New-York daily tribune., 1861-08-11
wIsY COTTON rs KING.

The publc must be familiar with the reasons
given by recent British journals for their depen-
dencr on America for cotton. They resolve
thcnselyes practically into te single fact that we
happen to have possession of the market; and
that, having supplied England so fully 50 regu-
larl,, and VITA 80 little trouble to ber, she has
been content TO depend almost exclusively on u.s.
When crops were short. she adapted her industry
TO what was accepted as mere agricultural ca
lsnity. aud drew from other countries Whatever
deficiency existed here, just a. she had many
times done when her own wheat crop failed
Such deficiencies oc,a.i0ncd no national alarm
because il was known that the next good crop
would DO certain to restore the equilibrium of
prices aud supply. But Notwithstanding the su-
perior convenience OF obtaining cotton here, these
SEASONS of occasional scarcity did not fail to at
tract public attention TO tho danger OF what was
felt TO be too exclusive dependence ou our cot.
ton fields. Ii was moi, however, until the black
cloud OF the Slave Rebellion showed itself above
the horizon, that British manufacturers became
thoroughly alarmed. They have for months past
been auxiously watching its progress, aud have
wisely taken energetic measures to shield them
selves from the truly national disaster OF short
| supply. Their organs predicted that the incplent
Rebellion would become general; that the cotton
culture world be- seriously dimiOi-hed 1t not
wholly interrupted by servile iosurrectioD;
aud that ii TIN. contingency did not occur, the
failure of the Southern grain crop OF ast year
would compel the south to plant more corn aud
less cotton. In any event the cotton crop must
be largely diminished The onl, question with
them was the extent OF this diminution. Their
fears magniGcd il to third, aud sometimes to o
half The calamities which such diminution
would entail upon their industry were wildly
set forth in their newspapers, eLd the pictures
| given Of it were copied extensively into ours.
1t was while discussing this great question that
| the reason for their dependence on us came out
they relied on us simply because 1t was con-
yenient to do So This was the only country which
had thoroughly organized the cotton culture, in.
vested in it a vast capital, and possessed the
machinery of commerce which euabled us, with
certainty and cheapness, to deliver it in abundant
quality at every European port. These iac-
ties were so complete that England was content
at least measurably so, to let the business 80 On
| in the old channel it had created for ITSELF No
| diversion was to be made except gradual and
peaceful one. Rebellion, however, threatens oil
parties with violent disruption Of these old
alinities.
But why we happened thus to be in possession
of the European market, to tho exclusion OF
all other cotton.growing countries, was no part
of their speculatons The iact alone was oil
paramount importance to them, not tho agencies
By which it was achieved. But the cause may
be told in a single sentence-this country orig
mated the cotton nv- v-and from the day OF Its
invention may be dated the commencement OF
that overshadowDg ascendency Of the cotton
supply which has so enriched Europe that sho
sees destitution in the wake Of its being inter-
mitted. That machine was invented IN l793.
Unlike many great inventions which, from crude