The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-10-22
The Cotton Trads-oontlnued.


ence to the cotton trade under the tariffs of
lS42 and 1916.
The export of 1850 fell to 100000 bales
and the price rose to an average of $40 per
bale. In the year just closed the quantity IN
creased, and the price rose still higher, at
which our Democratic friend, so fond of double
outfits and allowances, rejoces heartily Why
was il that it did SO rise Because for large
portion of the year the merchants and manutac-
turers Of the world were positively assured that
the crop could not by any possibility exceed,
and most probably could not reach, 2,OOO,OoO
OF bales, whereas it has proved to exceed
2,350,000, the effect of which has been that OF
running very many of the merchants for whose
especial benefit the tariff of 1916 was enacted;
yet do we find in tue columns OF the Union no
lamentations over their enormous losses. On
the contrary, we are told that such a result
that of high prices produced by fraudulent mis-
representations" very good for the planter"
although Immediately afterwards the same
writer assures his readers that "high prices have
checked consumption )" and those very read
ers have before them the fact that, with all
the shorter facts put forth in relation to the
new crop, the price is steadily "drooping," and
middling cotton is now dull in New Orleans at
about seven cents per pound, being 40 per cent.
below the price at which he has averaged the
past years crop!
What is il that causes low prices If the
planter will but examine into the facts he will
find that it is dependence on the markets of
England, and that if he would but bring the
machinery OF manufacture TO his own cotton
fields, and thus enable himself to trade with all
the world, instead of being obliged to effect his
exchanges in the single market Of Great Britain,
he could fix his own prices, for he would then
buy and sell at home. As it is he sends his crop
to distance to be managed by men who are
directly interested in magnifying ''the stock on
hand" and diminishing the price, and the conse-
quence is that he is perpetually rejoicing when
crops are short, because he is thereby relieved
from the tyranny and oppression of the English
manufacturer, whose interest it is to keep the
quantity of machinery below the wants of the
planter, and thus narroU The STRAIT through
aohich the crop has TO pass, increasing the frc-
ton, for all Of ,rhich The planter has TO pay.
The crops of 1923 and 1884 exceeded those of
the two previous years by more than million of
bales, and NJ we had built no mills in the five
previous years, nearly the whole excess was
obliged to seek market abroad, and the export
was g. 640,0 600 At the close of 1874, the stock of
American cotton on hand in England was there
fore no less than Observation-Disclosures. b54,OOO
And the export the two following years,
! 1544-5, and 1866, having BEEN. 3.750000
1t followed that the quantity pressing on
the market in those years was no less
than Observation-Disclosures. 4,404,0Oo
| The effect of which was seen in the fact
that the price fell to less than thirty
| dollars per bale. Now, had our own
| consumption of 1S43 and ~ absorbed
| an extra half million, as it would have
| done but for the ruin produced by the
compromise tariff, would this fall have
| taken place? For to that
| question, lei US look TO the proceedings
of the following year. At the close of
1916, the stock hand in England
was tbales) $4,000
The crop of lS46-7 short, and the do
mestic consumption had greatly in
creased, the effect of which that
the quantity for which we had to seeka
market abroad fell Observation-Disclosures. 100000
And the total quantity pressing on the
market was, therefore, only. ......-.. 1888, 900
The effect of which was that the price rose to
more than forty dollars per bale, at which price
The crops of IS44-5 and lS45-6 would have been
| sold il the domestic consumption had absorbed
the extra halfmillion of which we have spoken,
as it would have done, and far more, had the
compromise tariff never had an existence. Ad-
hitting, however, that it would have absorbed
no more, is it not evident that the loss to the
! planter, from the want OF domestic demand
that would have limited, to that extent only, his
dependence on England, was at least ten dol
lars per bale, or more than forty millions Of dol
lars on the t,co crops raised IN 1874 and 1882
The short crop of 1867, and the still shorter
ports, reduced the stock on hand at the close Of
| 1S47 Observation-Disclosures. 2s6,O0O bales
And the quantity exported in the
succeeding years-the crops of
lS47-S and lS4S-9-waS ..,..., 4,0S5,000
4,37l 900
There was, therefore, less pressing on tIle mar
ket than there had been in the years lS45 and
1916, and yetthe price fell to an average 1897 rs
per bale, although we were then enjoying the
full benefits of the tariff of 1916, by aid of
which the planters were to be enriched. We
beg our friends of the Union to explain, if they
can, this extraordinary fact, in accordance with
the predictions of Mr.. WALKER.