Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1859-01-04

fr1np anu oVuShh -"
nr;ccs and produced less cotton with them, at
bcttcr prices. This view will derive additional
from the consideration that the price
the negro when once introduced, whatever
NAV have been his original cost, will tend to
itself to the value Of his productive
labor. This we shall see in the course OF tins
argument, constitutes the leading element IN
the permanent value and price OF negroes
The price will Auctuate according to the rela-
tive state of supply and demand; but in negro
property it continually grayitates TOWARDS the
point | have indicated. This point Will DC
more clearly demonstrated when 1t arises III us
proper order. ,.s
| am met here, in relation to the subject OF
cotton, with an argument Of this kind: that aS
the supply of cotton is increased, the demand
will be enlarged and the consumption increased,
The idea is entertained, that there is some vast
expansive power in the commercial world, rela,
tive to cotton, which will counteract the elect
of an ovcr-supply and keep the demand forever
Unsuitable. This idea. though prevalent Is
vague in its conceptions and exceedingly oelu,
siye in its nature. Now, how will an increased
production of cotton expand the c~onsumption'
That it will do it, | do not deny. But the ques-
ton is Aooc will it do it. In the first place 1t
will induce more capital in Europe to ne III
vested in manufacturing. Now, why Will the
increased supply Of cotton induce Investments
in factories. / do not deny such an effect; Dut
what is the principle on which it proceeds
Why do not these additional investments ne"
take place: Is it because they cannot get me
material at ull: Surely, they could become
competitors in the purchase of the preseN sup
ply of raw material. The new establishments
could buy cotton, as well as the capitalists al
ready engaged in it. Why, then, do they not
invest. 1t is because of the high price OF the
raw material. The limited supply would
not deter them from taking their chances
in the market, if it were not ior the
fact, that the limited supply is accompanied
with correspondingly high prices; Now 10 ire
move the difficulty, and induce them 10 invest
and become purchasers OF the raw-ma'erlai,
you must not simply furnish them with a more
abundant supply, at original hlgh priceS' you
must add TO the quantity the other essential
inducements of lower prices. The increased
supply without a reduction OF price would not
answer the purpose. 1t is then, IN that way,
and on that principle alone, that the enlarge
ment Of our cotton crops will cause more FAC
tories in Europe to be put into operation. IL
will effect it by depressing tic p'tcG 81 "H""
The capitalist is thus induced to embark IN the
Nysincss, 5eeauSe irhW he buys the rar cotton
"t."4fr rates, he ean sell his. ra6rics cheaper.
an" ~ m, q open a midsr. HeW et'cons"mp-
non. "heh tn; .otton fabrics are reduced in
price, more can DC >a'IS., for they are brought
eifhm tie tarh q ttts>. class Of CONSUMERS.
In this way, and on this pr.scinle. the con.
s,inptive capacity of the world wiff>> EXPANDED.
At reduced prices Il larger class bcco1sAs con-
sulmcrs. and consume more lountifully nsn
under high prices. The manufacturer market
for cotton goods being widened. he can sell al
cheaper rates OF profit to himself, because he
can sell more goods. But he cannot go below
the standard OF the cost of the material and OF
its manufacture. Within that limit he may re.
duce the profits of his business. The %controll-
ing principle with him, in the sale of the man.
ufacturcd articles, is the cost of its manufacture
added to the cost of the raw material. And
when YOU put the manufactured article down
to accommodate it to a larger class of consu.
mers, andin that way enlarge the consumption,
YOU must keep the cost of the raw material at
a corresponding rate. And when YOU have got
an increase Of manufacturing capital in Europe,
so that competition among them in selling their
fabrics, will make them sell as low as they can.
and thereby reduce the price of cotton
goods, you force upon the manufacturer the
necessity of buying the raw material low.
As long rs he can sell at good prices,
he can afford to pay we'll for cotton. The cost
of the cotton is the great lever power that con-
trolls him. If he pays high for that, he must
charge high prices for his goods. And, when
the competition Of his own branch of business
is reducing him to low profits, he will endcayor
to throw the loss upon the cotton producer
Now, here is the mistake which some people
make. when they talk about the increase OF
manufacturing establishments, raising the price
of cotton. by competing with each other IN the
market for that article; and it is thus that they
oycr-cstimate the advantage from that source.
They Ito not consider the strong competition on
the other hand, in the sale Of their fabrics
The latter reduces the profits Of their business
and the price of the manufactured articles, and
thereby countcracts the effect, to q great en-
tent. Of their competition as purchasers of the
raw cotton. They come out of the strife with
each other in the sale of their improved values,
less able or willing to compete vigorously for
the raw material.
Now, the idea OF the manufacturer being
able to sell cheaper, when he can sell more OF
his fabrics, and in that way repairing loss upon
one bolt of cloth by the increased aggregate OF
heavy sales, is principle which, it will be wellto
remember, is not applicable to the cotton plant
cr's business. We are not rendered the more able
to sell cotton low, because we have a double
quantity to sell. Cotton is not made by steam.
1t comes from the earth by the toll Of the hand
and the sweat of the brow. A printer of cali
Goes. or 4 printer Of newspapers, may lower
their prices if you will double the custom of the
one, or the subscription list Of the other. 1t is
not so with the man who grows the products
of the soil. He can afford to produce a thou
sand bales of cotton at no cheaper rates, than
he could one hundred.
If. then, the increase of our slaves through
the African traffic would double the quantity
of we produce, and that increased supply
would induce an extension ofthe manufacturing
business, rs | admit that it would; and these
two causes combined expands the consumption
of cotton goods in the world, as admit would
be true, and reduces the price OF those goods
the great question is. who is to bear the loss OF
that reduction of price: | might answer this
question by asking a more general and n more
abstract one. In all contests between The mo-
neyed capitalist and the tiller of the soil, who
triumphs, and who is compelled to bear losses
In other words, the loss Of the whole operation
Of which | have been speaking, Of the reduc-
ton of the price Of the manufactured articles,
consequent on the increase of manufacturing
capital, and the increase Of the cotton crop, 10y
the influx of African laborers, will be hurled
back upon the cotton planter of the South by
the depression of the cxchangeable value OF
his great staple. We talkenuch about cot.
ton being King. But that king has never
been able to govern the prices for which his
subjects sell the products Of their toll. Some
body else was king last fall and winter, when Il
cotton crop, unusually small, and which enter
cd the market at fifteen cents, was suddenly put
down to eight and nine cents. Who was the
king then? And where did the loss Of that
revulsion fall? 1t did not fall upon Wall street
nor London money changers. 1t did not fall,
as was supposed by some, upon the manufac,
turing capitalists. 1t fell upon the poor laborer