The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1871-07-19
THE C0NSUlIPTION AND Production
- OF COTTON
rFrom' the New York Bulletin, Jaly Isl

from the New York Bulletin, July Isl :, =.
We reverse the natural order of succession
in this designation of our topic because we
desire to point out the bearing. OF the con-
sumption of cotton upon preparations Ior Tue
CROP The Commercial and Financial Cnronl-
lastsix months, the consumption OF cotton
has increased in Great Britain l0,s84 bales per
week, on the Continent COCO bales per week,
and In the United States about 1000 bales per
week; or, in the aggregate or all countries,
say In rolfnd numbers, 1000 bales per week.
This increase OF nearly l,l0o, 900 bales per an
mum in the consumption Is about equa! TO .ae
our augmented crop would remain to enlarge
stocks In the manufacturing countries. IL IS
evident therefore, that, with crop OF 4 4,zU0..
600 bales, stocks would be too low for the
price to remain ut 73d per pound, ana ere
long the price must have advanced sufficiently
to check consumption and keep up stocks. In
other words, with crop OF tour and nan
million bales of the American staple. cotton
cannot rule permanently 80 low as I'D, and
must probably, with such q supply, range az
Sd to s1d, OF, as some think, even as nigh as
We desire to present this fact especially to
The attention of some Of our Southern cotem-
porarles, who few months ago subjected the
Bulletin to q good deal of ill-tempered criti-
clsm because we opposed the advice OF the
New York Tribune, and Of said contemporaries,
to the planters, urging them to grow less cot
ton and more grain. The planters were hood
winked with formidable array OF statistics
purporting to show that 7td. per pound and
four millions OF bales meant ruin to the cotton
interest, and that their only salvation was In
devoting large portion OF their cotton lands
to corn. Considering what the Tribune
s.knows about farming" it was not surprising
that 1t shonld make such recommendations;
but we had right to. expect that Intelligent,
Southern journals would have kept clear Of
such hnmlllatlng blnnder. very llttie renee,
tion would have taught them that after twelve
years increase In the population consuming
cotton goods, and after large extension OF
the great Asiatic markets Tor these fabrics, the
measure of supply in 1860 must be totally in
ADEQUATE to the demand of 1872. And, fnrth-
ct, when they saw the price fall TO I'D, IN an.
ticipation Of an increase of l.000,0O0 bales In
the American crop, an ordinary amount OF
Judgment should have sufticel TO satisfy them
that this was the extreme first result OF the
enlarged supply, sure TO be followed BY an up
ward reaction when that low price had stlnll-
lated a very active consumption. Ali such
considerations, however-patent to every one
having the most elementary knowledge OF
market movements were ignored, anu the
planters were bllndly imporrlned 10 neglect
the interest out OF which the South has al
ways realized It's chief wealth.
We can now clearly see the results OF this
short.sighted counsel. We place much less
confidence than many in the. reports from
various sources Of reduction In the cotton
acreage of 10 TO 20 per cent; but nevertheless
we have no doubt the crop will be much less
than it would have been had it not been tor
this unwise advice. 1t Is now seen that
another crop of 4, 200, 600 bales could have been
marketed Oh the basis oil about SGD per pound,
and whatever tho growing crop may Yield
short Of that quantity Is so much Joss TO Inc
South, to the whole country, and 10 cotton
consumers the world over. 1t Is true tnat, II
this discouragement OF cotton growing mas
materially reduced the crop of this year, the
planters will receive a proportlonately higher
price for their cotton; but 1t Is also true that
such an advance In price would so stimulate
cotton growing next year, not only mere onC
alsO in other countries, that the crop OF 1917
would be deprecated In value, and wnat was
gained one year would be more than lost the
next.
Had these blind guides left the planters to
take their own course, the decline OF cotton
to It'd. might have proved OF the Greatest
value to them. 1t had the effect OF competing
q reduction in wages and OF cheapening al the
costs of planting, raising, and gathering the
crop; and the planters having thus economic
ed expenses down to the basis of I'D, there
can be no doubt they were prepared to plant
the same acreage us last year: for 1t is conced-
ed that, with cotton at I'D. at Liverpool and
gold ut 1lOall2. cotton raised under the con-
dtious OF this year would pay an average pro-
fit, perhaps as large a profit as was to be e1.
pected on the crop of 1870. With the costs OF
production adapted to the expected price OF
I'D, however. the price actually realized
upon second crop of 1900, 600 bales) would,
as we have above shown, be about 84d.i 80
that the much bemoaned 74d. would have
been the means of securing the planters Id.
per pound more for the crop of 1871 than tney
had expected. Surely this result Is well
enough TO be let alJne by hasty counsellors,
and the planters have little reason to thank
their editorial guides.
When the planters became alarmed at a.,
we urged that they should simply economize
the cost of The crop accordingly, and plant as
in 1870, thereby neutra!iziag competition anu
keeping control Of this great branch OF COM
merce. Our southern contemporaries, how
ever. protested that cotton could not be grown
for I'D. and urged The planters to surrender
the field. Tleir affirmation has already been
amply refutsd In the preparations ior the
growing crop; and their advice 10 King Cot
ton to abdicate, however much or however
little it may have been followed, already
proves to have been as unwise as 1t was I'M
necessary.
THE MER4 LTNCHEN-G CASE.