THE HOLDING MOVEMENT IN AGRICULTURE 273 
result the Government was faced with ever increasing supplies 
which it had to buy in order to sustain the market. By 1917 the 
situation had become critical, and disaster threatened the Gov- 
srnment as well as the growers. The situation was saved, how- 
ever, by the killing frosts of 1918, which not only curtailed the 
current crop but wrought such damage to the coffee plant that 
normal crops were out of the question for some time to come. 
The destruction wrought by the frosts enabled the Government 
to market its stocks in storage at satisfactory prices. 
However, the depression following the Armistice brought a new 
crisis, and, importuned by the growers, the Government instituted 
2 second valorization, the outcome of which was a very severe 
financial loss. 
But this did not deter the advocates of valorization. It became 
2 political question and in the early part of the year 1922 valori- 
zation, which had been instituted as a temporary measure to 
meet what was supposed to be a temporary emergency, became a 
permanent policy of the Government. 
Since the Brazilian valorization has been perhaps the chief 
inspiration for the Holding Movement in this country, it will not 
he out of place briefly to summarize the salient facts concerning it. 
In the first place, the conditions surrounding the Brazilian 
coffee industry are highly favorable for such an undertaking. 
Brazil has a practical monopoly of the production of mild coffees, 
and she produces about three-fourths of the total coffee supply 
of the world. The growing of coffee is by far the most important 
industry. Production is concentrated in the hands of large pro- 
ducers and not only does coffee not waste or shrink during storage 
but it decidedly improves in quality. Finally, coffee does not 
undergo elaborate processes of manufacture on the way from the 
grower to the consumer; and as it is a quasi luxury its consump- 
tion is not unduly sensitive to change in price. It would seem, 
therefore, that the grower of coffee, assisted by his government, 
should be able, within reasonable limits, to regulate the market- 
ing and the price of his commodity; and it would seem that under 
such circumstances he should be able to escape the tyranny of the 
law of supply and demand and to gain for himself the much 
sought after and ever elusive “fair price.” But Brazil's experi- 
ment has brought about altogether different results. 
First, the unmanageable surplus of the first valorization was