The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-11-05

lS47 Il 24l 222 l,3ls,040 II 900
1913. i ,s5s POI 2,356,s30 49S, 900
ls49. 2 POT ,s44 2,566.2sO $4,000
1850. ,590,l55 1853 454
1851 Il ,95S,7l0
The comments of the Union, in reference to
the table thus presented, are as follows:
''Now. it will be observed that the quantities and
values in table those of the official reports
of the Secretary of the Treasury for the sca years
ending June 80 an each year. The table which the
Republic parades with such airs from HUNTS Maya
zine is the table compiled annually by the New
York Shipping List for each year ending Septem
Der 80. The mode in which that table is compiled
is to keep record of all the bales of cotton reported
in all the price-curr lists at the southern ports
during the year. These newspaper reports all.
at the end Of the year, added up, and the result
given as the annual cotton statement and it is
copied from the Shipping Last into Hunts Magazine
and most other publications. This statement is gene
rally pretty accurate in bales for the year ending
September 30; but as the bales vary in weight, it
gives no precise idea of the actual quantity of cot
ton contained in given number of bales. The Off
cial report gives the pounds weight of cotton
ported, with the export value the fiscal year. AS
there ia no duty on cotton here abroad, and the
freight ia paid the weight, those official returns
are pretty apt to be accurate. Now, to arrive Mt
the value per bale in each year. IL ia necessary that
the bales should be of uniform aceight. IT, therefore,
the pounds weight given in the official tables is di-
vided by 400 pounds, the result is the number Of
bales of uniform weight; and the official value be-
ing divided by the number of bales gives the value
per bale. In years the reports of the Shipping
List will approach those of the Secretary of the
Treasury in greater or less degree, according to
the circumstances of trade, the weight of bales
time of shipment, sc. Take now an example: the
Shipping List table gives, in the above quotation
for the year ending September 80, 1919, export
of pat s44 bales. The weight of cotton exported
for the year ending June 80 ,026,602 ,269
pounds, or 1850 200 bales of 400 pounds EACH as in
my table. The official value of the exports was
s 66 1896, 1867, or S45. per bale of 400 pounds; or
thus:
Bales
Shipping List for year to Sept 30 Is49 g, 227 s44
Official year, June 80, OPS, 602. 269
pounds, Or. Y, 900 .zUU
Difference 1886, 1856
"Out of this difference between an unofficial re
turn for different year and the official report for
the fscal year, the Republic manufactures charge
Of fraud How mucn protection does it require
to sustain such manufacture that? All the
column and half of fustan which the Republic has
appe nded to its blunder is not worth notice Upon
re-reading my letter, find it sufficiently clear to
make this explanation unnecessary, and shall not
trouble myself with any further folly that may be
exhibited by the Republic"
As regards the difference between the fiscal
year. which ends June so, and the cotton year,
which does not end September 80, but does end
August 3 the writer of this article knows as
we'll as ourselves that it is entirely unimport-
ant. The shipments of July and August are
always trivial.
1t is admitted that the statement of the bales
shipped is ''pretty accurate;" but the number Of
bales does not, we are told, give any "precse
idea" of the number of pounds; and by way of
giving his readers rery precise idea, our au-
thor uses tables by aid of which $685. 22 bales,
shipped in 1856, shrink to 1856, $3.50, and
1855, 26l shipped in l847-S, expand to $780,
830--the one being made to lose almost three
hundred thousand bales, and the other made to
gain almost half million; and, siDgularly
enough, the loss is all on the side of the tariff
of S42 and the gain all the side Of the tariff
of 1916, and the tables used were all prepared
by the advocates of the latter.
Now, the man who prepared this statement
believed in its truth, or he did not. If he did,
he certainly manifested great want of know
ledge; and we might suggest to the Union-in
its own words addressed to us-that sit should
be especially consIderate when it enters into
the field of controversy on subject so much be-
yond its grasp as the state of our exports and
| imports, and the index which they afford of our
commercial prosperity" If he did not believe
it, he meant to deceive his readers, and that he
| did so mean we entertain no doubt; because we
hold it to be quite impossible that the merest
tyro in commercial statistics should fail to per
ceive that such statement as that he has fur
nished could not be even an approximation to
the truth
| The whole question turns, our readers
will perceive, upon the weight of the bales ex-
ported-the number of bales being admitted tc
be "pretty accurate;" and that they may be
enabled to Judge for themselves on this subject
we now give the weights for few years prior to
the advent of Mr. WALKER to the Treasury.
From ls394O to 1923 the crops amounted
4 ,S75, 900 bales
And the domestic consumption TO. ,ls5,OOO
$500 900
from which, if we deduct 10000 for loss by
fire, &C., we have left for export 6,650,00t
bales, which at 400 pounds per bale would
give 1890, 100000, being almost the exac
amount exported as given in the Treasury Re
ports, the sum ofthose years having been z, 655,
100000 pounds; the average being four hun
dred pounds, and the weight, being in cours
>
Of gradual increase, the last of those year
would be little in excess of four hundred.
In the following year, 1884, the expor
1 was ,629, 900 bales, and the weight, as give