Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1857-03-06

thirds in value is raised expressly for the British
market, and is regularly imported into and manufac-
tured in the United Kingdom
7. That of the entire quantity of cotton imported
into and manufactured in the United Kingdom, near.
ly fourffhs in quantity and much more than four
htlhs in value is, on an average OF years. obtained
| from the United States
Various facts and figures are given 10 sustain the
foregoing and it is stated that in 1887 there
| imported into Great Britain 22600, 900 pounds of
cotton, obtained from the following sources:
British West Indies, $500, 900
French and Spanish Colonies, 100000
Dutch Colonies, LOO, 900
Portuguese Colonies, 100000
East India, procured from Ostend, 100000
Smyrna or Turkey, 500, 900
None from the United States.
In the three years of 1924 1926, and 1926 Great
Britain imported average of 189, 595 900 pounds
and this quantity was obtained from the following
sources the imports of the three years being reduced
to similar average of each country
United States of America, 121, ,318, 900
Brazil, 216OO,OO
| East Indies, 17,1S4 900
| Turkey and Egypt, 12, ,229, 900
West Indies, 6,4OS 600
All other countries, 10000, 600
In the three years of 1853 1856 j. and 1855 the to-
tai quantity imported into Great Britain reached an
average of 89l ,454 900 pounds, obtained from the
following sources:
The United States, 687,4 7,4IO, 900
Brazil, 22,824OOO
The Mediterranean, %, 1853, 900
| East Indies, l48 954 600
West Indies, 409, 900
Other countries 1902 OO0
Thus In 1887, the British imported no cotton
whatever from the United States, whiIe in 1924
1925, and 1926 they imported "a per cent of all
they used from this country, and in 1858, 1854 and
1855 they imported II per cent 1t is therefore in
erred that the United States possess advantages IN
the culture and expectation of this article which
place them In This respect far ahead of all competi-
tors. In relation to the manufacture Of cotton Great
Britain occupies the foreground. MIR. D. argues the
case thus:
The only country in Eu~rpe which can in any
sense, be said TO compete in The supply
of the extra European demand for cotton goods is
France And when the character ami extent of this
branch OF the French export trade is described it will
be that most formidable rival is not to be
dreaded thoug she undoubtedly offers US something
to learn
"Ihe year 1853 was favorable one for The French.
The French official accounts for that year show that
the quantity of raw cotton imported and retained for
home consumption 1902, 900 klIogrammes, or
about 165,OOO,OOO pounds, valued at 125,0O0,00O
francs The average quantity imported in the five
years, 1882, had been about 1872 millions of
pounds. There also cotton yam imported for
French consumption, In 1858, to The value of 400,
600 francs, whlch not far from double the GUAM
tty imported on an average OF the five years, 1848-
So Here, however, We observe rate of progres.
sion scarcely greater than might safely be referred to
the increasing wants of the home customers while
the increasing Importation of yarn. indicate
failure OF competitive power in the first process of
the manufacture.
Nor does an examination of The export trade lead
to a different conclusion. In 1853 The cotton manu-.
facures OF French production exported from France
were valued al 100000 francs, (92876, ,OOO)-I
This showed a slight, but only slight increase, as
compared with the average OF 184o-'52 The cot
ton yarn exported valued 100000 francs,
(g34 640) But before these figures are passed. as
marking the extent OF the export trade, there one
or Two allowances to bs made. The raw cotton was
burdened with an import duty, and bounty was al
10 we'd on the expectation OF manufactured goods
The precise effect of the counlerpose only be
estimated somew hat regularly.
he French tariff in 1858 imposed hve different
rates of duty raw cotton imported IN French ves
sells, according to where 1T Game from; and three
other rates OF duty, similarly distinguished On co..
ion imported in foreign vessels. The duty most ex-
ensively operative-that on American cotton enter
ing in French bottoms 20 francs pei 100 kllo-
grammes about sixteen shiings per $50 pounds.
And as the whole quantity imported ($75,09l 900
kiOgramme.l yielded 10 The revenue l7276, 900
francs, giving average of 1928 francs per loo
kiogrammes, it is probable that by Tar the greater
part of what was imported actually paid this Iate OF
duty.
The bounty on expectation was 25 francs pei 100
kilogrammes OF manufactures or yarn. 1t was al
lowed in 1852 on 6,117, ,s64 kilogrammes of manu-
acture and on 1873, ,604 kllOgrammes OF yarn. Ihls,
with moderate allowance for waste OF the raw ma.
eriaE though cal bounty, could in effect have been
little, if al ALL more than drawback OF the import
duty.
Ii would seem tha, the French exports in this kind
are not more than tenth in value Of our own. And
where were they sent, and why! The largest Gus.
toner for these French manufacturers (taking two
parts in seven of the whole vaue) was Algeria but
Algerian consumption may be deemed practically
French consumption. The two customers next on
the hist, whea arranged in order of magnitude are
the United States and and the United Kingdom.
These took between them two other seventh parts OF
the whole And the goods sold in the English ana
American markets are we'll known to owe their Pc