The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1867-12-20
CHAR L E S TON.
FRIDAY MORNING, DECEMBER 90, 1867.
The Future Of Cotton.

We have published several articles Oh late
on the culture of cotton and its present cost 10
the producer The subject is one OF para
mount interest to almost every man IN the
Southern States, for the cotton crop heretofore
has certainly been the main source OF our
prosperity True, Congress intends to effect
change, and by taxing our staple heavily ana
thereby stimulating foreign rivalry, compel
our planters to abandon their traoltlonary
staple, and devote themselves to the produc-
ton of cereals, stock, hemp, fax, hops, fruit,
etc. Still the hold cotton has upon our agri-
culturists is strong, and they are slow to
change their allegiance to the Heecy King
And in this they are unquestionably right
The experience of a lifetime, nay OF genera
tions, should not be rashly thrown ASIDE. IL
is proper that they should carefully count the
cost before giviog up the culture OF cotron'
in favor of such other products, as could lake
its place. And it is for the purpose OF assist
ing them in these comparative estimates that
we have devoted time and trouble TO the prepa-
ration of series Of articles on this subject.
We will to-day examine an estimate made
few weeks ago by Mr.. W. H. YOUNG, OF Coium-
hps Ga. an experienced merchant, manufac-
turer and planter. He says that FIVE hundred
pounds to the acre of seed cotton (the average
yield) costs the planter nearly seventeen cents
pound to produce clear ofthe tax-the wages
alone of the labor being fully one-halfthe whole
off fba ntatiO q o.
fore strenuously urges reduction OF the area
planted, believing that The same force can
produce more largely on few acres, well
manured, and thoroughly cultivated, than by
the old system.
In all business the cost Of labor is the prin-
cipal outlay. A manufacturer is offered mo-
chine for $500 that will produce certain
amount Of work, requiring The personal atten-
ton of two men. To the two men he pays
$3.50 each per annum, or $500, the amount OF
outlay for labor to "run the machine. A
new machine is offered him that will produce
the same amount of work, but from Its i'm
proved construction one operative only is
required to attend it, reducing the annual cost
$3.50; and although he has to pay for the i'm
proved machine $1,000, he abandons the old
one and buys a new one, because it is clearly
to his interest to do 30. N W our labor is
costly, and however reduced in price hereaf-
ter, it must still remain the great item Of ex-
pense in operating the plantation.
Suppose plartcr has three hundred acres
Of land to cultivate, the land capable of pro-
ducing FIVE hundred pounds of seed cotton and
ten bushels of corn to the acre (average). 1t
requires eighteen hands and nine mules, say |
about sixteen acres to the hand, and thirty |
three and third acres to the mule, cultiva-
ting ten acres in cotton and six in corn. The |
result is that on the one hundred and eighty |
acres in cotton he gets 10000 pounds of seed
cotton, or 81, 900 pounds of lint
12o SSa acres a' in Corn 1900 bushels at 10000
Gross produce Of crop. .............. .Sao'o'oo
By previous calculation Mr. You've had
shown that the cost per laborer Of operating an |
extensive plantation was S29S, or for eighteen
hands, $5364-a loss, therefore, on the opera
ton of S7s9.
Mr.. YoUNa therefore proposes that the plan
ter only cultivate one hundred acres of the |
land, and enrich it so as to produce fifteen
hundred pounds of fseed cotton and thirty bushels
of corn per acre. and to do so he expends for gu
ano, etc., $500, or four hundred pounds to the
acre; and if he can in this way produce as
much on the one hundred acres as he did on
the three hundred, we shall have the follow
ing result:
Cotton and corn. as above. ... s4575.OO
For hire of six hands and all OK
penses at 1854 each. .......... S1524.OO
Corn for six hands s. bushels; for
three mules 1S0 bushels-265
bushels az S1................ 26o.OO
Cost OF four hundred pounds gu
ano per acre Zone hundred
acres), 20 tons at s95. ...... 19O0.00-s36S9.OO
Loss in the former case S79l, profit in the
latter 1886; difference Sl677.
Without going further into details, we give
the result of Mr.. YouNG's calculations, and
commend them to public attention. No ostl-
mate of this kind, we are aware, will be ac-
cepted as accurate by all persons, and we shall
therefore be glad to hear on this subject from
any experienced and practical planter.