Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1868-11-19
Cotton in Am erica--Its G cultivation and
nufacture- e--Interesting SIatistics.

Cotton in America--Its Cultivation and
Manufacture--Int Statistics.
Although King Cotton is Gethroned,
the article itself as a convenience and q
luxury eXertS an influence which will
ALWAYS demand more or less attention.
The history of the early cultivation of
tile plant in the United States, as shown
by the CORES spondent of the New York
Times, contains several noteworthy facts.
A single paper of seed sent from Chel-
sea, England, to Georgia, in 1884, con-
tanned the germ of the trade that, in
1884. aimed to rule the Government of
the United States, and which cherished
the delusion common to kings up as late
as 1S6l-2. The first regular expectation
of cotton was made in 17S5. This ex-
portation comprised a single bag-cOtton
was not baled in those days.
During the next five years the receipts
of American cotton were respectively 6,
1O9, $50, $40, and 81 bales, estimated at
Isl pounds each, or l AL bags, weighing
PIG, $50 pounds, in SIX years, from lfSo to
1870 inclusive. In 1891 the export was
l2S,3l6 pounds in 1900 it had reached
7,77S, ,Su3 pounds. In 1850 the export
had reached the enormous amount of l,
767, ,BS6, 1888 pounds, or 3,S12,345 bales
This immense yield was grown, asshown
Dy otdtiSIlCc, Oit l3 pr ~Otfte. W sseO S'OSe
of the Southern States. The entire pro-
ducing region of the United States is
not larger than the states of Massaehu-
setts aud Connecticut! These figures
We're read recently before the National
Association of Cotton Manufacturers and
Planters, an organization of recent
growth, which held its second meeting
a few weeks since. a- FE. =
From carefully prepared report sub
mitted to the Association, we learn that
the United States census of 1880 en-
braced returns from 1,09l cotton mills,
5.235, ,721 spindles, and using Az, 7O4, ,975
pounds of cott0n--equal to about 92l, ,O0O
bales per auHun. So far the Association
has received the reports of 556 mills or
corporations. They have 6,04S, 249 spin
dies, produce yarn OF sizes that average
No. 27s, and use annually 3I6,OO3, $50
pounds of c0tt0n-equal to S17 ,379 bales
of 460 pounds each, or a consumption per
spindle of 62.17 pounds.
According to the census of 1850 there
are yet 543 mills to be reported to the
Association. 1t will be seen that the
556 mills reported use almost as many
bales of cotton per annum as the LODI
mills did in the years just preceding the
war The mills already reported have
an average of nearly IL ,090 spindles to
each of the mills.
L A recapitulatiOn of the summary gives
the number of mills in the Northern
States at 40; number of spindles, $685.
229; number of yarn, 2755; consumption,
3443 .545 $50 pounds; consumption per
spindle, 9.57 pounds, r. sat
In the Southern States, number of
mills, SO; spindles, 1879, ,772; number of
yarn, 12Es; consumption, % ,042, 1866 pounds;
consumption per spindle, l40.37 pounds.
Massachusetts takes the lead, as mat
ter of course. That State contains one
hundred and thirty-two mills, which,
when in fun operation, consume annual
ly 12S, ,7S2, $40 pounds. New Hampshire
comes next. Her thirtythree mills
work up 48, ,251 ,439 pounds annually
Little Rhode Island owns ninety-five
mills, which consume about 46,000,O0O
pounds. Twenty mills in Maine ework
UP %, ,S24, sos pounds. Connecticut and
Pennsylvania consume very nearly the
same amount. The first contains sixty
seven mills, the last forty-six. The diff
ference in.the annual consumption will
be perceived in the following statement:
Connecticut 25.555. l20 pounds, Pennsyl-
yania 25, I69, ,069. New York consumes
fraction over 2O,000,0 900 pounds. The re
markable feature in this summary il the
fact that no single Southern State with
the exception of Georgia works up :, ,000,
900 pounds. South Carolina, North
Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas,
Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Vir
ginia, Missouri and Maryland consume
about 26, 100000 pounds, or fraction
more than the amount consumed by
Pennsylvania.
A remarkable decrease in the produc-
ton of cotton goods in the United States
during the last eight years is exhibited.
Compared with the eightyears preceding,
the production during the last eight years
was only 678 per cent. The report closes
with glance at the British cotton trade
and manufacture, from which we learn
that =Hi -t r.-
"The consumption i'm Great Britain,
and the export of cotton goods and yarns,
have exceeded their production in the
aggregate of the last nine years to the.
extent of SS5, ,5S2. 900; and il does not ap-
pear that all the surplus productions
which had piled up before 1851, and
which threatened great disaster to the
manufacturing interests at that time,
have yet beeudistributeti't to consumers"
The explanation of this state of affairs
is found in the history of the British
trade with India. -. .s
, A careful estimate of the capital in
vested in cotton machinery in the Uni
ted States puts it at $4,000, ,000- The
opinion is confidently expressed by those
with the business that when
the producer and consumer in the United
States understand each other thoroughly,
and when the South shall have its full
share of COTTON factories, the trade will
witness aprosperity never before equaled. |
The Mother of Schuyler Colfay.