Lincoln telegraph. [volume] (Bath, Me.) 1836-1846, 1840-05-28

and vessels of every description were reaping a
richer and more abundant harvest from their en-
ployment, than for twenty years preceding
Here we have, not only the deliberate opinion
that freights have been higher during the past
winter than at any time for twenty years, but
that the ship owners harvest has been more a.
bundant than for the whole t,ceny gears preceding
Really neighbor You must have slept in Sub
treasury, and had visions of gold and sixpenny
freghts, or perhaps touched the skirts of Nilsson
ri's man of Mines and MINIS. But, to construe
as literally as possible, we think the writer meant
10 say, the ship owners harvest would be greater
the present year than in any one of the proceed
ing twenty. This we partly admitted in for
mer article, and explained the causes which gave
prosperity to the shipping interest while all other
interests were struggling hard for exstance We
showed it to be a forced condition of things, and
of course momentary, or temporary. But from
some cause our reasoning was not very palatable
to the Editor of the Patriot and for the gratiica-
ton of being opposed to US, and at the expense
of disagreeing with his own great authority, he
exclaims "a momentary prosperity indeed that
which has existed, scarcely without interruption,
for the last ten years" Most people would call
the twenty years, of which he speaks above,
some interruption. He must be an odd fellow,
that Editor, to be so afraid Of agreeing with him.
self. Ship owners in this vicinity are inclined to
the opinion that there was slight interruption
last year, for many of their ships waited eight or
ten months in Southern ports, and then took a
half penny freight. The most given at New
Orleans was three farthngs. After making these
contradictory statements, the Patriot goes ON to
notice the reasons offered in explanation of
the unexampled rates obtained for ffeights the
present year, to all of which but one reply is
made, namely, that freights were good in 1888
when such causes operated, and why should
they not be so now This is no answer to our
argument How does the simple facts that a
similar state Of prosperity existed some years
since, weaken our positions? There were causes
for the prosperity of 80, but they were different
from those which operated in 1910. 1t would be
as correct reasoning to say that because 1889 was
disastrous year for the ship owner, therefore
future years will prove the same. Does the
Patriot suppose effects produced without
causes? Or does he think Martins ofree trade
measures cause enough TO produce all things,
however remote and disconnected?
1t will be recolected that our principal reason,
for the late prosperity in our carrying trade, was
the unparalleled embarrassment of the planters,
which drove them to hurry their large cotton
crops to market to save themselves from total ruin
This is not denied, but met by so strange a spec-
men of logic and philosophy, that we are in
duced to quote it entire for the benefit of our
readers If we mistake not they will find it a
curiosity in the art of reasoning, and the concu-
sion at which he arrives
sBy report of the Secretary of the Treasury,
laid before Congress in December last, the ex-
Portation Of Cotton IN 1886, is stated, we will use
round numbers, at serenity million Of dollars },
in 1887 at sixty-tAree millions; in 1888 at sirfy-
one millions" "Thus it will be perceived, while
the Exports decreased the rates of freights in
creased, and the demand for vessels in 1888,
when the exports were the least, was greater
than in 1896 when they were the largest"
The writer of the above paragraph has either
shown great ignorance Of his subject, made
a barefaced attempt at deception, by a willful
of facts. Hefrst gives us the value
instead of the quantity of the Cotton crops, and
then tells us, that while "the exports decreased,
the rates of freights increased" But how stand
the facts' The whole cotton crop of the United
States, in each of the thee years mentioned, was
as follows -