Likewise, an individual may have worked hard to bring in a crop of what in the hope of obtaining a very high price for the wheat in the market.

Other individuals however, also wanting a high price for their wheat, have produced crops too.

And so it happens that so much wheat is produced, that the price for wheat is lower than any one of the producers of wheat had anticipated, and none is fully satisfied in his desires for a high price for his wheat.

This market situation is not immoral.  If it is right and proper for the first individual to put in a crop hoping for a high price, it is equally right and proper for any other individual, or everyone, to do the same thin in the same hope.  The fact that their actions are competitive is not immoral.

But now in another case a man puts in a crop of wheat and his neighbor, in an effort to limit the supply of wheat and thus obtain a better price for his own wheat, sets fire to the first man's crop.

This action is clearly and properly viewed as immoral.  In such a case, one individual trespassed the property boundary of another individual.  The other individual's loss was not an act of nature, but the deliberate act of an individual seeking to improve his own gain by committing a trespass upon and destroying the property of another.