The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1867-04-03
Cotton vs.. Corn.
STONY POINT, ABBEv1nnE DISTRICT,
: April 2, 1867.

MEssRs. EDITORS: Your advice to
the planters of this State to grow
corn instead of cotton is doubtless
given with patriotic desire to bene-
fit the South, and not, "with malice
aforethought," to injure tho North.
Actuated by the same feeling, I ven
ture to question the wisdom of your
counsel. You are opposed to build
ing up Lowell at the expense of the
South. So am I; nor do I construe
that feeling as revenge which prompts
me to withhold both friendship and
patronage from those Northern clans
who are represented in tho councils
of the nation by such men Us Butler,
Stevens, Sumner, et i'll onane genus.
These men must be the exponents of
the political sentiment of their con-
stituencies, and should they and their
people be the only sufferers by our
adhering strictly to your proposed
policy, I would be foremost amongst
planters to advocate it. But believ-
ing honestly that different course
would advantage the planter more, I
must ask leave "to enter plea or
demurrer. The prime duty of the
Southern planter is TO lend his entire
energy TO The cultivation of those crops
that to hin, aDiN be most remunerative.
When, in 1861, that great ground
swell of patriotism swept over the
South, constraining irresistibly every
planter to cultivate that, and that
only, which fed the rank and file of
our armies, cotton planting wns
abandoned by common consent.
During the next four years, when our
ports were blockaded, every avenue
of legitimate intercourse with the
outside world closed, and the vortex
of patriotism had become as calm as
a lake, mutterings 'for the fesh-pots
of Egypt" began to be heard, and
the cotton planting mania revived,
which could only be restrained by
legislation. Laws extremely oppres-
sive and odious were enacted, exc
cuted and obeyed; tithes were i'm
pressed. and, in many instances,
calls" were taken, and cotton plant
ing was prescribed. In all these
laws, the Southern people acquiesced
rs war measures, and many planters,
prompted by an excess of patriotism,
not only enlarged their corn area,
but also their planting area, believing
that they could as easily cultivate
eighteen acres of corn to the hand as
they could eight of cotton and eight
of corn. Experience. however, proved
this n delusion, and the increased
area resulted in decreased crop. Not
only SO, but during the war our ave-
rage yield of small grain had greatly
depreciated, from lack of that invalu-
able domestic manure-cotton seed
and our lands were becoming annu-
ally more impoverished from the
rough, careless culture we usually-I
may say, invariably-give tie corn
crop; and when the war closed, but
few planters had enough cotton on
hand to furnish the capital with
which to recuperate their lost for
tunes. Such, during the war, was
the result of that very ruinous policy
which you are now "blazing out" for
the planter, during civil but disas-
trous revolution.
Without discussing the politico-
economical question, as to whether
an excess of imports or exports en-
riches nation, or whether cotton
planting impoverishes the South
simply because it adds wealth to the
already powerful North, and assum-
ing that aggregated individual wealth
is the wealth of the State, 1 think it
can be proven, by process of rea-
soning as comprehensive to the
humblest as it is irrefutable by the
wisest of your readers, that it is to
the interest of every South Carolina
planter to pitch the greater part of
his crop this year for cotton, and, in
some instances, to plant no corn ut
all.
Abbeville is one of the largest anl
most productive Districts in the
State. The average yield of seed
cotton here per acre is about 45O
pounds, which will yield $50 pounds
of lint cotton and twelve bushels of
seed. The average yield of corn is
about twelve and half bushels per
acre-the same acre producing two
bushels of peas and $50 pounds of
fodder. The value, then, to the
planter, and hence to the District