Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1857-02-21


market and is regularly imported into and manufac-
tured in the United Kingdom.
T. That of the entire quantity of cotton imported
into and manufactured in the United Kingdom, nearly
four-ifths in quantity and much more than four.
fifths in value is, average of years. obtained
from the United States"
Various facts and sgures are given to sustain the
foregoing, and it is stated that in 1857 there were
imported into Great Britain 100000 pounds Of
cotton obtained from the following sources:
British West Indies 100000
French and Spanish Colonies. 6,oOO,O0o
Ouch Colonies 100000
Portuguese Colonies, 2,500,O0O
East India, procured from Ostend, 100000
Smyrna or Turkey, 5,7UO,UOO
None from the United States.
In the three years of 1924, 1925, and 1926 Great
Britain imported average Of 49,, 595, 600 pounds,
and this quantity was obtained from the following
sources the imports of the three years being reduc
ed to similar average of each country
United States eff America, 12l,3ls,o0O
Brazil, 2l,6O0,0cO
East Indies l7lS4, 600
Turkey and Egypt l2.229,OOo
West Indies 6,4US, 900
All other countries, 10000. 900
In the three years of 1858, 1854, and 1855 the
total quantity imported into Great Britain reached
an average of s9l. 454, 900 pounds, obtained from
the following sources:
The United States, 6s7,4lo,ooo
Brazil 22,S24 OOO
The Mediterranean, 2s,253,ooO
East Indies, 1926, 900
West Indies, 4O9,O 900
Other countries, $500, 900
Thus, in 1877, the British imported no cotton
whatever from the United States while in 1924, 1925,
and 1926 they imported 81 per cent of all they used
from this country, and in 1858, 1854, and 1856
they imported II per cent 1t is therefore inferred
hat Tho Init toto aAv
culture and expectation of this article which place
them in this respect far ahead of all competitors. In
relation to the manufacture of cotton Great Britain
occupies the foreground. Mr.. D. argues the case
thus:
"The only country in Europe which can in any
sense, be said to compete with in
the supply Of the extra European demand for cotton
goods is France. And when the character and ex-
tent of this branch Of the French export trade is
described it will be that most formidable
rival is not to be dreaded, though she undoubtedly
offers us something to learn.
1.-THE year 1853 wasa favorable one for the French
trade. The French official accounts for that year
show that the quantity of raw cotton imported and
retained for home consumption was 1852, 900 killo
grammes, or about l65, OOO, 900 pounds, valued at
l25,0OO,00O francs The average quantity imported
in the five years, 1s4s 52 had been about 1872 mil
lions of pounds. There also cotton yarn i'm
ported for French consumption, in 1858, to the value
of 900 frances, which was not far from double
the qanty imported ON average of the five years,
1852. Here, however, observe rate of
progression scarcely greater than might safely be
erred to the increasing wants of the home
while the increasing importation of yarn seems to
indicate failure Of competitive power in the first
process of the manufacture.
Nor does an examination Of the export trade lead
to different conclusion In 1858 the cotton man.
ufactures ofFrench production exported from France
were valued at 1000, 900 francs, (f2, S76, O0O)
H. eli h,,ko ;rhk
compared with the average Of lS4s'52. The COT
ton yarn exported was valued at $4,000 francs
(e34, 64O) But before these figures are passed, as
marking the extent Of the export trade, there are
one or two allowances to be made The raw cotton
was burdened with an import duty, and bounty
was allowed on the expectation of manufactured
goods. The precise effect of the counterpose can
| only be estimated somewhat regularly.
| The French tariff in 1853 imposed five different
rates of duty on raw cotton imported in French YES
| sells, according to where it came from and three
other rates of duty, similarly dstingu She'd on cot
ton imported in foreign vessels. The duty most ex-
tensively operative-that American cotton enter
ing in French bottoms-was 20 francs per 100 kilo-
grammes, about sixteen shillings per 22O pounds
| And as the whole quantity imported este, 091 900
kilogrammes) yielded to the revenue 17.276,OOO
francs, giving an average of 1928 francs per 100
kiogrammes it is probable that by far the greater
part OF what was imported actually paid this rate Of
duty.
The bounty on expectation was 25 francs per 100
kilogrammes of manufactures or yarn. It was al
lowed in 1853 on 6117,s64 kilogrammes of manu-
facture and on 1913 604 kilogrammes of yarn. This,
with moderate allowance for waste of the raw ma.
tera', though called bounty, could in effect have
been little, if at all, more than drawback of the
import duty.
It would seem that the French exports in this
kind are not more than tenth in value of our own.
And where were they sent, and why2 The largest
customer for these French manufacturers (taiine
two parts in of the whole value) was Algeria
but Algerian consumption may be deemed practi.
cally French consumption. The two customers next
on the list, when arranged in order of magnitude
are the United States and the United Kingdom These
took between them two other seventh parts of the
whole. And the goods sold in the English and
American markets are we'll known to owe their ne.
cuiar value rather to thedesgner and the DIVER than
to the spinner and weaver. Their consumption doe.
not admit Of anyvery rapid wide increase French
taste and French chemistry have deservedly won
for the French textile fabrcs wherever they are an
plicabe, superiority as well known as it is ncon
testible But this has little effect in determining the
locality of the cotton manufacture of the whole
with few trifing exceptions, of which cotton Lace
imported from Belgium is the only one worthy O
notice no cotton foreign were in 1855
admitted TO French consumption -