Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-06-16 00:00:00

THE NORTHERN TIMES.-LIVERPOOL, TUESDAY, JUNE 16. 185

Cotton. On the 11th of June, 1856, we had

527,910 bales of American, and on Friday last,

it was estimated at 593,260 bales, showing an
increase of 65,350 bales. From these figures,
we learn that the Cotton planters of the United
States are endeavouring, as far they can, to meet
the increased demands of this country, but it
would seem as if the benefits to be derived from
other sorts of cultivation was paying the people
of America more remunerative prices than the

profits to be derived from the growth of Cotton.

_
The meeting of Friday was peculiar, from the
fact that there was an entire absence of any

unity of purpose as to the best means of
procuring an additional supply of Cotton. All
the speakers urged the importance of the

subject, and each advocated its cultivation in a
different part of the globe. One gentleman
advocated the capabilities of the West Indies ;
another alluded to, and spoke of Africa ; and

another of the East Indies. Now, we agree with

all these gentlemen that Cotton can be culti-
vated with success in every one of the districts
alladed to; and, moreover, we consider that it
would be of advantage if we could obtain
supplies from all these quarters; but then we
must consider at the outset whether it would
pay the producer to engage in this extensive
cultivation of the Cotton plant. The pit

history of the trade shows that the Americans
can produce any quantity when prices are high
and remunerative, and that when there is a low
range of price the supply falls off. The question
which the meeting on Friday should have
discussed was, " Can the West Indies, the Cape
of Good Hope, the Ent Indies, or even
Moreton-bay compete with the United States in
the production of Cotton ?" The sound and
practical zerparks of Mr. BARBER, when he urged
caution in the adoption of means to produce an
increased supply of Cotton, should be pondered
over. He was quite correct when he urged that
they should not be led away by foregone
conclusions, inasmuch as " the present scarcity
in the supply of the article was only the result
of a casual short crop."

There was one speaker at Friday's meeting
whom we were astonished to see put forward,
namely, Mr. BAZLEY, the President of the Man-
chester Chamber of Commerce. It was only the
week before that he was up in London giving
evidence against the legitimacy of the Liverpool
Town Dues. He certainly had a vast deal of
assurance in presenting himself to a Liveipool
audience, after the testimony which he gave on
the Mersey Conservancy Bill. The fact of his
appearance here, and delivering a speech on the
subject, shows that this is, after all, a Man Chester
question, and it is somewhat singular that after
attempting to rob the borough of Liverpool of
its just rights, the aiders and abettors of that
scheme should be in the humiliating position of
seeking aid from Liverpool to obtain an
increased supply of Cotton. We are glad that
the meeting has taken place, were it for no other
purpose than that of exhibiting the duplicity
and selfishness of the Manchester men. With
respect to the movement itself, we consider that
much of the alarm that has been created
respecting a short supply of CottOn is uncalled
for; at the same time if thereis no other benefit
derived from the meeting of Friday, than calling
attention to the question, and inducing capitalists
to turn their thoughts to the culture of Cotton
in the British possessions, and thereby render us
less dependant upon foreign countries, a great
boon will be conferred on the trade and com-
merce of the ,country. Before, however, any
very active steps be taken in the matter, the
Cotton Supply Association will do well to
ascertain their actual position, and not give
currency to unfounded alarms, which must
eventually disarrange the wheels of commerce.

SINCE we called attention to the petition o
Mr. BERTOLACCI, Auditor of the Duchy o
Lancaster, Mr. WISE has moved for a Selec
Committee of the House of Commons, to
consider the allegations contained in the
petition. In doing so, he entered into an
historical narrative of the revenues of the Duchy,
and their mode of expenditure. We believe that
as far back as 1844, the same honourable
gentleman brought forward a motion on the
same subject, but was then informed that the
Duchy was private property—and, as such,
beyond the control of Parliament; although it
still happened that, when the Duchy wanted
anything, it was proclaimed to be public
property. Prior to this, Lord BROUGHAM
insisted that it could never be contended that
the revenues of the two Duchies—Cornwall and
Lancaster—are private property, or anything like
private property. Granting the truth of this
statement, as well as the correctness of Mr.
WISE'S account of the expenditure of the
revenues of the Duchy, it certainly presents a
strong ease for the Administrative Reformers.
According to the returns which have been
presented to Parliament, the average income fog
the last nineteen years has been about 38,0001.,
of which 13,0001. only finds its way to Her
MAJESTY'S privy purse. The country is anxious
that the revenue of the Duchy should be
improved as far as possible, and that these Royal
estates should yield as large an income as
possible. But the legal sharks and pompous
officials connected therewith are influenced with
less patriotic ideas. With them Lancashire is a
County Palatine, and the Duchy is a territorial
dignity requiring many and well-paid offices for
the proper support of the officers. Hence it is
that the revenues of the estates are squandered
away in keeping up an empty and totall y