.o o~.n -n .- n- .- -- n- -n n- -n -n . n- n- -- -- -- -n -- -- -- n- -- hum coupe
mm.m no.“ h#.n on.» co." ”a.~ no.0 n4.d «o.n n~.n oo.n _o.N nn.e m~.n m~.¢ a~.~ no.“ «o._~ mm.n mo.¢ “o.- No.~ “a.“ mm.~ on. mm.~ n>ncnu
om.o 0H.m No.» ~a.o on.¢ o~.n n~.4 om.n no.n NN.N nu nu nu un o~.c no.” om.“ Na.n ¢~.n Om.o nn nn nn nn n- nn hunch vcom some Oudem
oq.~ oo.q q~.o co.” on.n m~.~ mo.n «o.~ .n oo.n ~o.¢ on.“ nn.n oo.q nn.n mo.~ OO.H no._~ u¢.¢ on.“ m~.¢ o~.~ oo.n as.“ m¢.q -.n .flanwau
we.“ n~.m ~4.~ o¢.a nn nu nu nn nn nu nu nu nn nu nn nu nn nn un nu nn nu n- nn nu nu oniuauwucm
no.n «H.~ o0.0 nn.¢ on.” as.“ «n.n oo.n ¢~.n on.“ ma.“ -- ma.“ hm.n oo._ no.~ MA.“ 00.0 q¢.o mm.o m~.~fi ma.” nn.o mH.n ON.N so.~ and“
co.” o~.o on." -.¢ o~.~ no.~ an.“ ¢~.o nn.~ oq.e on.“ an.“ mm.“ wn.~ o~.~ on.n do.¢ mm.» cm.o on.» no.“ oq.q ~q.q 5m.g ¢~.A “o.H cannon
“a.a no.m om.~ o~.o mn.~ go.“ ma.” No. hm.n oo.n n~.¢ oo.~ ~o.¢ mm.m o~.n ¢~.N NN.; ma.n o~.o oo.n on.” oo.¢ mo.n NN. -- -- unnagdou
o~.n NN.“ No.0 mo.m qo.n n‘.m mo.n no.~ an.e o~.n .. no.n <¢.¢ no.0 ad.“ co.n on.m oo.o No.“ «0.0 an.n ~o.~ ~q.q na.n co.“ oh.n .mciuam nnymou
mq.m N‘.q «~.o NN.; ¢~.¢ fin.~ o¢.q on.“ an.” n- n- “a.“ ed.“ 05.; no.“ do.n as.” oo.o “a.“ no.“ -.o ”5.; ou.m an.” Ho.“ on.q co.>nau
on. q”.¢ no.» qw.~ mu.” hm.~ mo.n oo.~ no.~ ca." oo.o no.~ “a.m ON.O go.n ~n.n 0o.n mm.m oo.m mn.o 0o.n ~¢.¢ ma.m o~.n -.n mo.n ”mafivcgnm
n~.¢ mo.¢ mm.“ «H.q oq.~ m¢.n ~n.n -.~ n#.¢ .. oo.q ~o.n Am.o -.o -.n no.n on.” o~.~ -.u NN.O an.o o~.¢ m5.“ ha.‘ ad.” om.» >ngucnun
-. -- No.~ no.q om.¢ -- -. -n n- n- n- .n -- -- n- -- -- n- .- -n -- -- -- -- -- -- “as“.am as“;
No.m no.0 mH.o -.m e~.n m~.~ ~n.¢ an.” ~c.n co.“ oo.c n~.n «~.« on.“ on.n no.” -.a .- .. No.9 ~n.¢ -.n -- -- -- -- nanafinnc<
ooum n~.q ca.~ No.N NN.N nu nu nn un un un nn un un nn nu un nn un un nu nn nu nn nn nn odufi>unp<
. “mzpmun
amoa mnofi «mmfi cmofi mmofi amod mmo_ «mod _nofi on¢~ " oqo_ anoa ” “nag oqofi moo“ Mano” nnofl ”cog dang o¢o~ . onod «flog “no” ” Ono” mmofi anofi mzo_H<Pmm;

 

 

.voacducou n- n can.»

412

«m.o

om.o

nn.¢
n~.o

~4.n

No.n

~0.N

o~.N

0o.n

vmuh~><

co.¢ om.~ mm.c >0uw
un nn nn nEOuofim
mm.m «4.4 mm.o n~fium u~>du
am.fi~ 00.5 m~.m JhCuo
nu nu nn cou>9z
nn nu nu couxuoun Jbz
nu nn nn uuazxuog
o~.a n~.o no.0 BEG: vcuficwd:
nn nn nu ncafluaoz
nn nu nu mum cuuuo
no.0 nn.m an.m a>scuo
nn nu nn “czar vcom cwao cu~um
an.» n~.n n~.c QHJawam
nn nn nn o-wuaumucm
«m.o m¢.m NN.N Inflm
~m.~ an 3.0 canyon
no.m no.0 nu nunsafiou
oo.¢ mn.n o~.m uwcfiuam youuou
o~.- Ao.o ~m.m coax-Mu
no.0 a¢.o an.m owvwvcsun
no.0“ mm.n m¢.o zvflucunn
nu nu nu nwcuuam uzflm
nu nu nn canafiquc<
nn nn uu a.fld>uan<
”Hm;03<

 

a¢o~

new”

oqa~

anoa u mn¢~ “ «nofi mzoww<kmmam

 

 

n4 n _n.n no.“ mo.~ nn.n oo.~ 4m.n _o.~ do.“ m~.¢ ~n.q oo.n #9.;
no.” o~.~ m~.~ n~.~ ~n.4 Hm. oo.~ _o.n No.¢ 00.; as.“ q~.n OH.O
wm.n mm." an.~ NN.H o0.0 m . No.q nu nn nu nu nn un
oo., MN.“ 0“.” on.” o~.q mo.~ o~.o fin.og o~.~ om.¢ n~.4 -.q om.H~

-- -.n o~.n an." ~m.¢ m~.~ mo.c oo.o n«.~ nh.m no.q o~.q om.o
no N oo.n nq.q um.” no. no.“ ”K.“ «a.» -- ~o.~ an.“ OO.H -.m
n“ m m_.o n~.~ on.“ mo.“ H~.~ n~.~ no.0 “N.” a~.n no.” um.“ oo.o~
q~.~ ~ ~_._ fin.~ co." -.~ m~.n an.“ no.” ~q.q #0.; o~.n ~m.m
mm.n no a NN.; «4.0 00. ~0.~ nn.~ nun nn nn nn nu nu
~o.n H4 N oa.n no.” n~.n mo." --. -. -. -- -- -- --
N¢.n h¢.n oo.n m~.o ~n.0 an." ”n.~ ¢_.o nn.¢ nn.¢ «w.n o~.~ o¢.o
no 0 om.n an.“ no.H fin.n Ho. flo.q oo.n ”n." -- -- -. --
Na. n~.4 n~.~ o~.n q~.n o~.~ nn.a -.n co.“ no.“ oo.a o~.n q~.n
No.n o~.m oo.n -.~ nu nn nn un nn nu nn nu nn
o~.# qo.~ ”N.” 0".“ co.” on.~ go." «o.- n~.. on.o .. q~.n Na.m
m~.~ sq.~ mo.~ mn.~ o~.~ o~.n oo.~ no.9 an.“ ~n.n no.a oo.o 4M.“
o“.~ m~.q oo.n oo.~ on. a~.~ ao.n “e.. on.n 0o.n “a.” nH.¢ -.¢
m~.n an.n an.~ n~.n Ho.m co.“ we." 0o.n o~.n oo.~ no.“ no.n “5.0
ok.n q_.~ n5." oo.~ oo.~ on.“ on.¢ ¢~.. a~.~ oo.a on.“ no.n on.n
Ho.~ nfi.n -.n ON.N o~.n as. «o.o ma.“ on.n N~.. -.~ om.n on.“
oo.¢ ma.. o_.~ qm.~ .~.w nu. hm.n ~o.a o~.H do.c «n.o on.” a~.o
-- -- -- a¢.~ -.m co. -- -n -n n- -n .- --
o~.m ON.O ‘o.. as. mo.~ n..~ mo.n co.“ an.“ co.~ o~.~ no.“ on.“
m~.a oo.~ no." o~.~ «a._ ~o.« .. n. -n u. n- u- ..

nu amomunuwmww “mofi an¢~ mmofi qfiofi nnofi «mofi “ Hmofl onafi onofi "nod oqofi
«o.m on.“ ~n.¢ ~¢.~ nn.~ flo.q ~5.n no.“ oo.~ 00.0 -.~ oe.n
no.o" ”5.4 do.“ n~.n ca.n oo.q oc.~ an.“ -.~ 5n.» mo.fi «n.e

mo.n "N.“ 5”,; -- -- -. -- -. -. u- -n ..
on.» nm.° n~.~ ma." "a.“ no.“ no.“ o~.o hm.~ o~.o ~¢.~ o~.n

.- -- .. od.~ no.“ on.“ .- .- -- n- -- -.
4A.n 00.0 «5.; on.“ oo.fi OO.N ca.~ c~.e -.¢ 00.0 eo.~ nm.~

gm.“ 0n.n om.¢ .. u- -- -- -- -- -. -- ..
ea.“ o~.o no.“ .om.n mg. #0.; so.a “n.“ No.“ NH.O ~g.~ oo.n

~m.4 o~.n ~o.n ad.” oo.n .. -. -- u- -- .- ..

no.~ no.“ am.“ No.“ so.“ o~.n oa.~ no.o ON.N -- -- --

a~.¢ 0o.n NN.N 0o.n a~.n -.o n_.q -.m ¢~.n -- -- --

0o.n no.n co.“ -- -- -- n- .- -- n- u- --

an.~ “n.o 0,.“ u- -- n- u- n- .. -.. -- --

nn.~ an.m ma.c .. -- n- -. -- -- u- -- --
uu.. nnofi nno_ “nod . ommw «Nag o~o~ -o~ ONafi «mnfi U n~o~ “ “no“ fiflofl

ON.O

«0.0

«fiofi

mfiod

no.n mn.~ mo.n omega><
nn.n ~N.~ no.m xOuH
n nBouon
«Ago; uu>qu
N¢.q oo.~ Q~.¢ xuuuo
nn nn un coup»:
couxuohn 1&2
“hcxxuoq

080: vcugcmq:
u ucufivco:
uuu cooho
un un nu u>~cuu
~030h unom some oufiqm
ufianuaw

uufiunuoucm

.. u- .. qnflu
nu nu un :Izuoo
quasafloo
umcfiunm unwuou
couxcgu
owvuucahm
xoflucohn
Own—«umm “=19
Iu-aguvc<
ygdg>~nn<
UHmzo:

flflod H ofiofi “ oooa H monH<Hmmpm

 

 

.uuacducoo.-- m «An-H

 

413

~§.n

nn.n

no.~

no.n

on.~

o~.A

on.~

«sue

no.¢

oo.a

-.n

OO.H

On.n

—Q.N

no."

as.

no.

n~.~
¢~.m
On.¢
~¢.o

nn.m

mo.a

n¢.~

oo.~
o~.¢
mm.~
mo.~

xvcum
,uouuqm
oxen-ox
udouuuuu
nucuunm vc-:u_¢
uuum mad-«u
nun-x con ».~«¢
puma-u
zoncuuu
licuam
uOuoucou
uuu-Hm
gin-L
can“; cacm
acouaz
soc-m “do:
uuu-con:
can-uuu:
um“: annual
soc-d coo:
ndaon finned“:
cucum vaqdoou:
gonna uoflflux
no.1:
soc-x edgy-x
aflu ofiuuua
051~4
nuada
zucdz coma;
o~#«>-«)0A
quad-o 0:04
Huoamou
cue-x co-cnon
duo-u~
u>0uu zone:
anon-add:
inch zu~qox
adds-z
qua-)zuvfiou
eagu>nocunu
«hang-ouch
> acaxdm
wuss-soauovouh
ouah
caflnao
..oo
ace conwcoo
nauquoo
coucon
uuu
vcuauocu
ocucdm occuu
onuculou
no couuugo
dong-go
Huey-nu
sued: uu-u
zucqu can-u
gun’s
v001:30un
“honouvdun
sea-um
xvcun
who.
a-zcon
uuxcndn
“caosuon.<
xuuu nacuu<
“m22n

 

 

 

 

~mo~

“no~

mwod

«flog

n «Nod
. aooa

ago“

.ucaw :a
uncuuuu-nao dcoauo—ouo-uul vouooflo- you vauuonou fifi-ucd-h mo cozuca vacuu><nnco ofinqp

monH<meum

414

 

 

 

-u on.0 nn.n nn.n n0. #0. on.n no.o n0.n nn.n u- no. .. oo.n oo.n _~.o o0. _n.n -u u- un nun-n
nn.n no.n on. nn.n 0n.n oo.n oo.n no.n -u u- u- .. oo.n nn.n o0. oo.n no.0 u. u- u- u. beacon
oofl0 nn.n oo.n n0.n no.~ no.~ oo. o0.0 nn.n oo.0 n0.n oo.n no.” 0n.o o0. 0n.n on.0 u- u. -n u- anon-on
0n.n o0.~ on. nn.n n~.n oo.n oo.n n0.n on.n on.n o0.n nn.n no. nn.n oo.. 0o.n o0.n o0.n uu .. nu onouuono
oo.n uu oo. nn.n no. oo.n oo.~ u- oo.n nn. on. nn. on. nn.n oo. oo. nn.n 00.0 n. u- nu oucnuom va-noonu
oo n oo.n on. oo.n nn. 0o. 0o.n no.0 n0.n on.0 00.o 0n._ n0.n nn.n -u n0.n .. u- nu -u nu anon non-nu

-q no.0 oo. no.n 0n. o0. oo.n oo.n oo.. 0o.n oo.n nn.n oo.n no.n no." oo.n oo. oo.~o -- uu nu goo-o con noon:
no.n onn no. oo.n oo. on. nn. uu n- oo.n nn.n 24 on; -u un nu uu -- nu uu nn no?!
no.0 oo.n no. on.n 00.n no. 0o. 0n.n nn.n n0.o 00.n n0.n nn.n no.0 on. 0o.“ 0o.n no.0 o0.0 o0. uu neocoqo
nn.n 0n.n on. no.q on. n0.n no. no.o nn.n nn.n oo.n nn.n o0.0 no.n on. no.“ on.0 oo.n nn.n 0o. on. lagoon
oo o nn.~ n0. o0.n on. on. no.” nn.n oo.n on.n on.n .. -u nn.n nn.n on.0 nn.n o0.o n- u. n- uoooouon
EMS nn.n nu 3.0 u- nu on." nn.n m0. oo.n S. nu un n0.n on. 0n; n. oo.n uu nu uu 30.:
co o 00.n 0o.n no. on.“ 00. on. nn.n oo.n oo.0 nn.n no.n oo.n o0.n 0n.n oo.0 no.0 00.0 no.n nn.o oo.n .nuon
no.0 oo.n nn.n oo.n on. oo.n nu nu nu nu nu uu -u nu nu nu nn nu uu uu uu 3:: on:
n0.n 0o.n nn. no.n nn. 0o.n 0o. nn.n 0o.n no.n nn.n 0o.n on.“ n0.n nn.n no.n nn.0 uuu u- u- u. .oo.:-
o0.n o0.n oo. n0.n no. nn. nn.n no.n no.“ nn.n n0.n o0. o0.o oo.n 0n.“ oo.n nn.n no.oo -u n- nu sou-a no.2
on.0 oo.n nn.n no.0 on.n on.n nn. 0o.n nn.n oo.n no.0 nn.n oo.n on.n on.n o0.0 n0.n -u u- nu nu oo.-coax
86 EA 2. can oo.n on; nu nu un un uu nu un nu nu nu un nu nn uu uu 3.3.5:
on.0 oo.n no. oo.n Z. 2. un nu nu nu nu n- n- nu nu nn uu u- uu uu nu :n: 593:
oo.n 0n.n o0. nn.n no. oo. oo.n 0n.n nn.n oo.n nn.n nn.~ oo.n on.n nn.o on. nn.n no.0 .. -u -u ouauu one:
and no; no. nn.n on; on. un un uu un uu un un -n nu un nu nu nu nu nu 0:0: nun-5:
. nu oo.n on.“ o0.0 oo.~ no. no. on.n nn.n no.n 0o.n oo.n on. 00.0 oo. oo.n .. u. u. u- u. .ooon enouooux

-- -u -u no.n on. no. oo.n nn.n u- u- no.n -u .u no.n o0. on.n oo.n n- u. u- n- 00:0: gonna:
on.0 nn.n o0. oo.n oo.n on. no. nn.n no.n on.n no.n 0o.o oo.n no.n nn.n oo.n nn.0 on.0 u. u- u- soon:
oo.n nn.n on. on.o on. no. no. u. nn.n nu on.n no.n oo.n no.n 0n.“ on.0 on.n on.0 u- .u nu goons anuuux
onJ nn.n no; no.n oo.n no. 2. on; nn.n 2.0 u- on.0 no. oo.n nu uu nu nu un nu un I: :33
nn.o no.n no. nn.o on. no. 0n._ oo.n no. nn.n oo.n no." on.o oo.n no.n n0. no.n 0n.o 00.n 00. no. canon
3.0 non on." 0o.n on.“ on. nu u. u- uu nu .. uu -u uu u- uu uu uu nu un :13
uu un uu un nu nu ma. n0.n oo.n an; ON.N :. oo.n nn.n n0.n nn. 2; oo.? nu uu uu son: :03."
0n.n no.0 on.0 on.0 nn.n on. u- nn.n nn.n on.0 no.0 oo.0 00. u- .oo. no. 0o.n u- u- u. nu onnnoonaon
-u -- .u -u oo.n 0n. oo. 00.0 oo.n o0.0 -u no.0 on. nn.n no. 0n.o no.n -u u- -u u. oonnoo .344
nn nu nn un nu nn nu uu un nu nu nu nu un nu un nu nu nn nn un uuomnou
no.0 no.“ no. on.n n0. n0. n0.n o0.n 00.0 n0.n nn.n no.0 no.“ oo.n n0. oo.0 nn.o oo.0 -u nu nu goons cooaooo
-- -u u- u- -u n- u- u. u- -u nn.n .- oo.n 0o.n .. oo.n oo.o no.0 .. .u u. noooun
00.0 oo.n oo.n no.” nn.n oo. n0. no.no 0o.n nn.0 nn.n oo.n nn.n no.o 0n. o0.0 oo.n oo.0 oo.n u. on._ noooo once:
on.0 0n.o on. o0.0 00. on. on. nn.n .u n0.n uu oo.n nn.n on.o o0. nn.n no.n 0o.n "0.4 .. oo. ouonoonoo
un uu n- nu u- -u -n u- u. nu .nu oo. 0n.o on.n u. no." on.n oo.n nu u- n- no.» ounce:
o0.n no. no. oo.n oo.” oo. oo. nn.n nn.n nn.n nn.n no. no.“ no.“ o0.0 oo.n oo.n -u u- -- .. anon-2
oo.0 00.n n0. 0o.n o0. on. do. no.0 on.0 0n.n no.” no. no. no.n no. no. n0.n on.n oo.n 00. u- ounuaouoooo
nn.n 0o.n 40.“ 00.0 nn.n 00. on. oo.n nn.n 0o.n 00.0 oo.n nn.n no.0 oo. on.n on.n oo.n n0.~ no. no. connooouo-o
on.o on.0 on. no.0 00.n 0o. nn. no.0 on.0 _n.o uu oo.n 0o.n no.0 on. nn.n on.n on.0 .- u. u- unsouoouon
n0.n no_n 0n. 0n.0 .u on. no.” un oo.n no.“ oo.n -u u. 00.n on. u- nn._ on.o nu n- u- > nunono
oo.n nn.n on.“ nn.n 00._ n0. 0n.n nn.n oo.n oo.n 0o.n no.“ 0o.n on.n o0.o nn.0 0n.n o0.0 nu u- un ou=0oxonuoenon
o0.0 uu uu on.0 oo. n0. oo. nn.n oo.n nn.n uu no. on.n n0.n no. u. -u -u u- u. nu on:
oo.n no.n nn. no.4 nn. nn. on. nn.0 oo.n o0.o on.0 nn.n n0.n n0.n nn. no.n on.n oo.0 oo.n nn. no. undone
oo.n o0.n o0. oo.n nn.n oo. nn.o oo.n oo.n u- nn.n 0o.n oo.n oo.n no. no.0 oo.n oo.n .. u- u. ..oo
nn.n oo.n 0n. nn.n 0o.n no.n no. on.o o0.~ no.0 no.n oo.n o0.n oo.0 no. oo.n on.0 no.0 u- -. u. loo oo.nono
oo.n 0o.n oo.n 0o.n no.“ on. n_. 0o.n nn.n n0.n no.n 0o.n nn.n on.n u- -u u- -- u- u- -u nouqooo
n0.n oo.n u- n- u- on.“ on. no.0 no.4 nn.n oo.n 0n.n. n0.n oo.n on. oo.n on.n oo.n oo.0 no. nn. oooaoo
u- -uu uu .n uu .. oo.n 0o.n oo.n nn.n u- nn.n u. u- u. n- u- .u nu .. u- uuu
nn.n nn.n -u -u no. 0n.o H0. nn.n oo.n nn.n oo.n oo.o 00.o oo.n 0o. oo.o no.n on.oo oo.n oo.n nn. oo.n...»
.. .. nn. n0.n -u oo.n on. n0.n nn.n nn.n nn.n oo.n nn.n nn.n o_. no.“ n0.n nn.n -u u- u- .cnonn ..o.u
n0.n nn.n on.” no.n no._ do.“ on. oo.n no." oo.0 oo.n no.“ nn.n nn.0 oo. no.o 0n.o nn.n oo.n nn. o0. none-uuu
oo.no nn.n oo.n n0.n 0o. n0.n nn. nn.n H0.n nn.0 nn.n on.n nn.n 0o.n nn. _o.~ oo.0 no.0 0o.n oo. oo. no counnnu
00.nn nn.n 0o. no.n no. on. oo.n on.o nn.n o0.o n0.n oo.~ no. oo.n oo.~ no. oo.n .. -u -. u- nooooou
.. -- -u u- u- -n on. u- nn.n .- n0.n -u on.” nn.n oo. oo.~ n .o oo.n -- -- u- nnouooo
on.0 on.n on. oo.n nn.n 0o. nn.n nn.n 00.n oo.n oo.n nn.n. oo.0 on.n oo.n oo.n no. N.o~ oo.n nn.n on. guano oo.0
un uu nu nn oo. 3. un un nu uu nu un nu un uu u- u. uu nu nu nu :35. 23.0
nn.n 0o.0 oo. o0.0 on. on.0 oo. on.o oo.n oo.n u. on.“ 00.~ nn.n 0o. oo.o 0n n oo.n .. u- u- .oono
oo.no no.n 0n. on.0 no.” on. on. 0o.o 0o.n no.o un “0 oo.” oo.n no. nn.~ fin.n 0o.n oo.0 on._ no. oooxaaono
nn.n no. on. oo.n oo. nn.n nn. oo.n oo.n nn.n on.n no.0 nn.n 0n.n nn._ oo.n no,n oo.n oo.. oo. u- ”noonuvnnn
no.n n0.n oo.“ o0.0 0n. nn. oo. oo.n n0.n u- -u u- -- .. -u .- u- u- -u .. oo. non-no
on.n oo.n oo. nn.n n0. nn. on. nn.n 0o.n nn.n _o.n oo. on. nn.n on. n0.n on.“ no.0 no.« u- .. noon.
oo.n on. 0o.n nn.n 0o.n on. on. no.0 on.0 nn.n nn.n on.~ -u -u u- .u -u u- -- u- u- soon
no.n o0.0 0o.n 0o.n nn.n nn. oo.n 00.nn 0n.~ on.o oo.n .- on.“ on.0 0n.0 on.m nn.n nn.n 0o.n on. 0o.n lance-
nn.o on.n nn. nn.n nn.o 0o.~ on. 00.n no.~ nn.n 0o.n 0n.o nm._ 0o.n on. 0n. nn.n no.0 .. -u .. uoxoono
oo.0 oo.n nn. nn.n o0. oo.n 0n. nn.n oo.n n0.n no.n n0. oo.n oo.n nn.n 0o.n oo.n 00.” on.o oo. oo.n .oooosuooo<
nn.n nn.0 o0.n 00. on." 0o.o no.n 0o.n oo.n 0o.n nn.n 0o.n nn._ 0o.o nn.n 0o.n Mn.n n0.n oo.n no. on.” ounu 0:00u<

”axon
H onoo onoo 0noo noon «moo noon nnoo “nod onoo oooo nowanJ Koo“ 00o“ wood ” 04o. nooo nno“ ono” nnon “ 0noo onoo ozonn<un0oo

 

 

.uuacnUCOUunco Una-H

415

an.

on.~

nn.n
no.~
on.“
-.~

on.“

an.“

co.n
c~.n
~¢.N
nn.n
~¢nu

noun
oa.u
nn.n

nn.n

n~.~
N~.n
on."
«u.—

n~.~

no.0
nu.o

n—.¢

~o.a

unuc

on.n

 

anon

wno~

anon

one“

ulll‘

anon

anon

'1"

” nuou

I...-
I."

....sacgasus

oo.n

oo.n

cc.”
cans

2.
no.
.nuu

«.nu

on.“

on.n

c5
‘2

O I uc3:2a
flN—znn—o

oo.n

no."

nn.n

a...
an.»
o...
«cu—n

o~.u~

can»
own.

nn.n

cone
ounn

«nun

ownon
n.
....
ammo—

nMun on.on

oo.n

«an.
nn.n
unuo
Gono~

«cum

nn.n
«n.c
no.

nn.n

On.n

an.

adun
nu.~

«nun
an.“
«a.

o<.¢

no.0

on.~

nc.n

nn.n
an.¢

o~.~

oo.n

nn.n
«n.n

OQ.
03.

:-
nu.

ouch->1

unounuo»
I:;¢o»
nonnqa
novnoca
vuvnanuk
nuns-oh
couuuozh
unnatsunla
ansnuu
unanno~anon
union

ans-unl oncOuI< nun
mono “novnpoum
uncoou
naught-m

no nan-non
noun.
gnomes-u: has
uuu-Ion; .uz
nan-z

and; used
uuu-nun;
cauncvuaon
anus-w

onion
ous-no: sou-ac:
01:0:
icon-Luau
onnn>nuuo~n¢u
cannon-nu
353.8
scan-nan»
chow onuu
onnn>oouonu
nu:0uc~u

auqu nan-u
nuanuan

nonua

uuu clan
nonnno

can?on
cann>no
o-oum»u

cacao
outsoOHU
oanlnnoo
unnauou
cannonu

gun-u Icon-.nu
onnn>uunuou
canal-u
acununnusn
oncuusn
ocozu<
“gunned:

.8 :52:
anauh

cane-uh
oaocnonoh
o~_«>:o;moum
mzzo crnuum
shouldum.
aconm

"nounnm
Bulk-5m

nn.n ad»
"mash

 

 

one“

" «daa

" can“

" anon

“ ”no“

” fined

«nod

“nod

n Ono“

 

 

monH<Hmnbm

.voscnuzounndo oflndh

 

416

., n
N
(D

~TMPGMHNfiMrlv4Mm..¢—4H

rar~
{CIDC

D

0‘

_‘
..4

a)“

P. Po -4

n’uxn' fl
5‘
!\
r~o
J m n

4’ P‘fv‘
.,P‘|.,_—--nr'

h u

.1"~r<t")°\r'r\

racy-”‘lelfl>—H

«firm:
0»!
~foJ-1mq
4M5.

O

O

I
I
m
'\
nfimr.-. s-‘n.
..
0-

N

H

0*

O

can
1

i

m g 4 A
4 no

0
.0
x?
O

J ~1
no N
-. .n .n -n

c.
9
O

.3

O
C

4'

0"
Ix

m

108
n
In?

J

run—4M0
.ynnomrn

r\
Q“

00
on

ooonuncor—nru

O

¢oOoc4mrav~0

m

3

.nanuwonmnmd 1

Q
I)

 

o0.n oo.n no.n oo. nn.n 0H.”
o_.n o0.~ no.n oo.n .. on."
o_.n oo.n oo.“ oo. on. ..
nn.0 0o. nn.0 on.n n. oo.
no." oo.n o0.n no. no. . nn.n
on.o nn.n oo.n nn.n on. 7:
o_.0 0o. 0o.0 oo.n on.“ --
oo.o 00.n oo.0 o0.~ .n oo. o,.
oo.n nn.n _o.n no. 0o.n n . on.o
nn.n on.~ a . on. on.n oo. nn.n
oo.n n0.n _n.0 oo.. 0o.n 0. o0.o
nn.n o .0 oo.n nn.n 0o.n n0.n nn.o
nn.o on.n oo.n nn. oo.n on.n no._
0o.n nn.~ on.n no. oo.n no." no.
oo.n nn.n 0n.n o_. on.n no._ no.”
no.n 0o.n on.“ no. 0n._ nn.n oo.n
no.0 no.0 nn.n n0.o no._ No. on.
oo.n 00. oo.n .. nn.0 oo.. nn.o
No.¢ ¢~.~ no.4 mm. oo.n nn.n oo.n
0o.n nn.n o0.0 n0.n nn._ no.
no.n nn.n oo.n nn.n .. on.
nn.n 0n.n 00.0 n0. on. no.
nn.n on.“ oo.q nn. nn. oo.n oo.n
oo.n no.o oo.~ -u oo.n oo.~ on.
oo.n n0.n oo.n nn. no. n0.n oo.n
0o.n oo.n oo.0 n0.n oo. nn.n on.o
on.n n0.n _o.o nn. oo.n on. oo.n
00.0 on. nn.n nn.n n0. nn.0 n.
o_.n on.0 nn.n no.” on. on.o oo.“
oo.n oo. nn.n 0n.o no. _m.n oo.
nn.n on. no.0 00.o on. nn.n oo.n
00.0 no.n no. nn. n.0 no. oo;
00.“ 0n.n nn.n no. 0n.n on. o .o
o0.o nn.n nn.n no.n 00." no.~ oo.
.. n0.n no.n oo. n_. no.” oo.n
oo.n nn.n _n.n o0.o oo._ on_n 00.
no.n 00. 00. n0. no.n o0. nn.n
oo.n nn.n _n.n on. on. 0n.n nn.n
no.n no.o _o.0 nn.n no. _n u.
no.” oo.. no.n oo.n nn.n on._
00.” on.0 on.0 do." on. on.n
nn.n 0n. 00.0 nn.n oo.n 0o.n
oo.0 nn. oo.n on._ no. on.0
oo.o oo.n nn.o on._ on. 00.
o0.n nn.n oo.o on. no. oo.n
0o.n nn.o on.n oo.n no.n oo.n
00,— n0.n n0.n 00.o 0n.n no.n
no.n on. o0.o oo. oo.n n.n
00.0 00.0 oo.n oo.n o0. 0o.
no.n nn.n o0.0 nn. oo. n0.
nn.n nn.n no.n no.n no. 0n.o
o_.n oo.n on.n no.” on. no.
00.0 oo.. n0.n n0. on." on.“
oo.0 oo.n on.o oo. nn.~ no.o
oo.n 0o.n oo.n no." 0o.n --
n0.4 nn.n oo.n on. on. oo.
no.0 no.0 oo.n on. no.” on.
-u .. n0.« n0. oo.n no.
on.0 -u oo.~ oo. 0“. ..
on.0 oo.. nn.. oo. oo. .-
oo.n 0n._ oo.n on. no.o --
0o.o on.n oo.. 0n. on. no.“
oo.no n0.n nn.n 0o. no.0 oo.
oo.0 0n.n nn.n oo.n oo.n no.
no.0 .u o0.n oo. oo. no.o
onoo onoo nnoo 00o_ umoo nno“

on.

n@.n

mm.a

our-Now“
mfi<f|fiMmOQF~Pd—~

‘1

OO‘n—‘QO‘COL‘R

QWQ

no.

no.n

nn.n

NO
ON

«8
rsrs¢arnv\—nnnen—-oorI-—-vah¢

nn no—nhqmncoONo
QSONU‘MNMQO—‘On
u-O

«N.g

no.~

on.~

so.~

nq.n
on.~
n«.o
an.“
Nn.n
n~.~
{o.n
as.“
oo.0
nn.n

O
N

| l a n I o o . o n u I O n
hw‘ vs view-o «uh-l:u:9‘dnno

$n382n233382$§3
O

audOOIflN
°.¢OM
I I .- 0 C
onoflnoOo-fi
o-a

an MOMQ
n:~QN—IN
0‘ F‘

—‘

no.0
n<.c
an.n
na.n

 

n4o~

Neon

 

n econ

o~.n

an.“

oo.n

on.¢

_n.

o~.n

no.

o~.n

oo.n
n¢.o
oo.n
«c.n
oo.n

«an.

ou0u0b<

crouxuo»
lax-or

nonnca

haunt-3

vdvncnuw

nnuAIOH

noucuonh

cann>sunln

analom

uuaaconazon

uni.“

unusual onaouq< a.»
aunu acovuhoug
accuou

uncouooh

mu nan-non
noun:

o~ou¢30un ail
undo-.nu .ux

Ian-t

ondduuqa
acne-duaon
ovvon
cognac: can-:0:
cane:
coon-Ali:
onnn’ouuonn-n
noon-acuo
.9: 3.8
cannonaou
snow onun
onnn>uou0n~
caucuanu
auno unnnu
nqunuun
uoaun

no. «can
nonnno
onn>on
nn~n>¢n
unsusxu
cacao
uuoxoouu
nunlsnou
unnauou
cantonu
sued: uuu-nanu
onnnououaou
non-ICU
acunsnnunn
on-uuao
quogu<
nnoauun:
.Iia nqcunzn
anauh
scan-uh
0:0:n0nch
on~n>aoznuum

 

 

" anon

 

no.n nn.n
on." no.
4n.« oh.u
ON.N On.n
~N.~ no.n
oo.n oo.
no. an.~
an.” as.
nn.n «m.
on. no.n
no.n nn.n
on.0 no.c
on.n an.N
«e.. no.n
oo.n oo.”
nu oo.n
oo.n can"
oo.” oo."
c~.~ cu.
Noun on.
Ouun nn.n
no. nn.n
«u. an.“
oo.n n«.«
ac.c an.“
mg. ms.“
nu Nu.n
_n.n an.“
no.n oo.n
o~.¢ «N.c
nn.n oo.n
" anon n anon

anon

 

mzo~H<Hmn=m

 

 

.voscnucoonn-o cnnqw

417

uu nn.n no.n on. no.n on.~ o~.n ~n.¢~ _¢.~ no. so. no.~ on.n nn.n oO.N mu. o~.c ~o. on.n is. ¢¢.a nn.n no.~ ~s. ma. Quack

uu uu u- uu uu .. --- uu uu uu uu uu u uu uu uu uu uu uu -u u- uu uu uu o~u«m o~nm
uu .- uu uu uu uu uu uu .u -u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uaouaz
uu -u uu -u -u u- uu uu -u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu -u soon: ~10:
uu uu .u uu uu uu -u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uuuccoat
uu -u u- uu uu uu .u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu valance:
uu u- u- uu uu uu uu uu uu u- uu uu uu uu . uu uu uu uu u. uu uu . uu uu .. uu ad“: scuba:
u- uu uu uu uu .- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu .- uu gonna o-oz
-u -- -u .u u- u. u- uu uu -u -u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u. -u u- uu -u o_~o: dquocaz
.. u- .. uu uu --- -u uu uu .- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu .. uu . -u -u uu «youm v—qconux
-u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu -u gonna uoflquz
uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu .u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu no.n:
-u -- .. uu uu u- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u- u- u- soon: nauu¢x
.. .- -- u- u- u- .u -u -u u- .u u. u. uu uu uu u. uu uu uu u- u. u- -u u- Ian cauu.q
«o. «o.~ no.~ uu u- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu an. uu no.~ oo. on.n oo.‘ fig. acid;
-u uu u- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu adaua
u- uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu 49:1: and“;
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II Un—«’I«’...—

- -. u- -- -. -- ...flca Ian;
-- -- -- n~. o~. ao.n 0“." fi~.o .5. cc. oo. on.“ oo.. on.n on." u. co. aw." nn.n no. o..~ .. oo.¢ an.“ on.~ ~..naoa
u uu uu uu uu uu Audi. aoo:now

II II II II II II II II III II II II II II II II II II II . II II II II II II .UI'OH
m«.a Hm.n -.o no.~ «A.¢ ~n.¢ ~m.o no.¢~ «o. o~. «a. on.“ an.“ no.n nn.n co. no.n on.~ .. u- .- .. u- -- -- o>o~u aagoz
. cu. a~. oo.n nu.o nn.n n..— an. as." oo.~ an. an. on. nn.e no.~ nN. o.on.-.:

uu -u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu luau nuflco:
-- -- -- -- -. .- -. .u .- .. u. .u so.“ u. a... no. on.“ nu. oo.~ an.“ nn.n ha. o~.~ -- .. efidu¢=
uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu .. u. .. uudcazuu~ou

do.“ o~.n no.~ on. ”N.” oa.~ no.0 a¢.~ d~.~ on. on. on. ad.“ cc.n ...- no." oo.n nu. no." no. .«.n «o. oo.” ~o.o Nu. ou~.>..a.oo
uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u- .. au3Aucou0h

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II > gdhd-

-- -- -- u- u- u- u- .u .u u- .u .. uu uu u. uu uu u- u. an.“ ad. o..~ a~.~ nn. -.o nuns-sudhooo.u

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II .Huh
a~.~ n¢.m mo.“ no. o~.~ HI. ca." “e.. .¢.. an. nc.~ ~o.n -. on. c~.n oo.. nn.n «a. as.“ n¢.~ an. oo. .o.a oN. o~._ udunaa
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II ..8
II II II II II II III II II II II II .II II II II II II II II II II II II II ..a gin—us
uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu II Iu II II II Iu Iu uu uu uu uu S. ~N. ..auouun
-.¢ hh.~ -.~ an. an.” ca.~ -.¢ cc.“ on. “n. on. as. “a.“ ca.« «0.. as. a... n.. an.“ e.. nn.~ -. -- -- -- =o.:.a
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II 'h”

«a. an.n fin.“ nd.fl o~. o¢.n an.“ .n.c oo.n “a. on.“ an." on. . «..~ nn.n oo. n~.. as. no.“ oo. .. .- o~.~ -- -- oeu~u.qu

u u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu -u .nu-"m uncuu
no. no.” ¢o. a“. u¢.d go.” on.“ n~.n uh.“ .. -- u. u. u- u. .. nu.” .. ad.“ n«.~ mo." -- -. -- -- Isuzu-cu
n~.o -.~ n¢.~ «o. n“. -.~ ua.~ nu.“ ae.~ an. an. .n.. .~.n nn.n no.n no. nn.n c~.~ co.~ n~. g..~ oo." nn.n -. -- no nouud~u

uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu ~onangu
uu u. uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u. uu uu uu uu uu uu uu -ouucu
on. 3.5 ND.“ uI II uu II II II II II II II II . II II II II II II II II II II a. £81.. nn.0
u- u- uu uu uu u- uu uu u. u. uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu u. .u nun-d nan-u
u. uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu uu Ivy»:

«I. ~o.~ nN. ma. ”n. e..; .n.n .~.~ a.. In. an.. ...N nu. ma." no.n oo. -- ... -. as. oo. an. n¢.¢ o“. .c. voozauo..
¢~.~ he.¢ nn.~ ca." om.~ “e.. “0.0 so.“ .~.n no. on.“ oo.~ on.. an.“ ~o.n oo." .... .. ... ... as.“ as. oo.” .d. nu. ..oa..ua..
“a. “0.: «a. do. n~.~ an.“ ofi.c ...~ .~.~ no. “a." as. oo. e‘.n .n.‘ ... ~c.~ ... en. «5. an.“ ad.“ no.“ an. ad.“ .ouuu.

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II 8. II II “a“.
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II IJ II II II II II II II ”is
-. .. -- .¢.~ uo.~ o~.~ «m.e ~o.- -.~ Ia. on.. .... «e.. no." .a.. as. o..a n.. o~.n so. a... ¢~.~ a... -. n~._ Ia...-
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II 803‘.

II." on.n Nd." ac. nh.n “a." co. e~.e «o. oo. a.. -. .. n~.. oo.» oo. nu.“ no. an.. ...n a... ...N .o.« -. -- . .asauu...<
,o.q Na." oo.n am. no. oh.~ «e.. «5.. on.. an." on. oo.n ...» .... . ~n.¢ nn.. n~.n . 5.." on.“ .n. nu.“ oo. oa.~ ._.~ on. hudu .ag..<
">435

 

nnou u «mod n “mud ” Ono“ u o~o~

 

 

 

..nod . on.“ ...-ya ...-a -. ...«u-u..-u ...a-u...ola.- .oo.-...
... .oo.-... aqua-... u. .....a ...-.54.... can.»

418

 

 

 

 

 

 

no.n NH.o nn.n a“. nq.a do. ofl.m mm. nn.n o~.H oo.n nn.~ no.n cm.~ no.“ «N.n oo.¢ no.a an.o «0.0 N~.c nq.o «c.n n~.~ No.d~ on.n uuu-m
mm o oo.¢ nn.n mm. 0m.“ MM u an.“ nn nn nu nu nn nn n. nn nu un nn nu uu nn nu un nu nu uu Ouuum aficm
n“ n m~.~ on. no. n~.q ma. n~.n no.n nn.~ ma.m 0m. do. ¢~.« No. ad.n en.n an. an. ac.” un nu nu nn nu nu nu ocean:
Ho.~ 0n. ac. m~.~ m~.~ 0H. nn.n no. NH. do.“ nn oo. nu. ma. an.n #9. mm. au.d Ne." on. nn un nu nn nu nu sound «no.
mq.n cm.n Nn. mo.” on.“ mk.H mo.a nm.‘ oh.n Ms.“ ac. q~.n «o. oo.“ cm.“ On.~ 00. no. oo.a nn nu nJ nu uu un nu nuances:
nn.n n~.c n~._ on.“ «o. o..fl “~.n «o. mo.¢ nn.n nu no.“ oo. he. No.0 N0.N nu nn nn nn nn un nnn nu nn nu can-uuu:
no q oo.~ 0n. no. -.~ o~.~ do.“ n. nu nu nu nu nu nn uu . nn nn nu nn nu nn nn uu un nu nu uuu: undue!
an. ~¢. an. OH. om.~ oo. o~.~ mn.~ no. mo.“ ac. oo.~ oo. oo. «w.~ RN. ann nn.~ van o~.~ nu nn uu nu nu nu sound .09!
on.n no.n ma. co. “m.“ nn.n um.H nn nu nn nn nu nn nn nn un un nn nn nu nu nn nu nu un nu . n-03 uuu-flu:

un un mo.H oo. om.~ oo. mq.n on. mu. mn.n an. en.“ 00. oo. ~n.n Nc.n oo. oo. nn nn nn nu nn nn nu nn uncum vacaOAul
no.n ow. oo. -- oa.n an. no.” oo.“ oo. .. -n no." u. on. 5“. kn. oo. my." oo. nn n- nn nn -n -n -n sue-u uo—uqx
no.n ow. nn a“. no.“ as." o~.~ mo. o~. nn ca.n nn.n can . No. “0.“ no. so.” oe. cunn Nana nu nu nn un nn nu no.1!
~n.~ oo.n an. oo.~ -.n NN. ao.~ m4. ¢~.~ No.4 nn.~ NN.N ma. cc. nn.~ on. n¢.~ go. {6.0 can“ . nu nn nu nu nu nn sue-x annual
no.n oq.~ an.~ oo.n ~m. m¢. OO.N mm. on.~ wo.m mm. oo. nu «o.n nn.0 ~O.N nu un nn nn nu nu nu nu nu nn lgu cuuuua
oo.H no. oo. NN. ~H.~ n . oh.~ Ho.~ go. He. NN.“ nq.~ cu. no. ao.~ «e. we.“ he. no.« an.n n~.~ {n.o~ no.~ oo.0 os.n uu gang;
2: 2; 3. : 2.~ 2.“ a: .- -- -- -- n- .n n- n- n. -n n- nu nn nn nu n. nn n- -n .13

-- -n n- -- -- -- -- mm. -- : S; S.“ 2. 8. 3. 8. 3. nn 1... on.“ n- -n n. n.. n. n- :25. no.3
NN.N q¢.~ oo. oo. on. an. no. no. q¢.~ nn n~.~ oé. oo. o~.n oc.~ do. 00. nn «0.. nn nu nu nu nu nn nn on~u>uusla
-n n- n- n. 34 mm. 3. no. 2.~ $6 an. nu nu -.n no.n 3." on. no. oo. «n3 nn nn un nu nu nn 3:3 .3
.. nn n- nn n- -n n- n- .. nu nn nn nn un un nn nu nn nn nn nu nn nu nn un nn Casi
oo.q an. as. Na.” o~.q no. mm. no. oo. an.” a~. oo.~ o~. an. oo.n co. no. an. nuna «on nu nu nn un nu nu gun-u nonason
nn un nu nu nn nn n. nu un nn nu nu.n oo. oo. nQ.¢ aunn an. on.~ nn.n oo.n nn nn nu un nu nu doc-um
26 flé 3. -n 3..“ 3. 3.0 3.“ :6 2.: :6 nn.n «”4 an. 2.... cod 2. un 3.0 :3 osnu 3.“ no; nu. as; an. 26.5 hull
and SA 34 on. SA 2. £.~ 2. 9... n- 2; 3.4. 3. on. no.n no; 24 an.“ oo.n on; 8. oo.” an." nn.n 2. 3. 33::-
un nn nu nn uu nn un nu nu un nu uu no. ON.N nn 00. «and oo.~ on. nn nn nn nn nn un nn luih sud-cl
3.: an. on. i.” . C.“ 3. $3 2.“ £4 an.” 3. $4 3. On. 35 :3 no. to; nn nn un nu nu nu nn nu Sui.-
ng.n ne.~ on. no. on.“ on. Ho.~ nn ca.“ ~v.~ q”. no.n ca. co. no.— ac.” nu. oo. sunu an. ac. N5.N~ wand oc.¢ an. nn ouucazutaoc
am.n -.n me. an.“ ac. a¢.~ 4n.a on. an.“ no.0 ow. #n.~ no. so.“ de.n on.“ no.“ o~. Gong on.c cu. vs.u co.u ¢¢. oo.n ao. ou~u>ooau¢e
uw.¢ do.n On. no." no. q~.~ on.~ no. nn.n no.4 co. nn.n 00. on. nn.n oo.n nu. oo. «0. uono nn nn nu nu nu un uusnu-IhOL
no.n 3; 3. an. S; -. 24 3. n- .- n. 3." n- n- 8.“ no. nn 2. on; 3. nn nn nu nn nn n. > 1:»:
an.u as. oo. u4.~ en.q m_. up. an. m“. cm.“ -.~ <n.~ we. no. o~.~ an. oo.n co. n¢.~ nc.~ nn.n nn nn nn nu nn Inna-souroUuu
oo.¢ go. «o. o~.~ no.~ -. Na. #0. ON. o~.~ oo. nu nu mm. as.“ nnu un nu nn nn nn nn nn un nn nn . ouuh
oo.~ no.n go. NN. ~n.~ no. n¢.~ ~c. on. no.n ~N. nn nu nu." No.n no.n an. #0. cont ocnu n~.~ oo.n no.n ou.— ca. No.~ launaa
ou.~ o¢.~ on. ad. nfi.n oo. ~q.~ 0¢. o~.~ $0. ~o.~ mo. fig. 00. oo. no. nn.c n~nn oo.n an.“ un nu nu un ..un un .09:
nn.n on.“ o4.~ n~. ca.~ «o. nn.n no.~ ~_.~ «e.o an.d nn.0 co. nan gc.o ¢o.~ oo. «n. oo.u n~nn un nn nu nu nn nn . Ila Gena-on
ca.n ou.¢ ¢¢.~ nn.n 4~.~ ¢~.~ o~.~ n¢.« no.~ «a.o~ no. on. No. o~. o¢.n un nu un nn nn nu nn nu un nn nu usuuucn
an.n on.~ oo. an. an. nu cc.d oo.“ oo.~ nn oa.~ an.“ oo. an." oo.n on." no.“ a“. nu oo.£ no. on.“ «c.~ oo.“ oo.n no. cannon
nu nu nu un nu nu no.n an. ”o.n no.n nn. nu nu nu un nn nn nn nn nn nn nn nn un un un uuu
~_.n N..¢ on. nu nn o“. n~.n an. N~._ 0n.4 On.“ oc.~ cu.” no.~ na.n oo.n 0A. on. cunn co. acne oo.0 no.n nn.n n~.~ no.n tangy-I-
oo.¢ OO.N n‘. nn ha.n mm. ~n.~ 0‘. no. no.n on. oo.~ nn an. -.n -.e nn o¢.~ Dena «N. we. nn nI nn nn nu nuunum .oouo
#a.< ¢o.~ Na.” 06. no.~ mg A o~.~ ON. we. na.n ao.~ -.n oo. «n.g <~.n nu.n no. nn.n uenn an. as. an.“ owns menu 90. ac.~ . caved-cu
2... «n. 3..” 3. no; .5; mod 8; .No; n~.~ nn.n on; 3. 2. 35 no. no. 3.” o~.n nn.n 3. 3.0 ow." on; «in 2. no .8330
a: 3; 3. 2. 3; 3. oo.." 2. 2. oo..” 2; S; S. no. 3.~ 3. 3.. on." 2% nn un nn nn nn nn nn «2:28
nn.n nn oo. un nn nn nn «9. mo.~ an. un n¢.¢ nu an. oo. oo. nn as. nn.u ounu nn nn nn nn . nn nu anew-IO
oo. 2. «n. S. n~.n 3. 36 3..” mm. nn aim 36 2. no. nn.n SJ do." SJ 3. .3; 23 3.0 no; 3; owlu nn and... .38
-n n. n. n- -- S. oné -. -n n- -- n- .. nn .. n- nn nn un .... n. ..n nn .. nn -n no...- ...—8
no.o~ oo.~ oo. oo. no.n no.~ aw.“ an. 04. nn.q no. on.d 00. an. no.n nn.n oo. na.a N~.~ cu. nn nu un nn nn nn ivy»-
23 34 2d 8. and an. .54 an. “n. 3.~ «N. on; nn no; 2...: on." nn 3. 2... 2. 3. 3.3 34 3; an. an. wool—Io..-
neé 3..” ~n. :é oo.“ 34 no; 84 omé 3.0 no. 34 «a. "a; oo..» oo. 3. 2. :4 No.0 3.— 3. 34 no. nné 3. 32.33.:
oo.n os.u nu.“ me. «A. . n~.n nn.< o“. -.~ oo.~ nn nu nu nu nu nn nu nn nn nn nn nn nn nn nu on.“ concu-
On.~ no. ou.— an. as.n nn oo.~ as. oo. c~.~ na. o~.~ we.“ an. cunu an. no. as. can" sn. nn.~ nn.c~ 0N.u nn nn nn hick-
no.¢ no.n so. «n. he. NO.H dc.” ON. 00.“ am.oa cc. mm. «o. nn nn nu un un nn nn nu nn nu nu nnn nu than
3.0 3.." no. .3. oué 8. 36 u. nn n- nu nn nn n. ..n nu nu nn nu nn nu nn nu nn nu nu . i
on.n nu o~.~ oo. an.” no. no.~ no. mm. mm.” «a. ~n.~ oo. oo. no.0 0a.. mm. as. «cnn Nu. nn nn nn nn nn nu aux-Ian
3.0 no; 2." 3. 3.“ oo. 2..” no.“ n~.~ SJ 3. R.“ «a. co. 1..” on.“ .2. 3; on; 3. 3. oo.n «in to; 3. «a. all-no.3
no.0 nn.n 26 24 53 on.“ ma.” 3d omé 3... .2.” 3.... on; «n. 3..” 36 on. «n. 3.. $3 nn.n no.n on; 2.» oo. :4 :5 «an»:
onoa u nn¢~ a nn0~ " owod “ now“ " <mo~ ” nnofi " who“ u _nmwxulbmo. U oqo~ ” neofi u n4¢~ u o¢o~ u meow an A " «nod u mmmmmmwmmmm

 

 

613.80--.. .23.

419

nu nu nu un uu nu un nn nu nn nn nu nu nu un nn nn nn nn nn nn uu nu un nu lauaUVuaon

u- .n -- u. u. .n -. u. u- u. u. nn nu nu u. u. on." oo.~ nn.n nu uu aw.“ oo.n _~._ on." .unnnn

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II 0“.“

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II .UA‘dI- ..U.:°.

A“. oo.. nm.~ q~. n~.~ «a.~ on.” oo.‘ ca." no. s..~ as. an. ...u ...5 an. nn.~ .~.o nu. o~.. .o. an. so. ca.— ~..~ ova-
:4 a; ......” 8. 35 SN 2... 8.“ S. a: S; 2.“ 3." u. and S; ......" «a; 3.n 8." 3. 8. no.n 3.~ :4 III...
nn.n nu oo.~ n¢. oo.n on.~ no.n nu.¢ we." nn noun Dung on." OO.N «nu. an.“ 00.0 nn.n asuu «uuu as. ON.N oo." Onuu oo.n C-u§¢qua~Ifl
I II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II III II II II . II II II II 33‘“
o~.~ “e.. nn.n oo. "a.” oo. o~.~ uu as. oo. “c. ...c uu uu nu nu ad. on.c an. oo. oo. uu nu .u u. noun-“no.
II II II II II II II II II II II II . II II II II II II II II II II II II II .3“ Odhh

o~.n o~.~ Ho.~ an.“ nn.n Io." oo. no._ on.~ an. oo.~ oo." nu. co.~ c~.o no. an. nn.n uu nu nu. un un u. nu o~_.n...o~.
on.“ No. n~.~ Q~.~ o~.n on.~ oo.~ nn.n on. so.~ nn.n nu. nn.n n0. «tun an. nn.n {Ann .0. at. an. oo.~ so.~ on.— c~.o h denounuh
nu nu nn un nu nu nu un un uuu .nu-5

n~. do.~ nn.n nu. no. ~o. oo. os.n ON. ~O. no." onuu on." no. on.0 Cu. .nu asun oo. nn nn oo. nn 0N.n _Q.~ unlumun
I II II II II II II II II II II II B. a

II II II II II II II II II II II '0‘ an
co. co." uu xoddda
. - u- -- u- u- n- -nu nu nu uu uu nu nu n un oo.“ oo.n oo. oo. an. an. an. ac. nu ncd>on
uu u. u. n.~u>nn

II II II II II II II II II II II CDCHQMU
. on.~ Na.“ «A. no.” no.n Oo.~ do.~ gonna as. '0.“ nn.n Gang at. .6.~ an. QC.“ «0. an.¢ Ouoau
n . .uoxoouu

OO.~ {Qua O~.¢ '0.“ No.“ QQAI5~OU
nu. an.” oo. .5. ad. on.~ oo. "a. nn.n uu nu ma. nn.n o~.. oo. oo. on. oo. u- .. ndflauou
u nu nu un nu nu nu nu nu nn un nu gadvodu

II II II II II II II II II II II ‘0... .‘0...AU
I II II .——«>hUUB.U
EOn—‘IU
I II II III II II II II II II II gugd~hafl

II II II II II II II II II II II °~.uu3fl

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I‘
.
l
N
3.
N
n
0
u
't
O
“I
I
“I‘
d
PI
I
f.
I’I
I
"I
I"
d
o
h
'I
'I
f.

nn nn nn nu nu nn uu nu nn nn II II nu uI nu uu un In. In nu nn In un nn n0 30£u<
nn un un nu nn un nn nu nu nn uu nn nu nu nu nu uu nn Iu un nn u... nn nn nu 1.2.9.33
nu nn nu nu nu un nn nn un un nu nn un un nu nn nu nn un nn uu nu nu un nu Ila noauuga
nu nu nn nu nn nn nn nn un nu un nn nn un nn nn un nn un nn nu nn nn nn nu unauh
nu nu uu nu nn nu nu nu nu un un nu nn nn nu nn nu un nu nn nu un un nn nu lauuouh
nu un un un nu uu nu nu nn un nu uu nn nu nn nn nu nn un nu nn nu nu nu nu «flogged-h

nn nn oo.n nn nn nn na.~ nn.n o~.~ cc. nn.~ Q~.— nn N..— o~.n an. nn nu nn nn nn nn nn nu nn o_~«’u05509m
nu nu nu nu nu un nn un uu nn nn nu nn nu un nn nu uu un uzzo graham

ON.N ou.~ no.~ o~. n~.~ ~0.n nn. oo._ un nn nn nu nu nn nu nn an." un nn.c .n.~ nn.n nn.~ oc.~ uu un afloulnum
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II . =.°~m
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II -.vddw

oo.¢ 4o.n n_.~ ca. od.n oo.n og.o “0.0 no. ea. oo.n os.n oo.n nn.n u... «a. -_.n nu on.~ nouu nn.n oo. nn.n oo.n «A. culhonn

n uu nn nn CH. CH." «0. ad. un. on. no.~ s“. on. can“ :Im

nn us nu nn nu un nn un un un nu nu nu nn nn nn nu nn nu nn nn nu uu nu nn avc-m
nu un nn nu nn un nu un nu nu nu nn nn nu nn nu nn nn nu nn un un un nn nn pond-m
un nn nu nu nu un uu nn un nu nn nu nu nu nu uu nu nn nu un nn nu uu un nn axonqoc
n. uu n- uu uu uu .. un u- nu nu uu nu nu nu nn nu nu nu nu uu nu u. nu un v~ouucau
uu nu nu un un un nn nu nu nu unn nu nn nu nu uu nu nu un nn un nu nn un nn unauuan van—god:
uu nu nu nu uu un un nu nu un nn nu nn nn un un un nu nn uu un nn nu nn nn unun uuu-u:
.. -u -u nun .. -u u. -u u. -u u. n. nu nu un un uu nn un uu uu nu u. u. u. sue-u an. hogan
nu nu un nu un nu nn nu nn nu nn nu un un nn nn nu nn nn nn nu nu nn nn nu bong-u
-- nu .. nu .. -u .n nu --. nu uu nu uu uu n- nu nu nu nu u. u- nu nu .. -u aonc.-¢

no. no.“ oo.~ ow.” ca." no.n o~.~ nc.~ o~.n 00. on. an. no. no.~ nn.n 00. we.” con 00. oo.“ oo. Oo.~ o~.~ nn nn lacuna

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II ”du.d~

"$33.38 52.

 

II ILII‘

nnofi u Nnafi u ~no~ u Ono“ ” Ono" n mod n nmod ” onoa unnod ” c~¢~ " nuou " «Nod " ~No«

 

 

" -o~ H o~o~ u coo” " nzo~u<Hnnbu

\ILI"

 

.voaauuGOUnnno catch

zuzzn)

 

 

NN.N NN.N oo. oN. No.N oo.N oN. oN. NN. «N.N NN.N ON.N No.N oo. oo. 9N“ NN.N oo.. NN.N oN.N
NMMN «WHN «wuN ow” NMUN NM” NM” om.N n- NN.N NN.N NN.N oa. omuc ”Mme ”MUN “MUM NN.NN eN.N NN..
. . . . . . NN.N No.N No.N NN.N No.» No.N n” o . . . . . u n.
NN.NN ”M.” ”M.N “M.“ “M.M wm.N No. oq.N oN. ON.N no.N NN.; oN on No NN “M.“ “u.“ "M.“ "N."

. . . . .n .N No. .. un nu
. . . . N.N NN.N nm N N» N No N NN N 00 n 0N. . . . . . . . .
n ...- ..-.
NN.N Na. oN.o NN.N NN.N ON.N no. 4N.N NN.N NN.N «N N on 0N. NN. . . . . . .
. . . NN. ma. 0N.u Nn.N NN.N No. nu wo.N «N. Na N mN No N no N NN.N cone nn.n mars
M”. “M.” w“. NN.N NN. NN.n oo. -. -- -- -- -- oo. NN. NN.N -n oN N N. o N. N .N
. n . . un . on. oo.n nu un nu nn nn nn un nu
oo. o . oo. No.0 00 N NN oN co no N . . nu u- . . . . . .
oN.n NM. NN. NN.N NN.N 0N. No. NN.N no. u. oN N co N . . NN. oo. NN.N N«.NN oN. oN.N
. . .n . . NN.N oo. oo.N NN. no.N oN.N um um um . . . . n n
m. n; 2. mu m.“ s. s. g. g. z. a. a s. a. E 2. n: a.“ _C :.
NN.N NN.N NN. Nu.N oo. No. oo. NN.N No. NN.N oN.n Nn.N wm.N MM. NN.N “M.N Mu.” HM.“ «MuN omnN
. . . . . . n .N on.N NN. .. No.N .- . . . . . . .
on. NN.N «N. no.” ”N.“ Mm.n N“. No. .- NN.N NN.N ON.N NN.N NN N. No. No.N NN.N NN.N NN.N
oN N oN . oo on WN. -- oo. .. u- .. nn oo. on. NN N «a N no N on 9N
.. n. u- n- n- .- . . . -- .n -n n. NN.N NN.N nn nu nu nu nn
. n .N . o. No. NN.N an 4 an N oo . . . . . . . nn nu nu
”M.“ ow. NN.N MN. NN.N oo.N No.N ON.N no. oo.n NN N Nn N NN N N... No.N oo.N NN.NN . . .
4N.N NN.. nN. NN. om. NN. on.N Nn.N oN. NN.N on.0 NN.N No. NN.N NN. NN. oo.n oo.. NN.N o..¢
NN.N on.” mo. NN.N as. no.N NN.N Nn.N no. NN.N NN.N NN. nu oN.N oN.N No. oN.N oN.N NN.. No.N
. .m nu no. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N oN.N 0N. NN.N NN.N Nq NN.N NN.N NN. NN.N o¢.o NN.N oo.n
No.¢ NN.N No.N oN. «N.N NN.O oo.N oowN -n ON.N 0mm” WM.N MM. H- omnN om- nu nn nn nu
NW.N ON.N NN.N oN. NN.N ON.N N . nN n NN -H N .n . . .N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. NN.N NN.N
. . . an. Sim NN.N Na. 4m.” 2. no N “N n moN an an . . .
«N.N oo. “M. no. NN. NN.N Nu.N N... .. ON. NN. NN.N on. NNH NNHN NN.N No.c NN. “N”. NNHN
MN.“ MW.” NN. NN.N NN.N NN. NN.N ON.N NN. NN.N on. oN. No.N NN. Nn.¢ NN.N oo.. NN. NN.N No.
No.N NN. NN. oN. NN.N ow. OO.N oN. NN. .. n. NN.N NN. NN N N. N NN N NN N NN N No N an N
. . . . . a. NN.N No.N oo. n- Nq.N No.N oN. nn um um um um um um
nmnN ”M.” ”M.” NN.N MN.“ Mo. NN. oo. .. mo.N NN. NN.N oN. u. 0; N no N oo NN N N. N NN
. . . . n2 :. u: -- -- -- -- -N .N -. .N -N .N .N -N -.
MM.” MM.N ”w.N MW.N NN.N NN. mn.n NN. No.N oN.q NN. an N No nu on N NN N No NN .N N un
. u . n n .I II A0. II II II II II II II
n n u dud NQnN man no G ~0~ 05 d 0“ O 50 r n n n n I
ano oMnN Mm.N ”o.N NN.N -. NN.N NN.N OO.N NN.NN NN. nn NN.N o¢.N NN.N cN.N n. um um nu
NN.; -n NN.N NN.N oo. NN.N NN. NN. ON.N NN.N NN.N NN.N No No NN N no N on NN No N nu
. . . . .N N .N oo.n uu. nn u- nn nu nu um um um um nu nu un
NN.N MM.MN MM.N mm. mm. NN. NN.O nN.N no.N NN.N No. NN.N No” co. NN.N NN.N NN. NN.N NN.N o.”
ON.N 0N. ON.N NN.N NN.N NN. ON.N NN. Nu. NN.N NN.N NNHN No.N «o NN N No o. NN oo N on
. . . .N ON.N No.N N-.n NN.N NN.N No.0 No.N No N oo. um um nu nu nu um um
um.” MN.“ NN.N M”. oo.N NN. NM.n NN.N NN.u NN.N NN.N NN.N NN 0N. NN.N NN.N Ne. NN. NN.N nN.N
anuN II “anfl Nd. own” d”. finnfi o”. 0%. ”0.” “O. “N." I” 8. “.0" 8 a." :- Ndon .dl
NN.N NN. .4. oo.N q¢.N «N. NN.N on. no. NN.N No.¢ -n oo NN. NN.N Nun co.N NN.N Nc N N; N
no.N No.N NN. NN.N NN.N NN.N an.N oN. No.N -- .H n” nu NN.N NN.N NM.“ M". MM. nu un
No.4 NN.N oN. 0N. NN. NN. NN.N NN. oN.q No.n NN NN N .u oo. NN.N . . . . .
on. NN.N No.N oN. No. NN.N No.N oN.N NN.N NN.N NN. NN. nu NN NN.N oo.N NN. oo.N NN. NN.N
NN.N nNN. NN. NN. NN.N 4a. oN.N oN.N NN. NN.N NN.N NN.N oo. nu ON.N NN.N oo. Nmn Nu N on-
No.o eo.N NN. No. NN.N oN. NN.N q . oN.N NN.N 4N. ON.N oo. oN. oN.N no.N oo. . u n.
NN.N No. ao.N No. oN.¢ oo. on. No. NN. ON.N ON.N NN.N oN NN. on N NN oo N no N NN N oo N
. . . ON.N No. NN.N NN.. oo.N oo.N n- n. NN.N NN. oN. nu . . . . .
Mn.” "N.“ am. No. NN.N oo.N no.“ on. no.N NN.N NN. NN.N oN NN N No.N oo.N NN.N NN. NN.N NN.N
NN.» NN.N NN.N 4N. ON.N NN. OO.N ON.N NN.N No.N NN. NNHN n- oN NN.N NN-N om- om- mm.“ N".
ON.N No. oN. on. NN.N 9N. No.N .. .. NN. NoHN NN.N nn ”H NN.N NN. oo. nn N N
on.q n. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. NN.N NN. oo. NN.N oN N Na N nu No N
NNNN NNNN NNoN ONNN NNNN «NNN NNNN NNoN NnoN oNoN oaNN NnNN NNNN oqNN " muuwuwuwnoN " nooN “ NeoN N

 

 

NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N oo.N
NN.N nu NN.N NN.NN NN.N NN.N
NN.. oo.N NN.N ....N NN.N NN.N

nn NN.N nun .n nu nu
NN.N no. NN.N u. n. NN.N
NN.N un NN.N NN.N NN.N oN.
No.n NN.N NN.N NN.NN NN.N oN.N

.NN.N oo. NN.N oo.N NN.N ....
NN.N .o.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN..
N... NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN..
on. NN.N NN.N NN.. NN.. NN.N
NN.. NN.N e.. NN.oN NN.N NN.
NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. NN.N NN.N

no. nu oN.N nn nu n.
NN.N ...N NN.N NN.N NN.N 9N.

.oo. NN.N ... NN.N as. nu

oe.N NN.NN NN.N NN.N NN.N uu

NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.

NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N Ne. u-

NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.

oouaquaon
NN.:IH

ovvon

nun-Non sou-ao-
avia-
woos-I-
ONNNI-uNONNIn
sanNnfinuo
.9338
NNON.N-NIL
shah oNun
oNuuboouoNu
.N-oN-N-
NNNo .NN.N
NqINu-n
nonua

so. ula-
NINNNQ
caNI-a
.NNNP-a
o-ounho
cacao
uuodoouu
eaglaNou
INNauoo

.NNNtnuanoun
silo canuuu
yuan-uuu

nIoNn

NNnvNNN

idly-an

can» can

Nun-N

no!»

040600-

uNo-NaN-
.NINNNN vanNNoNN
Noun u-N-N-
sun-- so. NnNNN
nonun-

 

 

.1I:laul00unao Can-R

421

we.“ cann an. NN.N o~uu «oun can. OO.N ac. wand as.” nn.n 5n." .uun hm. no." Gnu. mung so. oc.~ 00. nn.n on.~ Nona ounnov‘

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II . SU‘MO”
oo. NN.N NN. NN.N -n n. n- n. -n NN.N NN. N... ...N ...NN NN. N... N..N NN.N NN. u- n- -u nu n- nn.nnN
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II H.Ad.3
nn nn un nn nn nn nn nu nu nn nn nn nn nu In nn uu II .un nu nn nu nu nu hoquII

oo. NN.N oo. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N an. ac. oN.N NN. NNwN NN.N oo. NN.N NN. No. nn nu nn nu nn .u N-uNana
II I II I II I II II II II II II II II II II II udifl
nn . nn un nn nn nn nu nn nn nu nu un sou-Iona.
NN.N oo.. No. NN.. NN.N NN. NN.N NN.N nu NN.N NN. NN.N N..N NN.N NN. NN.N nu uu nu uu nu n. u. nu .NNNnNNN-u
II n II II II II II II II II II 3””
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II ezgflzsp
cN.N Nuun asnn nunn nn.n nn.n owns anuu no. nn.n OO.N {sun nan. nuns «and nn on.¢ noun can on. no." oo.n nn nu >~Iou
. an.N NN.N NN.-Nan oNIoNa< In»
nn nn nn nu nn n nu n n .33 e..-3.6.:—
II II II n II II II II II II II II II II II “8“
ON.N No.n menu NN.N «a. ms. at. on.0 oo.n OO.N noun 0.. no.n «an. 95. Band oo.» oo. .0. an. no. an. nn.n nn NN.-undm
n nn no u nn nn nn .0 canines

NN. oN. NN.N NN.N NN. . oo.N NN. oo. o..N ... NNTN nu nu un nn nu nn nu nu nn nu nu nn nouN-

oN.N NN. oN. NN.N . . oo. oN. nu NN.N NN. NN. «N. N... 9N. NN.N NN.N ... No. oN.N NN. NN. oo. NN.N .NnNasn.N .n-

oo.o oN. NN. oN.N NN. No. NN.N NN.N c... NN.N NN. un nu nn nn uu un nu u. UIn}: .N:
NN

00.
no. 00.

N .un
.N no.N oN. NN. NN.N NN. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. NN. ... oN. NN.N NN.N NN. nNnnx
n .-

NN. NN. N

N
NN.N NN.N NN.. NN.N oN. on. NN. NN.N NN.N NN. nNnN unoN
N co. No.N oq.N NN.N .N.N nn nuannonN
"€33.88 :2.
N NNNN N NN.N N NN.N N oNNN N .ocN N N-oNN<Nuu=»

nvllluulIOIuJo Oal'k

n0.
NNN
I

OO.N anN Noun Ne. {cum on.» nn.n ON.N on.~ nn.n an.

 

 

‘i
N
9
"
I.
n
9
d

mxmwON N NnoN N onoN N onaN N ouoN N suofi

I
h .
H

 

 

 

 

422

 

 

 

 

no.n NN.N mo. 2.. no.N 4N4 ooN ON.N $4 3..“ EN NN.N oo. SN .1.” 34 NN.N ON.N 3N NN.N ON.N NNJ no; NN.N 34 no; INN-No:
2. SN oo. ooN no; nu nu NN.N on. 3. £8 24 NN. SN 34 oo. NN.N 8.2 NN.N 34 nu un uu nu nu nu 5.65:0»
um.N NN.N NN.N Nq.N NN. No. NN. .. NN. .. -n ON.N NN.N oo. NN.N No. NN.N NN.ON NN.N NN.N NN.N Ne. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N aaNno»
no.N ON.N oo.N NN.N No.N Nn.m NN.N NN.N OO.N ON.N Na.N NN.N NN.N NN.N No.N oo. NN.N nu un u- -N. nu u- u- -n .. .nNNn:
OO.N N.N No. N0. N4. NN.N NN. NN.N oo. NN.N NN.N .n NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N un nn un nu .. nu n- -n n- -- NnuNnn:
ON.N NN.N NN. NN.N NN.N «N. NN.N Nu.N .. NN.N NN.N ca. oo. NN. NN.N oN.N oo. NN. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N oN.N ON.N oo. oo. unvN=N.N
oo.0 No.N NN. NN.N oq.N NN.N oN.N .. NN.N No.N NN.N 4e.N 4N. oo.a NN.N NN.N NN.NN N¢.o un nn n. u- uu u- -n .. NNnnaON
NN.N oo. NN. oo. OO.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. .. NN. -n oo. No.N NN.N NN.N nn nu nu nu nu n- -n n- -n .. no.n.ozN
NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. NN.N oo.N oN.N -- NN.N NN.N NN.N No. no. NN.N oo. NN.N NN.. oo.n oN.N NN.N ON.N NN. No.NN NN.N NN. nNNNnguNeN
N0.N NN.N NN. N4. N0. NN.N oN. NN.N no. NN. NN.N NN. NN.N NN.N No. NN.N NN.N oN.NN NN.N NN. an.N NN.N NN. NN.N No.N NN.N cNamnm
N0.N no.N NN. ON.N on. NN.N 0N. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N oN.N No. No.N «N.» on. NN.N oo.N NN.N nn .. n- u. n- n- .. NuancuNagum
Nq.N NN.N NN. NN. NN.N No.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N oo.n NN. NN.N NN.N «o.N oN. NN.NN NN.N NN.N No.¢ NN.N No.N NN.N Na.a No.4 NN.N . NNnnm
NN.N NN.N NN. NN. NN.N NN.N No. No.N NN. ON.N NN.N NN. oo.N oN. NN.N nn NN.N NN.N No. co. NN.N No. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NNn..=z oNaoN=< cum
NN.N NN.N oo. NN.N NN. oo. No.N Nq. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. no. NN.N NN.N oo. un .n un uu u- nu n. n- -u .. NNNU NcnuNnoNN
NN. NN,N .. NN.N NN.N No. «N. Na. oo.N oN. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. NN.N oo. o... NN.N un nu -n n- n. nu .. .. unnNoN
NN.N .. oo. ON.N NN.N NN. NN. NN. NN. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. NN. No.N Na. NN.N NN.N No.N on. NN.N NN. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN...nnN
NO.ON NN.N No. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N Nq.N NN.N n- uu nu NN. NN.N ON.o oN. NN.. NN.N NNNc NN.N nu n- n- -- n- .. mo .aNnmoz
OO.N NN.N no. .. NN.N No. oN. NN.N oo. NN.N oo.N NN.N oo. NN. NN.N NN. NN.N No.oN NN.N N..N NN.N NN.N oo. NN.ON NN.N NN.O coxNz
NN.N NN.N No.N NN. NN.N NN. NN. No.N oo. NN.N NN. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. NN.N N¢.oN oo.N co.N NN.N NN.N NN. NN.N oN.N No.N .NnNc:.NN an:
NN.N NN.N No. ON.N oa.N NN. No.0 nn.N ON.N NN.N n- NN.N «N. n- NN.N NN.N NN.N Ne. NN.N NN.N «N. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. oo. NanNNNNN .Nz
oN.N NN.N oN. «o. eo.N No. NN.N NN.N NN. ON.N NN.N No.N no. oo.N No.c on. NN.N oo. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN. .anz
NN.N Nq.N ON. oo. on. oo. o¢. NN.N oN. a.“ NNHN No. oo. NN. NN.N NN.N NN.N on. NN.N NN.. on. NN.N NN.N oo.n NN.N oN. nN-N acoN
No N Na N NN NN NN NN «N «N N NN no N No N nn NN «o «N N NN.N NN.N NN.NN NN.N NN.N oN.¢ NN.N NN.N NN.NN NN.N ON.N nun-NonN
NNNN N NNNN H NNNN N oNoN N NNoN N anoN N NNNN N NNNN N NNoN N oNNN N NNNN N NNNN N . . . . NunamwmzouN NNNm
.NnoN . NnoN . NNNN . oNNN N NNNN N NNNN N NNNN N NNNN N NNNN N «NNN N mzoNN<NNNNN

 

 

.unacNucouunno .NnnN

mbmmunmnnmd
IRWWMIWHW.
Inn-.1904”?

423

 

nah :zfizilngnflfg'fiHfiin . 8
:nn:'fififgz:I3zlfnfifugn:E§§:::n§w§3§g'§-nfig'Efnn3:nfnfiglfn
n°nnnj§§fnInbnnfingfinfin:Efifaznlfifigfifi3nfiu'4f'33nnsnn3333:32
Ifi::n3§§§n1:3:nu233:3nz3fi3unungfififi33n3'n§§n3§I:§|'3nfigzg'
n3:nn3§33nI13I:3I33I3ln353:2I::3n333n3nn30n:nln3un3nfi3ngn
% :3:::§§§§::n§:n§n§§n lg:Iggfiznuufiafigéfinfinnfimn33:13':nnf§:3:
E :3nnn3n33nnn3lnfin3finfin:33=:::3:333.3I3|:33I33In3:Inn3§n3n
a u3nnn3fifif'nn3nnfinfiglnun33§nnnn§§e§.3n3n:8§:3§:n3nun:Efinfn
g ugun §§A3nnnfilzfin¥§n§3I3fijnnnn3§§3fignpnngflfgnlfinn:I33n3:
g usunn333§nnn3:13:3nu3:153::snn3fi3i3gn3:nn3'33lngnn'lgfl3'
g I3:Ilfifilfinuzgnnfilfifinfinlfigfi Inn§3$3fifizfinn§§n§§nn§un§n§§n§z
g u3lln3§|31IIRIninifin§n35°¢u'nn33338313n:33II3I13I:3I§::3n
g 13:31I3n3lunnIIInl3nlnng33nnun3§3§38u3nn33313113nnn|3|n31
3 nnnnnnfil.unufln:3133nunlfifan:In§§§§§11§lnfifinn§::3:'3Iofiufin
g n§nnun§n§unn31n§n§§nnnngafinunngufiifinniungfinlfinnfiln3n§§I2n
5 n3-unuflufnun3nninfiunnnnfififinnnnfififigfiu uu§|n§§I13119|n3n§3n§n
g n§unu3333nnnunn3n$3nnnn3§31n§n§3§nnnn€nnaunn3nn3nnfinfignfin
g n§nnIggfifinnn3nn3u§§n§1IfifianIgngfifiuflnIfinu33|nnnu3nn§n33ugn
E n31:I§§§6In33nn§n§nn§nn§§§nngnfifignfinn§nn§§nnnun§nn§n§§u§n
g n3:nIE3§§nn§§nnnI§nnnnn§§§nn§n§§§n§uu§nn§§nnu:Innlgnggngn
lg:nnfiggfinnfiannnnfinI3nn§33In§n§§§n§nn§nn§.unnnnnnnnnfifinun
I4nnn3§§§nul3nn3n3nnnnu§3ann3uggfllnnn3nn.finuunnunnnnfifinfin
nEn:nfi3fi“n:§§nnnn§unInn§§$nn§I§§3n§nnguu?3nnnnn:nnnnfifilfin
Iann:ng€finn§§|:3n31nnnu333nn3nnafinfinnnunfinnnnnlnnnlzfill§n
IfinnII33énn§nnn§1§nnnxu3§§nu§113filqnnnn:§nnlnnluln nn3ln§u

 

424

0~.4 4~.w 0N. mo.4 mm. 04. 4m.4 no. 40. n4.4 m5.
0n.~ m5. mm. 44. m4.4 0m.n 4m.~ n4. 05.4 40.“ m5.
50. 4~.4 0n. 00.4 04.4 mm. 00. 00.4 m4. 00. 0~.4
00.4 m0.m 0m.4 4N. mm. 05. 55.4 55. 4N.4 II 00.4
54.4 II 0m.m 05. om.0 N4.4 M4.~ 54. mm. 50.4 Nm.~
n0.n 04.4 o0.N No.4 «0.4 II II N4. 55. o«.~ 50.N
40.m 04.4 40.4 04. 40.0 00. 00.0 II 04. II II
mm.¢ 00. 04.~ m~.4 nn.n II 4m.4 00. 00.4 On. «0.~
40.4 0N. 04.4 00.4 ~0.m nn.4 04.4 II 50. mm.4 on.4
05.4 04.m N~.4 55.4 4o.n 00. «0.4 Mn. 00. 00. II
no.4 o5.~ 4m.4 «0. nn.n 5n.~ No.4 II 05. cm. 45.n
4o.m 45.5 0n.m 45.4 N4.N Nm. mm.~ oo. Nc. II no.
m~.5 4~.4 44. 4N. 5m.~ 54.N 0m.n 04. 40.~ 54. 5~.~
0m.m 05. 40. 50.~ 00.4 «a. 05.4 II 44. 04. m0.
m0.w 44.4 50. n0.4 00.0 5N.4 ~0.m «N. 0n.4 04.4 N0.~
mm.4 on.4 50.4 cm. 00.4 4A. 40.04 II 00. 40. 05.
no.n m4. 4N. 4o.m 4r. no.4 ~4.n 40. 00. m~.~ 40.4
00.4 00. oo. 4m. no.0 Om.N 05.04 am. 5N. no.4 Hm.“
mm. mm. 5N. an. 90.4 n~.N m5.~ 00. m4. No.4 04.
50. II N4. 04. 4m.n o4. 0n.5 00. 00.4 .0n.N 0m.~
45.~ m~.4 m4.m 4~.4 nn.n 44.4 mm.4 44. mm. II II
00. 00. 5o.~ II 44.~ 4n.~ 04.4 00. «4.4 n5.4 0N.4
0N.4 m4. 4N. cc.“ 5n.4 44. 04.4 No. «N. «5. mm.~
~0.n n5.4 mm.4 50.~ mn.5 4o. n0.4 no. 4N. “0.4 II
40.4 mm.4 m~.4 04.4 no. N0.~ no. 00. O5.N A4. 00.4
44.m 05.4 5m.~4 05. 44.0 n0. 4N.4 0N.4 n4. nN.4 40.4
MWoN HN.H 0N0 NF. “M.“ on. ‘0.“ 3- 3. 30H 3.”
04.4 ea. 00. 40.4 05.4 no.4 54.0 00. II n4.~ 00.4
0m.~ II m5. 04.4 N5. 00. 05.4 00. 54.4 II .4
00.44 4n.4 00.4 Nn.4 04.4 00.4 40.0 «n. «0. «0.4 “0.4
40. 00.4 00.4 00.~ mm.4 40. 40.N 40. 04.4 5N.4 m4.4
5~.m 44.4 00. 50.4 n4.n mm. 40.4 00. 54. n0. 54.N
on.4 II «0.4 04. 5m.5 0M.N 44.n oo. 40. 0o.n II
4n.m n0.n 55.0 54.4 nn.~ 00. “0.4 4N. 04. 50. 00.4
54.4 55.4 no. 50.~ nn.5 00.4 00.4 00. 55. on. 54.
8. 8. II a; S. 8. 2.“, 8. n... I II
04. II «N. 0a. 04.n no. n5.0 II 04. 44.4 50.4
8.4 8. 44. 8.4 $.w no.~ 8.5 8. 9. l 8.~
«a; 8. II 3. R... N... on.“ 8. 8. 3. 50.4
40.4 40.~ 0N. n0. 0n.“ 0N.4 no.4 oo. 54. 40.N 00.4
05. 04. 00. 0a. m5.4 04.4 no.n 00. n0. «0.4 44.4
NN.n mm. aw. on. 0o.n 00. 04.0 04. 4N. 40. 40.4
54.~ 40.4 04. n0. N0.~ an. 00.4 00. oo. 44. Nm.~
0N. N5. no. 44. 0n.~ on. 50.4 00. N~.4 04. 50.0
I II II I I II 8... II 3. II II
“0.4 ~o.~ 4H. 5”.“ 4o.~ oe. an.” oo. on. II II
“4.4 50.4 00. 45. 40.m 4m. 04.4 wo. 54. m4. 0n.n
n~.N 4m. 00.~ 4n. 04.~ 50. 05.4 40. NN. oo.~ 00.4
“0.4 40.0 No.4 0n.4 00.m 50.4 «9.4 04. 40.4 00.4 «0.4
050M 3-N Nan-N MO. p.“ 0N. do@ So 80 H0. 80H
om.4 Mn. 00. «0. 05.4 0~.4 00.4 00. 04. Na. 45.0
no.4 50.N ~4.4 05.4 no.0 0m.4 40.0 05. II 00. 00.4
n5.n 0m. on. oo.~ 50. N0. 00.m 00. II N~.n 54.~
m~.n 04.0 00. mm.4 50.0 44.4 00.4 mn.4 00. 5a. 05.
~0.~ 4~.~ N4. 0m.4 0~.4 00. no.n 44. 04. 04.4 n4.4
no.~ ~0.n II 4N. 0N.~ 04.N 04.~ 00. 44. II 50.4
0m.n 0o.n No.~ 5m.4 nn.n 05.4 n5.4 nw. 00. II 04.4
00.~ 44.0 nn.n 00.~ 00.4 00. 00.4 50. 00. II 45.4
. . u . .4 u I . I . 4 . c . .4

 

 

 

33333333
r40! rieri

o. .-
CV09!‘

Regan

II§§§§3§II3I

.I33

33I333333€33I33I3
r4 virird F‘rfl“ rd r4

$REBS

mm4o£u44m4

. ..333333
F‘F\¢'U\
aaaaqansa

asagsggsqax
UNB*~3FNF\-3fV

.3II§§3§I3I§I
333

183333|2Q5333
444£n 84445 ~0onnn
5?3:33:R

o
“'F\~‘r4

3838:

seassaaasasazga

8
6504445044g045mmn4m
.4

: agaLSIOUO
£6 0N0 0n~~n5gn

,agaa

o~
9
.

0 I
FWiDriF‘ r4

aaaa.sgaasaaa

I333I
:3!”
33

o o C
U‘f‘ffl

ages

I
O I

..3.I
e~cu

saeagass

:zun
l.i.
“4'00 :2 5010434

323:

0‘

«0

O O I I I

5n~n~o 40 “MM4

Raaaagasnaaz

333
~3-8-8t56\<3fi

(V
m
0

233833883:

0

R
5n6l~4nd0n0nmn

IN I‘ rd"
.9I18II320
“Hf! CD‘DF‘

.aea338
U‘P~OIU‘O‘F\dIF\U‘13-C

.II3333

ux cu
g:c>3!eo
H\—t-t~0

3333388

04.
a.

3.

f.
Jldli
n

:39

s: a
O 0
¢ Hanna

0‘
13
o

888§838
~8-‘F‘1’F\F\U‘F\

3.3
O O
.3 U‘

g 335228
-. F‘fl-Q-OC'U‘

l‘
Ifi

II33333
.-ce\a4I«¢v Iv

agag
F‘OMJ-3

3333II.
dIriF\fl

.32

no.4

“on“
33II39192II
H MQHH

3:33:38
r‘FNriFN-fl EN

.IfiI
(V

zqtsg

.na.aa,
Cool.-
rd “\ri

.fiI.
U‘Olr‘
.8333

assa,,a:a
O O O I I I
NF‘HM

.aagaa
'44 "

E;U\U\-‘
0'12C*
6‘94

8:33
0 O O
¢VerdriFNrfl

9‘
‘0
o

F‘
:F‘

o o
F‘ F‘

33

- U‘F\ F‘
3313?

353II . .
04H M4

82
I'A&

3

ax r~
9l§3l

32838
CV rzr4r4¢V

I3II§§§IIII

O\U\
I —'C‘
o
F4fv

.xsg:aa:
. I O O O
F'N NO!"

3333
...J

to
II1III
OJ

. ...—ErmmflwwhEEQEEIIWSI14.4Eunnnhgafliisaagfl

when

adnccm
aoxca4m
uconuonnc
moan usquc
rzovxuow
csxao»
L044a2
LquOHB
vaw4cauh
44anrow
coacuopu
444>zu4um
c4amom
muahcu49rum
h41rm
muonudr o4Cnucc can
na4o acov4’ohm
anode“
44dnuqom

mu us4auoz
c3?
n4vmn50hm >ur
ucgnnr4m .ux
wanna

oxdq «:04
owcmun 44
sounde=Ow
353
ovvow

.nu: cognzox
ovco:
vocunrfiom
0444>uoun44¢m
ucauoraun
nuw4vW4w
couLo4rom
c305 o4um
.444>noun4h
¢4nqu4L
ho4n a44dm
4acaocm
gonna

xon 0:40.
k3:3
0:4>cn
a444>¢0
navbnho
020:0
aaoxoouo
usnud4ou
¢4H=aou
0:4v040
.zom acooud4u
0444>Lovcoo
5350
593.3
o4quunn
.60544
900004

u 0.0 h4hmmam

voacaacooIIoo can-p

425

In In II In In II II II In nn II In In In nn In. In In In In nu In I In In .262...
II II II II I II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II Linia.‘
nu un nn II II In II In II II II II II In In In II II II In In In In nn nu 01.2.3.9”
In In In nn In In un In In In In In In nu nu nn In nu nI In nn In In nn nu waowucflx
nn In .I II nu nn nu nI nn nn nu In nu II II In In un In In nu In In nn nn mfiywynn vuqu;<wx
II In II In nn nn nn In In In nu II In In nn nn nn nu nn In In In nu -n nn Laam wuum«d
nu nu In In II II nn In In II II II In In In In nn In In In nn nu nn nn nn Lou.d ccm huflax
II In nn In In In nn In II II nu In In II II nu In nn nn In nn nu nn nn nn Lowrnx
nn In In II II nn nu In In un nu nu II II In In In In nn In nu nn nn nu nu xoncflqq
ow.q 04.q hm. Hm.” 0G. 4m.« 00. mo.H 5H.H 4N.H oo. OH.H oo. Ho.m Ho.” ca. 00. mm. no.n m¢.0~ nx. Cm.“ flu.u nu nu encuam
nu nu nu nu nu In In II II nu nu nn nn In nn nn nu nn nu nn nn nn In nu nu uoaoarom

I I I I I I I I I I I I I n I n I I n- I I nu I I 3% E

~44. om. oo.n 84 ea. on..." mm. omé no. .34 2.3 .35 N04 6N.m $6 mad 3.6 S. 3.0 «ms: .3. $2.. 8.... oo.n oo.... 3.3m

un nu In In nu II In In II nu II In In 0.25m Casi
nI nu I I In nu II II In I II II In I In nu In In In In II II II nn nu nevus:
I I I I I nu I I I I I I nu I I I I I I I ..n I I I I 225.. 1......
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II I II II II II II II II Lourcezk
nn nu II II II II In In In II II In In In In In II II In In II II In nI In onmaucox
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -n I n- -n -n E: SE9.
nn nn In In In In nn II II In In In In In In In In In II In In nu In In In scram mmoz
In nu In In nu nI In In In nI II II In In In II In In II II II II In nI nI nHHox Hauucfix
II II II In I In I I I In In II II In I II II II II II I II II II I 98...”... deCOOuI
I n- -n I -n I I I n- I I I I I I -n I I I I I I I I I :25 3:;
II II II II II I II II I II II II II II II II II I II II II II II II II coca-I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 55$ :33:
-n I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5m. £33
I nn nn nu I I I In In I I II I I I In In In «o. m on . On . oo. 8. an .N om . 4 05.3
FN 0N 5N c 4 ON 0 I II II II II II II II I II I II II II II II II II II I II II 34
II In In In In In II II In In In In In In In In In In II II In II II In In gonna couaa
I I I I I I I nu nu I I I I I I I nu I ..n I I I I I I 23.5.3
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -n I I I I I I 238 33
I I I no.n I t. A a; um. 34 8.~ R. 3. SA 8.“ 2.x: SJ .8. RA 3 a do.“ owé nn.n no a I 3.4 1883.
II II II In nn In In In In In II II II II II II II II In In In In In I! In gonna conczow
In I I II II I I II II II I I II I II II I I II I II II II II II nomad"
I I I 34 .3. .:.~ on. a... R. an.” a... R." RA on; 8.0 2.4 2..~ 8. I I I I I I I 26.6 98:
2.4 8... a... a. n. Rd on. R. 8. 3. 8. S.” 2.. .3.“ 8;. RA 8.“ 2.; and 3... R. 88 8.~ 8 $4 833::
“N H HN.H “H. II II II I I II I II I I I II II I I I II II II II II I 5L :03:
I I I I I I I I I 8. .aa I .3. 3:: 8.~ 8. 8. no; 8.... on... 8. saw 3. I I 53
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .33538
I I I a; R. 3.~ 8. BA 8. 2. A .3.~ SA . a.» 2." .a. 3... no.” no.» $8 . 8... 8.0 .34 R.~ 5.8.5.6
in . n 2.. an .n nu In I II I I II nu In I II II II II I I In I II In In I 33:98:
I I II I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I II I b g:
I I I I I I I I I In I nu I I I I I I I 2.0 24 .8. 94 S. 2...“ 8333.33»;
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 82
84 2.4. 8. 8.~ I .8... 2.. 2.“ 2.. 3. G. 3. I I I S. 8. on. 8... n2. 2... S.~ 3.“ 2.. S.“ Smufl
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .8 83:8
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8. SA 5588
2k 45. 3.~ RA mm. 93 s. on.“ «3 «3 o: 2.. 34 as.“ 8... R. 8... S; S... 8.2 I I I I I 80”“
RA 8..“ $4 8.... 3. 3... 34 84 a; .3. 8.” 8. S. a.“ 8. 34 RA on. 3... no; 2.. 8... .3 I I 3.3.8
I I I I I I I I In I In I I I I I I I I I I I I In I N .02 aim 30.6
...... Mu MM... .. .. .... .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. ......fi

0 o o o I o 4 .H NH. W42" @QcH o o o o o c o a o u :0“ s 80H I I
S... in... S. I I I I I I I 3| nnla 8|” SIS Slog «mun omna «mun dune omno I I I I I 7846
No. “nun on I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ‘03 5
I I I I I I I I I I I In I I I In I I I I I I I I II :3 8610
amnn nn.n. om. 3| I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Baal-BB

o u .H o I 8. 8. mm. oN 8o OO.N and OH. 80M “0- 8. SoN 4M!" MM." 3.5 3. NO.‘ M004 “N. 8nd 0‘
8.... $4 8..“ 3. I 94 8. SA 84 SA a. 8. 2.. S.“ oo.n 3. SA a. . 8... «3. 8. e..“ 8.“ a. .3. £883...
2.~ .... 8. SA 8. 3A a: n3 3; a.“ 8; a. 3. 88 R." 8. .n . nun 2.3 . .o M.» 8. 8.~ 83.5

fibflmmfl‘inva .

 

426

 

 

 

 

 

on.4 48.~ 88.4 N8. 00.. nn.n . .4 8.. a. n.. .n.4 un o... 44.4 48.. .o.- 48. 04.8 no. 44.~ nn nn un un nu un 84:.»
04.4 ma.~ «N. 48.4 88. on.4 04.4 n. .4. n. 44.4 nn un u .. 80.4 ... o . 44.~ un nn nn nu nn nu nn nu 800:40
~4.4 ~8.u 4~. 4n. .n. nz.n 4u.4 a.4 ou.n or. , .4 a.. 04.4 44.4 o .4 No.8 88. 48.4 nn nn nu nn nn nn nn nn oxocdou
44.4 88. n. w. w . 44.9 40.4 n4. .4. - .u -u. 8~. nn ... 84.4 48.4 o». 44.4 40.4 88.8 nu nn -n nu nn nn 04omuc4n
44.4 84.4 84. «0.8 04.4 44., 44.4 04. un 4..” 48.. uu 4«.4 n. 84.4 08.. o . 08.8 8~.~ 48.8 un nu nn nn nu nn .0c4uam 4:14gu44
mo.~ ~4.8 04. Do. 88.4 84.4 8... tr. .4. 44. e.. n- ...4 u... on. 44.. 08. un nu nn nn un nn nn nu nu gnaw 8:4.4u
0o. nn 84. 04. ro.4 48.4 44. r,. nn.4 4u.. u4.. nu. nu o4.~ ~4.~ Nu 84 - . ~0.n 88. -.~ In nn nn In In nn soc-z com 8944:
08.4 88.4 84. .4.4 48.4 «n., 84.4 n. 8-.4 nn 4n.4 4,. 8.. 84.~ nn nu nu nn nn nu nn nn nn nn nn nu u.u¢-u
08.4 08.8. 8. ...... 4.4 9:. ...I... .... .4. 4..., I I... I... 44.8 5... 43. 8. 40.4 88.8 «8.8 2.4 I 88. I 88.4 I .358
88.4 84.8 uu nn w”. o~.4 88.0 88. 4.. "4.4 84.4 0.. ... 8..4 40.4 0..4 oo. 08.8 88.8 08.8 ~8.8 0o. .8 nn 0o. 84. Incas;
8~.~ 8..8 08. 0n.u 04.4 44.8 44.4 nu nu up.“ a..4 ow.“ nu uu 04.4 nn n. 00. 8~.8 48.4 nu nn nn nu nn nn cocoacom

I 914 2.4 00.~ 2.4. 4;. 8.4 I I In I I I uu m...4 maé n4. «8.0 3.4 O4.~ «4.8 nu II In I I 0494.8
04.8 4m.4 40.4 n. 80.0 04.0 M4.m 4m. 84. 08.4 «w. 04.4 44.4 n .4 4m.~ 40.4 m~.4 04.n 00.4 n4.~ 4~.4 4~.~ 80.8 ow. oo.n 88.4 .4848
04.4 08.4 88. 04. 08. 04. 88.4 nn nn nn nn nu un nn nn un nn nn nu un nu In In un nu nI 04:48 0448
84.n 88.8 80.4 ON. 44.4 44.. o..n 44. u.. 0,.” 44.4 04. 48. 80.4 04.4 0..q 9.. ~8.4 88.8 40.8 nn nn nn nn nn nn 0:001.
No.4 04.4 o~. 04.4 40.8 0-. ...4 u . nn. 8... .4.~ 44.” 8~.u o8.4 o8.~ 88.4 on. 40.8 m8.~ oo.n nn nn nu nn nn nn :ocuu 4a.:
NN.N 48. 48.4 mq. um. n .n nn.n an. 44.4 84. 4 “n. .,. .u. nu.4 o .n o8.u on. 08.~ oo.0 nu nn nu nn nn nn un uuwunusz
«0.4 88.4 m~.4 88. 44. on.. u¢.u 8 . u .4 r8.n nu 4.. 0n. n .4 ~8.4 88.8 9,. nu nu nn nn nn nu nn nu nu . a “no:
.n.4 -.4 on. 88.4 4r. 84. 84., nu nu un nn nn n. u. nn nn nn nn nn nu nu nn nu nn nu nn 444; no no:
48.. 84.n on. 8 . 44.8 g~., 4r.. um. .-.4 u. 40.4 .n. .n.4 8..4 44.4 84.8 00. 84.8 08. «8.4 nn nn nn nn nn nu soc-m ..ox
u8.4 4~.8 04.4 :4. ~.. 48.8 84.4 nn un uu n- nu u- n- n- nu uu un nn nn un nu nn nn nu nu .44.: 4.80:4:
nu . No.4 88. 08.. 84.4 48.4 40. 4 . 48. ...4 40., n. an.4 88.8 . 80.4 88. oo. mo.~ 84.8 nn nu nn nu nn nu nn .8008 04¢cooo:
nn 00.4 on. 04.4 08.4 .8.. .... U4. ,,.4 nu u- un nn 04.4 ~4.~ «0.8 -. «8.0 48.8 nu nu nu nn nu nn nn swans 80444:
48.4 o~.4 8w. 81.4 4c.. 4..n a... nu 4n.4 84.. p4:. ~4.~ 8m.n 84.. un 48.4 nn 88.8 80.4 8~.~ nn nn nu nn nn nn coon:
84.4 80.4 84. 48. .4.” 44.0 Nn.4 v . u..4 No." (4.4 88.4 o..4 48.4 84.4 ~0.~ oo. 44.4 4~.~ ~0.~ nn nn nn nn nn nn sauna c4484:
u. on... N4. .3. 0m. ban... . .4 u... nn.n 44w .47 #0. un QHJ I~.4 inn In II II I I II In I In I a 04.5.3
nn.n c8.~ oo. 88. 88.4 4..” an. 44. «4. no. on. n~.4 40.8 4,.4 88.8 88.4 oo. 88.4 08. .n «8.8 «o. In 8~.~ 80.4 4w. oca44
4n.4 04.8 or. 40. 0.. n .4 84.4 un u- nu -u nu nu n- u- nn nn nu nn un nn nu nn nn nn nn c0944
-u nu nu un nu nu .H.n n . -u nn ~4.4 «4.4 no.n 48.4 8..” 40.8 w4. 40.4 08. 80.4 nn nn nn nn nu . nu nun-m :o844
80.4 av. 48. oo. 84. on.“ 48. 4.. un.4 nu u. .n. 84.4 84.8 84.4 88.8 nu nn 4~.8 nn nu nu nn nu nu nn 04448-4n-4
nn nn nn nu nu 0«.4 8.. .~.4 8..4 u .n .8. 08.4 44.4 4.4 04.4 08. oo. 88.8 84.8 04.8 un nn nn nn nu nn .444ua 0444
I In I I I nu I I nu nn nu I In I I I In II II I I I I I I II .nu-anon
m4. on.~ 4w. 48. 80.. ,4.o or.4 4n. 8.. 84.4 .4." .4. n8 4 .mo. 40.4 44.: 40. 88.8 o0.4 no.4 nu nn nn nn nu nn sauna no.nzon
un nn nn nn nu nn u. n. nn nu nn ... nn 0~.w 4m.~ 84.8 oo. 88.0 48.4 84. In In In nu II II 40.004
08.4 08.4 00. 08.4 84.4 84.4 48.4 8.. 44. 4..4 8n.. mm. 40.: 4... 84.~ 0.8 nn o~.8 80.4 88.4 80.8 04. 80.8 80. ~8.~ 4w. 0.080 80:02
80.4 48.4 cu. 84.4 04.4 48.“ ”4.. r.. 8.. un ,4.4 nu «~.4 8o. 4n.4 ”.8 80. 00.4 08.4 o8.4 48. 88.4 48. 04. we. . 98°00444=
-u nu nn un nn un -n -n -n un un un u. nu 90.4 o..~ go. «0.8 80.8 «8.0 un nu nn un nn un .808 404.0:
90.4 84.4 8n.4 04. 8.. ~8.a 44.. 4.. .8.4 8n. ”4.. no.4 0.. 80.~ 44.4 4n.~ oo. o4.4 nn nu nn nn nu nn nn nu 444.0:
88.4 08. 80.4 4o.~ 48.4 86.4 o..4 88. 4.. 44. 88.4 ~u. 84.~ 8n. 84.~ ~4.4 nn ~4.n 00.~ 88.8 08.4 84.4 48. 84. 80.4 un 004-nz004oo
ON.N ~0.~ ~44 48. 84.4 3.. on... 4". 4.8.4 4:... mu.4 4... 44.4 ...".N 48.4 ~84. 8. 84.44 O4.8 04.~ no.n mm. 04.8 04. «4.4 .N 0444.558
80. 88.4 44. 80. u . n.“ 48.4 ”4. n . -8.“ 4..” 04. ”a. ~v.4 84. 84.8 on. 40.4 88.4 48.8 nu nn un nn nu nn nusnououou
48.4 r8.~ 00. 88.8 48. n- 44.” n4. nu 8". -u nu nn 08.4 «8.4 4u.4 nu nn 84.8 40.4 un nu nn nu nn nn 8 8:484»
88.4 4~.4 44. n8. 8n.4 c~.4 0..4 9 . 0.. 88.. m4. nu 48.. nu.4 no.n 84.84 N4. 8 .8 8N. 80.4 80.~ nu nu nn nn nn nugnoxu4800098
80.4 .4 8o. , .u m,.~ n- 84.4 uu .4.4 u..4 .... nn nn .4. 48. 84.4 nn un 08. nn nn nn nn nn nn nn .44.
88.8 o4.~ we. m. 08. o..4 4... 44. 40. on. 4r.“ un 4~.4 08.4 nu. nn.8 oo. m4.~ 80.8 88.8 08.8 88. on. we. 48.8 80. n44naa
at. 08.4 88.4 e.. ~4.4 o..o 8n.4 ,,. nn 48.4 04.4 84.4 u4.4 4.. 44.4 04.4 00. 88.4 44.4 48.8 nu nu nn nn nn nn ..on
04.n 8~.4 v.4 -. 8n.4 8... «4.4 4.. 84. u .8 88.4 uo. 8n.. 8n.u n8.~ 88.4 on. 08.4 88.4 88.4 nn uu un nn nn nn nun co-4coa
~8. 80.4 ow. 44. 44. 4.4 8u.n u”. 4.. 88., 48.4 m. N". 89.4 <.. 08.8 nn un nu nn nn nn nn nn nn nu 85009.9
8«. No.4 84. o... 4.... 3... P... J; ...u. ...). 4...... I 4.4. 84.. .8. 88 oo. 8o.n 0m.8 $.m 4o.~ I 08.~ m4. 4N. 04. 4.34.8
n- -n -n un -u nu 8n.” ,8. 4..” 04.4 4..“ 88.8 n8.8 ~4.u 80.0 nu nn nn nn nn nn nn nn nn nn nn .nu
8.4 48.4 44. nu un 84.4 48.4 4”. .4. .n.4 8..- 84. «u. 84.4 p~.4 84.4 oo. ~8.~ 84.8 o8.~ «4.8 4o. 84.4 oo. 04.4 nu 4:440-44
48. oo.” cc. 0,. wn.4 8..“ nn.n 84. on. ~.4 .0.” ”8. un 84.4 40.4 48.8 00. 44.~ 48.0 88.8 88.8 nn nn nn nn nn u .o: .n4448 onoso
8q.~ 88. .88. 04.4 84.4 80.8 08.. 4.. nn 80.4 84.4 84. wu.4 nn.« 8 .m 04.4 00. mfl.~ 00.8 88.4 84.4 . 4N. 88. no.4 oo. ogocanuo
04.8 04.4 44. we. 84.4 44.“ ~4.n .4. ,4. 40.4 44.. 44. 80.4 «o. «4.4 00.4 w4. 84.4 84.8 08.4 40.4 88. 48. 80. 00.8 88. no c04444u
88.4 4.8 a». ~4.4 mu. 04.4 84.~ nn nn nn nn nn nn 44.4 n4.4 08.4 00. 44.~ 80.0 08.0 ~8.~ 00. 80.4 oo. 88.~ oo.4 4onnqgu
I In 4.... un nu nu 8..., a... I 48... I I I 4n... mim no.4 I nu I 4m.4 II In In In I I 44358
88.. 88.4 on. 9,.4 48.8 0..” a... a.. ma. uu.4 «4.. 0n.” 4 . qn.4 «8.. «3.4 4.. 84.4 08. ~8.~ 88.4 «n. 84.4 08.4 . 8w. soc-u sync
un n- nn 04.4 «4.4 nn “8. ..n ... 4..n u- un 4n.4 nn nn 40.8 nn n8.~ 4o.~ nn nn nn nu nn nn nn gonna .8800
8.. 88.4 9.. 4c. 48.4 8.. 44.4 - . 4..4 U4.“ .8.- 8.. 04.4 04. 08. No.4 8. 88.8 48.8 88.8 nn nn. nn nn nn nn .0888
08. 44. 8w. 08.4 3.4 8”. 2.4 44. 44. 4W4 4.... 3... ”..., ..8. 8.... 0nd I -.8 84 00.0 80.8 I 8... 88. 8.~ 44.... 0338.5
.8.4 04.4 04. 04. 88. 80.4 8U.4 84. u.. ...4 4n.” 4u.4 8;. 44.. nn w~.4 oo. 40.~ 8~.8 8~.~ 88.~ «8. o0.4 nn 80.4 04. 0808000488
«.... 8., .w um. am. :4. on. "8.... n, . ,6. 0..u 4...“ I n- nu I I In II In I I I I I; I 3. 33.6
«I. 80.8 «n. ”4.4 0..4 8n. 8..4 4.. an. 8 .4 ...4 88.“ 84.4 .4.4 40.4 44.4 nu om.~ 80.4 48.~ 4o.~ NN. . nu nn nu 88080

" 88....4 " ”I84 " WW4 .464 .wwo4 " ... .... n-2, ~34 48.84 H .064 4 0484 n "4.4 n ....o... u 0.6.. " $84 " 4...”.4 " 304 4 ~43" 442. n 0484 4 on: 4 m

 

 

 

427

88.8 88.4 on. no.n 00. «now cam
Imzund

 

 

4 4n04 4 nu04 4 N~m4 4 4wm4 4 0Nm4 4

80.0 nn.~ 04.4 00.0 00.8 00.4 88.4 48.4 88.~ 04.0 04.8 04.4 84.~ 88.~ 4o.4 88.4 cwauo><
nn nu I nn I I I I I I nu nn nu I I I 442405....
I I I nu I I I I I I I I on I I I in 8254.5
I I I nu I I I I I I I I I I I nu . 8.4.5
nu I I nu I I I I I I I I nu I I I coucob.
nu I I nu I I I I I I nu I I I I I 242304.."
.48. nu 8.4 88. 08 .8 84.8 88. I I I I I I I I uu 0444:5538
nn nu I I I I I I I I I I I I nu nu mzzm 88.3.8
I I I I nu 84.0 I 8.4.4 00. 88.4 88.0 04. 88.0 08.8 I I 48.8qu
nu un nn nu nn nl In. In nu nu In In on un In In ano4m
I I I nu I I I I nu I I I nu I I I 44004 44...
44.~ 0m.4 n8.4 08. «0.44 44.0 nn 00.8 4~.4 .~4 04.9 O8. 84.8 «0.0 44.8 no.4 . cqccocm
un nu un nu nu nu nn 88. 8 44.
4

n

4

O
43.3

4 u {dawuu n4a4 4 ~4m4 4 4404 4 04m4 4 mom4 4 manHehmmam

 
 

 

 

 

324......on .43

428

on.~ 4N.~ on; 14 mod oo.n 88 Ta 4...,“ afim R.” R; «ad SA 86 53 3.0 SA 8.~ ma.~ on.~ 8.0 «flu V...— «né oo.0 03.85

mm. on.~ 3. 3. aw... 8.0 3. .3. 3. a..." Gd n~.~ 8. .3. 8. 8." 8. «a... 8.~ 3.4 I I I I I I 3.53:
“Cod m“ M A Fm. Mm-N Udon NN.H II II II II II II I I. II I. ' II I. II | | I II II 1.30“.
no. 9.~ 2. 9.: R.” 36 no; 2. n... . ..o.~ No. .24 8. .a RA 2.4. 8. ~04 no.n 83 I I I I I I Bra.
$4 I R. P. 2. :6 o...~ S 7. who nun I 86 8.4 I I I I I I I I I I I I 83.8.
I I or.“ 04..“ mod and ow.” mo 4w. ...o m...” I nn.n o~.m N1N oo.~ I I I I I I I I I I .8432
.2.~ 3. 84 S. NN.N a...“ Nm... SJ 3.. mm.“ 35 on.” 8. -.n R. £3 I RA 3.» I I I I I I I odds-.3
SJ 5.4 oo. ¢m.~ on. 3.0 No.” I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a! '38
NO.H no.~ 0m. 3. om. SA. mm...” 4... mm. m . 4...... oo.“ 2.. 9.4 oo. .~ 8. I I I I I I I I I e..—8'8
2.4 “A 00. on; nn.n. a... pm. .0. 4m. qo.~ 3.4 om.~ 3.." 94.4 no.~ was“ 3. g; .4 85 36 an. 3. god 3.N I '0“
$4 S.~ a. 2. -.~ $.~ ......Nu S. 9.. s... on; o~. 8.0 S... 3. e..“ I SA 8.“ 3. .~ «"4 J S. .u 3. «I85
84 SA 8. m3 3.~ 3.0 3. 8. ..r. :2 3A Pd a; 3d «.3 R.~ 8. 8.“ RA :3 I l I I I I 13 In

 

 

“SIESEEIIEIIUEH3..-

3.53 .3

429

ao.m oo.~ oq.fl ~¢. ON.N No.n Hn.o n~.o Nu.q on.~ No.~ NN.m ON.N ¢¢.N mo.N an. Qm.n mm. nn.n c~.~ ¢o.~ «o.H nn.q no.n no.” umquo><

oN.~ oq.~ am.o II I- II II II II I- II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II .uz ou«:u«3

I II II II II II II I- II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II axoswn
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II 'éguwa
II I- II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II agar

I II II I- II II II II II II zunnauw

m~.m OO.N ¢o.n II m~.~ on.n n~.q~ oc.- om.N on. «o. o~.m on.¢ -.~ nn.n an. ~n.e no. on.~ o~.# m~.m «n. mo.~ no.n No. owcwEocauH
I I II II II II 0~H«>uuucunm

mm.m mm.a mm. 5H.fi o~.~ an.m qn.~ dd.“ oo.q NN.” no.“ na.¢ oo.“ om." oh. NO.H -.e a_. -.~ g“. No.~ on.H o~.n no.“ Ho. oocnazm
I I I I I II II egocuaum
II II II oumnm
I II II caucfiso
II. II II II usmuum
II II II ocuoucom
en.n Io.” mo.n fig. no.~ . nH.~ ~m.e ~n.~ fio.n ~¢.n on. «0.5 oo.~ on.” «5. ad. no.q “a. -.~ #0.. no.“ no. an.¢ -.e o¢.fi oomdaaxo
I . II I I II II II uuo
II II II oa>auox
N I~.N m~.q no.n oo.n -.q o~.n 4o.¢ ¢~._ on. oo.: oo.~ o~.~ no. no. oo.¢ od. m~.H mm.“ oo.“ mo.H um.~ om.~ No.~ “axon:
“a.“ an.“ mm.n mm. oo.~ mo.¢ no.0 om.m am.n No.~ om.e as.“ no. n~.~ «N. am. n~.n an. mn.~ I- I- -- -I I- -I uuun-<uz
g ~o.~ NH. o¢.q o~.n o~.m an.“ OO.N oo. “a.“ «~.q o~.o “a. ¢~.¢ no.“ oo.~ mm. m~.H I- no. ao.~ oo.n on.~ In. aunMMhuu

I II II II II II p

II II II II I- II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II “Hana:
oq._ hm ao.o II I. -- I- I- II II II II II II II II II II II II II -I II II II cou3aq
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II uzqcox
II II II II II II Ir II II I- II II II II II II II II II II II - II II II acunwcux

own:

Ho.o oo.q o~.e on. o~.~ 0n.n nn.n Rn.o oq.o mo.~ ae. no.n hm. oN.~ «w no. nn.¢ mm. mm." on. -.A on. o~.n o~.a oo. oflfia>cuv~o=
I I II I- 560 chanxu:

.. II -I I- I- II I- II II II II II no.n eq.~ oo.¢ ofi. n¢.n sn. nH.n II cm.“ mm.“ , oo.n n~.~ mm.~ cognac»:
I II II II II dawxua:
I I- «cum:

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II ”H ”H I” II II II II II II II II nnou ““0“
I- I- II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II -I II II aauuam

n qaacwam
.m um. vm. mu. mo.~ «q.m nn.n No.4 «o.~ «m.~ on.” o~.~ -.fl cm.n m~.n ON.N -.~ nfi. sq.q oo.“ «N. am. n¢.m we. oo. xuuwuw“w
_ I I I I accuse
II II II caucsa
I II II II II II “alum
II II II II xufiqo
II II ocuzqsou
ac.“ ma.“ an._ no. OO.N a~.a m~.n no.n oo.~ n~.~ fie. o~.~ om.m oo.~ II n¢. «n.~ n¢.~ ~w.~ an." Rn.“ ow.~ Nu.o no.n nn.n amuuuwwmw
~¢.n mm." Nm.n on. on. nw.~ on. mn.~ om.~ on.~ nH.~ oH.n mo. oo.~ uofimcqcu

I I I I II II II II II >ucwo
m~.~ cg. om.c o¢.~ no. cfl>~uo

II II II II II nouadum
II II II -u1nom
I- II axou<
mm. «o. on.0 ~a.~ an.” om.o cm.~ an.~ so. oo.~ ofl. oo.n ¢~. n~.n No.¢ ma. aHOEvu<

I I I II II oxuuvwc<

”>43“

Iu%maq . mm¢~ . Ana” , Ono“ N onofl “Immofl H mac” H cam“ H mm A U «no. “ Mao n ~mog n Amofi H ONod H oHoH “ mfioa H Nfioa . o.o~ “ mgafi H qfiofi H nfiofi ” Nam” H HH¢~ . odofi H ooofi I mzo~P<Hmmpm

n m as.“ mm.m Jo. qo.~ do.q ca.“ no.n on.a ha. ha. om.n mo.~ on.m mm. ¢n. oo.: o¢. mo.~ no.
oq.n Hm.n mm.” co.fl nn.n I
um.m on. an.n oo. "o. n
nn.n 3m.~ «m.m ow. mo.~ m

IIIIIVIIIIIII l

 

 

 

 

.Omo_ I moo. .naozudxo
.>~:n c. acoquognnan fiquwmodouoouoe couuudu-
haw vouuoauh -auc_qu uo nozucu ux¢uo><II.cn «fin-H

430

 

oo.n oH.q ma.” ~N.~ oo.~ A“. NN.N ed."
no.n mm.¢ mo.~ no.n mo.~ -- no.n m~.¢
-- - no.” o“. Nm. mo. m~.- mm.¢
mH.¢ nn.n mm. n~.H mo.H hm. Ho.m o~.q
oH.~M o~.m oo. NN. oh.H oo. mm.“ #0..
no.q “e.. ofl.~ 04.. “I. II. No.9 om.m
mo.q om.“ an.~ mm. mo.~ .- -.m cm.~
-- -- -- -. mo.fi -- mo.“ mo.~
m¢.m oo.~ an. cq.~ ck. an. mm.m cm.“
nn.n we.“ oo. mm.~ “o.H nn.fi om.o~ qH.n
am.n o~.o He. om. nn.~ ca. m~.n oH.~
“I.HH o¢.m no. oq.~ n~.H Hm. oq.- mm.n
oo.n no.“ Hm. oo.~ OI. HI. mo.“ mm.“
mm.“ nn.n m~.~ NH.~ No. No. oo.o ~n.~
“o.HH “q.q om.~ o¢.~ oo. oo. mq.m em.m
-- -- -- -- -- oo. oo.n no.
on.0 on.0 mo. ON.N mH.n -- ~n.¢ ~¢.~
mm.“ mo.n mo. n_.m H~.~ -- ofi.m -.q
ON.OI Nq.¢ -- -- -- -- -- «o.n
oo.n qo.~ eg. an. m~.H m". fifi.m no.n
mq.~ om.m oo." On. an. mm. am.m ~m.n
mo.q NN.N mn.~ 0H. mu.~ mo. qo.o m~.n
mm.“ no.n Rm. mm.n NN.H oq. HI.¢ oo.;
~0.¢ Hm.~ an.¢ hm. mm.H on. om.m oo.¢
mo.m oq.q -.~ cm. oo.n NN. mm.» mo.“
“m.ofl a~.m Rm.~ ~¢.~ ¢¢.~ - mm.» Ho.n
ON.O om.~ oo.. ~H.n fin.fi oo.n ~e.q~ no.n
Hm.H~ mm.o oh.“ MN.“ on. “I. mm.q --
m~.n mH.m nn.n H~.o mm. gm. oq.~ I“.
mm.“ on.0 on.~ an.” HM.” an. om.m w¢.¢
om.oH qo.q oH. mo. o~.H IN.“ o¢.h no.~
oo.a ~m.¢ NN.H ac.” ~¢.H no. «0.0 -.~
oo.o mm.m em.” WN. NH.H -I hm.“ on.~
m~.m~ -- NN. mn.~ ~H.H om.~ On.o no.n
om.~ Ha.o mm. m5. n5." Na. mm.« mo.~
-- -.¢ mm.” No.¢ oo.~ oo. mn.¢ mm.H
qo.m mm.~ an. ow. an.“ -.. ow.o~ fim.¢
mm.~ no.n om.a oo.“ mm.~ Ho. m~.m Kn.~
mo.o qo.o an.~ oo. mm. «N. nw.o q«.n
No.0H no.0 «o.H «n.n mm.~ mm.~ mo.mH --
mm.n nn.n fin.H ah.“ N~.n -- dq.m --
mo.o nN.~ cm. mH.m mm. mN. dq.m nn.~
mo.HH oo.n o¢.~ n~.~ a“. I- -.o om.~
w~.m “h.m nm.fi «m.~ NO.H wo.~ No.0 om.n
-- -- -- - -- -- I- ~¢.H
do.o «m.¢ co. no.~ no.“ - ~¢.nH mH.n
~m.- oo.n Km.“ Hm.~ an. ca. m¢.o ~o.¢
¢N.w cm.“ on. Na. aq.~ -- NN.» n~.~
-- q~.q no. an.“ cm.H I- no.n“ --
“H.m o~.o ~m.o m“. ~o.~ In. om.“ on.¢
on.0 o¢.m mo.fi q¢.~ co.” .- "o.m on.“
amofi mm-qu.NmoH-hlwmo_ “ moo” “ Imoa Mmofi Nmofl

 

mo.#

nn.n

em.~

NN.N

Om.N

om.~
«o.m

mm.oH

no.0

mm.m~
mm.-
~m.m~
w~.o~
n~.oH
no.0H

¢o.ofi

mm.o
no.o~
¢~.n
qH.¢A
mo.“
no.¢H
o~.o~

on.¢

HH.H

no.“

m~.n
mm.~
ow.~
nH.~
~n.
mH.N
ca.—
fim.
mm.

na.~

nn-

mm.

m~.~

nN.~
an.~
om.~
n“.

oqofi

ow.¢

OH.~
w~.~
-.w
c~.m
om.o
Nq.m
NH.m
go.c
ow.n
mc.H
nn.n
cm.m
nn.n
nn.n

mn.~
o~.¢
m~.~
mm.~
m¢.n
en.m
m¢.n
om.m
no.n
nc.m

n~.n

mm.c

QH._
no.a
vo.¢

w~.~
no.n

No.
mm.”
mm.

NA.~
mm.#

«n.H

mm._

mm.

mm.m

_H.o

nq.fl
eo.¢
no.n
mm.m
a~.m
on.“
«o.n
no.n

n~.n
o~.m

no.0
nN.¢
n~.o
HN.O
no.n
n~.n
OO.N

om.m

nn.n
¢H.m

oo.0H

oo.n
no.H
nq.~
cm.¢
no.n
no.q

oq.N

xi

{-1 .4

II"- P. I“!

OI (“I

l\

PI OJ

.4 ("I

If- IN

CI

CI

 

minub><

.u: auwzuuz
«roam:
ex53uzz
was»
yannauh
owc.Eo£mfiH
uHH_>uoucmam
uucawxm
oHoc_Eum
whpmw
coucwsc
931m»;
oououcom
ouwflssxo
uuo
~q>mpoz
pyxewz
puuawfl<uz
soflusz
auuufiuu:
ngvmz
couxa;
anacox
counxcuz
own:
~HHfi>couMoz
Ema chasm»:
couvauy:
afloxnm:
«can:

nnou “you
mauhmw
mgsmmam
sowum

kuwu xflm
”cause
caocan
unamn
undao
ozucweoo
qnmmxuflnu
Lauovwzo
umfincuzu
73:50
cfi>~au
Joumwux
##wznom
axog<
ouoEfiu<
oxpsvnc<
.rg;<
monH<hmmpm

.fluncflucouII.mu pucflh

431

mo.~
oo.~
om.~
Nd.~

mo.~
oo.n
mm.~
an.“

oo.~
fin.
mc.

mm.#

no.n
mm.“
nn.n
nn.n
nq.n

mm

no.n oo.~
n~.q no.
oo.n nn.n
II a~.~
-.a o¢.~
om.m o~.~
on.~ mo.~
ma.~ oo.
¢¢.n o~.o
mn.q oo.—
wm.~ we.
no.n ~n.~
0m.~ mm.
mo.n an.
on.~ no.“
om.~ on.
qa.o ~m.~
do.” II
~a.o An.

 

 

“no“

Omoa

o~o~

wmog

.omo_

oood .quco_Jo

m~.o
oa.~
oo.n

III: II IIIII

22 “lhflwlmE-FZE NEE H E:

.u-ax:< a“ acoauugansm “muuxo~o»oy.we vouuaaoa
ho“ vauuoauu -qucdau uo nacoc. ~1au~><--.nm w~no~

 

 

NN.N

IIIIIIIIIIIIIII

IRS “$2

owouo><

.ux «UaLUa3
axonox
axssuwa
«as»
monpfiua
owcfisocudH
oHAH>u~ucoaw
umcassm
oaocfiEum
mumum
acucflao
wawupm
ocuoucom
oowfiasxo
uuo
n«>¢co:
umxomx
hounwfl<uz
aofiuu:
«unwauqz
ddfiqu
acuaiq
qawcox
cognwcfix
own:
9H~fi>CuvHoz
Ema cuaoxuz
cauvfiaa:
~waauz
«can:

nnou uuom
mayhem
sandman
goaum

xufiu me
ucauao
c-ucaa
unauo
mmfloo
ozucwEou
dzmuxudcu
caucuwzo
“advcucu
zwcuo
cd>fiau
:oumaum
ddwaoom
9x0u<
whoavu<
oxumvmc<
“Hmpou<
mzo~H<HmmLm

 

432

nn.n no.n om.~ Hm. an.m No.” mm.~ Hm.H nn.H nm.m NO.H mm.fi Om.H oo.n NN.N noun on. mn.a om.m o”.n Om.m ca.“ "n.m n”. mm.m nn.n uxmuu><

 

 

 

 

 

 

oo.~ do.~ mm. NN-A cm.“ mm. ~N.# ON. o~.n m~.~ nn.n mH.~ «n. no.4 gm.n 4m.m mm. mn.m nq.m mm H nn.n mg. «H.q II on.~ mo. .uz muazu_3
m¢.~ ON.Na om.¢ mm. ~q.~ 0H.H ~m.m mm. «m. dN.m Hm.m mo. d¢. um.m on.“ nn.n no. Om.q 0H.n mo.¢ On. an. II I- -I II mx0353
mm. nn.n om.~ ow. ¢~.N m~.~ hq.a HN.~ ma.m ~m.m no. o~.~ nu. II II II II I- II II II II II II II II uJEJHa3
mw.~ no. om.~ No. mo.¢ nm.~ oo.n mm. on. no.0 mm. on. II II II II II II II I- II II II II II II ans»
m¢.n mm.q no.n mo. @o-o n¢.~ o~.n «H.~ mm. o¢.N om.~ mo.fi mm. am.~ mm.“ oo.~ no. mn.m no.n II II II II II II II >unc..H
no.~ m¢.~ 4o. mm. n~.H OO.H «o.~ oo. mm.~ m¢.w mm. 00. ON.N mo.m H~.~ mm.~ oo. mo.m cm.m om.~ om.n mn.H oo.¢ Hm. mo.c mm. omcfiEoLm_H
II II II II om.“ om.~ cm.~ mm.~ «m. mo.¢ om.~ mm.~ um.m mo.~ ~o.o no.n oo. Hm.n OH.M II II II II II II II zfiHw>hyucvmw
ON.N om.a~ mm.~ HH.A om.N mm.~ oo.n nn.n o~.~ MN.N oo.~ nm.~ NM. fiN.N mO.N OO.N q~. cm.q mm.N ofi.4 Mm.“ NJ. nn.n :- mH.m am.q avalmsw
oo.n no.nfi o¢.~ an. om.~ No.~ mn.~ Nn.~ m0. Nw-m ma. II NN. II On. Om.N Q~. om-m II om.m cm.“ on. Hm.m so. nn.n mm.q omocwfiym
m¢.~ an. Hm. mm. on. .o~.~ ON.N Ho.~ oq. mm.n mm. NH.N nq. no. o~.~ _o.n ofl. Q@.N ¢o.m ~fi.fi cm. NN. am.“ No. II II uh>um
NN.N nn.0 mm.~ o¢. ~0.m no. ON.N no.n no.n mm.n nn.n me. n~.H II oo.n o~.n Hm. Om.n II II II II . II II II II saunas?
q~.m oo.o mo.~ «H.H m~.~ am.H mq.~ nn.n cu. an.m -.N no. on. oo.~ no. mn.~ II II II II II II II II -L II 931m»;
II Nc.~ oo. ma. II oo. oo.q mm. oo.q ON.N“ II om. II qm.o N~.m II II II II II II II II II II II uououco;
NN.N on.0 ~o.~ cm. NN.m oo.H mm.~ mo.~ on. o~.¢ mm. No.N nfi. oq.N m¢.~ nn.n o¢. ¢o.¢ w¢.m ¢~.n oo.n mm.“ nn.n a“. do.n Hm.m vuxflzexo
II II II II II II mo.~ II II nn.n ww.~ ma. do. NN.N oo. ON.N II II II II II II II II II II nuo
do. ¢~.H mn.~ Nm. mm. m~.~ ~m.~ cc. NM. nH.n ~¢.N mm.~ mm. nq.m oo.n ow.“ N“. do.m qn.m II II II II II II II ua>acoz
~c.~ ¢N.m mo.~ mo.~ no." c~.~ q~.N mm.N on.~ No.~ m~.c no. II mo.d mm.“ mo.~ nn- mm.n on.” Mm.m II mo.” nn.n NN. mm.q No.5 uuxmyz
«o. oo.0 II II II II II oo.n ¢Q.~ «n.n N¢.N n~.n no. nn.~ mo.N om.¢ II om.“ Nm.m oa.q um.“ nn.n so.m mo. ~3.m no.~ hmuaufi<uz
m~.n flu.n I- NN.H mN.~ an." NN.N on.~ we.” aw.¢ cm.~ ~n. II Om.m no.n No.~ mo. Ho.o oo.n ~n.m mo.~ d. qm.m II mc.~ “A.“ zofluuz
~¢.~ mm.m cm. we. mo. mm.“ mfi.~ «m. on.~ mn.¢ oo. ON. mo.fl ~w.~ NN.H Ho.~ II mo.~ 3~.n II qo.u a. II II II II uuuauuwz
mm.~ ¢a.m on.“ II om. mm.~ ¢m. mm. on. Hm.~ cc.“ no. oc.m oo.m o~.~ ~¢.m II II mm d oq.fl mm.q ”n. mn.m II II II “diva:
oc.~ nn.~ mm. mm. HN.N an. oo.N an. an.~ On.n O¢.~ m~.~ mm. nn.n mm.~ om.~ 0m. 40.4 mm.m mo.“ og.u an. Hm.w 33. mm.~ no. souls;
mo.~ oc.~fi Ho.~ nQ. nn.n No.“ m~.¢ oq.~ oo. om.~ n¢.~ nn- aN. ¢m.a . ww.~ no.n ¢~. II II II II III II II II II niacsx
oo.n Hm.N oo.“ mm. nn.~ «o.H no. em. «N. o~.o om.~ on. on.~ II II II II II II II II II II I- II .- coumwcax
om.m we.“ o~.q ¢¢. ,~¢.m nn.n om." mm.~ oo.~ mm.c Nw. ow.~ cm.m Om.o mn.~ ma.m II mm.m no.0 om. mo.“ II qo.m m“. “n.n 3m. 0&3:
Nn.~ on.0H oN.n on. cm.¢ Nq.H m~.m nw.d ~@. ¢~.o nn.~ oo. mo.~ oo.0 qm.~ mm.N No. no.n oo.m um.q on.“ mn.fi mm.~ Hm. qq.m Ac.m L-a>cysfioz
o~.n n~.o No.m «m. nn.n ofi.~ NH.H II II II II II II II II II II II II II I- II I- II II II sac cunnmy:
nn.n no. On. m©.N 40.N hm.“ on. mm. Na. QQIO nn- II Q~.H oo.n Oo.~ II II Non-N mo. II II II II II II II COJvflwQ:
nc.~ mn.c -.N dN.— m~.o ¢~.H ~N.~ mo.~ mo.~ o~.¢ om.~ oc.o II <m.m mc. on.m no. II -I II II II II II II II ~aaxnm:
mn.~ HH.m o¢.~ 0H.H oo.n N¢.~ m¢.n ON.N on.~ «0.0 n~.~ II II I- oo.“ no.n II m~.o mo.n II II II I- II II .- scam:
oo. om.~ «H. ~¢. wo.~ NH.H o~.n cm. o~.~ on.q ¢¢.N ad.“ mo. m¢.a o¢.m no.n II mo.o om.m “o.a “o.H II II II II II 9300 “new
m¢.n mN.a mo.¢ om. mq.e a®.H ~n.~ mo.~ II NN.o II no. OO.H oo.n. mo.o mm.“ II II II II II II II II II II m‘uhmh
om.~ II on.“ mo. mo.o “N.H o~.¢ o~.m II mm.¢ mm.a ¢~.N ma.~ ma.n mH.m n¢.q ~o. kw.o II nn.0 um.u , nn.n ”n.m -I II nn.n agamwsu
mm.“ cc. mm. an. ac. oo. no.n oc. ¢¢.~ II II om.¢ II mq.m qo._ do.m o~.H mm.~ mm.o 9H.“ Hm.m m u.m m3. Hm.“ on xuuuu
cm.“ as. Hm. ~m. ~¢. Mm.“ as. ow. om. ¢H.¢ we. mc.m m_.H m~.~ ~n.n oo.n n“. no.n no.m cm.” 3h.” MM . nn.n N3 m¢.~ mm.” Judo xdu

II mc.~ mm.” an. co.¢ Om.m nn.~ ac. NN. no.n om. No. o~.n mm.o No.0 N~.n II no.n 4m.4 «o.H «c.n Nu. no.“ a“. o..m A”. “cause
mm.~ nn.n Nq. mo. om.H mm. o~.m mm.“ Hn.N Ao.o w~.~ ao.H oo. ao.¢ mm.~ o~.¢ II um.m mm.“ on.“ w«.. 0“. nn.n II II II c1ucsa
No.n flm.m mm. N~.~ No.q on.~ N~.m on.~ mm. on.n ¢q.a Mm.~ on.“ II II II I- I- II II II II I- II -I II chuo
oa.~ HH.¢ ~¢.¢ ~m.~ oo.0 Na.“ mw.m I- II II II II II II II I- II I- II I- II II -- II II II Anamo
Nn.m “m.m o~.~ oo. mo.~ oo. mw.m II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II aLucich
«o. mm.m mg. mm. ~N.m mm.w oo.n HH.H no.” No.m nq.~ mo.~ II $0.4 no.“ mm.~ H4. an.m n3.w 4n.” o“.¢ um. mo.n II rm.q 34.“ wzmmxu_zu
mo.” on.m wo.~ mm. do.m oo. on.~ -.m oo.~ no.c No.~ NN.N o~.~ nn.n m~.q nn.4 II II II II I- II .II II II II LmdoUzLU

II no.n mo.~ c¢.d an.“ om.~ oo.q mo.~ om.~ mn.m Ho.~ cn.m mg.“ qm.m mm. m3.n am. OH.2 no.n mt.“ nn.n 3M.n nn.n do. om.m no.“ ugflvcnsu

II II II II II II II ¢o.~ oo. oo.n mo. no. ow.“ II II no.n II II II II II II I- II -I II yacsu
o¢.N m®.m ON.¢ mm. Om.n ON.N oo.N mn.~ mm.~ do.n Om.N Nm.~ 4N. no.n mm.m m~.n II mm.“ nt-m mm.m 9;.n w.r ~3.fi II dc.n Hm.m :_>M1U
o¢.m o~.m QO.~ Hm. mm.N n~.n ~o.~ mo.~ om. om.m hw- DN.N mm. Om.“ om. Ho.“ nn.n mq.® n” a as m 53.7 nm.w no . mu. mn.d nn.n 399mg»:
mm.m Nm.c o~.N we. NM.¢ OO.N mm.“ an. mm. ON.Q mo.~ mo.“ ~Q.N nn.n 4 m a.” II no.n mn.w II II II II II II II "flvzmom
oq.m m~.c mm.~ oo. mm.m II o¢.N oc.~ II nn.0 om.~ ~o. OO.N cm.m II nc.m II nn.n II II II “A.“ on.n -I .- r3. axog<
oc.~ Hm.n No. mN-H mm. mm. «m.N ~0.~ o¢. m#.m «o.H Om. NM.H mo.» ~w.~ «c.m mo. I:.m an.m m:.1 um n ma.” n.: II. mfi.m an.“ auOEfip<
~w. Nc.m cm. oo. Om. mm.~ am.” NN.N ~0.N Om.m NH.H mo.“ am. ~m.q an.1 nn.n m4.“ “.5 01.4 mt. h:.w nu. .- II - .- alpavsc<

. I III III-II I I r L wing.
_ ommfi “ mmafi h.mmofi “ 0mo_ u mmom ” amofl “ mmofl “ mmofl H “mod N Onofi H Odo“ “ mead n nqu H oqyg H n49“-hImHRC-nlmwmthlhmv. “ H704 JIflMwJIJIwwMJIJvard h “mod _ two“ , marqvx.flmNgIJI mzumwdwmmJMI.

 

. «J 1:: JCSUI I . .7. ...MSQF

I

433

 

He.“ o~.m Na. do.m Hq.o on.“ mo.~ -.m “a. co.d n#.n m¢.H Nd.¢ Ho.d oo.~ o¢.n ON.N no.0 on.~ a~.n ON." mq. emah~><

II .uz «gazed:
I II II axe)»:
I II II II II II meDuyZ
II II II II II II was»
II II II I- II II xnnauh
mm.~ 00.4 m_. am.n m~.n oo.o n¢.~ o<.m on. co.u ~¢.n mm.H Hm.m mn.n o~.~ ¢o.~ an.“ no.m no. n¢.¢ gm. on. omcgeonmdk

I I I I II II II II ofifig>uwucwam

mo.~ ON.N n~.~ oo.n oo.0 oo.0 no.n oo.~a on. m~.~ fio.¢ nfi.N m¢.m Om.~ no.n ~N.N Q~IM mo.¢ NQIH oo.c ow.d No. uwcauzm
I I I I II II udocfisom
II II II II II mpxmm

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II III II II caucwao
.- II II II II II II II I- II II II II -I II II II II II II II I- mawuum

I II II II II I- II ocuOucom
~q.~ oo.n om. oo.m mm.ofi sq.“ nn.n “H.0H oo. -.H ao.~ oo.fi ON.N no.“ NM. no.~ mm.~ N~.n NM.” NN.“ Io.n co. mwmwaaxo

I II I II I I I I II II II uuo
II II aq>ucoz

o“. cm.~ OO.N oo.¢ “a.“ Ad.o No.~ m~.o~ mn.~ 5m.~ nh.n on.” no.~ A~.n «o.~ ¢o.n m~.n NN.N IN.“ Ne.n cm. on. Moxumz

N~.~ IN.“ hm. nq.n mq.m no.“ ~¢.¢ m~.o ma. o¢.a -.~ oo. as.“ as.“ om.~ nn.fi am.n oo.HH oo.H ch.n no. oo. uuu.-<ox
I I II II II II II II :bHuu:

II I- II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II auuuduqz
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II “a“uoz
gm.~ q~.m an. 0m.m nn.n mo.w oh. cm.e no.“ nn.n on.N no.~ nn.¢ an. on.~ ao.o oq.~ om.w mm.“ II II II :0u364
II II II II II II II II II II Ir II II II II II II II II II II II a3qcox
II II -I II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II caunmcdx

mh.~ Ho.m mN. mm.“ ~o.~ o~.n q~.n on.“ ms. mm.~ no.~ oo.c on.« oo.~ _n.~ n~.~ ON.N -.- II II I- I- ems:

mo.~ o~.o mq. nn.n nH.- ~N.@ wa.~ nc.n~ ~n.~ n4. no.n do.~ oo.n oo._ nn.H «H.n no.w NN.® oo.H <m.~ mm. A~.H o-u>cmv~oz
I I II I Ema chanxw:

couvaao:
I- .- dduxnu:

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II scan:
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II nnou “how
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II mdupah

no. II II II dedwjm
“a. mn.¢ q~.~ «o.H o¢.m n~.o o~.~ a~.a o~.H o¢.H un.m no.” no.~ m~.~ no.~ mm.m so. d¢.o mm.¢ No.~ I- oq. Jud-m

I I- I- I- -- .- cm.~ on. I- -- mu.u xflm
Hampsa
I II II II II EQUGDQ
I II II II hQJUQ

I- II II II -I II I- II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II mnfiqo
II II I- II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II uzucwEou

m¢.~ a~.o ¢~. o~.q o~.m m¢.o co.~ ~m.o o~.~ wn.N ON.N oo.~ o~.n oo.~ -.m mN.¢ mm. o~.n II . mNIN mm.~ o¢. mzmmxufizu
. II I II II :muouvsu

¢~.~ ON.N om.. nn.n NN.N o4.“ oo.n em.~fi mm. “q.~ mm.~ Ho.~ mq.n mo. Am.~ OO.N -.n um.n mq.~ mm.q Na. Na. hodmcazu
I I I II II II II II II acmu

Io.“ ON.O o~.~ om.q ~N.oH ~n.~ NH.~ no.n on. «I. mo.~ mm. ma.n mm.” o~.~ mH.¢ NN.N -.o ON.N oo.q «N. nq. cfi>flou
. I II II II abgwwhm
II II II II “Hmzmom

NN.N 0m.m om. -.~ nn.n I- II II I- II II II II II II II II II II I- II II uxou<
on.~ wo.q ON. «m.n nc.~ nq.o ~5.~ n~.~ mm. a~.~ m~.q no.“ oo.0 o¢.~ oc.¢ ~w.~ oq.~ do.c oo.~ gn.m o~.~ mm. whoEvh<
II I II I . II II II oxumvac<

hxmmthmmw

 

 

 

.Iunog I IM¢~ “ mmofl “ wmofi ” “Nod ”Iwme ” m~o_ n IN A H mam" “ mew ” “mod “ oNo_ “ odafi “ m_o~ n MammIJ.o~o~ n mflofi ” IMO“ “ mfiofi ” Nflod H ~Ho~ ” ofiofi . coo” “ mzo~h<Hmmzm

 

I
5
I

 

.omo_Iooa~ .wEo£w_xo
.hucsygmmm c“ acowqumnzm auuwxodohoouve vauuadmm
ho“ kuhomuu ~_mwcfloh go awzuc_ wxuum><IIu~ suns»

ZIEBII

 

~NI¢ om.o .NQ. Qo.~ mo.~ nn.n OHIN nn.n o~.¢ co.n no.n NN. HOIA o~.~ oo.o anN ma.c unaua><

 

 

 

 

 

nn.m ”o.~ Ho.o nN. ¢H.n hm.~ Nm.H «a. nH.a
~m.q o~.# In.n oo. Nq.m cm. on. oH. ~o.¢ no.“ no.“ -. n~.H <_.n n5.» nn.n oo." “a.” we.” on.~ II no.“ mo.¢ -.o H¢.~ Nfl.m .ux .u.zu.3
.- am." an.” «I. ~#.m fin. Ho._ -.fi do.n Am.“ -.o no. mm.e o~.~ n~.o~ cc.“ ~o.e oo.n on.¢ nn.n on. m... -I I. II I- .JOII3
-.o go.” mm.“ ¢#. no.n am. nn.~ -.~ cg.m on.0 o~.c ca. o~.n II II II II II II I- I. -I II -I II II axaguaz
mg.” ¢o.n ~m.o oo. n~.o «0.; no.~ eo- ho.n ~n.¢ nq.n no." II II . II II II II II II II I- I- II II I- .23»
mH.oH oo. do.o~ «N. a~.m «o. 00. Rd. ~n.n oo.e no.q oo. ~a.n we.n «o.o~ ~¢.n o~.e «o.n ~¢.n .- II II II I. -- .- munnfi.h
mm.N mfl.n om.q~ oo. no.q oo. o~.n oo. n¢.n #~.n Ne.o no. ann nn.n nn.n no. nn.n ¢-n on.“ so. II as. NN.N co.“ ON.N oo.n omcfiaocawa
-I II I- II Mo.» ad.“ an.H on.“ “m.q an.o ao.~ om. no.~ an.~ no.“ ad. oo.n no.n no._ -I -I I- -I I- -I . II uflflu>hzucanm
m¢.m as. qa.m ”fl. oo.¢ an. an. oa. fia.n ¢~.~ no.“ No. -.¢ on. on.- nn.n we.“ oo.e no.n oo.n do. “H.n -.n «o.o Ho.” “m.“ Iacxazm
om.“ oe.~ no.n on. on.n mm. n~.H no. 4¢.n m~.~ ca.n II no.n II 06.0 No.« No.¢ oc.¢ nn.n oo.n oo. co.~ -.~ ~¢.o II An.og ufiocdazm
on.q n~.~ NM. oo. No.” -- n4. no. no.n o~.~ an." ooIA cc. no." oo.~ nn.n an.“ c~.n ”n.n on." ad. oh.~ no. flq.~ -. I- ~.Iam
no.~ no.n oo.n I . o~.n an.“ q¢.~ mo.” ~o.~ oo.n ao.~ ed. -.n I. oo.0 an. oo.: ”o.n n~.n .- II II I- II II II coucdao
cm.~ m#.~ oo.“ o4. -.¢ om.~ «a. pa. no.0 so.¢ ~n.q cm. NN.N on. an.o~ n~.n II II II II II I- -I -I II .- IaxII;
«o.n mo.~ oq.n~ .- I- «a. II oo. no.n oo.~ Na.“ oo. fig.“ an.~ -.- II II II on.« II II II II I- I- -I uodo.co;
“o.o Qq.m md.o do. -.o do.~ mm.d oo. og.n co.n go." no. «o.n “a. so.» o~.n ~n.¢ nu.“ ea.“ -.o «o. no.~ ~¢.~ «0.5 o~.~ In.“ aumuaeJo
I- II II II II No. no. oo. II nn.¢ o¢.m II oo.~ II ue-o no. II II II II II I- II II II II pho
oo.m ¢~.fi flo. oo. o«.~ oo. on. ow. an.” ~h.~ II oo. 4“. co.~ ao.~ «~.n nn. so.n ca.q II II I- -I - II II aa>=coz
an.o nn.n n~.o «H. mm.“ ma.” no. n¢. «0.5 «n.n mg.“ «a. nn.n o~. nn.- do.~ nn.~ Jug.n «H.o o~.o I- no. “a.“ ~o_n om.~ mg.“ III-Ix
ma 5 H4.“ II II II II II NN.N no.9 nNIO m_.~ ow. nn.n an. 00.6 no. o~.n naIn an.N nh.~ _n. no. on.~ mm.HH ao.~ an.“ uuunwfl< u:
sn.m do.~ ~0.n ma. en.q 0H. o~.~ ofi. no.~ cm.n on.c -.~ no.n nn.~ noIau oo.n ~o.~ n¢.n an.n GA.“ 00. eo.~ as. mn.m no.n o~.m )oflhqz
~o.~ oo.“ mm.c oo. nn.n an. no.n Ac. nn.~ mn.n OmIn II NN.¢ no.~ oo.0 he. on.¢ N~Ic OO.N II oo. mu. II II II II causiumz
~m.n as.“ an.“ II ~n.o An.~ an.~ oo. ON.N no.n nn.n oo. nn.n NNI~ nn.n nu. NaIn II aQI~ on. so. nn.~ gm. II II II dwdva:
~¢.n no. No.n II do.n so. on. ~A. #¢.~ n~.n o~.n I- oo.~ -.n oo.. oo." o~.~ ~o.n no.q ed.” oo. «H.~ “a.“ Am.o o~.~ nn.n cause;
~n.m 40.. nn.n on. oo.“ ~o.~ o~.~ mg. m~.a “a.“ no.o oo. o¢.n uh. o~.o no.c e~.n II II II II .I- I- II I- .- axucox
n~.n An.~ Ho.o II on.0 on.~ Hh.~ oo.“ A~.~ on.“ so.n oo. om.o cH.~ I- II II II II II -I . II I- II -I .- co..wc.x
mq.~ oo.~ mm.- q~. on.0 ~n.m OO.N aQIH oo.c oo.~ an.n no. nn.n ~0.n oaIm oo. nn.n oo.~ ~OIN On.~ na- nn.g nn.n enIo n¢.n nn.¢ own:
No.5 mm.H ~¢.m «N. on.“ on. cm.c a~.~ oo.e on.“ no.0 an.d oo.n oo.” nn.n o~.~ ou.~ nn.n no.« no.“ no. ca. oo.~ ~o.- on.~ oo.- agga>c~n_sz
Hm.m nn.n a~.m an. on.~ No. m¢.~ II II II II II -I II II II II II II II II - I- I- II I- use chaphgz
Na. mm. -.¢ II 04.0 nu. no.“ co. co.n oo.n c¢.n I- ~o.~ on. on.0 II 0o.n nn.n nuIn II II II II II II II neuvfiqa:
mH.o cm.~ ~n.o am. o¢.n ed.“ oo.~ an. on.q ca.» oo.n oo. nn.n no. -.h ON.N oo.¢ II II II II II I- II I- I- flfloxa-z
ow.~ ~¢.~ NN.O an. oh.¢ oo.. oo.n cm.~ #«.a «0.; nn.n II II II mu.o as.“ II oo.0 oe.e II II II II I. II -. anus:
sq.a n~.~ nn.n II N¢.o II mg. mo. m¢.n no.n NaIH II on. no.~ no.n co.n cm. cu.o ~n.¢ n~In II oh.n II II II II anou ”you
mm.q no.n -.n~ Om. n~.n m~.~ om.q no. II ~NIQ «0.0 cu. no.~ oo.0 ON.N nu. II II II II II II I- II II II awhhsu
n¢.m 4..“ m¢.~ cm. no.n “a. nn.n Kn." m~.a no.4 o~.n .- nn.n «a. “n.o oo. on.q oo.0 au.n nn.n oo. «8. oo.n on.“ II ~a.o~ ndaauau
n..q no.~ oo. oo. o¢.~ 0“. RN. o~. Ho.~ II -I no." nu. as.“ co.” ~a.n .e.« ”e.. -.~ H~.n oo. H~.~ OO.N 4”.“ Km. no.“ Jug-u
ow.m oo.n «Q. I. mn.~ so. an. fin. a~.n -.~ on.“ no.. nu. on.~ oh.~ ~o.n oo. «o.n oo.~ oo.H II n~.H oo.~ ca.“ Kn. Io.“ xuflu xgu
.- no.¢ wo.- oo. 0H.o do.“ mm.¢ No. co.n n¢.n do.“ No. fin.“ on.q 4~.o ou. nn.~ ~o.« ad.“ no. og. ao.n “a. n~.o en." “a.“ .c..aa
om.m on. ON.N mg. “0.; cc. an. «H. on.” «o.~ ~n.¢ oo. o¢.~ no.“ co.o~ ~o.n I- ~o.n oo.a oo.» .N. an. oo.« I- .I .- saunas
no.n o~.¢ oo.n 0n. nn.n on.“ m¢.n nn.~ ~o.n o_.a Hu.n no. ~o.n II II II II II II II II I- II II II II “saga
so.m no.n Ho.~_ o4. nn.o_ ~m.¢ oo.~ I- II . II II II II II II I- II II II II -I I- II I- . I- -I xadqa
«m.m o“. q_.~ oo. on.“ me. ~o.~ II I- II II II II II II II II II II I- II -I -I II -I .- ocunqsou
nn.0 o~.n h”.n No. n~.m mm. 4n.” No. on.~ “a.“ NN.N no. do.” he.“ -.o oo." as.“ on.“ nn.n oo.” .- nn.~ n~.n oa.H~ no.n 4N.» -;.-xu.;u
nq.n no.n ¢~.m Nm. nn.¢ no. no.n o¢.~ nc.o oo.0 OO.N oo. «9.0 o~.~ oo.n so.~ II II II II II I- II II II II nuuouocu
35 on; ma... 2”. 2.n S. no. 24 3.0 SJ 2..” on. 36 no. noé nn.n 3..” Z...- 35 2." oo. oo.“ nn.n 36 3..“ 3... .3355
II II II II II II II On. no.n ~OIm ~QIn ON. oo.n II II to II II II II II II II II II II AUCCU
mn.¢ «5.. Nq.o Nd. NH.O Mn. «~.n ~n.n oo.¢ -.o -.B on. ad.“ on.. an.“ oo.n an.c oo.. oo." «o.n a“. no. "a.“ oo.0. an.” m~.a cd>~au
~m.¢ do.n -.n “fl. fin.” co.~ oo.“ Nn. ~¢.o -.c o¢.a co. o~.n oo.“ oo.- on.“ -.~ ma.n on.s o~.o n~.a no.“ #4.“ No.o 4¢.A o~.~fl sou-«hm
ON.N flq.q ma.ofi NN. ¢q.~ o¢.¢ nn.n No. mfi.n ~¢.¢ ¢~.n ... «o.~ an.“ en.“ an. ac.“ on.¢ sfl. .- II II I. .I I- -I ...).om
m~.w oa.« oo.qH oo. no.» -- no.n oo." oo.~ nn.n oo.a ”N.H on.~ .- .- oa. ac.“ an.n II II I- no.“ an.~ .- -I -- .xou<
.3. «ca 5.0 II . . . II . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . .
a... o: r...“ 2. MM” ”my MM. 8. w.“ "a.” M.” “w. “a; 8m 8.. 3. a...“ 2 ~ a a 2 3 s. H 2 a S 2 a 2 a 28v:
a co d as s no.n n~.n nn.n ¢¢In nn.~ II -.~ II II I- .- ox..vcc<
$2 . £2 ._ 22 h 32 h 22 n :2 n 22 n as n :2 u 8 a H u . H u H . . . . ..fiemEum
o aeafi a¢ofl .qog coo“ “co“ ImMIHIncod . mMMMIg dead . ego“ ” .nu“ ” ”mod n “no. N Ono. " who” u «no. “ monH<Pmmpm

 

 

uaacducou-.uh pan.“

APPENDIX B

STATEMENT TO

MR. J. E. THIGPBN

.435

436

STATEMENT OF THE VIRGINIA-CAROLINA PEANUT ASSOCIATION TO MR. J. E. THIGPEN,
.DIRECTOR, OILS AND PEANUT DIVISION U. 8. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
RELATIVE TO THE 1958 SUPPORT PROGRAM.FOR PEANUTS, APRIL 28, 1958.

EXHIBIT "A"

We would like to bring to your attention our conclusions concern-
ing the impact of a very significant technological change on the Virginia-
Carolina peanut industry. We have seen this change coming for some years,
but it is now accentuated to the point where constructive action must be
taken to make adjustments which no longer can be postponed. There are two
major developments we would like to discuss.

1. In the Virginia-Carolina area farmers have done a wonderful
job in responding to the demands of the market for ELK. (Extra large ker-
nels). Research in plant breeding has enabled them to do it, and a price
premium has provided the incentive. We have been able to pay premium
prices because market demand and supply justified it in meeting the needs
of the trade. A premium price for Virginia peanuts is still justified
for premium uses. However, because of the rapid technological change, the
supply of premium product has outrun the premium.market demand.

2. These rapid changes and trends in supply arising from the
advance of technology have made it imperative that the method of pricing
peanuts among grades and types be reconsidered so that this new supply
situation may be fitted to market demand.

The Virginia-Carolina industry, under the present pricing
structure based on historical price and supply data, has no means of ad-
justing to this situation. The forces at work through the use of histor-
ical data worsen the situation.with each passing year, compound the pricing
"error", and magnify the market maladjustment.

Technological Change

 

First we need to appraise the rapid changes which have
occurred in the product we have to market. It is a different product
now from what it was 5, even 3 years ago. This is not only true for the
Virginia-Carolina area, but also in other areas as well. These changes
give rise to a need for reconsidering the price relationships.

NC-2. In 1953 a new variety, NC-Z, was introduced in North
Carolina. This variety was genetically bred to produce 42% ELK. It is
now used on about 95% of the North Carolina acreage.

143]

56-R. A similar variety, 56-R, will be available to growers in
Virginia in 1959 in sufficient quantity of seed to plant all of the Virginia
acreage. Tests at Tidewater Research Station, Holland, Virginia, have
shown for the past two years (1956-1957) an average of 44-1/2% ELK.

The use of these varieties of seed is here to stay because
growers are well satisfied with them. Their use also established the
content of ELK at a substantially higher level, heretofore impossible.

We submit Exhibit A, (not included) a chart to show the rapid upward trend
in percentage of ELK which has occurred. Briefly, in 1949 ELK was 19.51%;
in 1954, 31.34% and in 1957, about 35%, or even higher, after allowing for
an unusually high percentage of damaged kernels. But you need not rely

on our chart for an appraisal of this trend. We submit Exhibit B, a series
of letters from growers themselves, seed shellers, dealers and agronomists,
testifying to the results they have obtained in terms of what we shall call
this "brand new product"; for indeed, it is not the same product we pro-
duced and marketed - even 3 years ago. And, as we shall demonstrate later,
it will no longer fit the old historical pricing structure, or the basic
structure of the support program. It is resulting in "over-support" of
price, which means that the historical price formula is no longer adapted
to the new products we market now.

Technology Developments in Southeast

The Virginia-Carolina area is not the only place where production
technology has advanced. The runner peanut is not the same peanut it was
10 years ago. "Change is the law of progress," says Mr. E. J. Young,
Stevens Industries, Dawson, Georgia, Speaking at the convention of the
Southeastern Peanut Association.

We submit Exhibit C, which sets forth a very able description
the new runner peanut. Mr. Young says that the runner "is uniform in size,
has a smooth seed coat, mild and sweet in flavor, easily blanched and of

fine texture." It is a more valuable product than it used to be. Mr.
Young states, "already manufacturers of peanut butter, candy and Specialty
lines are turning to runners for their peanut requirements." Regarding

its greater value, Mr. Young says, "For the first time in years, the new
No. 1 Runner brought as much or more than its leading competitor in the
market place."

These technological changes have drastically altered the com-
petitive situation to the disadvantage of the Virginia-Carolina area.
Under a truly competitive free market situation, the Virginia-Carolina
area would have to adjust to change or suffer. And it would deserve to
suffer if it refused to keep up with the'technological changes. However,

438

it does not deserve to be crippled at the hands of an outmoded government
price formula.

All of these characteristics of the E£w_runner peanut make for
greater ease of substitution of one peanut for another and obsoleted and
outmoded the degree of price differential that has been a part of the
historical data in the pricing structure. In addition to the great ad-
vance in production technology, there have been other innovations which
give greater relative value to the runner peanut. These include the use
of stabilizers in peanut butter to prevent oil separation and the homo-
genization process. These processes render less valuable some of the
characteristics for which the Virginia type peanut has long been noted,
and neutralize its importance and need. (Mr. G. L. Houston, President,
Southeastern Peanut Association, at a meeting held with the Department on
March 14, 1958, stated):

"All types of peanuts are now highly competitive.

"All types are interchangeable for practically any and all
needs and uses.

"Any and all can be used fOr peanut butter or for candy or
for roasting or for salting.

"The Dixie runner today is just as good as the Virginia or
Valencia for salting, roasting or the ballpark. They are expanding
out West.

"Last year you were agreeing that Spanish were substitutable -
this year, you say that Virginias are substitutable, so we are contending
in the Southeast that all peanuts are substitutable and we have plenty of
peanuts."

A39

EXHIBIT "B"
(Statement to Thigpen continued)

Excerpts from letters to the North Carolina Peanut Growers Association and
Others.

From Sevegg Peanut Co., Inc,, Severn, North Carolina, 4/21/58

..... As you know, sometime around 1950 extra large became
virtually non-existent. About this time, the Virginia-Carolina Peanut
Association began to realize that something had to be done, and at the
same time, Dr. Gregory, of N.C. State College, had started working toward
seed improvement. As seed shellers, in an effort to relieve this situa-
tion to some extent, we carried out a program of very strict seed selection
and screening of the smaller peanuts from planting seed. This probably
had some beneficial results but not to the extent we had hoped. We know
that you realize that it takes quite a long time to develop an entirely
new strain of seed and get a large volume into the hands of the dealers
and planters. About 1953 or 1954, some of these seed developed by Dr.
Gregory and known as NC-2 and NC-l, were released on a rationed basis
to the grower, the maximum to each being fifty pounds. These, of course,
were certified seed and naturally the demand was overwhelmingly greater
than the supply. In 1955 it became evident that the NC-Z was far superior
to the NC-l and the NC-l dropped out of the pichIe almost completely.

We believe that 1957 was the first year in.which about 95% of the North
Carolina crop was planted in NC-Z's.

Naturally, as seed dealers we like to have a large supply of

all varieties to offer to the trade. During the 1957 harvest season when
we began our program of field selection for seed, we began to realize that
the old "true blue" Virginia Bunch had virtually faded out of the picture.
As a concrete example, in Northampton, Halifax, and Edgecombe counties,

we were able to locate only two farmers who actually had the old Virginia
bunch seed and they knew and we knew that they were this variety. That
proves to us that practically all the North Carolina peanut crop, for the
‘first time, was planted in one of the newer varieties.

Mr. Gilliam, (Virginia-Carolina Peanut Shellers Association) we
want to impress upon you that we feel very strongly that it would be next
to impossible to switch the farmers to any other variety than one which
gives a bigger dollar per acre return. In the NC-l's and NC-2's, partic-
ularly the twos which have been most popular, the yield per acre and the
per cent of extra large kernels has been far above anything in previous
years, thereby resulting in a larger money yield per acre. We do not
hesitate to say that should other varieties be deve10ped which would give

I440

a larger yield and perueEnt of extra large kernels than we now have that
farmers would most certainly switch to them.

We believe that Virginia is most certainly at the crossroads
of a complete switch. The last couple of years, we have been distributing
some of our NC-l's and 2's to several points in Virginia and at these
points, we notice, from year to year, a bigger demand for this type pea-
nut. We know that you are aware that the Virginia Department of Agrin
culture has developed a couple of strains of certified seed to serve the
same purpose as the NC-l and NC-Z, that are known as 56-R and 46-2. Right
at this moment there is a very great demand, particularly for the 56-R,
and of course the supply is very limited. The farmer is paying as high
as 40¢ per pound for these where they are available. We do not hesitate
in saying that Virginia will switch to these large types just as fast as
they are available for planting seed. Etc ......

From P. O. Bulluck, Battleboro, North Carolina, 4/16/58 (Grower)

..... I have planted 30 acres of NC-Z peanuts for four (4)
years. I have been very well pleased with the yield. They have also
graded well the extra large kernel running from 40% to 46%.

I also planted a test plot of Virginia Bunch and NC—l and
NC-2 graded much better than either of them- Etc......

From Walter Sarkey (Grower) Murfregsboro, North Carolina 4j12fi8

..... In reply to your letter of April 14 -- we have planted
approximately 200 acres of NC#2 for the past (5) five years and have
had excellent results with same.

Our Extra Large has run from 40% to 54%, and our SMK has run
from 66% to 72% for the past three years. We have developed an excellent
peanut for the edible trade. Etc ......

From Mr. R. Gilbert Whitley (Grower) Como, North Carolina

..... To whom it may concern, this is to certify that I have
planted NC-2 peanuts for the last three years and have averaged from
38% to 50% extra large. I have planted NC-2 on from 65 to 80 acres
each year. Etc ......

441

From Mr. G. E. Fisherg(Grower) Pendleton, North Carolina

In 1954 I planted about 1/5 of my peanuts with NC-2 variety.
My old varieties averaged 24% extra large and the NC-Z's averaged 44%.

In 1955 I planted 50% of my crop in NC-2's and my average grade
on extra large was 36%.

In 1956 I planted 95% of my crop in NC32's and my average grade
on extra large was 40%.

In 1957 I planted 95% of my crop in NC-Z's and my average grade

on extra large was 34%. This drop in extra large was due to high damage
in our crop and most of the damage was in the large peanuts. Etc ..... .

From Ralph Brake, Jr. (Grower) Battleboro, North Carolina 4/12/58

..... Here in the lineup on my NC-2 experience

1953 l a. NC-2 32% Ex. L.
46.8 A. Va. 17-29%

1954 42.7 a. NC-2 28-54%

1955 43.6 21-47%

1956 49.9 30 to 50%

1957 43.8 30 to 48%

Better care in allowing peanuts to reach maturity before digg-
ing and rotation might contribute to a better grade of peanuts, as does
the NC-2 variety.

Farmers need encouragement to meet the demands of the market
and when these requirements are met, we expect continued fadjrreturns
for our efforts. I enjoy producing a premium product for a preimum
price.

I usually pay a premium quality for everything that I buy.

Don't let us get sold short! Etc ......

_Firom Mr. Jim Shields (Grower) 4/15/58

. .....I have been planting 105 to 117 acres of peanuts, and for
the past 3 years I've planted only "NC-2's". Our extra large have been
running anywhere from 40% to 47%.

I hope you are successful on your trip. Etc ......

2442

From Mr. R. V. Knight (Growte Jarboro, North Carolina

.....I find a variation in the extra large peanuts of NC-2
variety running from 35 to 50%. I have gone over the results of my
three years planting. ‘

From Mr. J. B. Gillam,er.,(Grower) 4/15/58

We have planted approximately 400 acres of NC two variety of
peanuts for the past three years. The Extra Large in the NC two peanut
is increasing in size each year. We have averaged the percentage of
Extra Large from our 1957 sales and the average of Extra Large was 42%.
Some of these peanuts graded as high as 50% Extra Large. Etc ......

From Severn Peanut Co.,Inc.,Severni NorthCarolina 4/15[58

.....We have noticed in our buying of farmers' stock peanuts
through the past two years that the percentage of Extra Large kernels
has increased considerably. We believe this is due to a very high per-
centage of the crop in North Carolina being planted with the NC-2 variety.

The percentage of Extra Large content during these two years
has ranged from 35% to 50%. Etc......

From Walton C. Gregory, North Carolina State College, Dept. of Pieldpj
Crops, Raleigh, North Carolina 4/15/58

.....I am happy to reply to your request for information on the
kernel size of NC-2 peanuts. As you know, this peanut has existed as a
line since 1947 and was released to growers in 1953. By this time (1958),
we are beginning to feel fairly sure of its characteristics.

For your information, I am going to present some figures for
different growing conditions comparing NC-2 with good farm stock peanuts.

Percentage Extra Large

 

 

 

No. of Kernels
Different Test ,Farm Stock No.2
Extreme and Protracted
drought 3 24.6 30.0
Continuous hurricane rains 2 16.0 25.0

Good growing conditions 21 34.0 46.0

443

We have, of course, more extensive data but I tried to select
contrasting situations for you. Etc ......

From-the Columbian Peanut Company, Norfolk, Vigginia 4116/58

.....In reply to your letter of the 14th, we regret that we do
not make a separate analysis of the peanuts that we buy according to seed
variety. We do analyze our purchases at each of our mills but, as you
must know, the total purchases will include some of each variety of pea-
nuts grown in the area.

We do know the increased production through our mills of the
Extra Large kernels has shown a phenomenal rise in the last two years.
We are confident that the range of Extra Large in the NC-2 variety would
be higher than the general average from our mill points and, I feel, I am
reasonably accurate in this statement.

The percentage of Extra Large in the NC—2 variety would range
from.32 to 52% with an average of close to 40%. I believe this is as close
as we could give you the information at this time and I hope that it will
be of some value to you. Etc ......

From Mr. Hassell Thigpen, Tarboro, North Carolina

..... Our entire crop of peanuts in 1956 and 1957 was planted in
the NC-2 variety.

In 1956 we planted and harvested 114 acres of NC-Z peanuts.
These were sold in 32 different lots.

In 1957 we planted and harvested 101 acres of peanuts. They
were sold in 28 different lots.

The E L K was as follows:

1956 1957
2 lots under 35% 0 lots
6 lots 35 to 39% 8 lots
11 lots 40 to 44% 6 lots
6 lots 45 to 497. 8 lots
6 lots 50 to 54% 3 lots
1 lot 55% and over 3 lots

444

The above figures are taken from 1956 and 1957 sales records
and give a complete record of the percentage of extra large in the two
years. Etc ......

Prom Keel Peanut Company, Greenville, North Carolina,f4/18/58

..... Minimum around 20%,,fiia‘xinmn around 557., 90% of the
peanuts run around 35 to 45% with average 38%. This is an average of
approximately 12% more than.we used to have with the old variety NC-Z
peanut. We believe 98% of the farmers in the Pitt County area are
planting NC-Z seed. Etc ......

Prom C. W. &:H. B. Spruill Company, Windsor, North Carolina, 4/16/58

.....We have been planting from 390 to 440 acres of NC-2
variety of peanuts since 1955, (three years).

Our Extra Large grade has been from 40 to 54%, with an
average of about 46%. Etc......

445‘

EXHIBIT "C"
(Statement to Thigpen continued)

ADDRESS OF MR. E. J. YOUNG, STEVENS, INDUSTRIES
_Dawson, Georgia

Before the Thirty-Ninth Annual Convention of the Southeastern Peanut
' Association, Atlanta, June 10, 1957.

RUNNER PEANUTS - OPPORTUNITY UNLIMITED
LADIES, GENTLEMEN AND DISTINGUISHED VISITORS:

Lately we have given a lot of thought to the subject of pride.
Of course there are two kinds: False, and the good and humble kind of
justifiable pride. Here in the Southeast where over 50% of our acreage
is devoted to the production of runner type peanuts we must very care-
fully avoid and work to eliminate a false pride in the product which
provides by far the principal source of our total revenue. We can
though, be humbly proud of the progress made to date in improving the
quality of our principal product.

To better understand the opportunities ahead for runner peanuts,
it is well that we briefly view the history of the runner peanuts. Actually
we find it rather difficult to ascertain the true origin of the runner
type peanut as a distinct specie. In the book "The Peanut, the Unpredic-
table Legume", we find quoted "Taxonomists frequently resort to controversy
concerning specie delineation because the ultimate nature of organic varia-
tion necessarily leads to integrating forms. As early as 1907 an attempt
was made to list some forty varieties into runner and bunch on the basis
of superficial characters, such as seed coat, color, etc." Actually in
this book, under the subject of varieties in the chapter, Morphology,
Genetics and breeding, peanuts grown commercially are classified as erect
or prostrate and all the prostrate are further classified as Virginias.

It appears that the original runners in the Southeast were
descendants of the African, North Carolina and.Wilmington Varieties of
runners, which Specie could have been the ground nuts or ground peas
grown in early colonial days from seed from Africa. We find in early
writings that runners were first grown in Virginia, Carolina and South-
eastern peanut belt, principally for farm and feed purposes and writers
then referred to the rough and ridged seed coat cover as making the run-
ner peanuts very undesirable for edible uses. As late as 1938 another
common complaint from producers, shellers and end users was the concealed

446

damage, typical of runner peanuts, and attributed largely to the hollow
center. The Southeastern runner mosttcommonly grown today is the Dixie
runner, developed by Dr. W. A. Carver of the Florida Experiment Station,
from.a cross made in 1933 from Florida small white Spanish and Dixie 1
giant, a large seeded Virginia-runner type. The unfavorable character-
istics of the preceding specie were largely overcome with the introduc-
tion of the Dixie runner, which really began gaining in importance inso-
far as production is concerned in the early 1940’s. The introduction of
the Dixie runner, the fact that it has provided farmers with a consis-
tently high yield, and because it is by nature eSpecially suited for
windrow harvesting, has encouraged the expansion of the acreage devoted
to runner type peanuts to the extent that today the production of runner
peanuts exceeds that of any other one variety.

It is encouraging to note that while the production of runner
type peanuts was increased there has been an even more significant in-
crease in the use of runner peanuts for edible purposes. In reviewing
the use of runner peanuts for the period 1945 through 1955 it is inter-
eating to note that the use of runner peanuts in candy and peanut butter
for each of the three years, 1953, 1954 and 1955, has exceeded the aver-
age use for those two purposes for the eleven years and, in the case of
salted peanuts with the exception of the short crap year of 1954, the use
of runners in salted peanuts for the same three years has well exceeded
the average consumption for the eleven year period. For the three years,
1953, 1954 and 1955, the use of runner peanuts for edible purposes has
exceeded the eleven year average by 15%, 25% add 20% respectively, while
the use of all peanuts for the same three years has exceeded the average
use of all peanuts for edible purposes by only 6%, 5% and 12% reSpectively.
In reviewing the production of milled peanut products in the most recent
report of April 30, it is interesting to note that the production of
milled runner peanuts for edible purposes, to date exceeds the production
for the same period of 1956 by approximately 11,000,000 pounds, as com-
pared to a total increase for Virginia and Spanish types of slightly less
than 16,000,000 pounds.

Let us look for a few minutes at some of these qualities in-
herent of the runner peanut which have contributed to this steady and
significant change in consumer preference. Dr. Carver, in writing about
his Dixie runner peanut, stated the flavor of the Dixie runner is mild
and sweet. This apt statement truly expresses the sound and fundamental
basis for the increasing popularity of the runner peanut, because in
food products flavor is now receiving more attention by manufacturers
and is of prime consideration in the purchase of good food products by
consumers. Looking further into the question of quality, we find two
significant statements in an article entitled "Factors Affecting the
Stability of Crude Oils of Sixteen Varieties of Peanuts" as reported
in the Journal of the American Oil Chemists Society in July of 1953 and

Xh47

having to do with work conducted by the Southern Regional Research Lab-
oratory. These statements are, first, that "rancidity has long been
recognized as a troublesome factor in the marketing of roasted peanut
products and workers have reported that roasted runner or Virginia pea-
nuts show less susceptibility to rancidity" and, secondly, that "with
the exception of the oils from runner peanuts the Tocopherol composition
of the sixteen oils studied were not found to vary significantly. The
enhanced stability of the oils from the runner peanuts may be due in
part to the higher tocopherol content of these oils". It is also recog-
nized that the oil content of runner peanuts is, generally Speaking, equal
to or higher than that of other varieties. In addition to the mild and
sweet flavor and the favorable physical characteristics of the runner
peanut, there remains the fact that today farmers are producing and
shellers are marketing a better runner peanut.

Change is the law of progress. Nowhere is this axiom more
applicable than in the production and shelling of runner peanuts. With
the adoption of improved varieties and in 1956 of new standards for
shelled runner peanuts, manufacturers are today being supplied with a
desirable and readily merchantable raw material. The new runner peanut
is uniform in size, consistently counting from 950 to 1050 kernels per
pound and has a smooth seed cost, mild and sweet in flavor, uniform in
size, easily blanched and of fine texture and color, the runner peanut
is gaining popularity and strength in the market place. Already manu-
facturers of peanut butter, candy, and specialty lines interested in
improving their products have turned to runners for their peanut require-
ments. For the first time in years and as late as the 8th of May 1957
the new No. 1 runner brought as much or more than its leading competitor
in the market place. In November of 1956 Jim Thigpen in addressing the
Georgia Farm Bureau, asked the question "Can the production of peanuts in
terms of type, variety and quality be modified more in line with consumer
preference?" We say today that this question has been answered in large
part by the shellers and producers of runner peanuts.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

448

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Public Documents

 

Commodity Stabilization Service. Compilation of Statutes. Agricultural
Handbook No. 158. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1959.

U.S. Congressional Record. Vol. CI, No. 73.

U.S. Tariff Commission. Peanuts, Supplemental Investigation Under
Section 22, Agricultural Adjustment Act, As Amended. Washington:
U.S. Tariff Commission, February, 1955.

Peanuts, Second Supplemental Investigation Under Sectign
22I Agricultural Adjustment Act,_As Amended. Washington: U.S.
Tariff Commission, May, 1955.

Peanuts, Third Supplemental Investigation Under Section
22 (d), Aggicultural Adjustment Act, As Amended. Washington:

U.S. Tariff Commission, August, 1956.
was

Fisher, William H. Peanuts in the Fifth Federal Reserve District.
Richmond: Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, 1946.

Fox, Karl A. Economic Analysis for Public Policy. Ames: The Iowa
State College Press, 1958.

Gregory, W. C.,Smith, B. W. and Yarborough. The Peanut-The Unpre-
dictable Legume. Washington: National Fertilizer Association,
1950.

Gresham, W. A”, Jr., Collum, C. E., and Kyle, R. J. Bibliographonn
The Technology of Peanut Production. Atlanta: Georgia Institute
of Technology, 1957.

 

Held, Anders. Statistical Theory with Engineering Applications, John
Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1952, 613-614.

449

.
e..]

450

Nerlove, Marc. The Dynamics of Supply: Estimation of Farmers' Repponse
to Price. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1958.

Quenouille, M. H. Associated Measurements. (Butterworth's Scientific
Publication, London, 1952) 153.

Articles and Periodicals

 

Agricultural Extension Service, Virginia. "Higher Yields of Peanuts,"
Agponomy Series, No. 6 (March, 1958), 1.

Badger, Daniel D. "The Case for Peanuts as a Basic Commodity,"
Virginia Farm Economics, No. 161 (February, 1960), 9-13.

Baker, V. H. and Cannon, B. M. "Peanut Harvesting and Drying
Research," Peanut Journal and Nut World, (Nov., 1951), 1-4.

Campbell, W. V. and Boush, G. MI "Chemicals in Insect Control,"
Virginia-Carolina Peanut News, VI, No. 2 (Spring, 1960), l.

Chappell, W. E. and Miller, L. I. "The Effects of Certain Herbicides
on Plant Pathogens," Plant Disease Reporter, XL, No. 1 (Jan. 15,
1956), 52-56.

 

Commodity Stabilization Service. "Title 7-Agriculture," Federal
Register, (Nov. 30, 1956), 1-11.

"Cultural Practices Help to Control Stem Rot in Bunch, Runner Peanuts,"
Extension Service News (Virginia), XIV, No. 5 (May, 1959), 4.

Duke, G. B. "Peanut Recovery Yields From Two Harvesting Methods,"
Vigginia-Carolina Peanut News, Vol. 6, No. 4, (Fall, 1960), 14.

 

Eheart, James F., Young, R. W., and Allison, Allen H. "Variety, Type,
Year, and Location Effects on the Chemical Composition of Peanuts,"
Food Research, XX, No. 5 (April 14, 1955), l-9.

 

Hallock, D. L. and Miller, L. I. "Crop Response to Various Rotations in
the Peanut Producing Area of Virginia," Virginia Journal of Science,
VI (1955), 230.

 

"How to Control Peanut Stem Rot,” Agricultural Research, VII, No. 10
(April, 1959), 7.

 

Howe, W. L. and Miller, L. I. "Effects of Demeton Soil Drenches on
Peanut Pests," Journal of Economic Entomology, XLVII, No. 4
(August, 1954), 711-712.

451

Kromer, George W. "It Looks Like a Record Year for Peanut ConSumption,"
Agricultural Situation, Vol. 44, No. 5, (May, 1960), 4.

Livermore, D. Upton. "Trends in Peanut Yields," Virginia Farm Economics,

 

No. 154 (May, 1958), pp. 9-18.

Miller, Lawrence 1. "Control of Cercospora Leaf Spot of Peanuts with
Copper and Sulphur Fungicides," Phytqpatholggy, XXIX (1939), 18.

_________ "Control of Cercospora Leaf Spots of Peanuts with Proprie-
tary Sulphur Dust," Phytopathology, XXXI (1941), 16.

 

"Control of the Sting Nematode on Peanuts with an Ethylene
Dibromide-~Vermiculite Mixture," Virginia Journal of Science, VI
(1955), 235.

__________ "Cultural and Parasitic Races of CerCOSpora Arachidicala and
CerCOSpora Personata," Phytqpathology, XXXIX (1949), 17.

. "Dusting Peanuts to Control Pests," The Southern Planter,
(May, 1940).

 

"A Report on the Effect of Ethylene Dibromide Soil Treatment
on Root-Knot Control, Nodulation and Yield of Peanuts," Virginia
Journal of Science, II (New Series) No. 2 (April, 1951), 109-112.

 

"Root Nodulation of Holland Jumbo Strain Peanut Grown from
Seed Treated with a Fungicide," Phytopathology, XXXVIII (1948), 18.

"Studies of Parasitism of Cercospora Arachidicala Hori and
Cercospora Personata (B. and C.) E11. and Ev.," The Virginia
Journal of Science, (1954), 239.

"AflWhite Grub Injuring Peanuts in Eastern Virginia," Journal

of Economic Entomology, XXXVI (January, 1943), 113.

Moore, R. P. "Tetrazolium Testing Seed Peanuts," Virginia-Carolina
Peanut News, VI, No. 2, (Spring, 1960), 12.

"Peanuts Aren't Just Peanuts,” Monthly Review, Federal Reserve Bank
(February, 1958), 8-9.

"Peanut Growers See Stem Rot Control Methods Demonstrated," Extension
Service News (Virginia), XV, No. 4 (April, 1960), 4.

"Record Crop Year," éggicultural Situation, XLII, No. 9 (September, 1958),

 

l.

452

Sackrin, S. M. "Measuring the Relative Influence of Acreage and Yield
Changes on Crop Production," Agricultural Economics Research, IX,
No. 4 (October, 1957), 136-139.

Shear, G. M. and Miller, L. I. "The Effect of Time of Planting and
Digging on Yield and Maturity of Virginia Jumbo Runner Peanut,"
Processing Association of Southern Agricultural Workers, XLIX,
(1952), 149.

__________ "Factors Affecting Fruit Deve10pment of the Jumbo Runner
Peanut," Agronomy Journal, XLVII, No. 8 (August, 1955), 354-357.

"Influence of Plant Spacing of the Jumbo Runner Peanut
on Fruit Development, Yield, and Border Effect," Agronomy
Journal, 52:125«127, 1960.

"The Inter~Relationship Between Plant and Nuts in Virginia
Jumbo Peanuts," Processing Association of Southern Agricultural
Workers, XLVII (1950), 180.

 

Stallings, James L. "Weather Indexes-Notes," Journal of Farm Economics,
XLII, No. 1 (February, 1960), 180-186.

 

Teter, N. C. and Miller, L. I. "Effect of Radicle Injury on Growth and
Development of the Peanut Plant," Phytopathology, XLVII (1957), 34.

 

Wells, J. C. "Peanut Disease Control," Virginia-Carolina Peanut News,
VI, No. 2 (Spring, 1960), 14.

"World Peanut Output Sets Record in 1957," Foreign Agriculture Circular,
(0cotber 14, 1958), 1-3.

Young, R. W., Miller, L. I., and Engel, R. W. "The Bromide Conteru:
of the Peanut Plants from Soil Treated with Ethylene Dibromide for
Sting Nematode Control," The Virgipia Journal of Science, V
(1954), 241.

Young, R. W. and others. "Bromide Content of Cows' Milk When Fed Forage
Grown on Ethylene Dibromide-«Treated Soil," Journal of Dairy
Science, XXXVIII (1955), 619.

 

Bulletins and Reports

Agriculture Information Bulletins:

Bachman, K. L., Crowe, G. B., and Goodman, K. V. Peanuts in Southern
Agriculture. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1947.

 

453

Badger, Daniel D. and Plaxico, James S. Selected Supplyand Demand
Relationships in the Peanut Industry. Processed Series P-338.
Stillwater: Oklahoma State University, 1959.

Beattie, J. H., Poos, F. W., and Higgins, B. B. Growing Peanuts,
Bulletin No. 2063. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1954.

Biological Sciences Branch. An Insect Preventive Program for Peanut
Warehouses. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1955.

 

 

Boyle, Lytton.W. and Hammons, R. 0. Cultural Practices with Respect
to Peanut Yields and Control of Southern Blight and Root Rot.
Mimeo Series N. S. 31. Athens: University of Georgia College of
Agriculture, 1956.

Chaffin, Wesley. Peanut Production in Oklahoma. Circular E-410.
Stillwater: Oklahoma State University, 1959.

 

Clay, Harold J. Marketing Peanuts and Peanut Products. Publication No.
416. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1941.

Commodity Stabilization Service. Peanut Marketing ontas and Related
Programs. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1956.

Control Weeds in Soybeans and Peanuts with Chemicals. Circular 642.
Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Agricultural Extension
Service, 1955.

Garren, Kenneth H. The Stem Rot of Peanuts and Its Control, Technical
Bulletin 144. Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 1959.

Hammons, R. O. and others. Comparative Performance of Four Varieties
of Peanuts in Cooperative Tests in Georgia. Mimeo Series N. S. 76.
Tifton: Georgia Coastal Plain Experiment Station, 1959.

Comparative Performance of the Spanish Apgentine in Cooperative
Tests in Georgia.‘ Mimeo Series N. S. 72. Tifton: Georgia Coastal
Plain Experiment Station, 1959.

 

Hathaway, Dale E. The Effects of the Price Support Progpam on the Dry
Bean Industpy in Michigan. East Lansing: Michigan State College,
1955.

Henderson, Harry W. Price Programs. No. 135. Washington: U.S. Gov't.
Printing Office, 1957.

454

Higgins B. B. and Bailey, Wallace K. New Varieties and Selected Strains
of PeanutS. Bulletin N. S. 11. Experiment: Georgia Agricultural
Experiment Station, 1955.

 

Peanut Seed and Seed Treatments. Athens; University of
Georgia College of Agriculture, 1959.

Hughes, William F. and Magee, A. C. Costs and Returns of Irrigated Peanut
Production, West Cross Timbers, 1953-57. Bulletin 917. College Station:
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, 1958.

Johnson, Glenn L. Burley Tobacco Control Programs. Bulletin 580. Lexington:
Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station, 1952.

Johnson, Magnus B. Volume-Weight Relationships of Farmers' Stock Peanuts
in Bulk. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1959.

Lacy, MI P. Larger Yields and Better Quality Peanuts. Circular 413.
Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Agricultural Extension
Service, Revised 1956, Revised 1960.

Langley, B. 0., Harrison, A. LI, and Watkins, G. M” Peanut Seed Treatment
Tests in Texas. Publication 272. College Station: Texas Agricultural
Experiment Station -- The Texas A &IM College System, 1958.

 

Mechanized Peanut Harvesting, Circular 740. Blacksburg: Virginia
Polytechnic Institute, Agricultural Extension Service, 1957.

Miller, Lawrence I. Peanut LeafSpgt Control. Technical Bulletin 104.
Blacksburg: Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, 1946.

Peanut LeafSpot and Leafhopper Control. Bulletin 338. Blacks-
burg: Virginia Agritfiltural Experiment Station, 1942.

Moder, J. J., Jr. and Penny, N. M. ,ngustrial Engineering_and Economic.
Studies of Peanut Marketing. Bulletin 286. Atlanta: Georgia Insti=
tute of Technology, 1954.

Osborne, W. Wyatt and Lacy, M. P. Control Stem Rot in Peanuts py,Cultural
Methods. Circular 825. Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic Institute
Agricultural Extension Service, 1959.

Penny,N. M. ,Economic ASpects of Peanut Marketing. Bulletin 273. Experi-
ment: Georgia Experiment Station, 1952.

. Physical Aspects of Peanut Marketing. Bulletin 284. Athens:
University of Georgia College of Agriculture Experiment Stations, 1953.

 

 

455

Some Factors Aifecting Quality and Value of Farmer's Stock
I? Peanuts. Mimeo Series 2. Athens: University System of Georgia, 1949.

Penny, N. M. Purcell, J. C. and Elrod, J. C. Peanut Price and Income
Support Programs. Mimeo Series N. S. 9 Athens: University of
Georgia College of Agriculture Experiment Stations, 1955.

Penny, N. M., and others. Sampling, Grading,_and Cleaninngarmers' Stock
Peanuts. Bulletin No. N. S. 32. Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Tech-
nology and University of Georgia College of Agriculture Experiment

 

 

 

Stations, 1956. F
Pickett, T. A. and Holley, K. T. Chemical Studies of Peanut Curing. i
Mimeo Series N. S. 90. Athens: University of Georgia College of 3
Agriculture, 1960. l
Thomas, a. a. and Kincaid, c. M. Peanut Hulls for Growing_and Fattenipg . 5
Beef Cattle. Bulletin 501. Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic '

 

Institute, 1959.

Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station. Peanut Harvesting and Dryigg
Research. Bulletin 439. Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic Institute,
1950. ‘

Handbooks:

Agricultural Marketing Service. Consumption of Food in the United States
1909-52. Supplement for 1957 to Agriculture Handbook No. 62. Wash-
ington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1958.

Agronomy Department. A Handbook of Agronomy. Bulletin No. 97, Revised.
Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 1956.

Carder, Lucille and Parisi, Annette A. U. S. Import Duties on Agricultural
Products. Agriculture Handbook No. 143. Washington: U.S. Department
of Agriculture, 1958.

Foote, Richard J. Analytical Tools for Studyinggpemand and Price Structure.
Handbook No. 146. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1958.

Friedman, Joan and Foote, Richard J. Computational Methods for Handligg
Simultaneous Equations. Agricultural Handbook No. 94. ‘Washington:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, November, 1955.

456

Nerlove, Marc. Distributed Legs and Demand Analysis for Agriculture and
Other Commodities. Handbook 141. Washington: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 1958.

 

 

Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment
Station. Texas bulletin 72? and Oklahoma bulletin B-361. A Handbook
of Peanut Growinggin the Southwesg. College Station and Stillwater:
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and Oklahoma Agricultural Experi-
ment Station, 1950.

 

Marketing Research Reports;

Agnew, Donald B. and Jackson, Donald. Storage in Marketing Farmers' Stock
Peanuts. M. R. Report No. 88, Washington: U.S. Department of Agri-
culture, 1955.

Banna, Antoine, Armore Sidney, and Foote, Richard J. Peanuts and Their
Uses for Food. M. R. Report No. 16, Washington: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 1952.

 

Gilliland, C. B. and Smith, Thomas B. An Analysis of the Peanut Shellipg
Industry 1950-51 Through l952~53. M. R. Report No. 134. Washington:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1956.

 

PeanuE‘Snack and Peanut Spread Potential New Products. M. R.
Report No. 29. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1952.

 

Huelskamp, Henry J. Evaluation of Retail Merchandising Practices. M. R.
Report No. 180. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1957.

 

Johnson, Magnus B. and Gilliland, C. B. Change in Farmers' Stock Peanuts
in Storage. M. R. Report No. 381. Washin ton: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 1960.

 

Kramer, Harold A. (Spoutotype Automatic Sampler for Farmers' Stock Peanuts.
,M. R. Report No. 353. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1959.

La Hue, D. W., Clements, Jr., B. W., and Womack, Herbert. Insect
Infestation As A Factor in Storing FarmerS' Stock Peanuts Grown in
Georgia. M. R. Report No. 364. Washington: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 1959.

. IprStorAge Treatments for the Protection of Farmers' Stock
Peanuts from Insect Damage-~Exploratory Tests. M. R. Report No. 363.
Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1959.

 

 

457

Weidenhamer, Margaret. Homemakers' Use of and Opinions about Peanuts and
Tree Nuts. MI R. Report No. 203. Washington: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 1957.

Progress Reports:

Barlow, G. E., Batten, E. T. and Davis, R. B., Jr. Peanut Harvestipg_and
Drying Research 1947-48-49, No. 439. Blacksburg: Virginia Polytech-
nic Institute. June, 1950.

Brennan, Michael J. Progress Report on Cotton Production Response. ARS
43-72. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1958.

Duke, George B. Prggress Report on Harvesting Virginia-Type Peanuts. ARS
42-11. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1957.

Elliott, T. A. and Carmichael, B. W. Machinery for Cleaning;Farmers'
Stock Peanuts. Project No. 147. Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Tech-

nology, 1951.

 

Elliott, T. A., Carmichael, B. W., and Martin, R. A. Cleaning Farmers'
. Stock Peanuts. Project 147. Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology,
1950.

Harrison, A. L. Terraclor for the Control of Southern Blight of Peanuts.
Progress Report 2014. College Station: Texas Agricultural Experiment
Station, 1958.

Moder, Joseph J., Jr. Analytical Studyiof the Sampling and Grading of
Farmers' Stock Peanuts. ‘Special Report No. 1, Project No. 168.
Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology, 1952.

Teter, Norman C. and Givens, Robert L. Technical Progress Report on
Curing Virginia Type Peanuts, 1952-56. ARS 42-12. Washington: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, 1957.

Walton, R. R. and Matlock, R. S. A Progress Report of Studies of the
Red-Necked Peanutworm in Oklahoma. Processed Series P-320. Still-
water: Oklahoma State University, 1959.

Williamson, M. N., Jr., Magee, A. C., and Rogers, Ralph H. Labor Savings
Related to Mechanization of Peanut Production in the West Cross
Timbers Area, 1950. Progress Report 1410. College Station: Texas
Agricultural Experiment Station, 1951.

 

 

458

Statistical Bulletins:

Agricultural Marketing Service. Corn: Acreage, Yield,,and Production by
States, 1866-1943. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1954.

 

Crop Production, 1956 Annual Summary, by States. Washington:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1956.

Crop Production, 1957 Annual Summary, by States. Washington:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1957.

Crop Production, 1958 Annual Summary, by States. Washington:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1958.

Crop Production, 1959 Annual Summary, by States. Washington:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1959.

Population Estimates for Per Capita Series. Washington: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, 1959.

The Fats and Oils Situation. Washington: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 1959.

 

Field and Seed Cr0ps; Production, Farm Use, Sales and Value,
by_States, 1956-57. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1958.

 

Field and Seed Crops; Production, Farm Use,,Sales and Halue,
by States, 1957-58. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1959.

 

Field Crops by States, 1949-54. Statistical Bulletin No. 185.
Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1956.

Prices Received by Farmers for Hogs. Statistical Bulletin No.
257. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1960.

 

Prices Received by Farmers, United States 1908-55. Statistical
Bulletin No. 180. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1956.

Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation. NQEEE,§EE°lina 1958 Annual
Report. Washington; U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1959.

-.. Annual Repprt,_Virginia 1956. Washington:‘U.S. Department
of Agriculture, 1957.

1957 Annual Report, Vipginia. Washington; U.S. Department
of Agriculture, 1958.

459

1958 Annual kgpcrt, Virginia. Washington: U.S. Department
of Agriculture, 1959.

1959 Annual Report, Virginia. Washington: U.S. Department
of Agriculture, 1960.

Alabama Crop Reporting Service. Alabama Agricultural Statistics.
Bulletin 7. Montgomery: Alabama Department of Agriculture and
Industries, 1957.

 

Peanuts Picked and Threshed in Alabama 1937, 1947, 1957.
Montgomery: Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries, 1958.

 

 

Bureau of Agricultural Economics. Farm Production,,Farm Disposition, and
Value of Corn 1909-38. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
1944.

 

Farm Production, Farm Disposition, and Value of Specified Field
Crops, Revised Estimates 1939-1943, by,States. Washington: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, 1948.

 

Peanuts, 1909-45. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
1948.

 

Peanuts - Revised Estimates - 1919-1938. Washington: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, 1939.

 

Statistics on Commercial Peanuts. Washington: U.S. Department
of Agriculture, 1951.

Crop Reporting Board. Q;op,Values: Season Average Prices Received by
Farmers 1956-57 by States. Washington: U.S. Department of Agri-
culture, 1957.

 

Crop,Va1ues: Season Average Prices Received by Farmers 1957
and 1958 by States. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1958.

 

Crop Values: Season Average Prices Received by Farmers 1958-
59 by States. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1959.

 

. Shelled Edible Peanuts jRaw Basis): Amounts Reported Used,
berypes,,in Making Candy, Salted Peanuts and Peanut Butter, by
Seasons 1945-46 to 1956-57. Washington: U.S. Department of Agri-
culture, 1958.

Soybeans Harvested for Beans by Counties, 1955 and 1956.
Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1957.

460

Crop Reporting Service. North Carolina Farm Report, No. 248. Raleigh:
N. C. Department of Agriculture, December 20, 1957.

 

Federal-State Crop Reporting Service. North Carolina Agricultural
Statistics. No. 97. Raleigh: N. C. Department of Agriculture, 1954.

 

North Carolina Agricultural Statistics. No. 99. Raleigh:
N. C. Department of Agriculture, 1956.

. North Carolina Agricultural Statistics. No. 100. Raleigh:
N. C. Department of Agriculture, 1958.

Georgia Agricultural Extension Service. Georgia Agricultural Facts 1900-
' 1956. Bulletin 511, Revised. Athens: University of Georgia College
of Agriculture, 1957.

Georgia Corn, 1954 Revised and 1955 Preliminary. Athens:
University of Georgia College of Agriculture, 1956.

Georgia Crop Reporting Service. Georgia Corn: 1957 Acreage, Yield, and
Production. Athens: Agricultural Extension Service, 1958.

 

. Georgia Cotton: Acregge,,Yield, and Production, 1957. Athens:
Agricultural Extension Service, 1958.

Georgia Peanuts: Picked and Threshed-1957 Crop. Agricultural
Extension Service, 1958.

Oklahoma Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. 1956a57 Annual Report
of the Oklahoma State Board of Agriculture. Oklahoma City: State
Board of Agriculture, 1957.

 

Oklahoma-Peanuts: Acreage, Yield,,and Production - 1939,
1947, 1957. Oklahoma City: Oklahoma State Board of Agriculture, 1958.

 

South Carolina Crop Reporting Service. South Carolina - Peanut Statistics--
Trends 1919-1957. Crop and Livestock Series No. 9. Clemson: South
Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, 1958.

 

Stuart, Thomas L. Acreage of Corn for Crop Reporting District #9, 1930-
1956. Richmond: Virginia Cooperative Crop Reporting Service, 1958.

Townsend, J. C., Jr., Florida Acreege, Yield, and Production of Peanuts,
Corn, Flue-Cured Tobacco, and Cotton, 1937, 47,757. Orlando: Office
of Agricultural Statistician, 1960.

United States Department of Agriculture. Commodity Credit Corporation
Charts. ‘Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1959.

461

Statistics on Cotton and Related Data. Supplement to Statis-
tical Bulletin No. 99. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office,
1958.

Texas Cotton, 1945-48 Revised and 1949 Preliminary. Austin,
Texas: Office of the Agricultural Statistician, 1950.

Texas Cotton, 1957 Preliminary. Austin, Texas: Office of
the Agricultural Statistician, 1958.

Texas Peanuts, 1944-1947. Austin, Texas: Office of the
Agricultural Statistician, 1948.

34th Annual Outlook Conference Report on Peanuts. Washington:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1956.

Virginia Crop Reporting Service. Peanut Countvastimates, 1957. Richmond:
Agricultural Statistician, 1958.

Peanut County Estimates, 1958. Richmond: Agricultural Statis-
tician, 1959.

Wakefield, Olas. North Carolina County Corn Estimates, 1955-56. Raleigh:
Office of Agricultural Statistician, 1958. "

Unpublished Material

Carney, Thomas P. "An Industry Viewpoint on the Residue Situation."
Paper read before the meeting of the National Institute of Animal
Agriculture, Purdue University, April 5, 1960.

Davis, Joe F. "Program for 1952." Washington: Oils and Peanut Division,
CSS, Oct. 26, 1959. (Typewritten).

"Program for 1953." Washington: Oils and Peanut Division,
CSS, Nov. 6, 1959. (Typewritten).

"Program for 1954." Washington: Oils and Peanut Division,
CSS, Nov. 17, 1959. (Typewritten).

Duke, George B. "Machinery and Methods for Harvesting the Virginia
Type Peanut." Paper No. 59-137 presented at the Annual Meeting of
the American Society of Engineers, Ithaca, N. Y., June 21-24, 1959.

Foote, Richard J. "Avoiding Nonsense Correlations in Time Series Analysis,"
Paper presented at a session of the Business and Economic Statistics
Section of the American Statistical Association, Sept. 11, 1957.

462

Foote, Richard J. and Waugh, Frederick V. "Results of an Experiment to
Test the Forecasting Merits of Least Squares and Limited Information
Equations," Paper presented at a joint session of the Econometric
Society and the American Economic Association, Philadelphia, Dec. 29,
1957.

Hallock, D. L. and Miller, L. I. "Crop ReSponse to Various Rotations in
the Peanut Producing Area of Virginia." A study made at the Tide-
water Research Station, Holland, Virginia, 1952.

Harper, W. W. and Anderson, R. F. "Agricultural Policy and Programs As
Viewed by Individual Cotton Farmers in Georgia." Georgia Experiment
Stations, 1959. (Mimeographed).

Reagan, Sydney. Peanut Price Support Programs, 1933-1952, and Their
Effect on Farm Income. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Harvard Uni-
versity 1953, Chapter VI.

Smith, Charles Wilkins, "An Economic Study of the Peanut Industry,"
Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics,
Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas, 1949.

Young, R" W. and others. "Bromide Level of Cows' Milk as Influenced by
Feeding of Peanut Hay Produced on Soils Fumigated with Ethylene
Dibromide." A study made at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacks-
burg, Virginia, 1955.

Other Sources
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Committee. Letter from
SH. D. Godfrey, Administration Officer. May 23, 1958.
Alabama Polytechnic Institute, Auburn, Alabama. Letter from.Jack S. Ross,
Department of Agricultural Economics to R. 0. Russell. V.P.I. June

24, 1959.

Michigan State University, Memorandum from Glenn L. Johnson, Professor of
Agricultural Economics, April 15, 1960.

Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma. Personal interview by
telephone with Ralph S. Matlock, Professor cf Agronomy. April, 1960.

Raleigh, North Carolina, Interview by telephone with Olas Wakefield,
N. C. Crop Reporting Staff. May 9, 1960.

463

Southhampton County, Virginia. Personal interview with representatives
of the Virginia Peanut and Hog Growers Association. April, 1960.

United States Department of Agriculture. A news bulletin, "USDA Announces
1960 Crop Peanut Price Support Levels": In.Washington, February 19, 1960.

Virginia Polytechnic Institute. Personal interviews with Dr. H. L. Dunton
and M, P. Lacy, Agronomy Department.

Virginia Polytechnic Institute Agricultural Extension Service. A news
bulletin, "Stem Rot Control Studied in Peanuts." Released April 1, 1959.

Virginia Tidewater Research Station, Holland, Virginia. Personal interview
with George B. Duke, Agricultural EngidEer. April, 1960.

om

t 2
r5

H

:«1
a:

ROG

 

 

_ch‘g

W
l ..